Power Points vs Spell Slots

[Azoth]

In the Playground's opinion, which is a more balanced way to handle magic? This assumes that in the event of using an equivalent mechanic to power points for spell casting that there is no automatic scaling with caster level for spell effects outside of increased duration (where applicable). To scale a spell would cost additional points according to the parameters of the effect.

[Aquillion]

Honestly, the difference between the two is not a matter of balance. Both are unbalanced in 3e (or at least stronger than non-full-casting options), and both have the potential to be balanced if handled carefully. The difference between them is more a matter of taste, not balance.

As a matter of taste, I like spell slots because I feel the tighter constraints force players to be more creative and to use spells in more interesting ways; it also rewards planning and thinking ahead, which I like.

[Slipperychicken]

A game can be balanced around either, but I think points are better for representing a more mainstream concept of magic (using magic taxes mana-reserves, or causes physical exhaustion, which limits its use), while spell slots were designed with Vancian "fire and forget" system in mind.

Personally, I prefer points for aesthetic reasons like allowing magicians to be more flexible. It clashes with common understandings of magic to have a Wizard say "Two fireballs. That's it for the day, see you all tomorrow", or "Whoops, no illusion magic today. I guess you're out of luck." If a magician knows how to cast a spell, I feel like he shouldn't be constrained by how many times he skimmed it that morning.

[TuggyNE]

I prefer power points, especially Ernir's translation. However, the balance gained is not massive; it's more a matter of tidying things up and making things a bit more sensible (although removing full-list prepared casters is certainly a good change).

[erikun]

Note that the balance of each system has a lot involved in it than just whether they use power points or spell slots. Psionics has psionic focus and metapsionics (which generally means only one per round), augmentation but less powers granted, a very hard cap on manifester level, and (sadly) very little content outside psionic books.

This all together is what makes psionics considered by some people "more balanced" than spell slots. The spell point system, which just takes spellcasting and applies power point values to it, is pretty badly broken overall for a system. :smalleek: And the idea behind spell slots - limited forms of magic in descrete chunks - is not a bad idea either. It ensures that casters make use of low-level "utility" spells rather than blowing all their magic on the high powered castings... in theory.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Spell slots is more restricting and thus more balanced. You simply aren't allowed to say, "I feel like casting nothing but 9th level spells today, even if it means I have none left after 5 rounds of combat." Going nova by casters and the short adventuring day with no real way to continuously enforce fighting on for longer (only so many plausible "time sensitive" missions you can cook up) are real, very major balance problems in 3E. And a points-based system just exacerbates it by allowing the caster to nova even harder.