Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreatLemur" data-source="post: 2022480" data-attributes="member: 28553">I like the ideas behind this system quite a lot.  Replacing both fire-and-forget and spontaneous casting with a magic point system is always something I support, and I dig the way the spellseed progressions almost force all casters to focus their spell lists around domains of related spells.  It just seems logical that, if you know how to cast an immensely powerful fire-based offensive spell, you probably learned how to cast a few lesser fire-based offensive spells along the way.I think the concern about Wizards using their large skill point pool on regular skills instead of spellseeds is a valid one.  What if skill points and spellseed points were completely separate resources?  At the risk of overcomplication, let's say Rogues continue to get 8+INT skill points per level, while Wizards get their old 2+INT skill points plus 6+INT spellseed points.  Spellseeds could also be bought with skill points (cross-class for all classes), but spellseed points could never be spent on regular skills (allowing Rogues to remain the unrivaled skill kings they are now).Making casting work something like skill checks doesn't seem like a bad idea, though.  I've been thinking for a while about a system where spellcasting ability uses different skills for different domains or schools, and each spell in a given group is just a DC that needs to be met in a check with the appropriate skill.  DCs would be modified by various metamagic-type effects.  "Failure" on a check wouldn't mean that the spell as ruined, but that casting it is going to take more than one round (and more than one check).  Each successive round of casting might even get a cumulative +1 to the check.  Some kind of penalty for additional rounds of casting might be appropriate, like a magic point or mana debt mechanic, or even progressive nonlethal damage to the caster.But a system like this--which would make lower-DC spells potentially free to cast--probably requires the spells themseolves to be rebalanced away from heavy damage-dealing stuff.  Maybe things like per-caster-level damage would actually require higher DCs to cast, meaning a 5th-level wizard will have to expend more time and power to cast a 5d6 fireball than a 1d6 one?Sorry, I'm thinking as I type, here.</blockquote>

Verification