Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5881978" data-attributes="member: 3192">9 spell levels for Magic Users is a fixture of AD&amp;D. There is no rationale I know for it other than the M-U could progress up to level 28 and then have 6 slots in all 9 levels (level 29 was &quot;turning it up to 11&quot; again IMO)I don't believe the game needs to go so high.The progression of spells per day was basically an accumulation of 1 / class level. That's the standard D&amp;D system as I understand it. 1 @ 1st, 1 @ 2nd, etc. After two spells in at a single level another level could be taken for the next, so 3rd may get 1 spell slot but at the next higher spell level.I like this low granularity because it retains spells as extraordinarily powerful acts.It may not be thought so now, but that stuff was rigorously balanced for effectiveness in combat. I do believe the spell levels were more of a range, so there were spells that were more effective than others, but they were all better than the best spell of the next lower level. Plus, all spell and ability benefits were situational. It was the balancing of situational occurrence in the game world for different challenges that allowed spells to be judged for overall utility. Not to mention how XP was awarded for a class.= = =Least, Minor, Major, and Arch spells sounds fine. What is the cost for their use though? Daily spells means a # / day. 1 Arch spell per day could be a little outside the realm of the game. Overcasting to a higher level balanced by special materia, conditions, etc. could bring back some of the difficulty for spells above one's level. Costs like 1 year of life of the caster could work too, if life span is treated as a resource. It comes down to why aren't these spells being cast every day by however many high level spellcasters are in the world?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 5881978, member: 3192"] 9 spell levels for Magic Users is a fixture of AD&D. There is no rationale I know for it other than the M-U could progress up to level 28 and then have 6 slots in all 9 levels (level 29 was "turning it up to 11" again IMO) I don't believe the game needs to go so high. The progression of spells per day was basically an accumulation of 1 / class level. That's the standard D&D system as I understand it. 1 @ 1st, 1 @ 2nd, etc. After two spells in at a single level another level could be taken for the next, so 3rd may get 1 spell slot but at the next higher spell level. I like this low granularity because it retains spells as extraordinarily powerful acts. It may not be thought so now, but that stuff was rigorously balanced for effectiveness in combat. I do believe the spell levels were more of a range, so there were spells that were more effective than others, but they were all better than the best spell of the next lower level. Plus, all spell and ability benefits were situational. It was the balancing of situational occurrence in the game world for different challenges that allowed spells to be judged for overall utility. Not to mention how XP was awarded for a class. = = = Least, Minor, Major, and Arch spells sounds fine. What is the cost for their use though? Daily spells means a # / day. 1 Arch spell per day could be a little outside the realm of the game. Overcasting to a higher level balanced by special materia, conditions, etc. could bring back some of the difficulty for spells above one's level. Costs like 1 year of life of the caster could work too, if life span is treated as a resource. It comes down to why aren't these spells being cast every day by however many high level spellcasters are in the world? [/QUOTE]

Verification