D&D lovers who hate Vancian magic

[Aldarc]

No, it's solidly a failing of the writers & editors if they cannot stay within the boundaries of the underlying IP.

Weren't many writers of D&D novels both players and game-designers of D&D itself?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Weren't many writers of D&D novels both players and game-designers of D&D itself?

I have no idea- like I said, I don't read RPG fiction- but if they were, they REALLY have no excuse for straying far afield from the underlying IP.

If you're going to change something in the fiction, give a good, internally justified reason.

When Trills were introduced in ST: NG, they could not use transporters. By the end of ST: DS9, they could do so freely- no explanation given. That's a problem. It screws continuity; it's lazy writing at best, and a lack of respect at worst.

 

[gamerprinter]

Weren't many writers of D&D novels both players and game-designers of D&D itself?

I spoke to several novelists at Gencon 2011, while getting autographs, I asked one of them a specific question regarding a suggestion of a type of magic mentioned in the book, and what it was related in the game - he had no idea what I was talking about. Not saying all D&D authors are like this, but I've found not all of them are necessarily knowledgeable about the game...

 

[MortonStromgal]

Vancian magic made my highschool group just avoid spellcasters. You may have a Paladin or a Ranger who eventually ended up with some spells but otherwise we avoided them. Later I played with people who actually enjoyed playing a wizard but with the exception of a beloved 3e cleric I still avoid magic for the most part as a player.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I have no idea- like I said, I don't read RPG fiction- but if they were, they REALLY have no excuse for straying far afield from the underlying IP.

If you're going to change something in the fiction, give a good, internally justified reason.

I think most of the authors either don't realize they are changing the rules or change it because they feel it makes the story better. I mean, one of the most common conceits in ALL of the D&D novels is that, despite how common resurrection magic is in every edition of D&D, no one who dies in a D&D novel ever gets brought back to life. Everyone treats death like it's permanent.

And, yes, most of the time even in D&D novels the Vancian system is ignored. Most of the time, it just isn't mentioned. Partially because the majority of them try not to include wizards as main characters. And partially because they are just mentioned as "casting a fire spell" and that's it. Sometimes they cast more than 1 of the same spell. But often, they don't run out within the course of the novel.

 

[SSquirrel]

Our Gifted & Talented teacher in 6th grade got me to read the Hobbit and then ask my mom for the Lord of the Rings. She then said if I liked those books, she hosted a D&D group on Friday's. I'd never heard of D&D, but I went and played a Wizard and I was hooked. I'm definitely on the side of Vancian is dumb, but it's more why should someone who studies so much not be able to remember what they read once they cast it. Yes I know, it's from a book, but it feels bad to me and always had. I like being the magic man, but I never liked how it was done in previous editions.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I mean, one of the most common conceits in ALL of the D&D novels is that, despite how common resurrection magic is in every edition of D&D, no one who dies in a D&D novel ever gets brought back to life. Everyone treats death like it's permanent.

I never thought of resurrection magic as all that common, honestly- in 30+ years, I've only seen a handful of PCs get brought back from the dead...and one of those had an artifact fused to his skull that did it automatically. Otherwise, its too costly.

But often, they don't run out within the course of the novel.

I'd be extremely surprised if a character ran out of magic over the course of a novel unless all of the action took place in a day or less.

 

[Hussar]

So, if the specific problem is the wizard class in D&D, what do people who don't like Vancian magic think of sorcerers and warlocks? (I'm thinking specifically as they were implemented in 3E). Also, does the same anti-Vancian feeling apply to clerics, who work essentially the same way as wizards do, mechanically at least?

I'm honestly more curious about the second question, now that I think about it. Clerics work almost exactly the same way as Wizards, in that they have to sleep, prepare specific spells, and then once those spells are cast, they're gone. The fiction in the rules is a bit different, but the mechanical effects are pretty much identical. Is there the same feeling exhibited towards the two classes? Why or why not?

Personally, I have a much bigger problem with Vancian clerics and druids than with wizards. At that point, it just doesn't seem to make any sense to me. "Oh, Great Graznock! Smite the enemies of thy Faith! *fizzle* Oh, well, I guess we're only allowed to smite one enemy of the faith today."

OTOH, clerics, as a class, have no real counterparts in any genre fiction.

 

[Niccodaemus]

I created a post on my blog suggesting clerics be treated more like freaks of nature... akin to stories of real world saints. They would be people who would freak out a simple priest, because they can actually perform miracles.

Shatterworld: Behind the Scenes: The Cleric as Prophet and Saint

 

[Aldarc]

Personally, I have a much bigger problem with Vancian clerics and druids than with wizards. At that point, it just doesn't seem to make any sense to me. "Oh, Great Graznock! Smite the enemies of thy Faith! *fizzle* Oh, well, I guess we're only allowed to smite one enemy of the faith today."

OTOH, clerics, as a class, have no real counterparts in any genre fiction.

Most magical priests in fiction would likely be classified as arcane classes, such as wizards, sorcerers, or witches. I personally like the Iron Heroes Companion solution: arcanists and spiritualists. Arcanists are regular mages and the like, while spiritualists derive their magic from pacts with otherworldly beings (e.g., gods, demons, devils, etc.). It's a nice split of both playstyle and source that's more well-defined than wizards and priests.