ggboostrom
First Post
When it comes Vancian Magic in D&D, saying it’s a ‘hot topic’ is an understatement - there are those who can’t live with it and those who can’t live without it. But if the D&D playtest process has taught me one thing, it’s that when something is so divided, it isn't finished.
When D&D creators Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson decide to borrow from Jack Vance’s Dying Earth series to create the magic system for their new game, what they created was a mechanical expression of a narrative design. The Arcana Wiki describes that narrative design as:
Now I know we’re accustomed to old-school ‘Vancian Magic’ in D&D, but who’s to say that we can’t take the essence of Vancian magic and find newer, better ways to express it mechanically? If we put our collective mind together, I know we’ll surprise ourselves - so what do you think?
When D&D creators Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson decide to borrow from Jack Vance’s Dying Earth series to create the magic system for their new game, what they created was a mechanical expression of a narrative design. The Arcana Wiki describes that narrative design as:
- Each magic spell does exactly one thing, you generally can't improvise a new effect.
- Spells must be prepared in advance. Wizards can prepare only a fixed number of spells, and can use each one only once before having to prepare it again. Spells are like magical ammunition, and you have to reload.
Now I know we’re accustomed to old-school ‘Vancian Magic’ in D&D, but who’s to say that we can’t take the essence of Vancian magic and find newer, better ways to express it mechanically? If we put our collective mind together, I know we’ll surprise ourselves - so what do you think?