Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

So Int-based number of total spell levels the MU can "master," letting him prepare them without consulting his book? It definitely has potential.

Dimirag wrote: On the other hand, if the spellbook contains the spells in a magical comprised form I would think a way of allowing casting directly from it, but would limit it to lesser utility spells, probably charging some material costs and making a roll...

I think that's where a certain even-numbered variant of the parent rules went for their non-combat spells.

I'm rather partial to the "open book, draw a circle, incense and chanting" school of noncombat magic. Having a set of spells that could be cast this way (and I'm thinking "as an alternate casting method" rather than "the only way it is cast") would give you a little more mileage... But I'm thinking this ought to go for some cleric spells as well - and there may be limits. Some spells probably ought to be a bit "ritually" to begin with, and some may be potent enough that a no-prep, by the book variant would be unbalancing.

To tie this down a little, I think some requirements on ritual spells would be 1) Counts as a separate spell in the spellbook (Detect Magic (prepared) and Detect Magic (ritual) are two different spells, have to be gained separately, count against spellbook capacity, etc.), 2) LONG cast time (10 min/level as a starting point - anything long enough to warrant a wandering monster check if cast in a dungeon is certainly in the right range), 3)Material costs - a combination of pricey foci (reusables - a lens or crystal, a specific wand, a brass bowl, a holy symbol) and consumables (chalk, candles, powdered silver, rare herbs, theif's ear, etc.), 4) Lack of subtlety (Lots of talking, light, smells, etc.), and possibly 5) An ability check to pull it off correctly.

Just a thought.

Imagine a 10th level magic-user with all his or her levels applied to Magic Missile.

Or Fireball.

This is why I believe point systems don't work, as I've explained before. At least, not so long as you use the spells "as is" from the rules.

My response to a 10th level magic user using all his levels applied to magic missile or even fireball, isn't really that much of a problem unless you're treating the game like a tactical combat game. A lot of questions about game balance come down to the tactics that can be used by the players rather than the approach taken by the GM to forstall such things. Maybe it's my background as a programmer, but most of the time you have to anticipate what the user (or player in this case) might do and be ready for it.

Or perhaps fireball is a very hard to learn spell for the simple reason that it is so powerful. That means to learn it means you have to 1) find someone willing to teach it to you 2) Persuade them to teach it to you with money, service or both 3) Not turn you and your fellow party members into flambe the first time you try to use it. not to mention the consequences the first time you use it in a populated area. Magic spells can be lethal weapons and just about any town or city is going to frown on firing a weapon within the city limits.

But let's take an example as is. A 10th level wizard has 14 levels of spell he can cast on any given day. That means that he can cast 4 fireballs a day. My thought is that unless you are giving him a reason to fire off 4 fireballs in rapid succession, the player isn't going to be able to participate very much the rest of the day if he fires all his load, so to speak, first thing.

I also find ways to make such foolishness pay for itself. I had a mage who got stinking cloud as one of his spells and proceeded to stinking cloud everything, until he ran into a dragon and tried to stinking cloud it. The dragon blew flames to clear off the stench, and the resulting explosion nearly killed the entire party and they were forced to make a hasty retreat from what would have been otherwise a pretty lucrative fight. (stinking cloud being essentially methane with a fragrant bouquet of flatulance, rotting vegetation and whatever else comes to mind)

Solomoriah wrote:

teluria wrote:The system I've used in the past said Mages get levels of spell that they can cast as per the basic rules. So if they have one first level spell and two second level spells they can case 5 levels a day. How they want to split that up is up to them. (1 second level and 3 first level, 5 first level, etc)

Imagine a 10th level magic-user with all his or her levels applied to Magic Missile.

Or Fireball.

This is why I believe point systems don't work, as I've explained before. At least, not so long as you use the spells "as is" from the rules.

I've played a magic point system and they're not as unbalanced as you may think. Because spells are still underpowered due to saving throws.

First of all, the chance that a single class m-u can survive to 10th level is practically impossible, even in a points system. No armor, d4 hp, armed with a staff, and spell disruption on any hit doing damage.

Secondly, ok you have 10d6 fireball. 10X3.5 = 35 pts of damage on average. However, most 10th level monsters or fighters will probably make their save. Thats 18 pts of damage area effect. If the enemy is fighting close to yourself (mage) or your friends then everyone gets hit. Magic missile at 10th level is pretty much the same, doing 4d6+4 (no save) = 18 pts on average.

By comparison, a 10th level fighter will probably have 71 hp or so (9 X 5.5 hp per level + 18 con bonus + 3hp at 10th). The m-u will have to use four fireballs to kill the warriors, taking four rounds of spellcasting assuming that the m-u gets the initiative win every time (doubtful). Meanwhile, the warrior will have a +10/+5 (two attacks per round). Even with the second attack at +5 Base, plus say +2 str, +2 sword, +whatever plusses for bless, or skill ... he WILL hit the unarmored magic user regardless of m-u dex bonuses. Damage with a sword d8 plus strength, sword bonus, skill bonus etc. more than likely the warrior could be doing 10 pts per swing and thats NOT disruptable.

In my experience m-u, even in a magic point system is STILL underpowered because many spells have easy saving throws at high levels that will half the damage.

Sir Bedivere wrote:Master Lok, I'm glad you like it and thanks for the ideas. I am planning on putting out one more expanded revision, so if you have any further suggestions, or feedback on what's in it now, please let me know.

Your experience with Magic-Users matches my own, except in my campaigns people stopped playing single-classed MUs fairly early on. For most of my years playing D&D, the only MUs were multi-classed characters.

Me too. Every M-u- player quickly became multiclassed for pure survival reasons, which also meant a slowed progression in spell advancement. Very few multiclass magicusers ever got to cast anything above 4th level spells.

Here's some additional house rules to improve m-u survivability.

a) Concentration Feat/skill: spells are disruptable so when you get damaged in the same round that you are casting a spell, then you lose the spell AND your action. Ouch. Concentration skill gives the m-u the opportunity to focus past the pain and cast their spell. If you pass a Con check (on a d20), then you still cast the spell. -1 per damage point taken.

b) redo the spell lists. I've redone all my magic user spells lists to include more combat (esp. defense) oriented spells. There should be a first and second level summon creature spell to protect the m-u. For example first level Summon Kobold spell. second level Summon Goblin spell. etc. In standard d&d, monster summoning is a THIRD level spell to summon up a one hitdie gleep. yeech.

c) physical defense versus armor class. I wrote up one system where AC was based purely on dex, skill and basically dodging. wearing armor like leather, plate did nothing to protect one from being hit, only from being damaged - it gave physical defense. (of course I changed the combat tables to make it more difficult to hit ac 0). What this did - was it gave magic users who wore no armor, the same opportunity as warriors to dodge hits. They just didn't have any protection to reduce the damage. I realize this is a radical change - and probably wouldn't fit in the basic d&d framework. Just throwing out ideas.

d) Magic users start off with 2d4 hp at first level, and gained 1d4 every experience level thereafter.

Master Lok wrote: c) physical defense versus armor class. I wrote up one system where AC was based purely on dex, skill and basically dodging. wearing armor like leather, plate did nothing to protect one from being hit, only from being damaged - it gave physical defense. (of course I changed the combat tables to make it more difficult to hit ac 0). What this did - was it gave magic users who wore no armor, the same opportunity as warriors to dodge hits. They just didn't have any protection to reduce the damage. I realize this is a radical change - and probably wouldn't fit in the basic d&d framework. Just throwing out ideas.

d) Magic users start off with 2d4 hp at first level, and gained 1d4 every experience level thereafter.

I did something like that also once. I listed the dex as the AC and treated the armor as damage reduction. The way I did it was the AC rating of armor -11. This would mean that leather armor protected for 2 point while plate protected for 6 points. Shields added to the AC not damage reduction. Magical bonuses added to the damage reduction unless specified that it protected not reduced damage.

A houserule that I used before: Hp = 1/2con + hd per level (no con bonuses per level). This allows all the classes to have a cushion in the beginning. It averages out by the time they reach reach around level 10 or so. It worked in my games pretty well.

First level characters hp ranges (house ruled) with the average afterwards.
Con 3 / 18 (Min/Max) Average 10
hp base :2 / 9 (Min/Max) Average 5
Class (hit die): (Min / Max) Average hp
Mage (d4): 3 / 13----- 7
Thief (d4): 3 / 13------7
Cleric (d6) 3 / 15------8
Fighter (d8) 3 / 17------9

At tenth level the average hp would look something like this. This just based on CON of 10 the average die rolls of 2(d4),3(d6),4(d8).
Mages : 27
Thief : 27
Clerics : 38
Fighters : 49

I think that is close to average with the normal systems but I could be wrong.

Two things about Hit Points: Remember that Thieves also has a d4 for HP, so allowing 2 starting dice for MU's would be unfair for them.
Giving them full HD value is unfair to the other classes...

I generally give full HP for 1st level characters regardless of class... call it an adventurer's perk, that little boost that makes them a tad better than non-adventuring types.

Metroknight wrote: A houserule that I used before: Hp = 1/2con + hd per level (no con bonuses per level). This allows all the classes to have a cushion in the beginning. It averages out by the time they reach reach around level 10 or so. It worked in my games pretty well.

That's a pretty neat houserule MetroKnight. I like it a lot. That would give everyone, regardless of crappy d4 hd or not, a chance to survive. An Adventurer's bonus.

I went the other way. If a character went into 0 (or below) they had to make a con check (-1 per hp below 0). if they failed , they would fall unconscious. -10 was death. Consequently, the poor m-u would fall unconscious quite regularly. But I like your idea better I think.

Dimirag wrote:Two things about Hit Points: Remember that Thieves also has a d4 for HP, so allowing 2 starting dice for MU's would be unfair for them.
Giving them full HD value is unfair to the other classes...

True, but I think d4 for thieves, who grow up in the tough ghettos of a cutthroat world is pretty raw. Especially compared to the soft clerics who walk around with a d6 hd. I would give thieves a d6 hd myself.

Master Lok wrote:

Dimirag wrote:Two things about Hit Points: Remember that Thieves also has a d4 for HP, so allowing 2 starting dice for MU's would be unfair for them.
Giving them full HD value is unfair to the other classes...

True, but I think d4 for thieves, who grow up in the tough ghettos of a cutthroat world is pretty raw. Especially compared to the soft clerics who walk around with a d6 hd. I would give thieves a d6 hd myself.

I just generally utilize AD&D style HD (Fighters d10, Clerics d8, Thieves d6, MU d4), with a system of race modifiers for small and large races... like 1/2Ogre uses 1hd type higher, Elves Halflings use 1hd lower (instead of hard limit of d6). I use a host of other races in my game, so this comes up more for us. In addition, there are some instances where a Sub-Class might use an alternate HD type (for instance Thug (thief) uses 1 type better, and Priest (cloister cleric type) uses 1 lower).

The HD progression is:
d2 (coin flip, or d6 1-3=1, 4-6=2)
d3 (d6, 1-2=1, 3-4=2, 5-6=3)
d4
d5 (d10, 1-2=1, 3-4=2, 5-6=3, 7-8=4, 9-0=5
d6
d8
d10
d12
d16 (d-any and d8; d-any =odd, then d8 as rolled (1d8), d-any =even, then add 8 (1d8+8)

Here is a copy of the on-going house rule changes that I utilize in our games. It is in a constant state of editing for additions and changes.