This was just an idea I had while working on a Pokemon Trainer archetype for Pathfinder's Summoner. And listening to the Pokemon Season 1 opening, repeatedly. (GOD I love that theme for some reason.)
While I was making the class, I realized it was the only "caster" class with MAD for its "casting" progression (I'm using the word "tactics"). This got me thinking: Would this sort of thing help out game balance? Say, a Wizard needs Intelligence to learn his spells, Wisdom to have extra spells per day, and Intelligence to enhance the DCs? Or some other combination therein. In short, have a single "dominant" casting score and a single "secondary" casting score; the former counts for two things, while the latter counts for one.
Has anyone else thought of trying this? While MAD is considered bad game design, a god-wizard or CoDzilla who has to put his good ability scores in two places to be a good caster could potentially give the fighting classes a great deal of breathing room.
If anyone thinks this is a good idea, where would you place the ability requirements? I'd like opinions on this idea.
NOTE: This is not official in any regard, and those of you whom have no problems with OP casters are not required to "call me out on my stupidity for nerfing the glass cannons". It's just an idea I had; I want the opinions of the people who DO have this trouble. I've noticed some tendencies of this myself, so I sometimes think of how to make this not such a problem. You are, of course, free to weigh in, but I'd like to see what everyone else thinks WITHOUT this thread turning into a flame war.
EDIT: For those who don't know, MAD is "Multiple Ability/Attribute Distribution". SAD is "Single Ability Distribution". I think there was another one, too, but I can't remember it...
What problems are you actually having at the table, and at what levels?
Casters are already, effectively, MAD.
Constitution HAS to be better-than-average, simply to avoid dropping after one hit.
Likewise, for arcane casters at least, dexterity MUST be better-than-average to avoid getting pummeled repeatedly.
Not to mention save bonuses - again, more problematic for arcanists, since divine casters (mostly) have two 'good' saves. But still...
I won't say your idea is without merit, but implementing it means using a higher point-buy or having very few casters that aren't dump-statted to death.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
As a long time 3.5 player, the multi-casting stat classes saw very little play unless you rolled some beefy stats. it just was better and stronger to play one of the single stat classes. I think it would just make casters even more MAD, and wouldnt stop them from still being the strongest classes.
That's the idea. If they're even more MAD but still strongest... that means they're still less dominant than they were.
The main reasons that casters dominate the games they do is usually the GM who is lax about keeping magic to the rules. Allowing unlimited spell acquisition, custom magic item creation, that last one is especially an opening of the floodgates.
i have always wondered why people find it "wrong" that a caster can defeat an encounter with one or two spells but its ok if a fighter crushes the encounter with his sword :)
Sounds interesting, but maybe make Charisma the DC save stat so that all three mental attributes are present. Though that might be going to MAD.
Of course this all happened while I was either asleep or just not paying attention. :P
In response to all:
Wraith: It's actually been too long since I've played. It may well have been my group's playstyle...
Alitan: Fair enough. I hadn't really thought of those issues, but that's what I meant to get when I came here. Thank you.
Xavier: See Viktyr's comment.
Viktyr: Exactly my point, yes. I'm doubting it'll be enough, but it's something to try, maybe.
LazarX: Depends on the magic item. What if it's a pipe that you can use to create a smoky obscuring mist that consumes a dose of tobacco? (I made this, actually. Full-round to light, and move to make it smoky.) But I digress; you do raise good points, but I doubt that's the only major reason.
BEGS: The thing is, the fighter can't do that in one or two rounds. Three, hell yes, but two, probably not. Let's say he's level 10, fighting a CR 10 creature. We'll say an advanced Yrthak (Best 2, pg 290). He Vital Strikes his foe, rolls a +3 greatsword hit, Strength 26 after magic items and ability +s from levels, about 50 damage if he rolls 16 on his 2d6? Tell me if my math is off, of course. This means he'll have to use another 2 turns (unless he crits) to take it down, because an advanced Yrthak would have 138 hit points. If a wizard can end the encounter sooner on his own, that's a power discrepancy. Of course, the wizard can only do it so many times in a day, but that's not a terribly strong balance factor.
Granted, this IS a teamwork game. Assuming the rogue could sneak attack (easily possible with a deafness spell by cleric or wizard!), and the cleric hit with some kind of smite, that would probably end the encounter in a single round (if they were all 10th level). That of course assumes semi-perfect conditions.
There's a lot of factors, yes, but in a vacuum with just the rules the fighter isn't quite as badass as the wizard.
EDIT: BiggDawg: Probably, yes. Two stats of MAD is probably just right. Look at the monk, which has three (or four, depending on how much you value HP).
What? Summoners aren't MAD (They only need Charisma for their spells, and extra summon monsters.). They only become MAD if you use them for purposes other than summoning (such as actually fighting with your eidolon.)
And really, making it two casting stats probably won't fix it. For the min/maxer (which would include me...) it's only another stat they just need to boost up higher at the cost of others, maybe even making it worse for their allies. Also, it would make playing a Magus even harder, they are more MAD than summoners from my understanding.
This IS an interesting idea... but.
If casters are required to spread their investment across two or three of the 'mental' stats, they're not going to be able to participate effectively in ANYTHING other than casting, and will be MUCH less-able to defend themselves from physical attackers, much less-likely to survive Fortitude attacks, etc., etc.
There is such a thing as going too far.
While it's an interesting idea in theory, the practice seems likely to make casters a real drain on the party, rather than providing useful resources.
At the absolute least, if you start using this system, give arcane casters Light Armor Proficiency and scrap the Arcane Failure % for light armor, or you will have made adventuring wizards a thing of the past.
Marthian: I actually am not going entirely by the book in my archetype. It might just end up being another class entirely...sorry for the confusion.
Alitan: I can see this. However, a wizard can do a LOT of things other classes can do. Charm/Dominate, etc. I agree there is a "too far", and I am glad for your feedback.
BEGS wrote: i have always wondered why people find it "wrong" that a caster can defeat an encounter with one or two spells but its ok if a fighter crushes the encounter with his sword :) I don't think that is the case at all. The issue is that it is harder to stop a caster from doing so within the rules. I am sure if you build an encounter crushing melee type they would hate that also.
The smite/paladin is broken threads are a testament to that.
Machaeus wrote: Of course this all happened while I was either asleep or just not paying attention. :P
In response to all:
Wraith: It's actually been too long since I've played. It may well have been my group's playstyle...
I would never just make blanket rules. I always make rules with the group in mind. What might work for one group might not work for another. Maybe some rules were being ignored in the old group, or maybe you have a someone who really knew the game well playing with people that did not.
Machaeus wrote: Marthian: I actually am not going entirely by the book in my archetype. It might just end up being another class entirely...sorry for the confusion.
Alitan: I can see this. However, a wizard can do a LOT of things other classes can do. Charm/Dominate, etc. I agree there is a "too far", and I am glad for your feedback.
..but it can't do its job, and the other class's job and not waste resources.
It also can do it as long or without other limitations.
As an example I had a player who chose a paladin because it can fight, cast spells, and heal. That sounds really good when you read it, but you still only get one action per turn, and the paladin is not the best at any of those except in certain circumstances.
Yeah wizards/sorc can charm/dominate, but at higher levels many monsters have high modifiers to save, they have to get past SR, and the monster might just be immune.
The bard can still use diplomacy or intimidate to achieve similar affects. Well skills can't dominate so with that spell he is not stepping on anyone's toes.
These are things I hear about in theory, but never see at a table. If someone tells me they happen at a table then usually the caster is allowed to waste resources and/or rest at will, but if you allow casters to rest at will it won't change anything. They can just max out the two casting scores, and be decent in con.
They don't really need dex since touch AC's are normally really low, even at high levels. The handy haversack takes care of them dumping strength.
20 pb
str 10
dex 10
con 14
2nd stat which controls how many spells you can cast 16(14 base+2 from racial modifier)
primary casting stat 16(controls which level of spells they can access + the DC )
10 or less for the dump stat.
These player might want thing more spells per day is important if he does not focus on SoD or SoS spells.
wraithstrike wrote: Machaeus wrote: Of course this all happened while I was either asleep or just not paying attention. :P
In response to all:
Wraith: It's actually been too long since I've played. It may well have been my group's playstyle...
I would never just make blanket rules. I always make rules with the group in mind. What might work for one group might not work for another. Maybe some rules were being ignored in the old group, or maybe you have a someone who really knew the game well playing with people that did not. This is actually, exactly my point in my OP. I understand not everyone has caster problems; I wanted to see what happens if you do that for groups that DO have caster problems. Which your next post somewhat addresses.
wraithstrike wrote: Machaeus wrote: Marthian: I actually am not going entirely by the book in my archetype. It might just end up being another class entirely...sorry for the confusion.
Alitan: I can see this. However, a wizard can do a LOT of things other classes can do. Charm/Dominate, etc. I agree there is a "too far", and I am glad for your feedback.
..but it can't do its job, and the other class's job and not waste resources.
It also can do it as long or without other limitations.
As an example I had a player who chose a paladin because it can fight, cast spells, and heal. That sounds really good when you read it, but you still only get one action per turn, and the paladin is not the best at any of those except in certain circumstances.
Yeah wizards/sorc can charm/dominate, but at higher levels many monsters have high modifiers to save, they have to get past SR, and the monster might just be immune.
The bard can still use diplomacy or intimidate to achieve similar affects. Well skills can't dominate so with that spell he is not stepping on anyone's toes.
These are things I hear about in theory, but never see at a table. If someone tells me they happen at a table then usually the caster is allowed to waste resources and/or rest at will, but if you allow casters to rest at will it won't change anything. They can just max out the two casting scores, and be decent in con.
They don't really need dex since touch AC's are normally really low, even at high levels. The handy haversack takes care of them dumping strength.
20 pb
str 10
dex 10
con 14
2nd stat which controls how many spells you can cast 16(14 base+2 from racial modifier)
primary casting stat 16(controls which level of spells they can access + the DC )
10 or less for the dump stat.
These player might want thing more spells per day is important if he does not focus on SoD or SoS spells. Actually, you can do both, depending on how well the player is playing the god-wizard. There are other limits, yes, but a wizard can, in fact, do some of the other class' jobs for them.
It's only a suggestion. If it doesn't work, and from your arguments it might not, oh well.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules
|
