{kjd-exp} Limiting spellcasters

In article <slrngj94uk.soe.keith.davies RemoveThis @kjdavies.org>,
Keith Davies <keith.davies RemoveThis @kjdavies.org> wrote:

<snip>

> I long ago changed it so that the inherent speed hit is only suffered by
> those nonproficient. Those proficient with the armor can still take a
> speed hit because of weight.

Me, I'd prefer to factor the character's strength in there, somewhere,
also. I mean, using 3e rules, a fighter with 20 STR, wearing a chain
shirt and carrying the usual backpack, distance weapon and a two-hander
for melee is still only lightly encumbered (I know; I had to look it up
recently). Why, then, is he/she still limited to a MV of 20?

<snip>

Baird

--
Bumper sticker: "If you can't operate your turn signal,
what makes you think you can drive the rest of the car?"

Keith Davies wrote:
> LL <Lorenz.Lang RemoveThis @invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Keith Davies wrote:
>>
>>>Hi All,
>>>
>>>I've seen comments before about how the full spellcasters (especially
>>>wizards, druids, and clerics -- the latter two are fullcasters with
>>>*more* stuff) are overpowered at high levels.
>>
>>I agree: Clr and Drd are probably the "best" classes in the game.
>>Wiz is a bit weaker, but still "better" than the others.
>>If we assume a certain value for "best" and "better"...
>
>
> Power and versatility, say.
>
>
>>>I'm prepared to believe
>>>this; fighters, rogues, and monks tend to be the poor cousins once
>>>you get past a certain point (opinions vary as to what point).
>>
>>I believe this too.
>
>
> IMO, noncasters are too weak, casters aren't too strong. The problem
> lies in the difference in ability and effect.

Pathfinder addresses this problem with additional/better abilities for
Ftr, Brb and Rog for example.

>>>What if spellcasters were to be limited to no more than half their
>>>levels in a spellcasting class (half plus one; you can lead off with a
>>>spellcasting class, so you can have a Wiz1, Wiz1/Ftr1, but not a Wiz2)?
>>
>>Or you could just say max. levels in Clr, Drd, Sor, Wiz is 11.
>>Otherwise studying magic (or developing in the case of Sor) would
>>only be possible as a part-time activity, which is counter-intuitive
>>to me.
>
>
> Possibly, though I'm sure people disagree about the cutoff point.

Wiz 11 means one 6th level spell. I like the idea of a capstone spell,
i.e. one spell of the highest spell level at the highest Wiz level.

>>>* it makes encounters unbalanced, because encounters are designed on the
>>> expectation of the higher-level spells!
>>>
>>> (if this makes the spellcasters too weak, what does it do to the
>>> *non*-spellcasters?)
>>
>>If caster classes are restricted to 10th level and don't have
>>6th-9th level spells, monsters should have the same restriction.
>>Applied to supernatural abilities too - SR is another issue.
>
>
> Possibly. Though I like the idea of monsters that *need* nonmagic
> solutions, so this might not be a problem for me.

Some monsters could become the "Be prepared or TPK" kind of problems.
Meaning that the "heroes" have to run away more often,
which some players don't like, because they want to be *real* heroes.
It's changing the play style - if you want that, okay...

>>>* it's dumb that some classes are limited this way and others aren't
>>>
>>> (okay, apply the same rule to all classes -- Ftr10/Bbn10 is allowed,
>>> but Ftr20 and Bbn20 aren't.)
>>
>>Ftr/Brb 10/10 still has high hp and BAB +20...
>
>
> Yep. Which is why I didn't bother with the 'must multiclass' limitation
> for noncasters -- little direct effect. The Ftr10/Bbn10 actually has
> *more* hit points (but same BAB and possibly worse AC).

I assume you have a solution for the strange effects to
saves and less than full BAB... fractionals, I guess?

>>>Thoughts, questions, comments?
>>
>>While it's true that Clr, Drd and Wiz are "powerful",
>>not everybody likes to play them.
>
> I like playing clerics, but that's mostly because I like playing
> clerics. I usually gimp myself in some fashion or another (my cleric of
> Kord has levels in Barbarian and refuses to wear heavy armor because
> it's for wimps).

My Clrs don't get heavy armor in the first place,
they have to pick the right domain.

>>Many players don't like to be told what to do by some god,
>>they don't want to be tree-huggers or weaklings who are
>>a dead duck without their spellbook.
>>Some players want to be able to survive a barroom brawl
>>at level 1 ...
>>
>>I thought about something else lately:
>>
>>1. spell DC depends on caster level instead of spell's level
>
>
> Possibly; tussock's suggested dumping spell level from save DC and make
> it a flat casterlevel/3.

Nice idea. IMO it's easier to to make spell casting equal to
spell-like and supernatural powers, i.e. CL/2.
The saves should be a bit better with both these solutions IMO.

>>2. saving throw progression becomes better (good becomes +17,
>> poor becomes +10 at 20th level)
>
> What are the formulae here, please? I've got a 'medium' save that's
> equal to 1+level/2.5 (+9 at 20th level), I can see 3+level/1.5 (which
> would be +16 at 20th level).

Good = 2 + level*0,75
Medium = 1 + level*0,625
Poor = 0 + level*0,5

I think about using just classlevel*x and give racial boni
at first level. PCs receive the fractions too and if these add
up to "1" their total save goes up (same for BAB). Remaining
fractions are ignored.

Two levels in diff. classes with a good save should give +3.
Two levels in diff. classes with a poor save should give +1 IMO.

LL