posted
I think that the Spell Casters in Dungeons and Dragons get a short stick when it comes to Attacks. Mind you nobody expects that that a mage can match a fighter sword swing to staff swing. However I am thinking about a drastic rules change. Giving Spell casters extra spells on the order of two level one spells per round for level six casters and three first or two third at level 12, I know this makes them much more powerful but I think the way high level fighters can take down high level mages from flat footed is unrealistic. Any comments or suggestions?
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:the way high level fighters can take down high level mages from flat footed is unrealistic.
Yes, I agree that it is unrealistic for mages to _________.
Fill in the blank at your convenience. Almost anything you put in there will make the statement true.
(You see, mages aren't real, so it's more than a little silly to talk about them being "realistic".)
----
I think it's a good idea for game play to high level characters of all classes roughly equal in power. Otherwise, you get the problem like existed in 2nd edition AD&D: playing a mage is lame at low levels, and playing a fighter is lame at high levels.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are already feats which do this. Check out Quicken Spell, Chain Spell, Spell Contingency, etc.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the "istic" part of the word "realistic" allows it to be applied legitimately to fantasy cases.
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
I am familiar with the feats but here is my logic, all fighter types get another attack every five levels. This reflects greater facility with the weapons, extra strike opportunities every six seconds. A mage has two combat attacks in the upper levels, perhaps level 12 or so. However I think that from the point of view of both role play and game balance high level mages should have grater speed with low level spells.
An Enraged Level 10 Barbarian with the right feats can make three attacks on a LV 10 mage that will almost certainly kill him/her, while the mage can cast one spell, which even if maximized will do perhaps 40 HP of damage, at most half his/her HP, that is not an even distribution of power. Nor does it make sense that the number of attacks for the mage goes up in melee but not in spell casting I was thinking of using 1+ (1-Spell level) + (Roundown(Character Level/6)) Spells per round. To generate the casting rate I will run some simulations in Excel to see.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
BC: I don't care if it makes sense for a magic user to cast more spells at a higher level -- it would still be a bad idea because it would unbalance the entire game.
Meat shields ramp up in damage dealing with both number of attacks per round and BAB. Spell flingers ramp up in damage dealing with the number and power of the spells they can cast.
quote:Originally posted by Lord Of All Fools: I hate the D&D magic system.
Same here. I have always found it intensely dissatisfying.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked Role Master Magic System best, however this change is never going to make the mage limitlessly powerful, Oh the equation that I am adding to my character generation is [1+Max( (1-Spell level) + (Roundown(Character Level/6)),0),0)] This gives a second Lv 1 spell at Lv 6, a third at 12 with a second level 2, and at level 18 a mage can throw four level 1, three level 2 and two level 3. I do not know how upset the game balance would be by this, but my parties have no fear of Lich's even at LV 18 because they know they get one attack per round. With hot mage on mage action that is fine, but I have always thought a mage at high levels shold have the ability to activate his low level defenses in a single round, it is even a standard for the fantasy genre, These are not the most powerful spells, they are the most often used utility spells, the most practiced. For an eightteenth level mage to get off two fireballs a round seems pretty resonable. If you think about it, the level 18 mage is terribly limited in what he can do. He needs way too much preperation to defend himself decently, so either he is dead if the plan is good, or he is untouchable if the plan is bad. No challenge.
I might make 3/round an upper limit hmmmm.....
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
That correction is [Min(1+Max( (1-Spell level) + (Roundown(Character Level/6)),0),3)] a pretty good equation though nothing so fierce as solving for the psionic level/stat combination bonus table, that was fierce. [ROUNDDOWN(((Intellegence-10)*0.25),0)*Level+ROUNDDOWN((Level/2),0)*(ROUNDDOWN(ABS(MOD(Intellegence,4)-2)/2,0))]
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regarding a mage needing several rounds to prepare himself: again, check out Contingency, Chain Spell, and Time Stop. I've never had any high-level mage in any campaign I've ever run who's been unable to cast multiple spells per round.
It's also worth noting that your hypothetical combat situation -- an enraged 10th level barbarian making a full attack -- requires that the mage and the barbarian end their previous turns adjacent to each other. A straight mage who allows this to happen either has failed to acquire useful meat shields or has failed to control the battlefield. And if there's anything a mage can do, it's battlefield control.
While it's true that fighter-types can actually rule the damage-dealing roost at higher levels (although not always), no class compares to mages in terms of flexibility. A mage should never permit a barbarian to get adjacent to him.
Why, when that barbarian started moving towards the mage, did the mage not cast Fly and then move 30' straight up? Or cast Blur or Invisibility? Or summon three wolves with Improved Trip to act as blockers?
In a straight combat, sure, the mage is toast. But it's a mage's job not to get into a straight combat.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Contingency should allow you to chain spells but it does not, it gets you one spell extra if the right bad thing happens and you specificlly predict it (usually get me out of here!) that as it may be timestop is way too high a level spell to kick in at a useful point, chain spell, is that a feat or a spell? Either way it is a slot that wizards should have for other things, If it is a feat then every wizard would need to take it, if it is a archmage feat then you cannot get it until you reach level 20 and if it is a spell then what level and from what book?
One thing that bugs me is that a wizard can either go item creation or meta-magic with feats, One is more or less a stay at home wizard, the other is the adventuring wizard. item creation should be one or two feats at the most or a skill set that lets you make certain items after you aquire enough craft magic item ranks. So if the Chain Spell is a feat then it is just one more that costs a feat slot. so you give up meta magic feats you really need.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a rare wizard who ever takes more than "Craft Wondrous Item." Most of the other item creation feats are simply not worth it for an adventuring wizard.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, a figher or a barbarian, at level 20, stands no chance against a mage at a similar level.
Unless he surprises the mage and manages to kill him before he's prepared, like, cou de'graceing him in his sleep or something, said 20th level wizard, or worse, 20th level sorceror is going to kick butt.
If the two start at 5' distance away from each other, within melee range that is, and the barb/fighter/whatever gets the initiative, he might be able to kill the mage. Maybe. But only if he started that turn right in front of the mage. Sure, I can do a build in which a figher does 8 attacks in a single turn, at least half of which have an incredibly good chance at hitting. But to do that I'd need to be literally right next to said 20th level wizard, and moving right next to a 20th level spell-caster is essentially suicide unless you can do something to him first.
See, those 9th level spells only take one hit to do the damage.
A good wizard will have something like quickened fly prepared, quickened haste prepared, etc. She will have a +5 ring of protection, amulet or natural armor, other things or all of them to add a huge bonus to their AC, permenant magical effects of all sorts, et. This is if he's just out adventuring, not if he knows he's gonna face said level 20 fighter.
Now, while the fighter will have magic weapons and items too, these are not gonna help, because the wizard has the same number of items, in addition to any spell effects he has prepared that day, which is a lot of spell effects.
Flying straight into the air 30 feet then casting Meteor Swarm, Wail of the Banshee, Dominate Monster, Power Word Kill, Bigby's Crushing Hand, Mordenkainen's Disjunction, Etherealness or Time Stop, just for starters.
If I had this fighter at melee range at the start of my turn, and I got initiative, I'd probably cast Time Stop. After that, depending on how many turns I had, I'd cast fly and fly away, then cast a number of spells such as Delayed Blast Fireball, at 20th level (20d6) several times, perhaps, maybe Cloudkill, or other effects that last after my time stop ends. Then, I'd activate all, say, two or three delayed blast fireballs, doing 40-60 d6 of damage at once. Maybe 80 if I have enough turns and enough spells. A sorceror wouldn't have that problem, of course.
tjhat's just one option. If I got the turn first, I'd fly away, he'd have trouble hurting me, and I could just cast Meteor Strike until he's at less than 100 hp, then fire a Power Word Kill.
I could Just Meteor Strike him to death, period.
I could humble him with something funnier, like creating a giant boulder over him and dropping it on top of him. Perhaps an anvil! That'd work.
Heck, I could even cast Mordenkainen's Disjunction, laugh at him as he wallows without any magic items whatsoever, losing the entirety of his fortune, warn him not to try to fight me again and walk away, satisfied that he's screwed.
Or I could imprison him, via the spell.
Then there are the hundred other ways I could make a meat shield pie.
Now, if he did start out at melee range from me, and got the initiative, he might attack me a bunch of times. I might survive, I might not. If I died, nothing I could do, I'd deserve it for letting myself get within melee distance of any level 20 fighter. If I did manage to survive, the guy'd die within the next two turns, and I'd not be harmed any longer.
I'm just using the PHB, not even bothing with any other books yet. And the fighter I'm thinking of DOES use other, strnoger books.
But, any farther away than melee rnage, and the fighter dies. There's virtually no chance. I'm barely even scratching the possibilities, really. If he was fifteen feet away, little to no chance. Any more than 30 feet away, almost absolutely no chance. The only way the fighter could get close to me was when I was sleeping, really.
As TomDavidson said, no mage should ever permit a meat shield to get that close to him. And the only reason they would, really, is stupidity, or the meat shield somehow managing to sneak through the defenses to where the wizard/sorceror slept.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: It's a rare wizard who ever takes more than "Craft Wondrous Item." Most of the other item creation feats are simply not worth it for an adventuring wizard.
In a world where it's extremely difficult to acquire magic items and potions, those feats could be extremely powerful.
Of course, most games don't take place in such worlds. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, Counter Bean, wizards get a number of extra feats so its' easil ypossible for them to get a bunch of item creation AND metamagic feats.
It's not a large problem, really. Let's see, non human wizard would get... seven feats normally, plus scribe scroll, plus 4 other feats. That's 11 feats, 12 if you're human.
In the PHB, the number of item creation + metamagic feats are 17. So, you could get all 8 magic item feats, plus 3 or 4 metamagic. Or you could skip a few magic item feats, like Brew Potion, a good one to skip, and have 4-5 metamagic feats. Maximise, Quicken, Empower, and another, Spell feats are pretty darn good. Or you could go the othe route, get all 9 metamagic, and still get 2-3 item creation feats, or skip a couple metamagics like silent spell or still spell, I'd prolly skip both, and have 4-5 item creations.
Then there are tall the other fun things you could do with feats, but I digress.
Granted, you probably won't use all your feats for those two routes. But you could. And you don't relaly need em all. (Brew Potion? Silent Spell? Eh... skip those and a few other lame ones, and you'd have no big problem. you don't need ALL of them, after all.)
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what do you do for your wizard characters players over the year they are not 18th level sheesh...
I am going to implement the change and play test it. It just makes too much sense, as a wizard becomes more powerful he does not need as long as a reeking novice to cast a level one spell. It is correcting an oversight not really making a new rule. It also lets some old mage clobber a young upstart in a single round without trading spell after spell with each other. As I have conserved it, no more then three spells in a round and never more then two of third level in a round, it will even make things more interesting, do I go with multiple low level spells or do I need to throw down with a big gun, it is a solid option. A wizard with level 9 spells in my campaign is certain to have some sort of resurrection contingency set up. Either a contingent trap the soul into a stasis clone or a mind seed planted into an apprentice with great potential and a magic item to bring the full power of the dead mage with it.
I am talking about Mages of intermediate level, from 8-14 where they are vastly under powered compared to even one fighter of the same level let alone a party of assorted attackers.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
At lower levels, yeah, fighters can outstrip wizards. At the levels you're talking about, though, the match is a lot more equal-ish. A level ten fighter, based on the best build I can think of, will have... about 3-4 attacks per turn, tops, depending on his attack style. (without two weapon feats, it'll be lower.)
Now, tenth level fighters versus tenth level wizards. Let's see what the difference will be:
Wizards are definitely more susceptible to physical damage, but at that point it still wont' be nearly the threat it was at levels 1-5.
Anyway, at that point wizards and sorcerors will have 5th level spells, a wizard can cast 2 perday, a sorceror 4.
Let's see...
again, if within 5', the fighter has a better chance of killing the wizard, and has a chance even if there's range. But.
Wizards can cast some nifty offensive spells. Fireball, cone of cold, lightning bolt, (all of which would do 10d6 damage to him, fireball to all his friends, too!) Ice storm does 5d6 to him and his friends, and even better, if he's farther than 5' away from the fighter, you can cast such yummy spells as wall of fire, or even better, wall of ice to trap him for a turn or two.
You could cast cloudkill, which would be really unpleasant for the dude. You could teleport away to 1000 miles distance, and avoid the fight altogether, with just a standard action. Take a five foot step away from him if you survive his attack (if he's in melee range anyway, which he shouldn't be at that level) and just cast teleport to get the hell out. That's a great last resort.
Then there's Baleful Polymorph, Hold Monster, Wall of Stone, Enervation, and other fun tricks. Like Evard's Black Tentacles. Those... could be painful.
In addition, Fly is a third level spell, and has the same effect as Fly at level 20. Go up 30 feet and then pound him with deadly evocations. Or just humilite him by turning him into a toad.
He probably doesn't have very strong spell resistance, if at all, which means he has a greater chance to be affected by all these lovely spells.
Fly kills most chances he has, and Fly is only a third level spell and at level ten you have 5th level. Any good wizard at that level will have that ready, at least in a scroll form, at all times.
The only way the fighter will win for sure is if he, again, sneaks up on the wizard while asleep or gets him totally unprepared. Catches him with his pants down. But then again, you can kill a fighter the exact same way.
Now, again, at level ten, I wonder how the fighter even GOT within five feet of the wizard. And even if he does, he has a much better chance of killing the wizard than at level 20, but even so the wizard is still stronger.
Now, at level 4, say, the wizard doesn't stand a chance in straight combat, and is better in a support role in a group, as the fighter's the star. At level 16, the fighter doesn't stand a chance, and is better in the support role in a group, as the wizard's the star.
Anyway, at level 8, with fourth level spells, which still include fly, 8d6 fireballs and other fun spells, the fighter isn't gonna do well unless he's hella well prepared.
---
Regarding feats, you can still choose between metamagic and item creation equally, depending on the level your'e at and what's available. It's not that big a change, really, from what I said above.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Not at all! All you have to do is fly out of the fighter's range, turn him into a toad, or just blast him to death with horribly powerful spells that do more damage than his attacks at that level.
At level ten, let's say he's got a +3 flaming burst greatsword, a stength of 20, and the wizard has casted haste on him just to be fair.
That means he will get three attacks with the greatsword. IF, and only if, he hits all three times (VERY possible, as his attack would be 19/19/14, thanks to weapon focus in addition to +5 from strength, +3 from magic) he does 3d6+8 damage per hit. That equals, for one hit, between 11-26 damage. With three hits, that's 33-78 if all 3 hit, or else 11-78, counting all variables I saw. Now, the wizard, let's say the wizard has a constitution of 16, so he has +3 hp per level, so... average 2 per d4 HD, for ten levels, and you have ~52 hp. Now, if the fighter gets in close to the wizard, he CAN kill him, as he's physically frail.
the fighter, with a CON of 18, +4 per level, average of 5 per d10 HD, would have... ~95 hit points.
He's got power, sure. And a fort save of... +11. Reflex, if this guy is all about strength, and has a DEX of 12, would be... +4. Now, to beat the 10th level fort save for spells, which, based on his intelligence of, say, 20, would be 10+5+5, or 20 for, say, Baleful Polymorph. So, the fighter would have a 60% chance of beating it, since he needs only to roll a 9 or above to match it, and 8 or below fail. To beat, say, a Fireball, the guy would have to roll a 14 or above, for half damage, so the chances are 65% that the wizard would do full damage. A cone of Cold, also, would go up to 75% chance, as it's a fifth level spell. Stastically, the wizard has a good shot of turning the fighter into a toad after he flew away, but still will fail more often than not. Fireballs, though, would be more likely to do full damage, and at 10d6 the damage is... 10-60 hp of damage for that one spell. And Cone of Cold is even better at this.
For one attack, the fighter can do 11-26 damage, while the wizard can do 10-60 to the fighter AND all his friends at the same time. Cold of Cold does the same, but at a higher level continues to increase in power. And he could do it from safely 30-60 feet into the air. Ranged attacks from a different build of fighter would still be powerful, but wind Wall, a basic 3rd level spell, can deal with this, creating a wall that the fighter couldn't cross easily, considering that the wizard/sorceror could just make it a cube kinda thing deflecting all arrows away from him, regardless of where the fighter/barbarian/ranger moves. While the wind wall would last ten turns, the fighter would be dead or gone long before ten turns are up, unless the wizard rolled VERY badly.
If you're at level 8, the wizard just loses stuff like baleful polymorph, and must rely more on directly damaging spells.
Again, it's possible for the fighter to win. But only if they start right next to the wizard, at which point they'll almost certainly force the wizard to withdraw. But how would they start right next to the wizard?!
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eh. I rarely get to play the game, and rarely think about the statistics or anything. I just have the book open and am thinking of useful ways to defeat a fighter. I'm not even using all the OTHER books I could be using, and the cool things I do from them!
The fighter, of course, could have magic items to make up for the weakness... but at the level we're talking, he's no longer the main damage dealer. He's deadly to a wizard who isn't careful, or who doesn't have fly prepared, but...
quote:Originally posted by Counter Bean: I am going to implement the change and play test it. It just makes too much sense, as a wizard becomes more powerful he does not need as long as a reeking novice to cast a level one spell
All game balance arguments aside, this line of thinking does make sense. Perhaps, if it does seem to unbalance things, some other balancing factor could be introduced?
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope i'm not derailing the thread with my question.
i was wondering with all theses RPG gurus here what would be a good set of spells for an adventuring level three druid ?? Posts: 513 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
All this talk about starting 5' away seems to ignore the bull rush and improved bull rush Feats, as well as the likelyhood of the fighter having Combat Reflexes or Boots of Speed to make his movement per round 60' anything under that is a partial action an atttack and if the fighter wins the initiative roll (with a +6 to initiative) he get across any reasonably sized room and gets an attack off before the wizard can react. At that point before the wizard can do anything he needs to pass two checks, If he took more then 20 HP in damage he needs to sv to stay conscious, he needs to make a concentration check to see if he cast spells at all (gods help the wizard that did not dump a lot of skill in concentration.) Then even if he does throw the lightning bolt, the fighter saves for half damage getting a whopping fifteen out thirty points possible (assuming he did not have the cleric in the hall cast a simple lightning Resistance spell to negate the first 40 pts of a lightning attack) A fireball is silly, who blows up their own house... Still the point is once the wizard and the fighter are in the same room together, the wizard is at an extreme disadvantage, even with a Fire-shield worn all the time giving every HP of damage the wizard takes to the fighter the wizard dies and the fighter gets a nose bleed.
I have played this out dozens of times with parties and I cannot think of a single time when even a level seven party could not beat a single wizard in the middle levels. Now admittedly he is alone and can run away efficiently but how embarrassing. I seem to recall a tenth level party fighting an 18th level lich and losing two player characters before destroying it. Both of whom were subsequently returned to life, so beating a wizard just requires that one find his room, not get within arms reach.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: i was wondering with all theses RPG gurus here what would be a good set of spells for an adventuring level three druid ??
Carry seeds of specific plants, (assasin vine if you can find it), but any thorny plant is great, use plant growth and entangle, and always carry your cure light and moderate wounds.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: i was wondering with all theses RPG gurus here what would be a good set of spells for an adventuring level three druid ?
Where are you adventuring? It matters. *grin*
---------
quote:All this talk about starting 5' away seems to ignore the bull rush and improved bull rush Feats, as well as the likelyhood of the fighter having Combat Reflexes or Boots of Speed to make his movement per round 60' anything under that is a partial action an atttack and if the fighter wins the initiative roll (with a +6 to initiative) he get across any reasonably sized room and gets an attack off before the wizard can react.
Bull Rush and Combat Reflexes are useless in this situation; Combat Reflexes doesn't make the fighter faster OR give him more than one AoO on the wizard (who, if he's smart, is casting defensively anyway and thus not drawing one), and Bull Rush just makes it possible for the fighter to push the wizard a bit to the extent of his movement. Boots of Speed would make a difference, yeah, and are a good example of why I don't allow them in my campaign. *grin* Giving enhanced speed to a melee fighter is enormously helpful; it's as useful as, say, giving a mage a staff with imbued metamagic feats or a cloak of displacement.
Based on your test case, by the way, I'm not sure you understand how wizards "Cast Defensively." I'd strongly recommend it.
But the core problem is this: you're pitting wizards one-on-one against an enemy of equivalent level. That's not what they're for. They're meant to lend flexibility to a party while taking out large numbers of enemies of slightly lower level. They're artillery, not tanks. Note too that you're concentrating on straight damage-dealing spells, which is the least-efficient way for a mid-level wizard to take out a single mid-level fighter. Evokers, even more than other wizards, are artillery; they're not duellists.
Now, you have a valid complaint: wizards are not good solo enemies, unless your definition of "good" is that they'll put up a fight and kill a weaker character or two before dying. This is why wizards need to get allies, learn conjuration spells, and be prepared to control the battlefield. If a wizard isn't willing to run away and come back later, he's going to be a dead wizard.
I ran a campaign in which a recurring enemy was a tenth-level wizard. An entire party of fifth to sixth-level characters was regularly schooled by him, because he used guerilla attacks and scry and other tools to ensure that he always knew the tactical situation.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wizards are the logical paranoid dungeon builders, sooner or later ever party gets to take on a lich. Of course my parties are none to likely to be scryable, they have all learned that I consider a 100,000 gp worth of equipment to be irresistible to dragons so above seventh level the keep a non detection up at all times, Improved Bull Rush lets you close distance without provoking an attack of opportunity.
I love the Feat Rods and Staffs they make sense from a role playing stand point more then staffs with spells in them, a staff should amplify spells not hold them, it creates a logical useful function for them. My fighters go after Gauntlets of Ogre Power, Boots of Speed and keen weapons just as one would expect. They are not fools.
But by the time a wizard is up to level 12 he either has tools or places to do any of the meta-magic feats. It is in this manner that the rules shape the desires of players in more sophisticated ways. "Lets build the tower on the earth node of spell empowering!"
It is all to the good. Druids are pretty cool and extremely tough in their element. Giant Wild Shape is awesome, I would never worry about a druid against a fighter of the same level, he would just go Dire Bear on him and entangle and animate plant are much better spells then most give credit for. I also use the old herb lists from role master to give them access to many more natural potions and healing. They are formidable.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Improved Bull Rush lets you close distance without provoking an attack of opportunity.
What kind of wizard has reach? You can close the distance without provoking an AoO anyway. You still provoke AoOs from other enemies when you use Improved Bull Rush; you just don't draw one from the person you rushed. And since you don't get an AoO for moving up to somebody in the first place, Improved Bull Rush doesn't help against wizards unless you really need to bull rush them for some reason.
Improved Bull Rush is a feat to be used against ogres on bridges. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Logically can you defend being able to cast a spell while being thrown across the room? It is like the uncanny dodge, if that is what you are doing that is all you are doing, it is uncanny because you are diving. Do you have Excel Tom, I can send you my new character sheet incorperating the new in house rule...
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed, and stone skin skivies, I have always worked to make my magic system make sense, the metamagic feats are a good step, studing a spell for me implies that it built and hung. Casting is really more like triggering it, We let rings of spell storing cast spells quicker this will be the same.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
Carry seeds of specific plants, (assasin vine if you can find it), but any thorny plant is great, use plant growth and entangle, and always carry your cure light and moderate wounds.
I planned on useing cure wounds since i'm the only spell caster in the party at this time. the plant growth and entagle sound like a good idea, thank you.
quote: TomDavidson
Where are you adventuring? It matters. *grin*
so far a deseret fighting wasp Spiders. then we where in a dunguen that would phase shift from something in ruins to what it would look like in its glory days.
quote:Lord Of All Fools
Druids are just an excuse for the True Neutral alignment to look even more ridiculous.
Don't be ridiculous.
My druid isn't totaly Neutral. he's Neutral Good so he's not to ridiculous.
quote:Counter Bean
It is all to the good. Druids are pretty cool and extremely tough in their element. Giant Wild Shape is awesome, I would never worry about a druid against a fighter of the same level, he would just go Dire Bear on him and entangle and animate plant are much better spells then most give credit for. I also use the old herb lists from role master to give them access to many more natural potions and healing. They are formidable.
I think mine is even more fomidable since the GM i'm with as divided the druids into two paths Combat and nature paths. because of a good back story the GM allowed my druid to be of both paths.
Posts: 513 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I played a system once, although I don't remember what it was called, that made a good deal more sense than the typical D&D system. In it, magic-users developed spell LEVELs that grew with each level.
How the mage spent them was up to him. It could be 10 1st level spells, or 5 2nd, or any combination of spells that he know that didn't exceed his spell level allotment.
I liked it because if a mage cast a HUGE spell it could really take a toll on him, and limit the amount of spells he could cast for the rest of the day....even longer depending on the spell, and how effective it was.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that it was a modified version of that, combigned wiht regular D&D rules. It may have even been something home grown.
We used the D7D books for most things.
Keep in mind that this was over 20 years ago, long before the new version of D7D. I still get confused these days trying to follow all the prestige classes and feats and all...we didn't have any of that stuff. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, I think this may just be the most entertaining thread I have ever read on Hatrack. Something about seeing MPH and Tom (Two of my favorite posters and, in my opinion, two of the smartest guys on Hatrack) discussing D&D rules just about makes my day.
As for the topic at hand, I pretty much agree with Tom's assessment of your suggestion, CB. I have to be at work in about ten minutes, but when I get back I'll read through again and see if I have anything more useful to add.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Role Master was great, because you got so many Power Points per level, very similar to the Psionics system in use or to the level variant, but spells went all the way to level 50, the catch was that you needed to be of the level to cast the spell, at level ten you could use up to the level 10 spell off say Fire Mastery List without harm, but the cool thing was for say a five percent risk per level you could over cast your level.
So in a pinch you could cast your level 20 spell off that list with a 50% chance of destroying yourself, too cool! Role-master had the original Middle Earth Copyrights so the One Ring and all the Rings of Power were also in the system. Among the many list they accessed they were also Power Point multipliers. So when you put on Nenya say, you got X 6 to you Power Points. A solid kick in the ass. The One Ring was a X 10 Power Point multiplier, so when you wore it you had an extra order of magnitude of power. You went from a 10 PP to 100 and so on. Sauron with 400 levels and like 2400 PP with the Ring had 24,000 while Gandalf with like 800 PP would have had 8000 and could have kicked the dog snot out of Sauron. It all works out, and I would actually build a combat system based on role master much more easily on a computer system then d&d simply because it incorporates everything, every attack has its OB and DB (Offensive bonus and Defensive bonus) and a chance factor that is open ended (95 or better gets to re-roll and stacks) but to solve some of those attacks took seven, eight, nine or ten factors, a computer would do this much more efficiently then we ever could with pen and paper. I wonder if any of the games like WOW use a role-master style combat check system.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I loved RoleMaster, too. But as Bean observes, it's a system that would work better on a computer than in play; there were simply too many charts to track.
And it broke down badly at higher levels, too, like all games with level mechanics.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wizards and sorcerers get more powerful than fighter-type characters anyway after about level 8-10. Even when you roughly gauge their capacity based on a 1v1 fight.
Multiple attacks are a minimal benefit until way later in a sample 'engagement,' anyway, given that multiple attacks cannot be taken until no movement has been made aside from a five foot step in that round. Yes, the warriors have a higher BAB and number of attacks, and the lower BAB of wizards is only slightly entirely redundant since they will never endeavor to duel with attacks, instead opting for quickened spells and/or spells with defensive casting (once you can exceed a minimum average 15 on a roll, you're set) which are more dangerous than even a full-round attack for warriors.
Something of a moot point for either, since at about the same time spellcasters start 'overtaking' melee fighters, clerics and druids are 'overtaking' everyone.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In Middle Earth the presence of Sauron kept magic on the down low. When world building with ICE it was important to put upper limits on using powerful spells in some way. I think the big failing of Role Master was its lack of an original world to play in. It was meticulous in its application of Tolkien's world, if you can get Moria, Morgul Vale, Cirith Ungul or the any of the products of Middle Earth (I love Celbrimbors Stats and Equipment) The Dudgeons were mortally impossible really but so cool to read. The linear progression of combat factors, critical hits, and the Power Point system, and skill ranks are all Role Master innovations that D&D adopted. I do not know if they bought out Role Master, I know that the new system for Middle Earth Role Playing is thin gruel compared to the old, and I know that the Tolkien people where serious enough about the copyright issue that D&D has Balor instead of Balrog, Halfling instead of Hobbit and so on. I think the D&D folk had more creativity in world building and so even with a weaker system they dominated the market. Those open ended critical rolls were a blast, I had a wood elf kill a LV 25 Corsair of Umber with a single shot from his long bow.
It was quirky too, you got extra XP for Criticals Delivered and Received, 1 XP per mile traveled, and you got the XP for killing a monster if you were the one who delivered the killing blow, that could really lead to fist fights, "Stay away from that Troll I just knocked out!" Good Times
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Something of a moot point for either, since at about the same time spellcasters start 'overtaking' melee fighters, clerics and druids are 'overtaking' everyone.
Wow that is no joke, I just made a Cleric of Dumathion for a Dwarf Character, he had eight different Domains and with them came with four feats, two skill rank bonuses, extra spells, one saving throw bonus and the power to turn elementals or command earth type creatures. With normal Dwarf bonuses I had more special abilities at first level then I had on my sheet. If they are not trying to hock the Priesthood I do not know what is going on. I don't think my player will ever go back.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sure that a cleric with eight domains has every reason to be better than any normal character, since that isn't usually at all possible.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look it up, I gave him one, Rune that I felt was lacking the rest are all listed. Cavern, Craft, Dwarf, Earth, Knowlege, Protection, Metal all on the list. Oh and I do not make them choose just two, that would suck.
Say I do not know if anybody else doesn't know about this but Giant in the Playground is the coolist comic on the net, It is hilarious, the more gaming experience you have the more fun it is. Plus just as a story it is not too bad at all.
Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Look it up, I gave him one, Rune that I felt was lacking the rest are all listed. Cavern, Craft, Dwarf, Earth, Knowlege, Protection, Metal all on the list. Oh and I do not make them choose just two, that would suck.
Wow...are we talking D&D 3.5 here? Because that is seriously munchkined out, man. How can you have that character in a party without him automatically becoming by far the most uber of all the characters? The feats, skill bonuses, saving throws, and special abilities you're describing represent I think at least two levels of power. Even fighters, the feat-happy class, only get combat-related feats as much as you're describing...and they don't get all that other stuff.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Look it up, I gave him one, Rune that I felt was lacking the rest are all listed. Cavern, Craft, Dwarf, Earth, Knowlege, Protection, Metal all on the list. Oh and I do not make them choose just two, that would suck.
BC, I'm a little confused by your house rules. In D&D3.5, clerics must choose two domains from all the ones available to worshippers of their god. The list of domains for a given god are the domains available to choose from, not the ones that clerics ALL get.
In fact, domains are so powerful that the ability to pick up access to an extra domain is both a feat and a class feature of some prestige classes. With the right build, I believe it's possible for a cleric in 3.5E to have five domains. This would require one feat and five levels in a certain prestige class (the prereq for which is a fairly undesirable feat).
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Spoken like a true gamer.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
