D&D Next (5E) Updates, Pax East, and a Poll

[Falling Icicle]

I hate "vancian" casting, but it's been a part of D&D since the beginning so I'm willing to accept that it's a sacred cow that they just won't slaughter. As long as Wizards get some at-will effects so that they don't spend much of the day twiddling their thumbs with nothing to do, I can tolerate vancian casting in the game. There also needs to be other options for magic provided. At the very least, they need to provide something like the "spontaneous casting" sorcerer.

They also need to make scribing spells in your spellbook free. I've always loathed the idea that wizards have to pay this enormous and totally unrealistic tax that no other type of spellcaster has to pay. 100 gp per page? That's ludicrous. Do people realize how much money that is, especially in a medieval setting? Even if the entire page was plated in gold it shouldn't cost that much! Scribing spells should be as simple as having a book, pen and ink, and whatever spellcraft type roll is approrpiate to see if you can understand the spell's formula.

I also hope that many of the utility spells are part of a ritual type system, so that casters don't have to choose between competence in battle and being able to do other, interesting things. 4e's ritual casting had some serious flaws, but the idea has alot of potential.

 

[Flobby]

I think they should keep the Vancian Wizard and Cleric and then just use different systems for other classes like the Sorcerer and Priest. Sounds like that would please everyone...Or at least me anyway.

 

[blargney the second]

I used to think Vancian magic was just plain stupid. That is no longer the case. I've grown to appreciate some subtle elegances of the system.

 

[blargney the second]

They also need to make scribing spells in your spellbook free. I've always loathed the idea that wizards have to pay this enormous and totally unrealistic tax that no other type of spellcaster has to pay. 100 gp per page?

There are some other idiosyncrasies in that particular mechanic: OotS #306 - Power Word: Annoy

 

[Lwaxy]

I don't get why it can't just be left to every group if they want to use vancian or not.

 

[Henry]

For me, Vancian is just one of those things that are very indicative of D&D. Without some Vancian resource management as the default, which every edition to date has had, it just isn't D&D to me. It's one of those hard lines in the pavement that I find it hard to cross.

 

[prosfilaes]

As long as Wizards get some at-will effects so that they don't spend much of the day twiddling their thumbs with nothing to do, I can tolerate vancian casting in the game.

Playing a wizard, I've not felt that I've spent much time twiddling my thumbs. There's always crossbow attacks at lower levels, and it's pretty hard to run out of spells at higher levels. If you did give them an at-will attack, either it's going to be useless, or it's going to cut down the cost of blowing all your spells early, which is part of the fun part and balancing feature of Vancian magic. If as a player of a wizard, you feel you need an at-will effect, get a wand.

 

[N'raac]

I don't get why it can't just be left to every group if they want to use vancian or not.

In large part, because "choice" means the possibility the DM or the rest of the group wants to make a choice I didn't want. If I don't like Vancian magic, I'm going to be equally unhappy whether it's the only system, the default system my group chooses to use or one of a dozen alternative systems and my group chooses to use it.

So I then want a system which makes my preferred magic system the only choice, so those fools with different tastes don't select a system not to my liking.

 

[N'raac]

There's always crossbow attacks at lower levels,

Or we just provide the wizard an at-will power which is more or less equivalent to a crossbow anyway.

I don't think there's going to be any suggestion that Wizards keep using 3e Vancian magic, Sorcerers get the same spontaneous casting, and the new Mage class gets to select three first level spells at first level, same as the Wizard and Sorceror list, and use them as often as he likes. If it's usable at will, it's going to be much weaker to balance.

Even if the options are presented as campaign-wide choices (ie all spellcasters use vancian, all casters use spontaneous or all casters use at-will), they'll have to balance against each other if they're going to balance against non-spellcasters.

 

[Alzrius]

Vancian
Caster
4
Life
​

 

[kitsune9]

I'm a fan of Vancian magic, but I'm always open to any new system if it's interesting.

 

[Ratskinner]

I voted "No, but make it an option."

My real answer would be more along the lines of "I don't care so long as its reasonable and flexible." I absolutely love the idea of including feats to gain "at-will" spells. I'd appreciate it if there's room for having casters that totally abandon the old system, which I always found contrived.

 

[jimmifett]

I personally hated vancian magic as presented in older editions. Thought it was an incredibly silly and arbitrary system limitation (like race/class restrictions in older editions)

If vancian MUST be part of the game , I don't mind a hybrid solution.
4e at-wills, 2/3/4 tiered number of school restricted encounters, ability score + lvl based number of vancian style prepared encounters, vancian style prepared level and abil score based dailies, and finally rituals.

Clerics shouldn't be doing vancian at all.

 

[Lwaxy]

In large part, because "choice" means the possibility the DM or the rest of the group wants to make a choice I didn't want. If I don't like Vancian magic, I'm going to be equally unhappy whether it's the only system, the default system my group chooses to use or one of a dozen alternative systems and my group chooses to use it.

So I then want a system which makes my preferred magic system the only choice, so those fools with different tastes don't select a system not to my liking.

So, then you make your own choice? Nothing says everyone in the group has to use the same style of magic, at least not if the GM is in any way flexible. If you define magic by the individuality of people, there can so many options to pick from. Just like the sorcerer and the wizard are now.

 

[Incenjucar]

Vancian casting is far too easy to tack on to a non-Vancian system to not provide it as an option. It would take all of an afternoon to design a Vancian variant for 4E. Most of the work would be checking up on the powers that let you regain or reuse other powers to make sure there isn't a huge exploit lurking somewhere.

 

[freeAgent]

I voted that yes, Vancian Magic should be core for those classes. That said, Paizo allows for casting unlimited Level 0/Cantrips. That prevents Wizards from ever having to dirty their hands with traditional weaponry if they desire. That seems like a good compromise to me.

 

[Yora]

If some people for inexplicable reasons want to play vancian spellcasters, they should do it. But please keep it out of my game!!!

 

[N'raac]

So, then you make your own choice? Nothing says everyone in the group has to use the same style of magic, at least not if the GM is in any way flexible. If you define magic by the individuality of people, there can so many options to pick from. Just like the sorcerer and the wizard are now.

If some people for inexplicable reasons want to play vancian spellcasters, they should do it. But please keep it out of my game!!!

Two counter viewpoints. Some gaming groups play a free for all structure, and that works fine for them. Others pick options and those are the options for the game as a whole, and that works fine for that group.

A lot depends on how modules are implemented. If they are structured to be campaign wide and mixing modules is not tested for balance, mix & match may be an issue.

It's interesting, though, that we suggest we ca just have each player choose their own style of magic. Let's assume we also have a module for the historical standard that armor and shield reduce your chances of being hit, and one for the common suggestion that it instead reduce the damage taken from a hit. Would we be OK with the Fighter deciding he prefers his armor absorb damage, but the Cleric deciding he prefers his armor to reduce the likelihood of being hit? Does the GM then pick separately for each opponent as well?

Finally, sometimes excessive flexibility runs counter to the tone/theme/feel of a specific campaign or setting. If this is an Arabian Nights setting, a heavily armored warrior is a poor fit. settings where certain magic styles work and others don't aren't really that hard to imagine.

A very common example across many editions - evil player characters.

 

[Alphastream]

Opening it up to only convention goers who must sign an NDA is not open; it's just a standard playtest.

Standard? I doubt anything about the current playtest has been standard, from the large numbers involved, to the approach/method, to the goals, to the way feedback is provided and used, and more I can't mention. On size alone there are very few companies, if any, that could have as large an initial playtest as Wizards has conducted.

It feels like WotC is trying to capitalize on the success of other company's playtests without actually doing the work of being open. I respect that they want feedback, but to call it open demeans the hard work of the companies who really did the work of doing open playtests and actively engaging their communities in a back and forth that produces a product that is connected with the fans.

Yes and no. Any of us would want to study what others have done before and build upon it. And it isn't that they are not being open. It is that they are starting early enough that the first playtests are testing things not yet ready for the actual open playtest to come later. That's a really important (and positive) difference. As others have said, the open playtest will happen - this isn't the open part.

 

[Primal]

I'm fine with that. Pathfinder does it. It works for wizards that have exhausted all their spells. I'm not fine with the encounters, at-wills and dailies etc.

Mike

I don't think you need to spend a feat in PF to do that; some schools automatically grant you an at-will attack power, but it's a limited resource (you can use it 3 + Int times per day). I guess those feats in D&DN most likely function like reserve feats from Complete Mage?