PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Spell Point Variant (again)



Sciran
2011-03-13, 02:09 AM
I know this has come up time and time again, and that various types of players/DMs have differing opinions as to the validity or brokenness of the Spell Point System as described in Unearthed Arcana. I am one of those who subscribed to the 'broken' school of thought, and set out to find a suitable compromise for my own game, since a few of my plot-central ideas really shine with an MP concept.

So after reading through several threads both here and in other places I came up with the following theory of a system, and am looking for opinions:

First step, take the numbers listed on http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/spellPoints.htm and cut them in half (round up), but NOT the spell cost numbers. This includes the base spell point numbers AND the bonus spell point numbers for high stats. This becomes the MP pool a character has. This would work out to the following totals:

{table]Level|Bard|Cleric, Druid, Wizard|Paladin, Ranger|Sorcerer
1st|0|1|0|2
2nd|0|2|0|3
3rd|1|4|0|4
4th|3|6|0|7
5th|3|8|0|10
6th|5|12|1|15
7th|7|16|1|19
8th|9|22|1|27
9th|11|28|1|32
10th|14|36|2|41
11th|17|44|2|49
12th|21|52|5|58
13th|25|60|5|66
14th|29|68|5|75
15th|34|76|9|83
16th|41|84|10|92
17th|48|92|13|100
18th|57|100|13|109
19th|67|108|21|117
20th|72|116|24|125[/table]
NOTE: A few of the numbers on the table above were rounded down rather than up in one or two cases to allow more fluid progression.

Bonus Spell Points (by Maximum Spell Level)
{table]Score|0|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|6th|7th|8th|9th
12-13|—|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|1|1
14-15|—|1|2|2|2|2|2|2|2|2
16-17|—|1|2|5|5|5|5|5|5|5
18-19|—|1|2|5|8|8|8|8|8|8
20-21|—|1|3|5|9|13|13|13|13|13
22-23|—|1|4|7|10|15|20|20|20|20
24-25|—|1|4|9|13|17|23|29|29|29
26-27|—|1|4|9|16|21|26|33|40|40
28-29|—|2|5|10|17|26|31|38|45|54
30-31|—|2|6|11|18|27|38|45|52|61
32-33|—|2|6|12|19|28|39|52|60|68[/table]

However, every spellcaster regenerates MP equal to his primary ability (INT for Wizards, CHA for Sorcerers, etc.) modifier per hour. This still allows for a larger and more variety of spellcasting like the original Spell Point system, but keeps a spellcaster from getting more powerful than he already was with the vancian system (in theory).

This effect on spontaneous spellcasters is simple, so long as you don't run out of MP you can continue to fire spells. The application on prepared spellcasters is only slightly different: a prepared spellcaster prepares spells exactly like they would in the vancian system, using their total spell points as the limit instead of specific slots of specific spells. When a prepared spellcaster receives a recharge amount of MP, he can recover a number of spells equal to that amount of his choosing when he receives the MP recharge every hour. Since prepared spellcasters don't really have to worry about MP except at the beginning of the day when they make their list anyway from the original Spell Point system, I don't see this being too difficult. For example: If a Wizard has a INT score of 24, he would receive 6 MP per hour. This would allow him to recharge either a level 3 spell (5 MP) and a level 1 spell (1 MP) or six level 1 spells, or two level 2 spells (3 MP), if he had any spells of those levels prepared at the beginning of the day.

This -does- mean, however, that even at level 20 you would not be able to recharge as much MP as you use with level 9 spells (17 MP). A prepared spellcaster wouldn't be able to realistically recharge a level 9 spell, even at level 20, and a spontaneous spellcaster will quickly run out of MP if they constantly use only level 9 spells every encounter.

This method -does- allow a lower level spellcaster to recharge their entire MP pool fairly quickly, but this is countered by the fact that they have much lower amounts of MP at once. This effect balances out to the same amount of power they have in the current vancian system (or at least should).

As far as I can tell, this system still breaks down once you hit about 5-8 levels into epic, but since I don't usually carry a campaign that far it did not truly make it into the factor.

Anyway, just looking for feedback.

firemagehao
2011-03-15, 08:04 PM
To (try to) not break it, you could use something like 1/(1.4*(1.2+ .2X)) as the fraction for base spell points, where X is character level, so as you approach higher levels, you get less points.

NineThePuma
2011-03-15, 10:58 PM
This -does- mean, however, that even at level 20 you would not be able to recharge as much MP as you use with level 9 spells (17 MP).

Hmm... getting a plus 17 casting modifier... It isn't that hard, is it? 20 (Base+Racial)+5(Levels)+5 (Tome) +6 (Item) +3 Age = 39 = +14 modifier.

That's just what I can think up without anything nifty like Templates.

Sciran
2011-03-15, 11:17 PM
Hmm... getting a plus 17 casting modifier... It isn't that hard, is it? 20 (Base+Racial)+5(Levels)+5 (Tome) +6 (Item) +3 Age = 39 = +14 modifier.

That's just what I can think up without anything nifty like Templates.

This is true. I suppose I should have put it differently: That naturally, a character should not regenerate as much as they use in level 9 spells. I personally do not allow Tomes in my games until epic levels, since I generally run a medium-high fantasy campaign. Items of any kind are entirely on a DM - so if a DM allows something, the DM gets what the DM deserves (Both positive and negative. That's not a jab at anyone's playing style.)

That said, it is true that a DM who allows these things may see closer to a full-recovery mage at higher levels. In that case, I would encourage a DM who allows these items to only allow half their modifier as the recharge amount. This should balance this out.

---
Edit: As for FireMageHao's suggestion, I created and campaign-tested a wizard/sorcerer (Hadn't tested the half and half classes, such as paladin or ranger) at 5, 10, 15, and 20th level, and the cut in half kept things balanced as far as my games go. Mages stayed useful throughout the game day so long as they didn't nova, and it gave nova-ing a point of pride when it was needed. Granted, as stated before, that's with my med-to-high fantasy style, so those who prefer higher fantasy games should probably cut the regeneration in half to avoid breaking rather than cutting the total points.

But, that's just me. I prefer to keep formula's simple to ease the table-top side.

NineThePuma
2011-03-15, 11:33 PM
... And when the mage just BUILDS IT? They do have item creation abilities of their own.

There is also the Wish spell, which, IIRC, can boost their attributes.

Sciran
2011-03-16, 12:23 AM
... And when the mage just BUILDS IT? They do have item creation abilities of their own.

There is also the Wish spell, which, IIRC, can boost their attributes.

Once again, very true. My statement was mostly about the Tomes, but your point at the Wish spell mostly negates that. I had forgotten Wish is indeed capable of that. My original argument was that a mage can't build something you've disallowed (meaning the Tomes again), but the Wish mention blows that out of the water, too.

But, even with the ability to get +17 modifier, you could still easily get to a point where you're using more MP than you are regaining. Even more so if you take the 'half primary modifier' suggestion. Which I am beginning to think should be made a standard part of the variant.

Toofey
2011-03-16, 12:28 AM
so I have to preface this by saying I never played 3rd ed. I've had more than a few players say that my house rules of 2nd ed are pretty close to it (although they always want me to start adding in feats)

BUT... I've found the best way to handle this (in 2nd ed at least) as opposed to going to a points based system is to let mages memorize 2x their number of spells per level, duplicating spells they would like to be able to use more than once so a 5th lvl 2nd ed mage who gets 3/2/1 could have
1st) magic missileX2, unseen servant, color spray, detect magic, read magic
2nd) Web, invisibility, alter self, darkness 15'
3rd) Lightning bolt, fly

So they could have some options when casting spells, so the player could cast any of the spells they have memorized but not more than the 3/2/1 per day they would normally get, in this case the player could choose to cast magic missile twice since they memorized it twice. this gives players a nice boost to their flexibility and still restricts their spell casting options enough to force them to think when using spells.

hopefully this isn't totally useless to you.

Epsilon Rose
2011-03-17, 10:49 AM
Have you taken a look at this mana based casting (http://www.dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Mana-Based_Spellcasting_%283.5e_Variant_Rule%29) homebrew? It seems similar to what your going for and might make a better base than the srd one.
That said I'm a big fan of spell points and regen but I haven't seen either used in a high or even mid levels so I can't say how balanced they'd be, though any problems with the mage regening two quickly could probably be solved with larger/back-to-back encounters. After all, even if they could get a couple free nth lvl spells in an hour they can't store more than their max and it doesn't help them if they spend all there spells in under an hour (or are forced to do something that prevents regen).
Lastly, I haven't seen it mentioned before but if you're going to give the mages regening mana it might make sense to similarly retrofit psionics so they're not getting left completely behind.

Sciran
2011-03-17, 03:50 PM
Lastly, I haven't seen it mentioned before but if you're going to give the mages regening mana it might make sense to similarly retrofit psionics so they're not getting left completely behind.

I considered that, but while converting magic to using a MP-based system is actually changing how things work, psionics already are fairly balanced on their own (at least in my opinion, haven't seen too many say they're broken as much as spellpoints are).

That said, I always feel there should be a considerable difference between magic users and psionic casters. I generally play with the Magic-Psionic Transparency rule (dispel/detect psionics works on magic, and vice versa) so I desire to keep the pros/cons on a system-based level. The fact that powers can be augmented really leaves me with the opinion that mana regen for psionics truly isn't needed as a balance point.

This way, Magic casters have lower pools but have regen, and psionics keep their high pool without it. Psionics augment, magic does not. It may only be a minor difference - and perhaps only a flavor one - but to me it is similar to the differences of a 3.5 Wizard and a 3.5 Sorcerer.

Mayhem
2011-03-18, 02:27 AM
So where abouts is the break point where the UA variant starts to crumble, in your experience? I'm interested in using spell points, but I'm not going to be playing at high levels so I'm not sure if your variant is needed.
Also, could you please post a table for your modified bonus spell points? It's giving me a headache trying to wrap my brain around it. I understand how to do spellpoints per level, but for the table for high ability bonus points is where your wording gets me hung up.

Sciran
2011-03-18, 05:22 AM
The OP has been edited to include tables that have my values.

I found the breakdown in the UA come about at level 5-6, when 3rd level spells like Fireball hit the table.

Even if you're not considering playing into higher levels, you may consider my system. At lower levels, it may not truly matter any more than simple taste: Do you wish to include regening mana? Do you have players that encourage the fifteen minute workday? Do your players whore the utility spells, or the damage spells? Those would be big questions.

In the end, it's for each DM to say what is right for them.

Mayhem
2011-03-18, 07:02 AM
Thanks for clearing all that up for me mate.
I'm considering using the vitalising spell point variant, but that thoroughly beats casters with the nerf stick at low levels, and at higher levels the casters' lack of hitpoint points make them double cautious anyway so taking an AC beating isn't a big deal there(I think, anyway). Also as written its retarded at mid to high levels due to spells like heal recovering spellpoints:smallconfused:. I'm definately getting rid of that silly rule.

First look at the tables, I definately like how your spellpoints/level progression actually follows a somewhat logical progression rather than the UA drip, drip, drip BURST progression.

I like your take on prepared casters under spell points. I've always thought of wizards prepare their spells by casting part of them in advance sort of like how scrolls work. This lets them keep that flavour.

There's a 3rd ed. campaign setting that's sadly dissapeared from the net, but in it they use spell points. They just rolled the sorcerer and wizard into the mage class using both major stats to solve the dilema of how they work in the setting. I was gonna use the class for my campaign setting, but realistically mages having both powerful intellects and charisma would make them too much of a force to be reckoned with and I don't want them to play a major world role, so I'm almost definately using your variant for wizards:smallsmile:. I'm not sure on your magic regen for my setting though, but it would be easier on book keeping than the vitalising system. I'll need a playtest on different magic regen systems I think, unless you have some advice from experience?

DaTedinator
2011-03-18, 10:32 AM
I think I like it, but I'm confused about how it works for prepared casters. They recharge specific spells? How are specific spells getting un-charged? And why don't they have to worry about MP except at the beginning of the day?

There's probably just something that's assumed that I don't understand.

Sciran
2011-03-18, 01:55 PM
I'm almost definately using your variant for wizards.
I really would recommend using the same system for Wizards and Sorcerers and other classes. Generally systems are balanced to keep both in check, and I'd not combine unless you've playtested the combination for compatibility already.
You didn't specifically say you were using something else, but hey, better safe than sorry.


I'm not sure on your magic regen for my setting though, but it would be easier on book keeping than the vitalising system. I'll need a playtest on different magic regen systems I think, unless you have some advice from experience?
You can search this forum and find threads pages long with people's opinions on different Spell Point Systems. General feeling that I've found was that people find it overpowered from the word go - that's what sparked this particular variant idea. I personally think this is far more balanced than UA's version.
On the regen, however - the point I like about this system is it is a little flexible. Playtesting several is a good idea over time, as that's how you find what fits your style best, but for the first test I'd stick with whatever regen comes with the spell point system you choose. This lets you see how they work together naturally, and gives you a more informed point to make decisions about what to switch to. Really, you might desire to create your own way they regen at that point.



I think I like it, but I'm confused about how it works for prepared casters. They recharge specific spells? How are specific spells getting un-charged? And why don't they have to worry about MP except at the beginning of the day?
Okay, here's a walkthrough example of the prepared caster with this system:
Let us assume for the moment that our prepared caster is level 6 with 3rd level spells, an "MP" pool of 36, and a regen amount of 6. I know these numbers are not in line with the tables - but hey, it's an example.
At the beginning of the day, he has to choose what spells are he can cast for the day when the day starts, just like normal, but his only limit is that he cannot go over 36 points. Let's say he chooses 4 fireballs (5 MP each), 5 invisibility's (3 MP each), and one true strike (1 MP) just because he has an extra.
Now his list is set, an encounter comes up! In the fight he uses his true strike, 3 of his fireballs, and two of his invisibility's. Well, with a regen of 6 each hour, he can select to regen either two invisibility's to be usable again, or one fireball and the true strike, because each of these total up to 6 points. Note that even if the true strike is reusable, if he wants to regain a fireball, that extra point is lost each hour - because there's nothing to spend it on. Likewise, if he had been able to cast 4th level spells (7 MP each) he would not be able to reuse them at all because his regen is only 6.

Now, as for how that compares with a spontaneous caster: While a wizard will never be able to regain a spell spent that has higher cost than his regen, and the sorcerer can simply use his remaining MP to cast them, there is a serious decrease in the likelyhood of a wizard running completely out of MP unless he made poor decisions in his spell list at the beginning of the day - which even then he could simply change tomorrow.
A sorcerer, on the other hand, can simply keep casting - but runs the risk of simply running out of MP altogether. Yes, a smarter sorcerer can avoid this, and treat it similar to the wizard and only use only spells they can regen quickly enough. This does put them just a tiny bit (but only slightly, you will see in practice) bit over wizards in power... But that's the very basis of the flavor difference between wizards and sorcerers: Wizards have the knowledge while Sorcerers have the power. This is simply just a built-in mechanic that shows it.

And just to be fair, the half-n-half classes feel the difference, too. At lower levels, these numbers nerf how many spells a given character can have available to them at one time compared to their standard in the vancian system. However, because of the regen, they get to use them more often, so I felt that balanced out. It pretty much continues like that throughout the levels, but with more flexibility starting at the mid levels. Higher levels still cannot prepare as many as they used to - but they can prepare more of the ones they liked and be a bit more refreshed to use them next battle. Their spell selection by itself helped balance that a bit.

And... That ended up longer than I intended, but I hope it clears things up.

Mayhem
2011-03-18, 06:40 PM
I like how your variant keeps low-level parties adventuring after a rest, assuming they played it smart and took little damage.
If I use your variant for wizards, I'd definately use it for the other prepared casters for consistancy.

I think I might use both your regen and the vitalising variant - Recover spell points equal to ability bonus which removes fatigued or exhausted condions if it puts them over the percentage. That allows the PCs keep on trucking. Would it put too much reliance on the "heal bots"? I'd rather not make clerics/druids essential, but I suppose it's better than giving out reserve points for healing or allowing a 15 minute workday.

Actually, if I upped the spell cost I could give every class spell points purely to make some cool essence draining monsters. Wights and vampires would become particularly fearsome.

DaTedinator
2011-03-19, 12:05 PM
Interesting, I don't know how much I like that part. What did you find wrong with the normal way prepared casters used spell points? Was it that they had too many spells prepared? Because I feel like a much more elegant solution would just be to reduce their number of spells per day. Or was it something else? Just personal choice?

Sciran
2011-03-19, 01:43 PM
Interesting, I don't know how much I like that part. What did you find wrong with the normal way prepared casters used spell points? Was it that they had too many spells prepared? Because I feel like a much more elegant solution would just be to reduce their number of spells per day. Or was it something else? Just personal choice?
The main point of change was that UA's spell points were, and many agree, broken. There are a myriad of ideas as to why - but my opinion was simply too many spell points.
Prepared spellcasters still use spell points exactly the same way they did in UA's system. You have your list, you make it at the beginning of they day, you're stuck until the next day. The only change was to accommodate the regen of MP - and that part was a personal choice, yes. I likes the regen.


If I use your variant for wizards, I'd definately use it for the other prepared casters for consistancy.
I was meaning more towards using the same system for prepared AND spontaneous, since you only mention prepared.

DaTedinator
2011-03-19, 05:02 PM
Prepared spellcasters still use spell points exactly the same way they did in UA's system. You have your list, you make it at the beginning of they day, you're stuck until the next day.

Okay, now I understand where the confusion's coming from, because that's not the way it works in UA's system.


With this variant, spellcasters still prepare spells as normal (assuming they normally prepare spells). In effect, casters who prepare spells are setting their list of “spells known” for the day. They need not prepare multiple copies of the same spell, since they can cast any combination of their prepared spells each day (up to the limit of their spell points).

For example, Boredflak the 4th-level wizard has an Intelligence score of 16. When using the spell point system, he would prepare four 0-level spells, four 1st-level spells (three plus his bonus spell for high Int), and three 2nd-level spells (two plus his bonus spell for high Int). These spells make up his entire list of spells that he can cast during the day, though he can cast any combination of them, as long as he has sufficient spell points.

So wizards still keep their standard method of preparing spells (i.e., just as they would without spellpoints), but rather than that being the specific spells they can cast in those specific quantities, their prepared spells function as sort of "Spells known for today." It's like how Spirit Shaman works, with spells retrieved.

Mayhem
2011-03-19, 07:58 PM
I was meaning more towards using the same system for prepared AND spontaneous, since you only mention prepared.

Ah, yeah I'll use it for both.

Sciran
2011-03-19, 09:21 PM
Ground Breaking Revelation
But... Then, you see... That can't... Well now I feel sheepish.
Been DM'n for years an' years, and I never saw that until you pointed it out. Blegh.

Will edit the original post to reflect this. Apologies for the confusion.

Sciran
2011-06-15, 01:50 PM
Necro'ed, but I had a bit more to add that I wanted opinions on.

I've been playtesting this system for a while now, and it has worked wonderfully in my med-magic campaigns (2 running simultaneously). However, I have noticed that it has two issues to be adjusted or added that I see it snagging on, and so in the effort of completeness I offer these alterations to the Playground for your critique.

1) Wizards.
This system was originally designed to reduce the amount of spells someone can have available to them at once, but increase how often they can use them. This was not the only goal, but it was part of one of them. This created an issue with the Wizard specifically - Mr. Utility, Jack-of-all-Magic-Trades. Since how many spells they can prepare at once is a major feature of the class, I thought this system would add one caviat for the Wizard:
The Wizard may forego the MP regen he would receive in an hour to exchange spells he has prepared, equal to the MP he would regain. For example, if Vash the level 5 Wizard has an INT mod of +5, he could choose to not regain his MP and instead change his fireball out for some other level 3 spell to be prepared. Or he could change 5 of his level 1 spells around. Or any combination thereof.

2) Counterspelling.
With the idea of MP making spellcasting easier, it made sense for counterspelling to be easier as well. That, and I said in other threads that any decent alternate magic system needed alternate counterspelling - so this is me eating my own words:
A spellcaster can use their MP or sacrifice a prepared spell to reduce the MP of another caster. As a standard action, they expend an amount of MP they desire (Or, if they are a prepared spellcaster, they give up a number of spells equal to the MP they want to use). A target within sight must then make a will save DC (10 + Primary Modifier + MP used) or lose TWICE the amount of MP paid into the ability.
I liked that this gives the ability to 'nullify' spellcasters without having to sit there and ready actions all day until someone eventually casts a spell. It also gives some flavor to Paladins, Clerics, Rangers, and other 'half-casters' that may want to specialize in fighting against other casters.

Flavor fits right in, I feel and it keeps things unique while not unbalancing. I might also contribute some items and feats specific to this system as well if response is positive.

Yitzi
2011-06-15, 03:51 PM
The idea of including recharge per hour is definitely a good way to handle the issues; it makes it harder to go nova (the main problem with spell point variants) without biting too much into normal 1/5-per-encounter usage.

Your counterspelling idea is a bit dangerous, as it allows a caster to completely shut down another caster of equal level (subject to will save) at a high but maneageable cost. Conversely, it's impossible to accomplish anything without very high cost.

If you want to make counterspelling possible without readying waiting for someone to cast, a better way would be to make counterspelling an immediate action rather than a standard action (which therefore must be readied.)

Sciran
2011-06-16, 11:28 AM
Yes, it was intentionally somewhat powerful and dangerous. This is for two reasons. First, that the most common complaint about spell point variants is that "going nova" becomes easier and that prepping only level 9 spells makes "going nova" more common, encouraging the 15-minute work day. The recharge was meant to increase the work day, but you cannot escape the fact that prepping all of one level of spell is still more powerful. This counterspelling idea balances that - yes, it's more likely you can cast 12 fireballs. But it's also more likely that you'll loose some if there's another mage about. Makes a caster think twice about "going nova". As for costs of the ability, it's also high. Should the attempt fail, you've already paid the MP to try and wasted the standard action, so you're out something too. The upside is that this isn't something you have ro ready an action to accomplish - you just choose to or not to do it on your turn.

Considering there's not been much reply for the Wizard additive, I'mma assume that means it's alright.