Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mon" data-source="post: 4358967" data-attributes="member: 71673">...As I've said, it is losing one of your best actions to do a few more of your not-best actions... If losing one of your highest level slots, and replacing it's use with lower level spells, isn't significant in your game then that's fine. However in every game I've played and DMed (which is many), it would be very significant indeed. Different personal experiences I guess.Aside, I actually think that all the doom and gloom you predict won't be as significant as you think...  ...No, you do use them 'instead of' on a round-by-round and encounter-by-encounter basis. The only sense in which you use them "as well as" is over more rounds of combat... which arise from... (drum roll) more encounters. Which is what I want.This is true even if you quicken and cast two... which you could do under either system. All you're doing is making lower level spells that allow a save become an option alongside those that don't allow a save... and they're the same level afterall. If having a choice between vampiric touch and fireball was not a balance problem at 5th level when these spells are relatively more potent, how on earth does it become one at 15th level? Especially given your 8th levels are potentially in play......So, to that 5 round battle. Lets say that somehow you have the capacity to quicken twice in that fight... a pretty big ask but certainly doable. Now you have 7 spells to use in the fight. Aw what the heck, lets cut loose and have quicken every round. Now you have 10 actions.Under the core system, you'd use 5 slots of your highest one or two levels (or maybe three, at most) and 5 quickened spells of lower level that take up significant resources to get quickened (likely including more of your highest level slots, but not necessarily so as you pointed out with the rod, or the splatbook cheese). You'd almost certainly choose to quicken spells without saves, as you said, because, also as you said, their low DC means they'd rarely get through... waste of an expensive quicken.Under the reserve system, you'd use 7 spells of potentially any level. You may even choose no spells at all from your top 2-3 levels. You can choose low level spells that do allow a save, or those that don't. Now instead of just using (say) magic missle because it has no save, you might choose burning hands even though it has a save, 'cause the DC is higher. Or perhaps ice storm and shout are your options since high level play is a concern here (quickened, they are 8th level spells).It doesn't make you more powerful, at least in the terms you're speaking of. Do you have more "endurance" in terms of rounds you can sling spells for? absolutely. Do you have more flexibility in terms of how many different actions you can choose from this round? Definately. And both of these are a kind of power, I agree. But the former is a feature for smoother game play and just the think I hope to achieve, while the latter consists of the flexibility to not-do-your-best-so-you-can-do-something-weaker.In summary:Do you dish out more pain in a single round than you would have otherwise? Not unless you would have chosen to quicken a low-level spell with a save, which as you pointed out, you wouldn't. Is it more powerful than a woefully underpowered tactical decision*? Yes. Is it more powerful than what you would actually do in play? No.* That being, casting a low level spell that allows a save against a high level opponent - quickened or not....Yup. Surely can. And please do....But only in comparison to their previous effectiveness... which was ~0 on the effectivenss scale. Compared to the other things you could be doing, they're still down that scale and therefore are, even with a potentially boosted DC, suboptimal choices for your limited number of actions. Or, at worst, equally as viable (when choosing what to quicken)....Goal achieved then.... Checkout the design goals one more time. I want to see these slots put to use so that more encounters can be had in the day, not "gone to waste at the end of the day".So yes, your effectiveness is improved, in exactly the way you say: because you can cast these spells you otherwise wouldn't. 100% agree.Here's the thing though... you're doing it in different battles that you otherwise wouldn't have had to face until tomorrow or the next day when you would be all souped up to nova on your top tier spells... ...I hope you're right about this one....No no, it is perfectly clear and has been since your first post. I went through this kinda stuff in my head before I even posted it here. It is just that I disagree with some of your assumptions and conclusations just as you disagree with mine... and I think we should agree to disagree or we'll keep talking around in circles like this...--I think I will tweak the rule a little though... you've (collectively) at least convinced me that a tweak or three might improve on the idea. I am still in the throes of thinking over a few of the things Jack, Stream, and you pointed out (I identified them upthread). It is leading me towards a different, and possibly less game-influencing, application of the same principle which I've been thinking about since I read Stream's suggested improvement in his first post in the thread. I will post it in a day or three when I have something threshed out.Thanks again Jack, Stream, and Rune.</blockquote>

Verification