L&L: Putting the Vance in Vancian - Page 5





+ Log in or register to post
Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 211
  1. #41
    Registered User
    Waghalter (Lvl 7)



    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sarnia, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    240
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore GM Dave
    I would reverse the thinking on the Cleric verses the Priest.

    The base 'heal bot' cleric does not need a spell selection. This is the 1e Cleric that wields a mace and it a pocket fighter (interestingly more of a gish then most wizard attempts at the gish).

    The cleric would have a few abilities to modify their mace usage and various healing magics as they level (maybe borrow the lay on hands ability from the the Pathfinder Paladin or something similar that allows healing or some charges to be used for more complex types of healing <cure blindness, cure disease> ).

    This would be the simplified Cleric.

    The priest would be more of the 'bells and whistles' version of a holy person who has domains representing different gods and pantheons. They would have the spell selection which would include various domain lists of spells.

    The bridge between the two classes would be taking the Cleirc and then giving some options that can be pulled from the base and replaced with other options. This would create the Storm Cleric or Fire Cleric (reducing the mace usage for something else and giving a bit different in the utility power selection).

 

  • #42
    They of course mention the Psion as being an example of a point using magic class, but is there anything about the way the Psion's power system (more likely the 3.5e one, over the 4e one) was implemented that should be changed?

  • #43
    Registered User
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,009
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Circvs MaximvsForgotten RealmsD&D

    Ignore El Mahdi
    I think using Feats to get some magical abilities is a little too limiting. Feats are a limited resource to begin with. Spending a Feat per spell-like ability is a bit expensive.

    I'd like to see something more like: at character creation, you choose a number of spell-like abilities equal to your Intelligence/Wisdom bonus. You may then aquire more spell like abilities through the expenditure of a Feat.

    Or...

    Make a Feat able to grant two or three spell like abilities.

    Or...

    Just reintroduce Cantrips and make them completely at-will.


  • #44
    My problem with Vancian casting is the focus on per-day abilities. I think anything more than minimal per-day balancing is simply bad, and is almost guaranteed to produce an imbalanced game. I think 4E has a bit too much, as it is. I'm loathe to see a return to those old mistakes.

    Hopefully, all that per-day junk will be limited to Wizards. And I can just ban them from any table I DM (and try to find a like-minded DM, if I'm playing). But my guess is the other spellcasting systems will be just as per-day based, since I recall one of the devs repeating that old "expected encounters per day" nonsense. In which case, so much for 5E.

  • #45
    Registered User
    Guide (Lvl 11)

    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,333
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Yora
    The big problem with the system is the situation, in which you can cast two more fireballs, but not a single fly spell. It's extremely rare to have such a thing appear anywhere in myth or fiction.

    But I am really interested how this poll turns out. It's a subject on which anyone has a strong oppinon, but nobody really knows how common each view is.
    http://spriggans-den.com My site for the Ancient Lands setting and everything RPG related.

  • #46
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)

    Scribble's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Berlin NJ
    Posts
    7,243
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Scribble
    Quote Originally Posted by El Mahdi View Post
    I think using Feats to get some magical abilities is a little too limiting. Feats are a limited resource to begin with. Spending a Feat per spell-like ability is a bit expensive.
    Yeah but we don't really know how feats will play out this time around do we?

  • #47
    Quote Originally Posted by El Mahdi View Post
    I think using Feats to get some magical abilities is a little too limiting. Feats are a limited resource to begin with. Spending a Feat per spell-like ability is a bit expensive.

    I'd like to see something more like: at character creation, you choose a number of spell-like abilities equal to your Intelligence/Wisdom bonus. You may then aquire more spell like abilities through the expenditure of a Feat.

    Or...

    Make a Feat able to grant two or three spell like abilities.

    Or...

    Just reintroduce Cantrips and make them completely at-will.

    We really don't know how many feats we get, what the all the types of feats, or if thier are ways to gain additional feats.

  • #48
    Registered User
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)



    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    North Akron
    Posts
    1,585
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Ratskinner
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage Wombat View Post
    If this implies that "Disciple of Tenser" is really phrased as some equivalent of "You may use Tenser's Floating Disc as a spell-like ability at will" then it's wouldn't be so bad. I would object to not having the option of preparing the effect as a spell at all.

    It also brings back the issue of combat balance and non-combat balance. If I'm using a feat for mage hand that another player is using for extra combat damage, we have the gimping problem again.

    It suggests a system by which feats are used primarily for out-of-combat effects, but we have evidence that's not the case.
    To me, it seems like Feats are being upgraded to be more like "class features" rather than minor tweaks. However, I favor blurring the line between combat and non-combat. I think that the utility of various things varies so much between campaigns that it should be possible for characters in the same class but different campaigns to adapt to what they need. Its the only way to allow for balance while not "locking down" a hardwired combat playstyle, AFAICT.

  • #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage Wombat View Post
    Article for 2/27/12.

    I'm reading this to imply that if you want a spell that doesn't affect combat, you have to use a feat to buy it?

    I hope I'm wrong, because this bothers me to no end.
    I think your wrong, these are probably more akin to reserve feats, minus the reserve part, aka lesser versions of greater spells, the way,fire javalin doesn't replace fireball.

  • #50
    Registered User
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)

    DEFCON 1's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Burlington, MA
    Posts
    5,543
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore DEFCON 1
    The one thing I'd love to see with regards to these "at-will" magical cantrips you gain with feats is for it to be stated quite clearly either in the cantrip explanation (or perhaps in the DMG) what the numbers could be for the DM to attribute consistent and balanced damage dice to their use.

    For example... Mage Hand as a spell/cantrip traditionally has done no damage. However, there have always been ways that magic-users have "explained" the method for using Mage Hand so that it could be used to cause damage. Whether this was telekinetic punches, knocking things off shelves to drop on people's heads, directing vials of alchemists fire, etc.

    It'd be great if there was a standard damage rating for all abilities gained via these feats. Like any basic magic feat could cause 1d4+INT damage depending how its used for example. So that whatever ability you got from whatever feat you took... if you found a way to use it offensively, the damage caused were balanced against each other and the 'spells' a Vancian wizard might have.

    Use a Tenser's Floating Disk as an offensive attack? Does 1d4+INT damage. Use Mage Hand as an offensive attack? 1d4+INT damage. Use Ghost Sound offensively (like creating loud screams in the ears of the monster?) 1d4+INT damage. Give the casters the benefit of thinking of cool, weird ways to use their magic in addition to the standard method of what these cantrips would do. The benefit is... you don't ask the player to have to take TWO of these feats... one an offensive at-will attack, the other, a cool "non-combat" effect feat.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Jack Vance
      By Uller in forum Miscellaneous Geek Talk & Media Lounge
      Replies: 8
      Last Post: Friday, 18th January, 2013, 02:17 PM
    2. [5E] To Vance or not to Vance - That is the Question
      By Mercurius in forum D&D and Pathfinder Rules & Discussion
      Replies: 88
      Last Post: Sunday, 15th January, 2012, 12:13 AM
    3. [5E] To Vance or not to Vance - That is the Question
      By Mercurius in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 4
      Last Post: Monday, 9th January, 2012, 05:16 PM
    4. Hybrid Vancian/Non-Vancian Spellcasters
      By rounser in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 7
      Last Post: Friday, 19th July, 2002, 06:11 AM
    5. Take that Vance!
      By widderslainte in forum D&D and Pathfinder Rules & Discussion
      Replies: 25
      Last Post: Wednesday, 29th May, 2002, 09:51 PM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •