Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
It's all Jack Vance's fault
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8805552" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Burning Wheel is an interesting take on "limited use" magic.</p><p></p><p>For those who don't know it, there is a check required to cast a spell - mechanically similar to RM in that respect, but often with higher failure rates. A miscast can have various adverse consequences, but because these are resolved consistently with BW's overall "intent and task" approach, it plays out quite differently from RM.</p><p></p><p>There is also a check for "tax", which in D&D terms would be a CON check to avoid temporary CON loss. When tax reduces the relevant state (Forte in BW) to zero, the PC falls unconscious; tax below zero can inflict wounds.</p><p></p><p>Spells themselves are discrete and individually known, a bit like a bard or sorcerer in modern D&D. Their effects are broadly comparable to 1st to 3rd level D&D spells.</p><p></p><p>The result, in my experience, is that spells are an important part of a sorcerer's repertoire, but are not the only or necessarily even the main thing that they do.</p><p></p><p>Which brings me back to [USER=71235]@niklinna[/USER]'s OP! This passage, from Gygax's AD&D PHB (p 18), seems relevant to this thread:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Character class refers to the profession of the player character. The approach you wish to take to the game, how you believe you can most successfully meet the challenges which it poses, and which role you desire to play are dictated by character class . . . <em>Magic-users</em> cannot expect to do well in hand-to-hand combat, but they have a great number of magic spells of offensive, defensive, and informational nature. They use magic almost exclusively to solve problems posed by the game.</p><p></p><p>On p 106, in elaborating on the proposition that "characters [who] gain treasure by pursuit of their major aims" will be "entitled to a full share of earned experience points awarded by the DM", Gygax notes that "magic-users aim to cast spells".</p><p></p><p>In his DMG (p 86), Gygax reinforces the above two passages by describing what would count as "POOR" performance by a player, having regard to "the character of his or her class". For the player of a magic-user, this would be "seek[ing] to engage in melee or ignor[ing] magic items they could employ in crucial situations".</p><p></p><p>This all gives a clear picture of how Gygax envisaged "Vancian magic" figuring into game play: it provides the "flavour text" for a particular sort of approach to game play, namely, solving the problems the game presents by deploying limited-use, high-effectiveness capabilities (flavoured as spells or as magic item charges).</p><p></p><p>This is evident also in Gygax's discussion of "Successful Adventures" on p 107 of his PHB:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Each character has a selection of equipment which he or she will carry on the adventure. . .. In like manner, spells must be selected in co-operation with other spell-users in general, so that attack, defense, and assistance modes will be balanced properly and compliment the strengths and weakness of the party as a whole. . . . Does the group have sufficient equipment of the elementary sort to meet both expected an unexpected challenges (ropes, spikes, poles, torches, oil, etc.)? . . . Do we have as broad a spectrum of spells as possible so as to be able to have a good chance against the unexpected, considering the objective [of the adventure] and what it requires i spells? Is there some magic item which one of the party members possesses that will be of special help, or general assurance of survival, in this adventure? All this should be done before play begins, for it is time consuming, and the readying of a party can require several hours if there are more than six characters involved.</p><p></p><p>This all makes clear that the rationale for "Vancian magic" has nothing to do with evoking a certain fantasy feel, or with "playability" in any general sense. (Those may or may not be happy by-products, depending on the game participant.) It's purpose is to create a particular sort of space for game play. Like equipment, it's part of the "load out" aspect of play. (As is well known, it also breaks down at upper levels where load outs become so extensive that the resource management aspect is diluted or near-absent.)</p><p></p><p>As soon as one looks at RPGs that are not particularly aspiring to reproduce this particular sort of RPG experience - RuneQuest, Rolemaster, Burning Wheel, etc - it's no surprise that different sorts of magic systems are adopted.</p><p></p><p>And given that relatively little contemporary D&D play seems designed to replicate the particular sort of experience Gygax was interested in - of hidden gameboard problem-solving based on the deployment of a resource load-out that is established before play begins, and is not easily changed during play - Gygax's vision of Vancian magic seems to have no particular logical role to play any more. Hence why it is watered down by making the modern load-out quite generous (a first level wizard starts with 6 spells in their book and can probably memorise three or four of them) and by allowing slots to be used on any of those prepared spells. The form of Vancian magic (spell books, memorisation/preparation, slots) remains, but the substance is vestigial.</p><p></p><p>EDITed to add a further thought:</p><p></p><p>Torchbearer 2e has a Vancian magic system that maintains a tight constraint on number of memorised spells, and does not allow using the slot of one spell to cast another. It also keeps a very tight rein on the total number of memorised spells. But as a result, it is not a system in which magicians "aim to cast spells" and "use magic almost exclusively to solve problems posed by the game". Like sorcerers in Burning Wheel, TB2e magicians contribute primarily through their other skills, like drawing maps and solving riddles and reading runes. They can even become reasonably adept in hand-to-hand combat.</p><p></p><p>The fact that a system intended to emulate classic D&D dungeoneering play nevertheless has to depart from Gygax's design specs for magic-users shows the demandingness of those specs. It's hard to create a game piece that will be fun to play, and whose play is almost entirely the deployment of limited-use problem-solving abilities, but whose access to those abilities won't break the game. Much of the history of D&D design and play approaches - LFQW, class "spotlight" balancing, 4e's distinctive approach to PC building, 5e's "Neo-Vancian" casting, etc - are responses to this design challenge.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8805552, member: 42582"] Burning Wheel is an interesting take on "limited use" magic. For those who don't know it, there is a check required to cast a spell - mechanically similar to RM in that respect, but often with higher failure rates. A miscast can have various adverse consequences, but because these are resolved consistently with BW's overall "intent and task" approach, it plays out quite differently from RM. There is also a check for "tax", which in D&D terms would be a CON check to avoid temporary CON loss. When tax reduces the relevant state (Forte in BW) to zero, the PC falls unconscious; tax below zero can inflict wounds. Spells themselves are discrete and individually known, a bit like a bard or sorcerer in modern D&D. Their effects are broadly comparable to 1st to 3rd level D&D spells. The result, in my experience, is that spells are an important part of a sorcerer's repertoire, but are not the only or necessarily even the main thing that they do. Which brings me back to [USER=71235]@niklinna[/USER]'s OP! This passage, from Gygax's AD&D PHB (p 18), seems relevant to this thread: [indent]Character class refers to the profession of the player character. The approach you wish to take to the game, how you believe you can most successfully meet the challenges which it poses, and which role you desire to play are dictated by character class . . . [i]Magic-users[/i] cannot expect to do well in hand-to-hand combat, but they have a great number of magic spells of offensive, defensive, and informational nature. They use magic almost exclusively to solve problems posed by the game.[/indent] On p 106, in elaborating on the proposition that "characters [who] gain treasure by pursuit of their major aims" will be "entitled to a full share of earned experience points awarded by the DM", Gygax notes that "magic-users aim to cast spells". In his DMG (p 86), Gygax reinforces the above two passages by describing what would count as "POOR" performance by a player, having regard to "the character of his or her class". For the player of a magic-user, this would be "seek[ing] to engage in melee or ignor[ing] magic items they could employ in crucial situations". This all gives a clear picture of how Gygax envisaged "Vancian magic" figuring into game play: it provides the "flavour text" for a particular sort of approach to game play, namely, solving the problems the game presents by deploying limited-use, high-effectiveness capabilities (flavoured as spells or as magic item charges). This is evident also in Gygax's discussion of "Successful Adventures" on p 107 of his PHB: [indent]Each character has a selection of equipment which he or she will carry on the adventure. . .. In like manner, spells must be selected in co-operation with other spell-users in general, so that attack, defense, and assistance modes will be balanced properly and compliment the strengths and weakness of the party as a whole. . . . Does the group have sufficient equipment of the elementary sort to meet both expected an unexpected challenges (ropes, spikes, poles, torches, oil, etc.)? . . . Do we have as broad a spectrum of spells as possible so as to be able to have a good chance against the unexpected, considering the objective [of the adventure] and what it requires i spells? Is there some magic item which one of the party members possesses that will be of special help, or general assurance of survival, in this adventure? All this should be done before play begins, for it is time consuming, and the readying of a party can require several hours if there are more than six characters involved.[/indent] This all makes clear that the rationale for "Vancian magic" has nothing to do with evoking a certain fantasy feel, or with "playability" in any general sense. (Those may or may not be happy by-products, depending on the game participant.) It's purpose is to create a particular sort of space for game play. Like equipment, it's part of the "load out" aspect of play. (As is well known, it also breaks down at upper levels where load outs become so extensive that the resource management aspect is diluted or near-absent.) As soon as one looks at RPGs that are not particularly aspiring to reproduce this particular sort of RPG experience - RuneQuest, Rolemaster, Burning Wheel, etc - it's no surprise that different sorts of magic systems are adopted. And given that relatively little contemporary D&D play seems designed to replicate the particular sort of experience Gygax was interested in - of hidden gameboard problem-solving based on the deployment of a resource load-out that is established before play begins, and is not easily changed during play - Gygax's vision of Vancian magic seems to have no particular logical role to play any more. Hence why it is watered down by making the modern load-out quite generous (a first level wizard starts with 6 spells in their book and can probably memorise three or four of them) and by allowing slots to be used on any of those prepared spells. The form of Vancian magic (spell books, memorisation/preparation, slots) remains, but the substance is vestigial. EDITed to add a further thought: Torchbearer 2e has a Vancian magic system that maintains a tight constraint on number of memorised spells, and does not allow using the slot of one spell to cast another. It also keeps a very tight rein on the total number of memorised spells. But as a result, it is not a system in which magicians "aim to cast spells" and "use magic almost exclusively to solve problems posed by the game". Like sorcerers in Burning Wheel, TB2e magicians contribute primarily through their other skills, like drawing maps and solving riddles and reading runes. They can even become reasonably adept in hand-to-hand combat. The fact that a system intended to emulate classic D&D dungeoneering play nevertheless has to depart from Gygax's design specs for magic-users shows the demandingness of those specs. It's hard to create a game piece that will be fun to play, and whose play is almost entirely the deployment of limited-use problem-solving abilities, but whose access to those abilities won't break the game. Much of the history of D&D design and play approaches - LFQW, class "spotlight" balancing, 4e's distinctive approach to PC building, 5e's "Neo-Vancian" casting, etc - are responses to this design challenge. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
It's all Jack Vance's fault
Top