You all ready for this? I'm going to attempt to recap and objectively analyze all of the running ideas that have been presented thus far, not all of which are mutually exclusive. Most of them can be categorized into one of two approaches, rewards for pressing on, and some form of recharge system. If I forgot anything or made a misrepresentation, please feel free to bring it up.
Keep in mind: it has also been proposed that different classes have different ways of getting their spells back. This has included divine casters having push-on style mechanics where arcanists do not, and differences between preparation and spontaneous casters.
(For the most part, you can replace any instance of the word “spells” with “dailies” in the following, should you be thinking in a 4e-style mindset)
OP
Recharge system where casters have a chance of recovering any cast spell at the end of the encounter/task. Higher level spells are more difficult to recover (which also means casters will be more judicious in their use).
Benefits: Simple to use and minimally invasive. Spellcasters retain all freedoms. Spell loss occurs on a curve, rather than a slope. Relatively little challenge to suspension of disbelief.
Drawbacks: Somewhat unpredictable. Unusually good or bad luck can end up altering the party's expectations for the day
The Going Gets Tough
Press-on system where as the party gets weaker, they gain access to bigger, stronger abilities.
Benefits: Prevents round 1 nukes.
Drawbacks: Encroaches on player freedom and resource management. Can be difficult to define when, exactly, the going is tough enough. Conflicts with out-of-combat spell use, or taking on big enemies without fighting mooks first.
Arguable: Suspension of disbelief is a mixed bag, both representing adrenaline rushes and heroic resolve, and placing arbitrary limits on characters who are doing perfectly fine. Counterbalances whatever “death spiral” there may be. Leans slightly towards the heroic end of the heroic-gritty spectrum.
Reflavoring
A thematic solution, rather than a mechanical one. By redefining the relationship between the mechanical and the story, one can alter whatever one does not like about the system. For example, in one group “rest” doesn't mean 8 hours, “rest” means a 5 minute break. “0HP” doesn't mean I'm dead, “0HP” means I've retreated.
Benefits: Extremely versatile, and allows each group to play they way they like it. Changes nothing about the system itself.
Drawbacks: Changes nothing about the system itself. Relies upon the DM and/or group's ability to devise and agree on effective solution(s) to their problem.
Point Cost
Recharge system where spells cast a certain number of 'points' to cast, with more powerful spells costing more points. Points recharge at a fixed rate, which may vary depending on how hard the party pushes themselves. For example, not getting proper rest or sleep would slow the recovery rate. This could be combined with the press-on concept, if desired, by having the party's 'momentum' build up and they gain points faster as they go on.
Benefits: Spellcasters retain all freedoms. Minimal impact of suspension of disbelief (it could be argued this is even more 'realistic'),
Drawbacks: Relatively complex.
Arguable: If this is used with a vancian system (that is, spells per day by level in addition to varied point costs), it is as it appears. However, if this were to be done in the absence of spells per day mechanics, with spell use solely determined by point cost, then the entire mechanic of spellcasting changes, for better or worse. It's a complex process, but as an example, with 50 spell points, and spells having a cost equivalent to twice what their level would be, you could cast two “level 9” spells and one “level 7” spell, or you could cast twenty-five level 1 spells. Compare that to any edition's vanican or at-will/encounter/daily chart and you'll see the difference. If going with that latter variant, each spell could have an individual point cost, rather than being based on level. This would be more complex and harder to balance, but allow finer-tuning and enhance the tactical element. See also: Casting Stress, for another angle on a similar approach.
Scaling Point Cost
As Point Cost, except the price of spells decreases for every level of spell you can cast over the minimum required. The proposed cost formula is [10-(highest slot level-spell level)*2 points], with scaling effects increasing by the slot level it's actually in: [scaling*level]). For example, Fireball is a 3rd level spell that deals 1d6/level damage. If you can cast level 8 spells, you can prepare it in a 3rd level spot for 0 points and 3d6 damage ([10-(8-3)*2] points, scaling*3) a 5th level slot for 5d6 damage, or an 8th level slot for 8d8 damage. Note that in this system, spells no longer scale with caster level, but with slot level. your lower level slots become dedicated to weak, but at-will powers, whereas your higher-level slots become where your dailies sit.
Benefits: Keeps a more 4e style balance with a more vancian feel.
Drawbacks: Relatively complex.
Arguable: Fuses vancian magic and 4e-style Powers into an inexorable hybrid, for better or worse. High level casters will never run out of low-level spells (which effectively become “at-will&rdquo
. Scaling effects are less powerful: this either means non-scaling spells will be relatively more powerful (or removed), or they'll increase the base scaling to match, negating any effect this could have on counteracting the 'linear fighters, quadratic wizards' problem.
Preparation DC
(I'm not entirely sure I understand this one correctly. You can read it for yourself here: community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758... . Page 2 contains a chart of the probabilities according to the proposed factors.)Casters must roll checks in order to prepare spells, one for each spell slot they have with the DC higher for higher level slots. You receive a bonus or penalty on this check depending on the conditions, for example, it's easier to prepare spells after having rested at an inn than after sleeping on the dungeon floor. This, combined with the scaling difficulty, discourages use of the use of higher level spells until necessary, while lower-level spells are almost guaranteed.
(The original proposal also included making saves vs spell DC a static-vs-static contest, but that's not inexorably tied to the rest of the proposal)
Benefits: Your list of available spells is dynamic and interesting; it would rarely look the same from day to day
Drawbacks: Could make the problem worse, with casters demanding to return back to town to rest, and refusing to leave until they have all their spells, even if it takes a week to do so.
Arguable: Some think this thematicly feels better. A variant could be to say that if you miss the target DC of a preparation, you can instead prepare a spell at the highest level that roll would have succeeded on. This would mean casters almost always have their max number of spells per day, but they aren't necessarily at the highest possible levels. I didn't see any word on if you needed to designate which spells you were preparing before you made the rolls. If so, it dramatically reduces the reliability of the caster having exactly the spells they want. Furthermore, this system has interesting implications for spontaneous casters, who would presumably either 'prepare' each spell as it is used, or roll preparation checks at the beginning of the day, but not assign spells to them until casting.
Experience Bonus
A press-on system that targets the metagame. Base experience rewards are divided by the expected number of encounters per day. Experience is then multiplied by the actual number of encounters per day.
Benefits: Directly targets the '5-minute workday' problem.
Drawbacks: Relies on players valuing XP over using their best guns constantly. Promotes metagame thinking, as opposed to proper role playing. Forces the DM to adhere to the same number of expected battles per day, or to reliably predict how far the PCs will go on each given day.
Press-On (direct)
Spells/abilities are recharged (or gained in the first place) after a certain number of battles, with the number varying based on the strength of the spell/ability.
Benefits: Directly addresses the '5-minute workday' problem.
Drawbacks: Strains suspension of disbelief; while number of battles may works fine mechanically, it's very arbitrary story-wise. Conflicts with out-of-combat spell use.
Arguable: If ability strength is based on category (be that vancian levels or at-will/encounter/daily), it is simple, and easy to implement. If each power has it's own number, it becomes more complex and harder to balance, but allow finer-tuning and enhances the tactical element.
(NEW) Recharge (direct)
(This is exactly the same as Press-On (direct), but recharges are based on time rather than number of battles. Essentially, this just means 'dailies' become 'hourlies'.)
Spells/abilities are recharged after a certain amount of time, with the amount varying based on the strength of the spell/ability.
Benefits: Directly addresses the '5-minute workday' problem.
Drawbacks: Would likely replace it with the group taking an hour rest after every encounter.
Arguable: If ability strength is based on category (be that vancian levels or at-will/encounter/daily), it is simple, and easy to implement. If each power has it's own number, it becomes more complex and harder to balance, but allow finer-tuning and enhances the tactical element.
Action Point Recharge
Pretty self-explanatory. Spending an Action Point recharges powers. 1 Action Point will get you back all encounter powers, or one daily. In addition, you gain 1 action point per encounter. May also include the option to spend on Healing Surges.
Benefits: Simple, easy to implement. Directly addresses the '5-minute workday' problem.
Drawbacks: Only works with both 4e's Powers, and Action Points systems. Conflicts with out-of-combat use of abilities.
Arguable: Presumably, the extra action points could be spent on things other than powers. What effects could this have?
Motivation
Another thematic solution (read: doesn't change the rules). This involves simply giving the party a compelling reason not to rest so often. Time limits, dynamic dungeons, pursuing enemies, a competing party, or having no where to run are examples of this.
Benefits: Extremely versatile. Changes nothing about the system itself.
Drawbacks: Changes nothing about the system itself. The DM has to build such an element into every plot arc (and there's only so many ideas out there).
Arguable: Done well, this can provide an in-story reason for the PCs to be motivated. Done poorly, this can feel contrived.
No Dailies
Also self-explanatory. This is proposal is to simply eliminate dailies entirely.
Benefits: Directly addresses the '5-minute workday' problem.
Drawbacks: Removes high-power abilities from the game.
Real-Time Resources
Use real time to calculate when abilities are retrieved, instead of game time
Benefits: Makes players think hard about their choices.
Drawbacks: Major problems with suspension of disbelief, and plot progression. The group may be unable to do what they want, because no matter how long their characters rest, they won't be able to use their bigger abilities until next session. Promotes metagame thinking, as opposed to role playing.
DM-Controlled Resting
Removes the players' ability to voluntarily take extended rests (at least in the mechanical sense). Instead, they recover a little at each milestone, or when the DM deems appropriate. If healing surges are kept, this system applies to them as well.
Benefits: The '5-minute workday' strategy becomes literally impossible.
Drawbacks: Major problems with suspension of disbelief. May leave players feeling enslaved by the DM.
Casting Stress
Recharge system where the caster's physical state is linked with how many spells they can cast. Each spell would 'cost' (inflict) an amount of non-lethal damage on the caster proportionate to its strength. Non-lethal damage recovers as normal (which is relatively fast out of combat, but slow within it).
Benefits: Spellcasters retain all freedoms. Addresses the 'linear fighters, quadratic wizards' problem as well, by giving casting a tangible cost. Can lead to dramatic choices where the caster gives everything he has left for the greater good. Encourages teamwork, and distributes the glory, as the caster relies more heavily on others to survive.
Drawbacks: Encourages high-HP casters (as if that wasn't already a priority) at the expense of other builds. Casters don't die more easily, but they do get knocked out more easily.
Arguable: Some see this as even easier on suspension of disbelief than the current systems (you're channeling that much energy, it's going to take a bit out of you!). The grittiness of this approach will please some, but turn others away. The vancian Point Cost proposal is similar to a non-gritty version of this, and converting between the two is as simple as saying if Casting Points are non-lethal damage, or an independent stat. The system creates a greater strategic element for casters, but this may turn off inexperienced players, or those who just want to run and blast.
EDIT: A possible extention of this is to allow casters to cast when no castings per day are left for the chosen spell. However, doing so deals lethal damage to the character.
Focus
This idea is yet-unrefined, but as it stands, powerful abilities are only available when “Focused”. Focus would become a new mechanic, which may be modified by situation, feats, etc. Using 'big guns' would expend your Focus, which you would then have to refocus somehow. This idea is not necessarily limited to casters.
Benefits: Tough to say until the idea is further refined.
Drawbacks: Again, tough to say as of yet.
Arguable: Has potential for flavor and suspension of disbelief benefits (for casters). It appears to have no long-term restrictions on high-level abilities, so as long as one is able to Refocus, they will always have their most powerful abilities, which can be dangerous in the hands of a high-level mage. Possible solutions include restricting how often one can Refocus (either a hard cap or increasing difficulty), and/or having martial classes maintain and/or regain Focus more easily than casters. A possible option is to have mid-level powers require Focus, but not expend it. In any case, this mechanic would dramatically change players' approach to combat.
Channeling
Spells become more powerful the longer you spend casting them. This could include bonuses to range, damage, duration, etc. or it can give the spell a completely different effect (for example, 'sleep' becomes 'paralysis').
Benefits: Also addresses the 'linear fighters, quadratic wizards' problem, by making wizards unable to use their biggest spells every round. Prevents round 1 nukes. Can lead to dramatic moments where combatants struggle to protect, or interrupt the caster. Somewhat encourages teamwork, and distributes the glory, as the caster relies on the rest of the party to protect him while casting his bigger spells.
Drawbacks: Out of combat, spells can almost always be cast at the highest level.
Arguable: Good flavor. Broadens spellcaster versatility, for better or worse. Fewer number of spells in the game, but each spell can do more. Spellcasters never truly run out of any spell.
Empowering
Similar to Channeling, and certainly compatible with it. this involves making spells more powerful by investing greater resources into them. If using a slot system (like vancian, but without the levels), this means spending more slots on a single spell; if using a Spell Points or Casting Stress system, this means spending more than the minimum points on the spell. This could include bonuses to range, damage, duration, etc. or it can give the spell a completely different effect (for example, 'sleep' becomes 'paralysis'). Psionics tend to work this way in existing D&D editions.
Benefits: Addresses the 'linear fighters, quadratic wizards' problem, by making wizards invest more resources in more powerful spells. Good on suspension of disbelief and flavor.
Drawbacks: Doesn't really address the '5-minute workday problem'. I'm including it more as a possible expansion to the Channeling mechanic, and part of the Spell Research system.
Spell Research
A system that incorporates both Channeling and Empowering in an attempt to bridge the gap between vanican magic and 4e powers. By default, all known spells are at-will, and subject to Channeling. However, the caster has the option of preparing spells in slots ala vancian magic. If they chose to do so, the spell is considered to be strengthened similar to as if it had been Channeled for a while, but it is 'forgotten' after casting. You may also multi-slot spells as in Empowering to get an even bigger bonus.
Benefits: Allows both vanican magic and 4e-style powers and intertwines them nicely into a single system, without making them inexorable. All the benefits of Channeling and Empowering, depending on the situation.
Drawbacks: All the drawbacks of Channeling and Empowering, depending on the situation.
Arguable: Good flavor. Complex, and broadened spellcaster versatility, for better or worse. Fewer number of spells in the game, but each spell can do more. Spellcasters never truly run out of any spell, unless its prepared. Preparation and spontaneous casters are no longer distinct.
Equity of Resources
All actions (not just casting or Powers) draw from a single pool of energy reserves (which presumably refills either every turn or every few turns). More powerful abilities do not have “daily” or “encounter” limits, but instead draw more from this pool, leaving less to devote to other actions, such as moving, or defending. Thus, characters must be judicious about when to use their 'big guns', as other actions might be even more pressing, like moving to a more advantageous position, or putting some semblance of effort into avoiding that marilith's attacks. This would apply to all characters, not just casters, and not just PCs.
Benefits: Gives combat an organic feel. Players retain all freedoms. Increased tactical play.
Drawbacks: Requires pressure to be put on characters for the balance to work.
Arguable: Retools the entire combat system, for better or worse. Suspension of disbelief can go either way, depending on how you think of high-level abilities working. A character's strongest abilities are available at any time, given the oppurtunity to use them.
...Phew. We actually covered a lot of ground, and the ideas are quite unique from each other as well. I'll try to update this list as necessary. If people want to start advocating/voting for or against any options, I'll try to tally that as well.
