Vancian Magic - Yes or No?

[Ridley's Cohort]

Vancian magic is very easy to balance and works excellently from a purely mechanical stance. Beyond that, it has no redeeming qualities.

If you're part of the "3.X ruined D&D by focusing on balance" crowd, then half the reason to like it is gone. On the other hand, if you're someone who doesn't like game mechanics showing through the seems like the frame of a battered old sofa, the other half is gone.

That is very well put.

A few people really do like the flavor of Vancian magic -- so don't discount that angle so easily, but for me its feel is too alien to all the fantasy and mythic traditions that I care about.

But it makes for a decent mechanic for a wargame.

 

[nikolai]

I think the "Vancian" magic is more easily shaped and modified than some posts imply. 3e already took a big step away from it with spontaneous casting and metamagic.

I think judicious changes to the standard spell lists and changes to the manner in which spells are learnt (in terms of prerequisites) is probably most urgent. Divine spell acquisition and spell lists in particular, this has never made much sense. 3e is definately a big creep away from pure Vance. Vancian magic should stay, but I think there is room for more of a broad mix in the core rules.

I'd also welcome a big hardback "Alternate Arcana" book which focuses on modifiying the d20 magic system to encompass a variety of magic systems inspired by fantasy novels. This would allow DMs to fine tune the spell system to the campaign. I accept that you can't simply directly port from novels, put there's still plenty of room for other styles. Some publisher will do this soon and make a killing...

 

[DrZombie]

I love Vance, but the D&D magic system is a bit silly. I just LOOOOOVE the shadowrun magic rules, where basically you choose the level of the spell you're about to cast, then make a RR, getting more fatigued when you cast bigger spells. You can whop up a really nasty mofo of a fireball, but risk getting splattered allover the landscape by doing so.

 

[frankthedm]

More options are nice, I think the vance system works ok, but i would like to see balanced alternatives. Unfortunatly those who seem to want a non vancian system forget that the fixed and prepared nature of spells in D&D is one factor in determining how strong a spell is. The sorcerer is good example of what you would have to pay for flexibility. If a caster could freely craft spells then the strength of thier magic would suffer greatly.

 

[Agback]

Oh, cuts like a knife...

Don't lead with your chin.

The Dying World stuff. Haven't tried anything else...

Well, I don't like The Dying Earth, Eyes of the Overworld, Cugel's Saga, or Rhialto the Marvellous much either. But I still count Vance one of my favourite authors.

So, if you're ever short of something to read, try Emphyrio, Araminta Station, Trullion, Whyst, Lyonesse I: Suldrun's Garden, Planet of Adventure, or even Nightlamp. I can't guarantee that you will enjoy them, but I can guarantee that they are different from the Dying Earth stuff, both in the style of writing and in the likeableness of the characters.

And if youwant something really different, remember taht Vance wrote not only fanstasy and SF, but also mysteries, such as The Man in the Cage and A Room to Die In

Regards,


Agback

 

[ciaran00]

I like Vancian in regards to D&D, and D&D alone. It's tradition, call me old fashion (even in my late 20's). If I want variants, play something different.

So by your argument, monsters without statistics and with a bunch of random, unbalanced abilities or the utter lack of spellcasters to create items is also "tradition"

I'm just arguing

ciaran

 

[Olive]

So, if you're ever short of something to read, try Emphyrio, Araminta Station, Trullion, Whyst, Lyonesse I: Suldrun's Garden, Planet of Adventure, or even Nightlamp. I can't guarantee that you will enjoy them, but I can guarantee that they are different from the Dying Earth stuff, both in the style of writing and in the likeableness of the characters.

Thanks for the advice. Most people just go 'what, you don't like Vance? You must have terrible taste!'.

 

[Corinth]

I voted "No."

I would prefer something akin to the Force rules in SW or the Psionics rules in SFA: a system driven by Feats and skills, powered by (in D&D terms) nonlethal damage.

 

[MerricB]

Interestingly, this poll probably points to the retention of Vancian Magic - though the split is close to 50/50, if we were presented with the most popular alternative system to replace it, I think that more people would prefer the traditional magic system of D&D to it!

(Mind you, I'm all for giving additional, optional magic systems, such as you might find in Unearthed Arcana).

Cheers!

 

[DWARF]

I've gone to the Arcana Unearthed system, and I doubt I'll be going back much...