Spell Schools and casting cost

[AC81]

To add to all the wonderful suggestions we've had recently ...

I think we should implement a casting cost (to represent component usage) or a component system for spellcasters. Adding to this, I think high-end spells (9th level and definitely epic spells) should incur an xp loss upon use. This xp penalty is non-refundable, cannot be restored magically and cannot delevel a caster. If the caster doesn't have enough xp (e.g. they've just levelled), then they can't cast the spell.

Also, the current change to specialisation and the ability to pick spell schools, I believe should change. Wizards should be made to pick two opposition schools if they want to specialise in one.

These suggestions are in-line with PnP and can be implemented mechanically based on what I've seen in our PW (e.g. we currently have spells that cost gold, we have the new spell school system).

[Tantive]

It would be one way to limit spellcasting willynilly bringing risk and cost into it. Theres plenty spells dont incurr exp costs, but each do have some component.

[JCVD1]

I'll all for it if:

Weapons can break if you roll 1's and aren't refundable
Armors get damaged with each critical hits, and aren't refundable.
If boots get worn out and aren't refundable.
If cloaks tear up and aren'T refundable.

I think this is too a good way to prevent abuse of epic gear on mundane creature and silly PvP.

[AC81]

Well, I think my suggestion is reasonable, given that we currently have the mechanics to support it, it's lore based and it would help curb casters power somewhat. There is no reason for specialist mages to not have to pick two opposition schools -as per lore. I don't think degradable armour and weapons are practical as that would affect everyone (and is also off topic).
Why are casters able to cast epic spells without some cost? Why all this power and no willingness to discuss pnp and lore accurate balances? Is altering/reducing power levels of casters taboo and yet it is fine to increase power levels (or nerf melees) all the time. Why is it okay to suggest pnp or lore accurate changes to other classes, or ridiculous suggestions like playable vampire sub-types, yet changes to casters classes are continuously met with silence or criticism.
My point in making this post is that there are countless things in this game we could not-pick over - why can't we let things be and let people enjoy their pastime?

[chad878262]

How would the selection of two opposition schools for specialist mages impact the red wizard prc? Would they then need a third opposition school? Balance doesn't happen in a bubble...What about druids? Seems of they would buy components.

[AC81]

I would assume red wizards would need to select a third yes. But not sure on that. I understand that balance isn't ever going to happen. But there is an ever-widening divide between casters and melees. Druids ... not sure, but surely even divine casters have components and they definitely have access to epic spells. Druids have to pay for spells like Treestride already, so I assume we are already using component cost of sorts there. I also like the idea of xp reduction for epic spells. Again, this is nothing new for casters - it's all straight out of the players handbook. And before anyone says it, I know we aren't playing pnp but everyone has been using that as a reason to further dumb down melee classes lately so I thought I'd have a look at some drawbacks that our casters are currently missing out on.

[Akroma666]

Not to detour the thread, but aren't mages already broke because of spell scroll costs, teleporting, and alchemy?

[AC81]

Not to detour the thread, but aren't mages already broke because of spell scroll costs, teleporting, and alchemy?

Scrolls are one off costs, teleport has a cooldown and alchemy ... are all mages alchemists? Plus, we essentially have infinite hold on this server, it's even been stated as a problem. How do we give gold value? How do we create gold sinks? etc.

[Kauaiian]

I like this suggestion. It gives casters a more "real" element to it. Couldn't the spell damage changes be reverted back as well?

[Face]

Gows to the bat cave to..... harvest some guano for his fireball spells.

[Storm Munin]

Yes, finally tall people can make coin off the cob webs they collect in dungeons, basements and other adventurous locations!

Seriously though I am all for it AC81, feel free to come up with a suggestion of costs and required (if any) components for each spell.

[Wolfshear]

Dear god no to pretty much all of it.

[Shad]

I like the suggestion!

It is easily implemented to all spells using Spellhook mech in toolset, and opens whole of new opportunities for RP and collecting and trading rare components. Gems would have real use, all the shrubs in the wilds, components would drop in creatures loot, whoa! Better then empty bottles.. no, empty bottles could be used to!

And components should not weight much. Or wizards would need to hire someone to carry all that things for them... or maybe they should? Again, new rp!

Teleports are used by pretty much all through scrolls, and are good gold sink. Scrolls to learn spells are only needed once. And only best should have many spells, wizards learn spells all their life!

[metaquad4]

So long as scrolls also incur these material costs, and the gold sink exists on both sides of the coin (weapons and armor breaking, creating the need for them to be replaced for martial characters who rely on them) that sounds good.

Also, if spells are going to be reverted to their original damage caps (as was suggested previous to my post) then BAB should stop progressing at 20 (since, at most, spells capped out at 20, with the exception of 1 that capped at 25), with +1 AB at 23, 26, and 29 in a similar manner to caster's +DCs. The reason the spells were changed was that attacks progressed (unlike nwn1) past 20, while spells did not [making many offensive spells fairly useless in comparison to straight up attacking]. Maybe in addition to this, attacks could be reduced in damage by 5, in addition to AB, with every new attack.

Next, reduce the gear limit by 1 (to +2, with +3 things being very expensive/rare) but do not touch the mobs. This creates a strong element of teamwork, where martial characters will require wards for the higher level areas and will need to work with casters to gather materials, etc. It leads to new RP, so, can't be all bad.

With the recent talk to expose weakness cheese, I have a solution that is in line with the ideas presented in this thread. We could implement a "stamina" system, which prevents the spammability of a lot of cheesy combat feats. Each character can have a pool of 10+CON, and each combat feat uses up 1 stamina (knockdown, expose weakness, etc). Things like improved power attack could use up 1 stamina per round of attacking. It would certainly be good, as it adds an element of exhaustion-RP, something that is sorely lacking (most 10 con characters can run for days, and such!).

[AC81]

Sounds homebrewed metaquad. The suggestions I made, I got from a quick glance in the spellcasting section of the 3.5ed player's handbook.

Look guys, in case you haven't realised by now, my suggestions were made purely tongue-in-cheek. I don't honestly believe we are going to ever have a spell component system, nor would I want one. I think we need to start using these suggestion threads a bit more responsibly. It isn't a great thing to start calling for nerf's (especially of weaker classes) when those suggestions directly impact the enjoyment others get from the server.

P.S. - except the suggestion about opposition schools, that was for real. You sneaky a$$ wizards really need to be picking two opposing schools.