My group has decided to use spell points for the next campaign. I read and understand the spell point section from d20SRD.org, but as DM, what should I expect to change compared to DMing a wizard or sorcerer?
1) They will be able to cast a lot more of their highest-level spells than normal, and can "go nova" easier.
2) They will get free benefits from their lower-level spells, as any non-direct-damage spells scale effectively for free and can sometimes outperform higher-level spells.
"A spell functions at a caster level equal to the number of spell points spent on it before metamagic feats, to a maximum of the caster's Caster Level."
This helps balance out the fact that Arcane spells were not designed with the augmentation mechanic in mind, as Eldritch Lord pointed out (i.e. problems with scaling of non-damage spells). If they want the longer durations or the ability to punch through SR, they have to spend the extra points.
Mor
The spell points system in the UA book effectively slashes the number of spells a caster can cast across the board when they are in use as opposed to the base system. I would suggest having the spells auto-scale to keep the same caster level. Otherwise, there will be no way for your casters to cast the standard number of spells for their class.
That's balanced plenty by the fact that they can unload more high-level spells and that they get free scaling on non-damage spells. It's almost like getting rid of a 20th level wizard's 1st-3rd level spells in exchange for increasing his 9th level spells and boosting his CL on 4th-8th levels; you're not going to miss those spells, trust me.
1: Do you advise I treat them like PP? Doing so would mean spells with dice-based effects like cure light wounds or fireball require more SP to be effective.
2: Do you advise I require 1 SP per spell level? This would allow for a bit more variance and seeming balance since L20 wizards would be less likely to use 10+ L9 spells per day.
1) They will be able to cast a lot more of their highest-level spells than normal, and can "go nova" easier.
2) They will get free benefits from their lower-level spells, as any non-direct-damage spells scale effectively for free and can sometimes outperform higher-level spells.
1) Nova is really the least of your problems, because direct damage spells are clearly the worst path you can go using spell point system, as you have to pay to augment them, unlike the old system, where they scaled for free. This means that the opportunity cost is much higher.
Instead, what you want to watch out for are spells which are every bit as effective regardless of what lv they are cast, and less/not at all reliant on caster lv. Examples typically include those which do not offer saves, such as enervation, forcecage, maze, gate, disjunction etc. Save or dies are fairly effective as well, since their effect is independent of the amount of hp the target has (and so you don't need to waste PP augmenting them just to keep up).
The spell points system in the UA book effectively slashes the number of spells a caster can cast across the board when they are in use as opposed to the base system. I would suggest having the spells auto-scale to keep the same caster level. Otherwise, there will be no way for your casters to cast the standard number of spells for their class.
I wouldn't have the original system any other way. While a normal wiz or sorc will have more slots, this is offset by the fact that they will normally never get to expend all their slots before the end of the day. More often than not, your wiz have some spells left uncast, simply because they were unsuitable for what scenario your DM threw at you. Same with a sorc, you can't convert lower lv slots to higher lv ones (and must use a higher lv slot to cast a lower lv spell).
This will never be the case with a spell point caster, because they are so malleable, in that you can readily channel your spell points towards casting any spell you want, without worrying if you have the "correct slot" to use or not. Imagine a sorc being able to break up and combine his slots on the fly to cast any spell he knows, without any "wastage".
This is the power of the spell point caster, and to balance out the efficiency with which they use their points (in that there will never be such a thing as a wasted or extra unused spell point), they should (or rather, must) get less points compared to what the same class would have with spell slots.
vitalization makes spell points base off your level of fatigue meaning that as you begin to use spell points you soon become fatigued, then you become exhausted, if your fatigue/exhaustion is removed you gain spell points back.
another optional rule allows you to cast spells while you have 0 spell points remaining, when you try to cast a spell for which you do not have enough spell points you must do a concentration check (DC 20 + spell level) or take lethal and nonlethal damage equal to the spell level. the spell still goes through no matter what.
if you have these rules then it is literally impossible to run out of spells, just like it is impossible for a fighter to run out of weapon attacks that's the way it should be.
just like it is impossible for a fighter to run out of weapon attacks that's the way it should be.
It is a fairly common misconception that a fighter has infinite offense at his disposal, because he still has 1 glaring limitation - his hp.
A typical fighter will quickly run out of hp in battle. So it really isn't much use being able to swing your sword an infinite number of times each day, if you can't stand toe-to-toe with a foe to attack, which in turn means that you cannot get to attack him.
Conversely, the typical wizard, played correctly, should rarely be getting hit, if at all.
Infinite spells is just asking for trouble. What is to stop me from simply trapping a foe in a forcecage or flying over him or using some other evasive technique which he cannot counteract, then spam attack spells with impunity? Even against foes like the tarrasque, it will eventually have to roll a natural 1 if I throw enough finger of deaths at it.
fighters have limited defensive capablities but who doesn't every one has HP, I am not saying one is better than the other I am saying that spellcasters usually get the crappy end of the stick meaning their spells are limited while a fighter's attacks are not.
HP is not an offense. fighters have unlimited offensive capabilities, many times a well built fighter can do more damage in a round than a well built wizard. (I have a feeling this is going to be tested in the next hour to few days)
It is nevertheless a factor which ultimately limits how much damage a fighter can do. Which makes sense to include it, as I feel it would be much more meaningful to consider maximum probable damage as compared to maximum theoretical damage possible. Because it would be for naught if a fighter can deal a million damage with each hit, yet cannot get close enough to the foe to deliver his attack.
fighters have limited defensive capablities but who doesn't every one has HP
Like I said, hp is really only relevant if you do get hit. For the wizard, who can easily ward off blows by utilizing combinations such as mirror image+displacement, contingent teleport or dim door, fly, disabling the foe etc, it does not really matter if he has 300hp or just 1hp if he is in no danger of being injured or killed.
Basically, my point is that I do not think it is prudent to compare a fighter's attacks to a wizard's spells, much less allow them at-will. Implement reserve feats if you must, but stay away from Zog's suggestion, as I believe that it is a surefire recipe for disaster.
so if you are tired of the spellcaster saying "well, I am out of spells time to go back to town and rest" then I do suggest the use of at least one of those rules.
and one last thing if the cleric is doing (one of )his job(s) than HP should not be a factor in how much damage a fighter dishes out.
edit: and most protection spells can be cast on a fighter as well.
My suggestion isn't really a suggestion I simply pointed out that if you have those two rules in play spellcasters can cast an infinite amount of spells (limited to 1 or 2 per round (quickened)), and those rules are reserved for high-powered games even more so than spell points in general.
No, you proceeded to say the following, and I quote
if you have these rules then it is literally impossible to run out of spells, just like it is impossible for a fighter to run out of weapon attacks that's the way it should be.
The implication of which I think is all too apparent. The problem here is not that you are necessarily giving bad advice (in that it may well be a viable manner of gameplay in the right setting), but that you are not entirely aware of the ramifications of what you are suggesting, which does not seem at all compatible with what the OP has in mind.
so if you are tired of the spellcaster saying "well, I am out of spells time to go back to town and rest" then I do suggest the use of at least one of those rules.
Except that it way well encourage the caster to not bother about conserving spell points, since he can cast them more often. There are many other ways of working around this (charged items, reserve feats, learning to ration your spells) that help preserve game balance.
Likewise, I personally think those variants were very poorly thought out. It is clear that little or no effort was placed into playtesting or balancing them out. The designer was well aware that spells and effects (such as iron heart surge, but to be fair, that came out long after UA) which removed fatigue could be used to recharge your PP, resulting in a potential endlessly repeatable loop. Likewise, with the 2nd variant (the one with the concentration check), once you crank your concentration check to 19+highest spell lv you can cast, you will never run out of spells, because you can never fail the con check!
and one last thing if the cleric is doing (one of )his job(s) than HP should not be a factor in how much damage a fighter dishes out.
Which in turn imposes a drain of resources on the cleric. So it is not entirely cost-free, as the fighter's seemingly endless supply of hp comes at the expense of the cleric, who could well be using those slots for other purposes.
Healing is a task best reserved after combat, not during, since it is typically more efficient for both the fighter and the cleric to attack the foe, then heal when the battle is over, rather than the fighter attacking, and the cleric hanging back as a healbot. For instance, the faster you take down the foe, the less time he has to attack, which in turn translates to less damage dealt, which can be construed as a form of indirect healing.
This also means that ideally, the fighter should have enough hp to last at least 1 battle without having to call upon the cleric for help.
edit: and most protection spells can be cast on a fighter as well.
Such as? The ones I listed are range: personal, meaning that the wizard can only cast them on himself.
No, you proceeded to say the following, and I quote
*Goes back in time *smacks self *returns to present my reasoning is that spellcasters always get the crappy end of the stick because fighters are always looked down upon. the point is you need both to survive in the dungeon (according to WOTC) and while the spellcaster does nothing because he is "rationing his spells" the fighter is up front laying the smack down (or not), meaning that the fighter is having more fun than the spellcaster. and that's the way it should not be. true, spellcasters usually have some uses outside of combat but I am talking about during combat, and besides spells there isn't much spellcasters can do
The implication of which I think is all too apparent. The problem here is not that you are necessarily giving bad advice (in that it may well be a viable manner of gameplay in the right setting), but that you are not entirely aware of the ramifications of what you are suggesting, which does not seem at all compatible with what the OP has in mind.
I have been using this variant for over a year now and when we use it we get things done, we do not waste time, and we hate wasting time so we decided to put this variant in to save time. it's a time saver that allows spellcasters to have more fun, meaning they get to roll dice more often.
also keep in mind the enemy spellcasters have the exact same thing. I usually choose several spells they have to be on them when the fight starts.
Except that it way well encourage the caster to not bother about conserving spell points, since he can cast them more often. There are many other ways of working around this (charged items, reserve feats, learning to ration your spells) that help preserve game balance.
like I said while the caster is rationing his spells the fighter is up there having fun. and those items cost currency you may not always have, and there are many other feats more valuable than reserve feats.
Likewise, I personally think those variants were very poorly thought out. It is clear that little or no effort was placed into playtesting or balancing them out. The designer was well aware that spells and effects (such as iron heart surge, but to be fair, that came out long after UA) which removed fatigue could be used to recharge your PP, resulting in a potential endlessly repeatable loop. Likewise, with the 2nd variant (the one with the concentration check), once you crank your concentration check to 19+highest spell lv you can cast, you will never run out of spells, because you can never fail the con check!
there is a spell in spell compendium that makes conjuration(healing) remove fatigue, its called healing lorecall. and it will be a while before concentration becomes that high. I have skill focus(concentration), I am 17th level and a +6 constitution stat boost, I still don't have high enough to always pass a DC 28 concentration check.
Which in turn imposes a drain of resources on the cleric. So it is not entirely cost-free, as the fighter's seemingly endless supply of hp comes at the expense of the cleric, who could well be using those slots for other purposes.
Healing is a task best reserved after combat, not during, since it is typically more efficient for both the fighter and the cleric to attack the foe, then heal when the battle is over, rather than the fighter attacking, and the cleric hanging back as a healbot. For instance, the faster you take down the foe, the less time he has to attack, which in turn translates to less damage dealt, which can be construed as a form of indirect healing.
so if a fighter is losing HP the cleric does not go to heal him which is guarunteed healing, and risks the chance of attacking the monster with a dagger and doing little to no damage. and let me also say that this variant also allows the dm to throw harder challanges at the party, I recently threw a CR 21 at them, it was tough for all of us (there weapons were sundered) but we still got through it.
Such as? The ones I listed are range: personal, meaning that the wizard can only cast them on himself.
displacement is touch range and many other protections are also touch range,
1) Nova is really the least of your problems, because direct damage spells are clearly the worst path you can go using spell point system, as you have to pay to augment them, unlike the old system, where they scaled for free. This means that the opportunity cost is much higher.
Instead, what you want to watch out for are spells which are every bit as effective regardless of what lv they are cast, and less/not at all reliant on caster lv. Examples typically include those which do not offer saves, such as enervation, forcecage, maze, gate, disjunction etc. Save or dies are fairly effective as well, since their effect is independent of the amount of hp the target has (and so you don't need to waste PP augmenting them just to keep up).
Nova-ing isn't just damage; I consider tossing 4-5 save-or-dies in a round or too nova-ing as well. ;)
my reasoning is that spellcasters always get the crappy end of the stick because fighters are always looked down upon. the point is you need both to survive in the dungeon (according to WOTC) and while the spellcaster does nothing because he is "rationing his spells" the fighter is up front laying the smack down (or not), meaning that the fighter is having more fun than the spellcaster. and that's the way it should not be. true, spellcasters usually have some uses outside of combat but I am talking about during combat, and besides spells there isn't much spellcasters can do
If you play a caster to its full potential, the fighter might not contribute anything at all, and where would you be then? Infinite spells gives the casters something to do all the time, yes, at the expense of game balance being thrown out the window.
like I said while the caster is rationing his spells the fighter is up there having fun. and those items cost currency you may not always have, and there are many other feats more valuable than reserve feats.
You only need one reserve feat and wands are very cheap; sacrificing balance in favor of constant blasting is great in the short term but can ruin games in the long run.
there is a spell in spell compendium that makes conjuration(healing) remove fatigue, its called healing lorecall. and it will be a while before concentration becomes that high.
That's exactly the point: It's too easy to remove fatigue.
I have skill focus(concentration), I am 17th level and a +6 constitution stat boost, I still don't have high enough to always pass a DC 28 concentration check.
At 17th level, you have 20 ranks. Take the Steady Concentration feat (Races of Stone) and you make DC 30 every time, no items or other feats necessary.
so if a fighter is losing HP the cleric does not go to heal him which is guarunteed healing, and risks the chance of attacking the monster with a dagger and doing little to no damage.
Why is your cleric using a dagger instead of flame striking the monster or putting up divine power and getting a greatsword and full plate?
If it works for you, great, but in general spell points, fatigue casting, etc. don't mix well (if at all) with Vancian casting.
also keep in mind that enemies have the exact same thing, it seems that is what everyone forgets.
and we also seem to be discussing high level play, a cleric doesn't ever get displacement and they don't get access to divine power until 7th level, they are the only ones that have access to healing lorecall which means wizards need to rely on items to get their spellpoints back, nothing they have can remove fatigue to my knowledge, and casters cannot simply dip into cleric to get healing lorecall as it is a second level spell. maybe if I ever do a low power campaign I will make it 3rd or 4th level or get rid of it entirely.
also I think it is cool that a wizard can literally cast himself to death if he really has to.
also keep in mind that when a spellcaster casts enough spells they become fatigued then exhausted, and that sucks for anyone.
but I am just making points here everyone seems to think that I must be in the looney bin to allow these rules to come into play, they are balanced to some degree especially since enemies can do the same thing.
I don't think I am trying to convince everyone that my way is better, I am simply saying that if you don't mind a spellcaster casting a spell every round of the day then this is the way to go.
also keep in mind that enemies have the exact same thing, it seems that is what everyone forgets.
and we also seem to be discussing high level play, a cleric doesn't ever get displacement and they don't get access to divine power until 7th level, they are the only ones that have access to healing lorecall which means wizards need to rely on items to get their spellpoints back, nothing they have can remove fatigue to my knowledge, and casters cannot simply dip into cleric to get healing lroecall as it is a second level spell. maybe if I ever do a low power campaign I will make it 3rd or 4th level or get rid of it entirely.
also I think it is cool that a wizard can literally cast himself to death if he really has to.
also keep in mind that when a spellcaster casts enough spells they become fatigued then exhausted, and that sucks for anyone.
but I am just making points here everyone seems to think that I must be in the looney bin to allow these rules to come into play, they are balanced to some degree especially since enemies can do the same thing.
In that case, go ahead and use those variants. It just seemed that the tone of your last few posts was more defensive than they apparently were meant to be, and a few of your points were in error, so I thought to correct them. If that's not a problem for you, feel free to ignore that advice.
I have skill focus(concentration), I am 17th level and a +6 constitution stat boost, I still don't have high enough to always pass a DC 28 concentration check.
That gives you a con check of +29. How is it that you can even fail a dc28 check, considering that a natural 1 is not an automatic failure, when the lowest you can possible roll is +30?
And that is just the unoptimized version, given how one can readily boost his concentration check if he feels so inclined.
and you didn't notice that a constitution increase of +6 only garners a +3 to concentration. (base constitution 12) becomes an 18 (+4) 20 ranks and skill focus makes it +27.
but I stopped it at 19 ranks anyway because there is no point, I can take a few points of damage without fretting about it. it is not often I run out of spell points because of the first variant.
and you didn't notice that a constitution increase of +6 only garners a +3 to concentration.
Nitpick: Since you didn't give a base score you were improving with the +6 "boost" it seemed more likely that +6 was your total Con modifier (a "boost" to the check), not +6 to your existing score.
That being said...
I use the spell point variant in my games and I use the concentration and fatigue rules to boot.
Players can't wipe away fatigue and such with spells such as the ones listed above because it is a deep soul weary fatigue. Yes I created something new in my world but I had to because number crunchers wanted to take advantage of something good to twist it into something like it was a video game with a cheat code enabled. The type of fatigue can only cured with rest, yes you heard me, old fashioned rest.
And as for the concentration variant I changed that as well. Players can push themselves beyond there normal limit but have to take into account a few things in my world.
They don't take 2 lethal/Non lethal damage. If a player or NPC pushes themselves beyond there normal limits they first make the concentration roll. If they succeed they only take the level of the spell in non lethal damage. Pushing yourself is still pushing yourself so you don't get off scott free. If they fail they take Lethal and Non lethal damage = to the level of the spell.
This method has worked wonderfully in my 3 campaign's I am running. Players have flexibility while still having to be careful and not let themselves get carried away.
Even with spell point a wizard has to be careful. They could burn through them just as quickly as spell slots in the old system. The mage still has to rest to recover spell points, so its 8 hours of down time either way.
0-levels: 3+(level 1 SP) per day = clerics and druids lose 1 0-level spell, wizards get 1 extra, sorcerers are unchanged, and bards are totally shafted (they only get 3...ever)
all other spell levels: nixed. At low levels, these numbers add up to almost the same number of spells per day, but after about level 5 or so the difference becomes obscene...
Bonus SP though adds up perfectly though... every bonus slot gives you the SP needed to cast that slot instead.
Example: 20th level sorcerer has 6/day at all levels. SP cost of all those spells is 6(1+3+5+7+9+11+13+15+17) = 6(81) = 486. The amount of SP a sorcerer gets at 20th level is 249. That's 0.51 times the amount of SP it would take to get all of the sorcerer's normal spells per day.
This system benefits wizards the most, turning them into almost spontaneous casters, and with the least amount of loss in spell power. Instead of the 324 needed to cast all their spells per day, they get 232, which is 0.71 times the amount they'd need to cast it all. It also turns them into effectively spontaneous casters with a constantly expanding selection of spells to swap in for spells known for the day. It's like sorcerer on crack.
So, by the numbers, sorcerers lose power, wizards gain versatility at the slight expense of power, and I don't feel like running numbers for the divine casters. Also, bards are totally shafted. lol