D&D lovers who hate Vancian magic

[Mercutio01]

Part of the problem also stems from the notion that spells per day was really a balancing factor that applies to combat spells only. A lot of the interesting "quieter" options shouldn't be spells that take spell slots, they should be the equivalent of incantations or rituals, and any magic-using character should be able to do more of them, to keep the process of playing a magic user interesting, even in non-combat situations. For combat itself, I'm perfectly OK with having a more limited pallette of options for any given character.

Now that's an interesting idea. I could run with that.

 

[RainOfSteel]

So for those who really despise Vancian magic as much as some clearly do, I have to ask: What is it about D&D that attracted you to the game?

I was pulled into AD&D in the summer of 1980 with a promise of, "Hey, it's like Tolkien, it has elves, dwarves, halflings, and wizards in it, and you get to play one of them in a fantasy world."

I went to a game, was handed a character sheet, and was hooked forever after.

I knew nothing of the magic system, which I despised forever after from the moment I figured out how it (what little of it there was) worked.

I did not even know it was the "Vancian" system until many years later. I just knew it matched nothing of what I read in Fantasy, save perhaps for the Summon Elemental spell which I one day recognized matched a spell cast early on in the novel, Empire of the East (which itself had little in the way of a recognizable magic system).

 

[Aldarc]

I found the exact opposite to be true. Because Sorcerers can only know a handful of spells, ever, they have to pick the "wide range" staples or be stuck with dead weight for the rest of their lives. Wizards and Clerics, on the other hand, have a lengthy spell list and are able to branch out to try the obscure and niche spells every so often, because they didn't have to buy the cow along with the milk.

And that's why I dislike Sorcerers. Only one chance to get it right, and if you get it wrong then you are shacked with the mistakes forever instead of just one day. I also dislike fireball and "elemental damage" spells with no additional effects for that matter.

But then I have to wonder how much of this isn't just individual spell balance instead of underlying mechanical issues.

And that's why I like Monte Cook's spell system in AU/AE: none of the downsides of either the wizard or sorcerer and all of the good sides as well. It's magically-infused goodness.

Edit: I'm wondering if the reason why "Vancian magic feels like D&D" holds true is largely because people refuse to let D&D's magic system be anything else, thus not allowing any other magic system the chance to let it feel like D&D. Just something to consider.

 

[Thotas]

I "hate" Vancian magic. But ... I got used to it.

It feels weird to say it that way, but it's what it amounts to. If I'm reading a book or watching a movie, I'd still have that same "Grrr, that's stupid! Magic should be a force within me that I control, or an expression of knowledge that I've accumulated over years of study, not something I have to relearn every day because I used it up!" gut reaction to Vancian magic that I first had in D&D.

But in the context of the game, after three decades? Yeah, I've accepted it and just really don't think about that aspect somehow.

 

[Janx]

D&D - Vancian magic[/B] just doesn't feel like D&D to me.

I think there's a certain barrier of re-design that some people don't want to cross. I don't want any house rule to invalidate a large swath out of a rule book.

Messing with the magic system runs that risk.

In 2e, it was quite trivial to say spellcasters don't have to memorize spells, but are still restricted to # of spells per day. The main tables in the book were still valid, as were all the spell casting rules and spell descriptions.

In 3e, that would have invalidated the Sorceror class. So we didn't do it.

Other rules ideas sound find. But most the people I play with, want to play D&D and use their books. Not some other system or hybrid they have to cross-check against.

 

[DragonLancer]

I like Vancian magic. It's one of those aspects of D&D that for me makes D&D what it is.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

A lot of the interesting "quieter" options shouldn't be spells that take spell slots, they should be the equivalent of incantations or rituals

This may surprise people...but I agree with that statement 100%. I've thought that certain spells made more sense as rituals since about 1980 or so, but of course, those didn't really pop up in D&D until 4Ed. When I wanted to play ritual casters, I used different RPGs.

In fact, despite it still being a bit of a mess, I think the introduction of rituals was one of the best innovations in that edition. Still needs work, though.

 

[SSquirrel]

I liked it- AU/AE is probably my favorite of the 3.X games.

But I reiterate that I think Vancian magic is part of D&D's identity and should not be replaced. D&D - Vancian magic just doesn't feel like D&D to me.

Likewise, I think the laden spells & such are really cool...and help distinguish AU/AE from D&D and other 3.X games. I would no more clamor for replacing it with Vancian casting than placing Monte's system into D&D.

Just to be clear, I've spent a lot of time contemplating a chimaera of my favorite parts of the 3.X games I own- 3.5Ed, AU/AE, True20, Pathfinder, Fantasycraft, Midnight and M&M- because I'm trying to create a campaign experience that (IMHO) no one of them would support as is...and my group doesn't want to learn HERO.

And that would probably not have pure Vancian casting.

There are some things you and I disagree on danny, but a love of AE is not one of them Did you ever see Dr Spunj's Classless D&D? Search here on ENWorld for it or I can give you the link sometime, just have ot dig on an external drive. It was a point based version of D&D or AE, however, it used the AE magic system in either game. Instead of having 4 or 5 different progressions like D&D had in 2E and 3E, AE had 2 progressions, which got listed as Full and Half casters in Spunj's version of things. It worked very well. It gave templates showing all the base classes from each game or you could freeform a character as well.

It was interesting to me b/c this was at the same time that Ken Hood's Revised Grim N Gritty was making waves and I was helping w/that thread, then I was also giving opinions on the development of Spunj's system. Fun stuff. Kind of odd that I was living in Coralville Iowa and Spunj was just about 3 minutes up the road from me in North Liberty. Small world indeed.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'll take a look-see on that- thanks!

 

[Herobizkit]

I just feel like sounding off and saying that Vancian Magic has always been a thorn in my side... but no matter what systems I tried to substituted, I always went back to it.

I think that memorization was always the big issue I've had with Vancian casting.
I'm happy that 3.x introduced spontaneous casters for this very reason.

And if I had my way, 3.5 Psionics would be the OFFICIAL default system to replace magic casting. Augments do better what wizard Feats did (which always felt like wizard tax).