What magic shouldn't do, or "But I want to play a rogue"

[spinningdice]

What I was meaning is that Spellcasters look to have a party role similar to other classes, I know the D&D archetypes (Cleric, Fighter, Magic-User, Thief) doesnt' apply as much to Spycraft, but the Spellbound classes look to be on a par with another character type - though still different.
So if Spycraft's broad archetypes could be said to be:
Warrior
Information Gatherer
Face
Stealth

Then Chaneller can be filled firmly into the Warrior catagory, without question - he may do things differently to a Soldier, Thug or Martial Artist, but he is still a Warrior first.
I fully expect Enchanter to be firmly in the 'face' archetype despite doing things differently to the Advocate, Fixer or Faceman.

[Morgenstern]

I'd probably add a Resources category to the four you mention, but yeah, it's a sound way of looking at it. Naturally some classes stradle the distinctions, but their feet are ussually pretty firmly in one of those categories.

Given that their non-caster counterparts in SPycraft are rather powerful across the entire level spectrum, the caster needs pretty good support abilites to keep up. They have desirable non-spellcasting benefits for when they aren't able to leverage their spell points or just plain run out. Compared to D&D casters (which seems fair, as both groups are working from the same set of ideas for spells as laid out in the SRD), Spycraft casters get a LOT FEWER spells. This applies at three different levels: Their total range of available spells is smaller. The number they know and have availible to them is smaller.  The number they can cast is smaller. All of this is designed to give them a much more linear power curve than D&D casters, who are gaining both max level increases and substantial, accelerating benefits to the number they can cast. From a min/maxer standpoint the fixed spells per day tables are a trap. Once you take a single level, there is not any other option nearly as attractive as taking another level that will advance you on that table. There is no turning back for the optimized build. I tried to work a number of ways into the Spellbound casting so that if you left a caster class, you weren't automatically persuing an inferior option. You can still learn to cast more consistently (Prefession rank), and you can still learn new spells (again, profession ranks) without being in a caster class once you have started casting. Staying in the class lets you cast more (spell points), and higher level (circle of power), but it doesn't hold ALL the cards.

[Crafty_Alex]

I think not. If it's okay for him to insult another system that others here may enjoy, it should be okay for me to at least call him out on it (and the post wasn't even offensive for chrissake...).

Apparently you mistook my post for a discussion.

Be seeing you.

[NekoMouser]

My bad, 'Dice. I see your point, though, and I think that will make a good bit of difference on its own. Spellcasting isn't a niche, but what kind of spells and special abilities a caster has determine what their actual niche is.

As a side note, in the latest game I've tend to treat "Spells Known" in the same way as gear picks: you hand in a list during intel phase. This tends to make it more analogous to the D&D style, with Wizards possibly having vast tomes full of arcana, but only able to memorize the complex specifics and carry the odd spell components for a few at a time. It also means the spellcaster will get to pick spells that matter to the mission.

[Krensky]

As a side note, in the latest game I've tend to treat "Spells Known" in the same way as gear picks: you hand in a list during intel phase. This tends to make it more analogous to the D&D style, with Wizards possibly having vast tomes full of arcana, but only able to memorize the complex specifics and carry the odd spell components for a few at a time. It also means the spellcaster will get to pick spells that matter to the mission.

That is a stunningly good idea.

[Morgenstern]

*Blink-blink* That sooo gives me a feat idea. *scribble-scribble*

[Daedalus4096]

Apparently NekoMouser wins.  Flawless victory. 

[NekoMouser]

Right...so whose soul is mine, again? 

A feat...yeah, that could work. Use a feat to separate the Johnny One-spell sorcerer type fellows from the versatile "magic is gear" wizard types, as you don't really have an "innate vs. learned" system in place yet as far as I've seen (which is to say Spycraft magic is a bit of both).

[OverNinja]

As a side note, in the latest game I've tend to treat "Spells Known" in the same way as gear picks: you hand in a list during intel phase. This tends to make it more analogous to the D&D style, with Wizards possibly having vast tomes full of arcana, but only able to memorize the complex specifics and carry the odd spell components for a few at a time. It also means the spellcaster will get to pick spells that matter to the mission.

That is a stunningly good idea.

I agree.