An Idea For a Spell-Point-Like Magic System...

[Pbartender]

In my next campaign, my players and I have been considering using Green Ronin's fast hitpoint recovery rules (hitpoints and subdual recover by the minute and characters take Con damage, once hps are gone) from Skull & Bones... Magic in this setting will be a bit rare, but a bit powerful.

So, I was thinking of switching to a spell-point-like magic system in which spellcaster take subdual damage from the spells they cast, but are not limited to prepared spellslots per day.

For example:

Spells deal an amount of subdual damage equal to the spell level x caster level. 0-level spells count as 1/2 spell level. Spells may be cast a lower caster level than the spell caster's current caster level, and (unlike scrolls) there is no minimum caster level. Thus, an 8th level spell cast at 20th caster level would deal 160 points of subdual damage to the caster, but the same spell cast at 3rd caster level (thereby reducing the inflicted damage, range and duration of the spell) would only deal 24 points caster level.

This means that spell casters would be able to cast most low-level spells almost at will, but powerfully high level spells could feasibly knock a spellcaster unconcious when cast at full power.

Necessarily, Sorcerers would be obsolete, and all spellcasters would have to have a known spell list that would not necessarily include all spell on their spell lists (otherwise clerics and ruids would become quite powerful)... In other words, everyone would 'learn' spells in a manner similar to wizards. Spellbooks could be used as books of Incantations, using the rules of the same name from UA.

So, spellcasters can cast any spell from its written directions, if they have the proper skill, but it takes a very long time. 'Known' spell are the ones the spellcaster knows the 'shortcuts' for, but those shortcuts are physically taxing.

Any thoughts or suggestions?

 

[Telsar]

I haven't seen the Green Ronin rules, but I like this idea. It gives wizards an entirely different feel, weakening themselves with every spell cast. The formula seems a little high, though; a wizard with no Con bonus can't cast spells 4th level or higher at full power without knocking themselves out; even 3rd level spells will probably exceed their total HPs (3rd level spell x 5th level caster = 15 damage. Average HPs for a 5th level wizard is 14). But maybe that's the effect you were looking for.

I think wizards above 5th level should get some additional benefits; high level wizards won't really balance with the other classes if they can't cast high level spells without knocking themselves out. I expect alot of characters would multiclass, not raising wizard above 5th, and having fighter-like classes to increase their HPs.

But I don't think I'd get rid of the minimum caster levels. Not every spell has damage (or even range or duration) affected by level. Can I cast Meteor Swarm at 1st level caster level? Still full damage, the only reduction would be it's range, and it would only cost 9 HPs.

If I were making this as a new class (and I might for my campaigns, it's a great idea and easily implemented), I think I'd change it to just costing caster level (not times spell level), and keep the minimums. Then a wizard with no Con bonus could cast his spells at maximum caster level 2-3 times (4 times at 1st level with max HPs) before risking unconsciousness.

 

[Pbartender]

But maybe that's the effect you were looking for.

Pretty much... The setting is a little bit low magic. This is to say, while small magics can be common, the more powerful ones are rare, diffucult and dangerous to cast.

Also, be aware that this would be the means of casting for ALL spellcasters, not just wizards.

I think wizards above 5th level should get some additional benefits;

That's not a bad idea... Additional bonus feats, or bumping hit dice up to d6 might help.

But I don't think I'd get rid of the minimum caster levels.

Yeah, I'd thought of that too, but the problem is with the equation as is, almost every high level spell would automatically knock the caster out...

I think I'd change it to just costing caster level (not times spell level), and keep the minimums.

Well, I want to keep caster level a factor... I like the idea of being able to tone down some of the spells when needed (why waste a 7th-caster-level Magic Missile on a blind kobold, when a 1st-caster-level Magic Missile will do). Maybe if the formula is changed so that the spell level and caster level are added, rather than multiplied, but then keep the minimum caster levels.

That might work. Then that third level spell would be a minimum of 8 non-lethal damage, rather than 15... Still a hefty blow to a 5th-level Wizard with only 14 hit points, but not completely incompacitating.

 

[Spatzimaus]

I've used a drain-based caster type for a homebrew, using a magic system my friends and I developed. It's lots of fun when balanced right; the ability to go beyond spell slots is big, and by tying it to health it's possible to go indefinitely (i.e., cast a few spells, heal yourself, repeat)... this isn't a bad thing, it's just something you need to keep in mind, because it means that the casters won't hold back as much. There's no need to save that 9th-level spell until the next fight, and you'll never catch your casters with the wrong spells memorized.

It also skews other things. For instance, one caster can heal the entire party between battles given enough time with no resources expended. It's like the old "I want an item that casts Cure Light Wounds at will for 2000gp" threads; it changes the balance of the game drastically. A competent DM can keep this in mind when planning an adventure, but it's not just a question of replacing one class with another in the module design.

Spells deal an amount of subdual damage equal to the spell level x caster level.

Bad idea, IMO. If it scales with caster level, then effectively the spell will always take the same fraction of your HP, unless you deliberately low-ball the spell. Allowing the caster to pick a level is a bad idea for other reasons, too; for some spells this'd make it useless, while for others it'd be way too strong. Cure Light Wounds and True Strike would cost the same at CL 1, but you'd need CLW to scale up while TS wouldn't. So, at high level, spells that cure or damage would be very expensive, while those with set effects would be dirt cheap.
While this'd be okay for certain game systems, D&D really assumes that your character will become more capable as he goes up. Besides, do the math: if your HD is a d4 and you have no CON bonus, one max-CL third-level spell would knock you out. You'd never see a 9th-level spell used, unless it was one you could REALLY drop the caster level on.

My suggestion: in our system we used a flat 4 damage per spell level (cantrips as level 1/2, of course), with a new skill added that had you attempt to reduce this; any damage that wasn't prevented forced a Concentration check as if continuing damage. Basically, you made a check versus DC 10, and each point of success reduced the damage by 1. On average, if you kept the skill capped, you'd be able to reduce about half the damage on your best spells, and the low spells would be practically free.
(And before you ask, no spells, items, etc. could improve this skill.)

Actually, we did it as 4 Lethal damage per level, with the each point of success changing 2 Lethal into 1 Mental damage (like subdual but with slightly different rules and slower healing) until there was only Mental damage left, and points after that remove 1 Mental damage to a minimum of 1 point; it's easier to explain if you have a table to look at. One key element was that Mental damage is NOT healed by normal cure spells; there's a separate line of mental spells, called Clarity (yes, EQ reference) that slowly repairs Mental damage. This helped eliminate any nasty combinations that'd allow people to throw 9th-level spells endlessly.

This means that spell casters would be able to cast most low-level spells almost at will

Only if you always used Caster Level 1. Otherwise, even a low-level spell would be prohibitive.

Necessarily, Sorcerers would be obsolete

No, that's not necessarily true. There's plenty of room for multiple kinds of magic; Psions, Sorcerers, Wizards, and Clerics all share many elements, but no one is automatically obsolete because of the others; in practice you'll want to pick two or three kinds for your campaign, but I've played a campaign with Psions, Sorcerers, and Clerics as the three magic types (no Wizards). For example, the Sorcerer could do one thing the drain-based types can't: throw all his big spells up front without knocking himself out.

Anyway, one last point I want to make: the big headache for drain-based systems is multiclassing. If the "Channeler" class was your drain-based one, what can a Channeler 20 do that a Channeler 1/Barbarian 19 can't do better with his higher HP? Okay, he can't go higher than Caster Level 1, but for many spells that's not a problem, and under your drain math that'd actually be a preferred thing anyway. So, you need something else; some skill that is required, some level-based cap on spell level, etc.

One of these days I'll post the full version of my Channeler class, but it's a bit too dependent on our other changes (replacing the core classes with six based on the d20Modern set, for instance).

 

[RangerWickett]

I'm always nervous when I do this, but I'd like to suggest you take a look at the Elements of Magic revised book that came out a few weeks ago at RPGNow.com. It's got a spell-point system, and a spell-creation system, and it's flexible enough that working in a channeling style of magic wouldn't be too hard. Depending on the flavor of your setting, it might work better, because if you are drawing magic from within yourself, it makes more sense that you could create spells on the fly, instead of using a handful of preset ones in spellbooks.

The expansion book, Lyceian Arcana, will have (among other things) several different rulesets for channeling magic.

 

[Pbartender]

I'm always nervous when I do this, but I'd like to suggest you take a look at the Elements of Magic revised book that came out a few weeks ago at RPGNow.com. It's got a spell-point system, and a spell-creation system, and it's flexible enough that working in a channeling style of magic wouldn't be too hard. Depending on the flavor of your setting, it might work better, because if you are drawing magic from within yourself, it makes more sense that you could create spells on the fly, instead of using a handful of preset ones in spellbooks.

The expansion book, Lyceian Arcana, will have (among other things) several different rulesets for channeling magic.

Well, I've got an in-game reason for using 'pre-set spells'... Essentially, spellcasting is a means to put your mind into a particular frame of reference that allows you to access that 90% of your brain that you don't normally use, and create a specific effect using sheer force of will.

Researching new spell effects can take centuries, as only very specific combinations of gestures and words will create a particular effect. Those combinations must be ardently tested, and in my campaign world only elves (or far-sighted generations of other races) have the longevity to create the new spells. The current spell lists are the tried-and-true methods of spellcasting. Tossing spell-casting elements together willy-nilly would be extraordinarily dangerous.

Anyway, I took a second look at Unearthed Arcana (I admittedly glossed over the spell point section the first time I looked through it), and it seems that UA's Spell Point system along with the 'vitalization' variation will work quite well for what I want to do.

Thanks for the comments and criticisms, guys.

 

[Aristotle]

The expansion book, Lyceian Arcana, will have (among other things) several different rulesets for channeling magic.

I can't wait for that book. I've got a copy of the new EoM sitting on my desk right now. Top notch work. I'm looking to use a modified version of the EoM material in my homebrew.

I've been playing with the concept of a "drain" system for my homebrew as well. As someone else mentioned you get some oddness when your magic users multiclass as warriors. They have more hit points so they can throw their lower level spells more frequently ... but they've generally sacrificed their ability to learn the highest levels of spells. Some folks feel thats enough of a counter and leave it at that. I just don't like the feel of taking levels in non-casting classes and effectively getting more fuel for your spells at the same time. For my homebrew, I was considering making it so that spell casters couldn't multiclass and then come back to spellcasting (sorta like Monks).

More recently (and since I've gotten EoM and decided to go with it) I've been thinking about using conditions (i.e. fatigued and exhausted) to provide that flavor of weakness after excesive casting. Now I just have to come up with a system (that meshes with some of the concepts in EoM) to determine when those conditions take effect and what, if anything, they mean for the caster above and beyond the definitions in the PHB. It'll come to me eventually...