How to add more sorcery points?

[GlassJaw]

If your goal is to create something that feels less like a charismatic wizard and more like soething that draws magic from the world and their heritage, I'd change the feature that makes them most like the wizard: Their spell progression table.

• No spell progression, just spell points.
• Creating a spell slot from a sorcery point requires an action.
• A spell slot that is not used in an hour is lost.
• Turn the existing spell slots into spell points at 1st level = 2, 2nd = 3, 3rd = 5, 4th = 6, 5th = 7, 6th = 9, 7th = 11, 8th = 13, 9th = 15. This is also the cost to buy spell slots.
• You can know spells of ½ your sorcerer level rounded up. Your spells known limit is per the PHB.
• Spells of 5th level or below are Lower Arcanum. Spells of 6th level and above are Higher Arcanum. You may cast 1 Higher Arcanum at level 11, 2 at 13, 3 at 15, 4 at 17, 5 at 18, 6 at 19 and 7 at 20. There is no restriction on how many Lower Arcanum you can cast other than the spell point limit.
• Each time you cast a Lower Arcanum spell, the cost to cast it increases by 1. The cost to cast a Lower Arcanum resets at a short rest.
• Each time you cast a Higher Arcanum spell, the cost to cast it increases by 3. The cost to cast Higher Arcanum resets at a Long Rest.

In general, I like this approach, although my implementation would be different.

With spell points, I would do away with sorcery points. You can spend spell points to modify spells with Metamagic. This also eliminates the need for creating spell slots (good riddance); every is from the same pool.

Without playtesting, my gut says there would need to be a way to limit the number of higher level spells cast. I like you idea of Lower and Higher tier spells. However, modifying spell costs on the fly requires too much bookkeeping.

Could simply be that a sorcerer can cast higher "tier" spells a number of times per long rest. Higher-level spells is certainly the trickiest problem to solve when converting to spell points.

But again, I wish the sorcerer had spell points instead of slots to begin with. That would have done wonders to differentiate from the wizard. I'd also like to see more thematic Origins and spell lists.

 

[Guest 6801328]

When all I had read was the title my response was, "Level up?"

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The house rule I'm currently considering is to reduce the cost of any sorcery point expenditure by 1 point once per (their own) turn. Then it could go up to 2 points at level 10 or so. To prevent infinite spell slots, I include the rule that any spell slot you make with that discount disappears if not expended on the same turn, and a note that it can't reduce the cost of creating spell slots to less than 1. (I haven't totally finalized these rules, and there were still glitches in the math last time I looked at it.)

If you only want to boost non-spell slots, you could do something similar but just not have it apply when creating spell slots. However, without letting it apply in some way to spell slots, it ends up being significantly less powerful than giving them Arcane Recovery.

I personally think the proper mechanical balance point for the class is to give them Arcane Recovery. However, I also think that is boring and doesn't fit terribly well thematically. This version allows them to use certain metamagics and sub-class abilities for free, which I like.

What about gaining back points when they roll a natural 20, or a creature targeted by a save spells rolls a natural 1? Not all points each time, but we can work out a normal frequency per fight, figure out what the right amount would be to get roughly the same power as Arcane Recovery, and then adjust from there.

 

[FrogReaver]

In general, I like this approach, although my implementation would be different.

With spell points, I would do away with sorcery points. You can spend spell points to modify spells with Metamagic. This also eliminates the need for creating spell slots (good riddance); every is from the same pool.

Without playtesting, my gut says there would need to be a way to limit the number of higher level spells cast. I like you idea of Lower and Higher tier spells. However, modifying spell costs on the fly requires too much bookkeeping.

Could simply be that a sorcerer can cast higher "tier" spells a number of times per long rest. Higher-level spells is certainly the trickiest problem to solve when converting to spell points.

But again, I wish the sorcerer had spell points instead of slots to begin with. That would have done wonders to differentiate from the wizard. I'd also like to see more thematic Origins and spell lists.

I don’t believe a spell point like system can be balanced.

 

[Maxperson]

I don’t believe a spell point like system can be balanced.

Well, balance isn't everything. If it increases the enjoyment of the players, then balance should take second seat.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well, balance isn't everything. If it increases the enjoyment of the players, then balance should take second seat.

I believe unbalanced systems take away from the enjoyment of players.

 

[Maxperson]

I believe unbalanced systems take away from the enjoyment of players.

If that is a general statement, then you are factually incorrect as I and my players enjoy unbalanced fun more than boring balance all the time. If you are speaking for yourself only, then sure, I can buy that. We're talking about him and his group, though.

 

[FrogReaver]

If that is a general statement, then you are factually incorrect as I and my players enjoy unbalanced fun more than boring balance all the time. If you are speaking for yourself only, then sure, I can buy that. We're talking about him and his group, though.

If you take balanced to mean doing exactly the same thing in exactly the same way then 5e is not balanced. In fact if that’s your definition of balance then I hate balance too. Perfect symetry is boring.

But balance as I and most others use it isn’t about having perfect symetry, it’s about being within an acceptable degree of relative strength. In our terms 5e is overall pretty balanced with a few outliers.

I don’t think a spell points system can fall within that degree of acceptable relative strength.

 

[Maxperson]

If you take balanced to mean doing exactly the same thing in exactly the same way then 5e is not balanced. In fact if that’s your definition of balance then I hate balance too. Perfect symetry is boring.

But balance as I and most others use it isn’t about having perfect symetry, it’s about being within an acceptable degree of relative strength. In our terms 5e is overall pretty balanced with a few outliers.

And with these statements you have agreed with me. Imbalance is fun. All that's left to determine is where the line is drawn for each individual. Where you draw the line will be different from where I draw the line, and where he draws the line will be different from the two of us.

I don’t think a spell points system can fall within that degree of acceptable relative strength.

For you. He and his players may draw the line farther on than you do, as I do. That's why I included the very important "if" in my first response to you on this. IF he and his players will get more enjoyment from spell points than without them, balance should take second seat.

 

[5ekyu]

Well, balance isn't everything. If it increases the enjoyment of the players, then balance should take second seat.

Fyi - Esper Genesis uses the 5e spell points system for one of its caster classes and it played fine during our 18 months campaign.