Haphazzard Casting, Thoughts?

[LordVreeg]

OOhkay.  Never saw this thread.  Near and dear to my scummy little heart, though.  Going to have to read over this whole thread, now.

But I am going to offer something right now.  
ANyone mention any spell success% yet?

[Higgs Boson]

No, we were making some progress, but we never got that far.

[Stargate525]

I got word from my friend, the original DC was 23+ spell level...

[LordVreeg]

something I have used is spell success %, which is analogous to a dc roll   Making harder soell succ % with spells outside your won scholls might give you the mechanism to simulate a somewhat incomplete understanding of a spell type,/

[Stargate525]

something I have used is spell success %, which is analogous to a dc roll. Making harder spell success % with spells outside your own schools might give you the mechanism to simulate a somewhat incomplete understanding of a spell type.

I think I translated that correctly... So you're saying we ditch the d20 roll and make it a % dice roll, with varying difficulty modifiers based on where you got the spell?

...That might actually work. If we add the skill bonus into the roll (maxes out at 30ish at 20th level) and average skill with the spell (additional 50), that gives you a roll of between 81 and 180. So we need to figure out how often we want them to succeed at different levels before I can cement the numbers, but this might make things a whole heck of alot easier.

[Higgs Boson]

Like SG said, that might actually work. I think we should gie it a try, at least.

[LordVreeg]

I use a different system than any of you do, so I'll not devolve this posting into a needless statistical discourse.

I have a spell success roll with every spell attempt, even spells in a character's area of expertise.  The tougher the spell, the bigger the -% (or DC).  Also, spells cast from outside the caster's area of expertise have a -%.  Spell casting % is a skill in my world, so there are modifiers on both sides.  Also, the more energy over the cost a caster pours into  a spell increases the success %.  And if they have the ritual magic ability (witchcraft), they can spend more time on it and increase the spell %

For those of you with spell slots, I'd recomend inxcreasing the spell success% if they burn extra slots to cast a spell, symbolizing more spell energy being poured into the spell.

[Higgs Boson]

Interesting. Maybe we could work this in somehow.

[Stargate525]

Yeah, give a bonus equal to the number of levels spent into it, and level zero counts as a half.

Makes it so that you could theoretically pull off that uber ninth level spell, but you'll probably have to trash all your spell slots.

I like it. Look for a consolidated list some time this week.

[LordVreeg]

Now we're talking.  
Energy is energy, and pouring more into a spell has got to help.  I like rules that allow a PC to think strategically, like'"do I blow extra slots and make sure this works, or do I try to save some for later and hope I can pull this stupid Fireball off".
If you want to convolute this further, look at my Ritual Magic posting, on the Celtricia HomeBrew.

[Haphazzard]

So, I crunched some numbers and this is what came out:

if the DC for a lvl 1 spell is a 12 on a 20 sided die, that's a 60% chance.  If it's a 13, it's a 65% chance.  I had two ideas: If we treated casting as a skill we could either add that number as a % or multiply it by 2 and add THAT as a %.  

Example: I'm a sorc. with INT 13.  I have two skills in Evocation (this is all assuming evocation is based off of INT of course).  That'll give me a +3 x 2.  That means I add 6% to my casting rolls.  With a 60% base I add the 6 and it becomes a 66%.  66 or lower on my die roll means I cast the spell.  I checked it and I had a 38% failure rate. For first level, that's not bad (in my opinion)

Same situation, but with the base at 65% (aiming for 71%) I had a 18% failure.  Could do better failure wise.

If I don't multiply the skills by 2, but keep the situation the same I get a 34% failure rate at base 65% and a 46% failure rate at base 60.  Quite frankely I think the last one was the best, a solid set-it-in-stone sort of number.  less than half, but no where close to never.  That's a base 65% and add skill points to that %  again, that's only at lvl one.

For the matter of mana-per-level, I used the link in the first couple posts ( This ) and modified a little bit.  I say we drop their suggested mana-per-lvl and use my own.  Basically, add one to each of the numbers on the spell point costs.  That makes lvls 0-9: 1,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18 points per-spell respectively.  Now, take your PH and go to pg 52 (chart of Sorc. spells-per-day) and apply the numbers above to that chart.  
First lvl gets 11 points (5 0's//3 1st)
Second lvl gets 14 points (6 0's//4 1st)
Fifth lvl gets 34 points (6 0's//6 1st//4 2nd)
Make sense?

Ok, as if that wasn't enough to digest, I have more.  Casting spells that are a different level: divide the highest level spell you can cast by the lvl spell your trying to cast, turn that into a percent, then subtract that percent from the cast percent.  Lets say a lvl 1 sorc. is trying to cast a lvl 5 spell.  You would take 1 (highest lvl spell he can cast in PH) and divide it by 5.  That's a 20%  Subtract that from 63% (assuming base 60, INT 13, and 2 Skills) and only a 43 or lower makes it.  That may not seem like much, but he'll be left with 1 lvl 0 spell that whole day.  Not to mention he'll have had to learn that spell.  Plus failure still takes some of that mana away (so he only has one shot with a 43% chance of success).

[Haphazzard]

P.S.  I like the idea of adding mana to increase your percentage, so I thought maybe 5% per mana point, or 2% per mana point.  I haven't had the chance to try this out, that's why I didn't put it in the post above.  Suggestions?

[Stargate525]

My God...  :huh:

if the DC for a lvl 1 spell is a 12 on a 20 sided die, that's a 60% chance. If it's a 13, it's a 65% chance. I had two ideas: If we treated casting as a skill we could either add that number as a % or multiply it by 2 and add THAT as a %.

You're backwards. You're assuming that the goal is to scoot under the determined number, when the rest of the system is designed to beat it. Your percentages should be 40 and 35, respectively.

Example: I'm a sorc. with INT 13. I have two skills in Evocation (this is all assuming evocation is based off of INT of course). That'll give me a +3 x 2. That means I add 6% to my casting rolls. With a 60% base I add the 6 and it becomes a 66%. 66 or lower on my die roll means I cast the spell. I checked it and I had a 38% failure rate. For first level, that's not bad (in my opinion)

Two skills? You mean ranks? And resetting this so that it runs the same as the rest of the d20 system, you've got a DC 34 on a d100 roll to beat, aka you can cast with relative certainty.

and your math has to be wrong. 38+66=104%

If I don't multiply the skills by 2, but keep the situation the same I get a 34% failure rate at base 65% and a 46% failure rate at base 60.  Quite frankely I think the last one was the best, a solid set-it-in-stone sort of number.  less than half, but no where close to never.  That's a base 65% and add skill points to that %  again, that's only at lvl one.

I agree with you. A 40-50% success rate sounds good, especially for new, unpracticed spells.

For the matter of mana-per-level, I used the link in the first couple posts ( This ) and modified a little bit.  I say we drop their suggested mana-per-lvl and use my own.  Basically, add one to each of the numbers on the spell point costs.  That makes lvls 0-9: 1,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18 points per-spell respectively.  Now, take your PH and go to pg 52 (chart of Sorc. spells-per-day) and apply the numbers above to that chart.  
First lvl gets 11 points (5 0's//3 1st)
Second lvl gets 14 points (6 0's//4 1st)
Fifth lvl gets 34 points (6 0's//6 1st//4 2nd)
Make sense?

Yes it does.

Ok, as if that wasn't enough to digest, I have more.  Casting spells that are a different level: divide the highest level spell you can cast by the lvl spell your trying to cast, turn that into a percent, then subtract that percent from the cast percent.

I'm certain there's a more elegant way to do this, as what you've got right now is either going to require some guesswork or a calculator.

Plus failure still takes some of that mana away (so he only has one shot with a 43% chance of success).

So does failure cost the full amount of the spell, or some lesser number, maybe half?

Also, you didn't address how the spell's level affects the spell... I got it. For each level below your maximum, you get a cumulative +4 to your roll. So a level 10 spellcaster (who can cast 5th level spells) casting a 2nd level spell gets a +12 to the roll.

Also, are we scrapping the 1-100 range of spell mastery? It's not figured in here, and that makes it much easier. In its place, Might I suggest something kinda similar to the item system, where you've got (essentially) 7 levels (normal, masterwork, then +1 - +5)? Learning a spell up to a certain level would net you an additional bonus to the check, or perhaps allow it to use less mana...

P.S. I like the idea of adding mana to increase your percentage, so I thought maybe 5% per mana point, or 2% per mana point. I haven't had the chance to try this out, that's why I didn't put it in the post above. Suggestions?

Yeah, make it a reduction of 5% per spell level (0-level spells do squat in this version, you'll see why in a sec), but you have to pay your way up. That way, you get something like this;
percent reduction = additional mana
5%=3
10%=7
15%=13
20%=21
25%=31
30%=43
35%=57
40%=73
45%=91

So to get a 25% reduction, you've got to spend the equivalent of one spell from every level 5th and below, plus metamagic plus the spell's base cost. The way I see it, you'd quickly start to get to the point of diminishing returns where most of the energy you're pumping into the spell is there to keep what's already there contained rather than to increase the casting chance. The reason a 0-level spell doesn't count is that it would only cost 1 extra mana point, which would be utterly silly.

[Haphazzard]

My God...  :huh:

if the DC for a lvl 1 spell is a 12 on a 20 sided die, that's a 60% chance. If it's a 13, it's a 65% chance. I had two ideas: If we treated casting as a skill we could either add that number as a % or multiply it by 2 and add THAT as a %.

You're backwards. You're assuming that the goal is to scoot under the determined number, when the rest of the system is designed to beat it. Your percentages should be 40 and 35, respectively.

Example: I'm a sorc. with INT 13. I have two skills in Evocation (this is all assuming evocation is based off of INT of course). That'll give me a +3 x 2. That means I add 6% to my casting rolls. With a 60% base I add the 6 and it becomes a 66%. 66 or lower on my die roll means I cast the spell. I checked it and I had a 38% failure rate. For first level, that's not bad (in my opinion)

Two skills? You mean ranks? And resetting this so that it runs the same as the rest of the d20 system, you've got a DC 34 on a d100 roll to beat, aka you can cast with relative certainty.

and your math has to be wrong. 38+66=104%

If I don't multiply the skills by 2, but keep the situation the same I get a 34% failure rate at base 65% and a 46% failure rate at base 60.  Quite frankely I think the last one was the best, a solid set-it-in-stone sort of number.  less than half, but no where close to never.  That's a base 65% and add skill points to that %  again, that's only at lvl one.

I agree with you. A 40-50% success rate sounds good, especially for new, unpracticed spells.

For the matter of mana-per-level, I used the link in the first couple posts ( This ) and modified a little bit.  I say we drop their suggested mana-per-lvl and use my own.  Basically, add one to each of the numbers on the spell point costs.  That makes lvls 0-9: 1,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18 points per-spell respectively.  Now, take your PH and go to pg 52 (chart of Sorc. spells-per-day) and apply the numbers above to that chart.  
First lvl gets 11 points (5 0's//3 1st)
Second lvl gets 14 points (6 0's//4 1st)
Fifth lvl gets 34 points (6 0's//6 1st//4 2nd)
Make sense?

Yes it does.

Ok, as if that wasn't enough to digest, I have more.  Casting spells that are a different level: divide the highest level spell you can cast by the lvl spell your trying to cast, turn that into a percent, then subtract that percent from the cast percent.

I'm certain there's a more elegant way to do this, as what you've got right now is either going to require some guesswork or a calculator.

Plus failure still takes some of that mana away (so he only has one shot with a 43% chance of success).

So does failure cost the full amount of the spell, or some lesser number, maybe half?

Also, you didn't address how the spell's level affects the spell... I got it. For each level below your maximum, you get a cumulative +4 to your roll. So a level 10 spellcaster (who can cast 5th level spells) casting a 2nd level spell gets a +12 to the roll.

Also, are we scrapping the 1-100 range of spell mastery? It's not figured in here, and that makes it much easier. In its place, Might I suggest something kinda similar to the item system, where you've got (essentially) 7 levels (normal, masterwork, then +1 - +5)? Learning a spell up to a certain level would net you an additional bonus to the check, or perhaps allow it to use less mana...

P.S. I like the idea of adding mana to increase your percentage, so I thought maybe 5% per mana point, or 2% per mana point. I haven't had the chance to try this out, that's why I didn't put it in the post above. Suggestions?

Yeah, make it a reduction of 5% per spell level (0-level spells do squat in this version, you'll see why in a sec), but you have to pay your way up. That way, you get something like this;
percent reduction = additional mana
5%=3
10%=7
15%=13
20%=21
25%=31
30%=43
35%=57
40%=73
45%=91

So to get a 25% reduction, you've got to spend the equivalent of one spell from every level 5th and below, plus metamagic plus the spell's base cost. The way I see it, you'd quickly start to get to the point of diminishing returns where most of the energy you're pumping into the spell is there to keep what's already there contained rather than to increase the casting chance. The reason a 0-level spell doesn't count is that it would only cost 1 extra mana point, which would be utterly silly.

Ok, as if that wasn't enough to digest, I have more.  Casting spells that are a different level: divide the highest level spell you can cast by the lvl spell your trying to cast, turn that into a percent, then subtract that percent from the cast percent.

I'm certain there's a more elegant way to do this, as what you've got right now is either going to require some guesswork or a calculator.
[/quote]
Also, are we scrapping the 1-100 range of spell mastery?
[/quote]
Me likey.

[Stargate525]

Ranks, skills, whatever.  And my math isn't wrong.  Those percents are different.  I did a test where I rolled 5 trials of 10 rolls, averaged the number of failures, and turned that into a percent.

Which isn't the way to do it. The fact of the matter is that at the end of the day it has to add up to 100.  

No, you just calculate all of that when you lvl up and then keep the % you need to succeed for a spell of that lvl written down on your character sheet.

Fair enough. I still think there's a more elegant way to do it.

I would say a failed cast would eat up half.  In the case of failed 0 lvl spells I would say just keep track of how many times you've failed.  Ever other time just take away 1 mana.

I'd say make it one for a 0-level. You won't be screwing those up much anyway.

No, that's the whole thing this is based off of.  Basically we change it so that instead of adding the number of points you've learned you make what you've learned a %.  We can keep the point system, so we don't have to redo how to learn spells.  Basically this:

It takes 23 points to learn a spell.  I have 20.  That means I have 87% of the spell memorized.  However, It's not complete.  That means I add the remaining % I don't know, to my cast DC.  Example: I have to beat a 37.  I have the spell memorized as above (87%).  I ad 13 to the DC.  Thereby making the cast DC for THAT save a 50.

The reason I left that out in the last post is because I didn't know how to incorperate it in, and I hadn't tested it yet.  Seems to work so far...

Where did you get the 23 points? I don't like this business of 'incomplete' spells. Learning the spell enough to cast it should be a complete spell. The bonus from casting it, I think, should represent the tweaks you've made to it to get it to run better, faster, whatever.

Also, what you've got means that a wizard doesn't completely learn a single spell until it gets to 100, which is silly. He continually fine-tunes it, that I could see...

The way I suggested makes sense to me.