Vancian? Why can't we let it go?

[Droogie]

This whole 'Vancian Sucks' thing is as tiresome now as the whole 'Hit Points' suck and 'Class Suck' debates. I agree with Somantus; must we have another thread about how D&D shouldn't be D&D?

I suppose we all have a different idea of what makes D&D feel like D&D. For me its classes, levels, some familiar races, and a 20 sided die.
Everything else is negotiable. For me, vancian magic is not what defines D&D, it just happens to be the magic system that it uses, and even when I started playing it back in the 80's I always saw room for improvement. For a game that pulls inspiration from so many sources, the magic system always struck me as overly...esoteric? Don't get me wrong, I understand the system just fine, but in typical early gygaxian fashion, it was not the most elegant game design.

Vancian magic is the modern system, just as hit points are. I spent six months or so playing World of Warcraft recently. It was D&D right down to its bones. The people that moved away from them thinking that they had really bright ideas, made game systems hardly anyone but us grognards remember. There are genera I would use something other than Vancian in, but they have different literary structures than high fantasy. Gandalf probably didn't use Vancian magic, but he used spells with the same pacing and purposes that a Vancian caster does in my games so that if you novelized the game and ignored the 'how' of the magic it would have the structure of the story. That's good enough for me.

I think you can have a system where magic feels special and rare that doesn't use a slot-based system where spell levels mean something different than character levels. I dislike the old-school D&D magic system from a mechanics viewpoint, not really a concept viewpoint.

As for why D&D is lagging behind fantasy video gaming in popularity, it's quite simple. For the DM, D&D is often a lot of work and will always be a lot of work. RPG's exploded in popularity as the only way to capture an experience like Skyrim that was available, but now that you can have Skyrim produced by a professional 'dungeon master' and a massive team of artists and illustrators, well naturally pen and paper has some stiff competition.

Agreed. The hobby has stiff competition these days. Continued refinement of the game is necessary to ensure that it is a game that enough people will want to play. Although I really do think you can design a game that isn't a ton of work to prep and still be robust enough for the hardcore.

For a game to work as a table top, it's got to be pretty darn elegant. Vancian Magic has stood that test. It's not merely the first system; it's the best for what a typical fantasy game is trying to accomplish. Nearly 30 years of gaming and I've never used a system that captured the classical literary nature of magic as well - rare, reserved, but earthshattering when unleashed. And if you don't agree that this works, that its time efficient in play, and that its fun to use, and comparitively balanced then build the alternative. A good 10 years spent trying to build your fantasy heartbreaker might serve as valuable perspective as well.

I think D&D succeeded in spite of its magic system (and other weird subsystems) not because of it. It sort of got carried along like eyes on a cave fish. D&D is popular mostly because it is the biggest brand name in tabletop RPGs, and serves as the gateway to the hobby for most.
However, if WotC really wants the next edition to please everyone, I have to concede that they have to have something "vance-like" in there, either as an optional system or a specific class that uses magic in that vancian way. At any rate, I do not envy anyone that works at WoTC right now.

 

[Elf Witch]

I like the fiddly nature of this, but it's probably more complex than is needed.

Here's a simple question for everyone: Should a tenth level caster be able to cast first level spells without preparation?

I say, yes, because it gives a sense of power, removes bookkeeping, and really isn't going to break anything since by that point, those spells aren't in high demand.

If you agree, then perhaps a system where spells get progressively easier to cast as a character gains level is the right direction.

No I don't not if they are a vancian type wizard if you want to be able to cast any spell without memorizing it then have class like a sorcerer.

While I like the idea of different ways to use magic I don't see the need to change how wizards work. Instead of messing with something some people like I think it makes more sense to develop another way to use magic as option for people who don't like it.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Here's a simple question for everyone: Should a tenth level caster be able to cast first level spells without preparation?

I say yes as well, but I wouldn't stop there. I think they should be able to cast them without using any slots, and I'm not even sure 10th level is soon enough. Basically, in a 3E-style system I think a caster should only track slots for about their top 3 levels of spells. Such a system, however, would probably require some rebalancing of certain spell scaling, which was in place to make some of those lower-level spells worth a slot in the first place.

Basically, the more slots you have and the more minor the effects in the slots, the less "Vancian" it becomes.

The exception would be options turned on for "operational play" -- the typical resource management game that so many people played in the early D&D dungeon exploration. If you are tracking arrows and vials of oil and encumbrance, and every detail matters, then tracking each prepared and specific use of each low-level spell is part and parcel of the central fun. Heck, carefully using those low-level spells for utility effects is part of how you make that work. But the more you move away from operational play, the less important low-level magic becomes (generally, it isn't a hard and fast rule).

 

[drothgery]

What are your thoughts on a robust spell system for non-combat situations?

If you can do it without trampling all over the rogue or bard (or make it an exclusive feature of a class designed to replace a rogue or a bard) that's great.

 

[Wormwood]

It's not easy being a wizard or sorceror. But making it through the trials of early levels, you soon become the most potent member in the party.

Oh yeah, the glory years when fighters went from being heroes to bodyguards.

 

[Wormwood]

Instead of messing with something some people like I think it makes more sense to develop another way to use magic as option for people who don't like it.

I think that is a point of agreement. One Vancian system for those who want it, another system for those who don't.

My feeling is that a non-vancian system as default could make the game more broadly accessible to people who wouldn't enjoy the game if Hermione can only say 'Leviosa' once a day.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I say yes as well, but I wouldn't stop there. I think they should be able to cast them without using any slots, and I'm not even sure 10th level is soon enough. Basically, in a 3E-style system I think a caster should only track slots for about their top 3 levels of spells. Such a system, however, would probably require some rebalancing of certain spell scaling, which was in place to make some of those lower-level spells worth a slot in the first place.

That's almost exactly what I was thinking. Using 3e as a base, a 9th level caster would have

• One 5th Level Spell Slot
• Three 4th Level Spell Slots
• Five 3rd Level Spell Slots

And then can spontaneously cast any 2nd, 1st, and 0 level spells they know. Thus, spell levels represent the complexity of a spell, and caster level represents how much complexity the caster can handle at a given time.

It could even be taken the other direction. Get several 9th level casters working together, and perhaps they could cast 6th and 7th level spells. This fits into the lore of Greyhawk and the great spells that created the desert lands. They were cast by groups of wizards.

Another bookkeeping advantage of this is that a Wizard always has the same number of spell slots. The only thing that changes is what level of spell he or she can put in them.

[edit: Referencing the 3.5 PH, if it were based on that system, the spell slots should be 1, 2, and 3 slots respectively.]

 

[Elf Witch]

I think that is a point of agreement. One Vancian system for those who want it, another system for those who don't.

My feeling is that a non-vancian system as default could make the game more broadly accessible to people who wouldn't enjoy the game if Hermione can only say 'Leviosa' once a day.

That is hope as well.

Though to be honest you can in 3E have a choice on not saying Leviosa once a day. You have the option of being a sorcerer, a warlock, a beguiler.

So I am hoping that 5E gives the ability to have different types of casters in the core not later tacked on.

 

[Celebrim]

Here's a simple question for everyone: Should a tenth level caster be able to cast first level spells without preparation?

No.

Quite simply, because the spells weren't balanced ever with the idea that they would be unlimited resources and are very difficult to balance if you allow them to become so. Even the lowly 'Cure Minor Wounds' is game breaking.

About the only sort of magic that isn't game breaking when usable 'at will' (regardless of the system we are playing) is the sort that 4e uses for its magical 'at wills' - simple attacks, reflavored as magical attacks. The only sort of magic that is inherently balanced with the mundane is the sort which can do no more than the mundane can.

It wouldn't be too bad to give wizards an at will similar to the Warlocks blast, but frankly, I don't think that they need it. You could just equally let them start with a wand of 50 cantrip type attack spells if you were really worried about they didn't feel wizardly enough, but even then, post D&D literary wizards are all basically inspired by the D&D wizard so you end up in some sort of wierd circular self-referencing. Stick to the classic.

 

[Celebrim]

Though to be honest you can in 3E have a choice on not saying Leviosa once a day.

It's pronounced 'Leviosa'.

And for all her virtues as a writer, Mrs. Rawlings is a terrible gamer. Just look at Quidditch. She never gives a single thought to balance or sharing party spotlight equally.