Help support TMP


"2nd Ed. AD&D Spell Points system for clerics & mages" Topic


6 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Fantasy RPG Message Board


Areas of Interest

Fantasy

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset

Drake


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

15mm Volcano Dwarf Axemen

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian reveals axemen for his Volcano Dwarf army.


Featured Profile Article

First Look: RavenClaw's Fjord Dragon

We open the box on the Fjord Dragon.


Featured Movie Review


1,636 hits since 5 Dec 2014
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Sgt Slag Supporting Member of TMP05 Dec 2014 3:29 p.m. PST

I know this is addressing a really old set of rules (mid-90's publishing date), but I am curious. The rules in question, are found in the optional book, Player's Options: Spells & Powers. They offered up several spell points systems for both clerics, and mages. Essentially the cleric points system allowed specialist priests to have access to spells outside of their spheres of power -- by paying more points, you could gain access to any clerical spell, even if your priest had no access to that sphere/spell, normally.

It seems overly complex, and it also defeats the purpose of the specialty priest characters: clerics can all be unique, between the pantheons/deities, no more "generic clerics", unless you go with the optional spell points systems. Seems like it was an overly complex rule-bender system. Anyone actually try to play those 2.5 rules? Cheers!

coryfromMissoula05 Dec 2014 3:57 p.m. PST

Those rules saw quite a bit of play in our games for a couple of years. They worked but definitely changed up the power sort of. The big issues were;

1) Casters using a powerful spell that drained most of their power and then wanting to stop to rest.

2) Not all players were cut out for the paperwork.

3) I remember endlessly fiddling with the rules between sessions to address perceived balance issues, but that may have been just me instead of the rules.

Personal logo Sgt Slag Supporting Member of TMP05 Dec 2014 9:17 p.m. PST

Cory, thank you for sharing your experiences. That fits with my reading of these optional rules. They struck me as being highly complex to track, in each of the various point systems. I hadn't considered the "stop to rest" thing, though I've encountered that in the past, just using the standard rules. The rules seemed both complex, tedious, and likely unbalanced. They strike me as ridiculously complex. My hat goes off to you for actually playing these rules. Cheers!

JimSelzer06 Dec 2014 4:50 a.m. PST

play 3.5 or pathfinder both are better by a longshot

Weasel06 Dec 2014 5:19 p.m. PST

RPG tastes are highly subjective and each edition is so different they are practically different games.

On the topic: I'll admit that we never used spell points. Vance or nuffin' :-)

If you wanted to use them and preserve the specialty priests, you could give bonus spell points that are ear-marked for certain spheres but I don't know if that's at all worth the bother.

tkdguy22 Dec 2014 3:11 p.m. PST

2nd Edition fan myself. I did not like 3rd Edition and happily returned to 2nd after trying to run a d20 campaign. I haven't looked back since.

I didn't care for the Player's Option books, but spell points would work better than the Vancian-style of spellcasting in some of my campaigns. I'd probably convert the MERP system if I were to use it.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.