Post/Author/DateTime	Post
lavekkia 01-19-06, 03:01 PM	i need spell point progression for assassin, wu jen warlock and others... could someone point me to an old thread/online res ?
Schitzophrenia_Manifest 01-20-06, 07:25 PM	Assassin: Dunno. I'm thinking it'd be a cross between the paladin and bard progressions. Wu Jen: Wizard progression, methinks. Warlock: They wouldn't have spell points. They can cast any of their invocations at will. My two oreos.
Seeker of Undeath 01-20-06, 09:16 PM	i need spell point progression for assassin, wu jen warlock and others... could someone point me to an old thread/online res ?Assassin would probably be as the paladin or ranger but sped up to fit in 10 levels. Wu jen would be as the wizard. Warlock has no spell points just as it never had spell slots.
MythMage 01-21-06, 12:26 AM	I derived this based on the the patterns shown in previously converted classes: Lvl Assassin 1 0 2 1 3 5 4 6 5 14 6 17 7 29 8 34 9 41 10 48 Incidentally, this also works for the Fatemaker from the Planar Handbook and the Vigilante from Complete Adventurer.
Xeviat-DM 01-21-06, 02:16 AM	The UA spell point progression is flawed, as is UA spell point spellcasting in general. In my signature is a new spell point system designed after the Expanded Psionics Handbook's Power Point system. Each spell has a base cost, and most spells have augmentations; an augmentation allows you to spend more spell points to gain added effects. As for spell point progressions, these are what I have right now: Sorcerer/Other Spontanious Casters: 2 5 9 15 23 32 42 54 67 83 99 117 137 158 180 204 230 257 285 315 Wizard/Other Preparatory Casters 1 3 6 10 15 21 28 36 45 55 66 78 91 105 120 136 153 171 190 210 Bard/Other 1-6 Spontanious Casters: 0 1 3 5 7 10 14 18 22 27 33 39 45 52 60 68 76 85 95 105 Ranger/Other 1-4 Casters - - - 1 2 3 4 6 8 10 12 15 18 21 24 28 32 36 40 45 I made these equasions with formulas that I think are more regular and make more sense than the current XPH formulas; basically the wizard, bard, and ranger gain points each level equal to cost of the highest level spell they know (averaged for the levels where they don't gain a new spell level), while the sorcerer gets 1.5 times more than the wizard (since the wizard used to have 4 spells per day per level, while the sorcerer had 6). Yes, these amounts are smaller than the XPH amounts (the psion would use the sorcerer total), but I like the fact that they make sense and can be extrapolated. The above poster is right about Warlocks: they don't use spell slots at all, so they won't have spell point progressions. Giving them one would detract from the whole reason of the class.
lavekkia 01-21-06, 09:01 AM	thanks for answers :)
Leonidus 01-22-06, 02:20 AM	Personally, the only problem I have with UA's spellpoints is the lack of free scaling. I prefer to keep augmentations a psi-only deal, I'd rather not have to re-write the PHB just for one small tweak like this. With the system as written (where I'll already take into accout my extra bit of the free scaling) I still want to see alt progressions for the other added classes. Some way to mathematically or systematically explain the progressions given. There has to be one.
Xeviat-DM 01-23-06, 03:06 PM	Personally, the only problem I have with UA's spellpoints is the lack of free scaling. I prefer to keep augmentations a psi-only deal, I'd rather not have to re-write the PHB just for one small tweak like this. With the system as written (where I'll already take into accout my extra bit of the free scaling) I still want to see alt progressions for the other added classes. Some way to mathematically or systematically explain the progressions given. There has to be one. As far as we can tell, there is no mathmatical formula for the psion's spell point progression. The 3.0 Psion had a formula: at each level they gained enough PP to manifest their highest level power. Now, the closest thing to a formula (more of a guideline) I've found is that their PP has a cumulative ratio of about 1.7; each level add 1.7 to a running total, and multiply that running total by 1/2 their class level, and you get a number that's somewhat close to their PP. And if you're interested in using augments for the PHB spells, I've already done the work. Hop over to my MP thread, it's linked in my signature.
Leonidus 01-23-06, 04:17 PM	As far as we can tell, there is no mathmatical formula for the psion's spell point progression. The 3.0 Psion had a formula: at each level they gained enough PP to manifest their highest level power. Now, the closest thing to a formula (more of a guideline) I've found is that their PP has a cumulative ratio of about 1.7; each level add 1.7 to a running total, and multiply that running total by 1/2 their class level, and you get a number that's somewhat close to their PP. And if you're interested in using augments for the PHB spells, I've already done the work. Hop over to my MP thread, it's linked in my signature. No offense intended to your and your work, but I meant what I said about not liking that system. I prefer to keep augments psi-only, for three reasons, converting the PHB spells being one, which you have covered, but also for flavor, keeping the two systems magic and psionics, functionally seperate. (I tend to use both at once.) There is also that I would rather not have to convert or re-write every new spell or whatever that comes into my game. (Especially given that I would rather be able to open up a new book and use things as-is rather than have to write-and-tweak or ignore new material altogether.) As for the formulas, I meant for the progressions given in UA, if anything, I would be more likely to use a variation on that system than anything. (As mentioned above..) Although that is a starting point for exploring the existing sets...