Now that the DM guide is here for 5e and everyone has had an opportunity to peruse it which do you think you prefer between using the 5e default spell slots or the DM guide option of spell points and why?
I prefer the standard spell slots (both as DM and as a wizard player).
Primarily because I feel that giving up 1 each of a character's possible 6th and 7th level spell slots per day is a huge, nearly unthinkable penalty - but at the same time I see that spell points effectively allow trading in your 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and all but one 4th level slot (a total of 12 castings of spells, with 27 total spell levels) for an extra nine 5th level spells (less castings, but still turning 27 spell levels into 45 spell levels), and that is a ridiculously potent bonus.
So I basically am giving up too much and getting too much all at once, while also adding complexity of book keeping - and that's all basically just one long list of negatives in my opinion.
Spell Slots preferred.
Especially since they reinvented the vancian system.
I really, really like how 5e is working the spell slots and the spells prepared now.
And the balance at higher levels with only just 1 spell slot for spell levels 8 and 9 as much improved,
compared to the non-casters.
spell slots for simplicity
spell points feel more organic but are a lot of extra bookeeping.
only solution i can think of is just limiting maxinum number of ninth level spells you can cast despite your number of spells points left in your reserve
cowleymen wrote:
We currently use slots. Though not the standard amounts. When we use points it's a higher magic game.
I have a character who is likely to multi-class into Sorcerer, and I plan to lobby hard for spell points. Reason 1: I only want to have to track one resource pool rather than multiple pools for each spell level. It will be easier for me to subtract two, three, or five points from my spell point pool based on the spell being cast than to track three different spell slot pools. Reason 2: I expect to use first level spells a lot. Spell points allows me to exceed four castings of Shield (for example) per long rest without having to spend higher level slots to cast a spell that doesn't scale. Reason 3: The relationship between spell points and sorcery points is eaiser to remember than between spell slots and sorcery points. One sorcery point can be converted to one spell point. Two spell points can be converted to one sorcery point.
For me, spell points will be simpler and more flexible. YMMV.
For D&D, spell slots because it just feels right. For other game systems I enjoy spell points. It all depends on how the designers built the system.
I greatly prefer the flavor of points. Organic is a good word for it. Spell slots never made any sense to me; just what are they representing in-universe? How is it that I can't possible muster the strength to pull off another level 9 spell, but I have no problem slamming out a level 8, level 7, level 6, two level 5's, 20 level 1's...
But D&D has really hitched its horse to the spell slot thing in terms of spell design. Artificially limiting the number of level 6+ spells you can generate each day defeats the purpose of having MP. Making the low-level spells so much cheaper means you can spam Shield all day. Making the high-level spells cheaper means you can use too many combat-ending nukes, or Wishes. Making them more expensive means up-casting lower spells starts giving terribly inefficient returns. The spell list just isn't suited well to an MP system.
I'd probably stick to MP for a lower-level game, though. I'd probably house rule a lower MP limit that's recovered after short rests, too. Warlock-ish, but fits that spellcasting style better, I think. Haven't tried this yet, though.
Btw, can someone explain how it's harder bookkeeping? Seems actually more straightforward to track one number, instead of all your slots.
Kurhi_al_Sid wrote:
Yes, I know about the chart for MC casters. What I meant by multiple pools was X first level spells, Y second level spells, and Z third level spells (three different pools) vs X spell points (one pool).
FighterFan wrote:
I'm still new to 5th edition as far as actually playing goes, but for the most part, I prefer Spell Slots. I haven't seen a sorcerer in action yet but I think I'd prefer them with spell points with the class but I'd probably put an upper limit on the level 6+ spells/day if we chose to play with that.
The reason why I prefer Spell Slots is because it seems pretty darned balanced. When you limit the level 6+ spells/day it still gives the players some heavy hitting awesomeness without making every encounter trivial. And with preparing wizard spells it gives you some versatility and still makes the choice of what to memorize interesting. Should I memorize two different 7th level spells even though I can only have 1 7th level slot?
- Eck
I have thought I would want to use spell points and represent them with a bag of counters and write my spell book out by point cost. As I spend points I discard my counters. If I use arcane recovery I put some counters back in. Seems like a simple and tactile way to handle them.
Unlike most posters in this thread, I greatly prefer spell points. I do know I'm giving up a 6th and 7th level slot endgame, but it greatly boosts my power in the meantime--I've used suggestion, phantasmal force, and the like to enormous effect, something I just couldn't pull off with only a few slots.
Also, I'd rather have 9 Walls of Force than 2 Forcecages, but that's just me.
Eck wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Hate spell points with a passion. Love the slots. Love the crafting and preparing of each spell in advance.
arnwolf666 wrote:
Matau99 wrote:
Luck had nothing to do with it.
They didn't put the dreaded horible terrible Spell Slots Points in the PHB ... because they know how "hard" it is ; as witnessed by generations and editions of d&d fans.
Instead it's in the DMG where DMs can navel gaze, and wonder if there should be Magic Items, or Spell Points, or Towns ... or worse !!
... oh my Mearlsus , save us from the fires of spell points. Alleluia. Where's the tylenol?
To be honest I have never seen a spell point system that worked ever. The memorize slot system always worked well for me. That's my experience anyway.
Thematically, Spell Points fit Sorcerers much better than Wizards.
Spell points, obviously. They are an organic way of dealing with magic, whereas Spell Slots reek of artificialness.
I could buy vancian magic, if it operated on a Memory Capacity basis, rather than the spell slots/level basis that they do. So you could either memorise big honking lvl 7 and above spells completely, or you could opt to memorise and prepare to spam lvl 3 and bellow spells all day long.
So, yeah, Spell points. But not the option presented in the DMG.
I think of preparing spells like working in a lab. When I work in multiple test throughout a day. I can do 2 little tests at the same time, sharing resources, When I am doing a big tests, during the little breaks while things are setting up, I work in some of the smaller tests. It allows efficiency in preparation and getting my work done, rather than just do test 1, then test 2, then test 3. That is why I can do lots of smaller tests while working on a bigger test. That's kind of how I look at preparing spells with a slot system. It's about economy in time, and why you can prepare a low level spell (especially in 3.x) in a higher level slot, but it doesn't really get you any extra spells per day.
We are doing Spell points in our game. It has turned the Mage into more of a Warlock (FireballX5). I use it on my Cleric/Sorcerer Tank mostly to spam low level spells that don't get much from casting at higher (Shield, 4 person Bless). I find the party tends to push a little harder since they usually have a good spell available.
randl wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
Matau99 wrote: