Move away from Spell Levels

In my opinion, and that of my fellow players in my group, is that having player levels and spell levels is kinda confusing. Different terminology might be helpful in making a difference between them. It's been more than once that I've heard a level 2 player wanting level 2 spells.
I like circles personally.

Spells of the first circle, second circle, ect.. 

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

In my opinion, and that of my fellow players in my group, is that having player levels and spell levels is kinda confusing. Different terminology might be helpful in making a difference between them. It's been more than once that I've heard a level 2 player wanting level 2 spells.

Why not add multi-level dungeon crawls to the mix?

www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0012.html

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
Yeah, I really wish they had taken the 4e model where a level 5 spell is the spell you get when you are at level 5. I know we need to appeal to nostalgia, but are people going to lose their minds if we make the spell levels make sense? Would it kill us to have level 1 spells, level 3 spells, etc?
Oh, MeCorva... Unfortunately, people have shown repeatedly that they like their idiosyncrasies... Yes, many would be "horrified" to see spells levels who make sense :P.
Are you threatening me master jedi? Dungeons & Dragons 4e Classic - The Dark Edition
I like circles personally.

Spells of the first circle, second circle, ect.. 



I'm down for this. I like how the spell levels were laid out in 3E, but I can see the problem with the terminology.
"Quanta"

It's just nerdese for "levels"
"Quanta"

It's just nerdese for "levels"

And it would actually be an accurate use of the word, for a change. Since there is nothing *between* any two spell levels.

A quantum leap is not an impressively long distance. It's the shortest possible distance. The thing about it being the shortest possible distance is that there is NOT a moment where the thing making the quantum leap has gone halfway. It simply ceases to exist over here and begins to exist over there, without traversing the intervening space.

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
I liked the "grades" of invocations that warlocks had in 3.5: least, lesser, greater and dark. I'd love it if they ranked spells in a similar fashion in 5e. Of course, they won't.

I agree with the sentiment of this thread.  If they cannot forsee anything other than 9 grades of power for magic and they have 20 steps in character progression, then at least call them "circles" or something to distinguish.  In fact, I may start doing that anyway just for easy of use!



From the title, I thought this thread was going to be about getting rid of "spell levels" altogether, and making a different way of grading the power of magic - which I also think would be a great idea...


Like, what if magic -was- more about circles...  Envision the Olympic rings:  think if the middle one were "starting" spells, but each ring further out was available to certain types of magic, and you couldn't necessarily master all of them because they never overlapped.  Similar to some of the more creative Final Fantasy games' levels up systems...  Ok, sorry to derail.  

It’s been a while since I've played and I forgot that they fixed it in 4th. I always disliked that the spell levels never make sense; I always look at them and get a bit confused. It would be nice if they used either different wording or used more accurate numbers to reflect its level in terms of player character level.

AD&D 1st Edition Character (Simplified)

BIOGRAPHY
Name: Brother Michael
Adventuring Class: Cleric
Adventuring Experience: 1446 out of 1501
Bonus Experience: 10%
Languages Known: Common, Orc, Elven.
Alignment: Lawful/Neutral Good
ABILITY SCORES
Strength: 10
Dexterity: 10
Intelligence: 11
Charisma: 11
Constitution: 14
Wisdom: 16
WEAPONS: HIT; MEDIUM; LARGE
Footman’s Flail: 1d20; 1d6+1; 1d4
Hammer (Thrown): 1d20; 1d4+1; 1d4
Sling: 1d20-3; 1d4+1; 1d6+1
MAGIC
Today’s Prepared Spells: Cure Light Wounds x2, Command x1
Spells Spent: Cure Light Wounds x1
Other Cleric Abilities: Turn Undead
Spell Failure: 0%
Magical Attack Adjustment: +2
DEFENSES
Armor: 5 (-4 Armor, -1 Shield)
Maximum Health: 10
Current Health: 9
CONSUMABLE ITEMS
Water Skin
7 Days of Trail Rations
7 Pints (Flasks) of Oil
1 Ounce (Vial) of Holy Water
4 Parchments
12 Sling Bullets
6 Pieces of Silver
8 Pieces of Twine

I dunno, I've been playing over 20 years and I think it's pretty much mostly how they've always done it, and most video games have it like that too... so it's not really hard for me to understand.  But I guess also that it wouldn't really hurt if they did come up with different terminology. 

Though referring to them as circles just reminds me of Dantes Inferno... and Dante's Inferno reminds me of work.  So correlating dnd and work = fail in my opinion, but who am I to judge?   

Here in Brazil they translated the "spell level" terminology to "Spell Circle". Works wonders and noone complained. And you must know that most people around here are like grognards with their favorite edition, but the new terminology is loved and embraced.

I know that USA is a different country with different grognards, but Second Circle Spells sounds cool right?

edit: some spelling mistakes