Introduction
Ah, the growing pains of
heartbleeding.
With the sliding noose of the four
core classes tightening about the wrists I’m finally forced to spend some time considering
the caster classes once again.
The bemused sigh comes easy as one recalls the way
concepts are toyed with as a cat’s plaything, pawed about the mind until, their
interest quite spent, they’re posted to little fanfare and some relief only to
find the passing of time casting an increasingly harsh light on ideas once
thought to be set in stone.
Platitudes about how things don’t
change if they aren’t posted and are not posted if changes aren’t made aside,
banging the head appendages against the Cleric’s reconceptualization and
attempts to harmonize it with previous ideas led me to reread what someone that
I’d swear wasn’t me did post regarding the salient issues, namely the need to
build ties to a Magic System as of now still regarded as pretty much a
proverbial house of cards.
Garbage In…
Treading back over worn pathways,
a few months of perspective bring me to a dismaying conclusion: It needs to go.
Well, not all of it, warm feelings are still nurtured about the caster type distinctions, rather, it is the casting mechanics
proper – something common to all casters – where the rules seem to fall decidedly short.
Some preliminary conclusions that
a savvy reader probably reached immediately upon parsing the original post, now from a timeworn and more dispassioned perspective:
1. Establishing difficulty
ratings on the fly from the back of top-heavy complex rule structures is a sure
way to clog up a game’s flow, each pause for discretionary refereeing an
ebbing tide for gameplay.
2. Combat demands quick, simple
and unfailingly consistent resolution mechanisms to keep the plates spinning. Exceptions
are acceptable only at such a time as critical success or failure occurs, these
allowing limited forays into unpacking complexity.
3. Even transcending combat, where the
stakes are highest, a system nevertheless has to gain from player-facing transparency, facilitating antecipated
calculations to settle the decision on which is to be the desirable course of
action.
All these points were infringed
on some level by both the magic system and the divine beseeching proposals. Each
relatively stable in a vacuum but proven wholly unmanageable past some preliminary
attempts at replicating dynamic combat or multiple intervenients making
reiterated use of the mechanic.
Finangling difficulty ratings to the decimal point amid the running does not conduce to seamless play. Things need to be simpler
and straighter to remain manageable, all while preserving the design thrusts
behind the original attempt, these being “a caster having well-rounded
attributes matters” and “casting has a perilous random component, being more
difficult than just a snapping of the
fingers (or a standard action & expended slot)”.
So, once again, from the top…
The Crunch
Spellcasting (Revised)
- Spellcasting is a standard
action that requires at least one free hand.
- Casting a spell will draw attacks
of opportunity from any foes in melee range.
- A caster struck amid the
process of spellweaving immediately loses the spell.
The Spellcasting Roll
- Casting a spell requires
succeeding on a Spellcasting attribute
check, DC equal to spell level (or slot
level, if applicable).
- Instances where a spell
requires an attack roll use the difficulty to hit the target instead, if it is
higher.
- Failure on the casting roll will void the slot’s content from the spellcaster's memory.
- A natural ‘20’ will unleash the
spell without striking it from memory, trumping any constraints (see below).
- A natural ‘1’ will mean a
mischanneling has occured.
Constraints on the Spellcasting action
Spellcasting is a very special
type of action, one marrying the greatest need for precision and utmost
concentration, and as such easily disrupted by constraints, each translated into game terms
by the need for the spellcasting roll to not just beat the base difficulty but
also be made under a relevant attribute of the caster, to wit:
- Constraints of Burden, imposed if the character is encumbered or otherwise attempting to
cast while physically hampered, such as when bound with shackles or submerged
in water: the unadjusted casting roll must be lower than or equal to the caster’s Strength
attribute.
- Constraints of Dispersion, imposed on the casting of a spell on a
turn in which the character has taken any other action, including movement: the unadjusted
casting roll must be lower than or equal to the caster’s Wisdom attribute.
- Constraints of Concentration, imposed when the caster is being
actively distracted or is already concentrating on another spell: the unadjusted
casting roll must be lower than or equal to the caster’s Intelligence attribute.
- Constraints of Resilience, imposed if the character sustained
damage since his previous turn: the unadjusted casting roll must be lower than or equal
to the caster’s Constitution attribute (or under half the score, if the damage
sustained exceeded the character’s class HD).
- Constraints of Stability, imposed when casting is attempted on
unstable footing or in physically disturbing – though not necessarily damaging
– circumstances (amid a jostling crowd, on a galeswept ship deck, etc.): the unadjusted
casting roll must be lower than or equal to the caster’s Dexterity attribute.
When a casting action is about to
be declared but before the final decision is taken the referee will run the
player through any constraints derived from the situation at hand that the
character is currently experiencing, though in most cases these ought to be
self-evident.
- Failure to conform to any single constraint on a casting action will
result in a casting failure.
- Failure to conform to multiple constraints will result in a mischanneling, as if a natural ‘1’ had
been rolled.
Other Errata:
- Resting now restitutes a
caster’s full complement of slots.
- The Wisdom saving throw (DC 10
+ spell level) to avoid overchanneling is now granted by the use of a spell
focus during casting, which must be held in one hand while the casting proper is effected with the other.
Revised Overchanneling Table
Mostly unchanged, some entries clarified, some made harsher, others less so.
The Pudding Proof (further design notes)
With the original take the difficulties
were hard to establish and escalated much too quickly, leading to frequent casting
failures and in turn to efforts to compensate this by establishing that failed
spells could remain memorized, making the previous iteration slide down the slope
of chain-overcompensation, the intent being to restrain casters, not render
them useless.
Drawing from past digressions,
I now think that it is much more important to maintain the flow of play without compromising the game feel than it is to bog down the proceeds as the referee
makes painstakingly sure that a difficulty rating is fine-tuned to the tee that
matches one among a dizzying array of possible circumstances. Going forward, the DC is set deliberately low
and isn't meant to be much of an obstacle in becalmed circumstances; It just
mattering to have an ever-present chance of mischanneling, with additional
difficulties arising from the situation impacting the casting
difficulty through broad strokes, in a more organic way and without overconvoluting the numbers proper.
Instead of voluble DCs,
circumstances will lead to the roll being reframed but all hinging on the
single d20 rolled in cross-reference with the charsheet right in front of the player, an idea somewhat in the vein of Disadvantage’s
simplicity, only stat-based, so as to lend importance to a well-rounded
character rather than one focused on a single stat, retaining a measure of
complexity while being much less wobbly in its math (hence both more transparent and
predictable, in a good way).
As one can well imagine, rules
were made to be broken: of the six caster classes in the pipe it is expected
that some of them might be granted class-derived dispensation from certain
constraints due to their arcane training. Or not, I haven’t quite decided if
that is a good idea.
'Last comes the proof in the pudding:
will the average player (or poster-slash-referee rereading this in three
months’ time, enroute to go tilting at the next windmill in line) be able to run
with these mechanics from the back of his pocket with but a minimal
reacquainting effort? I've learned that my best answer can't hope to beat the simple act of waiting out for three months.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário