Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lutecius" data-source="post: 4722835" data-attributes="member: 60332">from <a href="http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=906391" target="_blank"> Mike Mearls' gleemax blog </a>:"BTW, who knew that so many people disliked Vancian spellcasting? The entire audience in yesterday's seminar cheered and clapped when we told them it was (mostly) gone."This is one of the first things I read about 4e and it did sound promising.Ironically, the "vancian action" we got instead is what put me off 4e. There were a few things i liked, others I didn't, but that was the deal breaker.Resting isn't the problem, though (I haven't played enough 4e to find that out.) For me it's a simulation issue. I just can't get past not being able to perform a manoeuvre more than once per day (or encounter) and more generally, martial action being managed like ammo in separate slots.I've read all sorts of justifications in other threads (fatigue, "narrative control", "cinematic action"…) but none of them makes sense to me.Fire-and-forget magic was bad enough, but at least 3e spellcasting had a few variants.So now the worst aspects of vancian spellcasting have contaminated every class and are pretty much hardwired into the game but hey, wizards don't have to use crossbows anymore <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />!yay.On a side note, the blog i linked to is an interesting read. Funny to look back on Mearls' 2007 comments knowing what he really meant and how things turned out.</blockquote>

Verification