Quote from: Necrozius;935413I like the idea that spells cost HP, actually, but through ritual, preparation, a good staff or wand and special components, a spellcaster can reduce the cost significantly (even to zero).

Just an idea. I'm not a game designer and I suck at math.

Both TFT and GURPS magic systems do something close to this (despite having far fewer hit points than D&D). It can work quite well, though of course the design (and casters) should take into account that casting spells then makes the caster more vulnerable.

I agree with the others who have pointed out that mana point magic systems can work very well but that they involve different kinds of balance and choices to make. I think GURPS Magic and (particularly) TFT's magic system do a very good job of balancing such systems carefully. But doing so is a lot of detail-oriented work, and if you take a spell list not designed for mana points and just try to use mana points on it without doing a lot of balance & design work on it, it's probably going to be very unbalanced, especially if you also remove the limits it was designed & balanced to be used with.

I sometimes add some other limits to otherwise-spammable spells in mana point systems, requiring consumable ingredients or extra casting time, or tracking the number of castings per caster and/or per target and applying cumulative success modifiers for repeated use within a time period (which is of course a big potential amount of record-keeping). The main thing I've done that with is healing spells, since powerful healing tends to undermine the risks & consequences of my combat-detail-oriented games.

Quote from: Pat;935412One thing I like about spell slots and levels is they serve as partitions -- you get X 1st level spells, and Y 2nd level spells. And even if magic missile is your favorite 1st level spell, it's probably not the best option (even if it's allowed) in a 2nd level slot. So it encourages players to have a repertoire of different spells.

Whereas spell points encourage players to always spam the best spell. Fireball, fireball, fireball until out of points; instead of fireball, magic missile, web.

I've found exactly the opposite.  First, this kind of behavior is only followed when you have very few spells you can memorize, which is an essential limiting factor when you have fire-and-forget spells.  That is, a fire-and-forget scenario means players never fill a slot with a utility spell, they don't have a repertoire of different spells (in fact you can't have a repertoire if you can only memorize 1 or 2 spells) far from it.  The Fireball example is the posterchild of why fire-and-forget limits spell casting.  If given a choice, I have never seen a player (or myself) in 35+ years of playing choose anything but Fireball when first given the chance.  When you can have one 3rd level spell you can use once, you choose the most powerful get-out-o-the-shit spell you can.

What you get is a Magic User with only Magic Missile and Sleep spells in the 1st level slots, until they get to much higher level. Or the Cleric with many Cure Light Wounds and little or nothing else in 1st level slots.  Why, because you know these spells will always be useful whereas the other utility spells may or may not be used and often non-magic means exist to accomplish what utility spells do.

QuoteWhereas spell points encourage players to always spam the best spell. Fireball, fireball, fireball until out of points; instead of fireball, magic missile, web.

Utter bullshit. If a player has spell points and the option to cast fireball, magic missile or web, they will choose the one that best serves the situation.  These are all pretty much offensive spells as well so this example is bogus.  

When you have fire and forget magic there is a strong bias to combat spells because you have no flexibility when the time comes how to use your magical power.  I can guarantee you in a fire-n-forget system no one memorizes Tongues instead of a combat spell; so you never in practice have the utility spell option in a Fire n Forget system.  In a spell point system you could memorizer Fireball and Tongues and you have the option of using Tongues without limiting your use of Fireball.


In fact, in actual f*cking play, where spell power is still tied to level but casting is tied to mana points, I've seen more spamming of Magic Missile as the combination of increased spell power with level with increased number of spells with mana provides an exponential power effect.  Of course it is hard to compare Magic Missile with Fireball, as one is an area effect spell and one not.  In addition, Fireball is not used nearly as much if you follow the old D&D idea that the fireball always expands to fill the spell effect volume, likewise with Lightning Bolt where it can bounce back; ignoring these drawbacks makes these spells much more powerful than originally designed.

 All that said, spell power tied to level but casting tied to mana points is the worse way to do mana points.  Over the years when I look into peoples complaints and judgments about mana point systems, this is the number one cause for the dislike, and rightly so.

Quote from: estar;935439By point still stands how is mana point any more paperwork than hit points? If it is there then something else involved and that the real problem not the fact that every time you cast a spell you mark down (or add to) a total.

For the simple reason that MP are one more thing to track.

Also, if spells have different costs, that's more book flipping or a larger character sheet.

Quote from: Xanther;935433An added feature of magic items can be the provision of mana.  You can have creatures that eat mana, ones that consume mana to heal, etc.  Many possibilities.

You can also have MP regen be variable depending on place/time/situation. Making some mana-rich locations (intersections of ley lines) be highly prized and fought over... while having other places be dead spots where MP regen is slow or nil or even actively draining MP.
You can have mana regen rituals that will resupply a range of points, rather than just refilling the pool.
You can make the source of regen MP matter by having certain areas 'corrupted' to various effects. "Don't sleep in the Temple of Hounds!"

Quote from: estar;935439By point still stands how is mana point any more paperwork than hit points? If it is there then something else involved and that the real problem not the fact that every time you cast a spell you mark down (or add to) a total.

If it suits the group you could have little beads or something represent your mana pool... toss them in a pot to represent casting and pull some out when you regen MP. No pencilling/erasing involved.

Quote from: Simlasa;935422Yes! Need to lift that heavy rock? Fireball! Need to scry what's going on down around the corner? Fireball! Need so fly up to a high ledge to escape a flash flood? Fireball!

It should be obvious from context and the examples that I was just referring to combat applications, where barring exceptional circumstances like particularly tight quarters or an opponent who's immune to fire, there's often one spell that's clearly optimal. Having separate slots for different levels breaks that up a bit.

Earlier posters had already covered the way spell points aggravate the Swiss Army knife problem, so I didn't feel the need to address it again.

Quote from: Simlasa;935448
If it suits the group you could have little beads or something represent your mana pool... toss them in a pot to represent casting and pull some out when you regen MP. No pencilling/erasing involved.

I was thinking of something like this both both mana and HP: http://www.litko.net/products/Casualty%7B47%7DDamage-Token-Dials.html (Dials with numbers.) Maybe see if Litko will make them up with 1-4, 1-6, 1-8, 1-10, and 1-12 options.

Quote from: Skarg;935443Both TFT and GURPS magic systems do something close to this (despite having far fewer hit points than D&D). It can work quite well, though of course the design (and casters) should take into account that casting spells then makes the caster more vulnerable.

I love this approach, but it does have a very different feel than what D&D players are used to.

QuoteI sometimes add some other limits to otherwise-spammable spells in mana point systems, requiring consumable ingredients or extra casting time, or tracking the number of castings per caster and/or per target and applying cumulative success modifiers for repeated use within a time period (which is of course a big potential amount of record-keeping). The main thing I've done that with is healing spells, since powerful healing tends to undermine the risks & consequences of my combat-detail-oriented games.

I've found you don't have to if you require mana to power the spell as well as cast it.  For example, I generally make it more cost effect to cast say Magic Missile and empower it to send forth 3 missiles, than say a base spell cast 3 times but with 1 missile each.  Frankly, I don't care if a player wants to use just one spell, what the mana point system does is give the player the option to use another spell.  In a fire-n-forget, and say you have 3 1st level spell slots, if you want to use Magic Missile at least 3 times you memorize Magic Missile x3, that is your only option (talk about spamming).  In a spell point system, you could memorize Magic Missile, Sleep and say Spider Climb.  So now what a player can cast has less to do with the spell system, and the incentives/disincentives it provides, but more on player style (they just like to cast Magic Missile) and the challenges presented by the DM.

I let the players spend there magical power how they wish.  If some spells are unbalancing the game then I look to adjusting the spell power or mechanics (instead of tacking on other systems that are designed to encourage players making choices I like) but more importantly, I look to how I run the game.  That is, make sure there are plenty of challenges where the non-combat and non-heal spells would come in very, very handy and if super heal is available, not problem, it's a limited resource after all so it is easy to up the deadliness level.

Quote from: Simlasa;935448You can also have MP regen be variable depending on place/time/situation. Making some mana-rich locations (intersections of ley lines) be highly prized and fought over... while having other places be dead spots where MP regen is slow or nil or even actively draining MP.
You can have mana regen rituals that will resupply a range of points, rather than just refilling the pool.
You can make the source of regen MP matter by having certain areas 'corrupted' to various effects. "Don't sleep in the Temple of Hounds!"

...

Exactly!  It's one way I have religion matter in my games.  If you're on consecrated ground to a deity you're in good with, you get bonuses, on the holy/un-holy ground of a deity you are opposed to, penalties.

Quote from: Ashakyre;935447For the simple reason that MP are one more thing to track.

Also, if spells have different costs, that's more book flipping or a larger character sheet.

Look there are mana based spell systems out there that are fussy to use. However if it is just a system that takes X mana to cast y spell system like Metagaming's Wizard, then it no more bookkeeping in terms of reference or character sheet space than D&D's memorization scheme. However most mana based spell systems are not as simple as Wizard and thus the mana cost is subject to factors which make the process overly fussy.

I played 20 years of GURPS with it moderately complex mana based spell system. I don't dislike it but I don't like it either. I had many players come up with combo of a handful of spells and that what they do nearly all the damn time. But I have had others with a diverse range of spells too.

The only I like the best and the one I will try to emulate if I used alternative system like Fantasy Age, is the combinations of D&D memorized spells with spell slots with allowing a caster to cast a 10 minute ritual from any spells found in their spell books at a cost in component. The rituals give enough flexibility to satisfy most players. While the spell slot still forces the players to weigh their option for anything involving combat time.

Quote from: Ashakyre;935447For the simple reason that MP are one more thing to track.

Also, if spells have different costs, that's more book flipping or a larger character sheet.

Of course, if you want a flexible resource you have to track it, like HP.  

Well if spells have different cost of course a problem, you just make all spells of a certain level cost the same.  At the worst you have 9 different costs, I can't see that being the hardest thing to track when you are such a high level wizard.  

On book flipping, D&D spells, and most spell systems, have such sui generis effects with level and other factors that you book flip anyway.  The thing that stops this is the fire-n-forget systems channels most players into such limited spell choices they've memorized the 2 out 20 available they always use.

I'm guilty of side tracking here too... but... any more complaints about mana point systems? I'm not trying to argue which is better. I'm making a game with a mana point system and want to avoid the common pitfalls. In a sense it is a "no wrong answer" scenario because there's no accounting for taste. I know I'll lose some folks with a mana point system, but perhaps I can keep that to a minimum while.keeping the people that do like mana point systems.

Quote from: Pat;935450...

Earlier posters had already covered the way spell points aggravate the Swiss Army knife problem, so I didn't feel the need to address it again.

This has to do with number of different spells you can memorize and if they are fire-n-forget.  The fire-n-forget extreme with few spell slots is you get a tool you can use only once, when tool which seems to be most effective is the hammer, you choose the hammer and everything becomes a nail.  In the spell point system extreme, you get a swiss-army-knife with many blades you can use over and over.

The mid-points, which is what game design is all about, is to give more slots in a fire-n-forget system (but you might get spam issues (just choosing a lot of hammers) as spells tend to be more powerful in such systems).  In a spell point system you lower the number of spell slots, not so much only a combat spell chosen, but not so many to make it a spell selection meaningless.

Quote from: Xanther;935446I've found exactly the opposite.  First, this kind of behavior is only followed when you have very few spells you can memorize, which is an essential limiting factor when you have fire-and-forget spells.  That is, a fire-and-forget scenario means players never fill a slot with a utility spell, they don't have a repertoire of different spells (in fact you can't have a repertoire if you can only memorize 1 or 2 spells) far from it.  The Fireball example is the posterchild of why fire-and-forget limits spell casting.  If given a choice, I have never seen a player (or myself) in 35+ years of playing choose anything but Fireball when first given the chance.  When you can have one 3rd level spell you can use once, you choose the most powerful get-out-o-the-shit spell you can.

What you get is a Magic User with only Magic Missile and Sleep spells in the 1st level slots, until they get to much higher level. Or the Cleric with many Cure Light Wounds and little or nothing else in 1st level slots.  Why, because you know these spells will always be useful whereas the other utility spells may or may not be used and often non-magic means exist to accomplish what utility spells do.

To borrow your words, that's bogus and utter bullshit.

Though that's not because I think your conclusions are off the wall. It's because your premise is wrong -- you're disagreeing with something I never said.

You made the mistake of assuming that I'm a partisan proponent of spell slots. I'm not. I think both spell points and spell slots are imperfect. But since the thread title is, quite literally, "problems with mana point systems", I was pointing out the flaws of spell points, not the flaws in spell slots.

I agree that spell slots tend to encourage players to load up the slots for bear. It's really hard to justify wasting a slot on water breathing when fireball is available, unless you're absolutely certain being dunked will come up. But having separate 2nd and 3rd level slots means those levels aren't really competing with each other, so there will be a different obvious choice for each level. That at least enforces some variety.

Spell points do away with those separate pools segregated by level, and put all the spells into a single pool where they all compete with each other. Instead of a 5th level magic-user having 3 optimal general-use offensive spells for each of the 3 spell levels, there's now 1. Which means if fireball is better in terms of point cost and damage output than magic missile, then magic missile will basically vanish (or vice versa).

My ideal solution is actually neither. I'd prefer a system that encourages casters to choose some of those second and third tier spells, without going to the spell point extreme where a magic-user will always have the solution to every problem as long as they know the right spell.

Quote from: Ashakyre;935458I'm guilty of side tracking here too... but... any more complaints about mana point systems? I'm not trying to argue which is better. I'm making a game with a mana point system and want to avoid the common pitfalls. In a sense it is a "no wrong answer" scenario because there's no accounting for taste. I know I'll lose some folks with a mana point system, but perhaps I can keep that to a minimum while.keeping the people that do like mana point systems.

Sorry Ashakyre, I'm a big proponent of mana point systems and almost all the complaints I've seen (besides of course stylistic preference) are based on bad design not a fundamental flaw with the concept.

I can share what I've done that works, the very specific details, maybe better if you have a thread under game design.  I originally did mana points as a change to our AD&D game.  After got things balanced, you would be surprised how much the modules played the same under the new magic system.  Ran this through so many of the modules, multiple times, with multiple groups.