Is D&D magic purely Vancian? Let's settle this.

[Remathilis]

I'd start with Dying Earth, but be wary, its slow in places...

 

[Glyfair]

That is so heavy.

hey, so I was thinking of trying to read some Jack Vance, but he's got a whole lot of books out there, and I don't know where to start.

The Dying Earth Series

The Dying Earth
Eyes of the Overworld
Cugel the Clever
Rhialto the Marvelous
(also Michael Shea wrote "A Quest of Simbilis" as a sequel to Eyes of the Overworld, which Vance later contradicted in Cugel the Clever).

I recommend starting with Eyes of the Overworld and following with Cugel the Clever if you like Cugel. If you don't, try the Dying Earth, which is a series of short stories. Eyes of the Overworld has an overarching plot, but it also sort of reads as a series of short stories at the same time.

Another series I'd recommend is the Demon Princes series, which is science fiction, but has some good D&D bits that can be used. Their is a specific order to read these in.

 

[Wik]

It should be noted that Gary is clearly a big fan of Vance's and used many things from his works in the game. In fact, he regularly corresponded (corresponds?) with Vance. Just compare their language use and you'll see a connection.

That would explain "Vecna", an amalgam of "Vance".


Edit - Crap, someone beat me to it.

 

[Bad Paper]

Demon Princes[/url] series, which is science fiction, but has some good D&D bits that can be used. Their is a specific order to read these in.

Excellent, thank you. I am a greater fan of sci-fi, so I'll try the Demon Princes stuff as well.

 

[RFisher]

Vecna, an evil god of secrets and magic created by Gary Gygax, is an anagram for Vance.

Wasn't Vecna Brian Blume's creation? (Hasn't Gygax explicitly denied authorship on that one?)

hey, so I was thinking of trying to read some Jack Vance, but he's got a whole lot of books out there, and I don't know where to start. Other than LotR, I have no patience for the fantasy genre. I peeked inside a Harry Potter book once and nearly puked.

Is there any fantasy that doesn't suck? Vance or otherwise?

Of course, I can't really know if you'll enjoy what I've enjoyed, but here goes...

As already mentioned, I enjoyed Vance's Dying Earth series a lot. One thing to realize about Vance, though, is that his characters' dialog is often stylized. I find it very enjoyable, but it can be a bit off-putting if you aren't expecting it.

I also liked Vance's Lyonesse series, though it is probably different from Dying Earth in as many ways as it's similar.

I've read some other Vance, but those are the one's that stick out. Some of his short stories are also good.

Of course there's the standards: Robert E. Howard's Conan (watch out for the pastiches or heavy edited versions, though). Lieber's Nehwon. Moorcock's Elric.

I enjoyed Three Hearts and Three Lions.

Heck, just get a 1e DMG or a c. 1981 Basic rulebook & check the recommended reading therein.

 

[Kristian Serrano]

Wasn't Vecna Brian Blume's creation? (Hasn't Gygax explicitly denied authorship on that one?)

You're right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vecna#Creative_origins

Point still stands.

 

[gizmo33]

Really, the only thing D&D magic has in common with Vance's magic as seen in The Dying Earth is the fact that it can be memorized.

The spells in Vance:
1. have unique names
2. have fairly well-defined effects (ie. there's not a whole lot of shaping and manipulation of parameters - pretty much just choose your area of effect and cast)
3. they exist in books
4. you have to know them to cast them - just because you've thought of the Excellent Prismatic Spray doesn't mean you can cast it.
5. the more trained your mind is for magic, the more spells you can cast
6. when you cast it it's gone from your memory

Compare this to Gandalf: he never names his spells, never deals with a spell book to cast them, and never forgets a spell after he casts it.

IMO the differences between Vance's magic and DnD are not really significant - because DnD is a game, and has level-based advancement and different character classes, you would expect things to be better defined in DnD than they need to be in Vance's fiction. Basically, DnD magic is far more like Vancian magic than it is like anything else.

Also, consider DeCamp's "Compleat Enchanter" series - which AFAICT contributed the "Verbal, Somatic, Material" idea to DnD's system. The thing that Vance and deCamp have in common with their magic systems is that they are described from the point of view of the caster - the protagonists of the stories are spell casters. The POV in Howard and Tolkien is from the non-spellcaster perspective, and IMO there isn't much of a magic system at all.

 

[Kristian Serrano]

Personally, I'd like to see magic follow a system similar to psionics with power points and scalable effects based on increased expenditure of power points making low-level powers worth acquiring at higher levels even.

Imagine being able to increase the DC of a low-level spell by spending a limited amount of additional spell points.

 

[RFisher]

One additional thing to note is that Vance develops additional (one might say, advanced) concepts about magic in the Dying Earth series that don't really show up in D&D at all. (Sorry if this was already mentioned, but I didn't catch it.) In the Dying Earth RPG there are two tiers of magic to represent this.

Re: The DERPG... I like it a lot, although I don't imagine I'll ever play it because I can't imagine you'd enjoy it much if you weren't a Vance fan. (& no one else in my group is.) You should take a look at the free Quickstart available from their downloads page if you're interested in it. Personally, I think I'd prefer replacing the "reroll pool" mechanic with a more straight-forward contest system.

I have no problem calling the D&D system "Vancian" as--like gizmo33 said--it's more like the Dying Earth than anything else & it was an influence. Pure Vancian? No, but D&D wasn't tying to be the DERPG.

When it comes right down to it the needs of fiction (or myth or legend) are different than the needs of the game. The game needs a working system. Magic in fiction needs only serve the plot. (Though sometimes fiction that deals with the magician's PoV may have more of a thought-out system.) If you really want fiction-esque magic, it should either be limited to use by the GM or invoked through a player-narrative-control mechanic (e.g. Fudge points).

 

[Desdichado]

Of course it's not purely Vancian, because Jack Vance used magic--like most fantasy authors--more as a plot device than as a system that would port well to an RPG. I'd still say it's more Vancian than anything else, though.

Funny--when I first saw the thread title, I parsed it as Vatican for some reason, and it made the conspiracy theory bells and whistles in my head start spinning in overdrive.