D&D 5E [5E] To Vance or not to Vance - That is the Question

[darkwing]

The options should be "no" and "hell no". I don't mind that you can only cast a limited number of spells per encounter (well, not really, I like 4th edition's idea of an at-will go-to spell). But having to prepare spells ahead of time is not a good game mechanic because it's too easy to pick the wrong thing (the only thing worse than being weak is being irrelevant). In the minority of cases where it is somehow useful to the narrative rituals are a better game mechanic and fill the need adequately.

 

[MoxieFu]

Using a Vancian spell system was a way of limiting the power or at least the flexibility of spell casters in earlier editions. It only takes one paragraph to change a Vancian system to Spell Point system. You don't need pages in a splat book to do that, but you could create more elaborate systems for those who want the increase in complexity. The Vancian system is a good place to start. It appeals to those who like older editions and it is easily changed.

I wonder how many of the complaints about the increased power of spell casters come from those who don't like Vancian casting? Of course when you remove the restriction of spell preparations it makes the caster more powerful.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Partially agreed...

on the other hand: the greatest thing about wizards was actually the aquisition od spells. Roll the dice to see if you learn them (of course 85% or more was the cool number). Gather as many spells as possible.

I think this can be combined with rituals:
Why should it impossible to cast any spell you like slowly and fast.

You can prepare some rituals at the morning, so you can cast them very fast during combat... lets call it memorizing, the rest needs to be cast with a minute casting time... the new heroic tier rituals are spot on

An I don´t understand why it should be impossible to cast a fireball out of your book withh the expenditure of some components... like bat guano and sulfur and need a few rounds to cast it...

 

[OnlineDM]

I don't like Vancian spellcasting. That said, some people love it and won't play D&D without it, so I'd be shocked if it didn't exist in dndnext.

I'm guessing they'll try for something like the wizard vs. sorcerer from 3e, but I'll bet that there will be both a Vancian and non-Vancian wizard. They'll effectively be two different classes, but I think the name "wizard" has meaning for players and they'll want to be able to play a wizard even if they don't want Vancian spellcasting.

This is where I'm guessing the modularity will come in. How they pull it off while retaining game balance is a very hard question. I hope that we don't go back to the days of linear warriors, quadratic wizards. Is that something that's seen as a problem or a desirable feature by people who prefer pre-4e D&D? Would folks who like Vancian spellcasting still want a game where wizards have roughly the same impact on combat as fighters do at both 1st level and 20th level?

 

[darkwing]

I wonder how many of the complaints about the increased power of spell casters come from those who don't like Vancian casting? Of course when you remove the restriction of spell preparations it makes the caster more powerful.

4th ed. has the fewest complaints of any edition about magic vs. non-magic disparity in power.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Don't care for Vancian casting myself but it is icnonic and thus should be possible but I really like rituals and they should be retained but more integrated. Full blown traditional casting would remove rituals completely that would make me sad.

 

[Wormwood]

4th ed. has the fewest complaints of any edition about magic vs. non-magic disparity in power.

And if this is lost, then I'm out.

 

[osprey126]

While I understand Vancian spell casting is part of the history of D&D, it was always the part of the game that I house ruled out. I let my wizards cast any spell they knew but kept to the spells allowed per level per day. It made finding new spells exciting but prevented the whole resource managment, not having the right spell memorized problem. I think 4e had a decent balance of allowing access to at wills and limited powerful spells. Another option would be to look at Arcana unearthed with common, uncommon and rare spells.

I also want to add in my support for rituals. They open possibility for hedge wizards, the thief who knows a little magic and for those types of magic that are necessary for the game but not suited to taking up valuable spell slots for something you will need for combat or to keep you alive.

 

[Greg K]

Honestly, I don't want Vancian in 5e as the default nor do I want the 4e Power system to be either . I am tired of hundreds of spells/powers, many of which are only slightly different variations or combinations of bonuses to hit and/or AC.

In my opinion, it is time to unify how powers are built and give a full system for building spells rather than many spells with just minor differences (bonus or appearance) taking up space in books to pad them out. Give me a list of powers similar to Savage Worlds, Hero System, M&M 2e, Tri-stat. I'd go with a power list similar to Hero or M&M2e with separate generic bolt, blast, and burst as in Savage Worlds using 4e Keywords M&M Descriptors Savage Worlds trappings/Hero Special Effects to customize the powers and describe what they look like.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Not having the right spell was room for creativity... usually it meant how to creatively use the fireball spell...
it was fun though... when to hold back, when not. (I know the 5 min workday complaints will come...)
Actually 2nd editions was a lot more fun in that regard than 3.5th edition. (3rd edition was a middle ground, actually) As spells were usually written in a more open/pseudorealistic manner, you could apply creativity...

The spellbook of wizards in 4e is a farce however... when you have the choice between 1 of 2 spells, yoú usually take the favourite one. If you can chose 3 out of 10, you can actually make use of those choices...

Also in 2nd edition there was the spells and magic system for casters, where you paid spells with points and were able to enhance the spells, prepare more lower level spells and most importantly memorize a free spell of a level, which used up basicall 2 slots but allowed spontaneous casting of the right spell.

So IMHO if you do vancian spellcasting, do it right, and don´t pay just lip service to it. IMHO it is all or nothing in that regard. (With the exception of maybe options to allow for a bit more flexibility.)