As I'm sure we're both aware, what should be and what is are often two different things.I would call a system in which points can be "wasted", one in which the value of a point has been assigned incorrectly. Spending 1 point on something should be well worth 1 point![]()
Having a minimum level feels to be like a bit of disadvantage: worth a 1/2 point to power per level or something like that. Consider -
Little Foom!
1st level
1 target
2d10 fire damage + 1d10 fire damage for each higher level spell slot (3d10 for 2nd, 4d10 for 3rd etc)
Big Foom!
4th level
1 target
5d10 fire damage + 1d10 fire damage for each higher level spell slot.
Little Foom! as written is always better than Big Foom! because it can be cast using all spell slots from level one upwards.
To compensate, Big Foom! needs something else. Quantified in hypothetical points it could be that Big Foom! needs 1.5 points of other stuff.
Chromatic orb is pretty good cast at higher levels. Especially if you happen to get a crit.![]()
Last session the wizard used sleep as 2nd level spell and put a flying wounded dragon to sleep making him crash on the trees below.. So yes I'd say it's worth to cast spells with higher slots..
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
I think we're basically in agreement. We concur that the example clearly demonstrates that having a higher slot minimum is a cost. We're agreed that we have to give something extra to Big Foom. I feel like that is a separate conclusion from any conclusion about how much extra to give.If we look to existing examples of spells as guides, the difference would be that Little Foom targets one creature, while Big Foom would hit all targets in a given area. Then you could have a Great Foom that hits all enemies (excludes allies) and perhaps a larger area.
Shadowrun does spells like this, although rather than levels they are more ease of use. They have something like:If we look to existing examples of spells as guides, the difference would be that Little Foom targets one creature, while Big Foom would hit all targets in a given area. Then you could have a Great Foom that hits all enemies (excludes allies) and perhaps a larger area.
I think that spells have more metrics by which to measure usefulness than only comparing damage amount and type, and as a result it is not so easy to say that scorching ray completely outclasses chromatic orb.Do you really think so? Isn't it completely outclassed by scorching ray against any enemy that is not fire resistant/imune?

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.