Removing the XP requirement from spells

[der_kluge]

I saw. What level do you expect your game to get up to, Curtis? I'm worried that this might not be workable in a big fight. It is not uncommon for 3-5 wishes/miracles to be cast during one big fight in my game nowadays. Even if you say that you don't need an outsider for spoofed spells, that still may get unwieldy.

I think my actual point is that your proposed system seems to weight APs vs the original xp very differently than the rules as written -- and, to be honest, very differently than I would. That concerns me a bit.

I view wish/miracle as quite a special thing. Keep in mind that this rule only applies to the version of Wish that *requires* the XP component. All other uses of Wish act normally, ie. if it doesn't require an XP expenditure, it also does not require an AP expenditure.


What about it concerns you? I didn't want to try to say n amount of XP was equivalent to y APs. Instead, I looked at the purpose of the spell and created an amount I felt was reasonable.

 

[arnon]

If you trust your players not to be too greedy, how about just removing the XP cost all together?

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I don't think you caught the part about their being absolutely no XP in my game.

I don't think you caught what they were trying to say. They are saying look at the PHB to see what amount of XP a character of their level would have and pick a percentage of "leeway points" that you would allow them go use. If you want to take a nice round number of 5%, then a 2nd level character would have 50XP to use for spellcasting/itemcreation. When he levels up to 3rd level he would get another 100XP (150-50 he already received) to go towards the same. The XP in this case represents "Personal Power Points" or whatever jargon you like.

DS

 

[Piratecat]

What about it concerns you?

One AP for a commune spell seems a bit too much to me, but the only cost I see as really problematic is 2 APs for a Greater Restoration. That's really un-fun to me because you're penalizing the cleric for having to heal one of his party members. When you cast greater restoration, it's because you have to, not because you want to.

I would charge one AP from the person being healed, and none from the cleric himself.

Me, I'd also keep limited wish in, just for the spell spoofing. But my game wouldn't fall apart if I removed it.

 

[Quartz]

At high levels, casters should expect to use Wish, Miracle, and other XP-draining spells regularly. This is self-balancing because the spellcaster will be a level or two behind the fighters and gain XP more rapidly. Hmmm... how about imposing a negative level instead? One that automatically goes away after a certain time?

 

[Randolpho]

I don't think you caught the part about their being absolutely no XP in my game.

No, I totally caught that.

If you are not familiar with the Artificer class in Eberron, an Artificer gets a certain amount of "craft reserve" points every level. They are not XP, but special points that can be used, like XP, toward the XP cost for crafting an item. Because you do not have XP in your game, I was suggesting that you create a similar pool of points that can be used toward the XP cost of spells and items.

In the Eberron campaign setting, the "craft reserve" serves as a means of *increasing* the total magic of the world, by basically allowing the Artificer to create more magic items than a wizard might normally create. The pool I'm suggesting would serve a somewhat contrary purpose; that is, it would limit the number of items or powerful spells that a wizard could create/cast, without requiring you to build up some weird XP/AP conversion scale, essentially serving the exact same function that XP costs serve. Additionally, it would allow the spellcaster to use APs for more appropriate, heroic situations without having to wait for an AP reward (which I'm guessing are fairly rare) to actually make something.

The number of points in the pool would be character level dependent; the example I suggested was 10% of the total number of XP that would have been required for that level, so that a fifth level character (regardless of class mix), who would have needed 10,000 XP to advance to fifth level if (s)he were playing in a game that had XP, would have 1,000 points to use toward the XP cost of items or spells. This 10% number is totally arbitrary; you could adjust it as you saw fit -- I would suggest playtesting before settling on a final number.

No, what I'm suggesting is not XP, nor does the point pool represent some form of "life force expended in order to cast/create". They are simply a game mechanic that balances the numiber of magic items and/or powerful spells that a spellcaster can cast in an XP-free game. Overall, I think such a system would be a simplification, one that would allow you to rely on the game balance inherent in the D&D game without having to come up with your own AP/XP conversions for individual spells and items.

 

[Randolpho]

If you trust your players not to be too greedy, how about just removing the XP cost all together?

That would, of course, be the simplest thing to do.

 

[der_kluge]

One AP for a commune spell seems a bit too much to me, but the only cost I see as really problematic is 2 APs for a Greater Restoration. That's really un-fun to me because you're penalizing the cleric for having to heal one of his party members. When you cast greater restoration, it's because you have to, not because you want to.

I would charge one AP from the person being healed, and none from the cleric himself.

Me, I'd also keep limited wish in, just for the spell spoofing. But my game wouldn't fall apart if I removed it.

Read it again. The recipient pays the cost. Not the cleric. Same for atonement.

I could keep limited wish for the spoofing, but I find that it, and wish are automatically the #1 spell to take at those levels. And if it's that superior to all other spells of their level, then I have to believe that something is wrong with the spell. I think I'd rather just remove LW. I think the game will be more interesting for it, and will make wish that much more interesting.

 

[der_kluge]

At high levels, casters should expect to use Wish, Miracle, and other XP-draining spells regularly. This is self-balancing because the spellcaster will be a level or two behind the fighters and gain XP more rapidly. Hmmm... how about imposing a negative level instead? One that automatically goes away after a certain time?

There is no XP in the game. I keep all characters at the same level. Period.

Yea.. negative levels. That's *much* easier. :\


My goal with these rules isn't just to replace the XP - though that's the primary benefit. I'm also seeking to tone down the magic just slightly.

 

[der_kluge]

No, I totally caught that.

If you are not familiar with the Artificer class in Eberron, an Artificer gets a certain amount of "craft reserve" points every level. They are not XP, but special points that can be used, like XP, toward the XP cost for crafting an item. Because you do not have XP in your game, I was suggesting that you create a similar pool of points that can be used toward the XP cost of spells and items.

Really, magic item creation is a non-issue. And I _hate_ the use of XP for magic item creation. I hated it when I wrote the Artificer's Handbook, and I hate it now. "Oh, I just made a +1 sword, but I can't make another one for another couple of weeks. I have no idea why. I'm just out of points, I guess." I HATE HATE HATE artificial limitations imposed on the game that make no sense.

Sort of like why bards can't learn any new spells from anyone, even though they're supposed to be the jacks of all trades, and pick up knowledge from all over the place, yet with cha-based casting, they can't learn any new spells from anyone, until they gain a new level. Not like in 2nd edition, when they could scribe new spells into the book. Yea, that makes a lot of sense. Nice one, WoTC.

But that's a rant for another day.

While my AP system isn't perfect, it does go a long way towards creating the kind of game I want.