Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kinematics" data-source="post: 7345941" data-attributes="member: 6932123">I've checked several other spells that take a bonus action to cast, and I'm not seeing any variance that can be attributed to the casting time.&nbsp; Plus, the Quickened Spell metamagic is a static cost, so I don't see why it would need to be a scaling cost when built into the spell itself.Now, being able to reuse the spell as a bonus action needs a higher cost.&nbsp; Right now I have it as the cost of the original effect + 1.&nbsp; So if the spell did level 2 damage (4 points), then being able to repeat that as a bonus action would cost another 5 points of the spell's budget.Further additions and fixes have been made to the document.It does assume that, yes.&nbsp; Given that they haven't publicized a set of standard rules for spell creation, I was uncertain about this when I started, but the more I've worked on it, the more it holds together.&nbsp; Given the &quot;clean room&quot; rules break from 5E compared to earlier editions, I see no reason to think that they haven't come up with strict guidelines to help maintain both the simplicity and the balance of the system.Part of why I was willing to assume there was a method to their madness was the previous work done to determine the 12-point race building system, where pretty much all races are built off of an apparent 12 point buy.Of course Wizards of the Coast are free to adjust and tweak their rules as they go, and as they find errors or issues with their original system. This seems to have taken place with the sunlight sensitivity that dark elves got, but that had its cost changed for one of the later races.&nbsp; If they published a rule set, they'd be locked into using that.&nbsp; If they keep it private, then they have more freedom to fix stuff. So the best approach for us as players is to reverse engineer their system if we want to expand on it, rather than go by gut feelings and loose design.&nbsp; But also don't be completely locked into a system, because even if we get it exactly right, further playtesting and evaluation may indicate that one cost or another needs to be changed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kinematics, post: 7345941, member: 6932123"] I've checked several other spells that take a bonus action to cast, and I'm not seeing any variance that can be attributed to the casting time. Plus, the Quickened Spell metamagic is a static cost, so I don't see why it would need to be a scaling cost when built into the spell itself. Now, being able to reuse the spell as a bonus action needs a higher cost. Right now I have it as the cost of the original effect + 1. So if the spell did level 2 damage (4 points), then being able to repeat that as a bonus action would cost another 5 points of the spell's budget. Further additions and fixes have been made to the document. It does assume that, yes. Given that they haven't publicized a set of standard rules for spell creation, I was uncertain about this when I started, but the more I've worked on it, the more it holds together. Given the "clean room" rules break from 5E compared to earlier editions, I see no reason to think that they haven't come up with strict guidelines to help maintain both the simplicity and the balance of the system. Part of why I was willing to assume there was a method to their madness was the previous work done to determine the 12-point race building system, where pretty much all races are built off of an apparent 12 point buy. Of course Wizards of the Coast are free to adjust and tweak their rules as they go, and as they find errors or issues with their original system. This seems to have taken place with the sunlight sensitivity that dark elves got, but that had its cost changed for one of the later races. If they published a rule set, they'd be locked into using that. If they keep it private, then they have more freedom to fix stuff. So the best approach for us as players is to reverse engineer their system if we want to expand on it, rather than go by gut feelings and loose design. But also don't be completely locked into a system, because even if we get it exactly right, further playtesting and evaluation may indicate that one cost or another needs to be changed. [/QUOTE]

Verification