I've heard a lot of good ideas for modifying the Vancian Magic System lately. Here's another one I came up with to bridge the middle ground between that and the 4e at-will/encounter/daily power system.
A wizard can become increasingly familiar with his magic as he grows in experience. To represent this, a wizard may cast spells a number of times based upon his Level vs. the Spell Level.
Spells more than 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast daily.
Spells of more than 1/4 to 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast once per encounter.
Spells of 1/4 or less the level of the caster may be cast once per round.
In this system, spell slots represent the maximum number of spells of that level a wizard may know at each level. So the wizard is less versatile, but will have more uses of his spells in the long run and over the length of his career. For example, a 3rd level wizard will be capable of casting a single Magic Missle each encounter while at 6th he can cast one each turn, but that slot used for Magic Missle can never be used for another spell.
I think this will keep the pulp fantasy feel of wizards, which is important for the feel of the game, IMO. I don't know if I'll personally use this system, but I thought I'd run it up the flag pole and see who salutes it...
Spellcasting Houserule...
Perhaps you should define "encounter" to mean something like two or three turns?
C&C/D&D-related writings, Cortex Classic material, and other scraps: https://sites.google.com/site/x17rpgstuff/home
Class-less D&D: https://github.com/ssfsx17/skill20
Class-less D&D: https://github.com/ssfsx17/skill20
If 4e did anything right, it was changing spell durations into three distinct time elements instead of giving you one more thing to keep track of.
Of course then they go and add a hundred little buffs, heals, effects, etc. to keep track of, which completely defeats that purpose, but that's another subject for aother day.
So I'm keeping the good aspects, less overhead and more capability, while ditching the numbers fest that the rest of the game is. Again, YMMV...
Of course then they go and add a hundred little buffs, heals, effects, etc. to keep track of, which completely defeats that purpose, but that's another subject for aother day.
So I'm keeping the good aspects, less overhead and more capability, while ditching the numbers fest that the rest of the game is. Again, YMMV...
-
SaintNiddle
- Ungern
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:00 am
I don't know..that does seem pretty overpowered..a magic missile every round is pretty strong..let alone once you get to 12th and have at will fireballs, invisibilities, and fly spells. Maybe something more like:
Spells more than 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast daily.
Spells of more than 1/4 to 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast once every 4 hours.
Spells of 1/4 or less the level of the caster may be cast once every minute.
Spells more than 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast daily.
Spells of more than 1/4 to 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast once every 4 hours.
Spells of 1/4 or less the level of the caster may be cast once every minute.
In designing the magic system, Gary Gygax intended spells to be used like ammunition. Just like arrows from a quiver, you expend your shots and must think carefully each time you use one or else you waste your ammo.
Just thought that deserved mentioning. If you want magic to be different, then the above calculations will probably suit one fine.
Just thought that deserved mentioning. If you want magic to be different, then the above calculations will probably suit one fine.
I understand what Gygax was looking to do, and I'm not even using this system myself, per se, just thinking of how to apply some 4e concepts to C&C in order to demonstrate how flexible (and in my mind, better) the C&C system is. In other words, why spend all that money on D&D4e when you can do the same thing better and cheaper in C&C.
But, I can see that there might be some spells that are incredibly powerful, now that I look at the list more thoroughly. Actually, Fireballs are the least of your worries as I think most wizards would prefer to go around casting sleep all day (especially as sand is such a common material component).
I still don't want to use 'minutes' and 'hours' and such, however. Again, the point is trying to reduce the number of things to keep track of. Instead, how about I move the markers a bit...
Spells more than 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast daily.
Spells of more than 1/4 to 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast once per encounter.
Spells of 1/4 or less the level of the caster may be cast once per encounter and no longer need material components.
But, I can see that there might be some spells that are incredibly powerful, now that I look at the list more thoroughly. Actually, Fireballs are the least of your worries as I think most wizards would prefer to go around casting sleep all day (especially as sand is such a common material component).
I still don't want to use 'minutes' and 'hours' and such, however. Again, the point is trying to reduce the number of things to keep track of. Instead, how about I move the markers a bit...
Spells more than 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast daily.
Spells of more than 1/4 to 1/2 the level of the caster may be cast once per encounter.
Spells of 1/4 or less the level of the caster may be cast once per encounter and no longer need material components.
There are several reasons C&C does not readily make this sort of thing viable (not that it is impossible) amongst which are:
1) few spell caps
2) lots of save or die
3) non-standardized level progressions
4) unequal saves
5) most spells simply "work"
#1 and #2 are important because they make spellcasters very powerful, especially so at high levels, and even more so when they can use spells over and over again, without much restriction
#3 and #4 are there for obvious reasons -- character A will not be able to save / resist like character B, for a multitude of reasons, primary of which is Prime and level advancement. Add to this that level of the caster is a factor, and any variation between the two can be disastrous (the difference has to be very significant for it to be positive.)
#5 is not so obvious -- in C&C, spells when unresisted (or saved against) simply have their effect, or partial effect: there is no attack roll for magic missile, nor is there a save for sleep allowed each round. This ties into all points above and lends even more to "spellcasters are godlike" because they are, in many ways.
So, to use a 4e-like style, you also need to make the spells work in a like manner. Implement a level cap for spell damage -- something like (spell level x 3) +1 (fireball = 10 max that way for example) and give all continual spell effects a new save to break each round after failure (or extend the duration of the effect to actually happen, such as flesh to stone requires X rounds before it petrifies the victim or require an attack roll (not a "ranged touch" either.) Increase casting times and reduce the # of spells known.
It can be done, sure, but in the end, I don't think it's worth it. Everything every edition has done since OAD&D regarding spellcasting has been to reduce the power of the class -- this is understandable. High-level spellcasters are incredibly potent, and should be, by the rules of the system, very, very rare (considering all that adventuring and the less-than-favorably odds of survival and all...) but it is often ignored, sometimes even encouraged (2e Forgotten Realms, for example.) And, that has led to the notion that spellcasting is "broken." It is not -- it is a reward. Other classes get their power(s) at the start... wizards, especially, hve to actually earn it, and it is always, always, in the hands of the DM to control because they control what spells are accessible.
But, anyway, umm... yeah... back to the point of the post.
You could simply do what you proposed but I think it might encourage a high-magic game experience. Not bad if its what you're after, of course.
1) few spell caps
2) lots of save or die
3) non-standardized level progressions
4) unequal saves
5) most spells simply "work"
#1 and #2 are important because they make spellcasters very powerful, especially so at high levels, and even more so when they can use spells over and over again, without much restriction
#3 and #4 are there for obvious reasons -- character A will not be able to save / resist like character B, for a multitude of reasons, primary of which is Prime and level advancement. Add to this that level of the caster is a factor, and any variation between the two can be disastrous (the difference has to be very significant for it to be positive.)
#5 is not so obvious -- in C&C, spells when unresisted (or saved against) simply have their effect, or partial effect: there is no attack roll for magic missile, nor is there a save for sleep allowed each round. This ties into all points above and lends even more to "spellcasters are godlike" because they are, in many ways.
So, to use a 4e-like style, you also need to make the spells work in a like manner. Implement a level cap for spell damage -- something like (spell level x 3) +1 (fireball = 10 max that way for example) and give all continual spell effects a new save to break each round after failure (or extend the duration of the effect to actually happen, such as flesh to stone requires X rounds before it petrifies the victim or require an attack roll (not a "ranged touch" either.) Increase casting times and reduce the # of spells known.
It can be done, sure, but in the end, I don't think it's worth it. Everything every edition has done since OAD&D regarding spellcasting has been to reduce the power of the class -- this is understandable. High-level spellcasters are incredibly potent, and should be, by the rules of the system, very, very rare (considering all that adventuring and the less-than-favorably odds of survival and all...) but it is often ignored, sometimes even encouraged (2e Forgotten Realms, for example.) And, that has led to the notion that spellcasting is "broken." It is not -- it is a reward. Other classes get their power(s) at the start... wizards, especially, hve to actually earn it, and it is always, always, in the hands of the DM to control because they control what spells are accessible.
But, anyway, umm... yeah... back to the point of the post.
You could simply do what you proposed but I think it might encourage a high-magic game experience. Not bad if its what you're after, of course.
Good points. I actually forgot about most spells needing 'to-hit' rolls in 4e and hadn't considered the 'saves' problem although I think the other points are really just variations on those two.
Me personally, I wasn't planning on using this houserule, as I said, it was an academic exercise to show the flexibility of the system which apparently failed to prove my original point but did, funnily enough, go a great way towards proving just how different 4e is from its predecessors. It is now even more clear that 4e is D&D in name only.
Incidentally, my house rule for magic is much simpler. I'm treating wizards as 3e sorcerors, allowing them to use spells on the fly and negating the need for them to spend inordinate amounts of time memorizing (upwards of half a day at higher levels)...
Me personally, I wasn't planning on using this houserule, as I said, it was an academic exercise to show the flexibility of the system which apparently failed to prove my original point but did, funnily enough, go a great way towards proving just how different 4e is from its predecessors. It is now even more clear that 4e is D&D in name only.
Incidentally, my house rule for magic is much simpler. I'm treating wizards as 3e sorcerors, allowing them to use spells on the fly and negating the need for them to spend inordinate amounts of time memorizing (upwards of half a day at higher levels)...
I have never liked any sort of artificial constraints on spells or powers, including the classic Vancian system, and especially in 4E. There is no in-game reason for it. It's just an artificial construct for the purposes of game balance
Consider:
- "Why didn't you case fireball?"
- "Well, i used it in the encounter yesterday."
- "So, why can't you case it again?"
- "Dunno- just can't do it again fer some reason. But give me another day and i'll give you a lightning bolt."
Limits like these just don't make sense from a roleplaying standpoint.
My preferred system is a spellcheck system. Fighters make rolls to do what they do best, why not wizards?
-Fizz
Consider:
- "Why didn't you case fireball?"
- "Well, i used it in the encounter yesterday."
- "So, why can't you case it again?"
- "Dunno- just can't do it again fer some reason. But give me another day and i'll give you a lightning bolt."
Limits like these just don't make sense from a roleplaying standpoint.
My preferred system is a spellcheck system. Fighters make rolls to do what they do best, why not wizards?
-Fizz
Quote:
My preferred system is a spellcheck system. Fighters make rolls to do what they do best, why not wizards?
That's why I love the WFRP magic system so much as it works in much the same way. You know how to cast the spell, but are you powerful enough and do you want to risk the potential side effects? Instead of 'Vancian' the system is 'Faustian' in that with great power comes great potential to do yourself a mischief from a flubbed casting attempt. So, leaving aside the 4e method at this point, how easy would it be to adopt the WFRP type of system to C&C?
Each Spell could have a CL = the spell level x3 (min. 1). So for a wizard with INT as a prime the difficulty by spell level would be:
0 - 13
1 - 15
2 - 18
3 - 21
4 - 24
5 - 27
6 - 30
7 - 33
8 - 36
9 - 39
The Wizard would add their Level + INT Bonus (casters who rely on other Primes will, of course, use those instead). to a D20 to cast. Casting without components when the spell requires them adds +2 to the CL, so a cantrip (0 level) would need a 15 to succeed.
Any roll that is less than the half the level of the spell being attempted (rounding up) causes a miscast (which will have a nasty table to roll on).
So hows that, then? Different but not too complex? Rewards being a spellcaster without they're dominating the game?
Spellcasting becomes very difficult.
A 20th level wizard with an 18 Intelligence, to cast a 9th level spell would need to roll a 16 --- d20 + 20 + 3 >= 12 +27. That leaves a very low % of success, and a very high chance of miscast failure; you'd be better off just applying a backlash effect for all spells of Xth level or higher.
I have said it before, and I will say it now -- if you want spellcasters actually using spells in a spellcheck system, spell level x 1.5 or x2 is more appropriate to the C&C SIEGE Engine. Otherwise, something akin to SR is viable. That is -- treat the spell as having an "SR" of 6 + (spell level / 2 rounded up;) against which nothing is added.
0 level = 6
1 = 7
2 = 7
3 = 8
4 = 8
5 = 9
6 = 9
7 = 10
8 = 10
9 = 11 (still fails 55% of the time)
There should also, always, be some penalty for failure -- magic is not the same thing as swinging a sword, nor should the same concept be applied.
A 20th level wizard with an 18 Intelligence, to cast a 9th level spell would need to roll a 16 --- d20 + 20 + 3 >= 12 +27. That leaves a very low % of success, and a very high chance of miscast failure; you'd be better off just applying a backlash effect for all spells of Xth level or higher.
I have said it before, and I will say it now -- if you want spellcasters actually using spells in a spellcheck system, spell level x 1.5 or x2 is more appropriate to the C&C SIEGE Engine. Otherwise, something akin to SR is viable. That is -- treat the spell as having an "SR" of 6 + (spell level / 2 rounded up;) against which nothing is added.
0 level = 6
1 = 7
2 = 7
3 = 8
4 = 8
5 = 9
6 = 9
7 = 10
8 = 10
9 = 11 (still fails 55% of the time)
There should also, always, be some penalty for failure -- magic is not the same thing as swinging a sword, nor should the same concept be applied.
Luther wrote:
That's why I love the WFRP magic system so much as it works in much the same way. You know how to cast the spell, but are you powerful enough and do you want to risk the potential side effects?
I don't know anything about WFRP, but that's exactly the right premise. I like magic to be not normal, and thus dangerous for mere mortals.
Quote:
Each Spell could have a CL = the spell level x3 (min. 1). So for a wizard with INT as a prime the difficulty by spell level would be:
As Serl said, that makes high level spells awfully difficult. I prefer a CL = 2x spell level. That way it still scales as per the Vancian. That is- a new spell level every two class levels.
-Fizz
Quote:
Spellcasting becomes very difficult.
A 20th level wizard with an 18 Intelligence, to cast a 9th level spell would need to roll a 16 --- d20 + 20 + 3 >= 12 +27. That leaves a very low % of success, and a very high chance of miscast failure; you'd be better off just applying a backlash effect for all spells of Xth level or higher.
I have said it before, and I will say it now -- if you want spellcasters actually using spells in a spellcheck system, spell level x 1.5 or x2 is more appropriate to the C&C SIEGE Engine.
Fair enough. Let's go with the 2x (which was actually my first inclination) and still assume that the caster is using their Prime:
0 - 13
1 - 14
2 - 16
3 - 18
4 - 20
5 - 22
6 - 24
7 - 26
8 - 28
9 - 30
Miscasts stil occur if a number equal to half the Spell Level is rolled on the D20 (round/ down, min. 1). I should also mention that miscasts don't always cancel the spell in WFRP, they just have additional consequences from your eyes glowing red (a very bad thing in the eyes of WFRP peasants) to crapping your pants to getting sucked into the warp where daemons use your soul as a plaything. The worse the miscast, the worse the effect. I'm thinking there should be 4 tables, each steadily worse, and the table you roll on is equal to the Spell Level / 2 (rounded down).
So, a level 20 wizard with an 18 INT Prime would have a +23 to cast. His chances of success / chance of miscast are:
0 - 2+ / 5%
1 - 2+ / 5%
2 - 2+ / 5%
3 - 2+ / 5%
4 - 3+ / 10%
5 - 3+ / 10%
6 - 4+ / 15%
7 - 4+ / 15%
8 - 5+ / 20%
9 - 7+ / 20%
And instead of making Material Components mandatory and adding to the CL when they are unavailable, let's make them a positive that reduces the chance of a miscast. So a component listed in the spells description will reduce the chance of miscast by 1, so a level 9 spell would only miscast on a 1-3 instead of 1-4. How's that, then?
And here's another idea for a magic item directly related to this system: Magical Fuses. They would be extremely difficult to create, being made out of incredibly rare components (say 1500gp/level of spell that can be channeled through it), and they would be one shot items, but they could cancel out one miscast at the cost of severing the wizards ability to use magic for a number of hours equal to the level of the spell 'grounded.' Perhaps the 'staff or wand' that a typical wizard carries around and appears to cast magic through at times is actually one of these items or contains a few of them...?
Here is what I've used in the past (way back in the 2e days, actually):
Effect / Penalty
Increase Range by Base* / -2
Base Range Increased to Higher / -4
Do not need Verbal / -2
Do not need Somatic / -2
Do not need Material / -2
Duration Increase to Higher* / -2
Double Duration / -4
Triple Duration / -6
Quadruple Duration / -8
Quintuple Duration / -10
Permanent Effect / -12
Casting Time* / -2
Instant Casting / -4
Affect +1 Level or HD* / -1
Switch from Caster to Another / -3
Switch from Touch to 10 / -2
Double Area of Effect / -4
Triple Area of Effect / -6
Area of Effect to 10 Radius / -2
Additional Die of Damage* / -3
Additional +1 Point of Damage* / -1
Base Die to Higher Type / -5
Save Penalty of 1* / -2
Allow No Save / -8
Cast in Armor to AC 6 / -2
Cast in Armor to AC 4 / -4
Cast in Armor to AC 2 / -6
Cast in Armor to AC 0 / -8
Maximum Effect / -10
Double Maximum Effect / -20
*Multiples are allowed of this type, to a maximum of the spells level
Example: A 5th level wizard wishes to increase the range of Lightning Bolt, a 3rd level spell, by the base amount. This may be done 3 times, since the spell is 3rd level, and will give the caster an extra 270 yards.
Control Effect / Bonus
Instant Casting to 1 Round / +2
Double Casting Time / +4
Triple Casting Time / +6
Double Material Component Value / +4
Triple Material Component Value / +6
Area of Effect / +2
Reduce Damage by 1 / Die / +2
Allow a Save / +6
Save Bonus of +1* / +1
Unique Spell to Wizard / +4
Within a Pentacle / +2
Minimize Effect / +3
Per Hit Die of Blood Sacrifice / +1
*Multiples are allowed of this type, to a maximum of the spells level
Effect / Penalty
Increase Range by Base* / -2
Base Range Increased to Higher / -4
Do not need Verbal / -2
Do not need Somatic / -2
Do not need Material / -2
Duration Increase to Higher* / -2
Double Duration / -4
Triple Duration / -6
Quadruple Duration / -8
Quintuple Duration / -10
Permanent Effect / -12
Casting Time* / -2
Instant Casting / -4
Affect +1 Level or HD* / -1
Switch from Caster to Another / -3
Switch from Touch to 10 / -2
Double Area of Effect / -4
Triple Area of Effect / -6
Area of Effect to 10 Radius / -2
Additional Die of Damage* / -3
Additional +1 Point of Damage* / -1
Base Die to Higher Type / -5
Save Penalty of 1* / -2
Allow No Save / -8
Cast in Armor to AC 6 / -2
Cast in Armor to AC 4 / -4
Cast in Armor to AC 2 / -6
Cast in Armor to AC 0 / -8
Maximum Effect / -10
Double Maximum Effect / -20
*Multiples are allowed of this type, to a maximum of the spells level
Example: A 5th level wizard wishes to increase the range of Lightning Bolt, a 3rd level spell, by the base amount. This may be done 3 times, since the spell is 3rd level, and will give the caster an extra 270 yards.
Control Effect / Bonus
Instant Casting to 1 Round / +2
Double Casting Time / +4
Triple Casting Time / +6
Double Material Component Value / +4
Triple Material Component Value / +6
Area of Effect / +2
Reduce Damage by 1 / Die / +2
Allow a Save / +6
Save Bonus of +1* / +1
Unique Spell to Wizard / +4
Within a Pentacle / +2
Minimize Effect / +3
Per Hit Die of Blood Sacrifice / +1
*Multiples are allowed of this type, to a maximum of the spells level
Ok I have thought on this alot. I think I have found a real simple way to do it with out breaking the system.
1. 0 lv spells= free at will.Filled slots=what you can cast. limit heal/creation to x/time
( i.e 1/hour) (CK decision). a wizard can use this for up to 1d3 harm damage/round (ice/fire/just a flesh wound)? Priest can heal 1 pt damage/person/hour. This may require a "spell check" if&how up to CK.
2. Spells are not memorized but bound or woven to the caster and refresh.(after rest/sun up/moon down),up to CK. No rebinding needed.
3. Binding requires a ritual costing 10gp/spell lev + 10mins(turns)/spell lev. (i.e. one 5th lev spell will cost 50gp and 50mins)(0lev cost 5gp/5min) Can be used to swap an uncast spellslot with a new spell.
4.(optional) 2 slots =1 free slot. A free slot can be used to cast any spell of the same lev that is in your book/list. 1 free slot is 2 times the cost to bind.
Over all this gives lo lev caster a boost and adds flexibility without killing or complicating things.
1. 0 lv spells= free at will.Filled slots=what you can cast. limit heal/creation to x/time
( i.e 1/hour) (CK decision). a wizard can use this for up to 1d3 harm damage/round (ice/fire/just a flesh wound)? Priest can heal 1 pt damage/person/hour. This may require a "spell check" if&how up to CK.
2. Spells are not memorized but bound or woven to the caster and refresh.(after rest/sun up/moon down),up to CK. No rebinding needed.
3. Binding requires a ritual costing 10gp/spell lev + 10mins(turns)/spell lev. (i.e. one 5th lev spell will cost 50gp and 50mins)(0lev cost 5gp/5min) Can be used to swap an uncast spellslot with a new spell.
4.(optional) 2 slots =1 free slot. A free slot can be used to cast any spell of the same lev that is in your book/list. 1 free slot is 2 times the cost to bind.
Over all this gives lo lev caster a boost and adds flexibility without killing or complicating things.
Another nifty system was that used in the Sovereign Stone setting.
Every spell had a casting threshold, which is a measure of the amount of magical energy needed to cast it. Every round, the caster rolls 1d20+his level, whcih is the amount of energy he has channeled into himself. Once he has accumulated enough energy, the spell is cast. But the longer it takes, the tougher it is to accumulate. So high powered spells are out of reach of low-level casters.
It was also quite neat in that there were no spell levels. Only the casting thresholds.
-Fizz
Every spell had a casting threshold, which is a measure of the amount of magical energy needed to cast it. Every round, the caster rolls 1d20+his level, whcih is the amount of energy he has channeled into himself. Once he has accumulated enough energy, the spell is cast. But the longer it takes, the tougher it is to accumulate. So high powered spells are out of reach of low-level casters.
It was also quite neat in that there were no spell levels. Only the casting thresholds.
-Fizz