9,988
edits
Changes
→Bizarre Implications
So what if we changed the scaling? What if instead of scaling in the spell itself, damage scaled with damage type of spell and CL? If Fireball is supposed to be a moderate damage single type, we can just let it deal moderate damage against enemies from level 1-20. And lightning bolt deals the same amount of damage. And so does cone of cold, despite being two levels higher (it should include rider effects or be larger in area or whatever to make up for that level difference). That sort of things requires a bit of hit point standardization, but it keeps damage spells and effects as relevant as the non-damage spells and effects you got at the same time, even long after you've acquired them.
Just to be clear, I'm proposing eliminating the spell level tie to damage of a spell, and making it entirely dependent on the intended category of damage and your caster level. A level 9 minor damage spell and a level 1 minor damage spell would deal the same damage at level 20, and it would be around 10% of the expected maximum hit points of your foes (whatever that works out to be). Damage becomes kind of like ranges are now, something you look up based on descriptor and caster level. Other things, like dual type damage or more targets or other rider effects would need to make up the differences in spell levels. Does this sound like the sort of thing that would help bring direct damage spells back into usefulness?
