For those of you who have switched to spell point system, either a published alternative or one of your own devise, how has it affected your game? With spell points the possibility exists for a magic user to top load or bottom load his arsenal throughout the day, providing him with quite a few more top level spells than the game is designed for at that level or many low level spells. Not having played this style I'm wondering if it significally changes your game and the way encounters run. I want to use a spellpoint system but its the simple things that are throwing up redflags. Like the massive numbers of magic missles that could be produced or a big supply of invisibilities. Stuff like that. We all play pretty low level so I'm not so concerned about upper levels so much, but I do wonder how its gonna affect low level play. Any input?
Spell Points and how they change D&D
- Thread starter donbaloo
- Start date
genshou
First Post
Characters will tend to want to spend their magic in the most destructive or beneficial manner possible many times, meaning that more of the top-level spells will pop out of both allies and enemies. However, the increased versatility may lead to some lower-level powers being used so many times each day that your eyes will pop out of their sockets. This kind of system works best in a rules set designed with spell points in mind.
I started using Elements of Magic (Revised) in place of normal D&D magic as soon as I downloaded it, and I'm never switching back. Ever.
I started using Elements of Magic (Revised) in place of normal D&D magic as soon as I downloaded it, and I'm never switching back. Ever.
Primitive Screwhead
First Post
Spell point systems allow the players to be much more efficient with the use of the spells.
But, they have another peice to balance. They can topload all thier heavy hitters for one or two encounters or maintain more of the minor spells to last across many encounters, or hit the same balance as the Core spell lists.
As a DM, simply adjust the number and style of encounters to match. Train the players that blowing thier entire spell list in a single encounter is a Bad Thing. And reward clever use of minor magics.
I also use the Elements of Magic.. altho I have not converted all my players yet so my game is currently mixed. A couple things you need to be carefull with this system is the easier access to teleport, scry, and magic creation. Some items, such as the bag of holding, are amazingly cheap to create. Not good when I have always severly limited this items existance in game
Another pitch for EoM.. the support here on the boards is phenominal! It helps that the author, Ranger Wickett, hangs out hereabouts.
But, they have another peice to balance. They can topload all thier heavy hitters for one or two encounters or maintain more of the minor spells to last across many encounters, or hit the same balance as the Core spell lists.
As a DM, simply adjust the number and style of encounters to match. Train the players that blowing thier entire spell list in a single encounter is a Bad Thing. And reward clever use of minor magics.
I also use the Elements of Magic.. altho I have not converted all my players yet so my game is currently mixed. A couple things you need to be carefull with this system is the easier access to teleport, scry, and magic creation. Some items, such as the bag of holding, are amazingly cheap to create. Not good when I have always severly limited this items existance in game
Another pitch for EoM.. the support here on the boards is phenominal! It helps that the author, Ranger Wickett, hangs out hereabouts.
Hmmm...never heard of Elements of Magic but I just checked out the link and its blurb. Thanks. Its hard to get a good feel for what its offering though. Can you give me any details? How complicated is the process of casting? How much does it slow play? How similar is it to The Black Company magic system? It sounds pretty similar. Anything at all you can fill me in on concerning Elements of Magic?
Primitive Screwhead
First Post
The system does not slow play unless the caster has not written out the spells in advance.
Most spells require at least a read over from the GM, both to ensure the rules are being followed and because so many possibilities exist.
The caster also gets to make thier own effects..and can name them and provide desired visual, non-mechancial effects as desired. Which can be real cool.
In actual game, creating a spell on the fly is rare. My characters always had a listing of various spells I had devised for use. Combat casting is usually limited to the signature spells as normal casting takes 2 full round actions, not a combat friendly deal.
The Publishing forum has a number of threads discussing rules and spells. There is also a Wiki, whose address I forget right now that has a compilation of the spells and house rules created to date.
Most spells require at least a read over from the GM, both to ensure the rules are being followed and because so many possibilities exist.
The caster also gets to make thier own effects..and can name them and provide desired visual, non-mechancial effects as desired. Which can be real cool.
In actual game, creating a spell on the fly is rare. My characters always had a listing of various spells I had devised for use. Combat casting is usually limited to the signature spells as normal casting takes 2 full round actions, not a combat friendly deal.
The Publishing forum has a number of threads discussing rules and spells. There is also a Wiki, whose address I forget right now that has a compilation of the spells and house rules created to date.
donbaloo said:
The trick with spell points is to use a method similar to the augmentation of psionic powers. Yeah, magic missile is a 1st-level spell. It would be overpowered in a spell-point system that always charged 1 point for it, but let the number of missiles keep increasing with your caster level. So the trick would be, spells are always cast at their base power level unless you pay extra points to increase their effectiveness. Spend 1 point, get 1d4+1 points of magic missile damage. If you're 9th level, you can spend 9 points and get 5 missiles; it doesn't still cost just 1 point to get the better effect.
Similarly, a fireball is a 3rd level spell, and would cost 5 spell points. If you're 10th level and want it to do 10d6 damage, it costs 10 spell points. And so on. Basically, the caster level you get from an effect is equal to the spell points you spend on it, up to your caster level.
Then, you don't just sum up spells from the wizard spellcasting chart to give spell points. You instead say, wizards get spell points equal to (1 + their intelligence bonus) * their wizard level. You still get some low-end effects like invisible that are pretty cheap and good in a spell-point system, but it's not as bad.
I play the system as written in Unearthed Arcana and it is fine. My only gripe is the lack of support for further spell-casting classes introduced in later supplements, and the minimal difference between the high level wizard's point total and his companion Sorcerer's point total.
Top-loading is a bad idea... extremely so.
The system allows casters to conserve magic... no more 10 dice fireballs blown on 6 goblins because the caster was out of options. It also GREATLY reduces the appeal of most Evocation magic which is something that I was distinctly interested in. In the rules as presented, you must pay extra points to increase and spell that deals damage dice above and beyond its minimum caster level, therefore only someone who truly wants to play a "bang-bang" caster will do so. Most of my players now look to other schools of magic and really try an be creative with spells that were previously never glanced at twice.
Top-loading is a bad idea... extremely so.
The system allows casters to conserve magic... no more 10 dice fireballs blown on 6 goblins because the caster was out of options. It also GREATLY reduces the appeal of most Evocation magic which is something that I was distinctly interested in. In the rules as presented, you must pay extra points to increase and spell that deals damage dice above and beyond its minimum caster level, therefore only someone who truly wants to play a "bang-bang" caster will do so. Most of my players now look to other schools of magic and really try an be creative with spells that were previously never glanced at twice.
Vymair
First Post
I've played in two games under this system and I really like it. It definitely promotes a slightly different spell selection and approach too magic. Others have mentioned the lower reliance on evocation. Utility spells like Knock are much more useful.
In addition, metamagic on the fly makes feats like silent spell much more useful.
In addition, metamagic on the fly makes feats like silent spell much more useful.
