| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Aug 2019 : 07:25:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by BrennonGoldeye
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• Metamagic feats can only be applied to one spell per casting. No Silent quickened still Magic Missiles for example.
A question, why would anyone do that? Its an act of will with the quickened. I don't think making an entire class of feats incompatible with one another is a good answer. Are you going to also stop the fighter from using Power Attack with her Specialized weapon?
When I saw the Cheater of Mystra build or the Incantrix Prestige Class, or the number of feats that allowed people to remove the level restriction on Metamagic feats with other mundane options (like Divine Metamagic) or when saw someone use feat shenanigans to get a Quickened Maximized Empowered Enervation spell and only use a 5th level spell-slot (of which at the level we were playing at, he had 7 of them) I realized that metamagic stacking (and the feats that reduce them entirely) were absolutely terrible and wouldn't allow them.
The concept is cool, trading off power of a higher level slot for a better version of a lower level spell. Unfortunately casters already get better versions of their lower level spells simply by their caster level. So it was a trade in power, a 5th level spell slot to let off 5 magic missile as a free action or to have a handful of silenced offensive spells in a area affected by Silence. But as more and more and more options rolled out, the hard-level jump of metamagic feats became obsolete. One of the Sorcerer's hindrances to his free non-Vancian casting was that he couldn't easily apply Metamagic feats to his spells without spending his whole action to do it....then Rapid Metamagic came along and said "yea, no more restriction for you." Or Arcane Thesis which said "choose a spell that a metamagic feat applies to, lessen the cost!"
Honestly, I feel spellcasters get SO many obvious buffs in this edition - I mean they can easily shut down entire battles with castings of 2 or less spells and/or buff themselves up enough that makes other characters pointless or summon allies that can do the other's job that this limitation would only hamper their power a bit.
quote:
Originally posted by BrennonGoldeye
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• Spells cast with target: Personal are subjected to Concentration checks after the first spell. The DC is 10 + spell level (of the highest personal spell cast) + 1/extra spell. Thus a 4th level Wizard who cast Shield and Mirror Image must succeed, at the beginning of their turn, a DC 13 Concentration check (10 + 2 + 1) each round the spells are active. Failure means the spell ends automatically at the beginning of their next turn. It's sort harsh BUT it's supposed to keep wizards and other casters from going SUPERMAN with a ton of low level personal spells AND if they fail it, they still get a whole turn where it's active. Failure means the highest spell fades first. Then you continue with Concentration checks for the next spell down (until only 1 is left, which they use for free).
If you do this you should also greatly lower the levels of any spell affected and take away most needed components. Part of the power of these magics is the fact you DONT have to concentrate on them. This is honestly a major rework on the concept of spellcasting classes. Not a fan.
Some do, some don't. Shield requires zero component. Spell Turning requires a small silver mirror. Again, in a game where you can literally fly (not personal spell), have a Shield, Turn away spells cast at you, and Spell Matrixes where you can have free spells just waiting around to be cast....there's no
limit except how many slots you get and the get dozens.
Not only that but this really limits Clerics going full-blown Aspect of their Deity all day long. They're going to have to really be good at keeping up their Concentration checks when they're stomping around with Divine Power, Divine Favor, and Righteous Might wrecking every monster in a 10'+ radius.
quote:
Originally posted by BrennonGoldeye
Everything else..YES!
Well I'm glad some ideas are cool  . I've been playing with 3.5 for as long as it's been out. I've tried PF (and read PF2) and I've played 4e and 5e. I still see there's some great bones about the 3.5 system, however a LOT of people disregard many of the fail safes that were in place (like Multiclass restrictions on classes, favored classes, etc.) or using Components or making sure they're writing down what Components are Focuses etc.
I had a conversation with a friend who, when I pitched my idea of a gritty-like game using the bare-bones of 3.5 but with these tweakes, got mad when I said I'd be strictly enforcing the Components of spells. He literally thought I'd be fine with an 8th level Dread Necromancer having 64 HD worth of undead (but only controlling 48 of them) just being raised up and not factor in the some 1,600 gp of Onyx gems needed to carry out the deed. He was perplexed because apparently no table enforces the Material Components rule for D&D 3.5. I mean, damn no wonder he thought the game was broken, when a wizard casts Stoneskin 5 times from scrolls and spell slots and doesn't take into account the 250 gp worth of Diamond Dust per casting, lol.
I guess that I've seen just too many games fail at mid level where a guys is playing a Scout or maybe they're a Knight with some add-on Prestige Class and they're excited they went first and did their 47 damage on a charging steed attack. But then the Wizard just says "I cast Enervation, take X level damage" and that enemy just falls over dead....Its funny here and there but when the caster has so many spells that even at 5-6 encounters a day, they're still pumping out excessive magical support it makes mundanes feel like they're just sort of....there. |
 |
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11825 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2019 : 15:08:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Yeah, the 5e spellcasting is definitely curtailed for high levels by the removing of spell slots. Even moreso, multi-classing (theurging) doesn't improve this even if you go say wizard/cleric, etc... You still have the same number of slots. While I was focusing on the idea of multiple concentration slots, OTHER types of ideas for improving spellcasters in 5e that should be available as options but simply aren't are things like the below... again, not everyone should get these, but they should be "paths" that a spellcaster can trod (and I've developed feats for some).
I get why they limited the number of higher level slots, it gives no-casters a bit of parity in that regard. I mean even a high level Fighter with 4 attacks (8 with action surge, 9 fighting with two-weapons or a polearm) isn't going to dish out the amount of damage or have the sort of impact on the battlefield that a caster will with high-level magic. If you're going to have high-level magic be extremely potent then you don't want that happening too many times. Look at 3.5 as the opposite, a high level Wizard gets 2, 3, 4, 5 # of 5th thru 9th level spells. Spell component costs aside, that's quite an astounding amount of firepower per day than what any non-caster can hope to accomplish given the same set of actions.
As to Theurging, I've never tread down the dual-casting road in any edition so I'd have to default to others for how it's handled and the impact it's had or not had.
You're list of paths is kinda cool, but ultimately I feel that in a tightly controlled game that 5e is, it would basically make spellcasters FAR ahead of anyone else in the game. Even if they only pick one of the paths, you're talking about abilities that don't just sometimes circumvent the safegards in place to keep casters on the same planet as non-casters, but shatter them completely. I mean, Contingencies alone can be abused ridiculously by smart and crafty players. Not to mention what people can do with Metamagic shenanigans.
I guess I feel that if casters could choose which things to get rid of, what's the off setting thing non-casters get? More feats or Ability Score bumps don't come close. I'm not sure if there is any parity there? I get wanting the feel that other editions allowed, especially with aspects like mantles and flying around like a mini-God, but I really hope we don't get to the day where every monster needs Anti-Magic Fields up all day just to make the combat fun for everyone.
Hey, hope you don't mind, but I kinda want to voice some views of mine on 5e with spellcasters. They may be colored by the fact that honestly I haven't studied 5e as much as I did 3.5 and earlier, but its things I've noticed. I also don't think a lot of newer DM's fully adjudicated all of the rules and don't realize the repercussions of a lot of the new things that are in to crimp the spellcaster's power. The problem as I see it with 5e now is that there's only a handful of paths that I really see that are effective for most casters, whereas melee artists have different options. In fact, multi-classing for melee folk doesn't even suck too bad like it does for spellcasters. Granted, I'm looking at things from the standpoints I've played in 5e (which have been all 12th level and under), but at present it looks like their power levels actually aren't that god-like at the upper levels, and at the lower levels their options are pretty much "fireball" tactics. Granted, you can do some other things, but most people that want to play a spellcaster are doing it to try and be creative, and this just sucks that whole thing out of it.
Basically, with things like concentration as is, someone can either have a defensive spell up OR maintain some kind of field effect, but not both. You can't for instance have up something like stoneskin and also have a cloudkill affecting the enemy. You are also hamstrung in the use of high level spells at the upper levels for any kind of significant dungeon crawl, because you have so few. In a single combat scenario, yes the spellcaster can release it all, but when they may have to hold that spell just in case they need to teleport the group out after the next room down, or they may need to keep some spell just in case they need to remove some magical schtick.
In short, I definitely agree that in previous editions... spellcasters were gods. In 2nd edition, definitely. In 3.5, at the upper levels they were pretty dangerous. I can't say for 4e. But, 5e..... I feel they got a little nerfed... while at the same time some spells have been overpowered (clone jumps to the top of that list). They've had their number of spells nerfed. They can't multiclass worth a damn. The concentration thing if PROPERLY DM'd (and that's the thing here, I bet a lot of DM's aren't paying attention to things like someone having up a defensive spell and an offensive "field" spell at the same time) puts a serious curtail on people's spellcasting. Then magic immunity is rampant as well with certain beings, such that upper level spellcasters can't touch creatures. Even a lot of the defensive spells aren't that useful (for instance, stoneskin is ineffective if the person attacking has a simple +1 magical weapon or if their attacks can be treated as magical). Contingency as an example used to be able to teleport a person out of danger, but that's no longer possible since it can only be used with 5th level or less spells that are castable as a single action. A LOT of the old schticks that people picture from previous editions, if you really start looking at them, you can't do at all under 5e rulesets either because of new rules, or simply the spells "don't exist". Also, spells not having improved saves for upper level spell slots essentially turns many spells into simple crap shoots. You may blow an upper level spell to no effect whatsoever.
Anyway, that's just what I'm seeing. I could be wrong and maybe there's things I haven't considered. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
Edited by - sleyvas on 20 Aug 2019 15:20:47 |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1536 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2019 : 03:33:15
|
What the designers missed out on is that spells scale exponentially, not linearly.
Unless you're a necromancer, in which case you curl up into a ball and cry at what happened to poor horrid wilting.
Also, I think it's more of a case of people being experienced enough at 3.5e that they know the rules inside and out, and how to break the game. There's nothing wrong with powergaming as long as the DM is okay with it, some players just enjoy the game by seeing how far they can take their characters. It's just as valid as the player who thinks that fireball is the best spell in the game, or sword-and-board fighter, or healbot cleric.
High level gameplay is rocket tag, because balance starts breaking down at 12+. |
|
|
|
Renin
Learned Scribe
USA
290 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2019 : 03:58:26
|
| The Pathfinder playtest was a stepping stone to PF2. There is a lot that is familiar, but PF2 really took to heart the play test responses with their changes. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11825 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2019 : 15:03:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
<snip>
I had a conversation with a friend who, when I pitched my idea of a gritty-like game using the bare-bones of 3.5 but with these tweakes, got mad when I said I'd be strictly enforcing the Components of spells. He literally thought I'd be fine with an 8th level Dread Necromancer having 64 HD worth of undead (but only controlling 48 of them) just being raised up and not factor in the some 1,600 gp of Onyx gems needed to carry out the deed. He was perplexed because apparently no table enforces the Material Components rule for D&D 3.5. I mean, damn no wonder he thought the game was broken, when a wizard casts Stoneskin 5 times from scrolls and spell slots and doesn't take into account the 250 gp worth of Diamond Dust per casting, lol.
I just had to say, its so refreshing to see someone who examines this stuff like me. This is exactly the kind of thing that I was kind of mentioning about people abusing systems by just not following all the rules. However, at the same time I'll just go ahead and say it... how many of us actually calculated encumbrance. I know some did, and I'll say that I used a basic idea of "what kind of armor do you have on, and does it sound like you're carrying too much extra crap without some kind of bag to put it in and displace the burden".
It sounds like you don't have a lot of pre 3e experience in gaming, and one of the things that was COMMONLY overlooked by everyone in 1e/2e was time to memorize spells at upper levels. They would harp on how powerful spellcasters were when fully prepped... and without a doubt, they were.... BUT when they started using those high level spell slots, it would take HOURS and DAYS and sometimes WEEKS to replenish their spellcasting abilities (not including the time spent resting... just memorization time). Also, the idea that simply destroying their spellbooks could cripple them was never factored in (you don't have to kill that lich up front to make him vastly less effective... just destroy his books). Some of this still applies to the versions of the games today, but not the memorization time. Now its just "zip-itty-do" and you have looked at and memorized multiple complex arcane symbols.
BACK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND (forgive me)
Anyway, I'm still going through the 5e core rulebook. I will say that compared to 5e, their concept for multi-classing seems more doable. Without actually building a character I can't say, but I'm liking the concept so far, especially for gish type characters (whether that be fighter/wizard, or rogue/cleric, or ranger/druid, etc...). I haven't looked at the spell lists heavily either, but I'm noting that the sorcerer is NOT the same as a wizard anymore. They use a spell list based on their bloodline. That makes the concept of the divine soul as a separate class kind of moot.
I'm also surprised at the number of ability boost you get (I think its 4 ability boosts at once, every 5th level). However, that being said, once you get past an 18 in your scores, an ability boost is only a +1 bonus to a score.
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2019 : 18:45:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Hey, hope you don't mind, but I kinda want to voice some views of mine on 5e with spellcasters. They may be colored by the fact that honestly I haven't studied 5e as much as I did 3.5 and earlier, but its things I've noticed. I also don't think a lot of newer DM's fully adjudicated all of the rules and don't realize the repercussions of a lot of the new things that are in to crimp the spellcaster's power. The problem as I see it with 5e now is that there's only a handful of paths that I really see that are effective for most casters, whereas melee artists have different options. In fact, multi-classing for melee folk doesn't even suck too bad like it does for spellcasters. Granted, I'm looking at things from the standpoints I've played in 5e (which have been all 12th level and under), but at present it looks like their power levels actually aren't that god-like at the upper levels, and at the lower levels their options are pretty much "fireball" tactics. Granted, you can do some other things, but most people that want to play a spellcaster are doing it to try and be creative, and this just sucks that whole thing out of it.
I've never played a full spellcaster in 5th Edition. My only venture is a current 4th level Moon elf Fighter (Eldritch Knight) and I think I get a few 1st level spells and I have 3 cantrips (Green-flame Blade, Minor Illusion, and Sword Burst) that are all going to go up in power at level 5. Is it the best build ever? Not really, apparently it doesn't get good til about level 7 when I can use a cantrip AND use the Attack action in the same turn. That's when cantrips like True Strike and Bladeward become really good options. But still, I feel on-par with some of the other casters in the game.
The thing is, in 5E they toned ALL the power across the board down. It was pretty much the reverse decision from 4th Edition. Because 3E borked everything power-wise, no one really had a good idea of what parity was past 7th level or so. 4E said OK, casters can shape reality and break games with a casting of a spell while Fighters can basically do some additional damage and that needs to change, so they build up the martial classes more and downgraded the casters more and fit them all into the same per-day Box.
In game-play, this works really well. As a high-level Fighter in 4E I can really contribute to combat and be a protection for my other players. Monsters don't want to mess too much with me but I force them. On the flip side, as a Wizard I can still have memorable and impacting spells that really effect how the outcome of the encounter goes (or I can use Rituals when we're not in combat to help the party) but neither of those two things make someone else obsolete.
Unfortunately, people didn't like that. The old-school thought of the Bell-Curve power (fighters early are great and wizards suck to Fighters suck and Wizards are great at the end) that should be prevalent in D&D. So what was 5th Edition to do? How do you both have good parity through most of the character's career AND yet still make Wizards feel great at later levels?
What they did was compromise - wizards can feel pretty cool about spells later in their career BUT you're not going to own the show the entire day so they decreased the number of slots you have. They balanced this with Cantrips going up in power, Arcane Recovery, and giving caters more versatility than they've ever seen in D&D by making you spend slots instead of prepared spells and allowing you to use higher level slots for greater effects for free.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Basically, with things like concentration as is, someone can either have a defensive spell up OR maintain some kind of field effect, but not both. You can't for instance have up something like stoneskin and also have a cloudkill affecting the enemy. You are also hamstrung in the use of high level spells at the upper levels for any kind of significant dungeon crawl, because you have so few. In a single combat scenario, yes the spellcaster can release it all, but when they may have to hold that spell just in case they need to teleport the group out after the next room down, or they may need to keep some spell just in case they need to remove some magical schtick.
Why are those bad limitations though? You also get Arcane Recovery, allowing a wizard to replace a number of spell-slots a day which allows for more casting. Also many spells have the Ritual tag, meaning you can cast that without using a Spell Slot. The thing is with Concentration, it's purely so Casters can't literally over power encounters.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
In short, I definitely agree that in previous editions... spellcasters were gods. In 2nd edition, definitely. In 3.5, at the upper levels they were pretty dangerous. I can't say for 4e. But, 5e..... I feel they got a little nerfed... while at the same time some spells have been overpowered (clone jumps to the top of that list). They've had their number of spells nerfed.
In 3.5 casters overshadowed everything after 7th level. There literally no need for Rogues, Fighter, Monks, Paladins, or Rangers if the campaign exceeded past that level. Why? Because a Fighter/Cleric or just Cleric could do everything the Paladin could do - but better. Same with the Druid and his animal companion. The Cleric can get a wand of Find Traps, making one of the Rogue's biggest schticks meaningless. Wizards can cast Knock or find a wand of Knock (again, making Rogues meaningless).
I think the reason 5E is designed that way is because of how abused pre-4E did magic and classes and they didn't want to repeat those mistakes. Clone, while being pretty awesome, still requires 3,000 gp in costs, specialized containers or a location that can't be disturbed, and a lot of other odd-and-ends that need to be met for it to be good. I think the costs justify the power of the spell. I mean look at Forcecage. It blocks all non-magical travel, period. If you teleport you still have to make a save, which can fail. You can't etheral step out of it either because it extends to that plane too. But it cots 1,500 gp worth of ruby dust to cast so it's actually pretty good.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
They can't multiclass worth a damn.
See, here's where I think you're wrong. Lets look at 3.5 (sans Prestige Classes) and a Level 20 character (Wizard 10/ Cleric 10). This character can, at best, cast spells from both classes to a maximum 5th level. IF you allow Prestige Classes, like the Mystic Theurge, they can get up to a total of 8th level of each class (Wizard 5/cleric 5/MT 10).
So in 5E, a Wizard 10/Cleric 10 can cast 4/3/3/3/3/2/2/1/1 spells of anything you want. You still prepare spells from each class separately, so a 10th level Cleric can prepared 10 + Wis mod number of spells up to 5th level (not including domain spells). The wizard also gets to prepare spells of up to 5th level, and can prepared 10 + Int modifier spells (not including bonus spells from their Tradition). Now it's true that you don't get access to 6th - 9th level spells but you can still use those slots to make better 1st thru 5th level spells. The only reason why it's better in 3.5 is because there's Prestige Classes that break the normal effects.
Again, having access to 25+ spells per day is a HUGE amount of versatility that few in 5e can compete with.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
The concentration thing if PROPERLY DM'd (and that's the thing here, I bet a lot of DM's aren't paying attention to things like someone having up a defensive spell and an offensive "field" spell at the same time) puts a serious curtail on people's spellcasting. Then magic immunity is rampant as well with certain beings, such that upper level spellcasters can't touch creatures.
I think Concentration works as intended, not to let Spellcasters reign as amazing Gods for battles on-end. You should have to rely on other characters to succeed, not take all the responsibility yourself. By forcing Concentration, it makes other characters in the party important.
As for Magic, the best I've seen is Magic Resistance: meaning they get Advantage on saving throws against spells. The only creature I found that had Magic immunity was the Helmed Horror, to which he got it from 3 distinct spells (chosen by the creator). Even Liches don't get Magic Resistance. Demons, Devils, some Dragons, aberrations like Mind Flayers, etc. do get it. Some get Legendary actions that let them shrug off a spell.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Even a lot of the defensive spells aren't that useful (for instance, stoneskin is ineffective if the person attacking has a simple +1 magical weapon or if their attacks can be treated as magical).
Looking at the Monster Manual, the only monster I saw that had magical weapon attacks were Gith. All other monsters that used weapons were not magical for the purposes of bypassing resistances. I don't make a habit of having my monsters wielding lots of magical gear because of the way 5E works with magic items and the rarity of such things.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Contingency as an example used to be able to teleport a person out of danger, but that's no longer possible since it can only be used with 5th level or less spells that are castable as a single action.
You can certainly use Dimension Door, 4th level and bring one willing creature with you for this exact purpose.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
A LOT of the old schticks that people picture from previous editions, if you really start looking at them, you can't do at all under 5e rulesets either because of new rules, or simply the spells "don't exist". Also, spells not having improved saves for upper level spell slots essentially turns many spells into simple crap shoots. You may blow an upper level spell to no effect whatsoever.
Yes, again that's the balancing part of the game. Failure is possible - as with any other high-risk/reward - in the game. A Fighter that lets off his Action Surge might still roll three 1's on his attacks. He might roll a 1 for his Second Wind. He uses his Maneuver but the creature saves when I tries to drive him off a cliff. I mean, thems the breaks as they say.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Anyway, that's just what I'm seeing. I could be wrong and maybe there's things I haven't considered.
I think you're reading it right, for the most part. I think old tactics and concepts don't translate well because, well, it's a different game with different expectations. Mages simply aren't Gods in 5E. They can do incredible things, to be sure, but it's neither fully automatic fool proof nor is it easy and free. The designers took care to make sure that magic doesn't reign supreme past a certain level.
I also think the designers fully expect people to make their game their own. You can certainly allow Mystic Theuregs in your 5E games. There was a template for Prestige Classes a year or so ago in one of the Unearthed Arcana supplements that you could use to emulate the old PrC. I'd fully expect it to be game breaking though. You can allow casters to take feats that allow multiple Concentration spells to be active at one time, or to hang mantles like Contingency spells, or just give them more spell slots like earlier versions. Understand that when this is done, anyone who's playing your good ol' Champion Fighter of equivalent level could feel completely underpowered, or even detrimental to the party because he isn't really being as big a contributor as any Caster is.
As to how this played to Pathfinder 2e, I guess it depends on their power Levels in later stages of the game. Maybe the final rules put Casters in the driver seat from 7th level onward like the old Version did? I'd assume with 3 spells at each level, with more possible based on things like Specialized school, you're not going to have any parity with other non-casters simply because you can cast more high-powered spells. Though, I didn't see any bonus-spells table based on Ability Scores, so maybe that's not a thing anymore. |
Edited by - Diffan on 22 Aug 2019 00:12:08 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11825 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2019 : 16:07:56
|
Sorry, on the magic immunity, I pretty much meant "you can't affect them with magic because either they're immune to the energy types you have memorized OR they have magic resistance which gives them a second save versus save or be affected stuff". So, beings that wizards would fight like extraplanar entities can ignore spellcasters a lot. Rakshasas can OWN spellcaster since they're immune to any spell under 6th level Then there are creatures with the ability to simply ignore a spell that they failed the save on.
On the why not being able to hold up a defensive spell and an offensive field sucks (for concentration purposes)… it quite simply makes it something that severely hampers a wizard's ability to even put up basic protections (because let's face it... they're not wearing armor... they can't fly away... etc... That being said, your mentioning of forcecage reminds me of old tactics I used to do, but with multiple spells having to be combined (specifically wall of force in a dome, proof from teleportation, and some field effect like cloudkill or I think it was called firestorm, etc...). In 5e, if you had a damaging field affect already placed in said area and then placed a forcecage there, it would be pretty dangerous (one would have to adjudicate the concept of whether pre-existing spells in said area are dispelled when the forcecage forms if they're created by someone outside of the forcecage).
On the theurge, they can actually get higher level spells that you picture in 3.5e. Remember most races had a class that they could ignore when it came to multi-classing (and humans could PICK which class that was). So, if someone when say wiz7/cler3/MT10 they'd get 9th level wizard spells and I think 7th lvl cleric spells. Only mentioning because I agree, they could get nasty in earlier editions simply because of how many spells they had available. Granted, without help, they were still limited by how many they could enact at a time. Pre-3e, this is why red wizards basically were an amazing power source, because ALL of them that were upper level casters (say 17th and up) would have had the spell slots of a 30th level spellcaster due to the circle spell and how it was written for 2e. More than any other caster they would have had the spells ready for almost any encounter.
I actually created some feats for 5e that allowed for theurging and for improving the abilities of people like eldritch knights in my "complete red book of spell strategy" on DMs Guild. I have not playtested them all, but I think it gives viability without destroying power, especially since in 5e feats are a rare commodity. Since we're discussing these kinds of ideas, I'll post the option I created for eldritch knights (which to note, is going to require another feat prior AND several levels in fighter AND wizard)
Raumathari Battlemage
Prerequisites - warcaster feat, at least three levels in fighter class with the eldritch knight archetype class chosen, at least two levels in wizard with the arcane tradition of either School of Abjuration or School of Evocation or War Magic (see Xanathar's Guide to Everything for information on War Magic)
The spellcasters of ancient Raumathar learned to blend their knowledge of sword and battlefield magics, and as a result, many stories of the ancient Raumathari Battlemages have spread throughout Faerun and the Hordelands. Some say that they uncovered these secrets from fey benefactors who wanted to see the foul scourge of Narfell fall. Some say these secrets were a present from the powerful primordial lord, Kossuth, in exchange for some service. Others say they uncovered this lore beneath the Priador in old Sarrukh caverns. Meanwhile, others say that the Raumathari simply developed this style on their own. The truth probably lies somewhere in between all of these.
The character retains all cantrips known from both the wizard and fighter (eldritch knight archetype) classes. However, all spells known as an eldritch knight are lost. In replacement, the "spells known and prepared" and "spell slots" for the character are treated as if the character were a wizard of a level equal to the character's class level in wizard + 1 + 1/2 <the character's class level in fighter (eldritch knight archetype) (rounded down)>. For example, a character with 6 levels of wizard and 7 levels of fighter (eldritch knight archetype) would have spells prepared and spell slots available as if he were a 10th level wizard (6 + 1 +3). If the character were to multiclass with any other spellcasting class, he would still prepare spells as a 9th lvl wizard, but his spell slots would be adjusted as though he were a 9th lvl wizard multiclassing with another class.
In addition, the character's weapons to which he is bonded can act as his arcane focus when casting spells. Also, once per day per six character levels, using his weapons as a focus the character may cast a spell without having to use either the verbal or somatic spell component.
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2019 : 21:03:40
|
Yea, Legendary Resistance are there specifically so Wizards and other casters can't go 'Nova' on them and completely neuter the encounter. You throw some soft "buffer" spells first in hopes they use it on those ones then pack a bigger punch later. It's strategic to say the least. It also allows other characters to shine who have to churn through the Monster's Hit Points to seem effective.
As for Forcecage, you can't dispel it, lol. It's pretty fool proof except by those who make their save when they attempt to Teleport out and even then, it's not a guarantee. But with it costing 1,500 gp per Pop, it should be difficult to get around. But Wizards are supposed to be squishy! That's why you have Fighters and Paladins, to be in the way of missiles and attacks that target the wizard. Really, monster attacks are so low across the board in 5E that even a +3 bump (a la Mage Armor is a significant improvement), not to mention the 8-hour duration.
For your feat, the battlemage, know that the Warcaster feat already removes the Somatic component from spells cast. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11825 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2019 : 21:37:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Yea, Legendary Resistance are there specifically so Wizards and other casters can't go 'Nova' on them and completely neuter the encounter. You throw some soft "buffer" spells first in hopes they use it on those ones then pack a bigger punch later. It's strategic to say the least. It also allows other characters to shine who have to churn through the Monster's Hit Points to seem effective.
As for Forcecage, you can't dispel it, lol. It's pretty fool proof except by those who make their save when they attempt to Teleport out and even then, it's not a guarantee. But with it costing 1,500 gp per Pop, it should be difficult to get around. But Wizards are supposed to be squishy! That's why you have Fighters and Paladins, to be in the way of missiles and attacks that target the wizard. Really, monster attacks are so low across the board in 5E that even a +3 bump (a la Mage Armor is a significant improvement), not to mention the 8-hour duration.
For your feat, the battlemage, know that the Warcaster feat already removes the Somatic component from spells cast.
Ah, true, so I don't need to add that statement about somatic in 5e (which came from the Raumathari Battlemage prestige class as an option). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Anyone look at the Pathfinder 2nd Ed ruleset yet
