Class Help Wanted
Shawn Wilson
Pathfinder.
Catch is- no spell slots or spell points. All its casting will be at
will. (Yes, much like a Warlock, but different)
Ideas?
Basics-
Bad BAB. Good Will, bad other saves. No armor or shield
proficiency. Simple weapons only. 4 skill points. 1d6 Hit points.
Sorcerer/Wizard spells.
For spell level balancing, casting is one round per spell level.
Cantrips are a regular action, 1st level are a full round, Nth level
are N rounds to cast.
Limited spell list? Evocation Only, Conjuration only, etc? (each,
for 8 different sub classes?)
9th level spells? or max out at 6?
Hadsil
Taking several rounds to cast a spell is very underpowered and unfun
to play. This class would be The Suck.
Gerald Katz
Mad Hamish
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I want to create a new (and balanced) spellcasting class for 3.5/
>Pathfinder.
>
>Catch is- no spell slots or spell points. All its casting will be at
>will. (Yes, much like a Warlock, but different)
>
>Ideas?
>
>Basics-
>
>Bad BAB. Good Will, bad other saves. No armor or shield
>proficiency. Simple weapons only. 4 skill points. 1d6 Hit points.
>
>Sorcerer/Wizard spells.
>
>For spell level balancing, casting is one round per spell level.
>Cantrips are a regular action, 1st level are a full round, Nth level
>are N rounds to cast.
Horrible idea.
Most combats won't last long enough for you to get a 5th or higher
level spell cast which means that you either don't get to do anything
or else you chuck out a magic missle a round or something similar.
Low level spells lose effectiveness as you level up due to the low
save modifiers
If you cast a spell over, say, 4 rounds even if the combat is still
going the odds are that the situation will have changed enough that
the spell you chose is now a bad option.
And the odds are poor that you'll get to cast the spell because the
odds are that you'll be smacked around the head and have the casting
disrupted.
Frankly it's one of the worst ideas I've ever seen for a rpg class,
and I've looked at world of Synnibaar
Shawn Wilson
<newsunspammel...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
> >I want to create a new (and balanced) spellcasting class for 3.5/
> >Pathfinder.
>
> >Catch is- no spell slots or spell points. All its casting will be at
> >will. (Yes, much like a Warlock, but different)
>
> >Ideas?
>
> >Basics-
>
> >Bad BAB. Good Will, bad other saves. No armor or shield
> >proficiency. Simple weapons only. 4 skill points. 1d6 Hit points.
>
> >Sorcerer/Wizard spells.
>
> >For spell level balancing, casting is one round per spell level.
> >Cantrips are a regular action, 1st level are a full round, Nth level
> >are N rounds to cast.
>
> Horrible idea.
> Most combats won't last long enough for you to get a 5th or higher
> level spell cast which means that you either don't get to do anything
> or else you chuck out a magic missle a round or something similar.
> Low level spells lose effectiveness as you level up due to the low
> save modifiers
OK, so what's a better idea? The only real limit is that spellcasting
not be 'depletable'. No magic points, no spell slots.
Loren Pechtel
How about a variation on spell slots:
You get a certain number of slots based on your level. Each slot has
a recharge time of say 1 round/spell level. Think of the cooldown
times that are common in MMORGS.
Keith Davies
>
> How about a variation on spell slots:
>
> You get a certain number of slots based on your level. Each slot has
> a recharge time of say 1 round/spell level. Think of the cooldown
> times that are common in MMORGS.
Interesting idea. Seems workable, if possibly a pain in the ass to
manage in play. Say you've got one slot per spell level, you can cast
spells several rounds running but will likely work down to your
lower-level spells as the fight progresses... but each eventually
recovers.
It might simplify things a little if, instead of all slots recovering as
they go unused you're limited in what gets recovered at a time. This
could be done as a token mechanism[1]. Start with one (or potentially
more) slot per spell level available and can be used normally. You can
gain tokens and spend them to recover slots. For instance, casting a
spell might gain one token (possibly more at higher levels, and there
can be other actions that gain tokens).
So, drop a /fireball/ and the third-level slot is used until you buy it
back by spending three tokens. You can gain those by casting spells
and/or 'combat meditating' (whatever the just-gain-tokens action is
called). This gives a lot of spell casting capability over the course
of a fight (let alone over the course of a day), but somewhat limits
nova behavior. Somewhat and kind of.
[1] no, I'm not have-a-hammering this, I think this might actually fit
The question of whether this is a wise thing to do, given that spell
casters as a rule don't need any more power, I'll leave to someone else
to consider.
Keith
--
Keith Davies "Do you ever get the feeling that
keith....@kjdavies.org you're discovering, rather than
keith....@gmail.com creating, Echelon?"
KJD-IMC: http://www.kjd-imc.org -- Robin Leung
Loren Pechtel
I would not be adverse to such a caster if it were balanced--just
because casters have enough power doesn't mean we can't have a very
different flavor.
The cooldown time wouldn't need to bog down if you do it right--a
simple physical prop. You have a sheet on which you have all the
spells written down along with one circle per level. These circles
are penny sized (or any other small, round object--pennies are cheap
and readily available.) When you cast the spell you put a penny on
each circle. At the start of the round you remove one penny from
every spell. You can only cast spells which are completely uncovered.
To do it with less space use a pile of tokens but it's harder to
remove one at a time and it's also harder to see at a glance when
you'll have it back.
Paul Colquhoun
Or limit it to removing at most INT_Bonus tokens per turn (or CHA, etc,
as appropriate).
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
Asking for technical help in newsgroups? Read this first:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro
Loren Pechtel
Looking at a wizard progression:
Level 1. Top spell is level 1. Int 12 lets you throw it every round.
Of course they have this.
Level 3. Int 14 is still very easy.
Level 5. Int 16. Few characters will start with less than 15 in
their casting stat.
Level 7. Int 18. I'm sure they have a +1 item by now. Int 16 gives
the top level spell.
Level 9. Int 20. Two stat boost by now and they should have a +2
item. Again, Int 16.
Level 11. Int 22. This one is a little questionable, if they didn't
start with an 18 they'll be limited to level 5's after throwing one
level 6.
Level 13. Int 24. Three stat boosts, at least a +3 item. Same as
before, one level 7 followed by 6's.
Level 15. Int 26. If they have a +5 it's one 8 followed by 7's,
otherwise it's one 8, one 7 and then 6's.
Level 17. Int 28. 9, 8, 7 and 6's.
Level 20. Another stat boost, now we have 9, 8 and then 7's.
This is assuming they have only one spell available per level. If
they get more than one spell per level then the last 4 cases are even
more favorable.
I think your version is too powerful.
Arandor
wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:47:31 +1100, Paul Colquhoun
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 19:56:54 -0700, Loren Pechtel <lorenpech...@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:
> >| On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 01:10:33 GMT, Keith Davies
>
> - Show quoted text -
Very minor nitpick: in D&D 3.x, enhancement bonus to stats come in +2,
+4 and +6 versions only. There are no +1, +3 and +5 items. (Contrary
to armor, shields, weapons, rings of deflection, etc.) The reason for
this exactly the "rounding"; a +1 item would be 1,000 gp, a +2 item is
4,000 gp. An odd-numbered stat would go to the next modifier for only
1,000 gp.
For the same reason, between D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 all the stat-boosting
spells (/Bull's Strength/, /Cat's Grace/ etc.) went from 1d4+1 (so 50%
odd/even) to a flat +4. Also they couldn't be empowered and maximized
anymore which led to all sorts of silliness.
However, your basic point stands. A dedicated caster will not start
with anything less than 15 in his primary casting stat. Period. And 16
is highly likely. Which means that, at the very least, up until 6th
level spells, you will *always* have a bonus spell of your highest
possible level in addition to your regular spells.
To address the original poster's question... what are you trying to
achieve? Does it have to be "spells", or do you want it to be
"magical"?
The closest equivalent of what you want is the Warlock. He has his at-
will blasts, plus a very, nay extremely limited selection of
invocations. And if he wants to modify his blasts... those
modifications come out of that limited selection. Barring feats, he
ends up with about 12 invocations, IIRC. But he *can* then fly at
will, blast at will, turn invisible at will, and have a couple of
other nifty tricks.
Have a look at the Pathfinder Sorcerer. Use him as a base (the
"bloodlines" give him abilities; especially look at the Abyssal and
Infernal, maybe also Draconic?). Strip away the spellcasting. Add the
Warlock "blasts" and invocations. Tweak a bit. Done?
--
Cheers,
Arandor
Matthew Miller
> Interesting idea. Seems workable, if possibly a pain in the ass to
> manage in play. Say you've got one slot per spell level, you can cast
> spells several rounds running but will likely work down to your
> lower-level spells as the fight progresses... but each eventually
> recovers.
See also the recharge mechanic in Unearthed Arcana.
--
Matthew Miller
Loren Pechtel
wrote:
>> >Or limit it to removing at most INT_Bonus tokens per turn (or CHA, etc,
>> >as appropriate).
>>
>> Looking at a wizard progression:
>>
>> Level 1. �ｿｽTop spell is level 1. �ｿｽInt 12 lets you throw it every round.
>> Of course they have this.
>> Level 3. �ｿｽInt 14 is still very easy.
>> Level 5. �ｿｽInt 16. �ｿｽFew characters will start with less than 15 in
>> their casting stat.
>> Level 7. �ｿｽInt 18. �ｿｽI'm sure they have a +1 item by now. �ｿｽInt 16 gives
>> the top level spell.
>> Level 9. �ｿｽInt 20. �ｿｽTwo stat boost by now and they should have a +2
>> item. �ｿｽAgain, Int 16.
>>
>> Level 11. �ｿｽInt 22. �ｿｽThis one is a little questionable, if they didn't
>> start with an 18 they'll be limited to level 5's after throwing one
>> level 6.
>> Level 13. �ｿｽInt 24. �ｿｽThree stat boosts, at least a +3 item. �ｿｽSame as
>> before, one level 7 followed by 6's.
>> Level 15. �ｿｽInt 26. �ｿｽIf they have a +5 it's one 8 followed by 7's,
>> otherwise it's one 8, one 7 and then 6's.
>> Level 17. �ｿｽInt 28. �ｿｽ9, 8, 7 and 6's.
>> Level 20. �ｿｽAnother stat boost, now we have 9, 8 and then 7's.
>>
>> This is assuming they have only one spell available per level. �ｿｽIf
>> they get more than one spell per level then the last 4 cases are even
>> more favorable.
>>
>> I think your version is too powerful.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Very minor nitpick: in D&D 3.x, enhancement bonus to stats come in +2,
>+4 and +6 versions only. There are no +1, +3 and +5 items. (Contrary
>to armor, shields, weapons, rings of deflection, etc.) The reason for
>this exactly the "rounding"; a +1 item would be 1,000 gp, a +2 item is
>4,000 gp. An odd-numbered stat would go to the next modifier for only
>1,000 gp.
Oops! I did that whole calculation using weapon plus progressions,
not stat boost progressions!
Justisaur
> On Oct 25, 6:21 am, Loren Pechtel <lorenpech...@hotmail.invalid.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:47:31 +1100, Paul Colquhoun
>
> > <newspos...@andor.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> > >On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 19:56:54 -0700, Loren Pechtel <lorenpech...@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:
> > >| On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 01:10:33 GMT, Keith Davies
> > >| <keith.dav...@kjdavies.org> wrote:
> > >|
> > >|>Loren Pechtel <lorenpech...@hotmail.invalid.com> wrote:
> > >|>>
> > >|>> How about a variation on spell slots:
> > >|>>
> > >|>> You get a certain number of slots based on your level. Each slot has
> > >|>> a recharge time of say 1 round/spell level. Think of the cooldown
> > >|>> times that are common in MMORGS.
> > >|>
> > >|>Interesting idea. Seems workable, if possibly a pain in the ass to
> > >|>manage in play. Say you've got one slot per spell level, you can cast
> > >|>spells several rounds running but will likely work down to your
> > >|>lower-level spells as the fight progresses... but each eventually
> > >|>recovers.
> > >|>
You could have a warm-up instead. Casting a spell of each level
requires you've cast a spell of the next lower level. So you'd have
to start off with a magic missile, then toss off a web before you
could do lightning bolt.
Another one would be a skill check, perhaps equal to 15+ level you
could normally start casting the spell. It'd make it less likely to
be able to cast your highest level spell each round. It'd probably be
better to make it a level check with whatever DC you want to start,
otherwise every caster would skill focus the spell.
> The closest equivalent of what you want is the Warlock. He has his at-
> will blasts, plus a very, nay extremely limited selection of
> invocations. And if he wants to modify his blasts... those
> modifications come out of that limited selection. Barring feats, he
> ends up with about 12 invocations, IIRC. But he *can* then fly at
> will, blast at will, turn invisible at will, and have a couple of
> other nifty tricks.
I'd agree with this suggestion as well.
- Justisaur
Jim Davies
inscribed:
Or my GURPSLike wizard. I've never played it so it may not be
balanced.
http://www.aaargh.org/DandD/GWiz.htm
--
Jim or Sarah Davies, but probably Jim
D&D and Star Fleet Battles stuff on http://www.aaargh.org
There is no God. But there is pudding!
Tetsubo
Have you looked at the D20 version of Talislanta? It's free and uses a
skill based spell casting system.
--
Tetsubo
Deviant Art: http://ironstaff.deviantart.com/
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/tetsubo57
Arandor
wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 01:38:16 -0700 (PDT), Arandor <aran...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >> >Or limit it to removing at most INT_Bonus tokens per turn (or CHA, etc,
> >> >as appropriate).
>
> >> Looking at a wizard progression:
>
> >> Of course they have this.
> >> Level 5. Int 16. Few characters will start with less than 15 in
> >> their casting stat.
> >> Level 7. Int 18. I'm sure they have a +1 item by now. Int 16 gives
> >> the top level spell.
> >> Level 9. Int 20. Two stat boost by now and they should have a +2
> >> item. Again, Int 16.
>
> >> start with an 18 they'll be limited to level 5's after throwing one
> >> level 6.
> >> before, one level 7 followed by 6's.
> >> otherwise it's one 8, one 7 and then 6's.
> >> Level 20. Another stat boost, now we have 9, 8 and then 7's.
>
> >> This is assuming they have only one spell available per level. If
> >> they get more than one spell per level then the last 4 cases are even
> >> more favorable.
>
> >> I think your version is too powerful.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >Very minor nitpick: in D&D 3.x, enhancement bonus to stats come in +2,
> >+4 and +6 versions only. There are no +1, +3 and +5 items. (Contrary
> >to armor, shields, weapons, rings of deflection, etc.) The reason for
> >this exactly the "rounding"; a +1 item would be 1,000 gp, a +2 item is
> >4,000 gp. An odd-numbered stat would go to the next modifier for only
> >1,000 gp.
>
> Oops! I did that whole calculation using weapon plus progressions,
>
> - Show quoted text -
*shrug* No biggie. Like I said: your basic point stands. A dedicated
spellcaster is *supposed* and *expected* to have his bonus spells all
the way up to at least 6th-7th, and likely also 8th. (And in
Pathfinder, also 9th, since you mostly get a +2 to the relevant stat
as racial.)
--
Cheers,
Arandor
Arandor
> Another one would be a skill check, perhaps equal to 15+ level you
> could normally start casting the spell. It'd make it less likely to
> be able to cast your highest level spell each round. It'd probably be
> better to make it a level check with whatever DC you want to start,
> otherwise every caster would skill focus the spell.
A better suggestion for this DC would be to use the concentration
mechanic in Pathfinder. (Not Concentration; concentration isn't a
skill there.)
Casting defensively = DC 15 + 2 * spell level.
Your bonus is your caster level + relevant casting stat modifier. It's
not an attack or save, so a natural 1 is not auto-fail and natural 20
is not auto-success.
So: a 9th level Wizard (CL 9th) with Int 18 (+4) has +13. To cast a
5th level spell on-the-defensive, the DC is 15 + 2 * 5 = DC 25. He can
make it... on 12+. A first level spell is only DC 15 + 2 * 1 = DC 17.
He only needs a 4+.
This makes Combat Casting (+4 on concentration) a really good feat for
casters.
If the DC seems to high (in the beginning it is quite stiff; around
mid-level it's doable, high-level it's usually OK... but remember,
lvl. 9 spells is still DC 33; even a 20th level caster with Combat
Casting only has +24 without his stat bonus; he'll need +8 to auto-
succeed), make it DC 10 + 2 * spell level. This might make it too
easy, however, and make the check essentially meaningless, like
Concentration is now.
--
Cheers,
Arandor
Shawn Wilson
> You could have a warm-up instead. Casting a spell of each level
> requires you've cast a spell of the next lower level. So you'd have
> to start off with a magic missile, then toss off a web before you
> could do lightning bolt.
>
> Another one would be a skill check, perhaps equal to 15+ level you
> could normally start casting the spell. It'd make it less likely to
> be able to cast your highest level spell each round. It'd probably be
> better to make it a level check with whatever DC you want to start,
> otherwise every caster would skill focus the spell.
The problem with one round per level is the many rounds doing
nothing.
The problem with one round 'cool down' per level is every battle will
start off with a 9th level spell. (and many rounds doing nothing)
There could be quickly recovered 'points' say equal to Int Mod, and
recovering one per round, that can be applied to the one round per
level casting time. So if you have an Int mod of 3, you can cast a
3rd level spell in one round, but next round you only have one point.
You can then cast a 1st level spell or do something else and
accumulate more. If you want to cast a high level spell you
accumulate points for 6 six rounds and then cast it. If you change
your mind about the spell you want, you lost the six rounds but still
have the base 3.
Should it be a Bard-like 6 level spells only?
Skill, or pseudo skill check might work. You can cast any spell you
know in (spell level) rounds, OR you can cast quickly with a failure
roll- d20 (no mods) v spell level (auto-fail on 1)*. Succeed and the
spell goes off normally. Fail and it doesn't, and you take 1d6 per
level damage with no defense. Partial preparation has partial
effect. Prepare a 9th Level spell for 3 rounds and you need to roll a
7+ for it to work. Failure is 6 dice damage.
*Alternatively, d20 plus mods (Int, feats) v 2xspell level. Or
Spellcraft check, against 4x spell level. (a 10 level character is
about is about +24 on spellcraft: 10 ranks, +6 skill focus, +3 class
skill, +5 Int) Thoughts?
Alcore
[snip]
> Or my GURPSLike wizard. I've never played it so it may not be
> balanced.http://www.aaargh.org/DandD/GWiz.htm
I like your G-Wiz concept. I suspect it needs "balance tuning" and
the book-keeping is actually worse that a normal DND Wizard, but I do
like it and think it's probably workable.
Why STR as the resource pool key? I see that you overflow it to CON,
but frankly, I think just using CON to start with makes a lot more
sense. I'm thinking something like a subdual damage mechanic that
when overflowed quickly turns to real damage. I am partial to the
idea that a Wizard could wind up passed out from exertion but recover
quickly with a few minutes of rest.
Regardless, thanks for sharing.
Alcore
WDS
I'd guess because in GURPS wizards expend fatigue to cast spells and
fatigue is based on STR (in GURPS 3e anyway).
Jim Davies
Yep. That's it. It makes the GWiz rather less SAD than the stock
wizard because Str isn't then a dump stat, which can't be a bad thing.
Piling it onto Con would make Con even more vital than it is now, and
result in constant recalculation of hit points or fudging something.