Spell Component Costs: All Spells or Just Some?

[Phantom Lamb]

One of the results we took away from our last poll was that financial burden on melee types is much heavier than on casters. Casters don't need to purchase healing as often, or don't rely on expensive gear to succeed. We want to inject a couple measures to balance this. The two that we're pretty certain on are these:

• Out-of-Combat heal kits:
  Bandages will heal over time now. They will heal for more than the old kits, and will be cheaper. They cannot be used in combat, and combat will break their healing.
• Spells cost money:
  This is sort of inspired by the 4th edition "residuum" concept. In 3.5, there are spell components. But these components are, frankly, a hassle to keep track of. Instead, we'll insert gold values equating to the value of the spell components.
  The values will be weighed with respect to potions and kits. Spells will be cheaper than these items -- but they will still cost something. We aren't looking to break anyone's bank here, so don't expect huge costs. They will likely be relative to the spell level.

So, with the second bullet in mind, how do you think this should be applied? To all spells based on level? To buff spells only? Healing spells? Overpowered spells?

[Urithrand]

My vote goes to healing and OP'd spells. Charging for buffing spells will make mages and clerics less inclined to buff their melee type counterparts, who will then spend even more on healing kits and potions (and probably a large number of ressurrections)

Charging 500gp to cast a "gate" spell for example makes perfect sense.

[Subal]

I agree 100% on spells that are super extrem for taxing on a magic user. But i forsee as well clerics no longer casting buffs on the counterpart tank when it costs him serious cash to buff a entire group, you will begin to see a large influx of saying...before we head out everyone must chip in 1000 gold incase of heavy buffs, and if someone needs a raise, may the gods save them.

[BedlamX]

Think I am inclined to agree with Uri on this one...to an extent. It's already tough enough to pay for a raise dead on a fallen comrade (I mean...3000 to save some xp/time running back to the party just seems a bit high to me). You start charging for Bulls strength and other buffs, mages will start skipping them...especially at low levels where fighters gain xp/gold faster than a mage anyway.

Basically, this whole concept boils down to who gets more gold soloing. If a fighter and a cleric go out together, the pair works off each other's strengths and weaknesses. Both gain xp/gold the same rate. A fighter and a mage...a bit different due to the lack of faith healing spells, but the armor buffs the mage can provide aid in not getting wounded as much/often. As long as the newb rest script is in effect, it really doesn't matter much anyway. After you get too high for that, fighters start falling behind on raw power and need more gear while mages are coming into their own and clerics are getting bad-ass. What most people seem to get annoyed with is the cost of keeping a fighter healed after a certain level. The equipment levels and cost make it virtually impossible to match mage or cleric buffs in regards to power and survivability. Fighters just can not solo as well at high level as casters without spending ungodly amounts of gold to get outfitted. So if the cost to buy healing goes down for the average fighter type, and the cost of healing spells goes up for casters (and the cost of uber buffs/kill everything spells) it might help equalize the economy...or it could just swing it the other way.

Maybe a way to make healing spells cost if cast on one's self but not on allies? Not even sure if that is possible, but it would promote partying up. And, if "overpowered" spells start costing, I would definitely like to see the list before choosing spells. It would seriously piss me off to finally get to the level to cast some kick-ass spell only to find I don't have the gold to do it.

[Intrepid42]

My vote is for OP spells only.

Spells that fill the "traditional" roles of divine/arcane casters, such as direct damage and buffs castable on others, encourage co-operation.

I would focus on some of the powerful self-buffs and summoning spells.

I'm equivocal on healing. Increasing the cost of healing probably won't disempower parties too much, as it is currently far more efficient to buff party members than heal them. At mid-level I find I end up using kits for party healing most of the time. However, it would further discourage clerics from healing. However, I also accept that the free self-healing is a large part of the earning discrepency you are trying to modify a bit. No easy answer, I guess.

(Disclaimer: plays a cleric)

[TheBlankStare]

I chose "All Spells."

I was originally going to say don't put gold costs on any spells at all but I started thinking about Pen and Paper games and how much fun being a wizard was because resources are limited. The really powerful spells always had an expensive component or focus required in order to be able to cast them. Stoneskin requires 250gp of diamond dust per casting. A lot of spells require xp instead of an expensive focus.

I'd have to say that putting a cost to all spells that have a material component would do the trick. 1 gp per spell level at a minimum would. Other spells could be adjusted accordingly based on the staffs analysis. Spells that don't have material components should remain free to cast.

This could also make room for another feat option for casters: Eschew Materials! We could just have it apply to all spells that end up with casting costs but not to spells that are cost more than the standard maybe.

[ZubMessiah]

I disagree with having the classes with the least HP and most often AC being forced to carry gold around in order to be effective. Since there's no vote for "none" I won't vote.

The way to deal with fighter types having a hard time getting cash relative to the expensive gear is NOT to tax casters.

Edit: But if it HAS to be done, if you simply can't think of another way to balance things, I'd rather see persistent components.
But then again, that means every time someone casts Bull's Strength, they'll be running aroud with either bull hair or bull crap... How much is a pinch of bullshit worth in gold, DMs?

[Lothoir]

Dungeons and Dragons Online has a pretty good system, only 18 different spell components. One for each spellcasting level of both divine and arcane spells. Only spells with a material component in PnP use it, but having to keep track of 9<= spell components (or 17<= for mystic theurges) isn't all that bad. The various create/animate undead spells need a component, but not summoning spells.

[PaToSsAuRo]

And what about melee arcane casters, like Catarina (swashbuckler/wizard)? She needs lots of healing potions (because of her low HP, she needs to use a potion every two hits!) and relies on buffs to survive. Geez, she'll go bankrupt!

Well, I just hope the prices are reasonable... or else she would be unplayable.

[vexxen]

Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in for what its worth...

Personally I think some of the more high level spells... Reasons being they can really make or break a fight. When i was playing my high level cleric, one of the things that saved me many times from death was enemies crowding around me, and myself casting implosion. If that had failed during those few specific times I would definitely have died.

[ParadoxicalAnonymity]

First, cool that the staff team is taking the feedback from other threads, and trying to genuinely incorporate it into improvements to the system.

Now, next, I have to admit that this wouldn't really effect the characters I play, since they're not exactly magic slingers nor hardcore buffers.

I'm still not exactly keen on any of the choices presented in the poll. I don't believe charging casters for certain sorts of spells exactly fixes the current dichotomy of the economical differences between different sorts of builds.

If you get down to the nuts and bolts of the people that were offering their feeling of what's a problem in the other thread, it mostly wasn't that the wizards or clerics were making too much money. It was the problem that the melee individuals weren't making enough. In the end, this doesn't exactly solve the problem of those that believe this is the case.

Like all video game economies, there is not a set amount of currency in the world. Currency is constantly inserted in due to people that are fine with grinding mobs, or the infusing of currency into the economy with events, and rewards. Creating another currency sink for casters isn't improving the ability for the melee individual to buy the gear he wants/needs, it's only bringing currency out of the system.

If we had a problem with inflation, that might be a rather usable solution. But in the current situation, I haven't seen inflation an issue. In fact, I've noticed a lot of crafters not charging that much above the cost just to craft. And they can't exactly go below cost, no matter how much money drops out of the system.

In the end, I think the best idea for a solution to the current conundrum is found within how can a melee character possibly increase his potential income, so he can afford the items around him? As I'm sure there'd be a demand for suggestions on the issue, I'm going to give it some thought. If I can think of anything, I'll throw another post up.

Otherwise, perhaps others in the Sundren community have an idea in that vein?

For the purposes of the poll, I'm going to abstain, as I believe that it should remain at no cost for spell casting, directly, except for that which already has a cost (that being the Lazarus spells).

[Phantom Lamb]

BTW, keep in mind, there are other solutions coming to couple with this. Stores will be cheaper, and very cheap bandages will be made available. So while we're pulling money from casters, the overall costs will drop, too.

[ZubMessiah]

Why would you do this? Why?
It won't make it easier for fighters, it'll make it harder for everyone.
Why not just add items with saves vs death and let fighters be equal?

[Phantom Lamb]

To make your life painful, Zub.

If this starts going into drama again, I'll lock it folks. I do appreciate the input, but not in that manner. Thanks for understanding--

[Peridan]

While my opinion on the matter may be biased since I play a spellcaster, I would just like to point out that increasing costs for castings will encourage two possible outcomes.

First, the mages will not cast their high level spells. It makes far more sense not to use them unless you absolutely need to, and even then you may hesitate because it will drain your account of five hundred gold that you just spent the last half hour accumulating by doing a run through Schild or some such. While this may be the intended goal, I'm not sure how I feel about having to worry about my bank account when there are so many other needs that must be met with the cash I was supposedly trying to get by this particular run through whichever zone.

Which leads to the second option, grinding. If wizards have their spells taxed, I guarantee that they'll have to make the castings worthwhile. Which means longer runs through the Viridale and so forth. The only real income advantage that I see mages having over other players is crafting, and I can count on one hand the number of such on the server. They have to heal and so forth like everyone else (besides clerics obviously) by buying kits and going in groups. Wizards and the like are, after all, very squishy.

Anyway, that's my half penny.