20+1 instead of 9+1 spell levels?

[Roman]

Would it not make more sense to have 20 spell levels (+0th level spells) instead of 9 spell levels (+0th level spells)? It would allow better gradation of the power of spells and would better correspond to level progression.

I can see 3 problems with this idea:

1) Tradition of having 9 spell levels (+0th level spells)
2) More bookkeeping (more spell levels to keep track of)
3) Less flexibility for the spellcasters (they would have to have fewer spells of each level)

With the spellpoint system problems number 2 and 3 pretty much disappear though problem number 1 is accentuated as the system departs even more from the traditional D&D spellcasting system. What do you guys and gal's think?

 

[apesamongus]

What do you guys and gal's think?

I don't see any real benefit. I haven't had any issues with the gradation of powers. In fact, some spells are hard enough to place on the correct level already (given natural variation in the usefulness of spells in different campaigns), so having a more finely grained system would make that even harder.

 

[Nifft]

Write it up. It's far easier to hate things in the concrete than the abstract.

I mean, judge things. Yeah.

-- N

 

[Gez]

It would be much work for little, if any, benefit. Do it!

 

[Roman]

Hmm, so the consensus seems to be that such a system would not really be useful. Maybe it would not - it was just a thought which struck me due to some responses to my thread about wizard specialists vs generalists, as it was pointed out that the spell progression breaks down after 18th level. I guess this could be correctible with just one extra spell-level (10th), but it struck me as strange why have two different types of levels - character levels and spell levels (not to mention caster levels...)...

 

[DreamChaser]

really, 9+1 (10 levels) changed to 19+1 (20 levels) would make more sense.

The idea of 2 levels of spells, beginning with "0" level does have some appeal. It creates a clearer sense of accomplishment for casters.

But, some levels are already very limited, especially within certain schools. Splitting them further creates an issue. And, like you mention, having fewer spells of each level (like 2 per level for a 20th level wizard).

DC

 

[Gez]

IMHR, there's a 10th level spell slot you get at caster level 19 and 20.

They're used for epic spells. But as long as you can't cast epic spells, they're instead used for 8th and 9th spells, respectively.

    0   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10
 0   4  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 1   5  1  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 2   6  2  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 3   7  2  1  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 4   8  3  2  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 5   9  3  2  1  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 6  10  3  3  2  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 7  11  4  3  2  1  -  -  -  -  -   -
 8  12  4  3  3  2  -  -  -  -  -   -
 9  13  4  4  3  2  1  -  -  -  -   -
10  14  4  4  3  3  2  -  -  -  -   -
11  15  4  4  4  3  2  1  -  -  -   -
12  16  4  4  4  3  3  2  -  -  -   -
13  17  4  4  4  4  3  2  1  -  -   -
14  18  4  4  4  4  3  3  2  -  -   -
15  19  4  4  4  4  4  3  2  1  -   -
16  20  4  4  4  4  4  3  3  2  -   -
17  21  4  4  4  4  4  4  3  2  1   -
18  22  4  4  4  4  4  4  3  3  2   -
19  23  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  3  2   1
20  24  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  3  3   2
21  25  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  3   2
22  25  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  3   3
23  25  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4   3
24  25  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4   3
25  25  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4  4   4

I've stopped progression after caster level 25, once everything reaches its maximum (25 cantrips, 4 slots of each true level).

A higher-powered variant would never stops:

    0   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10
 0   4  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 1   5  1  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 2   6  2  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 3   7  2  1  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 4   8  3  2  -  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 5   9  3  2  1  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 6  10  3  3  2  -  -  -  -  -  -   -
 7  11  4  3  2  1  -  -  -  -  -   -
 8  12  4  3  3  2  -  -  -  -  -   -
 9  13  4  4  3  2  1  -  -  -  -   -
10  14  4  4  3  3  2  -  -  -  -   -
11  15  5  4  4  3  2  1  -  -  -   -
12  16  5  4  4  3  3  2  -  -  -   -
13  17  5  5  4  4  3  2  1  -  -   -
14  18  5  5  4  4  3  3  2  -  -   -
15  19  5  5  5  4  4  3  2  1  -   -
16  20  6  5  5  4  4  3  3  2  -   -
17  21  6  5  5  5  4  4  3  2  1   -
18  22  6  6  5  5  4  4  3  3  2   -
19  23  6  6  5  5  5  4  4  3  2   1
20  24  6  6  6  5  5  4  4  3  3   2
21  25  6  6  6  5  5  5  4  4  3   2
22  26  7  6  6  6  5  5  4  4  3   3
23  27  7  6  6  6  5  5  5  4  4   3
24  28  7  7  6  6  6  5  5  4  4   3
25  29  7  7  6  6  6  5  5  5  4   4
26  30  7  7  7  6  6  5  5  5  4   4
etc.

 

[ARandomGod]

Hmm, so the consensus seems to be that such a system would not really be useful. Maybe it would not - it was just a thought which struck me due to some responses to my thread about wizard specialists vs generalists, as it was pointed out that the spell progression breaks down after 18th level. I guess this could be correctible with just one extra spell-level (10th), but it struck me as strange why have two different types of levels - character levels and spell levels (not to mention caster levels...)...

Yea, I have to agree that it wouldn't really be useful in the current setting. Now, make up an entirely new setting, and that would be a fine base. You'd also want to make up good and consistent rules for writing new spells, of course.

I mean, it *would* be a good thing. But too much effort to justify it in the current system.

 

[cmanos]

Please check out Rolemaster. Not only do they go up to L20 spells...they go up to L50!

 

[Angel Tarragon]

What would be the real difference between havin 9+1 and 20+1 spell levels. I'm just curious: do you own the epic level handdbook?