DESTROY CANTRIPS: Keep Orisons....

[Bobbum Man]

I like the idea that the D&DN designers were initially hinting at, where casters at-will spells are more utilitarian in nature...so the spell that the Wizard uses to ignite his bunsen burner is the same one that he uses to scorch a goblin.

I would also like to see them oust the old 1-9 spell levels and go with something lighter. 4 spell levels + cantrips is a lot easier to design and balance than 9, and it would mean less redundancy. I don't see the need for 6 slightly more powerful versions of Charm Person.

I vote for 1 spell level per tier of play:

Adventurer ( levels 1 -5; spell levels 0 - 3)
Hero (levels 6 - 10; spell levels 4 - 5)
Paragon (levels 11 - 15; spell levels 6 -7)
Legend (levels 16 - 20; spell levels 8 -9)

I mentioned this in my playtest feedback survey, of course...but it seems that WotC is too busy coating the rules in a thick layer of nostalgia ... to actually try something new.

Mod Edit: Ladies and gents, do recall that you're supposed to keep your language family-friendly on EN World. Thank you. ~Umbran

 

[ren1999]

This spell progression of related powers should be the future of the system.
Class levels should match spell levels. It's less confusing.
And perhaps we should dump encounter powers and slots and just divide the spells into burst once per encounter and non-burst at-will.
I think that learning one new spell/feat/prayer etc. per level is good.

 

[jadrax]

Arduin Grimoire used a mana system back in the... late 70s? Early 80s?

I think the first of the relevent Larry Niven books where early 70s, so I still think that's probably where it was popularised.

 

[Nytmare]

Sorry for the quick derail, but can someone explain to me why spell points are always called "mana"? Considering the word is Jewish term for 'bread like food that came from heaven', I don't see the connection.

In 1976 Larry Niven started a series of fantasy stories known as "The Magic Goes Away." In it, a warlock creates a magical device known as The Warlock's Wheel that sucks the magical energy (termed "mana" after the Polynesian concept of spirit/magic/soul) out of the world.

Richard Garfield, somewhat inspired by this story, borrowed several of the key concepts of the world when designing Magic: the Gathering. One of those concepts was using the term mana as Magic's magical energy currency. In recognition, Richard also included the Warlock's Wheel in the game, as nevinyrraL's Disk.

Cut to modern day gaming, where the influence of Magic[-]'s evil tendrils[/-] can be felt in almost every aspect of the industry, and you will find that many gamers automatically equate magic points in any game with mana.

 

[slobo777]

In 1976 Larry Niven started a series of fantasy stories known as "The Magic Goes Away." In it, a warlock creates a magical device known as The Warlock's Wheel that sucks the magical energy (termed "mana" after the Polynesian concept of spirit/magic/soul) out of the world.

Richard Garfield, somewhat inspired by this story, borrowed several of the key concepts of the world when designing Magic: the Gathering. One of those concepts was using the term mana as Magic's magical energy currency. In recognition, Richard also included the Warlock's Wheel in the game, as nevinyrraL's Disk.

Cut to modern day gaming, where the influence of Magic[-]'s evil tendrils[/-] can be felt in almost every aspect of the industry, and you will find that many gamers automatically equate magic points in any game with mana.

Wikipedia, as usual, has some good references:

Mana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Magic point - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[jbear]

it seems that WotC is too busy coating the rules in a thick layer of nostalgia ... to actually try something new.

That is not true.

Advantage/Disadvantage?

This is their first release for the CORE of the system.

So much can still change (and it will), that's the point, right?

And once there is a core, so much can be added in.

With regards to the OPs suggestion, I don't mind the idea that a spell is connected to a less powerful cantrip.

Wouldn't it be simple enough to leave it at that? You learn Charm Person so you get access to the Charm cantrip which is basically a bonus to a roll in a social situation, +1 to Cha checks perhaps.

You learn the Sleep spell, then you get access to the Doze cantrip which might have a low level humanoid lose a turn (like the Daze Cantrip from Pathfinder ... you see what I did there ...?)

Of course you can't have all those Cantrips active in your head at once. They are connected with the spells you memorise that day. If you memorise sleep then you activate Doze, If you memorise Burning Hands then you activate Ignite etc.

But that's as complex as I'd want it to get. Having to roll a spell check DC 11 every time you use it ... necessary?

Having level 1.5 cantrips? Hmm ... again getting a little too complex, but I can see where you are going. The .5 level ones would be of a lesser power than those of the 1.5 level ones, perhaps getting up around the power that the playtest characters are currently wielding let's say. I don't mind that idea but how could we simplify it so it's real clean and easy?

Maybe those linked cantrips which activate according to the lvl 1 spells are linked to similar vein level 2 spells which make the Cantrip slightly more powerful. Eg. Doze could effect slightly higher level creatures if the wizard has memorised the 2nd level 'improvement' of sleep (whatever that might be) or if thy memorised the 2nd level spell Hold Monster then Doze can affect non-humanoids ...

In any case this level of complication would likely best be left out of the core and instead presented as an optional variation. I think they would do best to have the very core of the game kept as simple as possible.