Search This Blog

Thursday, July 16, 2009

More on the Retained Spellcasting Percentage-

See the post immediately below:

Red, Kilgore:

Let me address the maths.
--If we, instead, use only (4x Intelligence), then an 18 yields:

1: 72%
2: 36%
3: 24%
4: 18%
5: 14%
6: 12%
7: 10%
8: 09%
9: 08%

Is that more in line with what you two are thinking?


  1. Feels a lot better to me.
    I'm sure that there are some DMs that will freak out at the notion of a 1st level magic-user potentially casting several Sleep spells instead of just one.

    This gives lower level m-us a boost, gives them a chance to roll to succeed (ie, keep the spell) without (I think) overpowering higher level casters.

  2. Red,

    Thanks for coming back to this.

    I wonder if 2.5, or 3x would be too little a multiplier, or do you feel that the 4x is a good value to use?

  3. That does seem to make a bit more sense. The idea of multiple sleeps IS a bit off-putting, but then I have never believed that sleep should be a first-level spell anyway.

    I would wonder if the 2.5x or 3x multiplier was better, but as you know from my constant harping on Bat that I'm one to always be on guard against M-U power creep. :)

    That said, I think this idea, whatever the final numbers end up being, makes low-level M-Us much more PLAYABLE, something I've never really found them to be.

    Thanks for following up. I'll have to think on this.

  4. Kilgore,

    At 2.5x:

    1: 45%
    2: 22
    3: 15
    4: 11
    5: 09
    6: 07
    7: 06
    8: 05
    9: 05