Vancian Anchor

[Empath Negative]

Balance will be found for spellcasters in the development of the Vancian Anchor.

The vancian anchor is a method by which you further define and manipulate magic within the vancian system using in game logic.

A wizard seeking to cast an exceptionally powerful spell (such as time stop) must find the spell within his book and read it alloud as the magical energies coallesce, taking a full round or more to do so.

In this instance the spellbook is the vancian anchor. The failure of 3.5 was in integrating the spellbook, and a requirement to read from it, as a source of weakness for the Wizard.

5th edition will find balance in this concept.

 

[Griego]

I misread this as "Vancian Archer", and was like "Nooooouuuu! I want to recover at least some of the arrows I shoot! 5cp may not seem like much, but it adds up in a hurry!"

 

[the Jester]

A wizard seeking to cast an exceptionally powerful spell (such as time stop) must find the spell within his book and read it alloud as the magical energies coallesce, taking a full round or more to do so.

Absolutely not, thank you very much.

 

[Kynn]

Why would you call this the "Vancian anchor" if it's not how spells worked in Vance's books anyway?

(Then again, calling anything in D&D "Vancian" is absurd for the same reason. *)



* Except, like, ioun stones which were directly ripped off.

 

[Empath Negative]

Absolutely not, thank you very much.

And this is precisely why.

The wizard, sorc, cleric, and others were given untold power without being held accountable to the logic that granted that power nor was that logic actively used as a balancing tool.

Sorcerers were absolutely lousy with this. They got every benefit of draconic/fey/fiendish/celestial blood.. But none of the drawbacks?

Tempering magic via vancian anchor would dramatically increase the sense of balance amongst the classes.

 

[mcintma]

As I've stated in other threads, I fear the popular passion for nerfing wizards will lead to them being cowering weaklings thru not only low-mid levels, as before, but now through the whole progression.

 

[Kynn]

As I've stated in other threads, I fear the popular passion for nerfing wizards will lead to them being cowering weaklings thru not only low-mid levels, as before, but now through the whole progression.

Gosh, I hope so!

 

[TwinBahamut]

As I've stated in other threads, I fear the popular passion for nerfing wizards will lead to them being cowering weaklings thru not only low-mid levels, as before, but now through the whole progression.

The thing is, wizards don't need to be nerfed unless you ignore 4E. They are just fine in 4E. Fans of class balance don't complain about 4E wizards being overpowered or underpowered. They already got their nerf, and they're still a fun and effective class.

The main problem is that a lot of people want 3E's really powerful wizards, and thus they want to massively empower wizards compared to 4E. So, of course, there is something of a counter-reaction to that idea from the people who enjoy the current D&D status quo.

 

[Sunseeker]

Could just reduce the power of each individual spell.

 

[Elf Witch]

Balance will be found for spellcasters in the development of the Vancian Anchor.

The vancian anchor is a method by which you further define and manipulate magic within the vancian system using in game logic.

A wizard seeking to cast an exceptionally powerful spell (such as time stop) must find the spell within his book and read it alloud as the magical energies coallesce, taking a full round or more to do so.

In this instance the spellbook is the vancian anchor. The failure of 3.5 was in integrating the spellbook, and a requirement to read from it, as a source of weakness for the Wizard.

5th edition will find balance in this concept.

I don't agree with this at all. It really penalizes the wizard. How many rounds will it take to get out the spell book and find the spell? To many rounds then you have just taken the player out of the action. Which is a complaint I hear often enough about spells that hold or paralyze.

Secondly spell books are not paperbacks so it would take two hands to hold one so how does the wizard even defend himself if someone comes to attack does he just drop his book to pull a weapon?

I think there are better ways to balance a wizard's power then this..