Vancian Spellcasting's Real Problem - CoDzilla

[Minigiant]

Vancian casting gets a bad rap.
The real culprit was always Poorly designed spells and class features.

Cool ideas with not enough vetting, appraisal, or evaluation.


Cool ideas with not enough vetting, appraisal, or
evaluation.

In is not just D&D. It happens in other p&p games, card games, board games, and video games all the time.

My guess is a good 50% of everything considered "broken" or "_____powered" is a "what the heck were they thinking" moment.

 

[Harlekin]

Think about a soldier who goes into battle with a clip of tracers, one of armor piercing rounds and three of normal ammo. After he's used up the tracers, he can no longer direct fire as well, but still has the other types of ammunition.

That's pretty much how the Vancian wizard works.

Of course the soldier can refill his clips right after the battle, he doesn't have to wait till next morning. The silly part of Vancian magic is not that a PC prepares a few spells until he uses them, but that he can only prepare spells once a day. If he could refresh used spells, say in a short rest, it would make a lot more sense.

 

[Hassassin]

Of course the soldier can refill his clips right after the battle, he doesn't have to wait till next morning. The silly part of Vancian magic is not that a PC prepares a few spells until he uses them, but that he can only prepare spells once a day. If he could refresh used spells, say in a short rest, it would make a lot more sense.

That's the exhaustion part. In 3e you can do that, if you leave slots open in the morning. However, you need sleep to get new slots.

 

[KidSnide]

I agree with the sentiment, expressed by several above, that the CoDzilla problem doesn't really have anything to do with Vancian mechanics. For clerics, the problem was how buff spells worked and, in later 3.5, how WotC had poor discipline in figuring out what kind of offensive magic was appropriate for divine casters. Druids were all about the problems with polymorph and the ability to use the monster manual as a second spellbook.

These are spell design problems -- not class design problems. And, while spell design is a humongous issue for D&DN if it's going back to a more 1e-3e style of spellcasting, the broader community has very little information about how WotC is going to go about designing spells for D&DN. Think about it -- they learned a lot about power design in 4e. And while we've seen the evolution of class design over the various PHs and essentials, the community hasn't seen how WotC would apply those power design lessons to more traditional spells.

-KS

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I agree with the sentiment, expressed by several above, that the CoDzilla problem doesn't really have anything to do with Vancian mechanics. For clerics, the problem was how buff spells worked and, in later 3.5, how WotC had poor discipline in figuring out what kind of offensive magic was appropriate for divine casters. Druids were all about the problems with polymorph and the ability to use the monster manual as a second spellbook.

These are spell design problems not class design problems. And, while spell design is a humongous issue for D&DN if it's going back to a more 1e-3e style of spellcasting, the broader community has very little information about how WotC is going to go about designing spells for D&DN. Think about it -- they learned a lot about power design in 4e. And while we've seen the evolution of class design over the various PHs and essentials, the community hasn't seen how WotC would apply those power design lessons to more traditional spells.

-KS

The cynical part of me though says there's going to be nothing more or less than the good old AD&D spell list exactly as it was in 199x.

The main issue is A) higher level casters simply have WAY too many slots. B) The spells they have access to are all over the map and they can step on anything. A can be fixed with some sort of modified spell acquisition, which can be Vancian or not to whatever degree but needs to be a good bit cut down at higher levels. B is only going to be fixed IF they're willing to kill all the sacred cows of specific old spells. That can also be approached by pushing all casters into a niche, but STILL you're going to have to do something about a lot of the higher level stuff.

 

[CleverNickName]

I was a bit sad to see that the Vancian magic system carried over into 5E. I had my fingers crossed for a Magic Point system ala "Complete Psionics" or "Unearthed Arcana." But I digress.

The way I see it, there are three "frameworks" for spellcasters in 3E: the low-magic frame (ranger, paladin), the mid-magic frame (bard), and the high-magic frame (sorcerer, wizard.) Each can cast spells, but they have different limitations and focus.

Low-magic characters have a d8 Hit Dice and a high BAT, but they don't get spells until later levels, and they can only cast up to 4th level spells. Low-magic characters are more focused on martial combat than anything else, and they often have an interesting mix of extraordinary or supernatural abilities, but their magic-use is mostly utilitarian. They can cast spells in armor without a problem.

Mid-magic characters have a d6 HD, mid BAT, and they start the game with spellcasting ability, but their spell list is capped at 6th level. This character is more focused on skills than anything else, and the class has a lot of interesting special abilities, with a mix of attack and utility spells. They can cast spells in certain kinds of armor, which is somewhat limiting, but usually isn't a problem.

High-magic characters have a d4 HD and a low BAT, but they have access to magic at first level and their spell list is uncapped. Their focus is on spellcasting...they have fewer special abilities and class features, but their magic can do practically anything. Casting spells in armor is severely penalized.

Then we have the Cleric and Druid, and they do not fit any of these frames. It is almost like the designers cherry-picked the best parts of each frame and mashed them together...the special abilities and armored spellcasting of the low-magic frame, the mix of utility and attack spells of the mid-magic frame, and the early and uncapped magic use of the high-magic frame. I'm sure they had their reasons, but the end result was severely unbalanced.

To "fix" the cleric or druid in 5E, my advice would be to pick ONE of these three frames and stick with it. If you want clerics and druids to be combat-oriented, then keep the d8 HD and give them a high BAT but dial their spells way back (think "ranger" or "paladin.") If you want the focus of the class to be on skills and special abilities, then pull their HD back to d6, limit their armor, and cap their spells at 6th level. If you want the focus of the class to be on the spells, then drop their HD to d4, give them the lowest BAT, and cull their list of special abilities.

Or hell, do all three: give us a high-magic option (shaman, priest), a mid-magic option (druid, cleric), and a low-magic option (warden, warpriest) for each. Just resist the urge to mix and match. Trying to be all things to all spellcasters will only create balance issues. And nobody wants to see "Dungeons and Dragons V: CoDzilla Returns."

 

[Gryph]

Could you point to a specific example system in an RPG? For example, if you take 3e psionics and call them magic, would that work?



Think about a soldier who goes into battle with a clip of tracers, one of armor piercing rounds and three of normal ammo. After he's used up the tracers, he can no longer direct fire as well, but still has the other types of ammunition.

That's pretty much how the Vancian wizard works.

I was a big fan of the Dragonquest magic system.

Spells were grouped into thematic "colleges" of magic and casters only had acces to one college. Every spell started at Rank 0 and you levelled them up individually through XP expenditure. The spell levelling process scaled up the spells range, damage, and chance to hit (typically).

Spells were cast from fatigue, essentially fast recovered hit points, so casting spells inherently made the caster more fragile. But, as long as the caster has remaining fatigue he can cast any spell he knows.

Casters rolled to hit for their spells, so mechanically the spell attack sequence matched the melee attack sequence (there are some initiative order differences). And the always possible chance of backfire. Backfire was a fumble system for spell casters that kicked in if they missed their spell to hit roll by more than 30 (on % dice). For small spells, backfire was really rare but for the big if this hits you die type of spell the chance for backfire often exceeded the chance to successfully cast the spell. Made encounter ending magic a real gamble.

 

[Hassassin]

The cynical part of me though says there's going to be nothing more or less than the good old AD&D spell list exactly as it was in 199x.

The main issue is A) higher level casters simply have WAY too many slots. B) The spells they have access to are all over the map and they can step on anything. A can be fixed with some sort of modified spell acquisition, which can be Vancian or not to whatever degree but needs to be a good bit cut down at higher levels. B is only going to be fixed IF they're willing to kill all the sacred cows of specific old spells. That can also be approached by pushing all casters into a niche, but STILL you're going to have to do something about a lot of the higher level stuff.

I totally agree about A. I think the number of lower level slots should decrease once you get to mid- to high-levels slots. For example, one new slot every even level and a new spell level every odd level.

[sblock=Example]1st: 3/1
2nd: 3/2
3rd: 2/2/1
4th: 1/3/2
5th: 1/2/2/1
6th: 1/1/3/2
7th: 1/1/2/2/1
...
17th: 1/1/1/1/1/1/1/2/2/1

12 spells is still less than 1/round in a 5*4 round adventuring day.[/sblock]
Regarding B, there are a lot of spells that aren't particularly iconic and can go. Problematic iconic spells can be nerfed.

 

[Gryph]

I totally agree about A. I think the number of lower level slots should decrease once you get to mid- to high-levels slots. For example, one new slot every even level and a new spell level every odd level.

[sblock=Example]1st: 3/1
2nd: 3/2
3rd: 2/2/1
4th: 1/3/2
5th: 1/2/2/1
6th: 1/1/3/2
7th: 1/1/2/2/1
...
17th: 1/1/1/1/1/1/1/2/2/1

12 spells is still less than 1/round in a 5*4 round adventuring day.[/sblock]
Regarding B, there are a lot of spells that aren't particularly iconic and can go. Problematic iconic spells can be nerfed.

You wouldn't have to take away low level slots, just stop giveing new ones, say once you can cast spells two levels higher. So when a Wizard hits 5th they get no new level 1 spell slots.

Though, if we move all non-combat, utility spells to a ritual structure with a different limiting mechanism, your method of slot restriction might be better.

 

[mcintma]

I agree with the sentiment that Clr/Drd were overpowered in 3.x, and Wiz could get that way past 10th level (depending on 15-min workdays, etc.), although even a high-level Wiz remained a glass cannon that was easy to take out (familiar, spellbook, grapple, silence, feeblemind, SR, immunities, antimagic, etc.) I also think this is not a Vancian, but class design, problem.

My only concern is, if they nerf the spells, Wiz will go from being pathetic ever-frightened sidekick at levels 1-10 to being that way through the whole 1-20.