Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mon" data-source="post: 4358284" data-attributes="member: 71673">G'day runestar.You made a very good point here: the Person/Monster difference for charm, dominate etc. This is a valid criticism the reserve system and one I haven't yet considered. Thanks for the insight, I will think long and hard on it.Most of the rest of the post is just re-stating things I had already addressed, and which I don't believe are valid points for dismissing the reserve system. I'll explain why, but I already did so upthread for most of those points....The fact that lower levels spells shift over to buff/utility is valid, but I have already said upthread that I am thinking about this one. There is nothing else in this snippet that I haven't already explicitly called out as wanting to overcome/bypass/change as a design goal, though. To clarify, it's not upsetting the equation, it's chaning it so that those lower level things you mentioned are meaningful. It is quite a deliberate and intentional change, the very reason for the change, infact....This snippet actually explains exactly what I am trying to achieve, complete with examples. Uh... thanks, I guess....This is a very good point and a valid concern about this reserve system. I'll have to think about it deeply....I've already addressed this one.1. because it costs you a feat to do it that way.2. empowered FB doesn't do more damage at higher levels, even with the feat.Conversely, Why burn a feat to empower fireball when cone of cold does  the same damage at 15th level and has a DC two points higher? (edge case level-specifying is unfair in a scaling system like this I know, but you started it <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />).(I know the answer here depends on what you value more as a resource  - spells or feats. I'm just illustrating the point in the damage-dealing-only context in which the original question was asked).The rule does interact poorly with highten spell, but as i said upthread, no great loss IMO....Burn through those lower level spells, baby. That's one less spell of your most powerful spell level that you're using.Casting a spell with a meaningful outcome every round isn't going nova... burning through your top 2-3 spell levels then resting is going nova.*sigh*Again, I've already addressed this. I'll go through it one more time.What are these spamming casters going to do? Cast them all in the first battle? the first round?Casting a spell on your turn isn't spamming - especially if it is a less powerful spell than other spells you have available. You will still only be able to use X spells per encounter... because having a greater number of meaningful spells available doesn't give you more actions with which to cast them in a given battle. It just means you'll have more battles before they're gone (c.f. the design goal). And outside combat, where actions aren't a commodity, the DC changes nothing.--That person/monster distinction is a bit of a zinger though. I'll get back to you.</blockquote>

Verification