Mana??

[variant]

I wouldn't mind a spell point module. The biggest concern I have with that type of system is that I have yet to see it properly balanced with the Vancian system.

 

[RangerWickett]

My preference is for WotC to try a Magic: the Gathering style mana system. You might start the day with X mana based on your level, and you can never have more than that amount. Each spell costs just 1 or 2 mana, but you can spend an action to recharge your mana. So the tempo of the wizard would be "spell, spell, recharge, spell, recharge, spell, etc."

 

[Teataine]

Based on certain comments Mearls has made recently, I'm 99% sure we will also see the Sorcerer and Warlock, and each of those will have their own mode of spellcasting (one of which might be spell points). One of those might even be a full AED caster.

 

[Stormonu]

Previous editions used a spell point system with psionics, and I've tried a spell point system back in 2E skills & power days.

I found neither very satisfying as D&D spell/psionic levels increase quadratically, instead of linearly - and I haven't seen a system that fairly rates powers without becoming a math headache.

I wouldn't mind seeing the return of something that lets you break one or two higher level spells into lower level spells (such as was possible with Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer), but I'd rather not see the wizard be able to combine spell points to cast one big uber spell and start reinforcing the 15-minute workday.

 

[HeinorNY]

My preference is for WotC to try a Magic: the Gathering style mana system. You might start the day with X mana based on your level, and you can never have more than that amount. Each spell costs just 1 or 2 mana, but you can spend an action to recharge your mana. So the tempo of the wizard would be "spell, spell, recharge, spell, recharge, spell, etc."

I always thought M:tG to be already a lot like D&D's Vancian system.
You have a deck of cards you have access to (Spellbook), but you can only cast from a limited amount that you draw to your hand (memorization) and when you cast a version of a spell it goes to the graveyard and you can't cast it anymore (fire-and-forget), unless you have another card with that same spell in your hand (same spell memorized multiple times).
What D&D doesn't have is the need for the caster to build mana before casting his memorized spells. In M:tG it creates a pace for the game, and you could add it to the Vancian system to also create a pace for spellcasters in D&D.


BTW how boring would M:tG be if you could cast any spell from your deck, as many times as you wanted, whenever you wanted, as long you had enough mana to?

 

[Ahnehnois]

Should we have spell points at some point? Yes. Not because it will pull in WoWers, but because it's simpler and more balanced.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Mmmm ... pass. Spell points/mana are not D&D to me, and require too much bookkeeping. Optional module? Sure, OK.

 

[justinhalliday]

My preference is for WotC to try a Magic: the Gathering style mana system. You might start the day with X mana based on your level, and you can never have more than that amount. Each spell costs just 1 or 2 mana, but you can spend an action to recharge your mana. So the tempo of the wizard would be "spell, spell, recharge, spell, recharge, spell, etc."

I base many of the concepts for the anima system in <i>Heroes Against Darkness</i> on M:tG. So most of the spells have X costs, and the magi can put in as much anima as they can (or as much as they <i>have</i>). It's better balanced than Vancian magic because it doesn't explode in power at higher levels.

I always thought M:tG to be already a lot like D&D's Vancian system.
You have a deck of cards you have access to (Spellbook), but you can only cast from a limited amount that you draw to your hand (memorization) and when you cast a version of a spell it goes to the graveyard and you can't cast it anymore (fire-and-forget), unless you have another card with that same spell in your hand (same spell memorized multiple times).
What D&D doesn't have is the need for the caster to build mana before casting his memorized spells. In M:tG it creates a pace for the game, and you could add it to the Vancian system to also create a pace for spellcasters in D&D.

BTW how boring would M:tG be if you could cast any spell from your deck, as many times as you wanted, whenever you wanted, as long you had enough mana to?

The difference in a spell-point system is that you deplete mana (lands) instead of spells (your hand). It works fine in play.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I strongly prefer mana systems in general, but for a D&D game I gotta have Vancian fire & forget.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Should we have spell points at some point? Yes. Not because it will pull in WoWers, but because it's simpler and more balanced.

Spell slots are pretty simple already. How would a spell point system make magic more balanced? I think it's been pointed out that a point system has been prone to abuse in the past when used as the basis for psionics.