Nuptup
2021-08-17, 09:41 PM
Title mostly states the intent, but do you guys think there would be any inherently problematic issues with using the same math for 5e to convert slots to points inside the PF2e system? My gut instinct is "You will have the same issues that is has with 5e BUT there won't be any new problems being created. Do any of you know of something fundamentally wrong with this kind of idea?
Also, I feel like the most common fan-made change with the 5e spell point system is making prepared casters still prepare specific spells/point usages ahead of time to stop them from just making sorcerers lose some of their flare (and other spontaneous casters) while still allowing them to have more or less of a specific level slot by converting up or down accordingly. However, since PF2e is still true Vancian casting where prepared's have to specifically allot a certain exact number of spells (Older Editions) instead of prepare X spell and casting it freely (The 5e style), that common change is already taken into account. Here's the mock-up I came up with. It's just a direct mathematical carry over with no changes. It would still function the same as 5e mechanically and whatnot.
Spell Point Cost
Spell Level
Point Cost
1st
2
2nd
3
3rd
5
4th
6
5th
7
6th
9
7th
10
8th
11
9th
13
Spell Slots Vs Points By Level
Class Level
5e Slots
PF2e Slots
5e Points
PF2e Points
1st
2
3
4
6
2nd
3
4
6
8
3rd
4,2
4,3
14
17
4th
4,3
4,4
17
20
5th
4,3,2
4,4,3
27
35
6th
4,3,3
4,4,4
32
40
7th
4,3,3,1
4,4,4,3
38
58
8th
4,3,3,2
4,4,4,4
44
64
9th
4,3,3,3,1
4,4,4,4,3
57
85
10th
4,3,3,3,2
4,4,4,4,4
64
92
11th
4,3,3,3,2,1
4,4,4,4,4,3
73
119
12th
4,3,3,3,2,1
4,4,4,4,4,4
73
128
13th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,3
83
158
14th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4
83
168
15th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,3
94
201
16th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
94
212
17th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,3
107
251
18th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
114
264
19th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
123
264*
20th
4,3,3,3,2,2,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
133
264*
*In PF2e, spellcasters only get access to a single 10th level spell to specifically limit the insane power of these spells outside of the natural progression (3 then 4 slots) of 1st-9th level spells. You can only get a second 10th level slot by spending your level 20 class feat to get it, and I did not think that it would be smart to add 10th level spells into the spell point system. They will act similarly to Focus Point spells and will be a seperate 1 or 2 per day resource.
Admittedly, it's clear that the amount of points that a PF2e character gets is massively larger than the D&D5e equivalent, but that is due to PF2e just getting more frequent use of higher level magic. The most extreme example would be that a 20th level character would have 10 9th level slots in 5e vs 20 in PF2e or could have 66 1st level slots in 5e or 132 in PF2e. This is in comparison to 5e naturally getting 20 spells of varying levels (More lower than high level) throughout the day, while PF2e gets 36 in that same day (4 of each level excluding 10th). So, Pathfinder gets 80% more spell casts per day, and all of those 80% extra are added to the higher spell levels. In the spell point system, PF2e gets 98% more points since it gets point contributions from more high-level spells, tilting the scaling a bit in it's favor (Which is already seen in the 80% extra casts when directly comparing systems.) These numbers also don't account for Focus Spells in PF2e which could make up some of the gap between the 80% value and the 98% value depending on your individual mileage on Focus Spells.
Anyway, mathematically, I feel like it's close enough to "Just_Work_Todd_Howard.JPG" without any massive issues. Feel free to prove me wrong, I genuinely want to know anything you might think of!
What are your thoughts on this?
Also, I feel like the most common fan-made change with the 5e spell point system is making prepared casters still prepare specific spells/point usages ahead of time to stop them from just making sorcerers lose some of their flare (and other spontaneous casters) while still allowing them to have more or less of a specific level slot by converting up or down accordingly. However, since PF2e is still true Vancian casting where prepared's have to specifically allot a certain exact number of spells (Older Editions) instead of prepare X spell and casting it freely (The 5e style), that common change is already taken into account. Here's the mock-up I came up with. It's just a direct mathematical carry over with no changes. It would still function the same as 5e mechanically and whatnot.
Spell Point Cost
Spell Level
Point Cost
1st
2
2nd
3
3rd
5
4th
6
5th
7
6th
9
7th
10
8th
11
9th
13
Spell Slots Vs Points By Level
Class Level
5e Slots
PF2e Slots
5e Points
PF2e Points
1st
2
3
4
6
2nd
3
4
6
8
3rd
4,2
4,3
14
17
4th
4,3
4,4
17
20
5th
4,3,2
4,4,3
27
35
6th
4,3,3
4,4,4
32
40
7th
4,3,3,1
4,4,4,3
38
58
8th
4,3,3,2
4,4,4,4
44
64
9th
4,3,3,3,1
4,4,4,4,3
57
85
10th
4,3,3,3,2
4,4,4,4,4
64
92
11th
4,3,3,3,2,1
4,4,4,4,4,3
73
119
12th
4,3,3,3,2,1
4,4,4,4,4,4
73
128
13th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,3
83
158
14th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4
83
168
15th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,3
94
201
16th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
94
212
17th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,3
107
251
18th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
114
264
19th
4,3,3,3,2,1,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
123
264*
20th
4,3,3,3,2,2,1,1,1
4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4
133
264*
*In PF2e, spellcasters only get access to a single 10th level spell to specifically limit the insane power of these spells outside of the natural progression (3 then 4 slots) of 1st-9th level spells. You can only get a second 10th level slot by spending your level 20 class feat to get it, and I did not think that it would be smart to add 10th level spells into the spell point system. They will act similarly to Focus Point spells and will be a seperate 1 or 2 per day resource.
Admittedly, it's clear that the amount of points that a PF2e character gets is massively larger than the D&D5e equivalent, but that is due to PF2e just getting more frequent use of higher level magic. The most extreme example would be that a 20th level character would have 10 9th level slots in 5e vs 20 in PF2e or could have 66 1st level slots in 5e or 132 in PF2e. This is in comparison to 5e naturally getting 20 spells of varying levels (More lower than high level) throughout the day, while PF2e gets 36 in that same day (4 of each level excluding 10th). So, Pathfinder gets 80% more spell casts per day, and all of those 80% extra are added to the higher spell levels. In the spell point system, PF2e gets 98% more points since it gets point contributions from more high-level spells, tilting the scaling a bit in it's favor (Which is already seen in the 80% extra casts when directly comparing systems.) These numbers also don't account for Focus Spells in PF2e which could make up some of the gap between the 80% value and the 98% value depending on your individual mileage on Focus Spells.
Anyway, mathematically, I feel like it's close enough to "Just_Work_Todd_Howard.JPG" without any massive issues. Feel free to prove me wrong, I genuinely want to know anything you might think of!
What are your thoughts on this?