Re: Four fixes for DCC
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 6:33 am
I thought the wizard staff only allows the casting of the spell a few times a day, not unlimited.
Fan Forums
https://www.goodman-games.com/forums/
https://www.goodman-games.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=44622
When I look at spells with permanent effects - e.g. Arcane Affinity, Patron Bond, Wizard Staff etc. - it seems to me that no wizard would ever cast them without using the maximum amount of spellburn. These spells are effectively rituals and the results are far-reaching.oncelor wrote:The main problem we had with spellburn was that the wizards burned 20 points and used this to max-out "Wizard Staff," which then gave them +2 on their main offensive spells.
Like anyone getting shot at, ever... cover. move. cover.beermotor wrote:I've also found that surprise and ranged attacks, including spells, are wayyyyy more potent against my players than melee combat. Warriors and dwarves are pretty tough toe-to-toe. But everybody's squishy from longbow range. I damn near TPKd my party in DotSK when they came out of the tomb and encountered the 6 or 8 archer guys. It took them several rounds to run up close enough to melee them, and by that time, a lot of people had been dropped. And last week, I pitted them against a 5th or 6th level warrior and his 5th level wizard companion, plus an elf of about 3rd or so. Between the lightning bolts and the archery, they almost had another TPK. Only saved by the cleric burning all his luck on a divine intervention request for an avenging angel to save them. It worked... but there'll be a price for that aid.
Sure, I've done this many times, but after a dozen sessions of doing this it has become a farce: blind creatures have become a running joke with the players. They know that I'm having them attacked by plant monsters or eyeless zombies or rock creatures or smoke-demons and shadowy-severed-hand-creatures (that was last session) just to balance "color spray."beermotor wrote: I bet he'd cry like a girl if you attacked him with about 20 small and quick mindless undead with no eyes.
What I'm saying is, I don't think it's unbalanced at all.
beermotor wrote:I think you're exactly right about what those spells were intended for and exactly wrong that they need to be "(re)balanced"... the point of the game is gonzo, not balance. To a certain extent, that was the point of The Original Game magic-user, too. The "balance" comes in the form of challenging play from the Judge. If you're just letting your player steamroll everything, then I think you've only got yourself to blame. Give them something CHALLENGING! that they can't steamroll. The guy w/ color spray / and area of effect heal is a great example, that's a very powerful combination. But so what? There are a million ways to counter that. Reflecting creatures, for example, or mindless/un-dead. A big part of the danger of an OSR game, also, is massed numbers of smaller creatures. This is where a lot of modules go wrong, I think... concentrating too much in one "big bad" enemy that gets overwhelmed and only have a few dice rolls to negate that. I think 20 1HD creatures is potentially a far deadlier opponent than 1 20HD creature, given the right set of immunities or area effects.
He can store three "color sprays" in the staff, IIRC. After he rolls a '1' and loses the spell he uses these up and then casts a few more "color sprays" using spellburn, so the '1' does slow him down but doesn't really stop him.cthulhudarren wrote:I thought the wizard staff only allows the casting of the spell a few times a day, not unlimited.
That's right. For instance, I have to make sure I don't throw too many undead at the party because in fights against undead the two thieves in the party end up feeling pretty useless, since I don't allow most critical hit results to work against undead. But if I use lots of undead against the wizard to counter his "color spray," I still don't give the thieves much to do during combat.cjoepar wrote:Don't lose sight of the fact that there is another facet of balance that this color spraying wizard upsets as well. Most people like to contribute more or less equally to the success of the party, regardless of what character they are playing. Having a wizard that can pretty much always blast away things and leaves the rest of the party standing there eating popcorn and watching the show is a balance problem of a different sort. Do you have a situation where if the wizard can't make it to a gaming session the rest of the party is going to really struggle through the encounters, more so than if someone else didn't show up? That's a balance problem then.
It sounds to me like this is a case of the perfect storm, where a lot of things just lined up to create this situation. I would try a few tricks to kill him off and if they don't work, maybe the local king hears about this guy and decides to recruit him into his service as a personal body guard. You know, maybe he makes him an offer he can't refuse, then you let the guy retire and try to move on. Sometimes things like that happen, and it doesn't really mean that the system is broken, just that everything lined up right in a way you couldn't foresee as the judge. Maybe you even hang onto the character sheet and bring him back as a villain down the road in a year or two.
I have started making "counter-spell" ala "dispel magic" a more standard ability for monsters. This doesn't feel too contrived since it works against all the casters in the party, and it gives the wizard a chance to cast his spell still. Also it has an old school feel to it -- I remember fondly that duels between high level AD&D magic users typically opened with several rounds of repeated castings of "dispel magic."maxinstuff wrote:Create an anti-mage that can lock down wizards abilities. Remember enemies don't have to follow the same rules as characters. As soon as he sets off colour spray - BOOM - counterspell with something that makes him lose the spell for the day (ALL his spells at the top end of effect), cutting him off from his source of power. Force him to get a bit more creative.
'you reach out for magical energies and find nothing but emptyness.....'
Might make a good villain for your campaign. When wizards start getting captured and magical collars put on them to restrict their abilities and enslave them - then they will worry
Hmm, if you've done this dozens of time and haven't killed the guy yet, maybe I'm just not understanding. Another thought is, a guy THAT powerful is a big juicy target. A couple Thieves from the shadows, backstabbing, should eliminate the problem.oncelor wrote:Sure, I've done this many times, but after a dozen sessions of doing this it has become a farce: blind creatures have become a running joke with the players. They know that I'm having them attacked by plant monsters or eyeless zombies or rock creatures or smoke-demons and shadowy-severed-hand-creatures (that was last session) just to balance "color spray."beermotor wrote: I bet he'd cry like a girl if you attacked him with about 20 small and quick mindless undead with no eyes.
What I'm saying is, I don't think it's unbalanced at all.
If the wizard didn't have an 18 INT and a +2 bonus from his staff, I don't think this would be such a problem, since he would lose the spell 25% of the time rather than 5% of the time. At fifth level with his bonuses he's basically casting the spell as well as an average 10th level caster, which is why he's so much more powerful than the other 5th level characters in the party (most of whom have average, or worse than average, ability scores.)
I think I see your problem. But, I'm not suggesting you make something just to kill this guy and that's it. Like it or not, he IS the main character in the party, the main character of the story. So now you've got to figure out a way to deal with that in a way that's fun for both you and him. And your point about the old DM not allowing the bard to ever use his charm stuff is well taken, I'm not suggesting that you always attack him with eyeless/mindless/whatever stuff. I guess I misread you, wasn't sure if you'd simply not thought of that or not.oncelor wrote: Sure, mechanically I can invent any number of things to counter a player's super-cool ability. But mechanics aren't the problem. The two problems are:
1) I don't like having to single out a player for special challenge. I just don't like doing that. I've done it many times before: I've been DMing pretty much continuously for the last 30 years, and over the years have circumvented the powers of many-a-super-character. (I recall with particular distaste a 2nd edition D&D character named Api who had a psionic power called "Death Field," which was about as an unbalanced as it sounds.) I know how to do it. I've done it with this wizard many times already. But players inevitably know when this is happening to them, and they don't really like it. And I don't like doing it to them.
So you've got to make it that way. I always liked the idea from MERP that using spells of any sort invited dark forces to notice you from far away, and corruption to seep into your soul, that sort of thing. This guy's going around blasting everything in sight with rainbows, that's going to catch a lot of attention unless you're in San Francisco during the Pride Parade. Eventually something dark and nasty is going to take an interest in this upstart 5th level wizard. Maybe it's a for-real 10th level wizard who senses a powerful rival coming up. Maybe he'd like to eliminate the competition. Or maybe he wants to steal the guy's power. Or maybe rival kingdoms want to enslave er, uh, I mean, "recruit," Rainbow-man for their own armies. He's like a nuclear device in a world where they can't be built. That's astronomically valuable.One of the other things I loved about DCC is the notion that players were to be afraid of magic. I think the idea of corruption and divine disapproval is really neat. ... I've never had players decide not to cast a spell because they were afraid that the negative consequences would be worse than the benefits, even when the benefits were very, very marginal indeed.
I would like it if players were more afraid to cast their more powerful spells.
Oh, I would put a stop to spellburn allowing him to recast. Does this character have a patron?oncelor wrote:He can store three "color sprays" in the staff, IIRC. After he rolls a '1' and loses the spell he uses these up and then casts a few more "color sprays" using spellburn, so the '1' does slow him down but doesn't really stop him.cthulhudarren wrote:I thought the wizard staff only allows the casting of the spell a few times a day, not unlimited.
Excellent point!The Venomous Pao wrote:With regard to the super powerful staff, you might want to take a look at the section called "Ire of the Gods" on p. 365. It suggests that characters who wield magic items of a certain power level ("+2 enchantment or better" and "any extremely powerful staff" are specific identifiers) draw a Luck penalty of -1 to -4 so long as the item is wielded.
Now, I'm not saying you should hose the guy for making an incredibly powerful tool that threatens the greater powers and tears at the fabric of the universe. But the rules seem in favor of it
A significant Luck penalty sucks in general. When combined with a fumble and a corruption roll it could solve (or at least alleviate) your issue pretty quickly.
He's been killed in combat a couple times, but death in combat only seems to be a minor inconvenience: one of the clerics inevitably heals any fallen character within the 1 round / level limit, and the "Restore Vitality" spell removes any of the permanent damage. I am planning on addressing both these items with house-rules (negative HPs, ability damage from dying cannot be healed with "restore vitality.") Though I don't mind having monsters identify targets of particular threat, or for powerful characters to develop the attention of powerful rivals, I really don't like singling out characters and marking them for death.beermotor wrote: Hmm, if you've done this dozens of time and haven't killed the guy yet, maybe I'm just not understanding. Another thought is, a guy THAT powerful is a big juicy target. A couple Thieves from the shadows, backstabbing, should eliminate the problem.
Thanks for the good suggestions!beermotor wrote:oncelor wrote: Like it or not, he IS the main character in the party, the main character of the story. So now you've got to figure out a way to deal with that in a way that's fun for both you and him.
I agree with the sentiment, and he has racked-up half-a-dozen corruption results, but after about 250 hours of playing DCC with a wizard who is absolutely unafraid of slinging as many spells as he can (he used "magic missile" to hunt frogs for dinner) he still hasn't seen a corruption result that is anything other than a social inconvenience (blue skin, extra-long arms, etc.)maxinstuff wrote:Rest assured that in the fullness of time - the corruptive properties of magic catch up with you.
Maybe not today or tomorrow - but eventually.
He should be fearing for his soul.
I really like your idea on negative hps. I will be using that if it comes up. Maybe a way to limit Restore Vitality is to require some epic quest by the cleric just to make it work. Like, 1 year of fasting in the mountains. Or something similarly arduous.oncelor wrote:He's been killed in combat a couple times, but death in combat only seems to be a minor inconvenience: one of the clerics inevitably heals any fallen character within the 1 round / level limit, and the "Restore Vitality" spell removes any of the permanent damage. I am planning on addressing both these items with house-rules (negative HPs, ability damage from dying cannot be healed with "restore vitality.") Though I don't mind having monsters identify targets of particular threat, or for powerful characters to develop the attention of powerful rivals, I really don't like singling out characters and marking them for death.beermotor wrote: Hmm, if you've done this dozens of time and haven't killed the guy yet, maybe I'm just not understanding. Another thought is, a guy THAT powerful is a big juicy target. A couple Thieves from the shadows, backstabbing, should eliminate the problem.