Out of Character -- Random Banter

[Omen of Peace]

That sucks for you !
The game is indeed a bit slow, but I'm under the impression we're waiting on a post from you, what with the "1 post per round" rough guideline - is that correct ? I'm not sure I can scrounge up enough stuff to post except for Elia's random thoughts given the short duration of a round.

Also, what about opening one slot for one of the numerous applicants in the Invitation thread ? Avalon is still conspicuously absent.

I don't mean to butt in, just trying to look for a way forward.

[Avalon®]

Sorry for being AWOL guys.

Real life took over and I've been trying to finish Maraxus even if only a bit at a time.

I can begin posting if you'd like me to as long as its not combat straight away.

[Judging Eagle]

Hey folks.

against Dave's previous warnings, I have taken strongly to a per encounter spell point and maneuver point system I have been developing.
It's a new angle, and the numbers are working, so I am going to conduct playtesting over on DDOG
Link is here:
http://www.dndonlinegames.com/showthread.php?p=2977513#post2977513

I am warning you all that this is going to be a high priority to me.  This game hasn't been maintaining itself well.  This is mostly because the company server still denies me access to all gaming sites now.  :/ 
I am not killing this game, but I am obviously not pumping it like a hormonal cheerleader.
You are all welcome to playtest if you want.  you may not want to get involved and let this putt around.  Your choice.

Just letting you know.

Well, after 160-ish thread views and 4 other people responding, I've got some interesting responses and assessments of the Spell Point System that you're working on.

Link here

Some of the questions raised are regarding how long duration buffs are handled, and if spells with a duration of 1 round/level suddenly become really useful, while those with a duration of 1 hour/level suddenly look like they suck.

[DaveTheMagicWeasel]

I like spell points in theory, my point was always that actually making the change requires rewriting all the spells because they've all been written in order to be balanced within the underlying assumptions of Vancian casting (not always particularly well written).

I haven't crunched all the numbers, but my first thought is that Frank, in his customarily polite way, is proving the same basic point - the system as written fails to account for a single balancing variable used in the current system, duration - all else being equal 1 round/level spells are massively superior to 1 hour/level spells.  It's why Persist + Free metamagic is broken, and a similar result is likely here.

Factor duration into the system somehow and it starts to look more promising, e.g:

1. knock off sustain costs before calculating how many spell points you have, with a consequent knock-on effect in terms of how much can be recovered with a standard action.  Not sure if this is how it's intended or not, but if it isn't then the obvious optimal strategy to me would be to commit half your spell points to buffs and then just refresh the rest with standard actions whenever you run out.

2. Possibly a maintenance cost?  1 spell point per spell level per round?   Would make for far too much book-keeping though, and out of combat casters would simply refresh every few rounds in a very unsatisfactory manner.

Or, as a more major change:

3. Add a duration multiplier for spell costs of sustained spells - similar to the costs in the DMG for continuous items.  That way Divine Power's superiority to Mage Armour is reflected.  Might even make sense to make the multiplier less than 1 for hour/level duration spells so that they are even cheaper.

If that doesn't work:

4. Split sustain and instantaneous into two separate pools - one can be refreshed, the other is a simple cap on how many permanent buffs can be active at once.  A little fiddly, but should be easier to balance.  Also opens up interesting options for spells/effects/items that shift points between the two pools, etc (e.g. DMM Persistent becomes a simple "for each turn attempt you spend in the morning add X spell points to your sustain pool).  Again, it's a lot of work though - if the multiplier idea can be made to work then it would probably be the least cumbersome.  In fact, this system would still need the multiplier as well in order to balance relative values of buff spells of the same level.

[fil kearney]

Here is the current thinking regarding the magic point system
http://www.dndonlinegames.com/showthread.php?p=2976431#post2976431

knock off sustain costs before calculating how many spell points you have, with a consequent knock-on effect in terms of how much can be recovered with a standard action.  Not sure if this is how it's intended or not, but if it isn't then the obvious optimal strategy to me would be to commit half your spell points to buffs and then just refresh the rest with standard actions whenever you run out.

Maybe I don't understand, but here's a quick example:
wizard10 CAN cast 5th level spells.... he has 32 points, and a 5th level exg costs 27 while a sus only costs 9.  A hybrid costs 27 to cast, and must leave 9 locked afterwards until choosing to end the sustained effect.
IF wiz10 chooses to sped half his pool to buff (16 points worth of buff ) That leaves only 16 points open to cast... he can pull off a fireball for 15 points, and he has to essentially skip next round recovering. 

Meanwhile warlock10 is popping acidic eldritch blasts for 5d6 + residual acid each round.
A wizard CAN cast mighty spells often, but he gives up all his buffs to do it.
And a debuffer/SoD has to pay for each and every debuff he layers on until he can't refresh. 

You are of course, MORE than welcome to playtest it.

[Judging Eagle]

* Judging Eagle wants to play a divine caster using the spell points system of fil kearney

You know, to get all of the kinks out and such.



bunney says: "pls, I'll help you playtest your spell point rules. :3"

[fil kearney]

then hoof on over there, get a profile, and stake a claim.
*nom nom nom* bunny.  My cat does that all the time.

[Judging Eagle]

Nah, it's ok. I've got... a bunch of PbP RPs (freeform and not) that I'm either joining or a long time part of. I can't spread myself too thin afterall.

[fil kearney]

Hey folks!  I couldn't wait any longer for someone else to post... Thanks Omen and Dave for your attentiveness and patience!

err... is this a duet now, or are others still here? 

[amalcon]

Well, I had a post in there... Didn't accomplish much, but it was there.

edit: I'm also not entirely certain where Talman is located at the moment.

[fil kearney]

just checking, Amalcon!

Are you able to read the map?  upper right hand corner has a key to who is who.  be welcome to provide your own icon if you wish, but I gave you the wartroll (fitting, eh?)

[amalcon]

I can read it, but for some reason I can't find any of the player icons either using openoffice.org or by rebooting to use excel.  Strange.

[Omen of Peace]

Note that there are two tabs in the file. By default OpenOffice opens the file on the Spirit World tab, where for obvious you can't find the PCs.

[amalcon]

Thanks!  I should've noticed that.

[fil kearney]

my bad-- I didn't spell it out.

[fil kearney]

Sorry folks.  I'm shutting this down.  I enjoyed the game, but it's just not going anywhere. 

I've got games running on DnDonlinegames.  If any of you have time, be welcome to drift over.
http://www.dndonlinegames.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6416

[Omen of Peace]

Thanks for trying and for your time !


Perhaps I'll drift over to dndonlinegames at some point since I like your style and to some extent I I think you liked mine. Probably not right away though.