The durations of D&D spells should not scale with level.

[CatharzGodfoot]

At all. Thank you, and good night.



Although a modified version of extend/persistent spell still has reasons to exist.

[koz]

Could you elaborate on this thought, CGF? I'm curious to see your arguments in this regard.

[RandomCasualty2]

I agree with the OP.

There's not one good spell I can think of that scales with level that was a good idea.

And I can think of lots of bad ones. Like the 1 round summon monster.

[Murtak]

I'm not Catharz, but scaling durations lead to bullshit like a summoning spell lasting for a single attack at level 1 and hour-per-level buffs turning into always-on buffs at higher levels. I'm sure there are a few specific spells where a scaling duration is fine, but 99% of all spells work better when you replace "level" with a fixed number (5, 8, 10, take your pick). At the very least durations should be turned into something like "one round per level, minimum 5" so low level casters can be expected to actually use those spells at all.

[CatharzGodfoot]

Could you elaborate on this thought, CGF? I'm curious to see your arguments in this regard.

Take the example of mage armor. Why should it last for one hour at 1st level? If it's an in-combat buff, you should have to cast in in or shortly before combat. If it's a long-term buff (as it seems to be), it should just last all day. No good comes from it lasting 1 hour at 1st level and 2 at 2nd.

Take the example of summon monster I. In what way is summoning a celestial badger for 6 seconds not completely retarded? If you want a short term summoned ally, make it stick around for a minute. That's a short-term ally at any level. It would make sense to have a higher level version that conjured a cohort for the day, and that's where a modified version of the extend spell feat fits in.

If I was forced to come up with durations for spells, it would be 1 to 5 rounds for tactical effects, 1 minute (10 rounds) for short duration effects, 8 hours for long duration effects (for obvious reasons), and then you'd have permanent effects.

If you really want you can throw in 10 minutes of water walking that's fine, but I still don't think it makes sense for a 9th level character to walk on water for an hour and a half when a 1st level character walks on water for 10 minutes.

[Edit] Ninja'd![/Edit]

[RandomCasualty2]

Not to mention that by definition it's extra calculation. If the duration is a flat 8 hours, that's easier to figure out than 1 hour/level, which constantly changes as your character levels up, gets negative levels or whatever.

So to include per level scaling, there really needs to be a good reason to put it in. And really I have yet to come across a spell where I say, "I'm glad we have a scaling duration because of this spell."

[koz]

You do make a valid point there, CGF. I suspect what would be best is if they simply had a set of durational 'categories', kinda like how we now have with ranges, and those determined spell durations instead of CL.

[Lago PARANOIA]

I am a fan of M&M d20's quadratic scaling charts for time/distance/effect.

While I think that tracking things from minute to minute or even hour to hour is generally bullshit, I can see real utility in a lower-level/undercasting spellcaster making a Wall of Fire spell last for a few seconds while another one burns all of their healing surges and their 1st to 2nd level spell slots for a day to make it last for a hundred years.

[Lokathor]

Well, does the same argument apply to ranges? Should "Close" always be exactly 30ft or something like that?

[Orca]

Why not?

Past character level 3 or so, the difference in D&D is more like 'Now I can cast Fireball!' or 'Now I get 2 rays with Scorching Ray' or 'Now I can Teleport instead of just Dimension Door'.

Another 10' of range on Scorching Ray is just fiddly bookkeeping by comparison.

[Lokathor]

So then,
Close: 30ft (matches sneak attack)
Medium: 150ft (5 sling ranges?)
Long: 500ft (5 longbow ranges)

[CatharzGodfoot]

Well, does the same argument apply to ranges? Should "Close" always be exactly 30ft or something like that?

I think that an argument can be made for scaling ranges, but there's barely more to gain than from ranges. And it's annoying to calculate unless you're the kind of person who puts them precalculated on the character sheet. You can always have feats like widen spell if you want range increases.

Really, the only things than absolutely need to scale are DCs and damage.

[Kaelik]

Part of the difference between ranges and durations is that Close is 50ft + 5ft per 2 levels.

Duration is seriously one round at level 1, and 20 at 20.

If Close range were: 5ft per two levels, minimum 5.

Then no one would ever cast Close range spells at level one, just like no one casts one round duration spells.

Not that we should do the same thing with durations, because I'm all for constant durations, just saying that the large constant value makes the variance less important.

I'd say, Close 60ft (and probably expand SA to 60ft too, a Rogue should be able to SA a Colossal Creature from outside it's reach.)

Medium 200ft

Long 500 or a thousand, does it really matter.

As for durations:

1) One day
2) 12 Hours
3) One Hour
4) 10 Rounds.
5) Various stuff with Instantaneous or very short and variable durations.
6) Permanent.

[TarkisFlux]

Really, the only things than absolutely need to scale are DCs and damage.

I'm not even sold on those things if you're willing to scale the actual cost of a spell downward as it becomes less powerful relative to other things you can cast. If you're going to stick with a fixed cost vancian system though, I think you're absolutely right about those as a minimum.

[Josh_Kablack]

Well, if level==power then something absolutely needs to scale with level.

In 3.x D&D, range, level, duration and damage all tend to scale directly with caster level. Save DC scales indirectly with caster level (due to stat gains, feats and items).

Furthermore, ways to make minor edits to spells (change damage type, increase range, increase duration, increase AoE) are semi-scaling binary feat-selection abilities

But the bigger deal is that in D&D, in addition to these: spells known and power of the best spells known also scales with caster level. Thus not only are casters getting more spells, and better spells all the time but also their second-best spells keep improving.

And that's what casters do in D&D. Reducing any aspect of that is a caster nerf. However if you are of a mind to nerf casters:


It would be totally viable to have a set-up where only spells known and power of the best scales scaled. In this set-up Magic Missile only ever does 1d4+1, and you are expected to only use it after you're gone through your Disintegrate, Cloudkill, Phantasmal Killer, Fireball and Scorching Ray.

It would also be totally viable to have a set-up where spells known did not scale at all but other things did. In this set up you just know Eldritch Blast, but at level 3 you get to eldritch blast 3 targets (like Scorching Ray), at level 5 you get to eldritch blast an area (like fireball) at level 7 you get to add a weak save-or-die to your eldritch blast (like phantsmal killer), at level 9 you get to elritch blast an area in a way that does damage over time (like cloudkill) and at level 11, eldritch blast vaporizes fools to more than merely dead (like disintegrate)

Heck, you could even have something wacky like a set-up where only damage scaled automatically with level, and the additional effects like those in the prior example were semi-scaling selectable binary advancement options. In this set up, damage spells cast by Nth level wizards would always deal Xd6 damage - but for some wizards they would deal that Xd6 as an AoE DoT while for other wizards it would be a single target Xd6 that had an attached Save-or-More-than-Die effect - and which happened would vary with "feat" selection.

[Kaelik]

Josh, that's not right at all.

How fast you scale does not make you stronger or weaker if the starting amount is worth more.

If every Hour per level spell just became "One day" then all casters with CL less than 24 would be buffed in duration.

If all round per level spells were changed to: One minute, then in fact, all people with a CL lower than 10 are buffed, and all people with CL higher are nerfed (Maybe, if they actually used those rounds).

This isn't a caster nerf, it's a simplification that makes lower level casters better in their use of a lot of spells, and higher level caster roughly the same or maybe a little shorter durations oh well.

[RandomCasualty2]

If movement scales, then generally range should scale as well. Either that or you may just require higher level spells for better range.

[Josh_Kablack]

Kaelik, I have no idea what you just said or how it relates to my post - could you rephrase?

Or am I really that drunk right now?

[Arijkos]

Not to mention that by definition it's extra calculation. If the duration is a flat 8 hours, that's easier to figure out than 1 hour/level, which constantly changes as your character levels up, gets negative levels or whatever.

So to include per level scaling, there really needs to be a good reason to put it in. And really I have yet to come across a spell where I say, "I'm glad we have a scaling duration because of this spell."

Nah, come on. 1min/level is easy compared to x rounds +x rounds/level or similar counts, which become total headaches if your party spreads out in terms of character level.

[CatharzGodfoot]

As for durations:

1) One day
2) 12 Hours
3) One Hour
4) 10 Rounds.
5) Various stuff with Instantaneous or very short and variable durations.
6) Permanent.

Apparently you missed the reasoning behind the 8 hour duration (avoiding the F. Trollman cheat). That or you just don't care?

I actually have no problem with spell casters having 8 hour work days (IMO a big improvement over 5 minutes).

Kaelik, I have no idea what you just said or how it relates to my post - could you rephrase?

Or am I really that drunk right now?

I'm pretty sure the point is that fixed durations are a buff to spell casters when their levels would give them shorter durations, and are a nerf when the levels would give them longer durations.

Also, you must be really drunk. So long as we're talking D&D, there is pretty much zero chance that a wizard who can cast cloudkill is ever going to fall back on a 1d4+1 magic missile. Even if she does, it doesn't matter. That kind of damage will be completely eclipsed by other players who have unlimited level-based attacks.

[Kaelik]

As for durations:

1) One day
2) 12 Hours
3) One Hour
4) 10 Rounds.
5) Various stuff with Instantaneous or very short and variable durations.
6) Permanent.

Apparently you missed the reasoning behind the 8 hour duration (avoiding the F. Trollman cheat). That or you just don't care?

I actually have no problem with spell casters having 8 hour work days (IMO a big improvement over 5 minutes).

1) I don't care. It's fine, any "One day" spell is obviously a spell you intend to be active all the time.

12 hours is my replacement for 8 hours on yours because I wanted to aim for the actual length of time everyone else would be up and about.

2) My example to Josh was just an example, I would think the "One day" spells would be pretty limited:

Things like: Rope Trick, Mindblank, Anticipate Teleport, MMM, stuff, not necessarily "Overland Flight" which would be in the 12 hour range.

Basically just protections against being junked while you sleep.

[RandomCasualty2]

Well, if level==power then something absolutely needs to scale with level.

Not always, no. Scaling is not to grant new abilities but rather to prevent old ones from falling behind.

In some cases, like direct damage or healing spells, your spell becomes rapidly useless if it doesn't scale. In other cases, your spell may well not degrade at all. See invisibility still works fine at level 12 to see invisible things as it did at level 3. There's really no need for it to scale.

Also remember that as you level, the spell costs you a smaller and smaller portion of your daily resources, because you get more slots. Burning a slot for invisibility is a pretty big deal at level 3, but it's trivial at level 12.

[Psychic Robot]

I'm going to have to agree with Catharz.

Spell durations should be:

--Five minutes.
--One hour.
--Eight hours.

Five minutes lasts for one combat. One hour lasts long enough to do out of combat things. Eight hours lasts for a day's adventuring. Personally, I'd say scrap the whole system, use encounter spells, and make the max duration of a spell five minutes, but that's just me.

[Username17]

I'm OK with the Day/Level Curses like charm monster. If that was your actual limit on Charm Thralls (and you couldn't just upgrade them to devoted followers with a DC 15 Diplomancy test), it would actually be a quanitfiable limit on how many thralls you could keep at a time.

-Username17

[CatharzGodfoot]

1) I don't care. It's fine, any "One day" spell is obviously a spell you intend to be active all the time.

12 hours is my replacement for 8 hours on yours because I wanted to aim for the actual length of time everyone else would be up and about.

The problem is, that encourages a 4 hour workday.

2) My example to Josh was just an example, I would think the "One day" spells would be pretty limited:

Things like: Rope Trick, Mindblank, Anticipate Teleport, MMM, stuff, not necessarily "Overland Flight" which would be in the 12 hour range.

Basically just protections against being junked while you sleep.

I'd just as soon make buffs just last forever until you go unconscious (you have to maintain 'slight concentration'), and make rope tricks either last just over 8 hours, a day, or permanent until dismissed.
[Edit] Long term buffs. [/Edit]

---

I'm OK with the Day/Level Curses like charm monster. If that was your actual limit on Charm Thralls (and you couldn't just upgrade them to devoted followers with a DC 15 Diplomancy test), it would actually be a quanitfiable limit on how many thralls you could keep at a time.

-Username17

It ain't broke (unlike some of the other durations), so we don't have to fix it. On the other hand, there's not a huge reason for it to scale with level rather than lasting a week or until the next new moon or something.