Standard/battle/realm magic how to distiguish them

[Angelbialaska]

Originally posted by Raesene Andu+Feb 22 2005, 02:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Raesene Andu @ Feb 22 2005, 02:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Osprey@Feb 22 2005, 02:34 PM
Something like 1 GB per spell level seems like a reasonably expensive baseline cost for battle magic spells - it will make any battle caster choose carefully, and use their spells sparingly (especially high-level ones).

This was around the cost I was thinking of as well, and it would generally mean that most battle spells were based off low level spells, otherwise they just get way too expensive. [/b][/quote]
1 GB per spell level is far far too much. Not even realm spells are anywhere near that cost.

As for the group of priests or wizards standing together, chanting, then why not simply use the Cooperative Spell feat? And many of the effects on the battlefield can easily be simulated using metamagic feats. Widen, Sculpt, Twin Spell, Mass <spells>, etc. For instance Rain of Magic Missiles could be created by using Sculpted Magic Missiles. Widened Fireball also does the trick.

These spells could easily qualify as battle spells. And their cost is nowhere near several GBs cost.

[MorganNash]

I&#39;ve read through the various discussions and it&#39;s definitely a tricky one this. In the end, I&#39;ve voted for choice 3. I&#39;ve tried to outline my reasoning and preferences - sorry if it&#39;s a bit vague at times:

While magic is rarer in BR than in some other D&D settings, there must be an effect on a battle when a wizard or a priest takes the field. While one fireball may arguably make little difference, the 3.5 rules make it possible for a wizard to produce a Wand of Fireball and loose all 50 of them into the enemy ranks in the space of a few minutes. This would seem to be a pretty devastating assault. To me this says that there should be guidelines that describe the effect of certain standard spells upon a battle.

The reasoning then takes me forwards to: "And should there be another kind of magic that works on an even larger level?" I will admit that I do like the idea of lots of priests chanting away to achieve some large effect and, given the relative frequency of clerics to wizards, that doesn&#39;t seem too out-of-place for the setting. I do just feel, though, that much of the Battle Magic feel can be captured by use of the Metamagic Feats and so on.

Really, I guess that I&#39;m saying that effort should be put into demonstrating how the current standard system can be used (with some modification?) and not into creating a whole new system. I will admit that I could well be convinced otherwise.

[Osprey]

As for the group of priests or wizards standing together, chanting, then why not simply use the Cooperative Spell feat?

Because 1. it&#39;s a terrible feat for battle magic, and 2. it&#39;s not in the core rules.

Explanation of 1:Every caster must be casting the spell seperately&#33;&#33;&#33; What a waste of good spells. As battle magic, if I had 10 wizards who could cast fireball, why would I make one really hard to resist fireball when I could volley 10 seperate ones?

The entire function of the Cooperative Spell feat is to hit highly-resistant targets - the feat increases a spell&#39;s DC and caster level vs. spell resistance. This is a feat built to allow groups of casters to take on powerful enemies with strong saves and SR (like outsiders).

And many of the effects on the battlefield can easily be simulated using metamagic feats. Widen, Sculpt, Twin Spell, Mass <spells>, etc. For instance Rain of Magic Missiles could be created by using Sculpted Magic Missiles. Widened Fireball also does the trick.

The real problem here is that so many of these feats will be needed at once that it is practically impossible for any one spellcaster to know enough of them, let alone have the caster level to actually apply multiple metamagics to even a first level spell&#33; If the spells don&#39;t already have a unit-scale effect, it&#39;s going to be really hard to metamagic them enough to create that scale.

The point of a Battle Magic feat is so that a caster doesn&#39;t have to take 3-5 MM feats, and be a 10th-20th level spellcaster, just to be a competent battle caster. It&#39;s meant to be an all-in-one feat that allows multiple enhancements on standard base spells through the process of extended ritual and components (and maybe cooperative casting applied differently than the Complete Arcane feat).

Osprey

[Raesene Andu]

Originally posted by Angelbialaska@Feb 22 2005, 11:43 PM
1 GB per spell level is far far too much. Not even realm spells are anywhere near that cost.

Not necessarily, if you tailor the effects to make it worth the cost. It may make a general think twice before hiring a wizard, but a wizard can quickly turn the tide of a battle and for a small, but cash rich realm (for example Ender) which can&#39;t muster a huge army to counter a threat, hiring a wizard to destroy your enemy&#39;s troops makes good sense.

In 2E some of these spells had not cost at all, something I don&#39;t think should be carried over. All battle spells need to have a GB cost, to better balance their use. Someone about to go off to war should have to decide if they recruit more soldiers, hire mercenaries, or pay the expensive fees of a good battle wizards. If he has the gold then a battle wizard makes good sense, but if he is poor then perhaps he can&#39;t afford to hire a wizard.

[Osprey]

Perhaps actual component costs could be reduced, especially if the effects of most (or all) battle spells are either instantaneous, 1 battle turn, or Concentration (one spell, usually a unit enhancement spell, may be maintained by the battle caster(s) in subsequent rounds after it is cast, in lieu of casting a different spell or fighting that round).

In this scenario, battle spells could be less expensive: 500 gp per spell level?

That&#39;s still exorbitantly expensive, mind you: 1 GB for a single 4th level battle spell. And these aren&#39;t realm spells, so the costs for battle spells should be set somewhere in a middle ground between personal spells and realm spells.

Also, we&#39;re just talking about material expenses here. A mercenary battle mage could easily demand twice that: 1000 gp, or 1/2 GB, per spell level. Or he could just ask for a lump sum and prepare a certain array of battle spells based on the total payment.

[RaspK_FOG]

I generally feel that battle magic, as a separate kind of spells, is a little not cool for all those people who must devote themselves to a line of spells they actually know&#33; While I generally feel that the "known spells" mechanic can be pretty bad for some characters (*cough*sorcerers*cough*), this would be devastating to them.

Such a mechanic would explain, however, why there really are elven wizards, after all... :P

Seriously now, I feel that Conan (don&#39;t throw apples at me, OK?) had a pretty interesting mechanic: combat manoeuvres; under that rule, players who meet some prerequisites get a specific ability they can use without taking a feat or what... Something similar to how Complete Adventurer denotes that people with many ranks in a skill can grant a very high bonus on checks they aid another.

For example, characters who take the Battle Caster feat can throw a Fireball at another after × time with the help of that many people and those costly components and produce a bigger KAPOW&#33; than normal.

[Raesene Andu]

Originally posted by RaspK_FOG@Feb 23 2005, 06:49 PM
I generally feel that battle magic, as a separate kind of spells, is a little not cool for all those people who must devote themselves to a line of spells they actually know&#33; While I generally feel that the "known spells" mechanic can be pretty bad for some characters (*cough*sorcerers*cough*), this would be devastating to them.

A couple of years ago I suggested that sorcerers could learn 1 realm or 1 battle spell for every level they took. As realm spells ended up being seperated from the normal known spells mechanic, then there is no reason that battle spells (as another seperate level of magic) cannot also be seperated from the sorcerer&#39;s list of known spells.

You could choose to either make it one spell/caster level, or maybe a better mechanic would be allow a sorcerer to research and battle spell that is based on a standard spell he knows. So to research a rain of magic missiles type spell he would need to know the standard magic missile spell and have the battle caster feat.

On the issue of cost of battle spells it makes it simpler to have one rule that governs the cost of all battle spells (be it 1 GB/level, 0.5 GB/level, or even 0.25 GB/level).

[The Jew]

If converting normal spells to battle magic spells was based upon a meta-magic feat, then Sorcerers would not be underpowered, as long as some of the more obvious and classic spells (i.e. fireball) were the standards.

Yes, they would have less selection than a normal wizard, but it is all made up for in number of castings per day. Same as normal magic.

[Mark_Aurel]

Originally posted by Angelbialaska+Feb 22 2005, 03:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Angelbialaska @ Feb 22 2005, 03:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Feb 22 2005, 02:21 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Osprey

@Feb 22 2005, 02:34 PM
Something like 1 GB per spell level seems like a reasonably expensive baseline cost for battle magic spells - it will make any battle caster choose carefully, and use their spells sparingly (especially high-level ones).

This was around the cost I was thinking of as well, and it would generally mean that most battle spells were based off low level spells, otherwise they just get way too expensive.

1 GB per spell level is far far too much. Not even realm spells are anywhere near that cost.

As for the group of priests or wizards standing together, chanting, then why not simply use the Cooperative Spell feat? And many of the effects on the battlefield can easily be simulated using metamagic feats. Widen, Sculpt, Twin Spell, Mass <spells>, etc. For instance Rain of Magic Missiles could be created by using Sculpted Magic Missiles. Widened Fireball also does the trick.

These spells could easily qualify as battle spells. And their cost is nowhere near several GBs cost. [/b][/quote]
1 GB per spell level sounds more than reasonable, actually.

Consider that raising a unit to do a hit costs at least 2 GB, in addition to the cost of maintaining it and moving it. Then there&#39;s also the cost of the actions involved -- mustering units, starting war. Also consider the time it takes to field a unit.

If 1 GB expended equals 1H on one unit, I&#39;d consider that a more than fair trade-off. I&#39;d even consider it to be a bit too cheap.

2 GB per spell may be more appropriate as a starting point.

[MorganNash]

Originally posted by RaspK_FOG@Feb 23 2005, 09:19 AM
Seriously now, I feel that Conan (don&#39;t throw apples at me, OK?) had a pretty interesting mechanic: combat manoeuvres; under that rule, players who meet some prerequisites get a specific ability they can use without taking a feat or what...

A similar idea is used in the L5R d20 books where a character can learn something like a "kata" (apologies, I don&#39;t have my books with me at the moment). There is a minimum requirement that varies much in the same way as for Feats and also an XP cost to learn the kata. The character can then gain a special ability for a limited time after spending some time in preparation. When I get home, I&#39;ll see if I can find an example (without infringing on copyright).

Maybe that would be of some use as a mechanic.

OK ... have got a book with me now. Here&#39;s a rough draft of how this mechanic might be applied - none of the figures are in any way balanced and the actual number-crunching would need to be examined:

Rain of Magic Missiles
Casting Time: 20 minutes
Requirements to learn: Must know the "Magic Missile" spell; Spellcraft 7 ranks
XP Cost to learn: 500 XP
Effect: Blats the living daylights out of the enemy.