One big problem with this idea is it directly steps on the Aberrant Mind subclass level 6 feature which is a very big part of the subclass.
Really the only thing that the sorcerer needs to be very successful is giving each subclass known spells similar to the two in Tasha's. That puts sorcerers in a very strong spot.
Two things about that. 1 if you're rewriting a whole class subclass revisions would be inevitable. 2 something being strong and something having a strong identity are not the same thing.
I also think adding the 1:1 ratio aims to fix something that isn't' really broken and actually breaks it in a very destructive way. Sorcerers get just as many spell slots as other full casters. That isn't their problem. Their problem is they don't know enough spells. If you wanted to change the identity to being able to cast more spells while knowing less, then do it with spell slots. It's way easier to balance. What the OP has suggested will get out of hand very quickly.
Here is the OPs idea:
This would be a total number of points equal to the amount of spell levels available plus the amount of sorcery points available. For instance, a level three sorcerer has 3 sorcery points and 8 spell levels (four 1st level and two 2nd levels), which would equal out to 11 spell points.
...
Casting spells is a 1:1 ratio.
I've done some quick math, and this spell point system system gets out of hand real fast. Think about it like this - At level 5 a sorcerer using this spell point method could cast 7 fireballs per day. (5 sorcery points + 4 1st level + 6 2nd level + 6 3rd level) for 21 points. Fireball would cost 3 points to cast. If that isn't out of hand enough for you, Sorcerers could cast 13 Wish spells at level 20 per day (sorta, Wish punishes the caster, but you get the idea). 13 Meteor Swarms? 13 Mass Polymorphs?
I actually like the idea of giving sorcerers more spell slots while knowing less. This method would break the game though.
A decent option would actually be to give all sorcerer subclasses an expanded spell list and at level 6 let THOSE spells be cast at 1:1 ratio. That would stop the shenanigans of being able to cast 13 level 9 spells back to back because the spell list would only go up to 5th level spells, and would limit the spells you could do it with for balance. I'm not crazy about it but it at least wouldn't break the game.
You're right that the math starts to get nutty at the higher levels. It's why the Spell Point variant rule places a restriction on Level 6+ spells only allowed once per level per long rest, despite spell slots allowing you to cast 2 6th and 7th level spells at Level 19 and 20. It can simply get so far out of hand like you described, although Spell Points do allow 19 5th level spells at level 20. I think any attempt to streamline Sorcerer's spell casting with its Sorcery Points needs to have a rule like that in place. I think that you'd need to reduce the number of points available at each level, in order to avoid lower level shenanigans, maybe not adding the expected number of sorcery points? At level 15, you'd have 16 points, which translates to 5 fireballs and 1 point remaining. Less, if you decide to add metamagic. At level 20, this means you have 89 points, which translates to 17 5th level spells, roughly in line with the Spell Point variant. This keeps the flexibility without being too bonkers, although at that point you may as well use the pre-made variant without having to recalculate everything.
So, I explored the idea of my level 5 Sorcerer using Spell Points with my DM, and we both came to the same conclusion that it'd be too much.
First of all, that system would allow my Sorcerer to use the 27 spell points to cast as many as 5 3rd-level spells, and even a 6th if we retained the Sorcery Point system too. Technically only needing a bonus action for the Sorcery Points conversion, though I imagine it'd be fair to require a bonus action to recombine spell slots or what have you. So the second consideration a DM would have to keep in mind, is that all 5 or 6 of those 3rd-level spells could be cast in a single combat, potentially.
I wondered how far that goes outside the bounds of the current Sorcerer rules, and refreshed myself on the fact that Font of Magic says "you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level" (bolding mine). My Sorcerer ended up using 5 Sorcery Points to make an extra 3rd-level slot and cast a clutch Fireball. At that point, if I wanted to make yet another 3rd-level slot, I would need at least 3 turns to liquidate 1st- & 2nd-level slots to make the required 5 Sorcery Points, then a 4th turn to make the slot and cast the spell. That'd certainly be doable, if the combat continued much longer and only I had the 3rd-level spell absolutely necessary to end combat. That would also give an opportunity for the rest of the party to keep the situation afloat while I charge up, and either way, that's 1 or 2 more 3rd-level spell-castings than the Wizard can do in this combat, since they need a short rest to regain slots. Frankly, I don't know that it'd feel that much more awesome to just fling out 5 or 6 3rd-level spells one round after another - though I can certainly understand someone wanting to be able to do so at level 5.
Others in this thread have already looked at the potential issues with casting all spells directly with a spell-level # of sorcery points. Limiting it to subclass spells would help, but frankly, I think it's best we let that be Aberrant Mind's own thing.
One possibility that seems less game-breaking to me, is letting the spell-slot to sorcery point numbers be the same both directions - I've seen folks mention allowing this. It would still take at least 3 rounds to make a 3rd-level slot from 1st- & 2nd-level slots, so this change would speed up the process without trivializing it. And it'd certainly be nice to have no "conversion loss"! I'd need to look into the downstream effect of being able to gain more sorcery points at once, though. I imagine that's more of a worry for DMs with players liquidating 5th-level slots to cast more Silvery Barbs, or situations like that? Keeping the 1st-level slot cost at 2 seems to be the crucial thing here.
The biggest problem is 6+ level spells. The game is built around one of these per day until 19th level (and never for 8-9th level spells).
A 17th level sorcerer could cast wish 9 times and still have a 7th level spell to cast on top of that.
This would let the sorcerer dominate both long days and short days. At 13th level going into a day where you know you will have 1 big battle and you can spam your 7th level spell round after round and probably never run out of slots. This is even more of a problem when you add metamagic on to this as well.
Even if you capped it at 1 spell of each level 6th or higher level, one third level spell is more valuable than 3 first level spells.
To be fair, a sorc with twinned spell can SORT of spam 6+ spells. It only works for single-target spells and they'll need to sacrifice other slots for SP and they'll still need the initial spell, but they could (at least in theory), cast 2 disintegrates, 2 Fingers of Death, 2 Dominate monsters, and 2 Power Word Kill's in a single combat. It would cost a whopping 30 SP meaning even a max-level sorc would need to sacrifice 10 SP worth of lower level spell-slots (36 if he wants to cap on the two level 6 spells he'd have at 20) but it IS doable. But it's balanced out by being stupidly costly and only applying to single-target spells. So he couldn't, say, twin-cast Meteor Swarm (which would be nucking futs).
One possibility that seems less game-breaking to me, is letting the spell-slot to sorcery point numbers be the same both directions - I've seen folks mention allowing this. It would still take at least 3 rounds to make a 3rd-level slot from 1st- & 2nd-level slots, so this change would speed up the process without trivializing it. And it'd certainly be nice to have no "conversion loss"! I'd need to look into the downstream effect of being able to gain more sorcery points at once, though. I imagine that's more of a worry for DMs with players liquidating 5th-level slots to cast more Silvery Barbs, or situations like that? Keeping the 1st-level slot cost at 2 seems to be the crucial thing here.
Another possibility that might be less game breaking is to keep the conversion rates the way they are, but make the conversion a free action. That way, you're still losing points by doing the conversion, but now you can have the slot you need exactly when you need it, rather than 3 turns later. And if this is still a bit broken, then you could limit it to a "once on your turn" type of thing, going either from points to slots or vice-versa, but not both. This way you can keep your Bonus Action while emphasizing the supposed flexibility of the Sorcerer.
Spell slots as the were used in 5e were a much better version of spellcasting than the 3e & 3,5e. They did a good job when they transitioned the previous system to this but I personally find the spell point system very nice and even more easy and flexible to use for players, like mana on rpg games as an energy pool which makes more sense and it is more logical as a concept than spell slots. "There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots" as Hipsters & Dragons once mentioned. I agree that spell points is a generally better system than spell slots to be used in One d&d newer version. The spell point system in DMG page 288, is complex as the same designers say at the cost of flexibility. You have to consult the table when you gain levels or want to cast spell points.
Instead a simple and elegant system can be used in its place that I have created and shared with you. A quite simple and effective way of playing with the spell point system instead of spell slots in your campaigns.
To cast a spell using spell points, you simply expend a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it, because it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 4). Half casters have spell points equal to half caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3). 1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who had 7 spell slots in total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell point now.
You can spend as many spell points as you want to cast spells up to 5th level. Spells of 6th level and higher are particularly taxing to cast. You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher. You can push on beyond that limit to cast more of them, at the risk of exhaustion. You need to sacrifice double the number of spell points equal to the level of the spell each time you attempt to cast a spell of 6th or higher beyond that point. A character must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of the casting. The DC is 10 and rises by 5 every time you cast more of 6th level or higher. If you fail the saving throw, you character suffer one level of exhaustion (see appendix A on PHB).
To be fair and not break the game by making spellcasters even more powerful than they already are, especially the full casters, I have limited the total of spell points a character gains per level and added a nice flavor of epic and dramatic feeling when pushing beyond your limits at the cost of exhaustion. We now have flexibility, simplicity and a bit more realism I could say at the cost of less spell points in total. Fair trade for everyone.
A would keep sorcery points as a different pool still because it has to do with their action economy and bonus actions every round. Warlocks on the other hand are a different story!!
Spell slots as the were used in 5e were a much better version of spellcasting than the 3e & 3,5e. They did a good job when they transitioned the previous system to this but I personally find the spell point system very nice and even more easy and flexible to use for players, like mana on rpg games as an energy pool which makes more sense and it is more logical as a concept than spell slots. "There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots" as Hipsters & Dragons once mentioned. I agree that spell points is a generally better system than spell slots to be used in One d&d newer version. The spell point system in DMG page 288, is complex as the same designers say at the cost of flexibility. You have to consult the table when you gain levels or want to cast spell points.
Instead a simple and elegant system can be used in its place that I have created and shared with you. A quite simple and effective way of playing with the spell point system instead of spell slots in your campaigns.
To cast a spell using spell points, you simply expend a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it, because it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 4). Half casters have spell points equal to half caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3). 1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who had 7 spell slots in total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell point now.
You can spend as many spell points as you want to cast spells up to 5th level. Spells of 6th level and higher are particularly taxing to cast. You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher. You can push on beyond that limit to cast more of them, at the risk of exhaustion. You need to sacrifice double the number of spell points equal to the level of the spell each time you attempt to cast a spell of 6th or higher beyond that point. A character must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of the casting. The DC is 10 and rises by 5 every time you cast more of 6th level or higher. If you fail the saving throw, you character suffer one level of exhaustion (see appendix A on PHB).
To be fair and not break the game by making spellcasters even more powerful than they already are, especially the full casters, I have limited the total of spell points a character gains per level and added a nice flavor of epic and dramatic feeling when pushing beyond your limits at the cost of exhaustion. We now have flexibility, simplicity and a bit more realism I could say at the cost of less spell points in total. Fair trade for everyone.
A would keep sorcery points as a different pool still because it has to do with their action economy and bonus actions every round. Warlocks on the other hand are a different story!!
Is that for each spell level like warlocks mystic arcanum, so one 6th, one 7th, 8th and 9th (when available) before saving for exhaustion or only one cast for all 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th level spells before saving?
I beleive I did use proper and formal wording, same as wizards do. "You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher."
Yes based on my homebrew ruling and table, you can cast each of them once as normal as in the DMG is allowed in the sector of spell points before risking to exhaust yourself as you push beyond your limit. For example if you play a sorcerer of 17th level who would have just gained 9th lvl spells, you can cast 1x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th and 1x 9th level spell before the other epic ruling.
I beleive I did use proper and formal wording, same as wizards do. "You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher."
Yes based on my homebrew ruling and table, you can cast each of them once as normal as in the DMG is allowed in the sector of spell points before risking to exhaust yourself as you push beyond your limit. For example if you play a sorcerer of 17th level who would have just gained 9th lvl spells, you can cast 1x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th and 1x 9th level spell before the other epic ruling.
Thanks, when I read it my mind seemingly focused on the one slot portion. I don't know if changing of (each) to for (each) would be a minor improvement?
There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots. Instead, a simple and elegant system is used in its place: spell points as in DMG 288. To cast a spell using spell points, you simply pay a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it cause it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x proficiency modifier (max 4). Half casters have spell points equal to half caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3). 1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who has 7 spell slots total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell points.
Spell slots as the were used in 5e were a much better version of spellcasting than the 3e & 3,5e. They did a good job when they transitioned the previous system to this but I personally find the spell point system very nice and even more easy and flexible to use for players, like mana on rpg games as an energy pool which makes more sense and it is more logical as a concept than spell slots. "There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots" as Hipsters & Dragons once mentioned. I agree that spell points is a generally better system than spell slots to be used in One d&d newer version. The spell point system in DMG page 288, is complex as the same designers say at the cost of flexibility. You have to consult the table when you gain levels or want to cast spell points.
Instead a simple and elegant system can be used in its place that I have created and share with you. A quite simple and effective way of playing with the spell point system instead of spell slots in your campaigns.
To cast a spell using spell points, you simply expend a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it, because it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x Proficiency Bonus (max 4). [If you still find it plenty in your game, you can limit it to Caster level x Prof Bonus (max 3).] Half casters have spell points equal to half Caster level x Proficiency Bonus (max 3). 1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 Caster level x Proficiency Bonus (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who had 7 spell slots in total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell point now.
You can spend as many spell points as you want to cast spells up to 5th level. Spells of 6th level and higher are particularly taxing to cast. You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher. You can push on beyond that limit to cast more of them, at the risk of exhaustion. You need to sacrifice an double the number of spell points equal to the level of the spell each time you attempt to cast a spell of 6th or higher beyond that point. A character must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of the casting. The DC is 10 and rises by 5 every time you cast more of 6th level or higher. If you fail the saving throw, you character suffer one level of exhaustion (see appendix A on PHB).
To be fair and not break the game by making spellcasters even more powerful than they already are, especially the full casters, I have limited the total of spell points a character gains per level and added a nice flavor of epic and dramatic feeling when pushing beyond your limits at the cost of exhaustion. We now have flexibility, simplicity and a bit more realism I could say at the cost of less spell points in total. Fair trade for everyone.
Sorcey Points & Spell Points; You can use the PHB system of Tranforming Sorcery Points To Spell Slots and vice versa with Spell Points. Because in this system each spell level or spell slot equals a spell point, whenever you see spell slot you have to to switch it to spell point. The Spell Points must have more value than the Sorcery Points as do in the PHB. If you don't do this and let 1:1 ratio, it will only make the sorcerer to have significantly more sorcery points, which means even more Spell Points, meaning in RAW more spell slots than it was intended in the design.
One big problem with this idea is it directly steps on the Aberrant Mind subclass level 6 feature which is a very big part of the subclass.
Really the only thing that the sorcerer needs to be very successful is giving each subclass known spells similar to the two in Tasha's. That puts sorcerers in a very strong spot.
Two things about that. 1 if you're rewriting a whole class subclass revisions would be inevitable. 2 something being strong and something having a strong identity are not the same thing.
Here is the OPs idea:
I've done some quick math, and this spell point system system gets out of hand real fast. Think about it like this - At level 5 a sorcerer using this spell point method could cast 7 fireballs per day. (5 sorcery points + 4 1st level + 6 2nd level + 6 3rd level) for 21 points. Fireball would cost 3 points to cast. If that isn't out of hand enough for you, Sorcerers could cast 13 Wish spells at level 20 per day (sorta, Wish punishes the caster, but you get the idea). 13 Meteor Swarms? 13 Mass Polymorphs?
I actually like the idea of giving sorcerers more spell slots while knowing less. This method would break the game though.
A decent option would actually be to give all sorcerer subclasses an expanded spell list and at level 6 let THOSE spells be cast at 1:1 ratio. That would stop the shenanigans of being able to cast 13 level 9 spells back to back because the spell list would only go up to 5th level spells, and would limit the spells you could do it with for balance. I'm not crazy about it but it at least wouldn't break the game.
You're right that the math starts to get nutty at the higher levels. It's why the Spell Point variant rule places a restriction on Level 6+ spells only allowed once per level per long rest, despite spell slots allowing you to cast 2 6th and 7th level spells at Level 19 and 20. It can simply get so far out of hand like you described, although Spell Points do allow 19 5th level spells at level 20. I think any attempt to streamline Sorcerer's spell casting with its Sorcery Points needs to have a rule like that in place. I think that you'd need to reduce the number of points available at each level, in order to avoid lower level shenanigans, maybe not adding the expected number of sorcery points? At level 15, you'd have 16 points, which translates to 5 fireballs and 1 point remaining. Less, if you decide to add metamagic. At level 20, this means you have 89 points, which translates to 17 5th level spells, roughly in line with the Spell Point variant. This keeps the flexibility without being too bonkers, although at that point you may as well use the pre-made variant without having to recalculate everything.
So, I explored the idea of my level 5 Sorcerer using Spell Points with my DM, and we both came to the same conclusion that it'd be too much.
First of all, that system would allow my Sorcerer to use the 27 spell points to cast as many as 5 3rd-level spells, and even a 6th if we retained the Sorcery Point system too. Technically only needing a bonus action for the Sorcery Points conversion, though I imagine it'd be fair to require a bonus action to recombine spell slots or what have you. So the second consideration a DM would have to keep in mind, is that all 5 or 6 of those 3rd-level spells could be cast in a single combat, potentially.
I wondered how far that goes outside the bounds of the current Sorcerer rules, and refreshed myself on the fact that Font of Magic says "you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level" (bolding mine). My Sorcerer ended up using 5 Sorcery Points to make an extra 3rd-level slot and cast a clutch Fireball. At that point, if I wanted to make yet another 3rd-level slot, I would need at least 3 turns to liquidate 1st- & 2nd-level slots to make the required 5 Sorcery Points, then a 4th turn to make the slot and cast the spell. That'd certainly be doable, if the combat continued much longer and only I had the 3rd-level spell absolutely necessary to end combat. That would also give an opportunity for the rest of the party to keep the situation afloat while I charge up, and either way, that's 1 or 2 more 3rd-level spell-castings than the Wizard can do in this combat, since they need a short rest to regain slots. Frankly, I don't know that it'd feel that much more awesome to just fling out 5 or 6 3rd-level spells one round after another - though I can certainly understand someone wanting to be able to do so at level 5.
Others in this thread have already looked at the potential issues with casting all spells directly with a spell-level # of sorcery points. Limiting it to subclass spells would help, but frankly, I think it's best we let that be Aberrant Mind's own thing.
One possibility that seems less game-breaking to me, is letting the spell-slot to sorcery point numbers be the same both directions - I've seen folks mention allowing this. It would still take at least 3 rounds to make a 3rd-level slot from 1st- & 2nd-level slots, so this change would speed up the process without trivializing it. And it'd certainly be nice to have no "conversion loss"! I'd need to look into the downstream effect of being able to gain more sorcery points at once, though. I imagine that's more of a worry for DMs with players liquidating 5th-level slots to cast more Silvery Barbs, or situations like that? Keeping the 1st-level slot cost at 2 seems to be the crucial thing here.
This would severely unbalance the game.
The biggest problem is 6+ level spells. The game is built around one of these per day until 19th level (and never for 8-9th level spells).
A 17th level sorcerer could cast wish 9 times and still have a 7th level spell to cast on top of that.
This would let the sorcerer dominate both long days and short days. At 13th level going into a day where you know you will have 1 big battle and you can spam your 7th level spell round after round and probably never run out of slots. This is even more of a problem when you add metamagic on to this as well.
Even if you capped it at 1 spell of each level 6th or higher level, one third level spell is more valuable than 3 first level spells.
To be fair, a sorc with twinned spell can SORT of spam 6+ spells. It only works for single-target spells and they'll need to sacrifice other slots for SP and they'll still need the initial spell, but they could (at least in theory), cast 2 disintegrates, 2 Fingers of Death, 2 Dominate monsters, and 2 Power Word Kill's in a single combat. It would cost a whopping 30 SP meaning even a max-level sorc would need to sacrifice 10 SP worth of lower level spell-slots (36 if he wants to cap on the two level 6 spells he'd have at 20) but it IS doable. But it's balanced out by being stupidly costly and only applying to single-target spells. So he couldn't, say, twin-cast Meteor Swarm (which would be nucking futs).
Another possibility that might be less game breaking is to keep the conversion rates the way they are, but make the conversion a free action. That way, you're still losing points by doing the conversion, but now you can have the slot you need exactly when you need it, rather than 3 turns later. And if this is still a bit broken, then you could limit it to a "once on your turn" type of thing, going either from points to slots or vice-versa, but not both. This way you can keep your Bonus Action while emphasizing the supposed flexibility of the Sorcerer.
Spell slots as the were used in 5e were a much better version of spellcasting than the 3e & 3,5e. They did a good job when they transitioned the previous system to this but I personally find the spell point system very nice and even more easy and flexible to use for players, like mana on rpg games as an energy pool which makes more sense and it is more logical as a concept than spell slots. "There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots" as Hipsters & Dragons once mentioned. I agree that spell points is a generally better system than spell slots to be used in One d&d newer version. The spell point system in DMG page 288, is complex as the same designers say at the cost of flexibility. You have to consult the table when you gain levels or want to cast spell points.
Instead a simple and elegant system can be used in its place that I have created and shared with you. A quite simple and effective way of playing with the spell point system instead of spell slots in your campaigns.
To cast a spell using spell points, you simply expend a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it, because it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 4).
Half casters have spell points equal to half caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who had 7 spell slots in total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell point now.
You can spend as many spell points as you want to cast spells up to 5th level. Spells of 6th level and higher are particularly taxing to cast. You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher. You can push on beyond that limit to cast more of them, at the risk of exhaustion. You need to sacrifice double the number of spell points equal to the level of the spell each time you attempt to cast a spell of 6th or higher beyond that point. A character must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of the casting. The DC is 10 and rises by 5 every time you cast more of 6th level or higher. If you fail the saving throw, you character suffer one level of exhaustion (see appendix A on PHB).
To be fair and not break the game by making spellcasters even more powerful than they already are, especially the full casters, I have limited the total of spell points a character gains per level and added a nice flavor of epic and dramatic feeling when pushing beyond your limits at the cost of exhaustion. We now have flexibility, simplicity and a bit more realism I could say at the cost of less spell points in total. Fair trade for everyone.
A would keep sorcery points as a different pool still because it has to do with their action economy and bonus actions every round. Warlocks on the other hand are a different story!!
Is that for each spell level like warlocks mystic arcanum, so one 6th, one 7th, 8th and 9th (when available) before saving for exhaustion or only one cast for all 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th level spells before saving?
I beleive I did use proper and formal wording, same as wizards do. "You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher."
Yes based on my homebrew ruling and table, you can cast each of them once as normal as in the DMG is allowed in the sector of spell points before risking to exhaust yourself as you push beyond your limit. For example if you play a sorcerer of 17th level who would have just gained 9th lvl spells, you can cast 1x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th and 1x 9th level spell before the other epic ruling.
Thanks, when I read it my mind seemingly focused on the one slot portion. I don't know if changing of (each) to for (each) would be a minor improvement?
Spell Points Variant Rule (DMG 288), Not Spell Slots, Revised & Simple
There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots. Instead, a simple and elegant system is used in its place: spell points as in DMG 288.
To cast a spell using spell points, you simply pay a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it cause it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x proficiency modifier (max 4).
Half casters have spell points equal to half caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 caster level x Proficiency modifier (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who has 7 spell slots total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell points.
Spell slots as the were used in 5e were a much better version of spellcasting than the 3e & 3,5e. They did a good job when they transitioned the previous system to this but I personally find the spell point system very nice and even more easy and flexible to use for players, like mana on rpg games as an energy pool which makes more sense and it is more logical as a concept than spell slots. "There is no Weave of magic in Taldaras that imposes impractical and illogical concepts such as spell slots" as Hipsters & Dragons once mentioned. I agree that spell points is a generally better system than spell slots to be used in One d&d newer version. The spell point system in DMG page 288, is complex as the same designers say at the cost of flexibility. You have to consult the table when you gain levels or want to cast spell points.
Instead a simple and elegant system can be used in its place that I have created and share with you. A quite simple and effective way of playing with the spell point system instead of spell slots in your campaigns.
To cast a spell using spell points, you simply expend a number of points equal to the level of the spell: 1 point for a 1st-level spell, 2 points for a 2nd-level spell, and so on. No more fussing with not being able to cast burning hands because you’re too weak (out of 1st-level slots), forcing you to cast a stronger version of the spell (with a 2nd-level slot) or Darkness (out of 2nd level slots and not even able to upcast it, because it has no upcast).
Full casters have a number of spell points equal to caster level x Proficiency Bonus (max 4). [If you still find it plenty in your game, you can limit it to Caster level x Prof Bonus (max 3).]
Half casters have spell points equal to half Caster level x Proficiency Bonus (max 3).
1/3 casters have spell points equal to 1/3 Caster level x Proficiency Bonus (max 3).
For example a 10th level Fighter Eldritch Knight who had 7 spell slots in total of 1st & 2nd maximum spell slot, has a total of 6 spell point now.
You can spend as many spell points as you want to cast spells up to 5th level. Spells of 6th level and higher are particularly taxing to cast. You can normally use spell points to create one slot of each level of 6th or higher. You can push on beyond that limit to cast more of them, at the risk of exhaustion. You need to sacrifice an double the number of spell points equal to the level of the spell each time you attempt to cast a spell of 6th or higher beyond that point. A character must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of the casting. The DC is 10 and rises by 5 every time you cast more of 6th level or higher. If you fail the saving throw, you character suffer one level of exhaustion (see appendix A on PHB).
To be fair and not break the game by making spellcasters even more powerful than they already are, especially the full casters, I have limited the total of spell points a character gains per level and added a nice flavor of epic and dramatic feeling when pushing beyond your limits at the cost of exhaustion. We now have flexibility, simplicity and a bit more realism I could say at the cost of less spell points in total. Fair trade for everyone.
Sorcey Points & Spell Points; You can use the PHB system of Tranforming Sorcery Points To Spell Slots and vice versa with Spell Points. Because in this system each spell level or spell slot equals a spell point, whenever you see spell slot you have to to switch it to spell point. The Spell Points must have more value than the Sorcery Points as do in the PHB. If you don't do this and let 1:1 ratio, it will only make the sorcerer to have significantly more sorcery points, which means even more Spell Points, meaning in RAW more spell slots than it was intended in the design.
Did you like my homebrew system? I added a small text at the bottom for sorcery points in association to spell Points.