Some spellcasting house rules I'm toying with

[PoliteNewb]

Here are some proposed casting houserules that I'm seeking feedback on. I'm also beefing up noncasting classes, but I don't want to rattle off everything, so this is the meat of what pertains to casting:

MULTICLASSING:

1.) Caster Level = Character level.

2.) Save DC = 10 + level. Period. No ability score bonus, no feat bonuses, that's it.
[note: I'm changing saves to a 1/2, 3/4, 1/1 progression like BAB, so this isn't as much of a boost as it looks; it's more to keep things consistent and prevent save stacking).

3.) Every level you take in a class with NO spellcasting gives you 1 bonus spell, of any level you can cast from another casting class (much like the Dragon Disciple). So a Ftr4/Rog4/Wiz4 only has the casting of a 4th level wizard, but gets 8 bonus spells (can be 1st or 2nd), his CL = 12, and his save DC for all spells is 22.

The bonus spells from noncasting classes apply to ALL casting classes you might have. Frankly, if you're multiclassing in multiple spellcasting classes, you're already boning yourself, so I don't think it would be overpowered. If you want to be a Wiz1/Clr1/Drd1/Sor1/whatever6 who can cast 30 first-level spells per day, hey, knock yourself out.

NERFS:

1.) Select spells are nerfed/banned; mostly polymorphing/summoning spells, and stuff like Forcecage (no save fighter hoser), Divine Power (schtick stealing), and stunlock spells.

2.) Druids and Clerics have reduced spell lists. Clerics are basically modeled on 2nd Edition cleric spheres, where you get so many Domains (6-8) and that's your whole casting list. Druids will simply take some cuts...if it's not centered around animals/plants/elements, it's probably going away.

3.) Crafting is limited/discouraged...all item creation feats all have higher level requirements (6th - 12th).

4.) Select metamagics are banned (twin, chain, persistent...any more to watch for?).

5.) No PrC gives full spellcasting progression.

BOOSTS:

1.) Clerics get bonus Divine/Devotion feats, so they have something to do with their turn use. No DMM.

2.) Sorcerers, to make up for their small spell list, can use ANY metamagic or reserve feat; they are considered to have all of them. No increase in casting time for metamagic.

3.) Wizards get spell secrets (pretty much imported from the Wu Jen), and automatically get all item crafting feats as they become available.

4.) Druids are getting a wild shape nerf, so combined with the reduction in spell list, they should be fine.

GOALS:

1.) Making multiclassing a more attractive option, especially for mixing casting with noncasting; if you're a dedicated caster, I don't expect this to make you want to multi (though it at least throws you a bone if you're a 12th level caster who dips fighter...an extra 6th level spell or 2 isn't awful). It's more to let a noncaster who dips a casting class not totally waste those levels by getting a few puny spells with shitty save DCs and effects.

2.) Make breakpoints and prestiging out less obvious...ideally, single-classing, multiclassing, and prestiging should all be viable options, with none clearly superior.

3.) Preventing big 3 dominance through massive spell lists; with reduced spell lists for the divine casters and reduced access to scrolls for the wizard, that should help.

4.) Throwing sorcerers a bone, to give them more versatility with their small list.

5.) Simplification for calculating levels, variables, and saves.


Ramifications? Exploits to watch for? Weak/broken?
Would any of this make you consider playing a multiclassed spellcaster? Would it make you more likely to play a sorcerer over a wizard?
Does it actually do anything to address my stated goals?
Do you have a suggestion on how to change this to make it better address stated goals?

[Blicero]

2.) Sorcerers, to make up for their small spell list, can use ANY metamagic or reserve feat; they are considered to have all of them. No increase in casting time for metamagic.

I'm assuming that you've strictly defined the number of MM feat that exist? Abilities where you know "everything" are only good when you know what "everything" actually means. Is it possible at all to combine effects or create new effects altogether?

[TarkisFlux]

Re: save changes - Have you also removed attribute bonuses, feats, gear, etc. from save bonuses?

[ubernoob]

2.) Save DC = 10 + level. Period. No ability score bonus, no feat bonuses, that's it.
[note: I'm changing saves to a 1/2, 3/4, 1/1 progression like BAB, so this isn't as much of a boost as it looks; it's more to keep things consistent and prevent save stacking).

Let's see what this does to characters that cast offensive spells.

Level 1:
Old wizard: DC 16 save
New wizard: DC 11 save

Huge nerf to the already hard to play level 1 wizard.

Level 10:
Old Wizard: DC 23 save
New Wizard: DC 20 save

Level 15:
Old Wizard: DC 29 save
New Wizard: DC 25 save

Now, considering that you're leaving the monster manual as is...
Fuck you. This is the most retarded idea I've seen all day.


Now, here's how you fix it:
1) Use Book of Gears to keep the DCs from jumping rapidly around level 8.
2) Ban Owl's Insight because that spell is RNG breaking.

Now, if you actually are rewriting the entire monster manual, then props to you. But in that case, I'm going to want to look at the monster manual because this would be an entirely new game with entirely new benchmarks.

Edit: The fact that you're actually keeping in the crafting feats is also stupid. Just let people craft whatever the fuck they want. If it isn't level appropriate, don't let them. I sincerely hope you at least were going to take the xp one level river out of crafting, but you don't seem to have mentioned that, in which case again... fuck you.

TLDR: Book of gears would fix a whole bunch of the issues.

[PoliteNewb]

I'm assuming that you've strictly defined the number of MM feat that exist? Abilities where you know "everything" are only good when you know what "everything" actually means. Is it possible at all to combine effects or create new effects altogether?

Yeah, I should probably pin it down to a reasonably tight list of MM feats. Reserve feats are all in one place in CMage, and aren't any big deal anyway.
I'm not sure what you mean by combining effects...if you mean multiple metamagics, sure, within the limits of your spell slots. I mean, you can totally do a Still Empowered Scorching Ray with a 5th level slot, assuming you know Scorching Ray and have that slot handy.
I would say "nix" to the creating new effects, unless you can better explain what you mean.

Re: save changes - Have you also removed attribute bonuses, feats, gear, etc. from save bonuses?

Initially, I hadn't intended to...I'm now thinking that a Resistance bonus is too cheap and easy, and could throw the save vs. DC thing out of whack. But something I've heard fairly regularly is how easy it is to stack save DCs and target weak saves, giving the offensive caster a decided edge there. Granted, under these rules the wizard already loses a few points due to the change in DC calculating. But figuring what saves a character has at various levels is difficult (not like looking up peeps in the monster manual). Shall we look at some examples?
Is it easy to build a character who can easily save vs. all the wizard's spells, under these rules? What do you feel is a reasonable chance of success a character should have against an equal level caster's spell? With his strong save? Weak save?

Level 1:
Old wizard: DC 16 save
New wizard: DC 11 save

Huge nerf to the already hard to play level 1 wizard.

Um...what? Can you tell me how a level 1 wizard is harder to play than a fighter or a rogue?
Everybody and his dog on these boards delights to point out how wizards have spells that fucking kill people, from 1st to 9th. Sleep, Color Spray, Grease?

Most CR 1 monsters have a weak save in the -1 to +1 range, which means the old wizard was pwning their ass about 3/4 of the time, and new wizard is down to about 50%. I have no problem with that, personally.

Level 10:
Old Wizard: DC 23 save
New Wizard: DC 20 save

Ok yes, he loses 3 points from his highest level spells...but he gains 4 points on his lowest level spells, so he might actually have a reason to cast them. Wow, wizards got nerfed, how embarassing for them, no one will ever play wizards now, amirite?

Looking at average saves for CR 10 monsters...
Couatl Fort +8
Cryohyrda Will +5
Bebilith Will/Ref +9
Fire Giant Ref +4, Will +9
Rakshasa Will +6
Noble Salamander Will +10

I'm seeing an average of around +9...which means (again) old wizard wins about 3/4 of the time, new wizard about 1/2. Again, I can live with that.

Level 15:
Old Wizard: DC 29 save
New Wizard: DC 25 save

Loses 4 points on his highest, gains 7 on his lowest, breaks even with 4th lvl spells.

His opponents?
Marut all saves +6 to +8
Mummy Lord Ref +8
Adult Red Dragon Ref +13
Nalfeshnee (1 CR down) Ref +10
Cornugon (1 CR up) Will +15
Marilith (2 CR up) Ref/Will +14
Frost Giant Jarl (2 CR up) Ref/Will +13

Again, I'm not seeing how wizards get totally hosed. They can no longer count on casting one spell and winning...that's actually what I'm aiming for.

No, I'm not rewriting the whole monster manual (though I am taking a page from Frank's book, and making CR = HD for all monsters, fiddling a bit to leave stats more or less the same). If you think this will make fights a lot harder, so I need to raise CRs by a point or 2 across the board, I'm fine with that...so people fight Fire Giants at lvl 12 instead of lvl 10, BFD.

I'm going to ignore the whole crafting issue, because to me it's practically beside the point. If you think people won't craft using these rules, they won't craft. Cry me a river.

So...can you tell me what the 2 fuck you's were for? If it's a matter of personal playing taste, okay, but I don't really care.
How does it change the balance points in a negative fashion?
Does this change make wizards unplayable, or simply more difficult?

I will actually take your advice and take a close look at Book of Gears...I figured it was mostly about crafting, and the entire crafting minigame pretty much bores me...the only reason I'm even addressing crafting at all is because cheap scrolls and wands at low level tend to favor wizards and UMD users heavily, and I'd like to stop that, but didn't want to just say "no crafting".

[ubernoob]

I'm assuming that you've strictly defined the number of MM feat that exist? Abilities where you know "everything" are only good when you know what "everything" actually means. Is it possible at all to combine effects or create new effects altogether?

Yeah, I should probably pin it down to a reasonably tight list of MM feats. Reserve feats are all in one place in CMage, and aren't any big deal anyway.
I'm not sure what you mean by combining effects...if you mean multiple metamagics, sure, within the limits of your spell slots. I mean, you can totally do a Still Empowered Scorching Ray with a 5th level slot, assuming you know Scorching Ray and have that slot handy.
I would say "nix" to the creating new effects, unless you can better explain what you mean.

Re: save changes - Have you also removed attribute bonuses, feats, gear, etc. from save bonuses?

Initially, I hadn't intended to...I'm now thinking that a Resistance bonus is too cheap and easy, and could throw the save vs. DC thing out of whack. But something I've heard fairly regularly is how easy it is to stack save DCs and target weak saves, giving the offensive caster a decided edge there. Granted, under these rules the wizard already loses a few points due to the change in DC calculating. But figuring what saves a character has at various levels is difficult (not like looking up peeps in the monster manual). Shall we look at some examples?
Is it easy to build a character who can easily save vs. all the wizard's spells, under these rules? What do you feel is a reasonable chance of success a character should have against an equal level caster's spell? With his strong save? Weak save?

The bolded portion is a stupid line of thinking. It's not about building a character, but what the actual numbers in the monster manual are. As is, the old 10+stat+1/2 level stays pretty well on the RNG, so we shouldn't diverge from those numbers. Edge cases are exactly that, edge cases.

Level 1:
Old wizard: DC 16 save
New wizard: DC 11 save

Huge nerf to the already hard to play level 1 wizard.

Um...what? Can you tell me how a level 1 wizard is harder to play than a fighter or a rogue?
Everybody and his dog on these boards delights to point out how wizards have spells that fucking kill people, from 1st to 9th. Sleep, Color Spray, Grease?

Most CR 1 monsters have a weak save in the -1 to +1 range, which means the old wizard was pwning their ass about 3/4 of the time, and new wizard is down to about 50%. I have no problem with that, personally.

Level 1 fighter with any armor and a greatsword is not only more lethal, but more survivable than a level 1 wizard. Yes, level 1 is a shitty level for wizards.

Level 10:
Old Wizard: DC 23 save
New Wizard: DC 20 save

Ok yes, he loses 3 points from his highest level spells...but he gains 4 points on his lowest level spells, so he might actually have a reason to cast them. Wow, wizards got nerfed, how embarassing for them, no one will ever play wizards now, amirite?

Looking at average saves for CR 10 monsters...
Couatl Fort +8
Cryohyrda Will +5
Bebilith Will/Ref +9
Fire Giant Ref +4, Will +9
Rakshasa Will +6
Noble Salamander Will +10

I'm seeing an average of around +9...which means (again) old wizard wins about 3/4 of the time, new wizard about 1/2. Again, I can live with that.

50% chance to save does NOT mean 50% chance to lose the encounter to the wizard. Please, for the love of god, look up some fucking same game test threads before you speak again.

Level 15:
Old Wizard: DC 29 save
New Wizard: DC 25 save

Loses 4 points on his highest, gains 7 on his lowest, breaks even with 4th lvl spells.

His opponents?
Marut all saves +6 to +8
Mummy Lord Ref +8
Adult Red Dragon Ref +13
Nalfeshnee (1 CR down) Ref +10
Cornugon (1 CR up) Will +15
Marilith (2 CR up) Ref/Will +14
Frost Giant Jarl (2 CR up) Ref/Will +13

Again, I'm not seeing how wizards get totally hosed. They can no longer count on casting one spell and winning...that's actually what I'm aiming for.

Fuck you and look up some SGTs.

No, I'm not rewriting the whole monster manual (though I am taking a page from Frank's book, and making CR = HD for all monsters, fiddling a bit to leave stats more or less the same). If you think this will make fights a lot harder, so I need to raise CRs by a point or 2 across the board, I'm fine with that...so people fight Fire Giants at lvl 12 instead of lvl 10, BFD.

I'm going to ignore the whole crafting issue, because to me it's practically beside the point. If you think people won't craft using these rules, they won't craft. Cry me a river.

So...can you tell me what the 2 fuck you's were for? If it's a matter of personal playing taste, okay, but I don't really care.
How does it change the balance points in a negative fashion?
Does this change make wizards unplayable, or simply more difficult?

As for the fuck yous, that's just a writing style thing. It's not actually personal, but simply a way to draw attention to what your biggest errors are. On the second, you totally did make level 1 wizards unplayable. Like, completely.

I will actually take your advice and take a close look at Book of Gears...I figured it was mostly about crafting, and the entire crafting minigame pretty much bores me...the only reason I'm even addressing crafting at all is because cheap scrolls and wands at low level tend to favor wizards and UMD users heavily, and I'd like to stop that, but didn't want to just say "no crafting".

Fuck, read the entire tome while you're at it. There are a fuck ton of asides of 'why we did this instead of rewriting the monster manual' in it that you'll learn from.

Big lesson for this post: Making something never succeed just means that people never attempt that act. If you want an act to be less powerful, you have to change the effect of that act (namely, rewrite every spell everywhere or just ban spellcasters entirely). Now, by making the chance of success shit, you can in effect ban spellcasters by making nobody want to play them, but you should just be honest with us and write "No spellcasters, no magic items, final destination, fox only" and get it over with.

[Red_Rob]

Most CR 1 monsters have a weak save in the -1 to +1 range, which means the old wizard was pwning their ass about 3/4 of the time, and new wizard is down to about 50%. I have no problem with that, personally.

A first level wizard can cast 2 1st level spells per day unless he is a specialist. If he has a 50% chance of failure that means he can be relied upon to take out 1 enemy per day. For this he is allowed no armour and 4 hit points. I guess not many Wizards make level 2...

Level 10:
Old Wizard: DC 23 save
New Wizard: DC 20 save

Ok yes, he loses 3 points from his highest level spells...but he gains 4 points on his lowest level spells, so he might actually have a reason to cast them. Wow, wizards got nerfed, how embarassing for them, no one will ever play wizards now, amirite?

I think most people on the boards here play with the rule that spell save DC is 10 + ½lvl + stat mod, not the system in the PHB. This alone powers up lower level spells to a useable level. In this light, your mod actually reduces save DC's across the board. Now, this might be what you are aiming for but bear in mind that in 2nd edition SoD's were easy to save against and the result was that noone used them.

I will actually take your advice and take a close look at Book of Gears...I figured it was mostly about crafting, and the entire crafting minigame pretty much bores me...the only reason I'm even addressing crafting at all is because cheap scrolls and wands at low level tend to favor wizards and UMD users heavily, and I'd like to stop that, but didn't want to just say "no crafting".

We have simply said that the costs in the DMG for Magic Items represent the amount of wealth you have to expend to obtain that item through any means. You mark off the wealth and then fluff up how you got it. A Mage might craft a wand, a Cleric might make sacrifices to their God and receive the item, or a Fighter might forge a new sword. This is totally unrealistic from an economic sense, but it fits with our gaming style and balances things out between the classes.

[TarkisFlux]

Re: save changes - Have you also removed attribute bonuses, feats, gear, etc. from save bonuses?

Initially, I hadn't intended to...I'm now thinking that a Resistance bonus is too cheap and easy, and could throw the save vs. DC thing out of whack. But something I've heard fairly regularly is how easy it is to stack save DCs and target weak saves, giving the offensive caster a decided edge there. Granted, under these rules the wizard already loses a few points due to the change in DC calculating. But figuring what saves a character has at various levels is difficult (not like looking up peeps in the monster manual). Shall we look at some examples?
Is it easy to build a character who can easily save vs. all the wizard's spells, under these rules? What do you feel is a reasonable chance of success a character should have against an equal level caster's spell? With his strong save? Weak save?

You've taken away the ability to adapt and improve from one side of the arms race then... Good save progression exactly matches save DC progression, so you succeed on a 10+ before adding anything. Resistance items cap out at +5, and if you have a +3 bonus to your save attribute or bonuses from spells or a feat you succeed on 2s and is as good as you need to get because of the auto-fail rule. This isn't even hard to do.

If you have a poor save progression and take the same +5 item and scrounge up a +5 on your save attribute through item boosters or books or whatever you have the good save progression bonus already. Again, this isn't hard, and still leaves room for further optimization.

In short, anyone who optimizes their saves isn't going to fail them very often, and there's nothing the spellcasters or other ability users can do about it because you've removed the ability for them to do so. Removing resistance items reduces this substantially, but doesn't actually prevent it. People who feel like not failing saves ever will just use spells to do that.

You could fix this, but I think the save totals you have here are also going to be high for all of the MM entries, and they're going to laugh those off as well. So if you're not changing those, you should probably not go through with your save changes at all.

If you are going to adjust all of the MM save entries, then you could go with a 3/4, 1/1, 5/4 progression for saves where you don't add anything to them at all, ever. Then some people have some strong saves and some weak saves, but since neither side can add things to their numbers they don't have a chance to push themselves off the RNG. No one can optimize anything in them, which is sorta lame, but they work I guess so whatever.

[Crissa]

So the Wizard, who can choose which save to target, should always win against a good save? What is the point of good saves, then?

-Crissa

[ubernoob]

So the Wizard, who can choose which save to target, should always win against a good save? What is the point of good saves, then?

-Crissa

A huge air elemental (CR 9) has a reflex modifier of +22. A level 10 wizard has a DC of about 23.

[Crissa]

Is that even relevant? The combat Rogue has a Reflex of ~+10 at level 9.

-Crissa

[Username17]

Is that even relevant? The combat Rogue has a Reflex of ~+10 at level 9.

-Crissa

You don't actually fight many Rogues at level 9.

Also, a Rogue gets +6 Reflex just for being a 9th level Rogue. Also they get a Dexterity bonus that is generally somewhere between +4 and +7 at that level and a +2 or +3 Resistance bonus. And you can add bullshit bonuses on top of that.

A 9th level Rogue should have a Reflex save in the +13 range, and it can easily go much higher. If you were a Halfling Flask Rogue who really cared about that sort of thing, your Reflex Save would be +18 or so. Clearly a save DC of 19 is comical bullshit at that level.

-Username17

[PoliteNewb]

The bolded portion is a stupid line of thinking. It's not about building a character, but what the actual numbers in the monster manual are. As is, the old 10+stat+1/2 level stays pretty well on the RNG, so we shouldn't diverge from those numbers. Edge cases are exactly that, edge cases.

Unless you only fight things from the monster manual and not NPCs, you kinda have to take character building into account...both for enemies saving against the PCs spells, and the PCs saving against an NPC wizard's spells. For that matter, since I'd planned on pretty much all monsters going to the same formula for save DCs (10 + HD), I need to be able to figure approximately how easy it is for PCs to stack their saves against their opposition.

So I'll reiterate:
What do you feel is a reasonable chance a PC should have to save against an opponent's spell/ability, with strong/weak save?
Or to use the monster manual, about how often (in your opinion) should the PC throw an SoD and the monster goes down? Half the time? 75% of the time?

Level 1 fighter with any armor and a greatsword is not only more lethal, but more survivable than a level 1 wizard. Yes, level 1 is a shitty level for wizards.

Dude, I'm tired of arguing this, because I'm not even sure what you're arguing.
Okay, maybe fighters are better at 1st level. So why are wizards so immensely popular?
Are you arguing that wizards need more 1st level oomph so they can live to be 5th level at which point they more or less eclipse all competition (except the CoD)? I seriously don't get you.

50% chance to save does NOT mean 50% chance to lose the encounter to the wizard. Please, for the love of god, look up some fucking same game test threads before you speak again.

I just googled "same game test wizard", and read through 4 pages of threads. None of them actually had a wizard put through the SGT. Any references to wizards and the SGT seem to indicate that in most cases, the wizard can pull an SoD off of Frank's list and win an encounter with one spell. Are you saying this isn't the case?

That's pretty much what SoD means...you cast it, and if they fail, they die. You win. Am I missing something here?

On the second, you totally did make level 1 wizards unplayable. Like, completely.

Ubernoob would never play a wizard under these rules, if starting at level 1. I'll write that down.

Making something never succeed just means that people never attempt that act. If you want an act to be less powerful, you have to change the effect of that act (namely, rewrite every spell everywhere or just ban spellcasters entirely). Now, by making the chance of success shit, you can in effect ban spellcasters by making nobody want to play them, but you should just be honest with us and write "No spellcasters, no magic items, final destination, fox only" and get it over with.

This paragraph is complete shit. I'm sorry, but it is.

I didn't make anything "never succeed". I lowered the chances of success from 75% to 50%. You may consider that a harsh nerf, and you'd actually be correct. But 50% is not 0%. The whole point of having saving throws is that sometimes opponents will actually succeed at them!
You seem to think that unless a wizard can always count on his spells working, they aren't worth playing. And that's not a totally unreasonable position to take. But if so, you should simply scrap the idea of saving throws in the first place.

When an SoD can win an encounter (and it can), you need to give the casting of such a spell a reasonable chance of failure, or else 1 spell = 1 win, and casters end up with a considerable number of spells once they have a few levels under their belt. I freely admit that I hate rocket launcher tag, so my preference is for a choice between a.) more reliable attacks which deal damage, so you need to whittle down the enemy and b.) less reliable attacks that one-shot the enemy, but don't always hit. And hey...if you don't like the idea of your spells sometimes failing, there's always buffs and utility.

A first level wizard can cast 2 1st level spells per day unless he is a specialist. If he has a 50% chance of failure that means he can be relied upon to take out 1 enemy per day. For this he is allowed no armour and 4 hit points. I guess not many Wizards make level 2...

Is this really so different from the stock wizard? If his chance was about 75% instead (using old save DCs), he's only taking down ONE additional enemy per day. Yet somehow that's hunky-dory?
I thought accepting that low-level wizards have limited spellpower was pretty much a given. If you don't want that, play a specialist, or a focused specialist, or a sorcerer, or a ranger or something.
Survivability for all characters at low level is pretty crap...one orc with a critical hit will take out most level 1 dudes, wizard or barbarian.

In this light, your mod actually reduces save DC's across the board. Now, this might be what you are aiming for but bear in mind that in 2nd edition SoD's were easy to save against and the result was that noone used them.

In all honesty, I didn't fully realize how easily save DCs could be increased (mainly through stat mod), so I honestly thought this system might slightly increase save DCs. I now see that was incorrect, so I'm probably going to ditch the idea of pumping up save progressions. Or I may scrap everything and start fresh.

Yes, actually, I was aiming for making spells easier to save against, in general. I disagree that nobody used SoDs in earlier editions, though (I played a fair bit of 1E/2E myself). They just weren't as much of a win button. Frankly, I feel that's how it should be (see response to Ubernoob above).

You could fix this, but I think the save totals you have here are also going to be high for all of the MM entries, and they're going to laugh those off as well. So if you're not changing those, you should probably not go through with your save changes at all.

I'm actually thinking you're right, I should completely scrap the idea of using BAB progressions for saves. If I stick with the old save progressions, that should (hopefully) allow room for save optimization and variation through variables in stats, feats, and so forth. I may still nix resistance items or simply increase their cost, so people aren't able to easily push their saves off the RNG. May also need to use fractional to prevent heavy multiclassing from screwing things too badly. I'll have to crunch some numbers.

I'd like to put more control in the PCs hands regarding how much they want to invest in what is essentially "magic defense", but without being able to invest as much in magical offense. Spells are pretty potent as is, and as aforementioned, the ability to target a monster's weak save gives advantage to the offensive caster. Ideally I'd like people to be able to shore up their weak save defenses without pushing their strong saves off the RNG, but we'll see how that works out. Anyway, more tinkering to do.

Thank you for your insight.

Also, a Rogue gets +6 Reflex just for being a 9th level Rogue. Also they get a Dexterity bonus that is generally somewhere between +4 and +7 at that level and a +2 or +3 Resistance bonus. And you can add bullshit bonuses on top of that.

A 9th level Rogue should have a Reflex save in the +13 range, and it can easily go much higher. If you were a Halfling Flask Rogue who really cared about that sort of thing, your Reflex Save would be +18 or so. Clearly a save DC of 19 is comical bullshit at that level.

To get +18 you're investing a fair bit just in maxing your Ref save...at which point the wizard targets your Will save, which is around +7 or so.

But now that it's been pointed out, 10 + 1/2 level + Stat may be a better way to go, from a simplicity standpoint, and I fully concede that.

Would you like to take a stab at my earlier question? Assuming you have a saving throw system, it's to be expected that sometimes your spells don't work.
In your opinion, about how often should an equal level opponent succeed using their strong save? Their weak save?

[Crissa]

And it should be, for their focus. And it should /still/ be better than 50% if they don't - an Int based Rogue for instance.

I just think it's stupid to match vs good saves. If Wizard can beat the good saves, they don't need other spells. Which they also have.

-Crissa

[Username17]

Wizards need a higher success rate at low levels when they don't have other spells to fall back upon than they need at high levels when they do. A 1st level Wizard has two color sprays to get him through the entire day. And yeah, it's an area effect save-or-lose. And that's impressive. But a Fighter can and will KO an enemy with a battle ax hit at that level, and he can do that all day. And sometimes as an attack of opportunity.

At higher levels it is reasonable to expect a Wizard to be carting around spells to target at least two saves and for them to have a substantial amount of depth to reach for alternate spell abilities if their first powers don't work.

Unfortunately, saves diverge. A lot. The difference between the high and low save on a CR 10 Knell Beetle is ten points - more than half the usable RNG. Which practically means that what you are looking at is characters pretty much always succeeding at high levels no matter what you do so long as they use the right kinds of spells. I think we can agree that a spell targeting a good save should have any chance of success at all, and once you've made that concession the Knell Beetle just doesn't have much of a chance of success on its shitty saves.

That being said, DC 15 seems to work pretty well at 1st level. If you insist on making things reductionist, DC 24 at 10th level would also be fine. A DC of 34 at level 20 would be vaguely acceptable. Or at least, as acceptable as anything can be when you realize that the difference between the Eldritch Giant Confessor's middle save and lowest save is seriously 19 points - or one entire RNG if you want to be snide about it.

-Username17

[Roy]

Is that even relevant? The combat Rogue has a Reflex of ~+10 at level 9.

-Crissa

You don't actually fight many Rogues at level 9.

Also, a Rogue gets +6 Reflex just for being a 9th level Rogue. Also they get a Dexterity bonus that is generally somewhere between +4 and +7 at that level and a +2 or +3 Resistance bonus. And you can add bullshit bonuses on top of that.

A 9th level Rogue should have a Reflex save in the +13 range, and it can easily go much higher. If you were a Halfling Flask Rogue who really cared about that sort of thing, your Reflex Save would be +18 or so. Clearly a save DC of 19 is comical bullshit at that level.

-Username17

Well, a Reflex DC of 40 would also be comical bullshit at that level. But that's because Reflex saves don't do anything you care about even when you fail them (which you would, 95% of the time if you actually encountered a DC 40 save at that level).

Anyways, it's kind of assumed that both players and monsters will stack their saves up to make instant win spells fizzle as often as possible. Especially PCs, as even a 5% chance to auto lose every round still puts you in the grave more often than you ding a level. And that's as low as it gets (pass save on a 2+, only one instant win spell caster).

Your system pulls a Pathfinder in that it does exactly the fucking opposite of what it is supposed to do.

Enemy save DCs 10 + HD? So in other words, a massive boost? Meanwhile your own spells take a huge nerf. You say you hate Rocket Launcher Tag (and still play 3.5, for some reason) and then you turn around and give the enemy clusterbomb rockets and the players bottle rockets. It's still RLT, just woefully one sided.

[PoliteNewb]

Unfortunately, saves diverge. A lot. The difference between the high and low save on a CR 10 Knell Beetle is ten points - more than half the usable RNG. Which practically means that what you are looking at is characters pretty much always succeeding at high levels no matter what you do so long as they use the right kinds of spells. I think we can agree that a spell targeting a good save should have any chance of success at all, and once you've made that concession the Knell Beetle just doesn't have much of a chance of success on its shitty saves.

Yeah, save divergence is a pretty huge issue...I'll have to find a way to tackle that without rewriting every monster in existence.

That being said, DC 15 seems to work pretty well at 1st level. If you insist on making things reductionist, DC 24 at 10th level would also be fine. A DC of 34 at level 20 would be vaguely acceptable.

All of those DCs are exactly 4 points higher than my formula...which makes modification pretty simple, and doesn't allow save stacking or require SAD/punish MAD...so I'm probably gonna go with that. Make it 15 + lvl, for a nice round number that gives wizards sufficient bulge at lower levels without being crazy at higher.
Thanks!

Enemy save DCs 10 + HD? So in other words, a massive boost? Meanwhile your own spells take a huge nerf.

Did you miss that I'm shifting monsters to CR = HD (or in most cases, vice versa)? They're on the exact same scale as PCs.


Did anyone have any opinion on the multiclassing idea?

[Username17]

Did anyone have any opinion on the multiclassing idea?

Well, the Bonus spells thing doesn't really do what you think it does, and probably isn't a good idea.

A Wizard at level 2 basically gets one bonus 1st level spell. Getting the same bonus from a level of Barbarian or Rogue is kind of a no brainer - except that if the game goes long enough to get to level 3, such a character suddenly gets raped by the multicaster inadequacy.

-Username17

[RobbyPants]

Yeah, save divergence is a pretty huge issue...I'll have to find a way to tackle that without rewriting every monster in existence.

You really can't. Well, you can ignore the low-level ones because the issue really shows up with high-Hit Dice monsters, but you'd have to rewrite all of the high HD monsters to fix the problem.