I don't know what the game would look like without spellbind, whether it would be more fun and varied or not. You can get around a mage wand with a spellbound minor heal using poisoned bloods and arcane wards and wardstones, or just baiting their dispels with other enchantments. Although, spellbind might be part of the reason that basically every spellbook still uses hard removal for dealing with equipments rather than relying more on other options. Drop item, curse item, disarm, or simply negating the effects of whatever equipment with spellbind that they are using, like using poisoned blood to stop minor heal mage wand. Thing about a spellbound spell is that they have to cast it again every time they want to use it.
Without spellbind it might also become harder to deal with armor stacking though, since you would need to spend more spell points on a third or fourth acid ball, and if your armor stacking opponent removes the corrodes you can't reapply them.
Then again, doing this might give piercing attacks more of a chance to shine.
Another option would be to introduce some other cost for the spellbind, like lowering your innate life by 1, or taking 1 damage every time you use it, or just adding the bound spell's level to the mana cost after the first use.
Spellbinding objects put the enemy mage on a clock. They have to either make the bound spell useless or remove the spellbinding object. And the former tactic probably tends to work better for early to mid game, while the latter is better if you want to outlast the spellbind user.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320A using Tapatalk
