Monte Cook's Design Thoughts On Spellcasters

[Corinth]

I don't. D&D is a game first and formost; everything else is secondary to this fact. The Vancian paradigm works very well for the purposes of creating a robust game where opportunity costs must be made due to limited resources and shifting conditions, which is what D&D gameplay centers itself upon--what any game worth playing centers itself upon--and taking that away invariably and inevitably damages that quality, making the game weaker. This is not about reproducing literature; this is about playing a game.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I don't. D&D is a game first and formost; everything else is secondary to this fact. The Vancian paradigm works very well for the purposes of creating a robust game where opportunity costs must be made due to limited resources and shifting conditions, which is what D&D gameplay centers itself upon--what any game worth playing centers itself upon--and taking that away invariably and inevitably damages that quality, making the game weaker. This is not about reproducing literature; this is about playing a game.

This is very much a matter of opinion. For me RPGs have always primarily been a way of reproducing literature. I want to experience the worlds of Andre Norton or Roger Zelazny. The game aspect of RPGs is a blast as well, but to misquote Shakespeare, "The play is not the thing."

I like the direction of Monte's thought and would like to see him run with it. It's not my ideal "dream system" (which I've been working on on and off for years) but it sounds like it goes about as far in that direction as possible without dropping the Vancian magic sacred cow (which isn't going to happen in any offical version of D&D).

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Wizards in books do not memorize spells each day, they learn them and can cast them when needed. D&D needs to move closer to a literary version of a wizard IMO.

It already started out that way. Spellcasting in D&D from the beginning of the game 30+ years ago wass based on how spells are cast in Jack Vance's "Dying Earth" stories. That's why it's called "Vancian Magic." Plus, what books are you talking about? Even disregarding Jack Vance's stories, it isn't anything like universally true that wizards in books always cast spells spontaneously.

 

[Celtavian]

re

It already started out that way. Spellcasting in D&D from the beginning of the game 30+ years ago wass based on how spells are cast in Jack Vance's "Dying Earth" stories. That's why it's called "Vancian Magic." Plus, what books are you talking about? Even disregarding Jack Vance's stories, it isn't anything like universally true that wizards in books always cast spells spontaneously.

Lord of the Rings though low magic is spontaneous. Song of Ice and Fire though low magic is spontaneous. Willow movie spontaneous. Excalibur ritualistic but spontaneous as well. The Bible prayers are spontaneous. Forgotten Realms novels actually seem like spontaneous magic.

It is true that magic isn't universally spontaneous. Sometimes you have to read out of a book while casting or it takes days to cast a single spell while some spells are spontaneous. There is alot of ritual magic that takes many fetishes, but even such witch types can usually cast a certain number of spells spontaneousy.

Wizardry and magic should be like a warrior drawing a sword, it should always be at the fingertips of the caster, at least a good portion of it. And having to choose what spells to memorize in advance doesn't lend itself to having the right spell when needed. Most literary works have the right spell when needed. As in the healer will be able to cure the poison when the person is actually poisoned, not wait to pray the next day. The D&D system does not lend itself to this type of verisimilitude.

I really don't know what percentage like it as is, but I don't. I much prefer magic to be like a scientific discipline: Once you know how to do it once, you can do it again and again. I also highly dislike priestly magic being like wizardly magic. You pray for a certain number of spells per day rather than learn the proper prayers to invoke your god to do a particularl useful action? That doesn't seem right at all. At the very least priests should be able to call upon their gods for what they need when they need it by learning the proper prayers to invoke their deity.

I could stomach arcane casters using Vancian magic, but priests should not be a part of Vancian magic at all. They invoke gods with prayers, just like real priests and reverends learn prayers to use at particular times and can always use them when needed.

The magic system needs work and a more creative approach IMO. I'm hoping they do this in future editions of the game. They should think in terms of how does this work in terms of a fantasy story because that's what makes D&D more appealing than say a Warcraft MMORPG or a Warhammer boardgame, the fact that us creative types can forge a story using the rules and our own imaginations. I'm hoping they start using a magic system that lends itself to storytelling as the current one does a pretty poor job IMO.

 

[wayne62682]

You know, all this talk makes me wonder just how unbalanced the game would be if Wizards and Clerics could spontaneously cast from the entire spell list (barring things like prohibited schools of magic, of course), along the same vein as a Warmage or Dread Necromancer but without the narrow list (in effect the balance between these casters and the "normal" Wizard would be the additional abilities such as wearing armor, d6 hit die, etc). For the Cleric it just makes sense since you should be able to utter a "Prayer of Warding" to keep evil creatures at bay (i.e. Protection from Evil) or "Prayer of Strength" (i.e. Bull's Strength) spontaneously. Keep the number of spells they can cast per day of each level on the lower end to balance it out by limiting the power; for example a high level wizard may be able to cast nine 1st level spells, but only one 9th level spell (the rationale being that very powerful spells take a toll on the caster so they don't do it often), and this would not increase.

Going further, perhaps Wizards (only) should get an ability at higher level that basically lets them treat certain levels of spells as spell-like abilities, so that an Archmage could have nearly unlimited use of low-level spells (not really unlimited, but you get the idea). Maybe additional rules that say you can sacrifice your hit points to cast a spell if you have no more slots (something like [Spell Level x 2])? Again, the idea would be that you could cast several very powerful spells, but it's going to nearly kill you to do it.. I recall a lot of fantasy stuff that had Wizards who pretty much killed themselves by casting very powerful magic that used all their energy.

Just brainstorming some ideas.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

you know what i done is spell points for starters simple 1 point per level of spell not hard easy and gives u lots of chorces over what u take with u ..also i added empower ever 3 levels and gave a chorce of things to pick from...+4 AC. summon spellbook,1 cantrip at will,
+2 to spot,minor change self hair eyes and so on ...things like that i also let them start with familer if they so wish and they have the staff ablity from dragon...a little much maybe but my players seem to like it...

 

[Wolfwood2]

I don't. D&D is a game first and formost; everything else is secondary to this fact. The Vancian paradigm works very well for the purposes of creating a robust game where opportunity costs must be made due to limited resources and shifting conditions, which is what D&D gameplay centers itself upon--what any game worth playing centers itself upon--and taking that away invariably and inevitably damages that quality, making the game weaker. This is not about reproducing literature; this is about playing a game.

I realize you were responding to another poster, but Monte's proposal specifically targets resource management as an important resource to keep.

He's just advocating reducing the number of resources to manage, while giving mages some low-level magic stuff to do when they're not tossing the big spells.[1] That's actually a move more towards the Vancian paradigm, where prepared spells are few in number and the "big guns".

[1]Note the the discussion has revolved around wizards and sorcerers, possibly because clerics and druids can already do a fairly well in combat even when not casting spells. The big change there would probably be to decouple the cleric's healing ability from spellcasting entirely, while reducing the number of clerical spell slots.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

You know, all this talk makes me wonder just how unbalanced the game would be if Wizards and Clerics could spontaneously cast from the entire spell list (barring things like prohibited schools of magic, of course), along the same vein as a Warmage or Dread Necromancer but without the narrow list ....

Going further, perhaps Wizards (only) should get an ability at higher level that basically lets them treat certain levels of spells as spell-like abilities, so that an Archmage could have nearly unlimited use of low-level spells (not really unlimited, but you get the idea)....

Have you see Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved? It has a unified spell list where the spell's power is determinitive of level, not the class that can cast it. Ironically, the Magister class in that game gets near unlimited low level spells once they get above 20th level.

 

[mmadsen]

He's just advocating reducing the number of resources to manage, while giving mages some low-level magic stuff to do when they're not tossing the big spells. That's actually a move more towards the Vancian paradigm, where prepared spells are few in number and the "big guns".

I like the notion of limiting spells to fewer in number, but making them powerful when used. I also like the notion of giving wizards something to do besides cast those few powerful spells -- but I don't think it has to be spell-like or magical. Wizards could and probably should have some of the bard's abilities, like bardic knowledge, and it wouldn't be out of place if they could, say, open locks and disable traps. (I also like the notion of the wizard being the only member of the party who can read text, etc.)

 

[Slife]

It already started out that way. Spellcasting in D&D from the beginning of the game 30+ years ago wass based on how spells are cast in Jack Vance's "Dying Earth" stories. That's why it's called "Vancian Magic." Plus, what books are you talking about? Even disregarding Jack Vance's stories, it isn't anything like universally true that wizards in books always cast spells spontaneously.

A couple others
The Chronicles of Amber (Where Merlin forgets to replenish his spells constantly)
Discworld