D&D 5E Spell Preparation - A Better Vancian or a Bridge Too Far?

[karolusb]

I am among the rare few who think this seems like a plus. Known vs All needs to be separate or you get the cleric with 100 splat books problem (as a note I also think clerics should have a known list, otherwise you get to the point I remember from 2e where the cleric is going through 10 books a night to find the exact right spell).

Known vs prepared is ok, about as Vancian as I can stomach, and now combat decision come pretty quickly, whereas camping decisions take a bit longer.

Flexible slots is really essential for me. I know some people like the old wizard, but I hated it. The reality isn't 40 brilliant uses of tensers floating disk that no one ever thought of before, it's all spell lists look the same. (Playing in a C&C game currently, all priests memorize sound burst and cure light, all mages memorize sleep +1 utility, when we know we are facing one powerful foe instead of lots of weak ones sleep becomes magic missile, I could close my eyes, never have met a player before, and know what spells his wizard has memorized).

My concern with implementation at current is prepared seems like a really large number, especially for the academic. Now 20th level is a long way out, but at 20th we are looking at 30 prepared spells. Seems like a tad too many to me, especially with combat spells having flexible levels. (Hmm now that I think about it 9 levels of spells might be the culprit here).

 

[Ainamacar]

I could quibble with the numbers, but I think the basic separation into known spells, prepared spells, and spell "slots" is a great compromise between traditional Vancian and D&D-style spontaneous casting. It's not because I think any particular balance of preparation and spontaneity is "correct", but because the same system can also be smoothly scaled between either extreme with relatively small changes from the default which gives a taste of both flavors.

This makes it a lot easier to introduce modifications to the spell system without needing to write a completely new version, and in fact means those different modifications will be easier to swap between various classes for those who are inclined to do so. One can head toward "pure spontaneity" by moving the number of prepared spells and number of known spells closer together. One can head toward pure preparation by specifying that some or all slots must have a pre-assigned spell. The details of these modifications need not be identical, so that two casters might have made starkly different trade-offs despite superficial similarity in the basic balance of preparation and spontaneity. Combined with the ability to modify slots or spells to create a more 4e-like caster one can have a single basic system that largely covers the traditional spectrum of D&D casting. To me that sounds a lot better than a mess of independent alternate spell systems -- leave those for systems which step firmly outside the generalized known/prepared/slots family.

I've successfully used a similar method in my own games. My homebrew system uses a fairly standard spontaneous spell-point system, except most spell points are "earned" during action and only a relatively small number are a daily resource. The wizard-like caster in this system can choose to dedicate 2 of these daily points to a specific spell in return for a third daily spell point, also only usable by that specific spell. They can do this to whatever extent desired, from none at all to dedicating all their daily spell points in this manner. Many other variations on this theme are possible, but the point is that this single spell system is compatible with various preparation vs. spontaneous preferences with quite minimal rules changes.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Like the Arcana Evolved system, this version manages to get most of the advantages of a "spell point" system while curbing the biggest abuse that always arise in such systems over wide ranges of power: gross imbalance by pouring all spell points into the lower or upper end of the range (depending on the exact system). This gives the caster some room to move and scale, but it is not completely elastic. Since avoiding the flaws of spell point systems while remaining fairly simple is the biggest virtue of Vancian casting, I'm all for that part.

 

[Stalker0]

Like the Arcana Evolved system, this version manages to get most of the advantages of a "spell point" system while curbing the biggest abuse that always arise in such systems over wide ranges of power: gross imbalance by pouring all spell points into the lower or upper end of the range (depending on the exact system). This gives the caster some room to move and scale, but it is not completely elastic. Since avoiding the flaws of spell point systems while remaining fairly simple is the biggest virtue of Vancian casting, I'm all for that part.

I agree here, though I even saw the abuses in the AE's system, which was a bit more flexible than this. Flexibility is a very powerful trait, but right now I like the compromise in spellcasting being tried right now.