Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 5780339" data-attributes="member: 5142">People have different tastes in regards to "magic." That explanation seems easy enough to understand. You should go ahead and just claim that they also hate America while you're at it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I think we can come up with much better - and far less insulting - reasons than that, especially on a thread about people who dislike Vancian magic, but like D&D. As I explained earlier in this thread, there are many people who see Vancian magic as something that can be removed or replaced from D&D's magic system without losing anything integral to the D&D experience. It's why people can play many of these alternate systems throughout the game (e.g., psionic power points, incarnum, sorcerers, Arcana Unearthed, etc.) while still be playing D&D just as much as classes that uses Vancian magic. If these other alternate systems can be played as "D&D" with equal validity as "Vancian magic," then it would be erroneous to say that solely Vancian magic is D&D or that people who dislike Vancian magic must ipso facto hate D&D.  There indeed may be ignorance, but I don't think that's true for most. We're all gamers here, and I think many detractors have a fairly good grasp of Vancian magic. Many have also played alternative systems. We are all gamers after all. If the people who understand it, but hate it and the people who don't understand it, but then hate it after explanation both hate it, then how is this not a good reason for these people not to remove Vancian magic from the game? If they hate it, then they hate it. That's just as viable a reason as for those who love it and want it kept. The difference is that the lovers are the ruling class who stamp out any and all dissenters. For me it's not "high simulation" but "maximizing simulation." Vancian magic by nature of its mechanics and assumptions inherently restricts the sort of worlds I can construct in my D&D settings. And I would prefer having a magic system that acts more as a "line of best fit," or the maximum number of settings of different types and feels. Considering that many of these alternate systems that people have proposed do place limitations (e.g., fatigue, mana points, reduced power level, etc.), I'm not sure how viable this criticism actually is. The reasons that you listed do not imply that these players are somehow "power gamers," and again it's insulting to suggest that when it's really just about playing a preferred simulation or mechanical system of magic. How is #5 bogus if the rules clearly do restrict players from a magic system that does not let them simulate magic that's appropriate to their tastes? If it doesn't, then it clearly doesn't, and that makes #5 just as viable a reason not to Vance as anything else. You're right. I'm not sure if you "get" the criticisms of Vancian magic or the desires of people who would want alternate systems if you are going to be rudely dismissive of other people's desire for alternate magic systems. This I think is bogus, as you can change a number of the spells per day and per level to a balanced level. Also the particular "game breaker" spells can be removed. You make it sound as if EVERY game system would be absolutely BOGUS for using systems other than Vancian. What's worse is the insinuation that since #2-5 are bogus, that this must mean that detractors hate D&D. Do you realize how insulting that is for people who do like D&D? How dare people want to play something other than Vancian magic? Clearly the only way to play guitar is thrash metal.</blockquote>

Verification