Fire & Forget Magic System: Should they replace it?

[Tsyr]

There is no fire and forget magic in D&D3, so why don't we just drop it. Seriously, has nobody read Spell Selection and Preparation on p.154 PHB? It says right there how wizards cast spells, which is totally not "fire and forget"... wizards don't actually even memorize spells, which would mean that there's nothing to "forget".

This whole thread seems to be based on a total fallacy.

Well, in a sense, your right. If the thread was purely about the in-game rational behind it, you might have a point, but (and this is regardless of if this was the original intent... gotta love morphing topics), it has sorta evolved into a discussion of the still-vancian-esq DnD system vrs other alternatives.

 

[Nine Dragons]

I believe the inspiration for the so-called Vancian "fire-and-forget" magic system comes from a series of short stories collected in trade paperback as "Tales of the Dying Earth" (by Jack Vance, $17.95). You can also presumably find these stories in the forthcoming 44 volume Vance Integral Edition collection for a mere (*ahem*) $1250, or $3000 for the Deluxe Edition. If I remember correctly, some spells like Prismatic Spray even make an appearance.

In case you're wondering, no, the collection is not environmentally-themed, despite it's title. It's actually got a lot of humor, of sorts. Be forewarned, however, that Vance, like Gygax, Lovecraft, and Stan "the Man" Lee, enjoys using the English vocabulary to its fullest.

As far as it's place in the D&D system, I don't mind it, really. It does, admittedly, make the D&D wizard less like other spell-casters in most of modern fantasy. But having read and liked the literary basis for the current D&D magic user, I don't have a problem conceptualizing spellcasters of that nature.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

The other thing I think is odd about wanting a "realistic" magic system is to then concentrate on how magic is done in recently-written and -published fantasy novels. Read up on how people here in the real world use magic - almost none of it (supposedly) works like magic in modern fantasy novels. I think it would be interesting to discuss translating into the game real world attempts at working magic (and giving it actual, tangible results in the game world). Trying to somehow rationalize that the way it works in novels is somehow more correct than the standard D&D system seems silly.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I believe the inspiration for the so-called Vancian "fire-and-forget" magic system comes from a series of short stories collected in trade paperback as "Tales of the Dying Earth" (by Jack Vance, $17.95). You can also presumably find these stories in the forthcoming 44 volume Vance Integral Edition collection for a mere (*ahem*) $1250, or $3000 for the Deluxe Edition. If I remember correctly, some spells like Prismatic Spray even make an appearance.

In case you're wondering, no, the collection is not environmentally-themed, despite it's title. It's actually got a lot of humor, of sorts. Be forewarned, however, that Vance, like Gygax, Lovecraft, and Stan "the Man" Lee, enjoys using the English vocabulary to its fullest.

As far as it's place in the D&D system, I don't mind it, really. It does, admittedly, make the D&D wizard less like other spell-casters in most of modern fantasy. But having read and liked the literary basis for the current D&D magic user, I don't have a problem conceptualizing spellcasters of that nature.

The original books that inspired D&D magic are The Dying Earth and The Eyes of the Overworld. These will be in the collections mentioned, but mind that any of the other books in the collections will have been written after D&D's magic system was created. Plus, the two I mentioned, especially the first, are the best of them.

 

[Rasyr]

There is no fire and forget magic in D&D3, so why don't we just drop it. Seriously, has nobody read Spell Selection and Preparation on p.154 PHB? It says right there how wizards cast spells, which is totally not "fire and forget"... wizards don't actually even memorize spells, which would mean that there's nothing to "forget".

This whole thread seems to be based on a total fallacy.

Here, open your eyes and sniff this cup of coffee for a bit while I explain

Yes, D&D still uses the "Fire and Forget" method.

It does not matter that they changed the names, and descriptions of the whole processes, the fact is that the actual mechanics (what is behind all the fancy descriptive words) is still the same old thing.

Simply put, you select certain spells in the morning, these are now in your head. As you cast it, it goes away and cannot be cast again until the next time you select spells to be prepared/memorized/readied/put into contingency mode etc.....

You fire off the spell, and then you cannot cast it again until you restudy/prepare it (i.e. for all intents and purposes, you forget it).

This is why it is called the "Fire & Forget" method. Other systems, use different methods. For instance, the Hero system uses Endurance to cast spells, while Rolemaster uses Power Points. In both those systems, you do NOT have to re-memorize, or re-prepare a given spell in order to use again (thus you have NOT forgotten the spell after firing it off).

It refers not to the descriptions, but to the actual mechanics behind it...

 

[EarthsShadow]

By they, I do mean the creators of the core rules for DnD.

People play with the system as is because its what they are used to, and its official in the core book. As for balance issues, I can see why they use this magic system, but is it the best for fantasy? That's the question I am really bringing up. Sovereign Stone is pretty cool, but I can't get a group together that is willing to play it because its not from WotC. Star Wars is cool, but people like Dungeons and Dragons. And they don't like psionics, which to me would operate as a more fundamentally sound magic system using power points for spells, but the people around here (and there is a good number of people I have talked to) have said that unless it was put into the core book as a magic system, they won't try it.

I guess the other part of this is acknowledging the fact that most DnD gamers are unwilling to try different things. I am not saying that ALL are not willing, just most.

From a personal standpoint, I think Sov Stone, Wheel of time, Star Wars, even Deadlands had better game mechanics for magic than DnD. Include Call of Cthulu in this list, and the upcoming Elements of Magic (if that's the title). All of these are better.

 

[Kesh]

I personally really like Mongoose Publishing's Encyclopaedia Arcane: Chaos Magic as an alternative. Very flexible, with good ways to keep the power levels in check while scaling in level.

My only complaint is that a Chaos Mage lacks divination magic, but I'm working up a homebrew solution for that.

With that said, I also like to use psionics and the Shaman class from Oriental Adventures as alternates.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

All of these are better.

How, specifically?

 

[EarthsShadow]

In just about all ways

How are they better? To me, they make more sense logically and in theory.

The psionics makes more sense because it simulates the fact that you know the power/spell, you have so many points of power available and when you cast the spell/use the power, you lose a number of points equal to the power cost. If you want to maintain it, it costs more points. If you want to increase its potential and power, it costs more points. And if your out of points, then you can't use your powers/cast spells more until you meditate/relax.

Star Wars/Archer Foundation sourcebook for psionics/the Force makes more sense because its skills and feats based and the more you use these powers the more you drain yourself, in game mechanics you lose vitality. Sure they both use vitality/wound points instead of hit points, but then again I am in favor of VP/WP because to me it just makes more sense. It's not limited to a certain number of slots available each day, and if a person with the power wanted to use it, then its available all the time.

Sovereign Stone is superior to DnD because it does a really awesome job in simulating the fact that you are truly channeling magical energy to form a spell. Each round you must make a channeling roll to see if it is taxing to you, and you must determine how much mana is channeled during that round. Once you get to the Mana Threshold, then the spell is cast. You are not limited to a specific number of slots determining which level of slots you can cast from. If you know the spell, you know it and you can cast it all day long if you want to using SS, as long as you can make your channeling resistance rolls, or else you could knock yourself out or even kill yourself.

Call of Cthulu is superior because the spells are not based on spell levels, not based on a class, and once you know it, you can cast it at the cost of bodily harm/sanity. Convert this over to DnD, each spell could be on its own and could have a drain save of some kind when casting the spell, if failed then the spell could do temporary harm to the caster or whatever, depending on the type of spell being cast.

Chaos Magic from Mongoose is superior in its own way because you have the option of creating the effects you desire as you cast the spell and you are not limited to the standard spells.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

You still haven't addressed the issue of real world magical practices; all of those you mention are based on rather recent fantasy fiction tropes. Depending on which real world practice you look at, magic use doesn't necessarily entail "draining" of vital essence. Quite often it involves complex and time-consuming rituals, which seems to be modelled more accurately (if one can really use such a term for this) by the core D&D system, especially if you rationalize it along the lines of how I did above - the caster does a ritual for each spell he is going to use that day.