A Simple Solution to Vancian Spellcasting

[airwalkrr]

Many people seem to have a distaste for Vancian spellcasting simply because it forces spellcasters to rest for 8 hours after they are out of spells. A lot of ideas have been offered on alternate spellcasting systems of late, many of them inspired by the BoNS. But there are those of us (like me) who dislike balancing spells "per encounter" in this manner. One of the more fruitful ideas that has been offered forth in the recent discussions on new spellcasting systems has been the idea of a caster level penalty to represent stamina of the spellcaster in one way or another. Based on this, I have an incredibly simple proposal that can be easily integrated into the core rules of 3e.

A caster can memorize spells at any time. Rest is not required. A caster can memorize spells once each day at no penalty. Each successive memorization period imposes a cumulative -1 caster level penalty until the caster receives 8 hours of rest at which point the penalty is reset to 0. Upon reaching caster level 0, a caster must rest before memorizing spells again. Spontaneous casters may regain their spell slots at any time by spending an hour in meditation and experience the same effects as memorization casters.

So what do you think? Admittedly, this does not solve the problem for low-level casters and favors high-level casters. However, there might be a way to invert the system somehow to give low-level casters more leeway.

 

[FireLance]

Why not make the penalty equal to the highest-level spell slot regained, or half that (round up) if you want a faster refresh rate? This way, low-level spellcasters can still enjoy "unlimited" use of their 0-level slots (at a time when they are still fairly useful), while higher-level spellcasters will still have an incentive to ration their higher-level spells.

By the way, since one of my posts at CircvsMaximvs may have sparked off the idea, I'm glad you like it.

 

[Sadrik]

How about an even simpler version of this idea. Every time you recover you lose your highest level spells. So a 17th level caster would lose his 9th first then his 8th then his 7th.

I think this would be the most simple way to do this.

The problem I see with this simplified version of my system is:

In my system I have balanced the spell points for a single encounter. Under your system you will run into the problem of too many spells between recharges.

An example:
Suppose you are a 17th level wizard. In my system you have 17 + Int spell points before you run out. with spells costing their spell level to cast. It forces you to make a lot of decisions. shoot off a 9th level spell and have 8 + int left? of use a couple of smaller spells so you can maintain your spell points longer during the encounter...

In yours you have enough spell slots. The slots are supposedly balanced for a whole day of encounters. If you were to implement a system like this you would need to reduce the number of slots by half round up? That would probably be about right.

 

[Sadrik]

Here is a feat that will allow lower level casters to recover their magic without getting a NCL.

Hidden Reserve [general]
Benefit: The caster can recharge his magic points (spell slots in your systems case) once per day without taking a negative caster level.
Special: This feat can be selected more than once. Each time it is selected it adds an additional time the caster can recover without gaining a negative caster level.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Many people seem to have a distaste for Vancian spellcasting simply because it forces spellcasters to rest for 8 hours after they are out of spells. A lot of ideas have been offered on alternate spellcasting systems of late, many of them inspired by the BoNS. But there are those of us (like me) who dislike balancing spells "per encounter" in this manner. One of the more fruitful ideas that has been offered forth in the recent discussions on new spellcasting systems has been the idea of a caster level penalty to represent stamina of the spellcaster in one way or another. Based on this, I have an incredibly simple proposal that can be easily integrated into the core rules of 3e.

A caster can memorize spells at any time. Rest is not required. A caster can memorize spells once each day at no penalty. Each successive memorization period imposes a cumulative -1 caster level penalty until the caster receives 8 hours of rest at which point the penalty is reset to 0. Upon reaching caster level 0, a caster must rest before memorizing spells again. Spontaneous casters may regain their spell slots at any time by spending an hour in meditation and experience the same effects as memorization casters.

So what do you think? Admittedly, this does not solve the problem for low-level casters and favors high-level casters. However, there might be a way to invert the system somehow to give low-level casters more leeway.

To me it just seems like Vancian+. Just more spells per day. And I haven't been happy with any of the Bo9S ideas (including my own).

I've been trying to come up with a skill-based system that makes higher level spells more dangerous to cast, but I haven't come up with enough to post an idea yet.

 

[Narsil]

I liked the spellpoint system from Urban Arcana...

But I also like the Vancian system... it makes it seem more strategic if you've got to prepare your spells in advance rather than just blast and blast all day long...

And if you do want to cast blasting spells all day long... try a bloody Sorcerer or a Warlock or something like that. (The former, in my campaign, would have bonus feats and spellpoints instead of spellslots and no bonus feats. The familiar is also capable of casting non-metamagical spells starting at level 15, and it improves to include metamagic at level 20)

 

[airwalkrr]

How about an even simpler version of this idea. Every time you recover you lose your highest level spells. So a 17th level caster would lose his 9th first then his 8th then his 7th.

Hmm. Now that idea has a lot of merit. Simple, yet elegant. I like it.

 

[Spatzimaus]

Problem is, with that negative-level system you're talking about a LOT more spells per day at high level, and that makes for a lot of balance changes. Even if I lose a spell level each time I rest, that quadruples my 6th-level spells per day. So then you'd have to go back and rework how many spells the classes get, which end result pretty much invalidates the whole "simple" part of your title, IMO.

That being said, I dislike overly simplistic systems; not every system should be usable by someone who can't count without using their fingers. Complex systems are great as long as you have a (calculator/computer/nerd) around to do the math for you, and these days that's never a problem.

IMNSHO the fundamental problems of the D&D system are inherent to the slot-based setup:
1> You're limiting by the day, which limits the number of encounters the DM can throw at the party. Allowing multiple "rest" periods per day in any way only draws out this problem a bit longer.
2> There's nothing stopping a caster from throwing all his high-level spells in a single encounter. At that point, the DM has to decide whether to continue his planned encounters (which really punishes the idiot's teammates), or change his timetable to allow rest (which only encourages it).
3> Limiting by spell slots discourages utility spells (although Cleric-like spontaneous casting helps with this), especially if there are enough encounters in the day that he needs even the low-level slots for combat abilities. Likewise, limiting known spells (Sorcerer, Psion) does the same.
4> As an explicitly level-dependent table, the spells/day and spells known tables pretty much have to depend on class level instead of character level, which punishes multiclassing.

The Psionics system is the closest I've seen D&D come to a system I'd like, and even there you're limiting it by the day.

The drain-based system we ended up using for the Channeler class in our homebrew was built along different conceptual lines. Effectively, given five or ten minutes of downtime, the Channeler could heal the entire party and be back at full resources in time for the next encounter, making "per day" encounter limits pointless. However, the Channeler couldn't throw multiple high-level spells in a row, or the cumulative drain would kill him. This encouraged the casters to use the MINIMUM firepower necessary to affect an enemy, and let the tanks mop up the now-weakened target. And since the Channeler didn't learn specific spells, he had full use of all the utility stuff.
(One of these days I'll get around to posting the class here, but it's a bit dependent on a bunch of other house rules, so I'd have to post the whole Spatzworld ruleset at once. But I'll only do this if there's actually any interest.)

 

[Vrecknidj]

Maybe something like:

1) Every time you rest (not including the big overnight rest), you cannot regain spells of the highest level (and this goes down by one level per recharging rest), and
2) You only gain the bonus spells from your ability score once per day.

For those more interested in further limiting things, you could add something like:

3) After you cast X spells (X will probably be equal to something like 2/3 or 3/4 of your normal total at the beginning of the day), you make a Fort save (DC = the total number of spells you've cast since resting?), if you fail the save, you're fatigued.

Dave

 

[airwalkrr]

So then you'd have to go back and rework how many spells the classes get, which end result pretty much invalidates the whole "simple" part of your title, IMO.

You only have to do that if you think this system gives them too much. And even then, why not just use the RAW? The whole point of this system is to give spellcasters more spells per day, not come up with another way of keeping their spells per day the same.

That being said, I dislike overly simplistic systems; not every system should be usable by someone who can't count without using their fingers.

It's a matter of taste. I believe simplicity should be strived for, but that is because I like playing the game, not doing a bunch of otherwise abstract calculations. Everyone likes different things however. *shrug*

Complex systems are great as long as you have a (calculator/computer/nerd) around to do the math for you, and these days that's never a problem.

...only if you want a "realistic" system of game mechanics. Me? I like realism, but it takes a back seat to relative ease of play. Chess is a good example. The game itself is not very a realistic representation of medieval warfare, yet it is enormously simple to play while still having very complex strategy.

IMNSHO the fundamental problems of the D&D system are inherent to the slot-based setup:
1> You're limiting by the day, which limits the number of encounters the DM can throw at the party. Allowing multiple "rest" periods per day in any way only draws out this problem a bit longer.

If it's long enough to finish the dungeon, then the problem has been solved as the group is going to rest after that anyway.

2> There's nothing stopping a caster from throwing all his high-level spells in a single encounter. At that point, the DM has to decide whether to continue his planned encounters (which really punishes the idiot's teammates), or change his timetable to allow rest (which only encourages it).

That is called foolishness. Being judicious with spell slots is one of the primary elements of strategy for D&D spellcasters. You have to balance it somehow. Some people like per day, others like per encounter. Either way, there are limitations to each. Some like a game where you have to save your highest level spells for the final fight. Others like to be able to use their highest level spells all the time, but then (IMO) each fight has to be equally challenging or you have a bunch of pushovers followed by a whallop. I'm not too fond of that prospect.