Classes with diff. power schedules drawing from same list

[OgreBattle]

So in D&D you have vancian wizards and spontaneous sorcerers both drawing from the same list of spells to use. You have "refresh small pool of powers with a standard action" warblades, "refresh one power with full round action but start with more powers usable" swordsage, and "randomly get powers to use each turn" crusader drawing from some overlapping power lists, though others are exclusive.

I like the idea of drawing from shared lists as it cuts down on page count, but the difference in schedules for how the same power is used would make it better for some and worse for others.

So what I'm getting at is, should the warblade, crusader, and swordsage be drawing from lists exclusive to one another because their scheduls and recharge mechanics are so different?

[spongeknight]

No need. If you have actual level appropriate things to do in combat, the power schedule is more like a flavor thing (or perhaps a rhythm thing) than a balance thing. This is not always the case, of course, but for the three examples you listed it certainly is.

[Username17]

The Warblade, Swordsage, and Crusader have schedules that are similar enough that they can share lists without that being too much of a problem most of the time. Similarly, the Sorcerer, Beguiler, and Wizard have schedules that are similar enough that most things that would be on a list don't stand out as problematic for one and not the other.

Obviously, there are exceptions. The classic would be animate dead, which is crazily more powerful for a Cleric (who knows the whole list and prepares a small sublist) than it is for the Favored Soul (who has to keep the same small sublist day to day. The Cleric can make some skeletons in down time and go to work with a full suite of combat spells, and the Favored Soul can't do that.

One could easily imagine the fact that Warblades get to run through their power list in exactly the order they want and then recover maneuvers and do it again being broken with some maneuvers that wouldn't be in a Crusader system where you didn't know what maneuver was coming next. And one could imagine the Crusader's ability to sometimes use the same maneuver two rounds in a row being broken with some maneuvers that wouldn't be problematic with the Warlord's deplete and restart system. But all of the abilities they actually get are kind of bullshit and not really a problem either way.

But of course, both of them would be broken as fuck if they could select off the Druid list, because Summons, Heals, and Buffs become a lot more valuable when you can spam the fuck out of them.

-Username17

[Orion]

It's worth noting that the warblade system was way better than the swordsage system, even before you look at their hit points and BAB and stuff. The classes actually weren't supposed to have identical power lists -- Only Swordsages get native access to Scorching Wind and Shadow Hand, and that was clearly supposed to a superior power set that made up for their other weaknesses. Of course, it turned out that Scorching Wind and Shadow hand aren't better than other disciplines, just cooler, and so that balance failed horribly.

[DSMatticus]

I like the idea of drawing from shared lists as it cuts down on page count, but the difference in schedules for how the same power is used would make it better for some and worse for others.

Note that just because two classes pick abilities off different lists, lots of abilities are still going to appear on both lists and only need to be written up once - even if each list those abilities are on belongs to a different class with a different resource system. You don't need to write one fireball per class that can cast fireball. You just need to write one fireball, and then put it on a bunch of different lists - which is pretty god damn easy and doesn't take too much page space at all. D&D casters mostly already do this, it just so happens that all the classes use the exact same damn resource system anyway.

[CaptPike]

personally I when I see two classes with 100% overlap in powers I do not see two classes I see one. I do not care that they gain them in a different way or that they have different numbers of them when they are doing the same things in a round to round basis they are too similar to be considered different classes.

I would prefer to either have a small list (say about the size of one or two class's lists) that all classes of a power source can pick from, then each class has its own list. Or a large list that everyone uses that has keywords and such to tell you what your class/build can pick from.

for example each power would have
Power source: arcane, divine, marshal, psionic or whatever.
A power could have one or several. a spell like raise dead might be divine only, and fireball could be arcane and psionic
School: evocation or whatever. except they are divided in a way that makes more sense then the way 3e does it.
keywords: damage type, mind effecting ect.

[Username17]

personally I when I see two classes with 100% overlap in powers I do not see two classes I see one. I do not care that they gain them in a different way or that they have different numbers of them when they are doing the same things in a round to round basis they are too similar to be considered different classes.

Wat. Seriously, you think the Cleric and the Favored Soul are the same class? Those classes are as different as any classes in D&D. They play differently, they feel different, one of them makes everyone's top three most powerful class lists and the other is often floated as one of the worst classes in the game, and so on. And yet, they have a 100% overlap in the list of powers they can choose from.

I would prefer to either have a small list (say about the size of one or two class's lists) that all classes of a power source can pick from, then each class has its own list. Or a large list that everyone uses that has keywords and such to tell you what your class/build can pick from.

Your powersource idea is bad and you should feel bad. If every class has their own list, then whether there are intermediate lists or not is completely meaningless. It's just obfuscation for the sake of obscurantism and nothing more. If your Snowscaper class has cone of cold and not fireball, who the fuck cares if both of them are nominally greenlighted for Arcane classes? One of them isn't greenlighted for your class, so who gives a shit? On the other hand, if gate is on the Cleric list and the Warlock list, what import could it have that the one is nominally allowed to have it on their list because it has been greenlighted fro Divine classes and the other is nominally allowed to have it because it has been greenlit for Arcane classes?

At the beginning and end of the day, the only important fact is whether the abilities appear on your class list. The power list greenlighting thing doesn't actually do jack shit. If you come out with a new power source and now you have Shadow classes or whatever the fuck, then those classes will just have whatever powers on their list that they say they have. And the fact that gate didn't mention that it was greenlit for Shadow classes in the original book will in no way trump the fact that it's written in black and gray on the Shadowcaster power list when that class is actually written. Hell, if someone decides to make a Martial class based on Street Fighters or Super Seiyans who just happens to have fireball on their list, whether it was nominally greenlit for Martial classes won't mean dick at that point either. And Martial classes were presumably in your original writeup when fireball's powersource greenlights were originally defined!

But really, the bottom line is that how a class interacts with its resource management systems is one hundred percent of whether a power is too good, too bad, or just right for a class. Consider remove disease. It's a fairly shit spell, and you will go whole campaigns without ever casting it. But the fact that it's on the Cleric list means that it's a raw powerup. That class knows all their list spells and can dynamically swap them around every day. That means that any situationally useful spell that is invoked after the information that you need it is given is stone cold awesome. On the other hand, the same spell on the Favored Soul list is nothing but a trap option. That class has to pick their spells at the beginning of story arcs, so any situationally useful spell is a snare and a delusion.

Summons, Healing, and Long Term Buffs are massively more powerful on characters who have power schedules that refresh scene to scene. Situational powers are massively better for classes that get to choose from big lists or resculpt themselves on short notice. And so on and on.

-Username17

[Seerow]

I dunno, I like the power source thing generally, as long as each power source has its own resource schedule/subsystem to work with.

I mean if Divine classes are basically Binders, Arcane classes are casters, Martial Classes as Maneuvers, and Shadow classes use Incarnum... taking an Arcane Spell and just giving it to a Divine Class doesn't make sense. They might have a Fire Domain vestige that can cause a fireball effect, but if you just give them a Fireball they don't know what to do with it because that doesn't make sense in the context of their subsystem.

[Username17]

I dunno, I like the power source thing generally, as long as each power source has its own resource schedule/subsystem to work with.

I mean if Divine classes are basically Binders, Arcane classes are casters, Martial Classes as Maneuvers, and Shadow classes use Incarnum... taking an Arcane Spell and just giving it to a Divine Class doesn't make sense. They might have a Fire Domain vestige that can cause a fireball effect, but if you just give them a Fireball they don't know what to do with it because that doesn't make sense in the context of their subsystem.

There are lots of spells that work fine on both the Cleric List and Wizard List. Heck, there's lots of spells that work fine as both Sorcerer spells and Wizard spells.

Even if the darkness of a Shadowcaster had a really different resource management system from the darkness made by a Cleric or a Wizard, the mechanics of the darkness itself should probably be the same. I mean, it makes things dark. We're in 4th edition levels of stupid if there are unique mechanics for that all three times. Having the game modularly reuse powers like darkness and fireball between different classes that use different resource systems simply makes sense. Not every power can be converted between every resource system, and not every power is going to be thematically appropriate or game balanced for every class to have, but where overlap exists you'd be a damn fool not to use the 3e power nomenclature where wall of stone was "Clr 5, Drd 6, Earth 5, Sor/Wiz 5."

But be that as it may, why the hell would you assign resource systems based on power source? Surely if you're going to have Martial classes you're going to want to have an "everything at will guy" and at least one character who does anything that isn't that. Maybe some kind of martial adept deck shuffling or an endurance system or limited rage uses or something. Within power sources you have classes that focus on being casterish like the Archivist and classes that focus on the stabbing like the Paladin, and obviously you're going to want them to use their magic differently. One of them is supposed to use their magic alongside stabbing people actions and the other is taking actions to use magic instead of attacks. There's no reason for those to use the same resource system.

-Username17

[DSMatticus]

I dunno, I like the power source thing generally, as long as each power source has its own resource schedule/subsystem to work with.

Let's consider four hypothetical arcane classes: alchemist, sorcerer, warlock, wizard. Now, which do you think would be more interesting:

1) They're all 3.5 wizards with slightly different class spell lists.

2) Given an hour, the alchemist can prepare a limited number of "spells," and can cast each prepared spell once. The sorcerer can use any ability he knows at will. The warlock can use any ability he knows at will, but his more powerful abilities require risking painful debuffs. Given an hour, the wizard can prepare a limited number of spells, and can cast each prepared spell at-will. They all have different class spell lists.

I genuinely have no idea why you would tie resource schedules to power sources. That seems incredibly limiting.

I mean if Divine classes are basically Binders, Arcane classes are casters, Martial Classes as Maneuvers, and Shadow classes use Incarnum... taking an Arcane Spell and just giving it to a Divine Class doesn't make sense. They might have a Fire Domain vestige that can cause a fireball effect, but if you just give them a Fireball they don't know what to do with it because that doesn't make sense in the context of their subsystem.

If you're a wizard, the thing that puts on a limit on your usage of fireball is not the spell entry, it's your class entry. The wizard's spellcasting class features is the thing that tells him he prepares fireball effects as spells and when he casts those spells they're expended.

The ideal is to have a giant list of abilities, and then to have every class have its own smaller list, and the items on your class list are just pointers to items on the giant list. You would probably separate out the "martial" themed stuff from the "magic" themed stuff, just because it would feel more natural that way. And the shared list thing, that's basically what 3.5 does. Pit Fiends and wizards both have pointers to the same fireball ability. One gets it as an at-will SLA, and the other gets to prepare it as a spell using the mechanics detailed in their class entry.

[CaptPike]

personally I when I see two classes with 100% overlap in powers I do not see two classes I see one. I do not care that they gain them in a different way or that they have different numbers of them when they are doing the same things in a round to round basis they are too similar to be considered different classes.

Wat. Seriously, you think the Cleric and the Favored Soul are the same class? Those classes are as different as any classes in D&D. They play differently, they feel different, one of them makes everyone's top three most powerful class lists and the other is often floated as one of the worst classes in the game, and so on. And yet, they have a 100% overlap in the list of powers they can choose from.

I would prefer to either have a small list (say about the size of one or two class's lists) that all classes of a power source can pick from, then each class has its own list. Or a large list that everyone uses that has keywords and such to tell you what your class/build can pick from.

Your powersource idea is bad and you should feel bad. If every class has their own list, then whether there are intermediate lists or not is completely meaningless. It's just obfuscation for the sake of obscurantism and nothing more. If your Snowscaper class has cone of cold and not fireball, who the fuck cares if both of them are nominally greenlighted for Arcane classes? One of them isn't greenlighted for your class, so who gives a shit? On the other hand, if gate is on the Cleric list and the Warlock list, what import could it have that the one is nominally allowed to have it on their list because it has been greenlighted fro Divine classes and the other is nominally allowed to have it because it has been greenlit for Arcane classes?

At the beginning and end of the day, the only important fact is whether the abilities appear on your class list. The power list greenlighting thing doesn't actually do jack shit. If you come out with a new power source and now you have Shadow classes or whatever the fuck, then those classes will just have whatever powers on their list that they say they have. And the fact that gate didn't mention that it was greenlit for Shadow classes in the original book will in no way trump the fact that it's written in black and gray on the Shadowcaster power list when that class is actually written. Hell, if someone decides to make a Martial class based on Street Fighters or Super Seiyans who just happens to have fireball on their list, whether it was nominally greenlit for Martial classes won't mean dick at that point either. And Martial classes were presumably in your original writeup when fireball's powersource greenlights were originally defined!

But really, the bottom line is that how a class interacts with its resource management systems is one hundred percent of whether a power is too good, too bad, or just right for a class. Consider remove disease. It's a fairly shit spell, and you will go whole campaigns without ever casting it. But the fact that it's on the Cleric list means that it's a raw powerup. That class knows all their list spells and can dynamically swap them around every day. That means that any situationally useful spell that is invoked after the information that you need it is given is stone cold awesome. On the other hand, the same spell on the Favored Soul list is nothing but a trap option. That class has to pick their spells at the beginning of story arcs, so any situationally useful spell is a snare and a delusion.

Summons, Healing, and Long Term Buffs are massively more powerful on characters who have power schedules that refresh scene to scene. Situational powers are massively better for classes that get to choose from big lists or resculpt themselves on short notice. And so on and on.

-Username17

cleric and favored soul are way too similar, they use the same powers they just access them differently. it matters what you DO in combat not the details of how you gained it.

Now obviously having Dev's who are not lazy and are willing to write spells for each class is ideal, but the least they can do is make sure every class is supported equally, this is in large part to get rid of trap options. Remove disease is a good spell for a cleric but a trap for the favored soul, it therefor should not be on the favored soul list.

Trap options are nothing but a sign of incompetence on the part of the designer.

One thing I would love to see in D&D is for each power source to have its own schedule for gaining powers, it would be a big step forward if making them feel different, it also would let you not have to have level X arcane spells equal to level Y divine or psionic spell.

I dunno, I like the power source thing generally, as long as each power source has its own resource schedule/subsystem to work with.

I mean if Divine classes are basically Binders, Arcane classes are casters, Martial Classes as Maneuvers, and Shadow classes use Incarnum... taking an Arcane Spell and just giving it to a Divine Class doesn't make sense. They might have a Fire Domain vestige that can cause a fireball effect, but if you just give them a Fireball they don't know what to do with it because that doesn't make sense in the context of their subsystem.

There are lots of spells that work fine on both the Cleric List and Wizard List. Heck, there's lots of spells that work fine as both Sorcerer spells and Wizard spells.

Even if the darkness of a Shadowcaster had a really different resource management system from the darkness made by a Cleric or a Wizard, the mechanics of the darkness itself should probably be the same. I mean, it makes things dark. We're in 4th edition levels of stupid if there are unique mechanics for that all three times. Having the game modularly reuse powers like darkness and fireball between different classes that use different resource systems simply makes sense. Not every power can be converted between every resource system, and not every power is going to be thematically appropriate or game balanced for every class to have, but where overlap exists you'd be a damn fool not to use the 3e power nomenclature where wall of stone was "Clr 5, Drd 6, Earth 5, Sor/Wiz 5."

But be that as it may, why the hell would you assign resource systems based on power source? Surely if you're going to have Martial classes you're going to want to have an "everything at will guy" and at least one character who does anything that isn't that. Maybe some kind of martial adept deck shuffling or an endurance system or limited rage uses or something. Within power sources you have classes that focus on being casterish like the Archivist and classes that focus on the stabbing like the Paladin, and obviously you're going to want them to use their magic differently. One of them is supposed to use their magic alongside stabbing people actions and the other is taking actions to use magic instead of attacks. There's no reason for those to use the same resource system.

-Username17

why are you assuming that stabbing someone is not a power? that it can not be worded as such.

4e was anyting but stupid, it used a level of logic and rationality that no other edition of D&D used.

having classes share powers like that is only useful if you are not making the system well, if you need half a page for wall of stone you have to share it, when you can do it in 5 lines then you should not.

wall of stone: wall 10 within 10 (2 tall): stone, each square has X hp and Y hardness.
done
that way you can have small changes to them to fit them to each class.

The ideal is to have a giant list of abilities, and then to have every class have its own smaller list, and the items on your class list are just pointers to items on the giant list. You would probably separate out the "martial" themed stuff from the "magic" themed stuff, just because it would feel more natural that way. And the shared list thing, that's basically what 3.5 does. Pit Fiends and wizards both have pointers to the same fireball ability. One gets it as an at-will SLA, and the other gets to prepare it as a spell using the mechanics detailed in their class entry.

one of the many problems with 3.5 is that wizards have not a small part of the list but practically the whole thing. there is this idea that "wizard" means "every spell ever that is not healing" that is one of the big problems that infected even 5e

[Kaelik]

wall of stone: wall 10 within 10 (2 tall): stone, each square has X hp and Y hardness.
done
that way you can have small changes to them to fit them to each class.

This is missing tremendous amounts of data that are essential to actually using. Undoubtedly you mean for some large amount of it to be subsumed in some general wall keyword, and some other large amount to be made up by the DM, but I probably disagree that either of those amounts are correct.

[CaptPike]

wall of stone: wall 10 within 10 (2 tall): stone, each square has X hp and Y hardness.
done
that way you can have small changes to them to fit them to each class.

This is missing tremendous amounts of data that are essential to actually using. Undoubtedly you mean for some large amount of it to be subsumed in some general wall keyword, and some other large amount to be made up by the DM, but I probably disagree that either of those amounts are correct.

all you need to know is how walls work. no reason to redefine this for every wall spell. nor would there be a reason to require the DM to make things up on the spot.

just define "wall" and how ranged spells work. and your done. that is the biggest reason why 3.5 spells take up so much space they redefine things so much. fireball could easily be made to fit in 5 lines.

EDIT: for example:

Wall: a wall spell is a spell that has an area equal to its size, each square of the wall must touch at least one other square on a side. It is as tall as the spell text says it is. the first square of the wall must be within the range of the spell.

done, each wall spell uses that.

[Kaelik]

Wall of Smoke, Wall of Ice, Wall of Force, Wall of Dispelling, Wall of Stone, LightWall, Prismatic Wall, Wall of Bones, Wall of Chains, Wall of Chaos, Wall of Coldfire, Wall of Eyes, Wall of Gloom, Wall of Magma, Wall of Limbs, Wall of Salt, Wall of Sand, Wall of Water, Windwall, Wall of Vermin, Wall of Thorns.

Maybe like 6 of those fit your stupid wall template, and all the rest don't.

Of the 6 that fit your template, all of them have restrictions on creation that you don't have, and that frankly, should exist for those walls.

There is a huge reason to "redefine" how a wall made of limbs works, versus a wall of water, versus a wall of wind, versus a wall of chaos, versus a wall that some people can see through, others can't, and that paralyzes people who cross it.

Your plan to simplify wall description is the same 4e plan to remove 90% of the content from the game.

[CaptPike]

Wall of Smoke, Wall of Ice, Wall of Force, Wall of Dispelling, Wall of Stone, LightWall, Prismatic Wall, Wall of Bones, Wall of Chains, Wall of Chaos, Wall of Coldfire, Wall of Eyes, Wall of Gloom, Wall of Magma, Wall of Limbs, Wall of Salt, Wall of Sand, Wall of Water, Windwall, Wall of Vermin, Wall of Thorns.

Maybe like 6 of those fit your stupid wall template, and all the rest don't.

Of the 6 that fit your template, all of them have restrictions on creation that you don't have, and that frankly, should exist for those walls.

There is a huge reason to "redefine" how a wall made of limbs works, versus a wall of water, versus a wall of wind, versus a wall of chaos, versus a wall that some people can see through, others can't, and that paralyzes people who cross it.

Your plan to simplify wall description is the same 4e plan to remove 90% of the content from the game.

I see no walls that would would not work.

and we all know that 3e is a paragon of logic and balance right? it has no huge problems at all? after all everyone knows that in 3e everyone can contribute in every situation, the fighters is never told he can not do anything.

keep in mind the wall keyword would just be the size and layout of the wall nothing more, it could have some stupid restrictions like "must be cast in the light of a full moon" that 3e uses and that would not effect the wall keyword.


wall of water:

wall 10 (2 squares tall) within 10
duration: the wall lasts 5 minutes
the wall blocks line of sight but not line of effect, creatures inside or on the other side of the wall have partial concealment. the wall is made of water.

special: the wall's duration and size is doubled if at least one square is touching a body of water at least the size of a small river


wall of stone:

wall 10 (4 squares tall) within 10
duration: permanent
the wall is stone, each square has a hardness of 10, and 50hp. it is automatically hit when attacked.

[Kaelik]

I see no walls that would would not work.

You don't even know what most of those walls do. You see several, but you don't know what you see.

and we all know that 3e is a paragon of logic and balance right? it has no huge problems at all? after all everyone knows that in 3e everyone can contribute in every situation, the fighters is never told he can not do anything.

1) Who cares if a guy who's stick is "has no magic or skill that a level 20 Commoner couldn't also have" is told to sit down and shut up?
2) 3e wall spells are in fact, not an example of huge balance problems. If you can't successfully recreate the extremely simple effects represented by 3e wall spells, then your game is less than garbage.

Literally zero percent of this paragraph is relevant to a discussion of what is missing in the short hand descriptions.

keep in mind the wall keyword would just be the size and layout of the wall nothing more, it could have some stupid restrictions like "must be cast in the light of a full moon" that 3e uses and that would not effect the wall keyword.

If the wall keyword is just the size and layout, then the wall keyword is garbage, because 1) the size is obviously no part of the wall keyword, 2) the layout system you wrote is garbage specifically because walls of stone should be made differently from walls of force, walls of ice, and walls of water.

wall of water:

wall 10 (2 squares tall) within 10
duration: the wall lasts 5 minutes
the wall blocks line of sight but not line of effect, creatures inside or on the other side of the wall have partial concealment. the wall is made of water.

special: the wall's duration and size is doubled if at least one square is touching a body of water at least the size of a small river

In addition to capitalization, you missed 90% of what a wall of water actually does, like hamper people walking through it, and potentially drown them. What you just described is an obscuring mist spell with a different shape.

And if you add back in all the effects that are missing from the actual wall of water, what you end up with is a description nearly as long as wall of water, but tied to your single stupid wall generation system that gives all walls the same ability to generate spontaneously in any shape.

[CaptPike]

I see no walls that would would not work.

You don't even know what most of those walls do. You see several, but you don't know what you see.

and we all know that 3e is a paragon of logic and balance right? it has no huge problems at all? after all everyone knows that in 3e everyone can contribute in every situation, the fighters is never told he can not do anything.

1) Who cares if a guy who's stick is "has no magic or skill that a level 20 Commoner couldn't also have" is told to sit down and shut up?
2) 3e wall spells are in fact, not an example of huge balance problems. If you can't successfully recreate the extremely simple effects represented by 3e wall spells, then your game is less than garbage.

Literally zero percent of this paragraph is relevant to a discussion of what is missing in the short hand descriptions.

keep in mind the wall keyword would just be the size and layout of the wall nothing more, it could have some stupid restrictions like "must be cast in the light of a full moon" that 3e uses and that would not effect the wall keyword.

If the wall keyword is just the size and layout, then the wall keyword is garbage, because 1) the size is obviously no part of the wall keyword, 2) the layout system you wrote is garbage specifically because walls of stone should be made differently from walls of force, walls of ice, and walls of water.

wall of water:

wall 10 (2 squares tall) within 10
duration: the wall lasts 5 minutes
the wall blocks line of sight but not line of effect, creatures inside or on the other side of the wall have partial concealment. the wall is made of water.

special: the wall's duration and size is doubled if at least one square is touching a body of water at least the size of a small river

In addition to capitalization, you missed 90% of what a wall of water actually does, like hamper people walking through it, and potentially drown them. What you just described is an obscuring mist spell with a different shape.

And if you add back in all the effects that are missing from the actual wall of water, what you end up with is a description nearly as long as wall of water, but tied to your single stupid wall generation system that gives all walls the same ability to generate spontaneously in any shape.

if two spells say "wall of [something]" the they SHOULD be the same shape, or they should not both be called walls. for the same reason that if two spells are called "sphere are [something]" they should be the same shape.
Where I am from walls can turn and still be considered walls.

wall was just an example with good use of keywords you can cut spell size down to no more then 1/4 of a page. rather then do what 3e did and re invent everything with every spell.

that and there were too many stupid "if this rare thing happens, this thing happens" in the spells. why would you need to use anything other then the normal swimming rules for wall of water? if an effect is only very rarely going to come up it better have a damn good reason to be wasting space in my book.

[DSMatticus]

one of the many problems with 3.5 is that wizards have not a small part of the list but practically the whole thing. there is this idea that "wizard" means "every spell ever that is not healing" that is one of the big problems that infected even 5e

I don't think you read my post. The giant list is not a class list. Exactly no one gets to pick things off the giant list. Each and every class has its own class list that is available , and the reason you have a giant list in addition to that is because a bunch of characters are going to use fireball and it's going to be the exact same fireball so instead of writing fireball a bunch of different times you just point to the exact same fireball.

[OgreBattle]

Making a "power source determines power schedule" system work would need the game to define power sources BY power schedule, and not by how D&D currently does it where "I was granted power by an outsider" is both divine clerics and arcane warlocks. You also have to acknowledge that 'martial power' is a bullshit 'source' and in historic mythology 'martial heroes' get their super powers from things like divine blessings and being attuned with the flow of energy in the world.

So it would be something like...

"Power granted through knowing the 'laws' and 'formulas' of the world"
This is your power source that draws from intelligence and has you 'memorize' and then expend them. Your vancian wizards and just-as-planned tactical geniuses draw from this power source.

"Power granted through cultivating one's internal energy"
This is the power source that draws from your stat associated with health (mental or physical or maybe both). Uses power point and/or drain mechanics to fuel your energy blasts and opening chakra gates.

"Powers granted through a contract with an outsider"
This is the power source associated with whatever stat you associate with faith or willpower. To represent that this power is not their own but granted a 'winds of fate' random draw is used for spontaneous casting but in downtime they can draw the power through prayer/petitioning. Your warlocks and men of the cloth (clerics and paladins) draw from this stat. For the 'martial' equivalent you have your berserkers and uprising boxers who have spirits inhabit their body give them powers.

and so on.

[CaptPike]

one of the many problems with 3.5 is that wizards have not a small part of the list but practically the whole thing. there is this idea that "wizard" means "every spell ever that is not healing" that is one of the big problems that infected even 5e

I don't think you read my post. The giant list is not a class list. Exactly no one gets to pick things off the giant list. Each and every class has its own class list that is available , and the reason you have a giant list in addition to that is because a bunch of characters are going to use fireball and it's going to be the exact same fireball so instead of writing fireball a bunch of different times you just point to the exact same fireball.

the point is that the wizard list is too big, really the class lists should be about the same size.

its not bad for fireball but most spells SHOULD be on class lists, if you do not everyone starts to be the same, and classes are just evaluated on how they access the same set of spells, rather the class abilities or anything else.

[DSMatticus]

Yes, the wizard list is too big. This is not a thread about batman wizards, no one is talking about batman wizards, you weren't even talking about batman wizards.

The cleric, druid, and wizard do not "feel the same." The beguiler, the dread necromancer, and the sorcerer do not "feel the same." It turns out that if you actually bother to write different class lists for each class, you'll get classes that feel different.

Again, it's not complicated. All of the abilities in your game should be on the same list so you can avoid writing six different fireballs, one for each class that might ever hurl a fireball. What abilities a class should actually be able to pick off that list should be tailored to that class and its resource schedule, because that is how you make the class unique and that is how you balance what it can do with the resource schedule it is on (long duration abilities are more appropriate for 1/day usage than at-will usage, for example).

[CaptPike]

Yes, the wizard list is too big. This is not a thread about batman wizards, no one is talking about batman wizards, you weren't even talking about batman wizards.

The cleric, druid, and wizard do not "feel the same." The beguiler, the dread necromancer, and the sorcerer do not "feel the same." It turns out that if you actually bother to write different class lists for each class, you'll get classes that feel different.

Again, it's not complicated. All of the abilities in your game should be on the same list so you can avoid writing six different fireballs, one for each class that might ever hurl a fireball. What abilities a class should actually be able to pick off that list should be tailored to that class and its resource schedule, because that is how you make the class unique and that is how you balance what it can do with the resource schedule it is on (long duration abilities are more appropriate for 1/day usage than at-will usage, for example).

the problem is that a power made to be an at-will warlock power does not work as a daily power for a wizard. what you plan MIGHT be ok if every power is basically used the same way.

That is every power cost the same kind of resource for the person casting it, and and can be used about as often. once you change either of those it no longer works. an encounter power should not just be a daily that you can use every encounter the math for how it works should be different. If I only get two spells per day then my fireball better be more awesome then the wizard who gets 10.

but if I am making a class with two spells per encounter, and one that has 10 per day the spells should be different in a way that you can do if you pull from the same list. if I am making a fireball for each then the at-will may need to be a smaller area, slightly less damage but scale across all levels.

[OgreBattle]

I could see it as both at-will and encounter fireguys cast fireball and flip to the same page in the magic section to look at fireball, but the at-will guy casts at -2 level ("at level 4 my fireball deals 2d6dmg) compared to the encounter ("at level 4 my fireball does 4d6 damage") guy.

[DSMatticus]

I know I just put you on ignore, but one more for this thread.

the problem is that a power made to be an at-will warlock power does not work as a daily power for a wizard. what you plan MIGHT be ok if every power is basically used the same way.

No shit. That's why the warlock (at-will) has a different class spell list then the wizard (daily). At any given level, the warlock's class spell list has weaker abilities with shorter durations (because they can spam them), and the wizard's class spell list has stronger abilities with longer durations.

At the level when a warlock is just getting access to scorching ray, the wizard is getting access to fireball. The wizard might get access to hour long buffs because they can only use them once per day, but the warlock will never get access to hour long buffs because they would actually be "always on unless you catch the warlock sleeping."

The entire point is that because every class has its own spell lists, you can tailor that spell list to the class such that warlocks and wizards aren't both casting fireball, and that means the warlock isn't better because they can do it at will and the wizard can't.

I could see it as both at-will and encounter fireguys cast fireball and flip to the same page in the magic section to look at fireball, but the at-will guy casts at -2 level ("at level 4 my fireball deals 2d6dmg) compared to the encounter ("at level 4 my fireball does 4d6 damage") guy.

That might potentially save you writing some basically duplicate spells, i.e. lesser fireball, fireball, greater fireball. But there's a lot of spells that sort of caster level manipulation shenanigans won't work, because their effects aren't numerical (invisibility vs greater invisibility), and you'll just have to write duplicate spells and give the more limited casters access to them sooner.

[CaptPike]

I could see it as both at-will and encounter fireguys cast fireball and flip to the same page in the magic section to look at fireball, but the at-will guy casts at -2 level ("at level 4 my fireball deals 2d6dmg) compared to the encounter ("at level 4 my fireball does 4d6 damage") guy.

the at-will guy would still have to have a scaleing DC that would keep up, as well as being able to ignore the cap for damage that fireball has. and after you have done all that it would be easier to just spend the 1/4 page to write him his own version of the spell. it also would be easier to pick spells when your just comparing 6 spells instead of 6 spells+6 sets of changes to them.