I was thinking the first way. You're totally right that at level 10 it's too much rolling and doesn't matter, I was thinking of much lower levels. And probably just accept that whatever the system is it'll be broken when you hit higher levels anyway.deaddmwalking wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:30 pmAnything is defensible if you have a design goal and it helps you achieve it. More often, people develop a mechanic and then try to implement it.Thaluikhain wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 7:40 amHmmm...ok, going back a bit and just throwing this out there, suppose instead of 1d6 per level and add them up, it was 1d6 per level and take the highest and forget the rest. Each time you go up level that spell technically gets better, but after a while only by a tiny amount and your maximum damage doesn't improve. Maybe with an option later on to take more than 1 die, but keep the numbers small.
I'm not 100% certain what your suggestion is, but I can see it in one of two ways (assume level 10).
1) Roll 10d6 - look for your highest roll. If you get a 6 the total damage is 6; if you get a 5 the total damage is 5.
2) Roll 10d6 - if you get a 6 the total damage is 60; if you get a 5 the total damage is 50.
In the first case, the total damage (and difference between ANY ROLL) becomes insignificant. In the second case, you can see how 60 damage might be a significant increase over 50. The issue is how many times you roll before you see the difference. On 10d6, you have an 85% chance of getting at least one six. The odds of NOT getting at least a 5 are virtually nil.
Possibly with something like "roll 1 dice per caster level, and pick one dice per X" where X is the level you are casting at, or your skill/knowledge of that kind of spell or something.