Okay so basic combat time economy is:
>each turn is a minute
>in a turn a character can do upto 5 actions per turn
>magic spells have components, like vocal, semantic, material, etc...
>each component requires the magic user use an action and make a diferent roll depending on component
>so a vocal component needs a CHA roll, somantic needs a DEX roll etc...
>after the component rolls, there's a final casting roll that also uses up an action.
>some spells need all the component rolls to succeed to not fizzle out completly, others need only the final casting roll to "work" but failing the materials rolls can alter how the spell works.
>so a fireball spell where the caster succeeds at the casting rolling but fails the somantic component could miss, either not hitting the target completely, doing only half damage, or hitting someone near to the original target instead
The idea is that it makes casters need to put a decent amount of points in more than just their core stat, and even then are still fairly reliant on "wizard's staff/wand" focus type equipment that gives them bonuses to casting or building their characters to be able to survive without relying exclusively on spells.
Thereby hopefully creating more of a spectrum of caster types, from your staff weilding gandalf type whose first and last resort is magic, to the more mundane focused caster who has a few spells up their sleeves for emergencies due to spells being less reliable for him than hitting things with a stick or running away if they're out of their depth.
Or is it just an overcomplicated way to handle magic in an OSR type arrangement?
>>48170455
>Or is it just an overcomplicated way to handle magic
It sounds like it is, but the real question is how does it work out for you and your players? Even if it is complex, if you and your players have good times using those rules, then no harm done.
>>48170455
It depends on how powerful spells are, but it just seems crazy complicated. Every spell has its own rules, in addition to every spell already having its own rules just 'cause that's how spells work (unless it's all standardized like 4e but I don't think so).
>>48170455
That depends, do other classes need to be good at three or more stats to be able to do their spellcasting? Because Rangers would need DEX for aiming, STR for actually pulling the bowstring back depending on the weight of the bow, INT or WIS to compensate for longer distances.
Really, if every class is that complicated than it's relatively fair. If a Fighter doesn't need good DEX to even remotely be able to use a sword than yeah you're probably screwing them over.
>>48170455
> Step 1: Make casting any spell of level 1 or higher a full-turn action
> Step 2: Don't forget concentration checks and attacks of opportunity
You can stop there, but if you want to make them actually have to try:
> Step 3: make them roll to cast spells. DC = 10 + Spell's level; no rolls for cantrips.
Either do it Elder Scrolls style and have there be a skill for each class of magic which are liked to INT, WIS, and CHA as appropriate, or you can just have Spellcraft also be the cast-a-spell skill if you wanna keep it simple. Either way the odds are in their favor still, but it adds that chance of failure that every other class has. If they fail the roll nothing happens, so they're not out components or slots or anything
And to really take it to the next level:
> Step 3: Make them actually track spell components; the components pouch just being a hold-all so they don't have to constantly oganize their inventory; say it can hold 30 total componetns of inconcequential value.
You can never fuck magic users too hard.
>>48170610
>That depends, do other classes need to be good at three or more stats to be able to do their spellcasting?
Your ridiculum ad absurdum is retarded but replying to it made me realise the real problem with this:
the point of rolling is that there's random variables that the dice represent, so pulling a bow string back isn't rolled for because either the archer has enough strength to do that, or not. Similarly a caster will either be able to remember the magical hand gestures and words or not, there's no real random variable for the dice to represent.
However, firing a bow has a load of variables, archer has to get the elevation right, make sure he leads with the bow properly, accounts for side winds etc... whcih is represented by the dex roll. Similarly, a caster has to control the unstable and fickle power intrinsic to the magic spell, which is represented by the Int or Cha or Wis roll.
So instead of having 4 seperate rolls, have one roll that uses up 4 actions per round and similar.
>>48170759
ara ara
>>48170987
Depends though, can you stab someone with 1 action? If so then your magic user even if you have one is going to get fucked hard. Unless each spell is really fucking good, someone is going to choose the versatility of spanking dudes instead of fumbling through a book and bag for your entire turn.
>>48170987
>account for side winds
>dex roll
what part of part of being dexterous helps with that. Just because he might be a nimble fucker doesn't mean it's going to help him calculate the drop of the arrow from gravity
The biggest issue here is that you have a bunch of different rolls.
If you want to roll several dice at once that fine, but there should only be one or two sets of rolling dice per action top.
Rolling for each relevant component, for the spell, and for the spells effect is in the neighborhood of four to six rolls per spell.
Also, what does Charisma have to do with precis mumbling and chanting?
If anything that's Dexterity (for precise movement) or Intelligence (for memorization and recollection).
For that matter, what gets rolled for handling material reagents? Dexterity again?
>others need only the final casting roll to "work" but failing the materials rolls can alter how the spell works.
Muh tediously frequent referencing!
>Thereby hopefully creating more of a spectrum of caster types
In the first place, I don't see your system leading to diverse casters.
In the second place, this is how you get parties where everyone is a wizard.
In the third place, high barriers to entry are how you get no one partially dipping into an archtype.
>Or is it just an overcomplicated way to handle magic in an OSR type arrangement?
Yes. Just do it in a run of the mill OSR fashion.
If you don't want characters throwing powerful spells around left and right, give them weak spells.
If you don't want versatile spells that trivialize certain archetypes, use narrow spells or exclude those archetypes.
If you don't want powerful wizards overshadowing semi-strong other guys, make the progress at a slower rate.
Throughout pretty much all of TSR D&D, Magic Users were the weakest class option. Both in crunch and fluff.
A round was pretty abstracted, but it represented an entire minute.
A fighter spent the entire minute attacking and parrying and posturing. Their "attacks per round" re the number of meaningful hits they might make in a minute.
A magic user spent the entire minute (or more!) casting a single spell. If they so much as stub their toe or step on a caltrop... Boom! Minute wasted.
>>48170455
Yeaa that's some pretty overcomplicated and overshooty with the nerfbat.
Standard D&D it's
>attack roll, if it hits the difficulty (from AC) then you hit
>cast, the target rolls a save
So they're both equal in amount of saves used.
Plus magic is limited in amount of casts and sometimes spell resistance adds another roll.
You are adding two extra rolls, two extra chances of failure.
Boost the other classes with utilities or ban the magic wholesale if you want balance. Don't go harebrained shit like this.
>>48170709
How many fucking times do you people have to be told that "enforce spell components" doesn't fix anything?
Having to pass 3 checks to do your main feature is kind of shitty, but without knowing exactly what you're running I have no idea just how justified it might be so whatever.
I'm just generally not a fan of having a fuck ton of rolls when making it just one more difficult roll is an option even if that means certain classes will overspecialize. What exactly is so bad about wizards not caring about their charisma?
It's over complicated in a system that already makes magic hard to do and magic users hard to play at low levels (OSR).
This ain't 3.X, oniifam; no need to put the boots to casters.
>>48172768
Well considering the OP hadn't said it was for 3.5 I wouldn't expect that person to be the best at paying attention.
The only 3.5 rule that enforcing can really make a difference on (and is often overlooked) is that casting a spell with a full round or greater casting time means it doesn't take effect until the start of the next turn. That mostly hurts summoning spells which are pretty OP without it. Material components are mostly joke shit like "a penny for your thoughts" for mind reading unless they have an actual cost attached and "enforcing that" sort of misses the point since they tend to be placed randomly in the spell list
>>48170455
>magic spells have components,
>like semantic
>>48172006
Because most of the components for firing an arrow fall under dex so it's easier to lump them all into one dex roll rather than doing some complex equation where you add a small fraction of your int to the roll every time you fire an arrow.
>>48172887
Semantics complaint caused by diction failure of semantics.
Lost so hard.
>>48170455
You'd be better off using the
AD&D system of making the round into 10 segments, and rolling a d10 for initiative minus dex bonus (low number goes first), plus the level of the spell in segments as casting time. This could potentially force high level spells or really bad initiative rolls to make the caster use more than a round to cast the spell (at ten the initiative rolls over to the next round). This would mean giving weapons a penalty as well (light one-handed +1, light two-handed +2, martial one-handed +3, martial two-handed +4, all exotic +5, and subtracting the fighter weapon training bonus and any weapon focus bonus from that number (which can create a negative number to initiatives for high level fighters using simple weapons). That's a quick, simple example, you ould even cut weapon speeds lower if you want to empower martials further.
Doing so means a little more work, but it keeps casters from overwhelming enemies in a fight when they need the martials to protect them so they can get those powerful spell off. It gives the martials a definite edge in the rocket tag.
>>48172887
>Wizard's spellbook is full of notes from private GM magic lessons
>Casting a spell involves constructing proper magic grammar, pronunciation, gestures, etc, and at least partial failures of consequence decided by GM depending on what you fucked up
Doesn't sound fixed but it sounds fun.
