Would You Give Wizards Unlimited Lower Level Spells?

[kigmatzomat]

Given that many warrior-type classes are melee, their "expendable resources" consist of hit points. Fighters don't have unlimited hit points, mages don't have unlimited spells.

Given the 3.5 feature of staves to use the caster level of the weilder, I'd think that high level mages running out of spells is on par with high level archers running out of arrows.

At low levels, which is a valid complaint, allow Reserve feats. I've got a few pet peeves on the Reserve Feats (mainly how it steps on the warlock) but it provides the low levels unlimited plinking.

 

[Fifth Element]

I like the idea of unlimited 0-level spells, but not too much beyond that.

Agreed. One of the sillier aspects of the wizard's spell progression is that he can cast as many 0-level spells at 2nd level as he can at 20th.

Since 0-level spells are limited in power, it's much more a flavour thing than a power thing. These are the things that powerful wizards are supposed to be able to do with a snap of their fingers.

 

[mearlus]

Running out of spells isn't a problem, its a feature

Haha I love it.

I'd have to agree, even though my primary characters are generally wizards and I'd love to have unlimited access to spells we do need balance.

One of the things I love about playing a wizard is being creative with what spells I have memorized in order to accomplish a task. If it were unlimited I don't think it would be as enjoyable to play.

 

[Voadam]

I really like the recharge magic variant from UA. Tweaked though with a few adjustments. Much better resource management dynamic for my style of playing. Can't do multiple top level spells in a row, and judging spell use against what you want to do in this encounter rather than against what you want to do for the rest of the day.

Much more fun for me as both a player and DM.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

(Bear with me, this is just off-the cuff...)

You'd permanently give up a 9th level slot in order to gain 9 spell levels of lesser spell slots, the type and kind determined when you give up the spell, and the election is permenent. So you could give up that 9th level slot in order to gain a 1st level slot and an 8th level slot, or three 3rd level slots or a 4th and 5th level slot, etc. You could only elect to take this ACF when you gain a spell of the level you are giving up. IOW, to exchange your 9th level slot for three 3rd level slots, your PC must have a 9th level spell slot to surrender.

I'd probably even allow this ACF to work in both directions...so a PC could give up three 3rd level slots to gain a 9th level slot.

A quality suggestion, especially for being off-the-cuff. Although, it is remarkably similiar to ... wait for it ... a psionics solution to the problem! Which in my book is a good thing.

That is one thing I love about psionics. A psion who is absolutely confident that they aren't going to need all their powerpoints for a day to be spread out over multiple encounters can blow it all on a single combat if needed. (I.E. novaing, and I'm in favor of being able to do it - so long as the DM expects it and doesn't let it happen most 'days.' But that's another argument for another thread) Or, or the other hand, a psionic character can guess that the upcoming day might be a little on the rough side and rather than blow their powerpoints on the higher level spells they decide to tone down their overall power but spread it out more. The fact that psionic characters are much more limited in their scope than wizards helps balance this.

I don't see why the same thing wouldn't work for wizards - so long as they had a limited spell list that they could use for "swapping" purposes. To allow them to swap spell levels for any spell that they know may be a bit overpowering, though.

 

[Slife]

That is one thing I love about psionics. A psion who is absolutely confident that they aren't going to need all their powerpoints for a day to be spread out over multiple encounters can blow it all on a single combat if needed. (I.E. novaing, and I'm in favor of being able to do it - so long as the DM expects it and doesn't let it happen most 'days.' But that's another argument for another thread) Or, or the other hand, a psionic character can guess that the upcoming day might be a little on the rough side and rather than blow their powerpoints on the higher level spells they decide to tone down their overall power but spread it out more. The fact that psionic characters are much more limited in their scope than wizards helps balance this.

Wizards can already do this.

Wizards can already do this better (especially with celerity and arcane fusion type spells).

 

[SavageRobby]

I think the biggest problem with unlimited casting would be that every such spell would become a new class feature for players to keep track of. The more I think about it, the more I'm certain I'd want to pare the list down a lot. A Wizard who can detect poison at will could ruin a lot of traps. I guess a Wizard who can always detect magic might cause similar problems, but honestly, doesn't it seem like every Wizard ought to be able to do that?

No, actually.


I'm not a big fan of video game wizards; I'm more of a fan of classic fiction - and most of the wizards in classic fiction (at least the sort that I enjoy reading, and on occasion, emulating) are forever not casting spells on a whim at every door they encounter, instead taking the opportunity to mumble something about "the balance" or "power for power's sake" or some other mumbo-jumbo thing about upsetting the cosmic applecart that doesn't at all appear in most RPGs. Magic isn't supposed to be easy. Magic is saved for when its drastically necessary, not merely convenient.

To quote a great wizard, "Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should."

 

[Squire James]

No, actually.


I'm not a big fan of video game wizards; I'm more of a fan of classic fiction - and most of the wizards in classic fiction (at least the sort that I enjoy reading, and on occasion, emulating) are forever not casting spells on a whim at every door they encounter, instead taking the opportunity to mumble something about "the balance" or "power for power's sake" or some other mumbo-jumbo thing about upsetting the cosmic applecart that doesn't at all appear in most RPGs. Magic isn't supposed to be easy. Magic is saved for when its drastically necessary, not merely convenient.

To quote a great wizard, "Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should."

The same quote can be applied to fighters who wield swords, yet "classic fiction" is full of guys who use those when they really shouldn't be. That being said, I don't think unlimited spell capacity is a good idea unless you also implement mechanics that make spells fail outright once in a while in a manner similar to a weapon missing their target, or perhaps grants some other penalty that might make casting spells too often a bad idea (1d6/spell level non-lethal damage?).

 

[GreatLemur]

No, actually.


I'm not a big fan of video game wizards; I'm more of a fan of classic fiction - and most of the wizards in classic fiction (at least the sort that I enjoy reading, and on occasion, emulating) are forever not casting spells on a whim at every door they encounter, instead taking the opportunity to mumble something about "the balance" or "power for power's sake" or some other mumbo-jumbo thing about upsetting the cosmic applecart that doesn't at all appear in most RPGs. Magic isn't supposed to be easy. Magic is saved for when its drastically necessary, not merely convenient.

To quote a great wizard, "Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should."

See, I'd argue that detecting magic is a little bit different from using magic. I can't remember seeing anyone in fiction actually cast a spell in order to detect magic, but I've seen loads of characters who are just able to feel its presence without trying.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

I already give casters at will use of cantrips and orisons. And have turned detect magic to a class feature of casting classes. What I'd really like is something that straddles the line. Say a token mechanic similar to Iron Heroes where you can do certain effects in an unlimited manner so long as you have any tokens and much smaller pool designed on a per-encounter balance with the ability to regain tokens quickly but not at a rate that would sustain an all-day Nova.