Replacing XP cost with ability damage

[UltimaGabe]

The problem I see is with permanent effects. Sure, it's great to penalize the wizard a few con when he casts Wish to teleport the party to Elysium or something,but what about using that Wish to boost his Int? It's a permanent effect, and the only cost is a few points of Con that'll return in a few days. With enough downtime, a Wizard could theoretically take a month and increase all of his stats by +5, as stated in the Wish description, and end up without really having lost anything. With the original rules, doing that would cost a 17th-level wizard the equivalent of three levels.

Another problem, of course, is Permanency. Permanency, by nature, is permanent, so as with the Wish conundrum, having a permanent Arcane Sight is going to be far better than losing a couple points of Con for a day or two.

See what I mean?

As things are in the 3.5 rules system, I'm afraid that in many, many cases, XP cost is necessary. There are many cases where it isn't- such as pretty much any time the effect is temporary- so though I would like to have an alternative just as much as the next guy, implementing any other kind of system is going to be a slippery slope that must be adjudicated in every single case.

My two cents.

-UltimaGabe

 

[ceratitis]

fair enough, good point
how about this then: when ever the effect is permenant the ability/xp cost is permenant. when its temporary, the damage is temporary.
takes a bit more DMing but by the time you deal with wishes you should be used to it.
as for magical item creation, i always prefered the quests for special components and ritual know how. couple it with ability damage as afor mentioned and its fine by me

 

[Li Shenron]

Here's a short list of spells with XP costs, and their ability costs:

Atonement: 2 Wis.

Limited wish: 1 Con

Miracle: 3 Con

Permanency: 1 Con/3 levels of the spell being made permanent (L1-3: 1 Con, L4-6: 2 Con, L7-9: 3 Con)

Planar ally, et al: No XP cost (I don't see the point of having an XP cost when you have to "request your deity to send you" someone in the first place).

Simulacrum: 1 Con (leeches your life force to give life to the clone)

Wish: 3 Con

I like the idea, but I would be much more mean with the penalties. Note that all those xp-burning spells are spells that are not really meant to be used in combat (although you could get something good for combat as well). So I'd make the penalties high enough that it would take the caster out of action for several days.

Like for example, having Simulacrum drop you DOWN TO 1 Con. Which basically means you either going to cast it during downtime, or you're going to send the clone to fight for you while you're staying safe at the inn (or at least in the back).

Atonement could do 10 points of Wis damage (but I'd set a minimum resulting score to something like 3 or even 6), and I could say that normally atoning characters spend this time praying and meditating, and not adventuring.

Permanency is actually different because its effects are not exactly permanent... they are permanent until dispelled, which is not the case with the other spells here. I think a gp cost should have been a better price than xp for Permanency, so I am not sure how to deal with an ability damage.

 

[Kerrick]

The problem I see is with permanent effects. Sure, it's great to penalize the wizard a few con when he casts Wish to teleport the party to Elysium or something,but what about using that Wish to boost his Int? It's a permanent effect, and the only cost is a few points of Con that'll return in a few days.

XP is very easy to make, though.

With enough downtime, a Wizard could theoretically take a month and increase all of his stats by +5, as stated in the Wish description, and end up without really having lost anything. With the original rules, doing that would cost a 17th-level wizard the equivalent of three levels.

Even if the DM allowed such a wizard to boost all his stats like this (because that's a huge abuse of the spell), he would be three levels behind the rest of the party - that's a pretty big difference, especially at that level.

I like the idea, but I would be much more mean with the penalties. Note that all those xp-burning spells are spells that are not really meant to be used in combat (although you could get something good for combat as well). So I'd make the penalties high enough that it would take the caster out of action for several days.

I originally thought about doing 1 point/100 XP, but that would mean wish/miracle dealt 50 points of ability damage. Ouch. I could bump them up a bit, though...

Atonement: This one shouldn't be too big - the XP cost only applies for one use. Maybe 2-3?

Limited wish: 3 Con

Miracle: 5 Con

Permanency: 1 Con/3 levels of the spell being made permanent (L1-3: 1 Con, L4-6: 2 Con, L7-9: 3 Con)

Simulacrum: 5 Con (leeches your life force to give life to the clone)

Wish: 5 Con

Permanency is actually different because its effects are not exactly permanent... they are permanent until dispelled, which is not the case with the other spells here. I think a gp cost should have been a better price than xp for Permanency, so I am not sure how to deal with an ability damage.

We ditched that spell and use two feats - Anchor Spell and Bind Spell. I made these to imitate the spells from previous editions that you couldn't dispel - you could just suppress them for 1d4 rounds.

how about this then: when ever the effect is permenant the ability/xp cost is permenant. when its temporary, the damage is temporary.

How about putting in a chance that any ability damage is permanent? I think they had that in previous editions. If you cast a spell with ability burn, you must make, say, a Fort save (DC 15+spell level) or have one point of ability burn become permanent. The loss can only be reversed with a wish or miracle spell (which, of course, also have ability burn...). Or, if you don't favor the save route (because eventually they'll be able to get around it), you could just make it a flat 10% chance.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Even if the DM allowed such a wizard to boost all his stats like this (because that's a huge abuse of the spell), he would be three levels behind the rest of the party - that's a pretty big difference, especially at that level.

But don't forget the "catch-up" nature of the XP-system. If he does it incrementally, he can cast it shortly before getting a new level, then be one level lower and therefore get more XP, using these extra XP to fuel the wish again.

Cheers, LT.

 

[ceratitis]

But don't forget the "catch-up" nature of the XP-system. If he does it incrementally, he can cast it shortly before getting a new level, then be one level lower and therefore get more XP, using these extra XP to fuel the wish again.

Cheers, LT.

i think thats the definition of munchkin abuse of power and should pretty much be the example for young DMs of "when should i intervine and simply stop the player?"

 

[Kerrick]

i think thats the definition of munchkin abuse of power and should pretty much be the example for young DMs of "when should i intervine and simply stop the player?"

Pretty much. There comes a time when you just have to stop trying to plug every single loophole in a rule and trust the DM to do his job.

 

[rgard]

For the OP, I think what you detailed works fine. You could even make the recovery period last longer.

I personally never had a problem with the xp costs for spells or magic item creation. As Tolkien's works were my gateway to D&D, the case of Saruman's lost power after he created the Uruk-Hai always fit nicely with xp costs.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[WhatGravitas]

Pretty much. There comes a time when you just have to stop trying to plug every single loophole in a rule and trust the DM to do his job.

True, but I wanted to offer that loophole for your consideration . But yeah, people who try that, should be whacked by their DMs. But even without abusing it, missing levels isn't that bad, because you still catch-up over time, meaning that the ability burn for wish is okayish - because it's a temporary setback, similar to the XP costs. Though I would make wish = down to 1 Con.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Kerrick]

Though I would make wish = down to 1 Con.

If you make wish 1 Con, what would limited wish be? I think I'll just keep the original values -
if someone pulls a trick like Gabe suggested, I'd expect the DM to smack him silly with a copy of the PHB. Villains wouldn't bother - the DM can assign any scores he wants, or simply rule that the villain has upped all its scores through wishes sometime before he meets the party and has regained the XP since.