Spellpoint system: any ideas?

[KDLadage]

UMBRAGIA (see my sig) also uses a Spell Point system... feel free to check it out. In fact, the table at the top here looks a lot like the one we use...

 

[Ravellion]

The spell scaling problem can be adressed by having damage spells not scale unless an extra powerpoint per die is paid (see If thoughts could kill)

Rav

 

[AeroDm]

Exactly what we're doing for the revisions of The Elements of Magic. The amount of MP you spend determines the strength of your spell, not your caster level.

Of course, your caster level determines how many MP you can spend on a given spell.

Ranger Wicket- Where can I read more about this system. I used a similar idea but then I made it too complicated with checks, hp damage, saves, et al. I'd like to see how you did it.

 

[RangerWickett]

Send me an email at RangerWickett@hotmail.com, and I can reply by sending you a rough copy of the rules for you to take a look at. Unfortunately, this weekend I'm moving back to college since the summer's ending, so I'll be out of touch between Friday and Sunday.

 

[reapersaurus]

In a very real sense, this does take the best of wizard & sorcerer. This may seem like a "munchkin" approach, but what I did was put the 2 classes back together. 1e/2e wizards could cast alot more spells that 3/3.5e.

YES.
It does seem munchkin, and not needed.
Wizards are not underpowered, as evidenced by the bazillion people who play them.

And I really don't appreciate it when people use a comparison to the ridiculously over-powered wiz of 1E/2E as a justification for 3E cheese.

geez! I just calculated out your (attribute_bonus*caster_level) spellpoint mechanic.
Unless I'm missing something, a 20th level mage (your class) would get approx 210 + (10*20)= 410 spellpoints, assuming a 30 CHA (not too much of a stretch, considering it's their main attribute). INT only has to be a 19, right?

A sorcerer with a 30 CHA would get 69 + 27+ 24 + 21 + 18 + 20 + 16 +12 + 10 + 5 + (cantrips?)= 222 spellpoints
A wizard with 30 INT would get 69 + 36 + 32 + 28+ 24 + 20 + 16 + 12 + 8 + 4 + (cantrips?) = 249 spellpoints

So you're almost doubling the power of the 3E spellcasting classes.

Oh - couldn't they cast 45 level 9 spells a day?

 

[Red Baron]

You could also check out this generic spellcaster I designed a good while back. It's intended to be Middle Earth-specific, but I've found it works equally well in most other settings.

http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/hosted/ME/SHJ/MESpellcasterSHJ.html

Cheers,

 

[Xorial]

YES.
It does seem munchkin, and not needed.
Wizards are not underpowered, as evidenced by the bazillion people who play them.

And I really don't appreciate it when people use a comparison to the ridiculously over-powered wiz of 1E/2E as a justification for 3E cheese.

geez! I just calculated out your (attribute_bonus*caster_level) spellpoint mechanic.
Unless I'm missing something, a 20th level mage (your class) would get approx 210 + (10*20)= 410 spellpoints, assuming a 30 CHA (not too much of a stretch, considering it's their main attribute). INT only has to be a 19, right?

A sorcerer with a 30 CHA would get 69 + 27+ 24 + 21 + 18 + 20 + 16 +12 + 10 + 5 + (cantrips?)= 222 spellpoints
A wizard with 30 INT would get 69 + 36 + 32 + 28+ 24 + 20 + 16 + 12 + 8 + 4 + (cantrips?) = 249 spellpoints

So you're almost doubling the power of the 3E spellcasting classes.

Oh - couldn't they cast 45 level 9 spells a day?

One, you only allowed to spend 1/3 of your points to cast your highest level spells.
Two, talk about cheese, I think a 30 Cha is very unreasonable. With that a core sorcerer cast an awful lot of spells. I see how that stat could come up, BUT most characters are not going to start with 18s in both Int & Cha. Then you have to get magic items to run up to 30....You can only get a magical increase of +6 total, that goe to 24. The if you put all your stat increases to Cha, thats +5...total of 29.

 

[Ravellion]

One, you only allowed to spend 1/3 of your points to cast your highest level spells.
Two, talk about cheese, I think a 30 Cha is very unreasonable. With that a core sorcerer cast an awful lot of spells. I see how that stat could come up, BUT most characters are not going to start with 18s in both Int & Cha. Then you have to get magic items to run up to 30....You can only get a magical increase of +6 total, that goe to 24. The if you put all your stat increases to Cha, thats +5...total of 29.

For one thing, do your stats. More than 1 in 10 characters will have at least one 18. A 17 is actually very common.

Second, you should balance for the worst case scenario, An 18th level caster will have a +6 item, and will most likely might even consider using Wishes or crafting of Tomes to increase this stat even further. Level Ability creases almost always will make it to the spellcasting stat.

Even with 1/3 only usable for the highest level spell, the combined sum of 8th & 9th wil vastly eclipse the standard already balanced alternatives. Not withstanding that 1/3 is actually already a doubling of the amount in a lot of cases.

Rav

 

[reapersaurus]

One, you only allowed to spend 1/3 of your points to cast your highest level spells.
Two, talk about cheese, I think a 30 Cha is very unreasonable. With that a core sorcerer cast an awful lot of spells. I see how that stat could come up, BUT most characters are not going to start with 18s in both Int & Cha. Then you have to get magic items to run up to 30....You can only get a magical increase of +6 total, that goe to 24. The if you put all your stat increases to Cha, thats +5...total of 29.

Dude, you actually looked at my stat analysis, and came back with a defense of your spellpoints rules?

The only possible response is - "ooh! I guess that is broken- I'd better go back to the drawing board - thanks!"

A 30 stat for a prime spellcasting stat would be minimum for a 20th level caster, in my mind. You've forgotten inherent bonuses. As it was, I only had the mage put 4 of his level ups into CHA and only a +4 inherent bonus, and the obligatory +6 enhancement bonus and he started only with a 16. If I was min-maxing it, I'd automatically put an 18 to start, 5 levelups, +6 enhancement, +5 inherent for 34 CHA. (That's ignoring any other bonus to CHA that could potentially stack, BTW : competence, morale, unnamed, etc) That'd give 40 more spellpoints, but really- when your 'system' is so far out of whack, power-level wise, what's the difference between + OR - 40 points?

And who cares about the 1/3rd limit on highest spells?
Even with that, he can still cast 15 9th level spells.
As for 8th level spells, he could cast 51 of them per day.

This is not a hard conclusion to come to here.
I'm not talking about analyzing TWF vs 2-handed weapons here - this is a straight out broken system.
Just go back with tweaks, so it's not like that.

But please don;t respond with "it's not THAT broken", or "that's cheesy"...

 

[reapersaurus]

BTW: That took quite some time to calculate - it's not like I'm working for you, or anything.
And to be fair: after looking really hard at it, I saw what you meant about the paladin and ranger's spellpoints equalling out in the long run, due to the attribute*level mechanic.

But that has 2 major problems:
1) It WAY overpowers the mage and cleric classes when they get their full caster levels *bonus.
1a) Remember, the only reason why it's even-out for the Paladin is because WIS is one of his lesser-important stats. I estimated his WIS to be 18 at 20th level (and I think you used that estimate, also). WIS is almost a throw-away stat for a Pally - probably his 4th-most important stat.
You give that bonus to a class (like Cleric) where WIS is their MOST important stat, and it unbalances the system.
1b) It's further unbalanced because Rangers and Pallys only get half-caster levels.

2) I don't like the idea that a Paladin would be dependant on having a high WIS to get enough spellpoints to do anything. He should be getting some points from his class, not just his abilities. In other words, his Faith and dedication should get him something, not just what WIS score he brings to the table.