Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Revised Pathfinder 1e: Static Spell Ranges (Patreon)

Published:
2025-09-29 01:07:36
Imported:
2026-11
Tags:

Content

If (and only if) you are someone who might pay for and play a game designed to be a revised version of Pathfinder 1e, how would you feel if spells had static ranges, rather than ranges based on caster level. For example:

Range short (30 feet)
Range medium (150 feet)
Range long (750 feet)

Comments

Joe

If I play without a map? Don't care at all, if I have a battle map then I might miss the close ranges but not a ton. If reach spell is still a thing then I'm fine with it.

Andy Christian

In many cases, tge level variable multiplier allows some low level spells to still be highly useful at higher level. So if you remove that scaling for spell ranges, I'd want tge spell system to be reworked in a way that spells are useful across all levels.

Ben Trieschmann

Not completely sure. I like that I can stretch lower level spells out further. Might be more interested in a small damage boost to combat cantrips as you level, but not as crazy as 5th does it.

Chris Mortika

I prefer that spell ranges give PCs information about caster level. I also like the feels, that powerful wizards throw better -- say -- Grease spells using spell slots than they can cast with wands.

Patrick Trapp

Ok, I have only given this the time it took to write it, so it may not be fleshed out fully, but I think it stands. There is certainly an audience for it, considering some popular games that don’t use ranges at all, relying on a descriptor and GM call. Personally, I like that an experienced caster gets more from the same spell than a novice. Does it have to be range? No. Does it have to be the same benefit(s) every time? No. Make it static unless they spend a resource to extend it. Higher level, more available resource to spend. I like that as an alternative to core PF1e.

Joe

You know what would be neat? If the caster level range was still applied to the reach spell metamagic. If you're playing around with that then that indicates you're fine playing with the grittier stuff and this is something you're interested in.

Lee Christoffers

I'm mixed on it. It definitely increases the cognitive load more than the benefit is worth, but it also makes more adept mages feel like they're progressing in some way compared to their peers-- unfortunately there's a huge number of spells which throw this out to have static ranges anyway. You could also do the same thing with base durations, being something like 1rnd/1min/10min/1hr/10hr/1day/1week I do think that if metamagics were reworked or there was a Spheres-of-Power-esque way to click up a signature spell in small increments about the size of FCBs (which also just bloat cognitive load), there could be a neat way to handle this and completely pitch the extant systems. To layout a draft of that proposed system, it'd be something like: Feat - Spell Prowess "Your growing mastery of the magical arts allows you to magnify portions of your casting" You have a pool of Prowess Points equal to your CL. Choose a number of spells equal to 1+1/3 CL that this feat will apply its benefits to. As you gain this feat and when your gain a level that increases your CL, spend the points as listed below to grant the chosen spells those abilities. You may take this feat multiple times. Each instance of this feat only applies its benefits to spells chosen for it. Prowess Points are unique to each instance of this feat. *Range*: If the first point in this prowess, multiply the spell's range by 1.25. Successive points increase this multiplier by 0.25 each. *Damage Dice*: For every 4 points in this prowess, add 1 to the spell's damage for each die rolled. *Damage*: Add 1/2 to the spell's damage. [alternative wording I don't like as much] *Duration*: If the first point in this category, multiple the spell's duration by 2. For every successive point, increase that multiplier by 1. *Number of Targets*: (something) *Shaping*: If the spell affects an area, for every 3 points the in this mastery you may select one square in that area and instead affect a 5ft square adjacent to the spell's area. (other simple metamagic abilities)

Lee Christoffers

Pf1e has so many positional abilities that honestly having the core expectation *be* on a map might just be ideal; so many things like charge lanes, flanking, filing order in a tight hallway, (maneuver of your choice) get laborious. Baking-in that expectation would also allow the consideration of cubes instead of squares as a base block as well, since many heads start melting once things start regularly flying. Obviously a footnote for alternate rules to have TotM combat can exist, but having the core system less permission-based seems like a more stable platform.

Dawnsbury Days

I would like this. While I play Pathfinder 1e for the complexity, at higher levels even close range gets far enough that it can cover much of the battle map. But gosh, it's exactly the kind of change that I would love to browse through for a revised Pathfinder 1e.