D&D 1E Should 5e adopt 1e style arcane magic?

[steenan]

1e magic system is a mixed bag. There are some things that I'd gladly see return: spells being declared before initiative roll and interrupted by damage, magic being costly and dangerous, percentage resistance. There are some I definitely don't like: the progression curve that makes you useless at low levels and god at high levels, inability to wear armor, inability to learn a spell after failing once.

The flaws are big enough that I don't want this style of magic to return. But if they ported just some parts of it, I'd be glad.

 

[Tallifer]

Harry Potter was written for little kids. Please keep that as far away from D&D as possible!

"What is the point of growing up, if you cannot be childish once and a while?"
- The Fourth Doctor

On topic: add me to the grumpy group which does not have many fond memories for the magic system of AD&D. I cut my teeth on AD&D, and I definitely prefer the magic of the Fourth Edition.

 

[Minigiant]

1E is a bit too much. That 50% of your party is useless 90% of the time stuff was okay back then but no. Having a character who can skip an encounter many times wasn't worth it. Especially when they failed to do so.

5E is all about unity and 1e magic scares people. Different xp tables was silly. Having practically no spells until you got a chunk of xp was silly. And then combine that with being useless at almost everything else. Um.. no.

I am all for drawbacks but only one or two (that are hard to circumvent and bypass).

 

[Someone]

You only get 3 strikes in baseball, but no one is clamoring to increase that.

Everybody would be clamoring to change that if the rule was that he could only use three bats and had to discard them after each swing, then make 3 new ones each morning.

 

[Hassassin]

Everybody would be clamoring to change that if the rule was that he could only use three bats and had to discard them after each swing, then make 3 new ones each morning.

Ok, consider soccer. Each game - each day, basically - you can only replace three players. It's a limited resource and if you've used it up and someone gets injured you are down a player.

Neither example tells us how D&D should look like, of course. (Although the above is quite a bit like a vancian Cleric's healing magic. Healing surges are per player, so it's not as good a match. But I digress.)

How limited magic "should" be is subjective. Arguing which makes more sense doesn't accomplish anything. The best the game can do is offer classes for each type of players.

 

[Mokona]

Almost half of respondents voted "No, I don't like the 1e arcane magic system" with many more choosing that option than disliking the 1e wizard drawbacks.

Perhaps EN World really is biased in favor of 4th edition.

Is there some strong distinction between the 1e-style magic system and either the 2e-style or 3e-style? They seem pretty similar to me.

 

[Yora]

I think 4th Edition is the version I like the least, and I still voted those very same options.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Is there some strong distinction between the 1e-style magic system and either the 2e-style or 3e-style? They seem pretty similar to me.

There were some pretty big distinctions that began in 2e and continued into 3e.

For example, 2e placed a level cap on many spells, including fireball. In 1e, fireball dealt as many d6s as you had wizard levels. Hence, you could throw a 20d6 fireball at 20th level. In 2e, fireball no longer scaled after 10th level (capped at 10d6).

3e expanded on this by keeping those caps but removing numerous restrictions and drawbacks from spells. For example, in 1e and 2e, Polymorph Other required the target to make a system shock check or die, and if successful to make a second check or assume the mind of their new form. Haste aged all targets (not terrible for elves, but very dangerous in overused for humans).

 

[Lanefan]

My PH is half a continent away so I can't easily check, but I thought if you failed your % roll to learn a spell you could try again once you had gained a level.

As for the rest, I like the 1e casting system pretty much as is - except for pre-memorization which I have come to despise. The level advancement rate could easily come in line with other classes, it is an extremely minor factor. But all the other restrictions serve a very good purpose.

To make this work however initiative should be rerolled each round.

Lanefan

 

[BobTheNob]

Almost half of respondents voted "No, I don't like the 1e arcane magic system" with many more choosing that option than disliking the 1e wizard drawbacks.

Perhaps EN World really is biased in favor of 4th edition.

Is there some strong distinction between the 1e-style magic system and either the 2e-style or 3e-style? They seem pretty similar to me.

Careful about drawing conclusions on other peoples behalf.

Do I think the 1e system was a old mechanic invented in an age where "gaming logic" was embryonic and that we have well and truly moved on? Yes.

Do the think the 4e solution is the way to go...No.

In this day and age with so many other ideas out there for handling the "cost" of magic (and an entire community collaborating towards the end goal of creating a great game) surely we must be able to come up with a system without resorting to either of the Vancian or 4e models.

Just because I reject 1e, doesnt mean I advocate 4e.