D&D 3E/3.5 Comparing Standard 3.5 Variant Magic Systems

[dulsi]

There's no reason to replace the cleric with a psionic version; the cleric's magic is distinguishable from wizard/sorcerer magic.

But that isn't what the original poster is looking for. He dislikes Vancian magic and wants to replace. I assume that means cleric, druid, sorcerer, wizard and all other casters. While using a psion instead of a sorcerer makes it more unique than the wizard, it does nothing to solve the poster's problem with the rest of the casters.

 

[EroGaki]

But that isn't what the original poster is looking for. He dislikes Vancian magic and wants to replace. I assume that means cleric, druid, sorcerer, wizard and all other casters. While using a psion instead of a sorcerer makes it more unique than the wizard, it does nothing to solve the poster's problem with the rest of the casters.

Ah, you are correct. My bad.

 

[ramira]

If you dislike the Vancian magic system just forget about magic and use psionics exclusively.

I wouldn't recommend the spell point system variant, imho, it has some serious balance issues.

I appreciate the input, but as noted in the OP, I am not concerned about balance issues as such. Not to say I am not concerned about balance period, but this particular game and format make it not a major concern relative to casting power.

Further, the adaptation of the Psionics to pull in the spells of the Magic Users is rather a bit of labour. If I may restate, I would like to discuss the Alternative Magic systems as such. And without extensive adaptation labour in particular, as I have neither the time nor inclination for such tinkering.

 

[ramira]

Rather than thinking of Psionics as something completely alien from magic, just declare it as a different method of using magic; that's how I've always viewed it.

Perhaps, but as noted, I am not interested in massive tinkering and wish insight on rather more plain vanilla adaptations (in particular things that can easily without extra labour adopted into tools such as PCGen).

I am hoping in the vast number of mechanics people here that someone has played both of the two Unearthed Arcana options and can give comparative insight..... To quote myself "I am interested in comments on effective, relatively easy to implement system, rather than ideal customisation."

 

[Ahnehnois]

I run a system using spell points. I standardized things so spell points are based on a simple formula, spells known are a flat number rather than a big chart (like the psion) and memorized spells are handled similarly, clerics cast spontaneously (also UA) and spell DCs are all 10 + 1/2 caster level + ability mod. This allows you to create a caster without referencing charts and to pplay one with much less time spent in preparation. You get a lot more flexibility and customization without an increase in raw power.

I've seen no balance problems and I think it fits the criteria of being easy to implement and effective but not perfect. I have not, however, used the recharge system to compare it to.

 

[Voadam]

I too dislike the vancian system. I like the recharge system a lot. Making the resource allocation decision more about round to round management of spells and choosing among a small number rather than focused on daily expenditure is a lot more to my style.

The biggest drawback for me is the extra die roll of general recharge time and actually tracking each spell level's recharge. For my games I eliminated the die roll and created static recharge times. At the table having dice next to your list of prepared/known spells by level allowed easy visual tracking (changing numbers each round for rounds left of recharge) during combats which speeded up play a bunch for my high level eldritch knight.

Consequences of recharge:
1) High level magics will be used every fight.
2) Less potential novaing though as you only have one shot per spell level before you have to wait to recharge. Normal casters can unload nothing but high level spells in a sustained 1/day nova while rechargers quickly downgrade the magical firepower round to round. Sorcerers in particular lose out on throwing three of their highest level spells in a row
3) Quickly have no magic in a fight. Unless you adopt a pathfinder style house rule to make cantrips at will low level casters will have two rounds of magic in combat before they have to pull out crossbows. wands and scrolls get around this as does the unlimited cantrips house rule.
4) Sorcerers with non general recharge spells get a little short changed, we house ruled that those recharges were reduced proportionally as well.
5) Preparation casters have a little advantage in that their normal slots (including bonus slots) never need to double up on useful spells, they can safely generalize their prepared list. Compare slots to spells known charts and compound from generally big pools of preparation choices.

 

[Voadam]

I also highly recommend the spontaneous divine caster options from UA. Sorcerer style seems a lot less vancian than wizard style with automatically knowing every spell on the list.

It makes every divine caster unique on their daily spells but still flexible to use scrolls from their lists. It also makes choice of domains more important for clerics as they are a bigger impact on useable spells.