Hehehe, "circle" feels sooooo mystic!!!
Besides, if it brings problems with the Magic Circle spells, just change them to "Magic Square Spells", or better, "Magic Thing Squarized to Resemble a Circle in a Square Battlegrid", and blow the backwards compatibility out of the window!
Man, I'm sleepy, and I have to dm in some hours...besides, the winter is killing me...
Well, before I go to sleep, I say this then:
The problem is that such system is a very high dream and all. we have some good ideas, however.
-Someone posted an idea of making magic a little more like mage the ascencion. I will try to put my efforts into this lads. Maybe with three days I'll come with something.
-Someone said a big truth about the sorcerer: it sucks. The idea is great, but he does not have that much firepower than the wizard. He gets his spells later, too.
So I ask for everyone to take a look at wich I am using at my game:
-Sorcerer works as the rules of UA. The difference is: Use the table of power knows and when powers are know of the Psion of Expanded Psionics Handbook: As said, this makes him learn his spells at the same level as the wizard, and gives him more spell points per day than the sorcerer of the spell point UA (sorcerers should have MANY MORE points than a wizard on my opinion). Include the Psionic Focus system to the equation to solve the problem of the metamagic feats. Call it a day.
I think that if we work on top of this we can make something very interesting, not too terribly complicated and that's still able to work with the vancian magic.
I can state you that using the Wizard as vancian, and the sorcerer as Spell Point (with the Psion table), the two systems work together very well. The wizard uses an "easy" arcane formula, something more or less predictable to someone as him, who studied and uses magic in "limited" and "safe" ways. The sorcerer controls raw power that he can shape as desired, the way he desires, without the "rules" of the wizards about "how many spells of each circle should the humanoid body be reasonably safe to cast each day".
Besides, this is OGL and could fit a sidebar like "Variant Rule: Spell Point Sorcerer" or "Variant Rule: More flexible sorcerer"
Good night, gentlemen, and don't burn your neurones too much.
Note: Don't ask me about the bard. The bard should not be a spellcaster in my opinion, and I made him a singer of magical songs that works mainly like the Warlock.
|
A Skill-Driven System with a cost of some sort, such as nonlethal / subdual damage equal to spell level, or a chance of being Winded / Fatigued / Exhausted, is a possibility I've seen floated about. The nonlethal damage is a fixed number and works mechanically, but the skill roll / Fort save to avoid fatigue would give any spellcaster a chance to suddenly crap out in the middle of a combat, without being nearly as predictable.
Spells that cure fatigue or nonlethal damage become overpowered in such a system, as they allow a spellcaster to overcome this cost too easily.
YES!
To me the best spell system is from Earthdawn. Skill-based spell system is close to Earthdawn's system.
Hm. I realized if you're counting bonus spells from magic Schools, that's probably around 32 Spellpoints worth, and it sounds like Psions are more limited than just School Specialists, so it would make sense for more.
The discrepancy between UA's Spellpoints (example caster @20th casting 18 9th levels/day) and applying UA's RATIO to the standard Spell Slots (casting 23 9th levels for the same caster) makes me think the RATIOS could be increased by ~25% (23/18). And I agree, Sorcerors should get a larger number of points, like Psions. I just did the math, and by UA Spellpoints, the Sorceror only gets 5% more Spell Points than the Wizard at 20th level!!!!!!!
Diego: If you could share the essence of how Psionic Focus (?, Psionic Metamagic) works, I'd be interested...
It might be worthwhile to re-do the Metamagic system for EVERYBODY.
I actually think making this Spell Point system the DEFAULT for Sorcerors is a great idea, and emphasizes their strengths more.
In any case, either as a side-bar for everyone, or possibily a new STANDARD for the Sorceror (daring to dream?), I think it IS getting boiled down to something that's simple enough to print (assuming that ANYTHING besides the standard Spell Slots COULD ever make it)
Monte Cook did something in Arcana Evolved, which is one of my most favorite systems, but that's not the point. It was a Vancian system, sort of. First off he created a lesser powered and a higher powered version of each spell so that you could cast the 2nd level spell as 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level of effect. To me it made all the spells seem a little more useful. But sadly that would require too much change. What wouldn't is that he also made a list of Spells Readied and Spells per day. In this he made all spell casters both Wizards, Sorcerers and Clerics in the way they worked.
You choose a list of spells that are your Spells Readied, much like the Spells Known list for a Bard or Sorcerer. However you can choose any spell available to you, like the Cleric. Once you have your Spell Ready List, you can cast them a number of times per day based on your level, just like a Sorcerer. However, the big difference is that as long as you have an hour of time and spell books on hand, you can always change your Spells Readied List, much like a Wizard.
I'm not sure how we could use this idea, or even if this is anywhere close to what other people are looking for, but the ability to change the wizards spells mid day is really nice.
Another option would be to take a look at Arc Magicus or Talislanta, both of which do not use a Vancian system at all, but could be replaced entirely with the current system without affecting the rest of gameplay that much. Such a radical change Could never be just a sidebar, it might require at least a chapter. Or maybe a book of magic or something.
I don't know, hope this helps.
Quandary, quick and easy: There's a spoiler on one of my posts that contains the explanation about psionic focus. Take a look there.
And I'v come with an idea about wizard magic being more likely mage the ascension.; It's nice, but hell to it, it will never fit a sidebar, so, no more work on that.
Bye, now I'm off to Dm.
The two issues with the Vancian system I would most like to correct are:
1) paperwork
2) spells behaving counter-intuitively.
A system where every class casts as Sorcerer (provided that's balanced somehow), and can exchange 3 first level spells for 1 second level spell, seems to address most of my perceived issues. It does this without recourse to changing the class tables, or adding new tables to learn. It keeps things compatible.
I see this as having great potential, if we can only address the Prepared-Spontaneous Dichotomy. Best to leave the Sorcerer as-is, and to "nerf" the prepared casters as best we can so that they keep their existing spells-per-day table, but can cast spontaneously.
I give one suggestion on how to do this: Spell Anchors, detailed above. However, I'm sure there are other ways, and I'm hoping for some suggestions. One idea (tell me what you think) is that Wizard always cast "scroll versions" (minimum CL) of their spellbook spells, unless they have taken Spell Mastery with that spell. In addition, we can take pity on them and allow them to master one spell per level. They can take a full-round action to "look up"/"power up" the spell to their caster level by looking it up in the spellbook. Likewise, Clerics "master" their domain spells. I'm not sure if this would be too crippling...
---
I don't think a skill-driven system has much hope of playing nice with the status quo. I love both Mage: TA and Shadowrun's magic system (the latter of which uses a skill system with physical backlash). Frankly, I'd rather see anything but a spells-per-day friendly system. But I think it's the only way to go if we want to keep this short and sweet.
And if I were Paizo, that's the only kind of rule I would give over a whole page of the magic section to.
(that said, I really enjoy reading about the "out-there" systems that don't work... I don't want to kill that conversation. )
The problemis that the system is so connected to the game. Other magic systems, such as Rifts or Shadowrun, tend to have fewer spells and the major differences between two spell casters isn't the number of spells they cast, but what spells they can choose and the other abilities they have.
Changing the way the Vancian system works also changes the relationship between the Wizard and the Sorcerer, so any ideas we have have to address this as well. That is going to take space and details.
So if this could be something that got an entire page or two, it has merit. If not then it might be a waste of time.
One option that is still the Vancian system that might work is to change the rules as such: First the Spells per Day and Spells Known charts do not change. A Sorcerer cast exactly the same way as always. A Wizard can cast any spell he knows in his Spell book, just like a Sorcerer. So they can cast the exact same way, but the Wizard has fewer per day, but more choices. To balance things out, the wizard takes a Full Round Action to cast any spell, this is so he can flip though pages and find the right spell or some such. If this isn't enough of a drawback, it could always take longer, say two rounds to cast a spell. Maybe a Specialist casts his Schools spells faster, I don't know.
The advantage would be not having to memorize spells in the morning and could always pull out the right spell at the right time. However, the increase in options could slow down combat, as every round the wizard might have twenty spells to think about before casting a spell. That's another reason to make the wizard take 2 rounds to cast a spell, gives the player time to figure out what to do.
Now I'm going to say this as well, I actually never had a problem with the Vancian system, but I like trying to figure out alternate ideas.
|
To maintain some level of backwards compatibility, I'd love to see both prepared and spontaneous spellcasting remain, but for both of them to be little more than sidebars themselves, a pair of options that *any* spellcaster can choose from. (Adept, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger and Wizard. Sorcerers wouldn't have any reason to exist as a separate class, although Wizards who choose the spontaneous option would still be called Sorcerers, just as Specialist Wizards who focus on the School of Illusion are still called Illusionists, even if they aren't the Illusionists of 1st edition.)
A Prepared caster, whether Wizard, Cleric or Bard, would have a spellbook, be able to learn all possible spells of their class given time and cash, and have a small number of spells they can prepare and cast in any given day.
A Spontaneous caster, whether Paladin, Druid or Wizard, would have no spellbook, and be limited to a very small selection of spell known, but be able to cast flexibly from that Spell Known list and have more overall 'castings' a day than a Prepared caster of the same class.
Advantage of the Prepared caster; potentially any spell on the class list, similar to what the Wizard has. This would be a big downgrade for the Prepared Cleric or Druid, who already have all the spells on their spell-lists!
Advantage of the Spontaneous caster; more spells per day, flexible use of spells known.
Variance from the current system;
1) Sorcerers become a version of Wizard, not a core class in their own right.
2) Bards, Assassins, etc. get the option to have spellbooks and much larger potential spell selections, but might have fewer spells usable
per day.
3) Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Rangers, etc. get the option to cast spontaneously, but would then only have access to a small selection of Spells Known, and not their entire potential repertoire.
4) Clerics, Druids and Wizards would have the same numbers for spells known (if spontaneous) and spell slots per day (if spontaneous) or spells gained per level (if prepared) and spells preparable per day (if prepared). No need for the chart to be repeated under Cleric, Druid and Wizard, as it would be the same, either the full caster Spontaneous chart or the full caster Prepared chart. Bards and Adepts would similarly use a similar pair of 'hybrid caster' charts, as would the Paladin, Ranger, Assassin, etc. using a 'partial caster' pair of charts for their Spontaneous and Prepared options.
5) Both options would be modified normally by Domains and School specializations and Cleric/Druid spontaneous conversions normally. A Spontaneous Cleric would have fewer Spells Known, slightly more castings per day, and be able to spontaneously cast from his Domain spells, as well as being able to spontaneously cast any of his spells as the appropriate level of Cure (or Inflict) Wounds, as if he knew those spells 'for free.' Similarly, the spontaneous Druid would have all of the Summon Nature's Ally spells 'free' and not have to use his Spells Known slots to learn them.
6) Clerics and Druids would be significantly less versatile, either having small Spells Known lists *or* being required to maintain a prayerbook full of spells learned through level increases or cash expenditure, in either case, not being able to freely access every single Cleric/Druid spell published on a day to day basis.
A Spontaneous Clerics choice of Domains becomes significant not just for the Domain power, but for the spells that will be added to his small list of spells known, and the choice of whether to channel Positive or Negative energy also becomes important for the Spontaneous Cleric, as the choice to channel negative energy means that he may have to use his limited Spells Known to learn the various Cure spells that are his bread and butter!
I haven't had time to read all the posts in this thread, but I like the idea and discussion I have seen, so forgive me if any of this is not new. I would love to see an alternative to the Vancian system, but I'd be amazed if you can fulfill all the requirements in the original post.
My preference is for a spell-point system for various reasons, mostly to do with psioncs. AD&D2e had a skill-based system for psionics, and it was annoying: powers are unreliable and, as any paladin can attest to, it sucks to burn an ability when you miss that roll at a crucial moment. Something like this might work for "new abilities" that your character is learning to use, but only adds more rolls and complexity to adjudicating game effects overall.
A point-based system also could, and I believe should, be more compatible with psionics in the 3.5 SRD. Whether or not it plays well alongside the Vancian system remains debateable, but at least it would be easier to adapt the psionics system to a point-based magic system.
Personally, I don't see the need for a point-based system to play nice with a Vancian system. It can be too fundamental a shift and represents how all magic works, rather than one character vs. another. Every system is going to have it's quirks and it's much easier to balance within a system than between systems.
My thoughts on a point-based system:
The distinction between prepared and spontaneous casters can still be maintained in that spontaneous casters have a fixed repertoire, while prepared casters can change it (by preparing new spells), but require a source of new spells (spellbook, deity, etc.). In a point-based system, casters have much more flexibility within a 'day' than under a Vancian system, so the added flexibility in repertoire that prepared casters have can be extremely powerful. This requires some trade-off for balance, some ideas for which were already mentioned, and could also include one or more of the following:
- Prepared casters have fewer points than spontaneous casters. More intellectual approach, but less raw power.
- Prepared casters have a smaller repertoire than spontaneous casters. They have access to fewer spells within a day but can change as necessary. This works well with a mechanic to allow swapping slots during a day (but not during combat!).
- added costs of a "Spell Anchor" for Prepared casters.
Metamagic feats: Spontaneous metamagic all the way, works the same for all casters. Flavourful, avoids the complexities of preparing augmented or altered spells, etc. The trade-off is that is increases your decisions at each action, but that's more of a player issue.
Scaling price for caster level: Psionics already does this, both for damage and DCs. I don't see the problem with this, except that it hasn't been worked out for some spells, but it could be pretty simple: for 1st and 2nd-level spells, the rate is +1(damage die / save DC) / 2 points spent, for higher-level spells, the cost is 1 point. There are also other alternative systems for augmenting and manipulating spells (see Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved, for example).
Also, I feel like this helps with the "too many low-level / too few high-level spells" issue. since damage (and possibly DC) effects cost essentially the same, the only effect of spell level is at what level your character has access, and other effects such as area (ray, line, cone, burst, etc.). Your point pool represents your total amount of "battery life", but the spell levels represent how much you can drain in each use, and how much experience you need to be able to use certain tricks.
Point Progressions: I never like the point progressions in UA / 3.5 SRD, especially given that the ones for spells don't seem to have any relation to the ones for 3.5 psionics. I've been toying with alternative progressions, based more on formulas than arbitrary increases. I suggest having 4 standard progressions, from highest to lowest:
- Spontaneous casters. Includes Sorcerer, Psion, Wilder, etc.
- Prepared casters (with a similar repertoire size as spontaneous casters). Includes Wizards, standard Clerics and Druids (and possibly psion alternatives like the Erudite psion).
- Partial casters. Bard & Psychic Warrior, where these abilities are not the core of the class, but at least half of the concept and complementary to other abilities..
- Minor casters. Where casting is an add-on at later levels, such as the Paladin and Ranger.
If others really want to see a wide range of alternative point progressions, let me know and I can put them on Google docs and publish them or something.
Howzabout "9 magnitudes of power"?I favor Magnitude for referring to caster level, myself, since it refers to increasing quantities of the same effect (just as it is increasing quantities of positive or negative value irrespective of sign in mathematics).
If I may add, the concept of spell level (as opposed to caster level) is something that is most likely to be referred to "in-game". For that reason, I'd use magnitude as a synonym of spell level. "Order" sounds more like an organization. "I do not master spells of the 5th order yet" sounds like the caster is missing a connection to a group rather than experience or skill. "circle" work a bit better, but get confusing when druids are concerned.
Regardless of what is chosen, I think it should elegantly be usable in-game. I have to admit it irk me when my character is asked "are you out of 3rd-level spells yet?"
'findel
I had created this mana point system some time ago. It still probably needs some balancing factors to prevent overcasting of high-level spells, and it does involve a bit of math, but I think it's balanced.
It should be relatively easily backwards-compatible, as well.
...
A Prepared caster, whether Wizard, Cleric or Bard, would have a spellbook, be able to learn all possible spells of their class given time and cash, and have a small number of spells they can prepare and cast in any given day.A Spontaneous caster, whether Paladin, Druid or Wizard, would have no spellbook, and be limited to a very small selection of spell known, but be able to cast flexibly from that Spell Known list and have more overall 'castings' a day than a Prepared caster of the same class.
Advantage of the Prepared caster; potentially any spell on the class list, similar to what the Wizard has. This would be a big downgrade for the Prepared Cleric or Druid, who already have all the spells on their spell-lists!
Advantage of the Spontaneous caster; more spells per day, flexible use of spells known.
...
I like this sort of flexibility and player-options. It would be nice if there was a simple conversion between prepared and spontaneous casters. I've toyed around with the idea that any prepared caster would have a spellbook, and never liked the idea that Clerics "download" spells from their deity while Wizards have to read a book.
That said, I like the existing additional differences in abilities between Sorcerers and Wizards. But, arcane magic is so central to a fantasy game that I'm ok with that.
So, one more person besides me votes for using the tables from EPH. Like I said earlier, I already use it in my games, and it works very nice. Also, if you include the psionic focus as "arcane focus" and give the chance of characters to buy a feat that would allow you to gain some spell points, that would enable Arcane Focus for every character, and the Arcane Feats (from psionic feats) for every character also.
Well, at the very least now I have some infrequent use of the EPH (the "psionic" feats), instead of no use at all...
Besides that, gentlemen, that could fit a sidebar...
Toy_Robots: Personally, I think your objective #2, making the magic system work more 'rationally' is more important, even if the 'paperwork' of preparation is the SAME for prepard casters. Spellpoints and associated proposed changes really make Metamagic more viable for all, while providing flexibility to exchange different level spells to gain other ones in compensation.
I think most importantly, they really let the Sorceror shine, instead of being in the Wizard's shadow. And for the Sorceror, Spellpoints are SIMPLER to keep track off, since you're just marking points off of ONE pool, not tracking how many spells you have left of each Spell Level.
Regardless of what is chosen, I think it should elegantly be usable in-game. I have to admit it irk me when my character is asked "are you out of 3rd-level spells yet?"
Circle works well enough. A unified standard could only occur by it being printed in the final version— and I don't see that happening. But if it does, I'll go with whatever term the design team decides is best for the book, and their setting. And happily!
So, one more person besides me votes for using the tables from EPH. Like I said earlier, I already use it in my games, and it works very nice. Also, if you include the psionic focus as "arcane focus" and give the chance of characters to buy a feat that would allow you to gain some spell points, that would enable Arcane Focus for every character, and the Arcane Feats (from psionic feats) for every character also.Well, at the very least now I have some infrequent use of the EPH (the "psionic" feats), instead of no use at all...
Besides that, gentlemen, that could fit a sidebar...
I'm not familiar, I avoid psionics. Sounds like you may be on to something though. Is it open content?
Toy_Robots: Personally, I think your objective #2, making the magic system work more 'rationally' is more important, even if the 'paperwork' of preparation is the SAME for prepard casters. Spellpoints and associated proposed changes really make Metamagic more viable for all, while providing flexibility to exchange different level spells to gain other ones in compensation.I think most importantly, they really let the Sorceror shine, instead of being in the Wizard's shadow. And for the Sorceror, Spellpoints are SIMPLER to keep track off, since you're just marking points off of ONE pool, not tracking how many spells you have left of each Spell Level.
You mean UA's spellpoints right? Chew it over for a while, see what you can "fix" with it, and post it here so we can start playtesting. The biggest advantage there is that it is already Open Content, and it is the most logical candidate for sidebar inclusion, since so many people use that rule already. Even though I have my problems with the rule, I can recognize that it's probably the best fit.
Jacking my own thread
Can we improve spell points for a sidebar in Pathfinder RPG Final?
|
I'm not familiar, I avoid psionics. Sounds like you may be on to something though. Is it open content?
Yes, the psionic material is all SRD:
http://www.d20srd.org/indexes/psionicRacesClassesSkillsSpells.htm
You can see the Power Point tables under each class. Although I don't have much to add to this conversation, I will add my vote for something like this to happen.
I'm not familiar, I avoid psionics. Sounds like you may be on to something though. Is it open content?
Yes, the psionic material is all SRD:
http://www.d20srd.org/indexes/psionicRacesClassesSkillsSpells.htm
You can see the Power Point tables under each class. Although I don't have much to add to this conversation, I will add my vote for something like this to happen.
Veeeerry interesting.
So two strong contenders emerge. A UA Spellpoints derived sidebar, or a Psionics derived Sidebar.
I favor the former, but a number of people would no doubt want to see some implementation of psionics in PFRPG. Then again, there's an equal number of players who want nothing to do with it, even in sidebar form.
I'm casting my vote for UA spellpoints. How do you plead?
|
|
Veeeerry interesting.So two strong contenders emerge. A UA Spellpoints derived sidebar, or a Psionics derived Sidebar.
I favor the former, but a number of people would no doubt want to see some implementation of psionics in PFRPG. Then again, there's an equal number of players who want nothing to do with it, even in sidebar form.
I'm casting my vote for UA spellpoints. How do you plead?
I'll start with an assumption that Paizo will eventually put something out for psionics along the PRPG model. If that is a valid assumption, it might be duplicating efforts to follow that path. Although I love the psionics material and would prefer that route, I think the Spellpoint variant might be the more practical choice and offer an alternative to Vancian that we might not see otherwise.
My vote goes to using the Spell Points from UA, BUT using the number of points the Psion gains for the sorcerer.
Why: Simply because in the UA table, the sorcer gains ONLY 5% MORE POINTS! At the very least, the psion gains more points, and it would make the game more even. Also, because than the Sorcerer would be able to learn his spells at the same level of the other spellcasters.
My vote goes to using the Spell Points from UA, BUT using the number of points the Psion gains for the sorcerer.
Why: Simply because in the UA table, the sorcer gains ONLY 5% MORE POINTS! At the very least, the psion gains more points, and it would make the game more even. Also, because than the Sorcerer would be able to learn his spells at the same level of the other spellcasters.
I basically agree. Give the sorcerer more points.
Not sure, but I may like to achieve that by scaling back the UA spellpoints for the other classes. I'm not quite sure how they arrived at those numbers anyway.
I'm the sort of guy who likes his tables to boil down to a formula I can do mentally with a little effort. If there's such a pattern to the UA tables, I didn't notice it.
Backward compatible... Let me see...
Can't think right now, but while this would change, I don't think there are many things that depend on this. As some people told here, the "one level later" seems arbitrary.
And about the mental formula, do one of the following:
1 - Don't try. I tried. AND tried, when I created my variant. I just couldn't find how they came to those numbers at UA.
2 - Please, try. Try and DO it, because I couldn't and would love to see a formula there.
|
Hi --
You guys seem poised to make a decision, but I was just wondering if the UA Recharge Magic option was a possibility? I have always been intrigued by it, but never got a chance to play it. I raised this in another post, and someone mentioned that it works well at low levels, but becomes hard to manage at higher levels. I also don't know if it meets the requirement of being able to fit in a sidebar since it requires an entry for each spell.
Sorry, that's about all I can contribute to this issue. I've never been a big fan of spell points since its just as much book-keeping I find. Its not so bad if numbers are relatively low; but when you start to get into the hundreds, its just a nightmare I think. I have found systems like Shadowrun were nice; where casting each spell had a chance to drain you; but that system also had a specific 'drain' per spell. Also, I find spell points doesn't particularly address the anomalies that one can cast far too many of a certain spell than should be allowed (eg: wind up casting 15 fireballs a day i.s.o. only 5 as one is supposed to). I agree that still burns your points, but still -- it winds up being 'overpowered' to an extent; a walking wand.
In any case, there seems to have been quite a bit of analysis done, so I'm sure in the end, the alternate system will be well thought out.
Thanks
PS: Please pick something that will be easily 'portable' to monsters (so that I don't need to break my head wondering how many points [or whatever] a Balor will have).
|
|
The problem with point based system replacing vancian magic, the level 1 spell costing 1 point is the problem...the UA system is broken...
If the level 1 spell cost 10, then goes up by 3 per level, that would help level out the spell casting so you don't end up with 400 spell points, allowing the casting of 400 1st level powers...
so how about this?
10/13/16/19/22/25/28/31/34
this creates a 3:1 conversion for 8th or 9th ----> 1st
meta magic abilities would add points equal to their level adjustment...
a level 1 adding metamagic feats equaling 5 levels would make it cost 15 points...
thoughts?
Why don't you calculate how may 9th level spells/day could be cast using that ratio (max # of 9th level spells),
say by the 20th level Wizard with 26 INT that was used in similar comparisons? (using the Vancian Spell Slot chart as a reference)
That's why there should be a high ratio.
Casting 400 1st level spells a day is not a problem at 20th level.
Most anything you do that affects other characters has a saving throw.
Other 1st level spells don't even affect characters over a certain HD.
Actions/round is the biggest limiter at high level, that's why spells like Time Stop are so powerful. Popping out 1st level spells is a joke, that's why they're only useful for minor buffs/ non-Save utility effects at that point. And Pathfinder is now limiting the number of buffs you can have effecting you at any one point, so they're not even useful for that anymore.
|
|
My favorite magic system of all time is from Earthdawn...
cast a spell...you need 2 skills, threadweaving and spellcasting.
Different spells required you to weave different numbers of threads, based on the complexity of the spell, 1 per round (unless you purchased certain abilities which allowed you to push yourself to weave more threads)
After you weave the threads, you cast the spell with the spellcasting skill. If you fail the casting, you can try again the next round.
Most low-level spells required 0 to 2 threads...you could weave 1 thread and cast the spell in the same round.
Only spells in a "Matrix" can be cast without serious repercussions.
..........................................................................
This Earthdawn system could be modified to Pathfinder by creating a "readied" spell...The spellcaster could have a number of readied spells equal to their ability modifier...swapping a readied spell could be done for free out of combat, or with a knowledge (arcane) wizard/sorc...knowledge(religion) divine casters, or perform for bards...with a relevant skill check with a DC=15+spell level(x2) during combat.
To channel the spell could require a channeling test of d20+CL+ability vs 10+(SLx2)
After the channeling test, the spellcaster must then cast the spell using a spellcraft test versus 15+(SLx2)+metamagic level mod.
|
|
Why don't you calculate how may 9th level spells/day could be cast using that ratio (max # of 9th level spells),
say by the 20th level Wizard with 26 INT that was used in similar comparisons? (using the Vancian Spell Slot chart as a reference)That's why there should be a high ratio.
Casting 400 1st level spells a day is not a problem at 20th level.
Most anything you do that affects other characters has a saving throw.
Other 1st level spells don't even affect characters over a certain HD.Actions/round is the biggest limiter at high level, that's why spells like Time Stop are so powerful. Popping out 1st level spells is a joke, that's why they're only useful for minor buffs/ non-Save utility effects at that point. And Pathfinder is now limiting the number of buffs you can have effecting you at any one point, so they're not even useful for that anymore.
Oh you definitely have a point there...I hadn't thought about the inverse...
Realistically, this shouldn't rock the boat of over-all magic dynamics in Pathfinder/d20.
I think a Point-based system would be a great addition for the Sorceror in particular, and let the Wizard stay Vancian. Your last comment, Xaon, made me think that increasing the ratios HIGHER than UA/XPH, would limit the ability to go "all-out" on high level spells, which is really the game-breaker. Spells lower than your max Spell Level are generally not effective against relevant (non-speed bump) enemies, and are in any case relatively cheap to gain thru wands/scrolls/etc on top of spells/day.
I think this topic is pretty well hashed out, though, so we can hope that it has offered something useful to be taken up by Pathfinder...
Someone mentioned the recharge magic.
Well, actually I tried it in my game, in two of the endless playtests to find my own "Diego's game sorcerer".
Well...f you want to give spellcasters more power, than fo to it. If you think they are already very powerfull without extra options, leaving behind the combatents, then leave it out.
What I found was that while it was nice to see the system, it favored too much the combat spells. Then, while you could cast a fly only once in certain time, you could always cast all your combat spells... Then went color spray, scorching ray, fireball, or hold person and the clerical ones...
Really, it was too powerfull...
|
|
Someone mentioned the recharge magic.
Well, actually I tried it in my game, in two of the endless playtests to find my own "Diego's game sorcerer".
Well...f you want to give spellcasters more power, than fo to it. If you think they are already very powerfull without extra options, leaving behind the combatents, then leave it out.
What I found was that while it was nice to see the system, it favored too much the combat spells. Then, while you could cast a fly only once in certain time, you could always cast all your combat spells... Then went color spray, scorching ray, fireball, or hold person and the clerical ones...
Really, it was too powerfull...
Very interesting. They do state in UA that using this system like boosting the CR by +2 (of the party). I guess your experience has proven that. I find 4th Ed uses the same sort of logic as recharge magic since they basically gone to each spell, and made only one of three categories: at will, per encounter, per day -- i.s.o. some arbitrary number per spell.
Casting 400 1st level spells a day is not a problem at 20th level.
This is what I find problematic of the spell-point system. If you are going to be able to cast 400 1st level at 20th level (which I have no trouble with), then you are effectively saying you can cast an 'infinite amount'. That being said, perhaps the points should only apply to your upper 4 spell levels (or some number). So by the time you can cast 8th level spells, spell levels 1-4 are 'free'; or something to that tune.
Thanks
|
|
Non-Vancian Magic for the Wizard (Fits in a Sidebar)
Don't like spell memorization? Then don't memorize spells ahead of time. Instead cast spells from a book or scroll automatically expending a spell for that day of that level or higher, you can still memorize it, but you don't have to.
Scribe Scroll, also allows you to enscribe spells on other items, such as a staff, so you don't have to access those spells out of a book. which is great because a wizard gets that at first level. A Sorcerer can do the same thing, but obviously gets less out of it.