A novel way to acheive intra-spell balance

[FrogReaver]

Currently the game allows a caster to know X number of spells and prepare Y number of spells. Because of this many of the weaker spells are never used. I want to give casters a reason to take such spells without having to redesign the spells themselves.

I propose casters get a resource called spell knowledge points and spell preparation points. Each spell has a point cost associated with it for how much it costs to learn the spell and how much it costs to prepare the spell. Casters spend their pool of spell knowledge points and spell preparation points in order to learn and prepare spells.

Spells that are currently very strong for their level would require more spell knowledge and more spell preparation points. Spells that are very weak for their level would take few spell knowledge and spell preparation points. This gives casters that take a lot of weaker spells a lot more spells known and prepared which presumably should increase their versatility.

The idea is to give casters a benefit for taking many of the weaker spells to encourage them to do so. Will this concept provide enough of a benefit to do that? Is there any specific implementations of such a system you think would work well?

 

[ccs]

All that'll really happen is that you'll shift how the player(s) optimize their spell lists in the middle.
The awesome stuff will still be chosen (unless you price it so ridiculous as to suck the fun out of the game), the weakest stuff still won't be seen, & in-between you'll just generate a new list of go to spells.

 

[Krachek]

Preparing more bad rated spells won’t be a good incentive.
Spell redesign can be more easier than you think.
You simply lower the spell level by one or two.
Or only change the numeric. Damage, range, number of target, duration.
You take Red spell of level 2 and more in Treantmonk’s guide and simply lower them by one level. It will be a good start.

 

[5ekyu]

Preparing more bad rated spells won’t be a good incentive.
Spell redesign can be more easier than you think.
You simply lower the spell level by one or two.
Or only change the numeric. Damage, range, number of target, duration.
You take Red spell of level 2 and more in Treantmonk’s guide and simply lower them by one level. It will be a good start.

Yeah adjusting levels can work for some but frankly many spells are not used often because they are circumstantial. Mucking with ldvelsbonly gets you the few cases where you have discrete imbalances of mechanics- same goal and same approach but off-numbers - and those are not that frequent.

Also, who cares?

Really, what does it matter if burning hands is a little worse than thunder wave? They each have circumstantially useful features and drawbacks.


The degrees of " imbalance that there currently are fall well within the circumstantial factor of "what challenges are provided." That brings it squarely down on "choices by the GM provide the last bit of balance or imbalance."

But the worse option would be a point buy, those really just ramp up the minmax and complexity just to shuffle around the main events and mid-carders.

 

[Blue]

Outright bad spells still won't get picked, but I think a lot of situational stuff may be. If these spells are really good in situations X, Y, and Z, and you can have them for the cost of this generically useful but not top tier spell, I can easily see going for them.

I think this would increase the flexibility of casters. For some of them, like the sorcerer, that eats away at one of their balance points ... but there is some discussion that the sorcerer is behind the power curve.

Caster dips will have to be looked at as well - there might be little used spells that don't rely on the caster stat that are ripe for multiclassers to use and they might get an outsized set of flexibility. Not a show stopper, just needs to be evaluated.

 

[Blue]

An interesting take on this would be for a specific setting where the metaphysics of magic resists being used in the same way. It would need to be some type of spell point system, but with more granularity then the DMG one (maybe multiply everything by five). The idea would be that each time a spell is cast in a locale it's costs go up by one. If a spell is cast A LOT it has a permanent effect. In the mythological past all spells were spell points of 1st level spells, but the higher level spells were just used that many times that the prices are what they are based on their current spell level. And 10th+ level spells have been priced right out of mortal hands by overuse.

Mind you, a foe casting a spell will increase the price the same as if you do.

 

[TallIan]

This sounds like mostly a lot of extra book keeping.

I can't see it making a significant difference in what I would take. If a spell is highly situational, I'l only take it if I expect that situation to come up often, no matter how cheap the prepare cost is. The only time I would take something cheap over something useful, is if I have some "spare change" eg. if I have a pool of 20 points and the spells I want cost 6 points each, then I'll take a 2 point spell, just to make it up to 20.

You're better off tweaking he spells slightly, as others have said; up spell damage, range, duration; lower spell level; remove concentration or make it a ritual; to encourage the spell. You can also make sure the sight situations come up often for highly situational spells.

In short, I think the drawbacks of this idea FAR outweigh the benefits.

 

[FrogReaver]

I checked out [MENTION=55582]Treantmonklvl20[/MENTION] guide and here's what I see rated below situational use.

Burning Hands
Disguise Self
Illusory Script
Jump
Arcane Lock
Dust devil
Crown of Madness
Hold Person
Continual Flame
Melf's Acid Arrow
Aganazzar’s scorcher
Snilloc’s snowball swarm
Glyph of Warding
Summon Lesser Demon
Wall of sand
Bestow Curse
Feign Death
Vampiric Touch
Erupting earth

*These are only the level 1-3 spells
I don't find most of these spells to be spells I never would cast, most are just spells that the right situation to cast is rare. Having more spells like that should mean the right situation to cast at least one of them is no longer rare.

 

[FrogReaver]

This sounds like mostly a lot of extra book keeping.

I can't see it making a significant difference in what I would take. If a spell is highly situational, I'l only take it if I expect that situation to come up often, no matter how cheap the prepare cost is. The only time I would take something cheap over something useful, is if I have some "spare change" eg. if I have a pool of 20 points and the spells I want cost 6 points each, then I'll take a 2 point spell, just to make it up to 20.

You're better off tweaking he spells slightly, as others have said; up spell damage, range, duration; lower spell level; remove concentration or make it a ritual; to encourage the spell. You can also make sure the sight situations come up often for highly situational spells.

In short, I think the drawbacks of this idea FAR outweigh the benefits.

You don't think being able to take maybe 5 highly situational spells in place of 1 good spell wouldn't change your mind about what you would take?

 

[FrogReaver]

Preparing more bad rated spells won’t be a good incentive.
Spell redesign can be more easier than you think.
You simply lower the spell level by one or two.
Or only change the numeric. Damage, range, number of target, duration.
You take Red spell of level 2 and more in Treantmonk’s guide and simply lower them by one level. It will be a good start.

Many bad spells are just as strong as other's provided that the situation where they can be useful in comes up. Lowering the level on such spells won't have much impact how often they are taken in the first place. There are some spells that will work for but most I don't think it will.