Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pyrex" data-source="post: 3400142" data-attributes="member: 11600">I completely agree with both Laws and both Theorems.To be accurate though, the 2nd Law is actually a corollary of the 1st law because it's directly derived from the 1st.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Conceptually speaking, how do you feel about <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/rechargeMagic.htm" target="_blank">Recharge Magic</a>?  It's really the closest thing WotC has published to "small pool / rapid regen".Hmm, that gives me an idea, which may be too complicated:First, we need non-linear costs for spells that are easy to calculate and don't get out of hand; so I propose something like the following:SL 1-3 cost SL*1SL 4-6 cost SL*2SL 7-9 cost SL*3I'd like something cleaner like SL^1.5, but that violates the "too complicated" axiom. I suppose something with a steeper ramp like SL*(SL*0.5) could also be used, but you're trading a smoother gradient for increased complexity again.Thusly, a 6th level spell is worth 4 3rd levels; a 9th level is worth 2.25 6th level spells or 9 3rd level spells.A 9th level spell is also worth 27 1st level spells, but I don't really care if a 18th level caster is casting 1st level spells all combat (or all day) long; that possibility is effectively balanced by the opportunity cost of wasting combat rounds casting 1st level spells.I'm also pondering some form on non-linear regeneration (i.e., mana spent for higher level spells takes longer to regenerate than mana spent on 1st level spells), but I'm not sure if there's a simple enough way to track/express it.Hmm, how about if after casting a spell you can't regen mana for SL rounds?</blockquote>

Verification