What inspired the D&D magic rules and do you like it?

[pdkoning]

YMMV, I respectfully disagree on the easy part. I have yet to see a true newbie look anything but scared when they see how think the PHB is. DnD has always be a hobbist game. You have to be in the hobby of game collecting (wargames, CCGs, whatever) to make an easy jump to RPGs, DnD style.

Manage? I'm getting back into DnD and looking at this whole list of spells of an 6th level wizard NPC that I have to memorize, bleh. I've gotten used to a smaller number of effects that I can utilize more often or being able to construct something on the fly and figure out its price later.

I have to agree on Balance, simply because if a spell is too weak or two strong, you simply move it up or down a level until seem just right and you have 9 guesses to do it in.

Of couse all of this is my subjective opnion and acentdotal. ...

So you think that the current magic system is difficult?

I must admit that I did not understand the magic system the first few times I played D&D. But some of the guys I played with already 'knew' how it worked, so after a few instructions I understood. But when nobody knows the rules it might indeed be quite difficult to understand. I however wonder if a non-gamer would understand a spell-point or skill-based magic system more easy.

 

[apoptosis]

There are certain things i like about the vancian system. I actually like vances flavor (The way he wrote memorizing spells was interesting).....

But vancian magic allows wizards to have powerful spells but not dominate play. The more u use a spellpoint system, either the caster has to have spells that are inherently less powerful or be able to cast much fewer of them, otherwise the caster starts becomine too powerful (in the case of the sorcerer it is having fewer choices of spells).

 

[Psion]

I like the spell slot system. I find spell point systems over-rated. I tried spell point systems and tinkered with my own, and eventually came to the conclusion that there is a certain elegance and charm in the easier accounting associated with the "X from list A, Y from B" approach of the spell slot system.

 

[pogre]

I played a campaign with the Grim Tales magic rules in a fantasy setting. It did make for a rewarding gritty game for me. My players did not really enjoy it. They like the Vancian system of lots of magic. So back to the core spell system we went.

Spell slots do not bother me. Forgive an old grognard's comparison, but it adds excitement like pre-plotted movement in a ship or airplane game. In other words, it forces fun and interesting decisions about predicting what lies ahead.

 

[sfedi]

Oh, brief aside about spell points: I find they work well at low levels, but they break down around the middle levels. Just my experience.

Did you play Rolemaster?
I've found it works well in that system.

 

[sfedi]

And do you like it the way it is? or would you like a system with spell points or some other system?

No, I don't like it.
although it has some merits, which should be preserved.
Like a limit to the number of devastating effects a Wizard can do.

 

[Victim]

I like the Vancian magic system. It's kind of a shame that more of the coolness of Turjan (I'm not so fond of the Sandeskin based Rhialto magic) level magic isn't captured in DnD. The system is gameable since spellcasters get the powers but also have restrictions. Also, Proper Name Spells can lead to plot hooks about their (re)discovery.

Those who disagree shall be rent with the 'Spray.

 

[pdkoning]

I like the Vancian magic system. It's kind of a shame that more of the coolness of Turjan (I'm not so fond of the Sandeskin based Rhialto magic) level magic isn't captured in DnD. The system is gameable since spellcasters get the powers but also have restrictions. Also, Proper Name Spells can lead to plot hooks about their (re)discovery.

Those who disagree shall be rent with the 'Spray.

Regarding the Proper Name Spells I think every campaign setting that does use the D&D magic system should include 'new names' for spells like Bigbys.... or Mordekainens... I mean, there was no Bigby or Mordekainen in Eberron. So renaming them to something linked to Eberron is a good idea in my opinion.

 

[Gez]

On the other, I find it sad that Sandestins haven't been copied, too, like the Excellent Prismatic Spray and the Ioun Stones. They're much fun.

And the lack of growing creatures in vats as the passtime of choice for wizards is also disappointing.

 

[Verequus]

I like my spells to be a different mechanic. I was thinking about a "building block"-like system once. A spell would consist of several components, a little like the spell seeds in epic magic. A fireball would be evocation and fire (maybe evo3/fire 2 or something like that). There would be major and minor elements, and you'd get X elements per spellcaster level. So if you have evo 6, fire 6, cold 6, you could use them to cast fireball, cone of cold, delayed blast fireball, agannazar's, and so on. I haven't done much about that system, though.

You are more or less describing "Elements of Magic Revised". You learn spell lists, which consist of a noun and a verb, like "Evoke Fire" or "Summon Outsider". The actual spells are the combination of enhancements, which you gain access through the known spell lists. One spell list is "General", where enhancements like bigger reange, longer duration, etc. are taken form. So a Fireball could be something like "Evoke Fire 6/Gen 2" or "Evoke Fire 3/Gen 5", where the first spell is more a bolt targeted on one creature or object, doing 7d6 fire damage, and the second one actually creates a 30-ft. circle, where all take 4d6 fire damage.

Spells used in battles are usually precreated with their effects, because on-the-fly spells take two rounds to cast them. Oh, before I forget it, EoMR is a spell-point system, but supports prepared spells like the core rules, because one can't create all spells and combinations alone due to the limited number of known spell lists. I like it also, that one can cast from books directly - no need for scrolls anymore.