Refresh per level abilities

[Borlon]

I simply hate the 'refresh per level' abilities.

To me it would be just as bad to give a caster type X spell levels of spells and they will only get more with level up or a fighter type only Y hp before next level, better hope you get it in time!

Scion hates 'em, but I find the notion of limiting spells by level kind of intriguing. There should only be 13 moderate encounters (using 20-25% resources) between encounters anyway. Let the wizard recharge 5 times per level, and you should be gold.

 

[ARandomGod]

Scion hates 'em, but I find the notion of limiting spells by level kind of intriguing. There should only be 13 moderate encounters (using 20-25% resources) between encounters anyway. Let the wizard recharge 5 times per level, and you should be gold.

I'm not entirely certain what you're asking.... define further please.

 

[Borlon]

The context of Scion's post was using Action Points in a regular (non-Eberron) D&D game. And whether unused AP should be retained when a character levels up. Some people said that if they were reset at level-up, then it would encourage people to use them. Use 'em or lose 'em. Scion then made this post.

I thought, though, that it would be interesting if spells were limited. A wizard or cleric could prepare spells from his spell books only a certain number of times before leveling up. A character might have a reservoir of healing (equal to several times his base hit points) that is tapped slowly by natural healing, quickly by magical healing. But when it is used up, he'll die... unless he levels up first. Then his pool of hit points resets.

The general question is what people think of abilities that reset on a per level basis instead of on a daily basis.

 

[ARandomGod]

Ah. Thanks, I got it now.

Edit: (more commentarty)

It's an interesting idea, but I personally really dislike this type of mechanic. I've even made house-rules to sorc (and like character's) ability to swap spells such that they can do it with an alternate method other than just the swap 'em out at (alternate) levels. A certain amount of time passing, and a certain amount of prep *should* enable a swap, IMO.

Sure I understand the ease of having swaps (or other types of abilities, say spells) recharge on a level basis, but... there just needs to be an alternate method IMO.

 

[the Jester]

In the 1e days, I played under a dm who did that with spells- your first level m-u only got one first level spell until he levelled.

Very, very ruthless. I loved the game, but hated that rule.

 

[JimAde]

I voted "sometimes" specifically because of Action Points. I don't think a wizard should stop being able to cast spells just because he retired and doesn't fight monsters any more. APs, on the other hand, should reset in this way to encourage expending them.

 

[Borlon]

I voted "sometimes" specifically because of Action Points. I don't think a wizard should stop being able to cast spells just because he retired and doesn't fight monsters any more. APs, on the other hand, should reset in this way to encourage expending them.

Well, some spells he would have to stop casting (permanency, limited wish, wish,...) and he'd have to stop making magic items eventually, too. Maybe that's a good thing, otherwise his hoard would grow too big.

But if he's retired, how many spells would he have to cast anyway? If the spells reset 1/year or 1/level (whichever came first) that might be better. It would explain why stay-at-home wizards don't upset the economy with fabricate spells and what not.

 

[JimAde]

Well, some spells he would have to stop casting (permanency, limited wish, wish,...) and he'd have to stop making magic items eventually, too. Maybe that's a good thing, otherwise his hoard would grow too big.

But if he's retired, how many spells would he have to cast anyway? If the spells reset 1/year or 1/level (whichever came first) that might be better. It would explain why stay-at-home wizards don't upset the economy with fabricate spells and what not.

That's a good idea. If they reset over time OR when you leveled it could work.

 

[genshou]

Well, some spells he would have to stop casting (permanency, limited wish, wish,...) and he'd have to stop making magic items eventually, too. Maybe that's a good thing, otherwise his hoard would grow too big.

But if he's retired, how many spells would he have to cast anyway? If the spells reset 1/year or 1/level (whichever came first) that might be better. It would explain why stay-at-home wizards don't upset the economy with fabricate spells and what not.

I don't like this rule, but with that corollary it's tolerable.

I don't think it would come up much with adventuring characters or anything, it's just... I can't justify it. The why is more important than the what or how when changing a rule.

 

[Kisanji Arael]

Calling All Wizard Players

There's an easy way to solve this.

I love wizards. They don't get many spells/day, but they get such a variety in what they can do. To me, a wizard is like a physicist who slowly starts to figure out the rules of how the universe works, and learns how to tinker with those rules. This isn't really the place to discuss all the reasons I love the wizard class, but I needed to say that I do.

I would never play a wizard under these rules. However, I will accept that these rules might be justified, but before I do I need one player to say he would play a wizard under these rules.

If there is ANYONE out there who would prefer to play a wizard under these rules, please declare yourself!