Spell Points: A Variant System

[Ninjadeadbeard]

Like everyone else, I thought the DMG would have what I wanted. Turns out, I was wrong. Very wrong. Wizards of the Coast completely failed to make a spell point variant that was internally consistent. So, I've taken it upon myself to do so.

Spell Points
If you possess the Spellcasting class feature, instead of gaining spell slots you instead gain Spell Points with which to cast spells. All you need to do to find how many spell points you have is to count up every single Spell Slot Level you have, and add them all together. As an example, a 4th level Wizard has 4 level one spell slots and 3 level two spell slots. The level one slots are each worth 1 Spell Point, and the level twos are worth 2 each. So a level 4 Wizard ought to have 10 Spell Points. When casting spells you need to spend a number of Points equal to the Level of the spell you wish to cast. There is a natural "cap" as to how high you can cast any spell.

See the chart here (https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/gBW7I1PfObER):
https://i.imgur.com/QGbBSel.png

This system is elegant. Every spell slot level is one spell point. Which means there's now total transparency with all features requiring Spellcasting. Arcane Recovery? Still works as-printed. Smites? Still works as-printed. Pact Magic... uh. Okay, so Warlocks/Coffeelocks lose something in all this. But you can't make an omelet without fixing a single overly-hyped playstyle.

But there's another upside to this system! And that's when you do the following...



Font of Sorcery
Replaces Font of Magic
At 2nd level, you tap into a deep wellspring of magic within yourself. This wellspring is represented by gaining additional Spell Points as you level in the Sorcerer class. Add a number of Spell Points to your total equal to your Sorcerer Level.

Sorcerers are meant to be powerhouses, literally born with the magic inside of themselves. Naturally, shouldn't they be most at home with magic? Should not they be able to cast longer than other spellcasters by virtue of always having access to their power? This solves that little bugaboo right away!

Metamagic
At 3rd level, you gain the ability to twist your spells to suit your needs. You gain two of the following Metamagic options of your choice. You gain another one at 10th and 17th level.

You can use only one Metamagic option on a spell when you cast it, unless otherwise noted. To cast a spell with Metamagic, simply increase the amount of Spell Points used in the casting equal to the number of 'Sorcery Points' in the Metamagic option's description.

Upcasting is back, baby! This change to the rules is simple and elegant. Just increase the cost of a spell to change its nature. Sure, you're still stuck with too few Metamagic options, but since Tasha's came out, there's a feat to fix that. Which reminds me...

Metamagic Adept
Prerequisite: Spellcasting or Pact Magic Feature
Changes: When you select this feat, you gain 2 Spell Points (instead of Sorcery Points). For Pact Magic casters, these points may be used to modify spells as originally intended.

Now, this does increase the overall power of metamagic, and makes it a viable strategy for other spellcasters to pick this feat, since it opens up a whole new option for them. But, since feats/ASI's are still rare and valuable things, I feel the opportunity cost balances itself out.



I have used this system in my own campaigns, and overall I'm quite happy with it. I have found the following to be true:

Spellcasters become very versatile in the early game, being able to better split their spell slots up and cast lower level spells more often. But such spells aren't usually world-ending in scope and power. And by the late game, the ability to do so loses some of its shine, leading to things... just sort of being the same, balance-wise, as in the vanilla game.
Paladins can smite WAY more often, but it's ultimately the same AMOUNT of smiting damage dice, so this system just lets you split that damage up, instead of nova-ing.


In Conclusion
This system is easy to implement, and intuitively meshes into the vanilla game with almost no balance impact, outside of lightly increasing the overall magical feel of things due to more low-level spells being cast more often. While some may dislike this, I have found the game's action economy more than capable of keeping the power-creep one finds in other Spell Point systems down.

So... what do you all think?

[Kane0]

Question for you: is a second level spell worth two firsts? Are three first the same value as a third? Is a fourth worth two seconds? And so on.
Similarly, is quickened metamagic worth a second level spell? Is subtle worth a first?

I think the devs chose those costs on purpose because of the relative disparity in value, which is to say that the increases in spell power are not linear, especially starting at 2 so there could be magical stuff that fits between costless magic and 1st level spells

Also, the aberrant mind sorc just lost a feature i believe.

[Maat Mons]

Spell point cost = spell level is what I've tended to for my own musing on the matter as well. I considered spell point cost = spell level + 1, since otherwise some spells become markedly more efficient when done slowly out of combat. But really, the only major offender is Cure Wounds, and letting the party recover HP more efficiently out of combat seems fine. Maybe even desirable.

For Warlocks, I've considered giving them a pseudo-spell-point pool equal to their Warlock level that refreshes on a short rest. Actually, I've given some thought to converting all spellcasting classes to a short-rest-based resource. And my never-completed translation of 3.5-style psionics to 5e was going to do that as well.

[LibraryOgre]

This is not dissimilar from the 3.5 Expanded Psionics Handbook (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicPowersOverview.htm#powersAndPowerPoints) method, or the Hackmaster method (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/104757/HackMaster-Basic-free?affiliate_id=315505). Spells and Magic (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/16864/Players-Option--Spells--Magic-2e?affiliate_id=315505) for 2e had a similar idea (for 1st and 2nd level spells, your numbers are exactly half of theirs), as well, but kept the "spells scale with character level", and that caused problems (making 1st level spells highly efficient compared to upper level spells).

[Ninjadeadbeard]

Also, the aberrant mind sorc just lost a feature i believe.

Actually, they just got a buff. All their Psionic Spells now have Subtle Spell added for free. Which hilariously fits the theme.

[Anymage]

Spell levels = spell points has been a popular idea, but also one that gives a pretty sizeable buff to casters. Being able to parcel out just the effects you want at just the right potency, and treat all your resources as fully fungible, makes you a lot more versatile. I get the appeal of that versatility, but it does tend to squash anyone who isn't a caster. And often, if two casters both have a relevant ability, lets the louder player keep hogging the spotlight.

Plus, given that spell power does not scale linearly with spell level, I see letting players spam level 6-9 spells if they have the slots just leaning even harder into nova playstyles. Which if you want caster nova dominant playstyles is exactly what you'll get, but that's a niche style I'd expect a lot of forumites here aren't the most fond of.

[johnbragg]

Like everyone else, I thought the DMG would have what I wanted. Turns out, I was wrong. Very wrong. Wizards of the Coast completely failed to make a spell point variant that was internally consistent.

I think it's more accurate to say that they explored that idea in the early development phases, and elected NOT to do that. And a lot of the math of upcasting is designed around NOT going that.



This system is elegant. Every spell slot level is one spell point.
Font of Sorcery
[LIST]
Spellcasters become very versatile in the early game, being able to better split their spell slots up and cast lower level spells more often.

I don't think there's any balance problem in trading *down*. Usually you run out of higher-level slots first, then lower level slots. And if you ARE out of lower level slots, you can upcast, or (if the spell doesn't upcast) just burn a higher level slot.



But such spells aren't usually world-ending in scope and power. And by the late game, the ability to do so loses some of its shine, leading to things... just sort of being the same, balance-wise, as in the vanilla game.



In Conclusion
This system is easy to implement, and intuitively meshes into the vanilla game with almost no balance impact, outside of lightly increasing the overall magical feel of things due to more low-level spells being cast more often. While some may dislike this, I have found the game's action economy more than capable of keeping the power-creep one finds in other Spell Point systems down.

So... what do you all think?

Let's take a look at a 5th, 10th and 15th level Wizard, by the book and by your Spell Point system. I'll keep things simple by just taking basic blaster-caster spells.

At 5th level, Book wizard can cast Fireball twice. Spell-points wizard can cast Fireball....five times.
At 10th level, Book wizard gets Cone of Cold twice. Spell-points wizard...8 times.
At 15th level, Book wizard gets Finger of Death twice (one 7th, one 8th). Spell points....8 times.

Is that what you want?