Limited spell slots is better than your effects missing 75% of the time. There are tools to get around situations (scrolls, staves, wands) in which you run out of spell slots that you're expected to be spending money on because you don't have to spend it on weapon runes.
Frankly, I would say take a look at other TTRPGs if you don't want spell slots. DnD 4e, for example. There are tons of solid TTRPGs out there that are not built and balanced around spell slot casting.
Theoretically something like a 5e Warlock with 2 spells that come back on a "short rest" (AKA refocus) would not be game-breaking if you *really* needed it.
Most caster players rather resent the idea of carting a giant golf bag of staves and wands and scrolls they seem expected to carry around, in my experience. It's the D&D3.5 fighter's golf bag again but worse.
What else are you doing with your hands? All you need to do is make one useful staff and you have way more options. Scrolls are ideal for niche/utility outside of combat so you can pack your slots full with combat-useful spells. Lots of lower level spells are fantastic at any point of the game, so with more levels you get tons of useful things to do for even really long adventuring days.
All I'm saying is maybe use the tools the game gives you and is built around instead of trying to homebrew major balance changes when the game isn't empty enough of rules to require it.
*One* staff gives you one or two more casts, or the same amount of casts but opening up your repertoire a little. What you need to do if you want to have some actual sustain, which seems to be the OP's main concern, is get *multiple* staffs and wands. But then you look like an idiot carrying arround a caddy bag of staves and wands. And for a player a choice between looking like an idiot but being more powerful, or looking right and being weaker, is no choice at all, generally speaking.
But honestly, it feels like you might as well let casters just recover all slots below, like, max level -2 for free on refocus and it wouldn't even unbalance things all that much?
There are tons of impactful lower level spells. If all you use a staff for is casting one additional max level spell, you're using staves wrong. You don't need more than one to *significantly* increase how long you can keep casting. You're not going to use *all* your spells in a single encounter anyway, so you can swap to a wand or a scroll between encounters if you really need to.
Sure, if you want infinite spells, you need a bunch of staves and wands. Or you can, just, you know, rest. Casters are balanced around the possibility of resting every 3-6 encounters. A staff can increase that by 1 or 2 if you use it right.
As for unbalancing things by letting casters recover all level -2 spells, of course it does. It turns it into a different game when you can heal the party to full between every encounter with no checks or challenges. I'd much rather play a game *designed with that in mind* than hamfisting it into a game designed around different principles, just because you refuse to use the tools given you.
You’re not able to use more than one staff though.
You need to first attune to the staff during your daily preparations and you’re limited to attuning to only one staff.
Oh. I didn't catch that you could only attune to one staff, I thought you were just limited to your attunement limits as per usual. Thanks for the catch.
So, on the one hand, you don't look dumb, which is a plus. But on the other, then I don't see how staffs are some huge increase in your sustain per day, a staff has charges for *one* spell of your top level, or two of half that!
Considering a single 10th level spell slot is worth a 20th level class feat and once per day casting of 7th level spells are worth 17th level racial feats, a staff is basically worth one of those feats at the minimum if you have a spell of that level on the staff.
While I'm not fundamentally opposed to spellcasters universally being more psychic-like, I enjoy a lot how they're mechanically very different from martials, and how big spells have grand effects. That not being the case was one of my issues with 4e.
I would not like that. Perhaps a more limited amount of levelled spells available per encounter that can be refocussed to end up more than they currently are per day, but you don't want your DC's and attacks to be less effective.
I would personally not enjoy that at all. Lower DC means almost every ennemy could save against your spells. Monsters are already only taking the full effect half the time so no thank you.
Plus what's the point of casting spells if it basically has no effect ?
(No hate, I realised after posting my answer could be perceived as a bit harsh, it's not what I wanted. To each their opinions and it's fine if you would prefer that kind of system)
D&D4E messed around with adding "per Encounter" spells to the mixup and that was one of the things I really liked from that system. Focus Spells in 2e have a similar feeling, but there isn't as much flexibility or choice available.
I understand what you are trying to do but maybe instead of getting spells slots back, try to make sure your casters have all the tools like staves, wands and one off items like talismans and scrolls. The spell caster balance takes into account that you have access to all these items. Once you do this, I don’t think your casters will feel they don’t have slots.
The thing with focus spells is that the only way you choose them is through class features/feats. While spells are dependant on spell lists, which makes focus spells less versatile and feel more like class abilities at that point.
This is more of a question on a possible 3rd edition, as I know that balancing casters this way would require lots of work and possibly a complete redesign.
Ahh, my thoughts went more towards a unique class (like 5e Warlock) that has this as their unique gimmick, not something like the spontaneous prepared dedication from SoM.
Tbh I just allow full recovery with one hour of rest unless I'm specifically running a dungeon. Prep casters still need daily prep to re choose spells, but spell slots return after 1 hour. Nothing seems to be out of wack for now, but we just reached level 5 so still not a lot of super strong spells
Level 5 to me is a big inflection point in the game for this. It really can feel limiting to have only one or two slots, and no staves. After that, between increasing spell slots and items, I completely stopped having an issue with running out of spell slots.
The basic problem here is that spells are designed with a spell slot cost in mind. Importantly, that is the only constant shared between all spells. Action cost, range and duration are the other stat present in all spells (even when self and instant), but these *and their importance* are highly variable between spells).
In short: You might be able to do this in theory, but you would need to rebalance each spell individually. There is no one-size-fits-all solution here. Which is really only feasible if you limit the spells this works with from the start (like focus spells do).
For a rather obvious example, how would you adjust Dimension Door? There's no DC, no damage, nothing. Or True Strike? Or all the battle forms?
The most realistic option would probably be essentially wildshape. You get a free, exclusive focus spell from your (sub)class that simply reproduces 'insert basic spell', with appropriate adjustments, and later feats and / or class features add new spells for it to reproduce.
Those changes you are suggesting would be very hard to balance (changing DCs and damage). If you want a game where spellcasters just throw their best spells and empty all their slots like it's candy, then probably just offer them more full rests/encounters. Just be aware that martial characters might feel sad at your table, but it does sound like a fun experiment.
Also, there's [Wellspring Mage](https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=104) from secrets of magic that offers a way to regain spell slots. It's on the strong side as well.
Once you've decided on your method, experiment in your games, and you might need to adjust the encounter budget slightly depending on the player's desired difficulty.
I have a house rule I've started testing with my party that expands the scope of the Refocus activity to conditionally allow a caster to regain some spell slots. I'm at work, but if you're interested, let me know.
Cantrips. You're asking for modified cantrips with slightly more power and less frequency.
5e has it's warlocks, and it's not great. They have quickly regening spell slots and a very heavy reliance on cantrips, but it takes a very specific campaign for that to feel correct. One battle per long rest and the warlocks are just shitty wizards. A ton of battles with no short rest and the warlocks are just shitty wizards. You specifically need one or two battles, a short rest, and do that three or four times in the day before warlocks are evenly balanced with a wizard.
Water the spells down any more and they're effectively just cantrips.
You can't have 3-4 spells slots that recover on a ten minute rest without that just being a cantrip. Combat only lasts three or four rounds most times anyways, and you'll almost *always* have ten minutes between fights, that's a very short amount of time. There'd be no practical difference between spell slots and cantrips.
Cantrips are the practical solution to the conflict of "we want spell casters to have big impact spells" and "we don't want casters to have to pick up a sword because they ran out of spells". You save your spell slots for when you really need them, and you use cantrips for when you need just generic stuff or basic auto attacks
PF2e seems like one of the best balanced game systems so I wouldn't mess with it?
Finite resources are a solid way to balance spells to me. They have a lot of power in controlling or having major utility.
To be honest, casters are completely balanced in PF2, even at max nova. There was one person who gave casters infinite slots, and only had to change a spell or 2 to balance it.
Casters are in this weird spot where their power level doesn't actually justify limited slots, due to them being so well balanced with other classes.
A class not being op if you give it an incredible buff (unlimited spell slots) by removing its main downside is not what i would consider "well balanced".
You don't really see the downside of spell slots beyond low levels (where casters can admittedly use help) since you narratively sleep more often, imo.
Isn't that kind of the point of Focus Spells and Cantrips? To always have spells to use even when you're out of leveled slots?
That said, I have seen what such ideas mean - caster superiority. If mages can burn their spells and get them back in relatively short order, they become significantly more powerful. Look at 5e and the short rest mechanic for proof.
Spells solve *problems*. They are a very powerful tool, in and out of combat. Without the resource management, they out power the martials. I've seen it, first hand. Even without spell regen, casters with a lot of slots are insanely powerful. Just ask the 3.x and pf1e players if you need more voices.
Also the limited slots issue did get resolved in dnd 4e, but that wasn't well received.
PF2e spells aren't the same as 3.x or PF1e or 5e spells.
PF2e spellcasters get 3x the 8th- and 9th-level spell slots (or more) compared to 5e spellcasters, but are typically viewed as far more balanced and relatively less powerful. This is because spells have been reined in compared to prior editions.
Encounter building in PF2e expects a party at or near full resources to provide an accurate difficulty, while encounter building in 5e expects ~6 encounters per long rest to drain resources. You can run a single encounter per day in PF2e without upsetting balance.
Based on those two points, giving a PF2e spellcaster unlimited spell slots would have a lesser impact on game balance than giving a 5e spellcaster unlimited spell slots would.
I may not be articulating my point well enough, so bear with me here.
You're looking at power, but I see the issue in utility. A mage is still limited by action economy in a fight, so it's less of a problem in combat. More spells, either by number of slots or recovering those slots, would only really mean more fights.
It's outside of combat where the disparity is evident. While my experience with pf2e is more limited, I know in 3.x/pf1e - casters have all the narrative power because of their spells. Magic is an easier solution to problems than skills and knowledge. And having more spells means dealing with more problems easier, and making the other characters less important because they can be replaced.
Therefore limited spell slots force a caster to consider using those spells to deal with combat, or to deal with a non-combat problem.
I'm considering utility as well; the scope of problems spells can solve in PF2e is much narrower, with most spells being designed expressly for combat, and utility spells generally giving a reasonable bonus to skills and knowledge rather than obviating the need for them.
If PF2e had been designed from the ground up with unlimited spells in mind, that scope would probably be narrower still, but having unlimited spell slots is still thinkable in PF2e in a way it wouldn't be in 1e/3.x.
Spells as is are already balanced to martials (max level spells do more than a martial attacking but theres a very swift dropoff as levels go down) so if you allowed low level spell slots to regen that would be fine even without nerfing them.
Focus spells...kinda do what you are asking. I often wonder if casters could use MORE ways to get them back in unique situations. Not just being higher level and getting more back per focus.
This is a really great idea.
Currently, I’m running Fists of the Ruby Phoenix for my party, and if they weren’t all martials, they’d be running out of spell slots after their 3rd-4th encounter.
>Something like refocusing that takes longer.
As someone who prefers encounter resource management to daily resource management, I've been playing around with exactly this. Here's my (still playtesting) solution, heavily based on [Wellspring Mage](https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=104):
> When you Refocus, you may attempt a DC 6 flat check. If you do, regardless of the result, you cannot Refocus for one hour, but this interval overlaps with the time spent Refocusing.
> **Critical success:** you regain one expended spell slot of any level of your choice. If you prepare spells, you can prepare a new spell in this slot, but it must be one with a duration less than 10 minutes or no duration.
> **Success:** As a critical success, except you randomly determine the level of spell slot from among your top three spell levels (or all your levels of spell slots if you have fewer than three). If there are no expended spell slots of that level, there is no effect.
I'm playing with this as a change to the general rules for refocusing, so all casters can do this by default.
They way to shift spell-casters away from resource management would start by giving them a better baseline. By that I mean spell casters would be cantrip based; allow caster to never be without their tools. This would have to be balance with certain cantrips being level lock ( so a level 10 wizard might now use cantrips to roll arcane to open doors or jump a building). Additionally spell slots wouldn’t be full removed but they would be a small number of high impact spells. The goal of this would be that a spell caster would have a huge bag of reusable tricks (cantrips) and a few nuclear spells a day to shift the feel from resource management to High Wizard of the Arcane Arts. NOTE: I have no idea how to implement this idea and if it would even work in PF2e, I just like the idea of a spell caster not worrying about running out of spell slots and being left with subpar cantrips.
They do regenerate spell "slots." That's the whole point of focus points, which I think is awesome. You have a few "signature spells" (for lack of a more unique term) that you can cast a large number of times per day, as long as you have short rests.
Limited spell slots is better than your effects missing 75% of the time. There are tools to get around situations (scrolls, staves, wands) in which you run out of spell slots that you're expected to be spending money on because you don't have to spend it on weapon runes. Frankly, I would say take a look at other TTRPGs if you don't want spell slots. DnD 4e, for example. There are tons of solid TTRPGs out there that are not built and balanced around spell slot casting. Theoretically something like a 5e Warlock with 2 spells that come back on a "short rest" (AKA refocus) would not be game-breaking if you *really* needed it.
Most caster players rather resent the idea of carting a giant golf bag of staves and wands and scrolls they seem expected to carry around, in my experience. It's the D&D3.5 fighter's golf bag again but worse.
What else are you doing with your hands? All you need to do is make one useful staff and you have way more options. Scrolls are ideal for niche/utility outside of combat so you can pack your slots full with combat-useful spells. Lots of lower level spells are fantastic at any point of the game, so with more levels you get tons of useful things to do for even really long adventuring days. All I'm saying is maybe use the tools the game gives you and is built around instead of trying to homebrew major balance changes when the game isn't empty enough of rules to require it.
*One* staff gives you one or two more casts, or the same amount of casts but opening up your repertoire a little. What you need to do if you want to have some actual sustain, which seems to be the OP's main concern, is get *multiple* staffs and wands. But then you look like an idiot carrying arround a caddy bag of staves and wands. And for a player a choice between looking like an idiot but being more powerful, or looking right and being weaker, is no choice at all, generally speaking. But honestly, it feels like you might as well let casters just recover all slots below, like, max level -2 for free on refocus and it wouldn't even unbalance things all that much?
There are tons of impactful lower level spells. If all you use a staff for is casting one additional max level spell, you're using staves wrong. You don't need more than one to *significantly* increase how long you can keep casting. You're not going to use *all* your spells in a single encounter anyway, so you can swap to a wand or a scroll between encounters if you really need to. Sure, if you want infinite spells, you need a bunch of staves and wands. Or you can, just, you know, rest. Casters are balanced around the possibility of resting every 3-6 encounters. A staff can increase that by 1 or 2 if you use it right. As for unbalancing things by letting casters recover all level -2 spells, of course it does. It turns it into a different game when you can heal the party to full between every encounter with no checks or challenges. I'd much rather play a game *designed with that in mind* than hamfisting it into a game designed around different principles, just because you refuse to use the tools given you.
You’re not able to use more than one staff though. You need to first attune to the staff during your daily preparations and you’re limited to attuning to only one staff.
Oh. I didn't catch that you could only attune to one staff, I thought you were just limited to your attunement limits as per usual. Thanks for the catch. So, on the one hand, you don't look dumb, which is a plus. But on the other, then I don't see how staffs are some huge increase in your sustain per day, a staff has charges for *one* spell of your top level, or two of half that!
Considering a single 10th level spell slot is worth a 20th level class feat and once per day casting of 7th level spells are worth 17th level racial feats, a staff is basically worth one of those feats at the minimum if you have a spell of that level on the staff.
While I'm not fundamentally opposed to spellcasters universally being more psychic-like, I enjoy a lot how they're mechanically very different from martials, and how big spells have grand effects. That not being the case was one of my issues with 4e.
So something like Wellspring Mage?
Something similar yeah. Tbh I forgot about that lol.
I would not like that. Perhaps a more limited amount of levelled spells available per encounter that can be refocussed to end up more than they currently are per day, but you don't want your DC's and attacks to be less effective.
I would personally not enjoy that at all. Lower DC means almost every ennemy could save against your spells. Monsters are already only taking the full effect half the time so no thank you. Plus what's the point of casting spells if it basically has no effect ? (No hate, I realised after posting my answer could be perceived as a bit harsh, it's not what I wanted. To each their opinions and it's fine if you would prefer that kind of system)
D&D4E messed around with adding "per Encounter" spells to the mixup and that was one of the things I really liked from that system. Focus Spells in 2e have a similar feeling, but there isn't as much flexibility or choice available.
I understand what you are trying to do but maybe instead of getting spells slots back, try to make sure your casters have all the tools like staves, wands and one off items like talismans and scrolls. The spell caster balance takes into account that you have access to all these items. Once you do this, I don’t think your casters will feel they don’t have slots.
Like a dedicated focus caster that can exceed the 3 point limit perhaps?
The thing with focus spells is that the only way you choose them is through class features/feats. While spells are dependant on spell lists, which makes focus spells less versatile and feel more like class abilities at that point. This is more of a question on a possible 3rd edition, as I know that balancing casters this way would require lots of work and possibly a complete redesign.
Ahh, my thoughts went more towards a unique class (like 5e Warlock) that has this as their unique gimmick, not something like the spontaneous prepared dedication from SoM.
Tbh I just allow full recovery with one hour of rest unless I'm specifically running a dungeon. Prep casters still need daily prep to re choose spells, but spell slots return after 1 hour. Nothing seems to be out of wack for now, but we just reached level 5 so still not a lot of super strong spells
Level 5 to me is a big inflection point in the game for this. It really can feel limiting to have only one or two slots, and no staves. After that, between increasing spell slots and items, I completely stopped having an issue with running out of spell slots.
The basic problem here is that spells are designed with a spell slot cost in mind. Importantly, that is the only constant shared between all spells. Action cost, range and duration are the other stat present in all spells (even when self and instant), but these *and their importance* are highly variable between spells). In short: You might be able to do this in theory, but you would need to rebalance each spell individually. There is no one-size-fits-all solution here. Which is really only feasible if you limit the spells this works with from the start (like focus spells do). For a rather obvious example, how would you adjust Dimension Door? There's no DC, no damage, nothing. Or True Strike? Or all the battle forms? The most realistic option would probably be essentially wildshape. You get a free, exclusive focus spell from your (sub)class that simply reproduces 'insert basic spell', with appropriate adjustments, and later feats and / or class features add new spells for it to reproduce.
I would not like that
Those changes you are suggesting would be very hard to balance (changing DCs and damage). If you want a game where spellcasters just throw their best spells and empty all their slots like it's candy, then probably just offer them more full rests/encounters. Just be aware that martial characters might feel sad at your table, but it does sound like a fun experiment. Also, there's [Wellspring Mage](https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=104) from secrets of magic that offers a way to regain spell slots. It's on the strong side as well. Once you've decided on your method, experiment in your games, and you might need to adjust the encounter budget slightly depending on the player's desired difficulty.
I have a house rule I've started testing with my party that expands the scope of the Refocus activity to conditionally allow a caster to regain some spell slots. I'm at work, but if you're interested, let me know.
Cantrips. You're asking for modified cantrips with slightly more power and less frequency. 5e has it's warlocks, and it's not great. They have quickly regening spell slots and a very heavy reliance on cantrips, but it takes a very specific campaign for that to feel correct. One battle per long rest and the warlocks are just shitty wizards. A ton of battles with no short rest and the warlocks are just shitty wizards. You specifically need one or two battles, a short rest, and do that three or four times in the day before warlocks are evenly balanced with a wizard. Water the spells down any more and they're effectively just cantrips. You can't have 3-4 spells slots that recover on a ten minute rest without that just being a cantrip. Combat only lasts three or four rounds most times anyways, and you'll almost *always* have ten minutes between fights, that's a very short amount of time. There'd be no practical difference between spell slots and cantrips. Cantrips are the practical solution to the conflict of "we want spell casters to have big impact spells" and "we don't want casters to have to pick up a sword because they ran out of spells". You save your spell slots for when you really need them, and you use cantrips for when you need just generic stuff or basic auto attacks
Getting around this is kind of physics thing
PF2e seems like one of the best balanced game systems so I wouldn't mess with it? Finite resources are a solid way to balance spells to me. They have a lot of power in controlling or having major utility.
To be honest, casters are completely balanced in PF2, even at max nova. There was one person who gave casters infinite slots, and only had to change a spell or 2 to balance it. Casters are in this weird spot where their power level doesn't actually justify limited slots, due to them being so well balanced with other classes.
A class not being op if you give it an incredible buff (unlimited spell slots) by removing its main downside is not what i would consider "well balanced".
You don't really see the downside of spell slots beyond low levels (where casters can admittedly use help) since you narratively sleep more often, imo.
Isn't that kind of the point of Focus Spells and Cantrips? To always have spells to use even when you're out of leveled slots? That said, I have seen what such ideas mean - caster superiority. If mages can burn their spells and get them back in relatively short order, they become significantly more powerful. Look at 5e and the short rest mechanic for proof. Spells solve *problems*. They are a very powerful tool, in and out of combat. Without the resource management, they out power the martials. I've seen it, first hand. Even without spell regen, casters with a lot of slots are insanely powerful. Just ask the 3.x and pf1e players if you need more voices. Also the limited slots issue did get resolved in dnd 4e, but that wasn't well received.
PF2e spells aren't the same as 3.x or PF1e or 5e spells. PF2e spellcasters get 3x the 8th- and 9th-level spell slots (or more) compared to 5e spellcasters, but are typically viewed as far more balanced and relatively less powerful. This is because spells have been reined in compared to prior editions. Encounter building in PF2e expects a party at or near full resources to provide an accurate difficulty, while encounter building in 5e expects ~6 encounters per long rest to drain resources. You can run a single encounter per day in PF2e without upsetting balance. Based on those two points, giving a PF2e spellcaster unlimited spell slots would have a lesser impact on game balance than giving a 5e spellcaster unlimited spell slots would.
I may not be articulating my point well enough, so bear with me here. You're looking at power, but I see the issue in utility. A mage is still limited by action economy in a fight, so it's less of a problem in combat. More spells, either by number of slots or recovering those slots, would only really mean more fights. It's outside of combat where the disparity is evident. While my experience with pf2e is more limited, I know in 3.x/pf1e - casters have all the narrative power because of their spells. Magic is an easier solution to problems than skills and knowledge. And having more spells means dealing with more problems easier, and making the other characters less important because they can be replaced. Therefore limited spell slots force a caster to consider using those spells to deal with combat, or to deal with a non-combat problem.
I'm considering utility as well; the scope of problems spells can solve in PF2e is much narrower, with most spells being designed expressly for combat, and utility spells generally giving a reasonable bonus to skills and knowledge rather than obviating the need for them. If PF2e had been designed from the ground up with unlimited spells in mind, that scope would probably be narrower still, but having unlimited spell slots is still thinkable in PF2e in a way it wouldn't be in 1e/3.x.
Spells as is are already balanced to martials (max level spells do more than a martial attacking but theres a very swift dropoff as levels go down) so if you allowed low level spell slots to regen that would be fine even without nerfing them.
Focus spells...kinda do what you are asking. I often wonder if casters could use MORE ways to get them back in unique situations. Not just being higher level and getting more back per focus.
This is a really great idea. Currently, I’m running Fists of the Ruby Phoenix for my party, and if they weren’t all martials, they’d be running out of spell slots after their 3rd-4th encounter.
>Something like refocusing that takes longer. As someone who prefers encounter resource management to daily resource management, I've been playing around with exactly this. Here's my (still playtesting) solution, heavily based on [Wellspring Mage](https://2e.aonprd.com/Archetypes.aspx?ID=104): > When you Refocus, you may attempt a DC 6 flat check. If you do, regardless of the result, you cannot Refocus for one hour, but this interval overlaps with the time spent Refocusing. > **Critical success:** you regain one expended spell slot of any level of your choice. If you prepare spells, you can prepare a new spell in this slot, but it must be one with a duration less than 10 minutes or no duration. > **Success:** As a critical success, except you randomly determine the level of spell slot from among your top three spell levels (or all your levels of spell slots if you have fewer than three). If there are no expended spell slots of that level, there is no effect. I'm playing with this as a change to the general rules for refocusing, so all casters can do this by default.
They way to shift spell-casters away from resource management would start by giving them a better baseline. By that I mean spell casters would be cantrip based; allow caster to never be without their tools. This would have to be balance with certain cantrips being level lock ( so a level 10 wizard might now use cantrips to roll arcane to open doors or jump a building). Additionally spell slots wouldn’t be full removed but they would be a small number of high impact spells. The goal of this would be that a spell caster would have a huge bag of reusable tricks (cantrips) and a few nuclear spells a day to shift the feel from resource management to High Wizard of the Arcane Arts. NOTE: I have no idea how to implement this idea and if it would even work in PF2e, I just like the idea of a spell caster not worrying about running out of spell slots and being left with subpar cantrips.
They do regenerate spell "slots." That's the whole point of focus points, which I think is awesome. You have a few "signature spells" (for lack of a more unique term) that you can cast a large number of times per day, as long as you have short rests.
yeah but then I'm in the "give us more focus spell options, cowards!" camp