PDA

View Full Version : Spell-Points - could this idea work ? (P.E.A.C.H)



nonsi
2015-07-28, 10:10 AM
.

Ok, I got to this formula for spell points and I think I'm on to something here.

The idea is that:
1. Spellcasters have less overall daily output of spells, but way more flexibility in what to use and when.
2. They can generate a bit more spells of the highest SL they have access to at one time than core spellcasters, but then they're "out of ammo" (or just nearly).
3. They have a certain rate of spell-points recovery, because 1) it makes sense; 2) if the situation dictates one or two spells are needed to advance, you don't need to go to sleep and wait till tomorrow to continue (which I always found dumb).


So, the rules are as follows, and I really want to know what people think of them.



Spell-Points costs are as follows:

- 0-level spells cost 1 SP.
- Each SL thereafter costs 2 SPs more (3 for 1st, 5 for 2nd … 19 for 9th)




How many Spell-Points each spellcaster gains:


Spellcasters gain Spell Points (SPs) at each level as follows (with SL access detailed at the bottom of each category's spec.):



Primary Casters:
- 1st – 4th: 5 SPs
- 5th – 8th: 6 SPs
- 9th – 12th: 7 SPs
- 13th – 16th: 8 SPs
- 17th – 20th: 9 SPs
This amounts to a total of [(5+6+7+8+9) * 4 = 35 * 4 = 140] SPs at level 20, with 9th SL access

SL Access (at level): 1st (1), 2nd (3), 3rd (5), 4th (7), 5th (9), 6th (11), 7th (13), 8th (15), 9th (17)



Secondary Casters:
- 1st – 6th: 3 SPs
- 7th – 12th: 4 SPs
- 13th – 18th: 5 SPs
- 19th – 20th: 6 SPs
This amounts to a total of [((3+4+5) * 6) + (6 * 2) = 72 + 12 = 84] SPs at level 20, with 6th SL access

SL Access (at level): 0th (1), 1st (2), 2nd (5), 3rd (8), 4th (11), 5th (14), 6th (17)



Tertiary Casters:
- 1st – 7th: 2 SPs
- 8th – 14th: 3 SPs
- 15th – 20th: 4 SPs
This amounts to a total of [((2+3) * 7) + (4 * 5) = 35 + 20 = 55] SPs at level 20, with 5th SL access

SL Access (at level): 0th (1), 1st (2), 2nd (6), 3rd (10), 4th (14), 5th (18)




Spell-Points Recovery by class level:

When awake and not involved in strenuous activity, spellcasters replenish spell points at the following rate:
- 1st – 7th: 1 / 30 minutes
- 8th – 14th: 1 / 20 minutes
- 15th – 20th: 1 / 10 minutes
Note: It's easy to notice that the less SPs a class has, the faster it recovers SPs proportionally. Well, that's perfectly fine, because the more SPs a class has, the more output it has to begin with and the easier it is to conserve.

During Sleep, or meditation, the recovery rate is doubled.

Once full daily rest is completed, all SPs are regained.




Spell-Points and Multiclassing:

For simplicity's sake, each class has its own SP pool. Deal with each class' SP pool separately, as if it was the only class with spellcasting that the character has.



.

redwizard007
2015-07-28, 01:47 PM
Do you plan on scrapping the wizard/sorcerer, cleric/favoredsoul concept all together or replacing the spontaneous vs prepared casting with something altogether different?

Also, are you making any changes to skilled or martial classes? Just making the top tier classes better seems like a waste of effort.

ZenBear
2015-07-28, 01:57 PM
When you say "0-th level spells" are you talking about cantrips? If so, it seems like you want spellcasters to lose their ability to cast at-will and be forced to resort to mundane attacks. This I do not approve of as it is the opposite of fun.

nonsi
2015-07-28, 03:04 PM
Do you plan on scrapping the wizard/sorcerer, cleric/favoredsoul concept all together or replacing the spontaneous vs prepared casting with something altogether different?

Also, are you making any changes to skilled or martial classes? Just making the top tier classes better seems like a waste of effort.

It's no secret that I hold no special allegiance to the core/official base classes. Those don't allow you to assemble the character you envision to the letter - you always have to compromise.
I specifically wrote "Primary", "Secondary" and "Tertiary", so that this homebrew idea will not be restricted to my proposed system...
But yes. Separating Sorc/Wis and Cleric/Fav. seems artificial to me,
In my view, each caster should have the memorization aspect (but not in the "Fire&Forget" format) and the spontaneous aspect.
1. That's how the mind really works.
2. It enables operational flexibility with power restriction - a far better result than the Vancian approach, where you have neigh infinite arsenal..... unless you guessed wrong - then you're shooting blanks.

nonsi
2015-07-28, 03:22 PM
When you say "0-th level spells" are you talking about cantrips? If so, it seems like you want spellcasters to lose their ability to cast at-will and be forced to resort to mundane attacks. This I do not approve of as it is the opposite of fun.

1. This is 3.5e in spirit, not PF, so I don't see where the "at-will" is coming from.
2. No one forces that 9th level mage (49 SPs) to cast 4 5th-level spells and remain with just 5 SPs. If s/he does - that's his/her problem. 49 SPs = 49 cantrips / 16 1st level spells / 9 2nd level spells (10 with 15min of meditation)....... etc.
3. I see nothing wrong with evening up the playing field between casters and noncasters - with a little shift in favor of noncasters.
4. This will restore spellcasters to their "squishy" position and promote cooperation & strategy. They can still do their nasty stuff, it's just that they'll need to cooperate with/delegate noncasters instead of owning the battlefield.

That's the agenda anyway. Question is, am I on the right track in promoting that agenda?

ZenBear
2015-07-28, 03:39 PM
1. This is 3.5e in spirit, not PF, so I don't see where the "at-will" is coming from.
2. No one forces that 9th level mage (49 SPs) to cast 4 5th-level spells and remain with just 5 SPs. If s/he does - that's his/her problem. 49 SPs = 49 cantrips / 16 1st level spells / 9 2nd level spells (10 with 15min of meditation)....... etc.
3. I see nothing wrong with evening up the playing field between casters and noncasters - with a little shift in favor of noncasters.
4. This will restore spellcasters to their "squishy" position and promote cooperation & strategy. They can still do their nasty stuff, it's just that they'll need to cooperate with/delegate noncasters instead of owning the battlefield.

That's the agenda anyway. Question is, am I on the right track in promoting that agenda?

I'm speaking from a 5E perspective. You didn't state in the OP that you were writing this with 3.5 in mind, so forgive my confusion.

Eliminating a spellcaster's ability to cast cantrips at-will doesn't solve the OPness of spellcasters because they still get to fly, teleport, planeshift, cause earthquakes, kill with a touch and Wish/True Polymorph whatever they want into being, on Contingency with Permanence.

Your spell points idea is good, it just doesn't solve that particular problem. Of course the 5E DMG has it's own spell points system I haven't really read up on yet but you might want to.

nonsi
2015-07-29, 01:03 AM
Eliminating a spellcaster's ability to cast cantrips at-will doesn't solve the OPness of spellcasters because they still get to fly, teleport, planeshift, cause earthquakes, kill with a touch and Wish/True Polymorph whatever they want into being, on Contingency with Permanence.

Your spell points idea is good, it just doesn't solve that particular problem...


I know. As long as such options exist, you can't really take someone who wields them below T2.
That's ok. It wasn't the goal.
The main issue is to make sure that spellcasters can't overshadow everyone else in combat all day long. They can have their big guns, but without conserving and/or relying on others, they'd eventually find themselves without tools to work with - leaving them fragile and exposed (including divine full-casters, whose BAB will be reduced to poor, but that's a separate issue from spell points).




Of course the 5E DMG has it's own spell points system I haven't really read up on yet but you might want to.


Read them once. Don't remember a thing about them other than that I didn't like them.

SkipSandwich
2015-07-30, 07:29 PM
Do spellcasters have to soend additional spell points to augment spells beyond the base level like in psionics? Or are all spells cast at full caster level? ( forgive qny spelling errors, typing from phone)

nonsi
2015-07-30, 11:55 PM
Do spellcasters have to soend additional spell points to augment spells beyond the base level like in psionics?


No they don't.
This isn't an attempt to convert psionics into spellcasting. It's just that experimenting with the PP cost values worked out somehow.




Or are all spells cast at full caster level?


That.

Grod_The_Giant
2015-07-31, 07:48 AM
I know. As long as such options exist, you can't really take someone who wields them below T2.
That's ok. It wasn't the goal.
The main issue is to make sure that spellcasters can't overshadow everyone else in combat all day long. They can have their big guns, but without conserving and/or relying on others, they'd eventually find themselves without tools to work with - leaving them fragile and exposed (including divine full-casters, whose BAB will be reduced to poor, but that's a separate issue from spell points).
That's not an appealing or functional way to balance things. It is, however, how WotC tried to balance things-- and look how that turned out. A class that's overpowered for the first half of the day and underpowered for the second not only isn't balanced against other classes, it's not even balanced against itself. Specifically:

Low spells/day encourages people to stick with the most overpowered, encounter-ending spells out there-- they don't have room to mess around with fun-but-ineffective stuff, not if they want to contribute to every encounter.
Unrestricted spell access means you're just as strong as before, just not for as long. In certain situations, they're more powerful, since they have the option to go nova.
It's no fun to play a caster that can barely cast-- especially when, as you seem to imply, they aren't going to get many other options. In game design terms, "fun" trumps "balance" so hard they're not even on the same page*.

I would encourage you to put unlimited low-level casting back in-- starting with cantrips, and slowly ticking up as your highest spell level increases. (Maybe highest level-3 are at-will?) That way at least casters can shoot their big guns and still have something to do.




*Excluding drastic, "100% better/useless" type inbalance that will crop up in every group and ruin everyone's fun

nonsi
2015-07-31, 10:13 AM
That's not an appealing or functional way to balance things. It is, however, how WotC tried to balance things-- and look how that turned out. A class that's overpowered for the first half of the day and underpowered for the second not only isn't balanced against other classes, it's not even balanced against itself. Specifically:


I hear you. That's why I suggested the Spell-Points Recovery rules, where you get 2 SPs / hour without even trying (4 w/ meditating)… going all the way to 6 SP / hour (12 w/ meditating).
It means that the party doesn't have to go to sleep due to getting stuck w/o the right spells – something that could happen to official prepared casters even when "fully charged".





Low spells/day encourages people to stick with the most overpowered, encounter-ending spells out there-- they don't have room to mess around with fun-but-ineffective stuff, not if they want to contribute to every encounter.



But when you have a spell pool, you're less worried about taking a certain spell only once (or not at all).
You choose the best tool for the job on-the-fly instead of several tools that would hopefully get you close enough.





Unrestricted spell access means you're just as strong as before, just not for as long. In certain situations, they're more powerful, since they have the option to go nova.



Yes, but if they fire all their big guns at once instead of partially relying on others – they might get screwed 15 minutes later.
So they can, but they better be damn sure they want to.
Also, using your big guns is not necessarily the most efficient strategy. Sometimes grease / ventriloquism / charm person could end up being the best strategy.





It's no fun to play a caster that can barely cast-- especially when, as you seem to imply, they aren't going to get many other options. In game design terms, "fun" trumps "balance" so hard they're not even on the same page*.



I don't know if the amounts I suggested count as "can barely cast" or not.
What I do know is that they prevent one from spamming.
I was hoping that I could rely on lower level spells and some good strategy (along with recovery) to ensure a more prolific workday.




I would encourage you to put unlimited low-level casting back in-- starting with cantrips, and slowly ticking up as your highest spell level increases. (Maybe highest level-3 are at-will?) That way at least casters can shoot their big guns and still have something to do.


Hmm, an interesting notion indeed.
How about this…
For each given SL [X]:
- If you have access to SL [X+5], SL [X] cost in SP is reduced by -1. (down to zero)
- If you have access to SL [X+6], SL [X] cost in SP is reduced by – (1 + 2) = -3.
- If you have access to SL [X+7], SL [X] cost in SP is reduced by – (1 + 2 + 3) = -6.

We haven't reached your sweet spot of no cost SL 3, but we did manage to get there for 2nd level spells, and 3rd SL is reduced from 7 SP to 4 SP.
Or…
Instead of advancing with SL-access, it could rely on -1 SP per level gained thereafter (starting at level 15, 3rd SL would then cost 1 SP at level 20).

I'm open to other suggestions on this one.

redwizard007
2015-07-31, 11:28 AM
Personally I think the limitless second or third level spells would be to much. Many of the best buffs are lvl 2 or 3 and have higher level mass ________ spells would become even more useless. A wizard spammind fireball or bulls strength are both to much.

nonsi
2015-08-01, 12:42 AM
Personally I think the limitless second or third level spells would be to much. Many of the best buffs are lvl 2 or 3 and have higher level mass ________ spells would become even more useless. A wizard spammind fireball or bulls strength are both to much.

1. The vast majority of spells are not "mass ________" spells.
2. By the time you'd get free 2nd level spells, you're facing horrors with reality changing powers.
3. The SP reduction part is still on debate.

Seharvepernfan
2015-08-01, 06:34 AM
You really oughta check this (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBeta111.pdf) out.

nonsi
2015-08-01, 08:18 AM
You really oughta check this (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19444168/VancianToPsionicsBeta111.pdf) out.


Loved the spirals in the opening page.


While I do appreciate the details that the author(s) put into that document (and it does have a lot of useful stuff in it), notice the following problem…

P.23 describes SP cost the same as those specified for psionics.
Clerics (p.31) have an SP pool of 231 by the time they reach 9th SL.
==> This amounts to potentially 13 9th level spells at level 17 (18 at level 20).

If core spellcastes are OP, then SP casters - as proposed in the document - are so far ahead that melees can't even see their backside anymore.

Having access to your entire repertoire is definitely desirable, but at the same time, having so much access to the heaviest artillery means that you took your derailed wagon (core rules) and crashed it into the side of a mountain and the wagon just exploded (the proposed document).


On top of that, the document seems quite old and naive.


And last but not least, the document is way too long. The vast majority in it has nothing to do with Vancian --> SP transition.



One thing I do consider, is adopting the idea at p.40 that cantrips are for free, reverting back to the psionics costs..... but the ability to generate 7 6 9th level spells one after the other at level 17 (119 113 SP pool with my proposed progression to full casters) is a bit alarming.