Spellcraft Checks

[Hamakto]

I would first of all like to say that variable spell effects seemed to work pretty well in the play tests. I know that checking the tables was a little slow, but I think that was more that we did not know our spells yet. As time progressed, it would flow much smoother.

As always, I have a few random thoughts about the spell checks. Some of these items were already presented to Joseph after the play tests, but I am going to include them here for everyone to comment on / pick apart.

On a natural 20 --- Do not automatically achieve the maximum spell result
---------------
1. Have a natural twenty work like a 20+bonus+CL. This prevents a 1st level caster from achieving magic that only a arch mage can cast.
2. Have a natural twenty be calculated at 20+(CL*2)-1. This makes it so you cannot get the top table result until you hit 7th level caster on a natural 20. This would be accomplished by adding a column to the spell chart that lists the highest effect a caster can achieve.

Spell burn --- spell burn is pretty severe for only a chance to be successful. In both play tests, the spell burn was successful and useful. But in an extended campaign, I would not see it used very often.
------------------
If you use spell burn, you shift one result category for each ability score point that is burned. How will this play out? Lets look at a small sample chart:

I am using the posted MagicMissle chart from earlier with one modification for to break out a 1 as a Critical failure

1: Critical failure
2-11: Lost. Failure.
12-13: You can throw 1 missile that does 1 point of damage. You must have line of sight to the target. The missile flows unerringly and never misses, though it may be blocked by certain magic (e.g., magic shield).
14-17: As above, but 1 missile does damage 1d4 + caster level.
18-19: As above, but 1d4 missiles that each do damage 1d4 + caster level. All missiles must be aimed at a single target.
20-23: As above, but 1d4 missiles that each do damage 1d6 + caster level. You may aim each missile at an individual target.
24-27: As above, but one extremely powerful missile that does damage 4d12 + caster level. Range is increased to 1,000’, provided line of sight is maintained.
28-29: As above, but 1d8 missiles that each do damage 1d8 + caster level. Range is increased to line of sight, as long as missiles travel in a direct path.

If I did 3 points of spell burn and I roll a 15, I would end up shifting 3 result categories and get a result of 24-27. This allows for some interesting side effects.

If you use one point of spell burn, you can not get a Critical Failure... and unless you roll a 1, you would never lose a spell when cast.
If you use two points of spell burn, you guarantee that you will not lose a spell as even a natural 1 would shift down twice.

I think this would make spell burn a more interesting mechanic and would be more likely to be used during a regular adventure.

Permanency - The bless spell at top levels had the chance to achieve a permanent bless effect (roll of 32+)
-----------------
I would probably suggest removal of any permanent beneficial spell effect for casting a spell. If you want to effect to be permanent, you should probably be enchanting a magical item.

Variable Spell Effects - Sometimes you get a more powerful effect than expected when rolling high.
---------------------------
Change the way the table works so that you can pick any effect up to and including what you rolled from the table. A good example of this is the hole portal spell from a posted play test. If you roll too high the door is gone. This can be a funny situation in the game, but it can also be very disruptive to the continuation of the adventure. If they could possible choose a lesser effect, it would go a long way towards making the Wizard something besides an agent of Chaos.

Fading spell effects - right now some effects (like bless) are d3+1 bonus to hit/spell checks/ability checks for X turns
-------------------------
It might be too much to bring into the game, but it would be a cool mechanic to have fading spell effects for things like bless. The first turn it is effective it would be the full bonus. It would then expire at +1/per turn/hour/day (depending on the die roll) until the effect fades away. It does add additional tracking/paperwork, so I am not sold on this idea.

Corruption/spell fumbles
--------------------------------
I am not positive if our tests were exceptional, but it appeared that corruption for rolling a one was not uncommon. That means that a Wizard is going to morph pretty hard by the time they hit 5th level. Because corruption is not a minor event, I could see that a wizard would be hesitant to cast spells all of the time due to the risks. How about the following suggestion: When rolling a 1 on a d20 and a corruption comes up, the caster can make a saving throw vs. Fortitude (or whatever) to avoid the corruption.

Saving Throw DC's - in the play tests the DC's were set by the spell craft check of the casting wizard.
-------------------
This created situations where the enemies had target DCs of anywhere between 13 and 27. For the same first level spell. With that sort of dynamic range involved, it makes saving throws very unpredictable. This will become even more important as death magic comes into play. I do not know how the Saving Throws will scale, but it appears that spell craft checks grow faster than saving throw bonuses (i.e. most 2nd level characters has +1 or +2 on their Saves --- and the casters had +3 or +4 on their spell craft checks). My suggestion would be to make DC's = 10 + (spell level *2)-1.

[Black Dougal]

I like what you are saying, Andy. You have some good ideas.

I will add one thing...

Permanency - The bless spell at top levels had the chance to achieve a permanent bless effect (roll of 32+)
-----------------
I would probably suggest removal of any permanent beneficial spell effect for casting a spell. If you want to effect to be permanent, you should probably be enchanting a magical item.

A wizard should be able to enchant another character with a permanent spell as well as an item.

[finarvyn]

I like what you are saying, Andy. You have some good ideas.

I believe that Andy's post was essentially quoting the playtest doc, not his suggestion of what should be in the RPG.

[Black Dougal]

I like what you are saying, Andy. You have some good ideas.

I believe that Andy's post was essentially quoting the playtest doc, not his suggestion of what should be in the RPG.

Ok.

It looks different than what I remember from the playtest I did in February. Perhaps I misread his initial post.

EDIT:
I reread the start of the initial post.

As always, I have a few random thoughts about the spell checks. Some of these items were already presented to Joseph after the play tests, but I am going to include them here for everyone to comment on / pick apart.

This indicates to me that what follows is from Andy, not the playtest doc. I may be wrong about that.

[Hamakto]

I like what you are saying, Andy. You have some good ideas.

I will add one thing...

Permanency - The bless spell at top levels had the chance to achieve a permanent bless effect (roll of 32+)
-----------------
I would probably suggest removal of any permanent beneficial spell effect for casting a spell. If you want to effect to be permanent, you should probably be enchanting a magical item.

A wizard should be able to enchant another character with a permanent spell as well as an item.

I am not quoting the play test doc, but instead I am throwing ideas out there from my play test experience. I do not believe that a spell should randomly provide a permanent enchantment bonus to yourself or someone else. It just promotes a situation where someone just keeps casting a spell until they roll a 20 to get a permanent in-game bonus.

I am trying to think through appendix N where a 'spell' would grant a permanent bonus to something with out it being related to an enchanted object. I remember in some other books (non Appendix N), they are done via tattoos (I am not talking Eberron). But in a way that is just a magical item embedded in a character. I like the randomness of the spell, but permanency should be restricted to magical items.

As a side effect, the restriction to magical items helps keep the player character power curve down to reasonable levels. The 32+ result of bless was something like (I do not have the spell sheet so I can be wrong), permanently gain a d3+? on all attack, skill checks, ability checks and damage rolls. With the depressed numbering system, that is a huge bonus. I will note that the permanent effect only works if cast on yourself and not others.

[jmucchiello]

I am not quoting the play test doc, but instead I am throwing ideas out there from my play test experience. I do not believe that a spell should randomly provide a permanent enchantment bonus to yourself or someone else. It just promotes a situation where someone just keeps casting a spell until they roll a 20 to get a permanent in-game bonus.

This. Permanent effects like this should always be unwanted. (and require remove curse to fix).

[smathis]

I agree with Andy and jmuchiello on this one.

I think getting a (positive) permanent enchantment for an item or person should require a quest or be the focus of at least one adventure. I don't think it should be the result of a lucky die roll.

Otherwise, I'll just sit there and Bless myself all day.

I'll be the James Brown of Clerics.

"Hah! Gotta step back! And Bless mah-self! Heeeey!"

And I can do that split and spin thing on an MDA.

[finarvyn]

This indicates to me that what follows is from Andy, not the playtest doc. I may be wrong about that.

My error. Sometimes I forget what I read as part of an actual play synopsis and what is speculation. Andy's post looked like actual play notes.

[Black Dougal]

This indicates to me that what follows is from Andy, not the playtest doc. I may be wrong about that.

My error. Sometimes I forget what I read as part of an actual play synopsis and what is speculation. Andy's post looked like actual play notes.

No big deal, dude.