Vancian Spellcasting's Real Problem - CoDzilla

[GreyICE]

I wanted to start this thread because I see too many people doing the false Wizard/Fighter dichotomy. The fact of the matter is the Wizard is a pure Vancian construct. Anything he does is within the Vancian framework. That means he is limited until the framework goes strictly quadratic.

The real design flaws of 3.5 were the Cleric and the Druid. Both were full Vancian spellcasters with extra options.

In the Cleric's case, that made him a melee combatant equal to the fighter as well as a caster who could stand nearly toe to toe with the Wizard. The combination of Vancian class features with non-Vancian class features lead to a power growth that was beyond quadratic - the Cleric could do all those 'party helping' maneuvers on himself, growing his own power beyond any lesser ken.

In the Druid's case, well, the ability to hijack any monster stat block as well as the weird stacking it provided, combined with buffs, broke open the game. The animal companion was a nice little addon that ensured he was broken at all levels, but he was typically no better than cute about when Wildshape was really gaining its teeth (9-12 levels).


Sooooo... what's planned here? I see full Vancian is back in for Clerics, and apparently this is melting down the design team (they've had about 5 polls in the forums asking what the iconic cleric is and whether or not it's a Priest, because they're clearly faced with making a Vancian caster with other features and flinching as hard as they can). And they've straight out stated the Druid is up there with the Fighter in problem undesignable classes.

As a side note, this is one of the reasons I hate full vancian systems. You end up being able to do a very small number of things, and because that number is small, they have to be very powerful. Then if you gain any other class features (so your standard action in combat isn't 'write bad poetry' inbetween breaking reality) you grow exponentially and break apart the system. The only way to limit it appears to be to make the number of things you can do REALLY small (Factotem, Bard) which only leads to more frustration as you can once per day break apart the system and then you're basically useless, or you mete out your cool in painfully small increments (or if you're a Factotem, you run on proto-AEDU and thus sidestep the entire thing).

But we're apparently stuck with them, so what do people think they're doing with the Cleric/Druid?

Frankly I wouldn't be half surprised if the Druid resembled it's much more balanced 4E counterpart than it's broken and ridiculous 3E one, but the Cleric seems to have no 'make people happy' solution (besides adding a new core class, the Priest, that is a full Vancian caster, while the Cleric exists in some nether realm between a Paladin and a Priest).

 

[Tallifer]

The godlike cleric really only happens if the system allows permanent spells or spells which last several hours. If the durations are limited to a single combat or a few rounds, then the cleric would have to pray for his enhancements every single battle, and that would mean wasted rounds of preparation. Another solution is to make the some of the prayers which enhance abilities and powers into rituals with long casting times.

 

[Savage Wombat]

The THEORY is that the cleric balances his greater weapon, armor and undead-turning abilities with the fact that his spells are less versatile than the wizards, and focussed around healing the party. And that the druid balances his pets and shapeshifting with his nature-focussed spells of limited application.

The PRACTICE of said theory is that the game designers (in both 3e and 4e) can't keep themselves from giving spellcasters of all stripes new, "kewl" spells that they haven't balanced fully against the design intent. Especially when splatbooks are released.

This is not a flaw of Vancian spellcasting, but it is a potential drawback. Spell creep needs to be kept drastically in check, no matter what system you use.

 

[GreyICE]

The problem with those solutions is you don't have a very cool class.

A Druid with lousy wild shape, lousy companion, and lousy spells may end up as good as your average class, but it still feels like your abilities are subpar. Remember the Bard? Average fighter, mediocre caster, mediocre (non-optimized) buffer? Actually quite strong in 3e (mostly 'cause being a caster was broken) but not well loved. Even people who hate on 4e usually admit the 4e bard was just a huge improvement. A coherent, focused leader with truly interesting powers.

A good solution is not 'give the Druid a bunch of bad abilities and pray that they add up to exactly as good as a class with a single focus.' Because that sort of balancing act, easy to fall off the ledge. It happened with virtually every other 'jack of all trades' class.

As for having the cleric use short term buffs, congrats. You just rediscovered encounter powers, and the cleric is supposed to be Vancian. You really think you waste limited daily slots on short term buffs unless they are godly?
We're not talking "+2 strength" here.

 

[Incenjucar]

Spell creep needs to be kept drastically in check, no matter what system you use.

Abso-freaking-lutely.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Hmm. Random thought - if a wizard's fireball doesn't get more powerful as she goes up in level, the druid's pet wolf probably shouldn't either, right?

So: Druid gets the option of taking a feat, like the wizard's javelin of fire that lets them have a wolf-range pet. If he wants it to be tougher, he has to level it up with feats and/or magic items.

And druid shapeshifting was fine until somebody invented "Natural Casting". If turning into a non-spellcaster was such a powerful option, Tenser's Transformation would have been the most popular 7th level spell.

 

[Incenjucar]

If we're assuming a druid is going to use both wildshape and an animal companion, perhaps it could work something like the 4E berserker, but with the companion worked into the math? The druid could basically switch between warrior/warrior and warrior/caster (aka gish) mode, while choosing to specialize in one or the other. Perhaps the druid and the companion are basically equals when the druid is wildshaped, and the druids powers are basically at 50% strength compared to a full caster.

For example:

Druid in human form uses Vine Whip for 1d4+4 damage and pull 10 feet.
Druid's companion uses Fury Swipes for 1d6 damage.

Druid in animal form uses Fury Swipes for 1d6+4 damage.
Druid's Companion uses Fury Swips for 1d6 damage.

Wizard uses Call of Cthulhu for 1d6+4 damage and pull 10 feet in a 10' radius sphere.

Barbarian uses Smashem Faces for 2d6+6 damage

 

[Frostmarrow]

In 4E they tried to position the cleric as leader. I'm not sure it stuck. What if cleric is the information gatherer instead? Clerics have access to an organization and a selection of augery spells. A druid is pretty much the same as a cleric in this respect with the difference druids have no reliable organization but instead have access to wilderness lore.

From a role-playing perspective I see the following schticks, in and out of combat:

Fighter: Melee combat and Athletics
Wizard: Artillery and Rituals
Rogue: Ranged combat and Burglary/Tool use
Cleric: Healing and Information

Ranger: Ranged combat and Athletics
Paladin: Melee combat and Information
Bard: Melee combat and Rituals

I don't see a niche for a face person. In an RPG everybody must feel they are welcome to speak. Also, there is no need for a leader, especially if leading means healing. It's dishonest. (I hate when people try to change the facts by changing the meaning of words).

When you encounter a problem the fighter can climb over it, the rogue can swing past it with a grappling iron, the wizard can transform it, and the cleric can decipher the secret password.

Athletics: Skills that require no gear. "Hey, look at me!"
Rituals: Skills that require time and exotic ingredients. "I wonder what happens if I mix this."
Burglary: Skills that require special equipment. "I'm so leet."
Information: Skills that require languages and books. "I want to map god's creation."

Information in the game comes from several sources. Talking to NPCs shouldn't be monopolized by any one class. We also have:

Tracking
Books
Memory
Spells (speak with dead, legend lore)
Dreams and visions

As you can see most of these are suitable to the cleric concept.

 

[FireLance]

Well, based on what I've seen from the hints and leaks (which may or may not be accurate), 5e will tone down Vancian spellcasting in the following ways:

1. Spell power will be tied to spell level instead of caster level. If you want to increase the power of a spell, you will have to prepare it in a higher-level spell slot.

2. The number of spell slots will be scaled back. In particular, spellcasters will be able to combine a number of lower-level spell slots into a single higher-level spell slot. Spellcasters will thus have to choose between preparing a larger number of weaker spells or a smaller number of more potent spells.

Taken together, this means that any potent effect is going to require a significant commitment from the spellcaster, i.e. one of his highest-level spell slots.

For example, divine power (if it exists) isn't going to be a mid-level spell that hands you the attack bonus of a fighter of your level. If you cast it as a 4th-level spell, it might grant you the fighting capability (whatever it works out to in 5e, given the relatively flatter power curve) of a fighter 2 levels lower than you are when you can first cast 4th-level spells. If you want to fight better (to keep up with the monsters you encounter) you will have to cast it at higher levels, and you will never be the equal of a fighter of the same level.

Maybe the animal companion will become the animal friendship spell again, and will only summon relatively weak animal allies when cast at 1st level. If you want your animal companion to do anything more than die within the first round of combat at higher levels, you're going to have to spend one of your (precious few) highest-level spell slots to get it.

 

[Nimblegrund]

Bard: Melee combat and Rituals

I don't see a niche for a face person.

What's a bard if not a people-person?