D&D 4E Combining Vancian and Will/Daily from 4E

[Arlough]

I, personally, like the idea of a wizard having a "go-to" spell or two that they use for damn near everything, with big effects needing to be prepared in advance.
I also liked the premise (if not execution) of rituals, being the bag of tricks so the wizard didn't have to memorize knock for half his spells.

When I played 2nd edition, nobody played a wizard unless we were starting out at much higher levels because they didn't want to only be able to to things a few times per dungeon.

When I played 3rd edition, everybody thought about playing wizards, and decided to jump over to sorcerers instead so they could have more flexibility.

And in the end, in both games, we ultimately ended up with a golf bag of the appropriate wands, because predicting what the DM would throw at us really meant either being prepared for everything, or keeping our character sheets secret and getting lucky.

Honestly, if there is no way to guarantee the players will always be able to contribute, I'll stick with 4th or move on to a different system.

 

[hanez]

all this talk about encounter, daily and utility spells is kinda bringing back bad memories honestly.

I hope they go back to the vancian system as presented in AD&D or 3e. I could see some simple at will powers (at first level) being a good thing. But if theres rituals, or siloed "utility" powers or anything like that it will be a hard sell for me.

 

[YRUSirius]

I guess. I'm just very opposed to the idea that you should need to spend a feat to get an at-will spell, or any sort of attack in general. I hated having to get a bunch of arbitrary feats to be able to perform a spinning attack in 3.5. I feel that attacks and spells should be tied in to your class, feats would allow you to customize your character regardless of class. They shouldn't take the same resource. Sacrificing a flavorful trait for your character like "iron will" or "alertness" because you want to be able to do something in combat is bad design in my opinion.

What if there won't be general feats but only class specific feats that fit the role of d20 modern/star wars saga class talents? Say fighters only got to chose between fighter feats and wizards only got to chose wizard feats. In this variant class feats would fulfill the role of 4E class powers and some of the 3E combat/fighter feats. Wizards only got to chose if they want the burning hand wizard feat, magic missile wizard feat - but there won't be general feats like iron will or alertness.

-YRUSirius

 

[Ellington]

What if there won't be general feats but only class specific feats that fit the role of d20 modern/star wars saga class talents? Say fighters only got to chose between fighter feats and wizards only got to chose wizard feats. In this variant class feats would fulfill the role of 4E class powers and some of the 3E combat/fighter feats. Wizards only got to chose if they want the burning hand wizard feat, magic missile wizard feat - but there won't be general feats like iron will or alertness.

-YRUSirius

I'm not too familiar with that setup, but it sounds intriguing. Would probably have to see it action before making up my mind.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well I would not mind basic vancian back, I really want to a magic system that lets me be the two harry's. Harry potter can cast any spell he knows, but only knows a few powerful ones. Harry Dresden has a fatigue thing going on, where he channel more and more power, but if he runs out of power he is screwed.

I love rituels that anyone can do

all this talk about encounter, daily and utility spells is kinda bringing back bad memories honestly.

I hope they go back to the vancian system as presented in AD&D or 3e. I could see some simple at will powers (at first level) being a good thing. But if theres rituals, or siloed "utility" powers or anything like that it will be a hard sell for me.

you know that can just as easily be turned around. and people can say the idea of back to 3e or 2e vancian systems are brining back bad memories. in the hope of compramize can we not have both?

 

[Janaxstrus]

I, personally, like the idea of a wizard having a "go-to" spell or two that they use for damn near everything, with big effects needing to be prepared in advance.
I also liked the premise (if not execution) of rituals, being the bag of tricks so the wizard didn't have to memorize knock for half his spells.

When I played 2nd edition, nobody played a wizard unless we were starting out at much higher levels because they didn't to only be able to to things a few times per dungeon.

When I played 3rd edition, everybody thought about playing wizards, and decided to jump over to sorcerers instead so they could have more flexibility.

And in the end, in both games, we ultimately ended up with a golf bag of the appropriate wands, because predicting what the DM would throw at us really meant either being prepared for everything, or keeping our character sheets secret and getting lucky.

Honestly, if there is no way to guarantee the players will always be able to contribute, I'll stick with 4th or move on to a different system.

Wow, you have had the complete opposite experiences I have had in 2e and 3e.

We always had people wanting to play wizards in every edition (1-3), no one plays sorcerers, ever really. Sure, they cast more spells, but they are very focused. Blasty sorcerers are pretty much one trick ponies, and generally less effective than a generalist wizard and way less than some of the specialists.

 

[n00bdragon]

I don't see a need to combine the two. The problem most people have with Vancian casting isn't that you run out of stuff to do in a day (because let's face it, you never do after 3rd level or so and the party will stop and rest after you do so no matter what the level) it's that it makes for easy design space at the expense of characters who don't have it.

It's easy to make yet another spell because spells are modular and follow a standard format. You can insert them and take them out of a game easily. Doing the same with class features and the like is much more difficult. That's why 4e offered very few class features and set the majority of special things characters could do in powers, which were easy to add and remove in a modular fashion like spells.

But a certain subset of people cried loud enough and now we have Vancian casting again. Why bother trying to fight it? Letting the casters choose to be Vancian or AEDU won't change the fact that they are still the only classes that have that kind of design and as such not only will they start on top they will continue to get better because you can't have a proper splat book without cramming a few more pages of spells into it, even if the book isn't meant for casters.

 

[xigbar]

If you wanted to simply create a more condensed and slightly separated version of both, just but a great focus on class features that are used x/day, similar to 3.x, but with the usage system more like 4e. Make the casters have some of their dailys be like spell like abilities for spells that they "specialize in, and therefore have a great potency and frequency for which they can use them.

 

[billd91]

I'm okay with encounter powers, because they can be presented as a pretty elegant fatigue mechanic. In a quick burst of time (1:30 m combat/encounter) you have only so much energy to fight efficiently or cast spells. That's why I never had problems with encounter spells - not even encounter maneuvers. You got to have to take a quick breath after the encounter to get your energy back. Not much tracking too, just "tap" your spell and be done. The daily limit on classic daily vancian casting seems more arbitrary than some kind of short rest limit (encounter power, just don't call it that ).

-YRUSirius

I could potentially get behind that idea if it weren't for the fact that each encounter apparently has its own energy reserve. That just doesn't work well for me.

I'd rather have a common energy reserve (using tokens for example) and a set of spells appropriate for encounter-based use. Then you expend a token to fire of any one of those spells. Next round, you want to cast it again so you spend another token on it. Then you've got a common energy reserve, but you can pick the specific mix of how that energy is spent.

I would consider doing the same with dailies too, particularly for martial dailies.

 

[fuzzlewump]

What about instead of at-will, it's like 8 times per day? Or some good number depending on the assumed average usage in a typical adventure? That might satisfy both camps, those who want at will, and those who want resource management