D&D lovers who hate Vancian magic

[SteveC]

Still, I still love Vancian casting: not only in D&D, which I think really needs to retain it as part of its product identity, but even outside of it on occasion. I have actually run Vancian casters in HERO, and at one point, could run a D&D game in HERO using all of D&D's various magic systems side by side.

I think you have a good point here. I have also done Vancian casting in HERO, and it works very well. I have been willing to put up with Vancian casting as a part of D&D because D&D is pretty much the best system out there for running a D&D game. I know that might sound stupid, (really!) but what I mean is that the tropes of a D&D game really do run best using the D&D system.

I have been very happy with 4E because it lets me play with those tropes, but removes the Vancian elements. Now obviously since my orbital mind control lasers are not operational yet, I think that the next edition of D&D would do well to use a Vancian system as one of the options or dials for those who disagree. I just think it will be horribly difficult to balance out, without making the game move more in the direction of a system like HERO. I think that would make both of us very happy, but I wonder how much other people would like it...

As an aside: when I heard of the concept of different "dials" that a GM could turn, it immediately brought the old Fuzion system to mind, which explicitly had dials the GM could set for the rules of the game. I wonder if you (Danny) had any experience with Fuzion, and if so what you thought of it.

 

[DonTadow]

I guess I hate it. I know i hate teaching it. THere's no example of it in games, which, is most people's reference to fantasy these days. I guess when books were the popular format, it was easier to explain. But now, people want to either know how much spell energy they get or when will they be able to regenerate this spell.

 

[Desdichado]

I wouldn't put it quite so strongly, but I basically agree.

Well, to be fair, I probably kinda oversold that myself. I'd still play, because I enjoy my group, and we have a great time being a bunch of bumbling Cugel the "Clever" wannabes. Luckily for me, the majority of the group is like-minded to me in this regard.

But one or two in the group start lamenting our tactical and/or strategic inefficiency and start making unwelcome suggestions on how to "improve" the characters after a while, especially in our last campaign which didn't really go well for us in a lot of different ways, and it got to be a bit frustrating and I'm sure contributed to the GM finally saying he was burned out and wanted to quit, leading us to look for another guy in the group to step up and run something else.

 

[Aldarc]

[MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION]: What do you think of Monte Cook's spell system in Arcana Unearthed/Evolved? What would you think if a similar system was in place for D&D in lieu of standard Vancian magic?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I wonder if you (Danny) had any experience with Fuzion, and if so what you thought of it.

AAAAAUGH! What terrible times are these when strangers may speak that word to harmless RPG players!!!!

What do you think of Monte Cook's spell system in Arcana Unearthed/Evolved? What would you think if a similar system was in place for D&D in lieu of standard Vancian magic?

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.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

To the original question of the thread, the thing I love about D&D is that I know it. I've been playing since 1979 and until 4E I could pick up any edition and run a game with very minimal time spent learning the system.

I'm not a fan of Vancian magic at all - I much prefer just about any other system - but if it's swapped for anything else, than learning the new system is an effort, and if I have to make an effort I'm going to do it to learn a game that I find more interesting.

 

[Hussar]

in support of Danny's special wizards, In one 3e campaign, I ran a pure conjurer. every spell of his was from the conjuration school. I do remember one player suggesting spells to cast to take out a bad guy and being baffled that I didn't have the spell.

But overall, he was pretty effective, given that he was always summoning something to help in fights. celestial badgers are mean because they don't give a .

I was thinking of this later. Since 2e, every wizard I ever played was a conjurer/summoner. But, just because I wasn't casting fireball doesn't really change my point. Summonings are among the most versatile spells in the game in any edition. There's just so much you can do with them.

Change my example from fireball to Summon Monster III and it doesn't really change the result.

 

[Leatherhead]

M&F magic means that general purpose spells will always trump specific purpose spells. No one will ever memorize Illusory Script before Fireball. There are a handful of spells that might as well be class powers because every (or virtually every) caster of that class takes them (or something close) because they are just that much more useful than the other choices.

The only thing worse than having severely limited spells/day is having spells that only function in very limited circumstances, most of which are beyond your control. In most D&D campaigns, it's usually not a big stretch to think that you might need to fireball or lightning something today. OTOH, Water Breathing is taking up a slot and, unless you know you're going to need it today, it might still be there when you go to bed tonight.

Which rolls me back around to the sorcerer. The sorc solves so many of the issues that I have with casters in 3.x. Give him a few more Spells Known and I'd happily eject clerics and wizards in favor of a Sorcerer that chooses either arcane or divine magic. The Favored Soul fills this role perfectly

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.

 

[Hussar]

Well, yes, as I said, you need to bump the Spells Known a bit. But, I found that you really only needed one or two offensive spells per spell level and then you could branch out a bit. But, yeah, the really specific stuff rarely saw the light of day.

But your point about the mechanics of the spells themselves is well taken. I wonder if you could simply have "Utility Spell Level X" and use the Cantrip spell as a model. Give each level a half a dozen common effects that could be reproduced in that Utility spell and away you go.

 

[Desdichado]

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.