Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Verelor 08-20-05, 04:59 PM	As a DM I think it's a little too much to expect my players to provide as a component an extremely specific 4000 g.p. gem object every time they want to cast a instantaneous spell. Don't you? Please give me your feedback about this simple varient: A character that does not have a specific material compnent listed with a cost simply pays twice the amount of experience as the cost of that component. So the above component would cost 8000 exp with this varient if they simply don't have access to it. That's costly as hell, I know, but a lot of players might like it a little better than going on a specific quest just to cast a single spell.
KmartKommando 08-20-05, 08:51 PM	Under creating magic items in the DMG, it says 5g per 1xp. Other than that, I see no problems with this variant.
Fargren 08-20-05, 09:57 PM	Under creating magic items in the DMG, it says 5g per 1xp. Other than that, I see no problems with this variant. True, but this variant(as I see it) is not meant to replace component, it's suposed to make casting wihout a material component possible, as a contingency plan, not to replace material costs completely. Maybe 1gp=2xp IS too much, but 5gp=1 exp is certainly not expensive enpugh
Mind Rogue 08-20-05, 10:55 PM	I think a better idea might be to make the Xp cost be half of the Gp cost. This would be more expensive then the normal 'price' of Xp, which makes it ordinarily prohibitive, but it works for a contingency plan. However, I think that even 1 Xp per 5 Gp will still make it mostly prohibitive since even an extended first level spell will cost 50 Xp, more than that for just aout anything else. Second level spells will generally each cost at least 200 Xp, and from there it just gets higher. If the casters want to keep paying these high costs, then they are not going to be getting anywhere. However, I like the idea, since it helps to give the idea that by using up some of the PC's personal power or soul or something, they can make their spells more powerful. Doing so might symbollically shorten their life expectancy, but it might also save them in an emergency.
Verelor 08-21-05, 11:15 AM	I think I'll settle with 1 and a half times the exp as GP cost. This certainly isn't any sort of replacement to material components with a cost (it can drain levels QUICK), but it's good for an emergency, like when you're in an undead wasteland and can't exactly provide an ornately decorated 3000GP mirror :)
weasel fierce 08-21-05, 01:54 PM	How does casting spells make you less experienced ? I personally like the spell components, since they are one of the balancing elements of many powerfull spells.
Mind Rogue 08-21-05, 02:12 PM	How does casting spells make you less experienced ? I personally like the spell components, since they are one of the balancing elements of many powerfull spells. The same way that making magic items does, you pour forth some of your personal power into it, which makes you slightly weaker, which is represented by a loss of Xp. There is even a precedent for it in some spells, such as wish, miracle, greater restoration, simulacrum, permanency, gate and planar ally, awaken and a number of divinations.
weasel fierce 08-21-05, 02:20 PM	So its basically a magic point system by proxy ?
Verelor 08-22-05, 06:56 PM	No. But you're pessimistic.
Verelor 08-24-05, 05:56 PM	*Necromancy