So I think I'm close to figuring out what I want to do for the Sanity system as a limit for casters in my world. I've worked out some things over the course of a few weeks, run some numbers and started checking against my pre-made storyline encounters (which are kind of difficult encounters, so that was important to do). I have come across a few issues with what I feel are the two best options for the Sanity casting system when applied directly to some of the encounters and with some of the things that need to be done by antagonists later in the story, so it makes both of the options require tweaking of some major battles. Which of course means more work and rebalancing.
So, for those of you who don't want to read the other entry (which you can read here) I'll summarize the best I can. Due to how I feel about the DnD magic system and what level of magic I want in my world I want to come up with some way to limit spell casting to keep it a low-magic world. I want there to be a reason why casters don't use much magic to solve the world's problems but they do need to exist in order for some of the plot points and objects/areas/etc to exist. So I needed to develop something that could explain it.
I came across the Sanity system, typically used in a Call of Cthulhu-type setting, in Unearthed Arcana and decided I was going to adapt it to spellcasting in my setting. The basics are that each caster has a sanity score based off of their Wisdom score (Wisdom x 5 = Sanity). When a caster casts a spell they take sanity damage due to the nature of the energies they're channeling through their body touching their mind/being/soul/whatever. the amount of damage is dependent upon spell level, with higher level spells taking heavier tolls. Whenever a character loses 1/2 of their wisdom score in sanity points they have to make a sanity check or be stricken with a temporary insanity. The sanity check consists of rolling d% based upon you current sanity score. If your sanity score ever reaches 0 your character goes catatonic until they've recovered a significant portion (I added this because the real system doesn't let you come back, still working on the specific number). I'm also still debating whether or not to allow the PC to take a point of Taint instead of a temporary insanity, but only because I haven't decided if Taint is going to be used in the setting.
So with that fresh in your mind I want to talk about the two systems I'm throwing back and forth and comparing to each other. I'm having trouble picking between the two because I like aspects of both but both bring their own set of issues to the table.
System #1: Low Loss
In this system the spell casters take a sanity loss of 1 point per Spell Level (1/2 Point per 2 0-level spells). When a character loses the cumulative equivalent of 1/2 of their Wisdom score in Sanity they must make a Sanity check. There is no resistance against these losses and the check is only made once per sanity loss (no matter if it's only 1 point or it was 30 points that puts you over the 1/2 wisdom total you only roll once for the loss that put you over). Recovery of sanity points is at the rate of 1D8 per Caster Level per day.
With this system I will also allow casters to be able to cast extra spells if they want to take a risk of going nuts. A spell caster can cast an extra spell from their known spells (even unprepared ones) by taking sanity loss equal to 1D6 per Spell Level followed by an immediate sanity check after the spell is cast. (This ability might get limited to a number of times per day equal to Caster Level for balancing, but then again maybe not. The drawback is pretty rough.)
The good thing with this is that it doesn't mean I need to adjust too much in the campaign world and still allows players flexibility with their class picks. I don't have to do the terrible thing as a DM with a low magic setting and have the enemies able to use more magic than the Players, which is always a big no-no. Spellcasters can still make it through the five minute workday without too much of a problem, maybe only getting hung up once or twice.
The bad thing I see with this kind of makes the magic level higher than I want it. It's still not a big enough deterrent to affect the way people do business in the world that most of the problems I want to avoid with high magic. Although it at least establishes a legitimate reason for non-casters to wary of magic.
System #2: Extreme Loss
This system uses similar mechanics as the other one. The major difference is in the amount of sanity lost. The sanity loss is 1D6 per Spell Level (1D3 per 0-level spell). At this level of loss I think each caster will be allowed an inherent resistance vs taint equal to their Wisdom Modifier and maybe more with feats, class features, and such (maybe various fractions of Caster Level, allowing will saves to reduce the amount lost, or something). The recovery rate per day would also increase to 1D8 + Wisdom Modifier per Caster Level per day.
I like this one because it puts spellcasting into the realm of rare, special, and dangerous.That's where I want magic to be. Those who master it are legends in their own right, but the journey is dangerous and prone to spectacular failure of the will of the mage. This turns everything magical into a liability on some level.
Both good and bad, this limits pure spell casters from existing as PCs because each spell cast is a major liability for the players. You potentially have people who will go crazy two rounds into the fight on a regular basis even with the resistances.
The bad things are that I have to redesign some encounters that were made based upon normal DnD rules and make sure they aren't accidentally too powerful with this setup. Some of the encounters are easy to fix, I just eliminate a spell caster or two from the mob roster. The problematic ones are at the higher levels or during special story encounters that make it difficult to judge the true difficulty of the encounter without magic in the party. Things like Hydras just got far more deadly once your players are only armed with torches and alchemist fire. (Which I'm totally okay with, I like that idea but it requires careful balancing)
I also need to be careful with how I design story elements. Some geographic features of the world and some elements of the story revolve around rituals and other such things of a magical nature that to deny magic to the player when there is magic that exists with such power that these objects or locations exists seems cruel and could take away from the players' enjoyment. There are good fluff reasons why these things could exist and why magic is so difficult and everything, but that doesn't mean a player will appreciate it, especially if they love playing a caster.
There will probably be concessions for various things when either of these things are implemented. Maybe alchemy is rather effective and "magic" weapons can still exist. They'd be specially crafted by master artisans and possibly alchemically enhanced, or with alchemical devices inside to give them effects. You know, the start of steam punk elements for the world on the verge of an industrial revolution. (I think I like that a lot... Maybe I'll look into the Alchemist class more for this as I'm converting everything to Pathfinder.)
This is in addition to Resurrection magic being rare and only possible in specially dedicated location among other minor alterations to the magic system (a couple spells removed here and other quick things). Healing potions being more plentiful, cheaper, and easier to craft (to pull healing duties away from the casters so they don't have to waste spells and sanity) along with other tweaks. All of this will eventually be put into some type of campaign guide/primer that will be given to the players.
Anyways, as always let me know what you think. I have been having fun designing this thing. Working on the campaign again so heavily has gotten my creative juices flowing and I'm altering some other aspects and challenging some of my earlier thoughts on the campaign. I'll write more about my upcoming campaign related stuff later and give those interested an idea of what I have been developing during the temporary silence.
No comments:
Post a Comment