# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## 3e: Was there a consumer demand for caster dominance?

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

- Print view

73 posts

- Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next

Dominicius
  Knight
  Posts: 491
  Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:28 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Dominicius » Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:13 pm

I distinctly recall that there was a thread around here about giving fighter metagame abilities as a possible solution. I think the idea didn't really impress people.
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:22 pm

It doesn't go over well because if you're not playing a comedy or postmodern game having a class that relies on the metagame for its phlebtonium breaks the fourth wall too much for people to enjoy.
I personally reject it because, like the Magic Item Mart Gift Card class feature, it's just a way for people to live in denial about their paradigm.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

CatharzGodfoot
  King
  Posts: 5668
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: North Carolina

###

- Quote

Post by CatharzGodfoot » Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:02 pm

There's no inherent a problem will spellcasters being more powerful than more mundane characters.
It's possible to imagine spellcasters who regularly do the 'impossible' and are yet completely outclassed by people who just train really hard to be totally awesome. What isn't possible is spellcasters who command armies of the undead from flying castles while throwing up walls of ice or flame with a gesture being outclassed by people who just train really hard. You can come up with all kinds of 'power source' excuses where a swordsman's flight isn't 'magic', but that's bullshit.
Let me repeat that: Power sources are BULLSHIT.
It doesn't matter if you were raised by condors, practiced really hard, or made a pact with a demon. What matters is what you can do. No matter what your game's glossary says, a character that regularly does the impossible is magic. There comes a point at which being really good at what you do can no longer beat doing the impossible, and that is the point at which you either have to become magic or go sit at the little kid's table.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Top

Krusk
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 601
  Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 3:56 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Krusk » Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:11 pm

I always liked the idea of forcing mundanes to become magic at some point. Hard code into the game fighting in melee isnt an option. You can start as a sworder, but by level 6 you need to prestige into dragon tamer, leader of the people,, or gadgeteer.
If you really only want to play mundanes that's fine, houserule the game, make your own, and don't expect it to work right. If someone insists on being the mundane, start your game at level 1 and plan to end by the end of level 6.
Early casters are reigned in to What is effectively a magic archer. Maybe some utility stuff that is replicatable with skills.
Top

Libertad
  Duke
  Posts: 1299
  Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 6:16 am

###

- Quote

Post by Libertad » Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:19 pm

One option several RPGs and fictional worlds incorporate is the acceptance of a lack of balance between casters and non-casters.
In the World of Darkness, Vampires are simply better than normal humans in almost every way despite their crippling weaknesses. Vampire: the Masquerade has rules for humans, yet the game assumes that every PC's a vampire.
A possibility for games is to do the "everyone has magic or nobody does" route. If you make a Harry Potter RPG, then you should structure the game around players being Wizards instead of trying to incorporate a Muggle/Wizard/Muggle group.
A possibility for D&D, then, is to make it so that the high-level guys get "magical" abilities to do cool stuff. This is in line with many campaign settings. In Forgotten Realms, magic is built into the essence of the world; in Dragonlance, magic is a gift from the Gods. It should be plausible in such settings that a powerful swordmaster or thief gets some nifty power from using techniques to "harness the power of the land" or gains "righteous fury" from his patron deity.
Or you can go Gurrenn Lagann and have sheer willpower grant people the ability to exceed expectations.
Level 5 Catgirl Bard
Top

ishy
  Duke
  Posts: 2404
  Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:59 pm

###

- Quote

Post by ishy » Sun Jan 01, 2012 10:46 pm

Or you can make the non magic classes scale better with magical buffs or something. So that a polymorph spell is only utility for a wizard and a combat boost for the fighter.
While at the same time making the non-caster effective at killing and controlling the battlefield and turning casters down a notch.

> Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game

> Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.

Top

CapnTthePirateG
  Duke
  Posts: 1545
  Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:07 am

###

- Quote

Post by CapnTthePirateG » Sun Jan 01, 2012 11:55 pm

> ishy wrote:Or you can make the non magic classes scale better with magical buffs or something. So that a polymorph spell is only utility for a wizard and a combat boost for the fighter.
> While at the same time making the non-caster effective at killing and controlling the battlefield and turning casters down a notch.

I don't think anyone would actually like that solution, because it feels too metagamey and you still have the fact that a party of all fighers is useless.

> OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
> -Sarpadian Empires, vol. I

Top

hyzmarca
  Prince
  Posts: 3909
  Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:07 pm

###

- Quote

Post by hyzmarca » Mon Jan 02, 2012 12:15 am

It's alright for there to be some things that a caster can do that a non-caster can't. But the converse has to be true as well. There should be things that a non-caster can do that a caster will never be able to accomplish.
If your party is all fighters, then you don't give them any challenges that require casters to beat. If your party is all casters then you don't give them any challenges that require fighters to beat. If your party is mixed then you give them mixed challenges so that both can shine.
The only problem with such a paradigm is that you have to redo practically everything from the ground up to accomplish it.
Top

MfA
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 578
  Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:53 am

###

- Quote

Post by MfA » Mon Jan 02, 2012 12:51 am

I think that most martial/rogue/face players wouldn't really care that the caster had the best solution for 75% of situations ... as long as they didn't intrude on their niches or make their niches irrelevant.
Top

Zinegata
  Prince
  Posts: 4071
  Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:33 am

###

- Quote

Post by Zinegata » Mon Jan 02, 2012 1:16 am

The "gap" between casters and non-casters would close if people would put greater limitations on what kind of spells that casters can actually cast.
For a martial class to gain a special and unique power, he/she usually has to reach a certain level and be stuck with that power forever (in the form of feats or special abilities).
For a caster class, once they hit the proper level they can simply pray to their God or read the spell book to switch out to what they need every evening.
Top

Libertad
  Duke
  Posts: 1299
  Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 6:16 am

###

- Quote

Post by Libertad » Mon Jan 02, 2012 1:23 am

I remember some folks suggested using Tome of Battle classes to replace the Fighter/Monk/Paladin while getting rid of Clerics, Druids, and Wizards.
The Favored Soul would fill the role of the Cleric, while "magical theme" classes like the Dread Necromancer and Beguiler would be the default spellcasters.
The theory is that such classes would be easier to manage since they couldn't add spells with splatbooks or wait 24 hours to switch out for a new set of spells.
This does close the gap a little, but the Tome of Battle guys still don't have a lot of out-of-combat utility, while guys like the Beguiler can still kick ass in a lot of situations.
Level 5 Catgirl Bard
Top

Ice9
  Duke
  Posts: 1568
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ice9 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 4:33 am

> CapnTthePirateG wrote:

> > ishy wrote:Or you can make the non magic classes scale better with magical buffs or something. So that a polymorph spell is only utility for a wizard and a combat boost for the fighter.
> > While at the same time making the non-caster effective at killing and controlling the battlefield and turning casters down a notch.

> I don't think anyone would actually like that solution, because it feels too metagamey and you still have the fact that a party of all fighers is useless.

Actually, there's a pretty easy explanation that works rather well for that. Everyone has a reserve of vital energy. Casters learn how to channel that energy into spells. Non-casters can't channel that energy, so it just sits there accumulating; when they get a buff spell or magic item, the stored energy supercharges it.
The problem with that is that it primarily just helps non-casters be better in combat, which isn't that hard to do anyway. Making them useful outside of battle is the real challenge.
Personally, I'm pretty much in favor of this:

> Krusk wrote:I always liked the idea of forcing mundanes to become magic at some point. Hard code into the game fighting in melee isnt an option. You can start as a sworder, but by level 6 you need to prestige into dragon tamer, leader of the people,, or gadgeteer.

You can dance around it for a while, but at some point, you just need to flat out say "No, we are not doing normal dudes with swords any more - play lower level if you want that."
Last edited by Ice9 on Mon Jan 02, 2012 4:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

virgil
  King
  Posts: 6339
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by virgil » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:43 am

> Ice9 wrote:

> > CapnTthePirateG wrote:

> > > ishy wrote:Or you can make the non magic classes scale better with magical buffs or something. So that a polymorph spell is only utility for a wizard and a combat boost for the fighter.
> > > While at the same time making the non-caster effective at killing and controlling the battlefield and turning casters down a notch.

> > I don't think anyone would actually like that solution, because it feels too metagamey and you still have the fact that a party of all fighers is useless.

> Actually, there's a pretty easy explanation that works rather well for that. Everyone has a reserve of vital energy. Casters learn how to channel that energy into spells. Non-casters can't channel that energy, so it just sits there accumulating; when they get a buff spell or magic item, the stored energy supercharges it.
> The problem with that is that it primarily just helps non-casters be better in combat, which isn't that hard to do anyway. Making them useful outside of battle is the real challenge.

Include magic items and noncombat buffs in that for the supercharging. In effect, have buffs and magic items scale with the mana of the recipient rather than the caster. That ring/spell of water breathing lets a wizard not drown, yet the fighter becomes a badass shark with arms when underwater.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Mon Jan 02, 2012 7:55 am

virgil: Why not make the character a Gadgeteer then? That way you could have 'Fighter' or 'Rogue' or 'Barbarian' just by compressing those abilities into one-time feat packages. You'd save on space and have a more flavorful class.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

TheFlatline
  Prince
  Posts: 2606
  Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:43 pm

###

- Quote

Post by TheFlatline » Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:36 am

> ishy wrote:Or you can make the non magic classes scale better with magical buffs or something. So that a polymorph spell is only utility for a wizard and a combat boost for the fighter.
> While at the same time making the non-caster effective at killing and controlling the battlefield and turning casters down a notch.

That only lasts as long as your developers are on board with you. As soon as you bring in someone who things that wizards should pwn because MAGIC!!!! you are back to the original problem.
Sooner or later a dipshit is going to come along who sucks magic cock so hard that he's offended by the idea that magic has limitations. To him, magic specifically means "no limitations", and the balance you've set up goes out the window when he creates "mage polymorph: mages gain +10 strength and gain the BAB of fighters" or some shit like that.
Top

Username17
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 29894
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Username17 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:02 am

> Libertad wrote:I remember some folks suggested using Tome of Battle classes to replace the Fighter/Monk/Paladin while getting rid of Clerics, Druids, and Wizards.
> The Favored Soul would fill the role of the Cleric, while "magical theme" classes like the Dread Necromancer and Beguiler would be the default spellcasters.
> The theory is that such classes would be easier to manage since they couldn't add spells with splatbooks or wait 24 hours to switch out for a new set of spells.
> This does close the gap a little, but the Tome of Battle guys still don't have a lot of out-of-combat utility, while guys like the Beguiler can still kick ass in a lot of situations.

Stuff like the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer is probably how casters should work. People want their wizards to have groups of similarly themed magics at their disposal.
It does not by itself fix things. Because non-casters still need to do something to affect the world outside combat and the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer actually have a very deep set of utility magic. But it solves the issue where people want tightly themed magic but the Vancian system incentivizes players to get spells that are as functionally and conceptually different from one another as possible to maximize coverage.
-Username17
Top

RadiantPhoenix
  Prince
  Posts: 2668
  Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:33 pm
  Location: Trudging up the Hill

###

- Quote

Post by RadiantPhoenix » Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:14 pm

> virgil wrote:Wonder Woman's steel door strength tearing, super breath, telepathy, & 160wpm typing powers (which could be negated when tied up by a man) used to be pure training before she became a godly endowed clay statue.

Well, in Greek mythology, normal humans are supposedly descended from animated rocks, after the 'made of clay' version proved to soft to deal with the contents of Pandora's box so...
Top

Username17
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 29894
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Username17 » Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:22 pm

In the new version, she's just a plain regular half-god Amazon.
-Username17
Top

tzor
  Prince
  Posts: 4266
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by tzor » Tue Jan 03, 2012 1:07 am

Getting back to the original argument. I always thought and assumed that the big evolution of the mega jump between casters and non casters in 3E was the systematic simplification of the magic system. There were a lot of checks and balances in 1E's magic. These were thought to be "un-fun" and were thus removed. Consider the 9th level wish.

> 1st Edition wrote:Other forms of wishes, however, will cause the spell caster to be weak (-3 on strength) and require 2 to 8 days of bed rest due to the stresses the wish places upon time, space, and his or her body.

Note second edition has the same wording (only replacing 2 to 8 with 2d4 and adding a 5 year age stress on the caste.
Then came 3E which had a list of things that were well beyond the simple 1E with options, "with respect to hit points sustained by a party, to bring a dead character back to life, or to escape from a difficult situation by lifting the spel caster (and his or her party) from one place to another," which biasically had no effects on the caster for overcasting.

> 3rd Edition wrote:You may wish for effects greater than these, but doing so is dangerous.

Back in the 1st and 2nd editions, the various rules on casters put significant limits on their abilities. All of these limitations were generally removed. Removing limitations on fighters, ironically made it better for everyone else to fight, not for fighters to fight better. So while simplification for wizards helped wizards, simplification for fighters hurt fighters.
Top

Vebyast
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 801
  Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 5:44 am

###

- Quote

Post by Vebyast » Tue Jan 03, 2012 7:16 am

My solution was just to give players either three identical, interchangeable, easily-replenishable fighters or one caster. Players ended up getting roughly the same screen time (spell selection versus tactics and rolling), and having twice as many pieces on the field made fights quite a bit more interesting, tactically speaking.

> DSMatticus wrote:There are two things you can learn from the Gaming Den:
> 1) Good design practices.
> 2) How to be a zookeeper for hyper-intelligent shit-flinging apes.

Top

Doom
  Duke
  Posts: 1470
  Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:52 pm
  Location: Baton Rouge

###

- Quote

Post by Doom » Tue Jan 03, 2012 8:48 pm

That's an interesting idea...I used "every gets a caster and a fighter", which worked to some effect.

> Kaelik, to Tzor wrote: And you aren't shot in the face?

> Frank Trollman wrote:A government is also immortal ...On the plus side, once the United Kingdom is no longer united, the United States of America will be the oldest country in the world. USA!

Top

echoVanguard
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 738
  Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:35 pm

###

- Quote

Post by echoVanguard » Tue Jan 03, 2012 10:08 pm

> FrankTrollman wrote:The fanbase wants things which are not compatible. They want balanced classes, but they want wizards to be able to overcome challenges that are outright impossible for non-magical types.
> Most damning of all is the basic Elennsar logic on display. What people want is generic fantasy literature. They want wizards to be objectively more powerful than warriors and they want the warriors to win anyway by "overcoming the odds". That's really what people want, even though that is one of the things that most demonstrably cannot be given by a game system.
> -Username17

Couldn't this be accomplished by giving warrior-types higher saves, more rerolls, and other "overcome the odds" type bonuses? Dresden Files RPG does this by assigning each character a fixed amount of "narrative influence" (Refresh) which takes various forms - spells for spellcasters, ad-hoc bonuses and rerolls for mortals, and weird powers for monster-race characters. I'm not personally advocating this idea - I'm in the camp of "get magic, already". But I think it's worth investigating.
Note that for the purposes of my question, "narrative control" is distinct from FATE's mechanic of "intentionally let bad stuff happen to your character to get more narrative control points".
Also,

> Lago PARANOIA wrote:I personally reject it because, like the Magic Item Mart Gift Card class feature, it's just a way for people to live in denial about their paradigm.

This statement doesn't make any sense. If the paradigm they choose is substandard, and there's a benefit which makes it not substandard, how is that denial? I agree that the Magic Item Mart Gift Card idea is terrible, but it's terrible for very distinct reasons which have nothing to do with the core viability of the class paradigm.
echo
Top

virgil
  King
  Posts: 6339
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by virgil » Tue Jan 03, 2012 10:38 pm

> echoVanguard wrote:Couldn't this be accomplished by giving warrior-types higher saves, more rerolls, and other "overcome the odds" type bonuses? Dresden Files RPG does this by assigning each character a fixed amount of "narrative influence" (Refresh) which takes various forms - spells for spellcasters, ad-hoc bonuses and rerolls for mortals, and weird powers for monster-race characters. I'm not personally advocating this idea - I'm in the camp of "get magic, already". But I think it's worth investigating.
> Note that for the purposes of my question, "narrative control" is distinct from FATE's mechanic of "intentionally let bad stuff happen to your character to get more narrative control points".

I've considered the higher saves and such too, but that's not really giving them narrative control, so much as giving them bigger bonuses to what they already do. Most of it is just increased defense on top of that, which is a distinctly reactive concept.
Being Mr Immortal does not make you relevant if you do anything while you sit there unscathed.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Top

Username17
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 29894
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Username17 » Tue Jan 03, 2012 10:46 pm

Being really tough does not make you overcome the odds. It makes the odds more in your favor to begin with. That is the essential Elensar problem: it is actually unlikely that you personally will succeed where it is likely for you to fail. Everyone can't be above average. It's simply tautologically true. People who want their characters to overcome impossible odds actually want to be lied to - because there is no way to give them that on a fair die roll. By definition.
-Username17
Top

RadiantPhoenix
  Prince
  Posts: 2668
  Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:33 pm
  Location: Trudging up the Hill

###

- Quote

Post by RadiantPhoenix » Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:03 pm

So, how can we make the odds better than they look?
Top
Post Reply

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

73 posts

- Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next

Return to “In My Humble Opinion...”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS