| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if instead of spell level we shorten it to splevel?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have another suggestion: page.
Space in the Spellbook: A spell takes up one page of the spellbook per spell level. Even a 0-level spell (cantrip) takes one page. A spellbook has 100 pages.
The wizard can catalog his spells by the number of pages each spell takes up in his spellbook. "It took me three years of study to master 2-page spells, but this young adventuring wizard went from 1-page spells to 2-page spells in five days!"
The disadvantage of "page" is that new level, new circle, or new rank implies a more advanced kind of spell, but new page implies merely another spell learned. The other disadvantage is that page makes sense for classes with spellbooks, but classes without spellbooks would say that only through borrowing the terminology of the spellbook classes.
One interesting idea I heard was to rename "spell level" as "valence," partly for clarity and partly to relate Vancian casting to something that makes a slight bit of sense to anyone outside of RPGs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One interesting idea I heard was to rename "spell level" as "valence," partly for clarity and partly to relate Vancian casting to something that makes a slight bit of sense to anyone outside of RPGs.
No offense meant, I'm just unclear how the term "valence" means anything to anyone, outside of a physicist or chemist? I really haven't heard that term come up in business workplaces, movies, songs or television with any regularity.
I would really like if they changed it to spell circles and got rid of "spell points".
Ars Magica used the term "magnitude" when describing the gradations of spells' power*. It's less wonky than "valence" and more precise than "circle."
*- Granted, the spells still had an associated level. However, that was more about the way the spell system worked (Form + Effect + modifier(s) + die roll to learn/cast); spells within a few "levels" (with each "magnitude" representing five "levels") were pretty close in their power and would be similar to what PF would be the same "spell level."
If I was to do it I would think of ‘order’ ‘a spell of the first order’ etcetera.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get why tiers wouldn't work. First tier spells being basic and typical sorcery, with Tenth tier spells being outrageously powerful and almost unheard of.
I've recently been involved in a game with several new players and I have to say the character level vs spell level issue has been... an issue.
I'm on old hand at the game, so I have no problem with spell levels vs. character level, but some of the new players I've seen don't seem to get the difference (someone pointed this out with the "I'm 9th level, so I can cast wish" comment).
I like the idea of calling spell levels circles instead. It's evocative and in my experiences with new players it will make more sense to them.
EDIT: Tiers is good too!
Agree with ending the overloading of the term "level". This has been an issue for new players nearly 100% of the time in my experience. "Tiers", "ranks", "pages", whatever term is used doesn't matter to me, but to avoid overloading words with a technical meaning, that's just good writing!