XP instead of costly material components

[airwalkrr]

What do you think of charging spellcasters XP instead of costly material components? The DMG recommends that spellcasters charge 25 gp for each point of XP spent in spellcasting, and this cost is integrated into items that involve casting a spell that costs XP (like a scroll of wish). So to apply this rule backwards, the XP cost for casting a spell with a costly material component would be 1/25 the gp cost of the material component. Identify would cost 4 XP for example. Animate dead would cost 25 gp per HD of undead animated. I think such a system would make for less book-keeping overall since PCs wouldn't need to track material components at all anymore, except for simply having their spell component pouch. It wouldn't affect the nature of NPC spellcasting. A 9th level cleric would still charge 5,450 gp for a raise dead spell (the 5,000 gp being used to defray the loss of 200 XP).

I am considering trying this system in my next campaign. Thoughts?

 

[FireLance]

I think it will work fine from a balance perspective, but I also think that generally, players are less willing to spend XP than they are to spend gold (I'm sure there are exceptions, though). This means that spells with expensive material components could be used less often. Whether that is a bug or a feature is something you will have to decide for yourself.

Another alternative is to have a generic "power component" (dragon blood, quintessence, fairy dust, magic mushrooms, mandrake root, whatever) that could be used to cast any spell with an expensive material component. This reduces bookkeeping, too, as PCs only need to keep track of one additional value in addition to the spell component pouch. However, it makes it more difficult to restrict certain spells - a PC could use 5,000 gp of the generic "power component" instead of having to obtain diamonds for raise dead, for example.

 

[Sigurd]

Spellcasters shouldn't lose their experience for spellcasting unless there is a blood, brain or soul sacrifice involved. When did you see a fighter type have to pay experience for a particular move or action? Mostly spellcasting under pressure should teach the character something and be an avenue to gain experience.

If there is a game reason for it great! Make sure there is someone\thing involved in taking the experience offered or a disorienting affect of the spell. If thats not the case make the spell difficult to cast with in game elements, components, conjunctions, blessings, etc...

This approach always feels more real to me.

Sigurd

 

[Nifft]

Wealth vs. XP is a good trade off in terms of resource pools -- you're expected to get quite a lot of both by high levels.

Take a look at the Psionics part of the SRD and see how they've handled the lack of expensive components and foci for Psionics -- should give you at least a guideline for setting XP values.

Cheers, -- N

 

[rgard]

What do you think of charging spellcasters XP instead of costly material components? The DMG recommends that spellcasters charge 25 gp for each point of XP spent in spellcasting, and this cost is integrated into items that involve casting a spell that costs XP (like a scroll of wish). So to apply this rule backwards, the XP cost for casting a spell with a costly material component would be 1/25 the gp cost of the material component. Identify would cost 4 XP for example. Animate dead would cost 25 gp per HD of undead animated. I think such a system would make for less book-keeping overall since PCs wouldn't need to track material components at all anymore, except for simply having their spell component pouch. It wouldn't affect the nature of NPC spellcasting. A 9th level cleric would still charge 5,450 gp for a raise dead spell (the 5,000 gp being used to defray the loss of 200 XP).

I am considering trying this system in my next campaign. Thoughts?

Personally, I'm not a fan of this idea. For me it's already a pain burning xp when making magic items, though there are variants for charging the xp to the person who commissions a caster to make an item.

If you want, you could try con damage or some other stat damage in lieu of the costly material component.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Michael Silverbane]

Mostly, this would make me not want to play a spellcaster, which is a shame, because I like to play spellcasters.

Later
silver

 

[Pyrex]

I think it's probably fine, but note that it's 5gp per xp, not 25.

If the spell
has an XP cost, add 5 gp per XP lost.

 

[Sigurd]

Perhaps if you had some sort of mechanic where a spellcaster could claim experience from their kills and use it to power spells. Perhaps an experience bonus for sealing a kill such that it is impossible to raise from dead?

S

 

[airwalkrr]

If there is a game reason for it great! Make sure there is someone\thing involved in taking the experience offered or a disorienting affect of the spell. If thats not the case make the spell difficult to cast with in game elements, components, conjunctions, blessings, etc...

The game reason would be simply that these spells are so taxing that they cost a spellcaster a bit of his life force. This is especially applicable in the use of raising the dead, but it also works well for explaining other powerful effects.

 

[Pyrex]

Perhaps if you had some sort of mechanic where a spellcaster could claim experience from their kills and use it to power spells. Perhaps an experience bonus for sealing a kill such that it is impossible to raise from dead?

S

Sounds like a fairly straightforward variant of Death Knell. Trade the standard bonuses for a pool of 5xp/hd that can only be used for XP components...