Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Products
 D&D Core Products
 Power level, perceptions, and misconceptions
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
4425 Posts

Posted - 26 Apr 2020 :  21:29:18  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

I should think that sticking with component restrictions would tend to help curb some of the issues with mages. Most games I've played, material components are generally just assumed to be there.


Well yes, that's sort of the issue. With components, you either have them or don't, and generally at 5gp most people buy them and it's assumed that you replenish in town or during the Adventure. Not only that, but one bag instantly has ALL the components you'll ever need so long as they're not "expensive" (anything deemed under 1gp). And there's not a lot of spells in the PHB that are too expensive.

What needs to be done is that there should be a limit on just how many casting these bags have. Whether it's a dozen, 20, etc so that the wizard needs to at least track something. If people are going to track rations, arrows, javelins, etc then Spell Components shouldn't get a free pass.

quote:

There is a difference with needing gold for class skills and needing a language, though... A warrior that finds armor can still wear it, even if he didn't purchase it. Saying a spellcaster can't cast any fire spells if he doesn't know a language that he'll only use for those spells is a different story. Especially since -- as I noted earlier -- you don't need to actually understand a language to repeat words from it. Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto!


One requires a Player decision and once selected, has it always (choosing skill points on languages) and one requires DM intervention to be allowed. A Fighter only "finds" heavy armor if the DM puts it in. A Fighter only buys Heavy armor if the DM puts enough gold in the Adventure for the Fighter to buy some. Aside from putting ranks into Craft (armorsmithing) and make their own, it's completely out of their hands.

The wizard has a choice early on: focus on more fire and damaging spells (burning hands, lesser orb of fire, flare) and grab Ignan or choose Rulathek and get some illusion spells (color spray, disguise self). If I get say 20 skill ranks, I also throw 2 points in and have both! A Fighter who rolls for GP gets 6d4x10 might roll max and get 240 gp. This is the only way to get heavy armor (splint is 200gp and the cheapest). I just rolled 6d4 x20 and the BEST I got was 190gp.

To me, I much rather have agency as a player than rely on the DM and a nice group just so I can utilize my class features.

quote:

Characters can always get more gold. More skill slots? Those aren't as readily acquired.

Like I said, I can see one required language for magic, but I think more than one language is just penalizing the caster for being a caster.



I see it as more of a decision on part of the player and not always having something for nothing. Again, wizard (specifically in 3.5) have the greatest versatility next to the Druid in magic and that ability is one reason they're a tier 1 class and really broken levels down the road.
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36779 Posts

Posted - 26 Apr 2020 :  21:57:27  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
There's still a hell of a difference between being limited by gold or being unable to use the single defining feature of your class unless you want to waste skill slots on it.

I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting to limit wizards, but making them learn an entire language just to be able to memorize a few written words is way too limiting. You're basically giving them a choice: cast spells and be unable to do anything else at all, or be forever limited as a caster because you wanted to be able to do something other than cast spells.

If I was sitting down to a game table and I was told my caster had to learn a language for every type of spell he was going to cast, I'd never play a caster.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 26 Apr 2020 21:58:13
Go to Top of Page

Delnyn
Senior Scribe

USA
883 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2020 :  00:45:06  Show Profile Send Delnyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'll get the "quickies" first. You will find our sessions were indeed heavy on tracking. Thank goodness for spreadsheets!

I support the hp caps starting at level 9 or level 10 just like in 1ed and 2ed. The only reason I did not do that in this particular instance was because as DM, I wanted to avoid insta-kill for either the party or monsters while we were still learning 3.0ed epic. The more I pondered Diffan's feedback, the more I thought this is a great way to discourage the potential murderhobo who might ask to join the campaign. Our campaigns focus as much on business, exploration and politics as combat.

The skill point caps would not be affected by negative Int modifiers, just like high level hp would not be affected by negative Con modifiers. Skill point additions are kept even to account for cross-class skills. The group consolidates some skills much like 4ed or 5ed, such as folding Spellcraft under Arcana, Hide and Move Silently under Stealth, etc.

Here is where I hit myself over the head for bad communication on a Candlekeep thread. All the stuff about languages, Perform (oratory), Sleight of Hand, etc. was about casting spells at a caster level higher than 20. I did not indent the bullets further to emphasize they were sub-bullets. Reserve feats, domain powers in our campaign never increase a caster level above 20 by themselves. We put a conditional cap at caster level 20 to prevent high damage output, but more importantly, not to steamroller/obliterate spell resistances above 30. These provisions do not apply at caster level under 20, except when researching original spells. Then the language requirements apply. By the way, our houserule treats Speak Language as a class skill for clerics and wizards. In social interactions, they serve as handy translators without causing undue alarm by casting tongues or comprehend languages.

EDIT: The language paragraph below applies specifically to wizards and to original spell research. With your feedback, I believe in particular we can illustrate a substantive difference between wizardry and sorcery.

"Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto" works perfectly as long as the caster is satisfied with CL 20. Casting spells at a higher capacity, however, is when we leave Styx territory. Combining Eragon and the Ignan example, the epic spellcaster understands "Brsingr" is not merely a word for fire, "Brsingr" is fire. To unlock magic's full potential, the researcher ultimately must bypass all derivative sources and go to the primary source.

EDIT: The skill paragraph below applies to arcane spellcasters. Based upon some reflection from Diffan's and Wooly Rupert's commentaries, I would posit wizards will have a harder time adjusting than sorcerors or warmages.

Perform and Sleight of Hand are not house-ruled to be class skills for clerics, druids, sorcerors and wizards. In blunt crass metagaming terms, they are meant to be inconvenient hurdles for the arcane spellcaster to hinder runaway caster levels. They also encourage full spellcasters to treat the party's bard and rogue very nicely *hint hint* to teach them these skills. Casting at epic levels requires the caster to have full vocal control and convey intent without even the slightest quaver in the voice. Sleight of Hand is the closest skill we had to force the caster to have full motor control of hands and fingers. It has nothing to do with hiding or palming small objects, and 5+ ranks in Bluff do not help in any way shape or form with the intricate gesticulations of spellcasting. If the spellcaster learns a few parlor tricks along the way, great.

And yes, tracking spell component pouches and expensive materials is on the books.

Our game is more stringent on permanent magic items than perhaps many Candlekeep scribes are used to. Wealth by level is more a very loose guideline. Magic items typically consist of potions, wands or scrolls with low level. The party will probably find or seize a dagger +1 when the average character level is 5 or 6.

Considering combat with foes that have damage reduction, characters with full BAB have some level-scaling capacity to bypass said damage reduction even with non-magical weapons. Characters with full BAB also have some class level-scaling capacity to reduce armor check and speed penalties for armor with which they are proficient. We also allowed class level-scaling increases in encumbrance limits for characters with full BAB classes. By the way, we included these features for crusaders and warblades too.
The problem was less between fighter, monk and paladin vs. ToB (which was not yet published) than it was wizard/cleric/druid/sorcerer vs everyone else.

Lastly, our group basically reconstructed fighters from scratch. The changes would merit a separate thread, and they reflect some unique features-quirks if you will-of our campaign where magic (and psionics) can not be taken from granted and is not always reliable. Think other planes of existence with the rules adapted from 1ed and 2ed. The premise is anything a fighter can do, any other class can do, and that is totally OK.






Edited by - Delnyn on 27 Apr 2020 01:25:44
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36779 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2020 :  01:44:36  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Okay, doing the language thing only at higher levels makes it far less painful. Still not a fan, but I'll not pursue it further.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

Delnyn
Senior Scribe

USA
883 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2020 :  02:41:07  Show Profile Send Delnyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Okay, doing the language thing only at higher levels makes it far less painful. Still not a fan, but I'll not pursue it further.



No problem. I still appreciate and solicit the feedback from you and the rest of the Candlekeep community. Compared to the train wreck over which I presided in 2003, the differences of opinion here are a cake walk. Too bad I did not learn of this site's existence until 5 or 6 years ago.
Go to Top of Page

Delnyn
Senior Scribe

USA
883 Posts

Posted - 27 Apr 2020 :  03:57:29  Show Profile Send Delnyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The issue of languages got me wondering how other players handled interactions between characters and sapient monsters. We seem to have a consensus that Common is good enough for "Where is the bathroom?" but deeper more nuances conversations with other humanoids needs to be in the regional language such as Damaran or Illuskan. I would propose it is the same when dealing with dragons, elementals, fey and especially outsiders, and even more vital.

Sure, many fiends have telepathy to make some kind of conversation easy. That said, not knowing the fiend's native language sounds like the player would be at a distinct disadvantage. Signing a baatezu contract, for example, without being able to read, speak and write Infernal is insanely reckless. And don't be surprised if the baatezu snuck in provisions that nullify certain provisions and enforce others in the contract if the signer casts comprehend languages before attempting to sign anything.

Investing in such languages as Draconic, Sylvan, Terran or Abyssal sounds like a worthwhile endeavor, especially for characters who like to call or summon creatures.
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
4425 Posts

Posted - 30 Apr 2020 :  15:05:46  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Depends on the interaction, honestly. Significant dialogue would require knowledge of that creature's native language but to simply curse at them, Intimidate them, or for quick phrases I think Common is good enough.
Go to Top of Page

Delnyn
Senior Scribe

USA
883 Posts

Posted - 30 Apr 2020 :  23:35:37  Show Profile Send Delnyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

Depends on the interaction, honestly. Significant dialogue would require knowledge of that creature's native language but to simply curse at them, Intimidate them, or for quick phrases I think Common is good enough.



Ask the pit fiend in Common. "Where is the bathroom? Oh, your leg!" Yep, that is an effective curse. Roll for intiative...
Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist

USA
11686 Posts

Posted - 01 May 2020 :  16:09:04  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Delnyn

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

Depends on the interaction, honestly. Significant dialogue would require knowledge of that creature's native language but to simply curse at them, Intimidate them, or for quick phrases I think Common is good enough.



Ask the pit fiend in Common. "Where is the bathroom? Oh, your leg!" Yep, that is an effective curse. Roll for intiative...



And thus the spell "summon incontinent puppy" was born.

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000