Spell Points

[jjordan]

I'm looking at spell points (DMG. 288-289) and doing a little pondering. If I'm reading this right (and it's been a long day so...) each character is assigned a pool of spell points and can create a spell slot using those points. Now, this replaces the default, Vancian spell slot assignments. So a 6th level wizard with 32 spell points can cast 6 fireball spells (at 5 points a pop for each 3rd level spell cast) instead of the maximum 3 fireballs they'd be able to cast under the default rules. Essentially it allows for spell-spamming as long as you keep the spells below level 6.

Is this correct?

[micahaphone]

Correct. It's effectively Sorcerer's Flexible Casting but with perfect conversion.

[cutlery]

Yep, it is a great increase in flexibility.

[MaxWilson]

Yep, it is a great increase in flexibility.

It's particularly great for warlocks because it prevents 80% of the warlock list from becoming obsolete trash at later levels. E.g. Mirror Image out of a 5th level slot is pretty bad, so bad you wouldn't take it, but with spellpoints you still have the option to cast it as a regular 2nd level spell. Ditto Hex. There's still the concentration opportunity cost to consider, but at least the spell list itself doesn't feel like it's shrinking.

[cutlery]

It's particularly great for warlocks because it prevents 80% of the warlock list from becoming obsolete trash at later levels. E.g. Mirror Image out of a 5th level slot is pretty bad, so bad you wouldn't take it, but with spellpoints you still have the option to cast it as a regular 2nd level spell. Ditto Hex. There's still the concentration opportunity cost to consider, but at least the spell list itself doesn't feel like it's shrinking.

Oh, 100%.

I am still a bit mad they didn’t add a short rest table for spell points for warlocks. I suppose they could handwave it as incentive to multiclass into a long rest caster (and it is most certainly that), but playing a warlock in a game with spellpoints for full casters would suck.

[MaxWilson]

Oh, 100%.

I am still a bit mad they didn’t add a short rest table for spell points for warlocks. I suppose they could handwave it as incentive to multiclass into a long rest caster (and it is most certainly that), but playing a warlock in a game with spellpoints for full casters would suck.

I don't see the problem? The warlock spell point table is simple enough that I don't even need to look it up, I have it memorized.

Level 1: 2 SP
Level 2: 4 SP
Level 3-4: 6 SP
Level 5-6: 10 SP
Level 7-8: 12 SP
Level 9-10: 14 SP
Level 11-15: 21 SP
Level 16-20: 28 SP

[Edea]

I'm not sure I'd ever consider playing a sorc in a game with that variant, not gonna lie.

[cutlery]

I don't see the problem? The warlock spell point table is simple enough that I don't even need to look it up, I have it memorized.

Level 1: 2 SP
Level 2: 4 SP
Level 3-4: 6 SP
Level 5-6: 10 SP
Level 7-8: 12 SP
Level 9-10: 14 SP
Level 11-15: 21 SP
Level 16-20: 28 SP

Oh, sure, they should have just said so in the DMG instead of basically saying don’t use spell points with warlocks.

I’d allow short rest points just like that for locks, and probably for warlocks before anyone else (sorcerers a second).

[MaxWilson]

Oh, sure, they should have just said so in the DMG instead of basically saying don’t use spell points with warlocks.

I’d allow short rest points just like that for locks, and probably for warlocks before anyone else (sorcerers a second).

Oh. I guess I just felt like they expected DMs to do their own math--after all, it's in the "DM's Workshop" section IIRC, which is all about changing the rules how you like.

I do wish they had more explicit discussion of the pros and cons, especially for warlocks. It wouldn't take much to say what we've said on this thread: "spell points for warlocks adds flexibility and keeps early spells cost-effective at high levels."

[jjordan]

So do casters have to decide which spell slots to prepare after each long rest? Do they have to select which specific spells they are preparing? Or are they free to create the spell slots as needed?

[Cybren]

Oh. I guess I just felt like they expected DMs to do their own math--after all, it's in the "DM's Workshop" section IIRC, which is all about changing the rules how you like.

I do wish they had more explicit discussion of the pros and cons, especially for warlocks. It wouldn't take much to say what we've said on this thread: "spell points for warlocks adds flexibility and keeps early spells cost-effective at high levels."

5e in general could do with more transparency on the parts of the developers and rules about what the intended function of various rules are so that DMs and homebrew designers know what areas of the rules are more load-baring than others. Then again sometimes when they state their reasoning for something it is so transparently a lie I guess that isn't worth it for wotc to waste ink on.

[Kireban]

Well, according to the DMG this variant rule is only for classes with the spellcasting feature. Its not meant for warlocks, so there is no need to write a short rest table for them.

[MaxWilson]

So do casters have to decide which spell slots to prepare after each long rest? Do they have to select which specific spells they are preparing? Or are they free to create the spell slots as needed?

For spella under 5th level, there are no slots (although there's still a limit on how many spells you can prepare / know). You just say "I'm casting Mirror Image" and the DM says "that'll be three spell points please," and you pay them and move on. Much simpler than tracking spell slots.

At higher levels though you still have to track slots.

[Asisreo1]

Oh, 100%.

I am still a bit mad they didn’t add a short rest table for spell points for warlocks. I suppose they could handwave it as incentive to multiclass into a long rest caster (and it is most certainly that), but playing a warlock in a game with spellpoints for full casters would suck.

For the record, by RAW, a Warlock cannot use the spellpoint variant. That's only reserved for casters with the Spellcasters feature.

[ProsecutorGodot]

For the record, by RAW, a Warlock cannot use the spellpoint variant. That's only reserved for casters with the Spellcasters feature.

There isn't really "RAW" in this case, it's a system intended for DM's to tweak and take inspiration from. Quote from the DMG:

If you’re confident that the answer to both questions is yes, then you have nothing to lose by giving it a try. Urge your players to provide feedback. If the rule or game element isn’t functioning as intended or isn’t adding much to your game, you can refine it or ditch it. No matter what a rule’s source, a rule serves you, not the other way around.

Not being applicable to warlocks simply because they didn't want to waste book space on a pact magic specific table looks like room for refinement to me.

I'm not sure I'd ever consider playing a sorc in a game with that variant, not gonna lie.

In our current mad mage campaign our Sorcerer is allowed to use it, incredibly strong, we've decided in the future that only Warlocks will be given the option to use it.

[Asisreo1]

There isn't really "RAW" in this case, it's a system intended for DM's to tweak and take inspiration from. Quote from the DMG:


Not being applicable to warlocks simply because they didn't want to waste book space on a pact magic specific table looks like room for refinement to me.

I mean, you can easily make a new feat that does something like give martials an extra attack then complain that it isn't necessarily balanced, but it's because you've used a variant that you designed yourself.

I wouldn't call giving warlocks spellpoints RAW unless you'd call allowing multiclassing with no ability score requirements RAW. If it's more fun for you, more power to ya but the way it works, by RAW, is that Warlocks don't get spell points because of their pact magic.

I also think this was purposeful as the warlock with spell points probably have access to *way* too many spells. They'd also probably be able to horde spell points with short rests similar to a coffeelock. They'd also be able to upcast past 5th-level spells which is beyond what the designers had in mind for a warlock class.

[RSP]

First, I’d only let Sorcerers use this: otherwise they just are awful with other casters getting a better version of one of their signature abilities.

Warlocks are fine, power and definitely flexibility-wise, but if giving them SPs anyway, I’d separate out their Pact Magic from Mystic Arcanum (which would still work the same way).

[MaxWilson]

I also think this was purposeful as the warlock with spell points probably have access to *way* too many spells. They'd also probably be able to horde spell points with short rests similar to a coffeelock. They'd also be able to upcast past 5th-level spells which is beyond what the designers had in mind for a warlock class.

What kind of a spell point system are you imagining that would make these things possible? Why not just give the warlock spell points per the table above (e.g. Level 6 = 10 SP), and they regain any used points when they rest? No sorlock style hoarding, no upcasting beyond 5th level (unless you also revamp Mystic Arcana to run off of invocations and spell points).

If you just implement warlock spellpoints in the obvious, straightforward way the DMG does for everyone else, these problems don't occur. Why make it harder than necessary?

[jjordan]

Thank you all for the responses.

I'm looking at the spell points variation because it seems to allow for some flexibility I'd like to have in my games/settings. It could allow, with minimal tweaking:
- Teams of casters (mostly NPCs but I like logical consistency) working together to accomplish bigger spells.
- Recovering spell points like you recover hit points.
- Spells that allow you to gather spell points in various ways.
- An easier implementation of my thaumovore Nothic.
- Greater flexibility for spellcasters and an end to tracking spell slots and the whole Vancian mechanics.
- Opens up some avenues for new magical items (wands that amplify spell points, staves that store spell points, rings that cost a single spell point to active their function, and etc....). Which works because a single spell point is less than spending a 1st level spell slot.
- Possibly even skill-based casting.

[KorvinStarmast]

For spella under 5th level, there are no slots (although there's still a limit on how many spells you can prepare / know). You just say "I'm casting Mirror Image" and the DM says "that'll be three spell points please," and you pay them and move on. Much simpler than tracking spell slots. At higher levels though you still have to track slots.

Mystic Arcanum are once per long rest, but the slot system recharges on a short rest. How do you resolve that? This may be obvious, but I'm not seeing it. (Also, are you tallking about up-casting beyond fifth?)

In our current mad mage campaign our Sorcerer is allowed to use it, incredibly strong, we've decided in the future that only Warlocks will be given the option to use it.

How to you intend to roll the Mystic Arcanum into this?
Also, are any spells gained via invocation (once per long rest) inside the box, or outside the box, for this spell point method? Some of them require a spell slot. (Example, Polymorph under the Sculptor of Flesh invocation)

Warlocks are fine, power and definitely flexibility-wise, but if giving them SPs anyway, I’d separate out their Pact Magic from Mystic Arcanum (which would still work the same way).

Once per long rest, got it. Can you upcast spells of level 5 and lower under this approach?

[ProsecutorGodot]

How to you intend to roll the Mystic Arcanum into this?
Also, are any spells gained via invocation (once per long rest) inside the box, or outside the box, for this spell point method? Some of them require a spell slot. (Example, Polymorph under the Sculptor of Flesh invocation)

I don't roll it in. Even with a slight increase in spells per short rest under spell points I still think it's alright to keep them recharging on a short rest. If I wanted to try a long rest warlock is look into a way to roll it in.

I don't see an issue with those invocations, you spend spell points now, why wouldn't they just roll over? They already work as if they were an extra spell known.

Can you upcast spells of level 5 and lower under this approach?

They still don't have 6th level slots when converting to spell points so I reason that they're still locked into 5th and below for regular casting.

[KorvinStarmast]

I don't see an issue with those invocations, you spend spell points now, why wouldn't they just roll over? They already work as if they were an extra spell known.

But they specifically do not recharge as a known spell on a short rest.

A niggling detail, but it's one of the things that makes the invocations a bit different from regular Warlock spells.

The intent is "once pre long rest for invocation spells of this kind" and 'Recharge on a short rest all other spells known"

But I do see your point in "OK, this now becomes "one more spell known" as the invocation benefit.

Pretty sure that doesn't break anything.

[RSP]

Once per long rest, got it. Can you upcast spells of level 5 and lower under this approach?

I think you accidentally added my comments on to Prosecutor’s, but just to clarify: I wouldn’t allow Warlocks to use SPs (I’d allow only Sorcerers to do so; as, otherwise, Sorcerers are just even further downgraded from all other casters, and lose their Flexible Casting schtick - not to mention it’s nust a straight up buff to casters and furthers the divide in balance with non-casters).

My post was recommending that, if allowing Warlocks to use SPs, that the rule keep MA separate from the SP pool (from Pact Magic), and just have MA work as normal.

Warlocks are fine with balance and flexibility and don’t need more of either. Their only issue is if the recommended allotment of SRs:LRs isn’t used, but giving them SR-recharging SPs doesn’t impact that at all.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think you accidentally added my comments on to Prosecutor’s, but just to clarify

You are right, the multiquote didn't quite work as I'd intended. .

My post was recommending that, if allowing Warlocks to use SPs, that the rule keep MA separate from the SP pool (from Pact Magic), and just have MA work as normal.

I like that idea. Simpler, to be sure.

Warlocks are fine with balance and flexibility and don’t need more of either. Their only issue is if the recommended allotment of SRs:LRs isn’t used, but giving them SR-recharging SPs doesn’t impact that at all.

Got it.

[MaxWilson]

Mystic Arcanum are once per long rest, but the slot system recharges on a short rest. How do you resolve that? This may be obvious, but I'm not seeing it. (Also, are you tallking about up-casting beyond fifth?)
How to you intend to roll the Mystic Arcanum into this?
Also, are any spells gained via invocation (once per long rest) inside the box, or outside the box, for this spell point method? Some of them require a spell slot. (Example, Polymorph under the Sculptor of Flesh invocation)
Once per long rest, got it. Can you upcast spells of level 5 and lower under this approach?

In that particular post I was responding to a question about all "casters", not just warlocks. So yes, needing to track slots as well as points is about 6th+ level spells (whether upcast or native). This may or may not be applicable to warlocks depending on whether or not you convert Mystic Arcana to run off of spell points and invocations or not.

5E greatly restricts access to spells over 5th level, and the DMG's approach to spellpoints is to restrict how many times you can cast an Nth level spell per day when N >= 6, but I find that clunky, so one alternative I sometimes have offered at chargen is for a PC to run off a different SP variant which just charges exponentially growing spell point costs above 6th level (to the point where casting two 9th level spells and one 8th level spell leaves a 20th level caster with, like, 2 spell points IIRC).

If you want to convert warlock Mystic Arcana, my favorite fix to offer is: Mystica Arcana are just invocations now which say "you know spell XYZ." At every level where you would gain a Mystic Arcana, instead gain one extra invocation and a corresponding long-rest-only spell slot (or spell points, if using the DMG spell points option--I've never combined this with my own exponentially-increasing-costs spell points). If you spend them on learning and casting that spell, it works exactly like vanilla Mystic Arcana, but now you have other choices such as picking no 7th level spell invocation and just upcasting Conjure Fey, getting two 9th level spells (True Polymorph and Foresight?) as invocations even though you can only cast one per day, or just spending all of the invocations and spellpoints on lower level stuff like Agonizing Repelling Spear of Hadar's Lethargy + Armor of Agathys VIII, if you want to feel really gishy.

[cutlery]

This ensuing discussion is exactly why I wish they had simply added a short-rest "eldritch points" table for warlocks to pair with spellpoints for other casters.

Instead, there is a variant rule that, if used, makes playing a warlock even more painful than it usually is, as far as casting goes.

[MaxWilson]

This ensuing discussion is exactly why I wish they had simply added a short-rest "eldritch points" table for warlocks to pair with spellpoints for other casters.

Instead, there is a variant rule that, if used, makes playing a warlock even more painful than it usually is, as far as casting goes.

Which rule are you referring to, and how does it make it more painful?

If you just do the simplest thing and don't convert Mystic Arcana to spell points at all (leaving them on their 1/long rest schedule), do you find that painful?

[cutlery]

Which rule are you referring to, and how does it make it more painful?

Playing a base warlock alongside spell point sorcerers/wizards/etc would not be fun.

[KorvinStarmast]

If you want to convert warlock Mystic Arcana, my favorite fix to offer is: Mystica Arcana are just invocations now which say "you know spell XYZ." At every level where you would gain a Mystic Arcana, instead gain one extra invocation and a corresponding long-rest-only spell slot (or spell points, if using the DMG spell points option--I've never combined this with my own exponentially-increasing-costs spell points). If you spend them on learning and casting that spell, it works exactly like vanilla Mystic Arcana, but now you have other choices such as picking no 7th level spell invocation and just upcasting Conjure Fey, getting two 9th level spells (True Polymorph and Foresight?) as invocations even though you can only cast one per day, or just spending all of the invocations and spellpoints on lower level stuff like Agonizing Repelling Spear of Hadar's Lethargy + Armor of Agathys VIII, if you want to feel really gishy.

Hmmm, I think that I like the "leave Mystic Arcana Alone" idea better, as it's less complicated. But I would like the option to choose to drop one of the lower ones and add a newer one at levels 18, 19, and 20 as is done with spels on the way up. Mabye still cap the 9th level one at 2.

[MaxWilson]

(A) Hmmm, I think that I like the "leave Mystic Arcana Alone" idea better, as it's less complicated. (B) But I would like the option to choose to drop one of the lower ones and add a newer one at levels 18, 19, and 20 as is done with spels on the way up. Mabye still cap the 9th level one at 2.

(A) Yeah, leaving Mystica Arcana alone is less complicated. Only do that if you feel dissatisfied with Mystica Arcana in the first place (inability to upcast, only one choice per level, etc.). I mentioned it only because you were asking specifically about them, but adjusting Mystic Arcana is really orthogonal to the spell points vs. slots issue except that they both fix unsatisfying things about warlocks.

(B) I didn't get this part, especially the "as is done with spells on the way up". I need a rephrase to understand it.