So a buddy of mine wants to run an all-magic campaign in Pathfinder...

[President Television]

And right off the bat, he's talking about removing all the daily spell limits. And I'm like no, dude, just give us wands. Make them cheap. Apply the price adjustment that you'd apply to firearms in a Guns Everywhere setting and you're golden. Look, I have Ultimate Combat right here. 10%. There you go.
And then he starts going off about how maybe I'm right, but continues to kind of miss the point. He's like, "Maybe the battle mages have magic items that are kind of like wands, but they recharge every day and you can change which spells are stored in them." And I say no, you're underestimating wands. They'll do just fine.
And then it occurs to me that in a setting where everyone's a spellcaster, the schools of Illusion and Enchantment are almost completely useless. Conversely, spells that require Fortitude or Reflex saves are overpowered.

Is it worth trying to balance, or should I write off the idea altogether?

[Don Coyote]

I say join the game and break the shit out of it until he breaks down sobbing and tell him, "And this is why I said I what I did."

[President Television]

I say join the game and break the shit out of it until he breaks down sobbing and tell him, "And this is why I said I what I did."

I'm thinking I'll be a Summoner. That way, I have an effective means of taking advantage of everyone else's physical weakness, and my high Charisma score will help with Use Magic Device, meaning I can just use wands for the offensive spells my class doesn't grant me.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

And right off the bat, he's talking about removing all the daily spell limits. And I'm like no, dude, just give us wands. Make them cheap. Apply the price adjustment that you'd apply to firearms in a Guns Everywhere setting and you're golden. Look, I have Ultimate Combat right here. 10%. There you go.
And then he starts going off about how maybe I'm right, but continues to kind of miss the point. He's like, "Maybe the battle mages have magic items that are kind of like wands, but they recharge every day and you can change which spells are stored in them." And I say no, you're underestimating wands. They'll do just fine.
And then it occurs to me that in a setting where everyone's a spellcaster, the schools of Illusion and Enchantment are almost completely useless. Conversely, spells that require Fortitude or Reflex saves are overpowered.

Is it worth trying to balance, or should I write off the idea altogether?

I'd write it off.  It's a gimmick, and those usually exist to cover a lack of actual plot.

[Freeky]

That sounds like an awful idea.  Everyone has unlimited magic capability?  Really? 

[Luna]

That sounds like an awful idea.  Everyone has unlimited magic capability?  Really?

Imagine the chaos you could create, with the right spell list...

[Freeky]

That sounds like an awful idea.  Everyone has unlimited magic capability?  Really?

Imagine the chaos you could create, with the right spell list...

Meh.  With everyone being some kind of spellcaster, the battles would be unimaginably boring.  No thanks.

[The Wizard Joseph]

I'd roll up a set of stats for a warrior and see if I can get in enough feats to make it bad-ass in hand to hand anyway.

but yeah, It definitely sounds like a gimmick... ask him for a detailed write-up of the world and see if he can give a decent plot hook.  If not I'd take a pass personally.

[Telarus]

At-will magic works, but not breaking a previously gygaxian "per day" system. Earthdawn has at will magic ("cast all day") but limits it by how many you have at hand at any one time (and then bans certain effects due to world metaphysics). Earthdawn still has summoned/bound spirits/ghosts/elementals/etc at upper levels, so it's pretty dead-on for the Sword& Sorcery and "Vancian" tropes.

[The Wizard Joseph]

I'm a fond of the GURPS magic system because it makes possible "all day" magic at very high skill levels and the world building easily allows for as much or little as you may want.

[President Television]

I'd roll up a set of stats for a warrior and see if I can get in enough feats to make it bad-ass in hand to hand anyway.

but yeah, It definitely sounds like a gimmick... ask him for a detailed write-up of the world and see if he can give a decent plot hook.  If not I'd take a pass personally.

He basically thought of it off the cuff. It's definitely a gimmick.
And no, he won't allow straight fighters(though he did reconsider his previous no-weapons position and allow magi) But a summoner's the next best thing. You have Summon Monster for minions, and when things get really hairy you've got the eidolon to stand in for muscle.

[Freeky]

Only arcane, or are divine casters allowed too? Seems like a paladin, cleric, or an oracle would be the most broken in that campaign, given their ability to wield weapons and wear heavier armor.

[President Television]

Only arcane, or are divine casters allowed too? Seems like a paladin, cleric, or an oracle would be the most broken in that campaign, given their ability to wield weapons and wear heavier armor.

You'd think so, but he declared that weapons simply didn't exist in the setting. His reasoning was that if everyone had magic, they wouldn't have had any reason to develop weapons. I pointed out antimagic, and a day later he grudgingly allowed magi, with the justification that fencing was a sport. Never mind that the entire origin of fencing irl was that it was an abstraction of a form of combat that already existed.
Then I talked him into allowing rogues, on the basis that they have a couple of rogue talents that let them learn magic. Still haven't heard from him on what he's doing with the rest of it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Only arcane, or are divine casters allowed too? Seems like a paladin, cleric, or an oracle would be the most broken in that campaign, given their ability to wield weapons and wear heavier armor.

You'd think so, but he declared that weapons simply didn't exist in the setting. His reasoning was that if everyone had magic, they wouldn't have had any reason to develop weapons. I pointed out antimagic, and a day later he grudgingly allowed magi, with the justification that fencing was a sport. Never mind that the entire origin of fencing irl was that it was an abstraction of a form of combat that already existed.
Then I talked him into allowing rogues, on the basis that they have a couple of rogue talents that let them learn magic. Still haven't heard from him on what he's doing with the rest of it.

Run, do not walk.

[President Television]

Only arcane, or are divine casters allowed too? Seems like a paladin, cleric, or an oracle would be the most broken in that campaign, given their ability to wield weapons and wear heavier armor.

You'd think so, but he declared that weapons simply didn't exist in the setting. His reasoning was that if everyone had magic, they wouldn't have had any reason to develop weapons. I pointed out antimagic, and a day later he grudgingly allowed magi, with the justification that fencing was a sport. Never mind that the entire origin of fencing irl was that it was an abstraction of a form of combat that already existed.
Then I talked him into allowing rogues, on the basis that they have a couple of rogue talents that let them learn magic. Still haven't heard from him on what he's doing with the rest of it.

Run, do not walk.

It's getting to be like a train wreck. I can't watch, but I can't look away.