Min/Max Boards

First part can be found here.

Foreword: I wish to thank faeryn, Eldritch_Lord, Jackinthegreen, Unbeliever, SneeR, and the rest for their invalubale help and all the helpful input.


Onwards!

• Spells memorized: The arcanist can memorize spells up to his Int. mod. + 1 (e.g. human with 14 int. can memorize 3 spells at any given time).
• Spell level limit: The arcanist can cast spells no higher then his class level divided by 2 and rounded up (e.g. Caster level 5 will be able to cast no higher then 3rd level spells).
• Spellcasting: each spell is cast against relevant save (Illusion vs. mental, disease vs. Fortitude, etc.). Casting a spell will not remove it from memorization. It is possible to recast it multiple times.
• Spells: The only existing spells are 1st level pieces that are very minor and can be combined for greater effect with other pieces. Example:
  Assume I have orb of acid, a 1st level 1d3 ranged attack spell, memorized. I can combine it with daze, another 1st level spell, and the widen metamagic in order to have a different spell in my arsenal. The new spell will be called bronzebeard's acid arrow and will be used as a 5th level spell of cone shaped acid 1d3 damage with daze effect upon hitting an enemy.
  
  (click to show/hide)

  Maybe spells could have 'greater' and 'lesser' manifestations. 'Lesser' would be the normal rules, while 'greater' will expend the spell from memory with some sort of greater benefit.
  

Questions? Comments? For? Against?

No ideas? Anyone? An outside view would be much appreciated.

Or is the chart not clear enough?

...As it stands, Dex is a pretty solid stat that anyone can benefit from having. Con is one that is nearly mandatory for everyone else. Cha can be dumped by everyone who isn't a spontaneous caster or doesn't have some weird niche feat. Similarly, it's going to be hard to design saves on these already-existing ability scores where someone doesn't end up saying "Oh, just dump Int. You're not a wizard or beguiler, and the Int save doesn't do anything important, anyway.".

This type of approach would probably work better in a system designed from scratch, where the abilities could be created from the ground up so that they are all equally useful....

This! 
This here is exactly it!

I know that trying to tweak the system is quite a chore and might "fall apart" midway. But I deem it highly necessary:

Both dex and con are highly sought after. str and wis are a tad important and cha is almost always a dump stat.
Maybe, just maybe, some items can be swapped around so that the abilities are more or less important for every character (excluding each class's own ability that fuels it's powers.).
The most obvious one, in my eyes, is granting cha as the save against Domination, Thrall and Charm spells.

Your thoughts?

I made a spreadsheet with all the numbers and levels with and without your addition and I must say that I still think that the inclusion of 1/2 HD to spells save DC is way too potent. It's giving somewhere between 85% to 115% of success. It seems to me way too one-sided.

The most immediate problem and goal is in regards to spells with saves. Its bugged me to no end that spell save DCs progressed exponentially slower than Will/Reflex/Fort saves.

In order to solve this, I'm afraid you'll have to break down some arithmatic dance moves and show how both the attack(spellcast) function and defense(save) function work. Keeping in mind that in order for the game to work, and assuming we're still talking about d20 system, then the attack function must be 10 points higher then the defense function disregarding levels and taking into account intervals of ability modifiers, equipment and buffs.

Both the old way and your new suggestion doesn't show that. Unless I'm overlooking something.

Next is the issue of multi-classing spellcasting. I don't aim to allow it at no cost, but I do aim to reduce the penalty. Multiclassing with another spellcasting class would logically still improve your casting ability in other casting classes. Similarly, learning a mundane class doesn't mean you would stop practicing magic. Since neither of these is direct advancement of the class you progress at a different rate. Arcane casters are still advancing arcane casting when they dip into a different arcane class so they would still progress full caster level. However an arcane caster who levels a divine casing class would still be training their ability to cast magic, but differences between the two types would mean a slowed progression. A caster who leveled a mundane class would still learn from their practice but since the new class is not casting they learn at an even slower rate.

The same sort of logic would apply to mundane class progression as well, however restrictions are nessisary... For this reason I restricted the advancement to abilities learned within the first 3 levels of a class that improve with class levels. The early class abilities are generally the most basic and fundamental to the class, so continued progression of them fits, learning new class abilities however should always require levels in that class.

I don't agree with you there. A few examples:
The spontaneous arcane caster which power from his vestige would not further advance his arcane powers if he would suddenly level a wizard in addition. His power source (thematically speaking) would not be the same one and therefore a different progression would need to be tracked.
Playing a sneakattack rogue and then adding on top a figher-sneak-attack-varient would mean that checks would need to stop him from advancing both sources of sneak attack. Yet, a very strong case can be presented for why he should receive the rogue special moves even if he didn't get to higher levels with his thief.

Making cantrips into at-will abilities gives spellcasters something...Overall goal was to make a system thats just more enjoyable and less punishing.

I strongly encourage you pursue that. Just that there are already a few items on the subject - including one that you and I had already shared.


=Now for the original post=

I hate cantrips/will. Much prefer to hand out free Reserve Feats.

I don't understand how the metamagic is going to work - can you further clarify?

The familiar change seems alright. Honestly, if someone gains a familiar I see no reason to not work with him so he can have the pet he desires.

The other parts have already been addressed above.

Anyway, going back to the initial post - I conjured up a quick table related to the answers in the thread. I entered both Illusion, Transmutation and Necromatic spell schools as my own intuition. Would love to hear more attempts at mapping the schools.

A note:
Spell schools are not set in stone. Maybe Conjuration should be broken up to smaller sects. Dunno.
The chart is not set in stone - I treat healing, for the moment, as removing debuffs. maybe it needs it's own line? I also don't know where to place summoning. I think it belongs to the Control part. Again, not sure.


So, give it your best go. And tell me what you think.

anything that a player wants to try that doesn't have material, I tend to be able to whip something up for them in a hurry.

See. This here worries me. It means that freedom is limited and the DM is forced to be in charge of even more work. It also means that most of these are non repeatable ruling that would diverse by time, gaming group and story.
But that just nitpicking.

But keeping a hand on things stops most of the runaway imbalance that the D&D splatbookfest devolved into over time.

GAWD    That's even more responsibilities for the poor GM...

I would like to comment on your writing. Yet, before that I would like you to elaborate on your Goal.
i.e. what is the problem in the mechanics?

I wish something like this would be implemented. Reminds me a bit of the 2nd edition initiative rules.

Thing is - the amount of bookkeeping is very traumatizing.

I have something in the works but I'm not so sure about it. I'll show it once I think it can stand on it's own.


I think that you are right in trying to base 'balance' as a way for each character to contribute to the game. And I do think that balancing classes 1on1 is very hard.
My main gripe with your method of providing different spellcasting rules for each playstyle (or game characteristic) is that it would be very hard to expand upon. If a player wants to cast a spell that he thinks is in the scope of the characters power he would have to encounter game-building alone. He would have to try to create a spell, balance it out, and implement it without support railings. Same goes for bringing a new spellcaster that is not represented by existing rules. Like, what if I want to play an enchanter? or Magical Elven Archer? or a paladin of tiamat?
That's why I'd much prefer to come up with a way of going LargePicture->SmallPicture and not the other way around.

This is a part of it. In addition to another discussion on the matter.

I still think your work is excellent and it would be fun to give it a go.