Vance vs The World: Using Spell Points in D&D
by Matthieu Pierce
In the gaming world, D&D is pretty much the last bastion of its magic system: spell preparation and memorization prior to casting, otherwise known as the Vancian magic system. The rest of the civilized world has moved on to newer and slicker systems, the most popular of these being the spell point system. In short, the amount of spells you can cast before recovering is limited to a pool of spell points, which are expended to different degrees depending on the power and efficacy of the spells being cast. From Diablo to Aberrant, spell/power points are the way to go. (It’s my opinion that the power point system is one of the primary appeals of psionics in D&D.)
The closest that we have to an official version of a D&D spell point system is the variant spellcasting system presented in Unearthed Arcana (pgs 153-157). I decided to take a dive into that system (more of a belly flop, really) and see how a character of heroic attributes stacked up to his counterpart with the standard, Player’s Handbook Vancian system.
Even though I’m not much of an optimizer, the system claims that its flexibility makes casters more powerful overall. Using average daily damage dealt as a rough guide for combat might, I’ve presented the comparative damage dealt by wizards with varied commitments to direct damage-dealing and “utility” spells in the hopes that this analysis will have an application to everyone, twinks and in-depth roleplayers alike.
Test Character: level 9 specialist (evocation) wizard, Int 20. Such a character would have:
Spells Per Day:
0: 6 +1
1: 6 +1
2: 5 +1
3: 4 +1
4: 3 +1
5: 2 +1
----OR----
Total Spell Points: 82
The Unearthed Arcana Spell Point System, Bite-Sized:
Spellcasters gain spell points daily in amounts related to their class, level, and pertinent ability modifiers. Preparation spellcasters prepare a list of spells as usual, from which they can cast any of those spells at the point costs listed below. Spontaneous casters can cast any known spells.
All spells behave normally, with one major exception: Spells that deal level-dependant damage default to dealing damage as the minimum caster level necessary to cast the spell (ex. 5d6 for a fireball). Casters may spend 1 point per effective damage-dealing level (ex. 8 total points for an 8d6 fireball). Other level dependant effects such as range and save DC act as normal.
Unearthed Arcana presents two options for using metamagic: 1) increase the spells’ level and cost as normal (still have to pay extra for damage spells) or 2) Each metamagic feat may be applied to spells 3 time/day at no extra spell point cost (still limited by max level rules, though). I highy recommend the first option.
Spell Point Costs:
0st: free, 3 +1st level class spell points/day
1st: 1
2nd: 3
3rd: 5
4th: 7
5th: 9
1) Damage Summary—PH Vancian system (1 utility spell/level, “Frothing pyro”):
1st: 6 magic missiles: 30d4 +30 damage
2nd: 5 scorching rays: 40d6 damage
3rd: 4 fireballs: 36d6 damage
4th: 3 ice storms: 15d6 damage
5th: 2 cones of cold: 18d6 damage
TOTAL: 109d6 +30d4 +30 damage = 486 avg damage
2) Damage Summary—PH Vancian system (2 utility spells /level, “war mage”)
1st: 5 magic missiles: 25d4 +25 damage
2nd: 4 scorching rays: 32d6 damage
3rd: 3 fireballs: 27d6 damage
4th: 2 ice storms: 10d6 damage
5th: 1 cone of cold: 9d6 damage
TOTAL: 78d6 + 25d4 +25 damage = 360 avg. damage
3) Damage Summary—PH Vancian System (a “utility wizard's” damaging spells)
1st: 4 magic missiles: 20d4 +20 damage (+expeditious retreat +feather fall +grease)
2nd: 3 scorching rays: 24d6 (+glitterdust +blur +shatter)
3rd: 2 fireballs: 18d6 (+arcane sight +dispel magic +fly[/i])
4th: 1 ice storm: 5d6 (+lesser geas +Evards’s black tentacles +shout)
5th: 1 cone of cold: 9d6 (+baleful polymorph +shout)
TOTAL: 56d6 +20d4 +20 damage = 266 avg. damage
4) Damage Summary—Unearthed Arcana Point System (simply the maximum amount of damage)
Available spell points: 82
1st: 1 magic missile: 1d4 +1 1 spell point
5th: 9 cones of cold: 81d6 damage 81 spell points
TOTAL: 81d6 +1d4 +1 damage = 294 avg. damage
5) Unearthed Arcana Point System Point cost estimation of a PHB “utility wizard’s” spell selection (same spell selection as #3)
0: Max 5/day, no cost
1st: (expeditious retreat + feather fall + grease) 3 pts (2 freezing hands) 10 pts (2 magic missiles) 18 pts— 31 spell points
2nd: (3 scorching rays) 21 pts (glitterdust + blur[/i] + shatter) 9 pts— 30 spell points
3rd: (fireball + lightning bolt) 18 pts (arcane sight + fly + dispel magic) 15 pts—33 spell points
4th: (ice storm + lesser geas + Evard’s black tentacles + shout)-- 28 points
5th: (cone of cold + baleful polymorph + teleport)—27 points
TOTAL: 149 spell points
Note: For the spell point summaries, assume that all damage-dealing spells were spent as level 9 spells (and thus costing more than usual).
Note II: Because the option of "utility" spell use is built into the spell point system, there's no need to tally up alternate spell summaries.
Summary:
With the Unearthed Arcana spell point system, wizards lose 45% [82 points/149 needed for PH-equivalent spell capacity] of their total spell capacity in exchange for a 10% [266/294] increase in average potential daily damage (when compared to a “utility wizard” spell preparation selection).
Conclusions:
The Unearthed Arcana spell point system is roughly worthwhile for spellcasters who currently invest at least 50% of their spell slots in non-damaging spells and consume roughly 55% or less of their resources each day. The improved efficiency of spell points and the arguable value of scalable damage are relatively valueless for the purpose of damage-value calculation in the face of these calculations.
The selling point for a damage-interested character is the potential increase in the quality of damage (delivery method and energy type) being applied, such as rays in singular-foe situations or ranged burst spells in multiple-foe situations. Of course, the value of this versatility is directly proportional to the amount of variety in combat situations presented to the character. Each player will have to consider the diversity of combat presented by their DM and make his own judgment.
The second dealbreaker is the drastic reduction in overall spell capacity. If a character regularly expends more than 60% of his/her spells in a day, this variant puts the character at a significant disadvantage.
Clearly, the Unearthed Arcana spell point system, as it currently stands, is a pretty terrible idea for mages who invest a great majority of their spell slots in damage-dealing spells or for mages who regularly exhaust their daily resources, as they’re far more likely to run out of spells.
Thoughts and Suggested Changes:
On the roleplaying front, the spell point system offered by Unearthed Arcana is a great idea for most campaigns. Most people, I think, would concede that the Vancian system is goofy and counterintuitive to the modern fantasy roleplayer’s sensibilities. Alternatively, abstracting spell capacity in the same way that 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons vaguely quantifies hit points seems more natural, and fun to boot—it encourages wizards to prepare an eclectic variety of spells and perhaps even apply them in imaginative game situations. As for players who would use the system to chuck even more fireballs—first, my estimations above hopefully prove this to be an un-twinkworthy endeavor, and secondly, it’s not like they’ll get any less interesting.
On the player optimization front, the spell point system is a gamble for utility mages (at best) and akin to invading Russia in winter for straight-up battle mages (at worst). The most irksome issue is the drastic reduction in overall spell capacity. As a current player in a rough-and-tumble campaign that leaves most party members either crawling home or taking dirt naps on a regular basis, there’s no way that any of our casters would consider downsizing their spell capacity for a bit more flex.
As this is, after all, a variant, I’d like to offer some possible changes to make this tantalizing variant as mechanically tasty as it initially looks. The biggest problem is the overall spell capacity, and can be solved by a simple increase in daily spell points, allowing for roughly one or two more spells per day.
THE BIG FIX: Add 30% to the number of spell points per day (round down to the nearest point) to your class’s base spell points per day.
This may seem like a lot, but because it’s a 30% increase prior to ability bonus modifications and because it’s fighting against an overall 45% spell capacity reduction just for choosing spell points over Vance, it works out just fine. Characters using the spell point system will still have fewer spells than their Player’s Handbook counterparts, but at least now the flexibility and fun provided by this variant is worthwhile.
If everything goes well, these modified spell pointers will mix and balance well with standard Vancian casters. Give spell points in D&D a shot. You won’t want to go back. It’s like trading in that tired old horse and buggy for a BMW.
Enjoy,
Matthieu Pierce
I like your idea for divine casters, Really REALLY like it al lot. On the arcana side i like it to, but... the difference between a wizard and a sorcerer disappears. I really liked that difference between the artist and the scientist being able to achieve the same things by different means.
Do you have any ideas on how to use spell-point and still make for a different wizard and sorcerer? What about giving the sorcerer more points (like your suggestion) but only a few spells, and giving the wizard less points, but being able to casts all the spells in his spellbook?
Any ideas?
Geek
Spell Point Progression (fixed)
I recall hearing that the amount of spellpoints given in UA were meant to be commensurate with the powerpoints given to psions in 3.0. However, now we have the XPH, which was supposed to make the psion more balanced. On the assumption that it is more balanced, and given that the 3.5 psion has more powerpoints than the 3.0 psion, then it's reasonable to assume that a more balanced spellpoint system, if we want commensurability between magic and psionics, would increase the number of spellpoints per level.
I would just give wizards the same number of spellpoints as 3.5 psions have powerpoints, and increase it slightly for the sorcerer. The question (that I have) is whether this happens to turn out to be roughly a 30% increase. (I don't have my books with me right now.)
On another note, I think the flavor of the Vancian system is perfectly fine. Never having the option of a spellpoint system in D&D was an annoyance, but I've never felt that the Vancian system had a problem. After all, it worked for Jack Vance's novels.
Geek: Hopefully, your concerns were answered in my belated "web enhancement" to the original article.
Caeruleus: The 3.5 psion has 343 power points at level 20, compared to the spell point cleric/druid/wizard's 301 spell points at level 20 (using the proposed +30% progression). I think it's worth noting that power points are actually more valuable than spell points-- both systems require that additional points are spent in order to do more damage, but most damage-dealing "augmented" psionic powers also receive a boost in save DC (+1 DC for every additional 2 power points spent), whereas the spell point spellcasters are stuck with the original save DC, regardless of how much they spend. Alltogether, I think the greater number of power points and the comparatively greater value of power points balances with the greater spell versatility afforded to clerics/druids/wizards.
As for the Vancian system, I have no problem with its flavor or even concept; it's a bright and original way of conceiving magic. It's my opinion, however, that it's considerably outside of the mainstream concept of magic, and that many people would be interested in playing a fresh and balanced alternative. In short, it's a pleasant case of good vs. better.
However, it can't be abandoned quite that easily. For one, it's become part of the flavor of the game - over the last Thirty Years. That's a fair bit of intellectual inertia to overcome.
For two, there are lots of other games out there that aren't 'Vancian' All of them, in fact. What's to differentiate the venerable D&D if it breaks with it's own tradition and starts imitating it's long-time imitators?
For three, all the spells ever published for the game are balanced around the mechanics of the 'Vancian' system. Preparation (and the not-too-different spontaneous casting of the Sorcerer) severely restricts what spells a caster can bring to bear in any given instance, and how often they can be used. These severe limitations allow D&D spells to be quite potent, without sacrificing game balance. If you look at other systems, you'll find that either their magic isn't nearly as potent on a spell-for-spell basis as D&D (the case, for instance, with GURPS, Hero, TRoS and so forth), or magic simply dominates the game outright (as in Ars Magica or M:tA).
Every alternative I've ever seen (and, in the 24 years since I started playing D&D, I've seen plenty, and made up a few, for that matter), has wildly over-powered casters by letting them cast spells too often or too easily or - and, surprisingly, this is often the worst of all - simply letting them cast the best spell for the situation every time.
Changing the 'Vancian system' would mean scrapping every spell, and by extension, every magic item and spell-like power, ever published for the game and re-building the magic system from the ground up. It would mean creating a new d20 fantasy game that would be D&D in name only. It's not going to happen. At least, I certainly hope it's not going to happen.
That said, nothing stops WotC from publishing a new fantasy d20 game with a less bizarre magic system.
The real problem I have so far, is what do you do with spell selection? The amount of spell points are all very well, but what to spend those on? In my vision of fantasy gaming, Wizard have acces to more spells less often than sorcerers. I would like to keep this, so do you give sorcerers a number of spells known just as they have know? I'd say yes. But...
Do you give Wizards access to all arcane spells? Or, to all spells from their spellbook? Or something else?
My suggestion is giving the wizard a preparation nonetheless. At the beginning of the day the wizard studies his spellbook, and memorizes the spells he think are good for that day. He spends those using spell points, so he could end up memorizing magic missile, fire ball and invisibility, but in the end, spend all his points on magic missile.
The amount of spells he can memorize should be level dependent and less than the amount of spells known for a sorcerer. Due to increased flexibility I am also tempted to decrease it compared to the spells/day a wizard has using the Vancian system.
I might include the option to cast spells right from the spell-book, using spell points, but the casting time would be at least 1 minute, or the normal time, whichever is longer.
What about that?
Geek
Spell points or power points, Psions are now hyper-cool.
-- N
But-->> I would concur that for classes that always "know" their spells, (Sorc and divine casters) would function better with points. I really think clerics need to be spontaneous, but that's another story. Now, I would be curious to see how it shapes up for Sorcs and Divine Casters.
IIRC, if you use the same equation that the wizard uses to determine the number of points that the Sorcerer gets, it is equal to the number that the XPH Psion gets at almost every level.
D&D is pretty much the last bastion of its magic system: spell preparation and memorization prior to casting, otherwise known as the Vancian magic system. The rest of the civilized world has moved on to newer and slicker systems, the most popular of these being the spell point system.
Honestly there's nothing "new" and "slick" about spell points. These systems have been around since Dragon magazine was in its pre-teens. "Mana" has been around since Final Fantasy I, forget Diablo, and even earlier in more obscure video games. The reality is that D&D IS it's magic system. D&D IS Vancian. If you take out the Vancian system you take out the D&D.
There's no way around it. I realise your article is about a calculation to try and equate things for some perceived injustice in the Unearthed House Rules book, but I think you're missing the point that was in the first three lines of your post. Spell points are not slicker, not newer and by no means in any shape or form better. And they're not D&D.
That being said there's no need to run around in circles about this B.Cordell has provided you with a psionics "points" system that mirrors identically the 9 levels of progression - just port it over integrally, no need for UA. I don't see why having anything "official" is necessary?
For one, the psion is like the sorcerer. They get a limited amount of spells but the ability to cast them however they choose, and can drop lower levels spells (in effect) to cast their higher ones more. Therefore, I believe that it should be the sorcerers who get the psion's power points, not everyone else. The other casters, such as druid, wizard, and cleric, would use a slightly reduced amount, while the bards would follow along the psychic warriors.
As for rangers and paladins, the best solution for them would probably be to take 2/3s of the bard level 2-3 levels lower. This will result in very few points at low levels, true, but if you round up it should balance out.
Just some thoughts, play with them as you will.
In my mind- there is another good reason to not use Spell points- "fantasy accounting" is boring. Then, there is another thing I have seen- Spell points are far too easily lost track of- I have seen psions burn over twice their possible total in one session.
Spell points also make spellcasters more powerful- and the most powerful classes in the game are already spellcasters. This either would make them so powerful there'd be no one wanting to play anything else, or you'd have to boost the other classes so much that'd you'd have to redisgn the whole game. And, already it'd get rid of the critical difference between the Sorc & the Wiz, crocking the poor Sorc even more.
No, let the other games go for their silly "fantasy accounting" methods. They have all fallen by the wayside whereas D&D has reigned as the #1 RPG for 30 years. And Vancian magic is what makes it #1.
Great post. I do have some remarks though:
I like your idea for divine casters, Really REALLY like it al lot. On the arcana side i like it to, but... the difference between a wizard and a sorcerer disappears. I really liked that difference between the artist and the scientist being able to achieve the same things by different means.
Do you have any ideas on how to use spell-point and still make for a different wizard and sorcerer? What about giving the sorcerer more points (like your suggestion) but only a few spells, and giving the wizard less points, but being able to casts all the spells in his spellbook?
Any ideas?
Geek
The Wizard in this official variant doesn't have a Spells Known spell list as a Sorcerer does, but for each day, he selects spells out of his spell book. These spells act as a Spells Known list for each day.
The Sorcerer has more points, and a fixed Daily Spells Known list.
The Wizard has slightly fewer points (equal to a cleric and a druid), and a flexible Daily Spells Known list.
Jak Rustrum,
That is a very good evaluation of the spell point system. Good work!
Just my little input to nudge you all in the right direction. But the post from Mr. Vargas has made me realize that I personally don't want to change the way spells are done in D&D, for that is what defines it mostly (that seems to be the main point, sorry if I erred in reading it) from other types of pen and paper games.
The Spell point system (Especially my system) allows the caster to feel more customized as mana increases much like HP. It is true that it also can make a caster more powerful but coupled with the Spell Recharge system it evens itself out in the end.
There's quite a few spell point topics floating around in the UA section from several months back. If anyone wants to see them and I remember to check back here I could post them up. Most of it was complaining about how nerfed casters, particularly the sorcerer became due to the cut in casting percentages.
*plugs own SP sorcerer in sig*
"Mana" has been around since Final Fantasy I...
I'm sure it has, but the original Final Fantasy uses a system more like D&D. It's mostly like the Sorcerer. Spells have levels and you can cast a given number of each level per day. You can only cast spells of the correct level with your uses. (You can't downgrade like a D&D Sorcerer.) There are four spells of each of the two schools (black and white). Mages can learn at most three spells per level. Spell progression is is pretty similar to D&D, but I think you get a lot less overall (not that a direct comparison is really possible). FF is pretty similar to D&D in the first game. Later the series develops more of it's own identity.
Final Fantasy 2 (the NES game, not the SNES one (that's 4)) is the first FF game with MP. Also, the GBA version of Final Fantasy Origins (1 & 2) had MP added to the first game to make it more like the rest of them.
In contrast, most spell point systems allow anything at any time. Once you know it, it's always available. Surprisingly, this can often reduce flexibility. Either the range of options is very small, so you're effectively using only a few abilities again and again (see also D&D sorcerer), or you have so much choice that choosing a spell to cast a major effort (eg Rolemaster spell lists). Often the latter degrades into the former. A D&D preparation-based caster can memorize few enough spells that the player can know from memory what each will do, yet if the need arises use in-game downtime to select from a much larger list.
I know of at least one other game that uses something of a slotted system: RuneQuest's Divine magic involves sacrificing for powerful spells that are either one-shot (most characters) or renewable (priests).
A lot of players have no idea what to call the system, and Vance is a little ambiguous of a name. I'd have explained that Vance was an author in the '70s from whom Gygax used a magic system based on preparation. Thus, "Vancian" system.
Without explanation, you could say "Classic" versus "Magic Point," in your terminology. But either way, I think this article is wonderful even without the explanation above.
I've seen systems with points, I've seen the Sorcerer, I've made a system based on MTG where you pull mana from lands, I've seen a system where you could cast any spell, anytime, anywhere, but you learned spells at a hideously slow rate, I've seen system based on drawing energy from outsiders, and so on, and so forth.
In the end, it boils down to liking the flavour, and balancing the mechanics.
Same for invisibility. A psion has this as his main advantage. He actually has all of his spells(powers) prepared, but he may not have the power points to use them when the time comes. I think the spell point system gets rid of preparation for versatility but has to sacrifice damage. I also want to point out that a psion can do more damage because of this versatility because in D&D you rarely know what to prepare for.
But I understand that the above is pointless to argue so I want to state that I already know I am wrong (in other people's opinions) so don't post to me on this thread about psionics. I also want to point out that I am not right (in others opinions) and I want everybody who reads this to know that I respect people and their opinions on psionics but I don't want to get into a discussion about it.
:D
It's not strictly Vancian anymore, anyway. You can have spells that you know permanently and are able to prepare without a spellbook. Knowing and preparing spells are now two different things, a subtle but important difference.
It's not strictly Vancian anymore, anyway. You can have spells that you know permanently and are able to prepare without a spellbook. Knowing and preparing spells are now two different things, a subtle but important difference.
Spell Mastery is your friend. Having at least some spells you'll always know is useful.
The only experience I have with points is 2e PSPs. As I cringed every time the psionicist used of his powers (especially Id Insinuation), so I kept track of PSPs closely. A horrid job - especially having to remember to replenish them every hour or so. Too much book work (I guess I just didn't trust the player to keep track of them properly).
Otherwise, I don't mind the system as is. It is tidy and no one in my group seems to complain - in fact I think they LIKE having to angst over which spells to choose (and I do remind them about being able to keep slots "open" if only to ease their pain and anguish).
1) It allows you to swap multiple low level spells for a few high level spells. This is a decided advantage. In your analysis of combat utility of spellcasting, you add up the total damage causable, and ignore damage per round. I'm not happy with that implied equivalence, since at high levels the lower level spells simply aren't viable combat choices, and while they might 'add up' on paper, they rarely do so in practice.
2) It allows you to use the same spells over and over again. This is obvious, and touched upon, but the only other class that can do this - the sorcerer, has crippling limitations on which spells he can do this with. Spell points effectively gives the wizard sorcerer flexibility, particularly with the utility spells. The main advantage of points is not the fact that you can cast a greater variety of damage dealing spells that you imply are functionally equivalent, but rather that you can prepare a large selection of utility spells, but only save the points to cast a few of them, without having lost much of your safety net.
For a 3rd or 3.5 edition game I'd add a concentration check to account for combat noises and other distractions and suggest 10 min/level. This should be long enough to make an open slot useless in a combat situation. If you fail the concentration check at the end of the time the slot would be wasted.
In an old campaign of mine we used a slight variation of the Vancian system. Wizards could choose to keep spell slots open for later use in the day. This was counterbalanced by the time it took to memorize a spell later in the day but gave the wizard much more flexibility. It also lead to interesting in-game situations where the rest of the party had to fight off the enemies long enough to buy the necessary time for the wizard. Of course back then D&D didn't have sorcerers. I don't recall how much time it took exactly but it was based on time per spell-level.
For a 3rd or 3.5 edition game I'd add a concentration check to account for combat noises and other distractions and suggest 10 min/level. This should be long enough to make an open slot useless in a combat situation. If you fail the concentration check at the end of the time the slot would be wasted.
In 3e you can do this. It just takes 15 minutes to fill up (one?) slot.
I personally really like the way the EverQuest magic system as ported to the quasi-D&D tabletop game, and I use something like it as a model in my games. Spellcasters get known spells and a very limited number of memorization slots. You could literally have every spell in the game in your spellbook, but you were still limited to a finite number of memorized spells. In terms of game play, it still calls for planning and foresight for spellcasters, but gives them more freedom to not have to worry about loading every slot with combat spells. A mix becomes far more practical.
For sorcerers, I adapt that to say they can cast any spell they know, which is as it is now, except they don't "forget" them but instead spend their spell points. The balance is their pool of "known spells" is limited compared to what a wizard could potentially know.
Wizard: Limited daily spell selection that is highly customizable but difficult to do "in the field."
Sorcerer: Daily spell selection matches known spell list, but known spell list is fixed and finite.
Cleric/Druid: As per wizard, except they do not have to load their healing/domain spells into memorization slots where they do not have to memorize them in advance in the core rules.
For simplicity, I use the "energy cost = spell level" approach and rather than monkey with remembering number of cantrips, set them at costing 1/4 a point. Balance is achieved by adjusting the fuel capacity (maximum size of spell point pool) and fuel regeneration (rate and system by which spell points are recovered) to control how hard a caster can "burn" and how fast they recover from it.
Large number of points/Slow Recovery: Excellent for allowing casters to "save the day" but with the cost of having to judge that against possible future need. Probably not very satisfying for players unless the spell costs are adjusted so that the regeneration rate matches the capability of being able to use low level spells enough to feel useful in adventures.
Small number of points/Fast Recovery: Casters lack the massive "punch" of the above, but can contribute at close to their maximum capability in most encounters/challenges the party will face.
I'm still toying with balance on number of memorization slots, pool size, and pool regeneration. My goal is to try to strike a balance between "high burst damage" and "being able to contribute consistently" without overpowering casters in general. For multiclass casters/psions, I have decided that magic/psionics draw off the same internal reserve of energy, and that the ability to memorize spells into slots is not restricted to arcane or divine only. A level 18 wizard/2 cleric would be able to load all of their spell slots with cleric spells (although they'd all be level 1) and would have the total energy pool of wizard + cleric (meaning they could cast a LOT of cure light wounds spells....) Similarly, a 10 wizard/10 psion would have the combined energy of both, spell slots of the wizard (since psions don't memorize), and be limited to the range of spells a level 10 wizard would know and the powers a level 10 psion would have.
For simplicity, I use the "energy cost = spell level" approach and rather than monkey with remembering number of cantrips, set them at costing 1/4 a point. Balance is achieved by adjusting the fuel capacity (maximum size of spell point pool) and fuel regeneration (rate and system by which spell points are recovered) to control how hard a caster can "burn" and how fast they recover from it.
The magic system in Fantasy Flight's Midnight works very similarly to this at a gross level. Though scoped for Midnight, I think it would work fine in any setting, provided the DM's intention is a "Rare Magic" world. If you're after more common magic, you probably need to alter the system slightly. Since the mechanics are OGL, I think it's okay to post.
Spellcasting is feat-based. Any character who wants can select the Magecraft feat. Casters come in three "flavors," based on what ability score determines their spellcasting: 'Spiritual' (WIS-based), 'Hermetic' (INT-based), and 'Charismatic' (uh...duh.). A character with the Magecraft feat gets one known spell (each 'flavor' chooses one from a list of 3 available) and can cast a number of 0-level spells per day equal to 3 + his spellcasting ability modifier. He also gains an amount of 'spell energy' equal to his spellcasting ability modifier and can learn and cast Universal spells. Each additional school of spells costs a feat. For the 'Rare Magic' setting suggested, Evocation and Conjuration are both split into "Greater" and "Lesser" schools. You have to be at least Level 7+ to select the Greater version. Also, to reflect the nature of Midnight, characters can learn any spell from the Core Rules not proscribed to ONLY the Cleric or Paladin lists. All spells appear at their lowest spell level on ANY list.
Spells have a cost of "spell energy = spell level" and any character can cast spells. To cast a spell, total character level must = 2 x spell level. Characters must also meet the core requirements, have access to the appropriate "school" and KNOW the spell. Learning a spell costs a character Time, XP, and GP. Learning from a teacher takes 1 day, 50 gp, and 50 XP per level. Learning from a book or scroll takes 2 days, 25 gp, and 50 XP per level. Learning spontaneously takes 2 days, 50 gp, and 100 XP per level.
Now you might do some math and realize that characters run out of spell energy REAL fast using this system. Characters who run out of spell energy can cast spells by allowing themselves to take "spell damage." Spell damage is temporary CON damage that will go away with 8 hours of sleep. Characters receive spell damage equal to the cost overrun in spell energy. In other words, if a character wants to cast a 5th level spell but has only 1 spell energy left, he uses up his last point of spell energy AND takes 4 points of temporary CON damage.
To account for the changes, the system does away with all the core "spellcasters" (Wizards, Clerics, Sorcerers, Druids, Bards, and yes, Paladins and Rangers). Replacing them all is a single class called the Channeler. The Channeler is proficient with the club, dagger, heavy crossbow, light crossbow, and quarterstaff but with no armor. Armor exposes the Channeler to the risk of arcane spell failure per the core rules. Channelers also get a decent skill list, 6 skill points/level and Medium BAB.
Each of the 3 Flavors gets a 'channeler gift:' spiritual channelers get "Master of Two Worlds" (something like clerical turning); hermetics get "Lorebook" (very like bardic knowledge), and charismatics gets "Force of Personality" (similar to bardic song).
Channelers get Magecraft for free at 1st level, plus Transmutation and one other school of choice, 5 0-level spells from his starting schools, plus 3 1st-level spells known from each of those or any other school he knows (due to having spent a 1st-level feat, for example). Additionally, to reflect their mastery of magic, Channelers also get bonus spell energy = levels in the channeler class (i.e. 5th level channeler = +5 spell energy). Channelers also get a bonus school known at Levels 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20. They get a bonus feat at levels 5, 9, 13, and 17 which can be used on a Metamagic or Item Creation feat. Channelers automatically learn 2 new spells of any level they can cast each time they gain a level. The XP cost to learn new spells decreases as the Channeler's mastery of magic improves.
Characters with more levels in Channeler than in other classes can add one to their character level for purposes of determining the level of spell they can cast. Caster level = Character level.
Finally, magic items (called Talismans) and rituals exist that can lessen the spell energy cost of a given spell.
While the tendency might be to think of this system as either "powering up" or "nerfing" spellcasters, my experience is that it restores balance to the classes, making adventures more collaborative at ALL levels. Obviously, some extra classes might be needed to fill in the gaps that result from eliminating 7 core classes (Even though the flavors of Channeler effectively adds 3).
Check it out. Very interesting system.
At odd levels, your healing would be slightly lower, 1d6 rather than 1d8+1, but at even levels, you would have more, 2d6 compared to 1d8+2, and things are even better if you have the healling domain. Likewise, most definitive damage spells would deal 1d6 points per spell point expended, with higher level spells having significantly better ranges or number of targets than lower level ones. For instance, shocking grasp and fireball would both deal 1d6/sp, but the former has a much lower minimum cost, while the latter has a longer range and covers multiple targets. Also, neither spell would have a damage cap, you simply pay more and more spell points.
Finally, most of the cantrips would cease to exist. Either they get rolled over into new 1st level spells, or they disappear entirely.
In terms of spell points/energy systems, the way spells have effects in healing and damage in particular, but other effects as well, also needs to be looked at.
Consider the a level 1 spell that heals 1d8+1 hit points, and a level 3 spell that heals 3d8+3 hit points. If you allow the caster to pump extra energy into a spell, then there is no difference between those two spells. Three castings of lvl 1 vs. 1 casting of lvl 3 is identical in all regards except the time taken. Why have the higher level spell at all except as an emergency/fast heal? Admittedly that does have its uses, but as its only selling point I'm not sure its a good one.
1d8+1 would produce a range of 2 to 9, or around 5.5 (call it 5) hp on average, per point of energy used.
3d8+3 would produce a range of 6 to 27, or around 16.5 (call it 16) hp on average, costing three points of energy (using a spell level = energy cost approach.) Per point of energy, that is 5.5, and if one rounds down the difference between a powered-up level 1 spell and a normal level 3 spell would be zero, and the difference between 3 castings of level 1 and 1 of level 3 would be 2 rounds and 1 hit point (if both are rounded down.)
So the question in my mind (which I don't have a satisfactory answer for yet) is "how do you make higher level spells valuable in real terms compared to up-surged lower level spells?"
1. Don't allow upsurging. A spell does its base effect and that's that. Lower level spells can be chain-cast for an equivalent effect, but the tradeoff is in time.
2. Allow upsurging to produce a scaled effect. In other words, adding +1 energy to a level 1 spell adds +1pt of effectiveness and adding +1 energy to a level 3 spell adds +3pt of effectiveness. So spending 4 points on a level 1 healing spell gives 1d8+1+(3x1) and spending 4 points on a level 3 healing spell gives 3d8+3+(1x3), making the first cover 8.5 and the second 19.5 for identical energy.
3. Alter the spells so that prior to upsurging and eliminating time, higher level spells are more effect-to-cost efficient. Perhaps the level 1 healing spell heals 5hp/energy, and the level 3 healing spell heals 10hp/energy, with the minimum cost in energy being the level of the spell. So one energy in healing 1 produces 5hp healed, 3 energy in healing 3 produces 30hp healed, meaning healing 1 would require spending 6 energy to achieve the same effect. The advantage of the first is there is no benefit in overhealing, so you might not need the full power of healing 3.
In other words:
- No variation based on level or energy
- Variation in how extra energy affects the rate of increase
- Variation in base spell efficiency by level which includes the effect of extra energy spent.
I suppose option #4 is to include different ways to heal as levels go up.
Level 1 = heal over time
Level 2 = fast/inefficient instant heal
Level 3 = moderate instant heal
Level 4 = slow-cast/powerful heal
Level 5 = reactive heal (cast the spell, person is healed when they take dmg)
Level 7 = lesser resurrection type spell
Level 9 = greater resurrection type spell
The point here is to make the kind of spell different, while allowing the spells to auto-scale with energy used.
Memorization: No change. You still can only memorize a certain number of spells. The difference is, that the memorized spells are not 'locked in' to your spells slots. If you have three third level spell slots, you can cast any of your memorized third level spells once, twice or three times. Or any combination thereof.
Spell slot substitution: You can use a higher level spell slot to cast a lower level spell. For example, you can use a 4th level spell slot to cast a 1st through 3rd level spell. The 'extra energy' is lost, unless you happen to have an open spell slot available. For example, a wizard with this variant is out of 1st level spell slots, he uses up a 2nd level spell slot to cast magic missile. The remaining energy left over from the 2nd level spell slot is retained. Basically re-charging a 1st level spell slot.
Improved spell slot substitution: You can add lower level spell slots together to cast a higher level spell (you can not exceed your normal spell level). For example, a 15th level wizard has used up all his 8th level spell slots and needs to cast an 8th level spell. He could spend two 4th level spell slots, a 5th and 3rd level spell slot, or any combination up to 8 to cast the spell. (You can implement this as a special ability after 10th level or as a feat. Either way works).
Metamagic: No prior preparation necessary. Simply use a higher level spell slot determined by however much the original spell was modified. For example an empowered fireball would use a 5th level spell slot. Whether or not it is a full round action is up to debate.
Fundamentally it works the same way the spell point system but takes the majority of the math involved out of it. It's much simpler and quicker. That and is has less of an issue with 'abuse' than the spell point system. Wizards come out ahead with more spells, Sorcerers come out ahead with more spells per day.
A) play a Psionic class,
B) work out a house rule with your DM,
C) Play a different RPG.
Just consider the complications using that system a taste of the complications of what the character must do for the same effects. Spell casting is not a clean neat and easy thing from their POV so why shouldn't their be an air of complication in the spell casting system
And yet, all attempts to address that problem invariably prompt someone to say "play another game system." And, the Psionics system, while interesting, is certainly not the ONLY available fix. Unearthed Arcana proposed several options. People familiar with the 2e supplement Players Option: Spells and Magic have even more available to them.
Changing the magic system is one of the chief ways to change the "flavor" of a D&D game. Yes, that may be a MAJOR change to the game mechanics, but it's still recognizably D&D.
Just because Vancian magic works in the game, that doesn't mean it's the only system that will work in the game. However, if you like the Vancian system, then by all means play with it. Some of us prefer slightly different options.
For example, I like the Midnight system I mentioned above, which I'll be using (naturally enough) in the upcoming Midnight Game I'm running. In my group's current game, I'm playing a wizard using the "daily spell list" variant from Unearthed Arcana, which works basically the same as the Magister in Monte Cooke's Arcana Unearthed. Like the Magister, my wizard is dependent upon his staff to cast spells. Without it, he can only cast one spell of each level, which is considered "innate." He's still bound by level "slots" like in the Vancian system, but doesn't have "fire and forget" spells. Basically, his casting closely parallels that of a sorcerer.
So far, the system works for us. Sorcerers in the game use the Monte Cook Complete Book of Eldritch Might class.
So, there's plenty of options out there. And D&D is still D&D without Vancian magic.
With the alterations, I feel that the system would work much better. Spell points and bonus spell points for the sorcerer should be the same as the psion, while the cleric, druid, and sorcerer should get some amount less.
The only issue with the spell point system is the added versatility of only needing to prepare a handful of offensive spells. So, rather than only having 2 Invisibilities per day, for instance, a character could cast it as many times as they needed. This versatility should come at a cost.
But I also think that the current spellcasters are a little too powerful, so perhaps they should have some amount of reduction in strength through switching to a spell point system. They'll deal a little less damage over the course of the day, but they'll have more versatility and contribute to the party more strongly.
1) "Extra damage" does not cost more. This is mostly a bookkeeping thing as it is a pain in the $*@ to have to figure out spell cost per each damaging spell. It seems to work better than scaling up the number of points IMHO.
2) Sorcerers (and all those that cast like them) get the points given in the book, but recover half their caster level in spell points per hour (or all if they sleep). This helps make up for the new versatility the wizard (and those who cast like them) get from the system. I also allow the PHB2 rules for retraining for sorcerers, so they can change their spells between adventures.
3) Clerics, etc. can spontaneously cast their domain spells in addition to their selection of chosen spells. That way, they may have to plan ahead (like a wizard), but they always have access to their god's "portfolio". Note - I also give all other divine casters access to at least one domain, based on "deity".
It all seems to work just fine in play-testing (so far).
Larkin
However, for sorcerers and other spontaneous casters it completely illogical. Because of that I've been thinking of just using the spell point system for spontaneous casters.
If you notice the bonus spell points per day they come up severely lacking. I'd suggest boosting them to (your caster level + your spell casting modifier)/2 like the psionics system uses instead of boosting spell points per day.
A little thread necromancy here but, if you're sick of the Vancian system, yet spell points seem off to you (or they are too close to psionic power points) one side option is the system Weis and Hickman made for their third party game Soveirn Stone, I forgot if it's 3.0 or if they made a 3.5 ed.
A quick summary of it is: instead of levels, all spells have a DC, each round you roll an accruing caster check (first round roll your caster check, second round roll a second caster check, add it to the first) until the spells DC is reached. Each round of casting, though, you have a DC (10+number of rounds you have been casting) Fort save vs 1d4 subdual fatigue damage. The average breakdown of spell DC would be about 15/spell level. Metamagic adds +15/level the spell would have been, except quicken which exchanges +5 (or +10, I forget) each round to your caster check for auto-failing your fort saves.
Furthermore, spell DC would be used with your spellbook too: memorization was broken into three categories, intimate, quick reference, and full reference. You could have int X level worth (totaling up the spell DCs) of intimate knowledge spells, that could be effectively spontaneously cast, 2(int X level) worth of quick reference, that were daily prepared, and the rest of your spellbook was full reference, you'd have to pull out your spellbook and read out your spell as you cast it.
It is actually a neat system, though high-level individual spells take longer to cast, but faster in acquiring spells. Also the spells/day mechanism is fresh yet balanced: you cast spells until you're too tired, and pass out!
EDIT: oh, I forgot about sorcerers; Sov Stone didn't have sorcerers, so I'd suggest just letting them have 3(int X level) intimate spells, of course, no quick or full reference... no spellbook!