Spells per encounter instead of per day??

[llamatron2000]

Well you certainly -could- fatigue fighters, but you'd need some sort of system to do it. And any system that fatigues fighters adds a whole new dimension to the class, as fighters are a class based upon consistency, whereas caster classes have a resource-management flavor.

And really, fighters get so little that they need the consistency. They don't get skills(casters get spells that substitute for skills, like knock, and others). They don't get inbuilt AOE damage(casters do). They're inherently gear-oriented, unless you go for a wonky build(casters don't need most gear to do well). They don't get to change their feats/combat abilities(most casters can change their spells day to day.). Doesn't really seem too good for the fighter if the one thing he can do, FIGHT is limited at all. Especially if you're penalizing him for less than a minute of exertion.

But yes. Hardly a natural imbalance.

I also kind of don't like the idea of giving a mage all his highest-level spells for virtually every encounter. 15 minutes is far too short a recharge time. With that kinda thing, the mage will end every single encounter singlehandedly. Repeatedly. As long as he's got 15 minutes. That's a lot of potential encounters hosed.

 

[Slapzilla]

The PHB talks about if you do your usual Prayers/Meditations/Bookworming at your usual time and leave a slot or two open, you can then later during the day spend 15 minutes filling that/those slot(s). I just figured on using the same timing. If you whip through some spells and can then spend some time doing your mantra/centering/checking your notes then reloading your (short spell duration) arsenal becomes an option that allows spellcasters not to be the party poopers. Recent casting limits rules can apply to changing your daily spell selection. You still have to pick your spells for the day, but you can recharge the shorter ones.

While the fighter huffs, puffs, heaves and groans.... I don't like the idea of fatiguing melee combatants either, I just brought it up to contrast.

Recharging would change the dynamic quite a bit, though. The drama of hiding, half dead in the woods with your wounded compadres while the wargs haunt will disappear because you'd never be half dead. I don't think it would entirely devalue scrolls and potions, or wands for that matter, but they might be less attractive a prize at low levels if your spellcaster is generous. The resource management aspect of spellcasters is part of the challenge and the fun. The hit point management aspect of melee combatants is also part of the fun.
I suppose that's why I like the reservre feats so much. (PHB2) They allow low level casters (3rd level and up) something with thier magic and not have to reload thier crossbow, and they don't have to use up all thier spells.

 

[DarkKestral]

Personally I think that there are two main problem with 'recharge magic' variants, like also the one in UA, which incredibly overlooks these problem completely...

One problem is that every long-duration buff spell automatically becomes a MASS spell. If you play 3.5 this problem is maybe not so serious, since buffs had their durations seriously reduced. But just think of a spellcaster that has a spell which gives a certain benefit to one target for half a day or more. With a recharging magic variant, if you don't actually have LONG recharging times, that spell can suddenly be cast on the entire party in a few minutes, and just needs 1 slot to be used.

For long term or especially powerful buffs or debuffs, as well as any 'item creation' spells, I'd go with longer recharges, or side effects of use that come with recharge times... or both. Forbiddance might be costly, because it takes a year and a day for the caster to 'regain' the magical energies spent casting it (so for a year and a day, the caster loses those spell points.. or he slowly regains them over the course of that year) because of it's permanency. Bull's Strength takes twice as long as it's duration to recharge, and gives a penalty to Str equal to it's buff during that duration. Healing could require the caster spending some of their own life (AE does this for spells that can repair lethal damage) to repair any deadly damage, else it only heals minor bruises. If you 'mitigate' spells by adding associated costs, it would help reduce the 'nova' ability of casters. I would also consider adding feats similar to Overchannel and Body Fuel.. These would increase the nova capacity, granted, but are designed to increase the negative consequences of the spells as well, and perhaps much more strongly.

Now, in such a game, perhaps one of the ways to mitigate the negative consequences is scroll use or using the spell directly from a spell book (because the scroll or book has the magical energies already 'built-in' and thus doesn't cause the negative effects) so it encourages casters to use scrolls of spells they plan to use often, and thus cuts down on the ability of casters to purchase spiffy permanent items, as compared to the fighters who don't need as many one-shot items.

I also agree that another means would be to limit each caster to a certain number of active 'effects' based on spell points, where the higher level the spell, the more spell points are required.

I also feel that in such a system, Sorcs get boned. I'd just get rid of them entirely.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Sorcs get boned.

I may have boned my share of sorcerers, but I haven't fornicated anybody.

 

[jaker2003]

And where do we find all these promising reserve feats . . . and who's been working on them since their first publishing?

Edit: I found some in Complete Mage; are there more elsewhere?

 

[Phoenix8008]

From the sounds of it, I only have to wait 9 months to see how WOTC is handling the issue now. 'Ask and thou shall receive'...

 

[Slapzilla]

And where do we find all these promising reserve feats . . . and who's been working on them since their first publishing?

Edit: I found some in Complete Mage; are there more elsewhere?

As far as I know Complete Mage is it. Does that mitigate the problem somewhat?