Why is the Vancian system still so popular?

[Lwaxy]

Why does a generalist wizard have to be best at everything? I say, if you want to be the magical jack of all trades, you have to accept being master of none. Sure, the generalist gets a few illusions; but he's quickly left in the dust by the Illusionist.

Definitely. I've always paid attention to this. It makes schools like abjuration and illusion really fun to play.

 

[Tallifer]

Because players who like non-4e Wizards like options. They like the ability to have one set of abilities today and a different set tomorrow, if needed.

Rituals are even more flexible than Vancian spells. You can cast as many different rituals as you want in a day provided they are cheap enough in residuum.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Well I am coming into this late but I'll just throw my 2CP in to answer the OP. I've played DnD from BECMI to 4E (and was a huge 4E pro when it was announced/first released).

Like many things which may well have mechanical or story 'better ways', DnD style Vancian casting makes it DnD. Without that as an option it loses a part of DnD feel. It is not what makes DnD but it is another part that contributes towards the feel of DnD. Clerics and Wizards/Magic Users should use DnD Vancian casting. It is so easy to make other classes that use spell points or AEDU style casting but to give that DnD feel, Vancian is required for those classes as a minimum.

 

[Leatherhead]

Because it's easier to use than practically every other limited resource spell system, and quite a few of the "limitless" resource spell systems.

It also has the advantage of having a low system mastery floor: If you somehow manage to pick all the wrong spells (like fireballs while fighting red dragons) you are only penalized for an in-game day instead of a level (which in some games, can be months IRL), or even worse, the rest of your characters life.

 

[dkyle]

We are talking about D&D, in the end a good game needs a good DM to run it, if you want to play a game that got rules for every thing including how the DM should act than look no further than WotC advanture board games...

I do not want to play a game that has rules for everything including how the DM should act. That would be impossible in any game with the flexibility and open-endedness of RPGs.

What I want is a game that the DM doesn't have to fix. The game should be balanced, by its rules. The DM should certainly be free to deviate from those rules, and a big part of the art of good DMing is knowing when to break the rules.

IMHO, what the game need is to teach the DMs to manage those risks, how to build advantures that reward active exploring instead of turteling every 15 minutes, one of the ways to do just that IMO is to build the advanture with a broader scoop in mind so that each combat won't be a grindfest but part of an whole that slowly tax the party resources, couple that with repercussion for not pushing forward.

You're essentially arguing that the rules don't matter, because the DM is there and can fix them.

3.X would be balanced if only DMs learned how to manage the risks of spellcasting. If only every adventure included an anti-magic field, or an angry god that punishes those who abuse magic, then 3.X would be a perfectly balanced game! Heck, just let casters cast any spells they want, as many times as they want, and it's balanced because the DM is there to fix it!

If the DM has to constantly fix or work around a rule, then it is a bad rule. Bad enough to break the game? Depends. I don't think overnight rests break 4E; they just might break 3.X.

For example, "you come back the next day to find that the kobolds rigged the entrance to collapse when big folks such as yourself walk the floor" or "just when the moon dip into the horizons you feel piercing cold sealing into your bones, you wake up in a start to find that three wraiths have risen through your tents from the crypt bellow"

Stuff like this could be part of the rules. A Fate-point-style system, where the DM gets points, along with the players, would help balance overnight rests.

My point is, what's wrong with encouraging the DMs to build more thought about advantures?

Nothing. The problem is forcing them to warp their adventure design to fix the game balance.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I really wonder how much of the "Vancian" love is from the Vancian system and how much is from the power and complexity of the individual spells, which is NOT related to being Vancian.

Certainly many people love Vancian in and of itself, but I'd be curious to see how they'd react to a Vancian caster using 4E's assumptions, or a 3E caster with spells balanced to be equal to a 3E fighter's output potential.

Yeah, I suspect that if 5e's Vancian system was essentially 4e's power list(minus all the encounters and at-wills) for casters and you got 3 daily slots that you could fill with any of the 6 dailies you started with in your spellbook, that a lot of people wouldn't like it.

I suspect people would be complaining that it didn't offer true choice or that it didn't resemble the Vancian system they remember. I suspect that the Vancian system isn't what people like, it's overpowered spells.

 

[Incenjucar]

Yeah, I suspect that if 5e's Vancian system was essentially 4e's power list(minus all the encounters and at-wills) for casters and you got 3 daily slots that you could fill with any of the 6 dailies you started with in your spellbook, that a lot of people wouldn't like it.

I suspect people would be complaining that it didn't offer true choice or that it didn't resemble the Vancian system they remember. I suspect that the Vancian system isn't what people like, it's overpowered spells.

Well, it's not strictly "power" with some spells so much as it's the open-ended nature of them.

It's like how, in 2E, I managed to talk my DM into giving me a Pick of Earth Parting.

I then collapsed the tower adventure he wrote for me, killing everything inside without a single encounter.

 

[paladinm]

Why can't we combine the Wizard and Sorcerer and have one primary arcane caster class? The Mage can prepare as many spells as s/he currently can; but once prepared, s/he can cast a spell as many times as s/he wishes until s/he runs out of spell slots. S/he can also use a higher spell slot to cast a lower level spell. That way, if the mage wants to be a magic missile battery, that's up to the mage. The party might regret it when they need that Web spell, but that's resource management for you.

 

[Incenjucar]

Ehh. A looot of people are tired of the wizard being the one true caster for D&D. It was horrible enough seeing them just pile on the wizard options in 4E.

 

[Blackwarder]

Ehh. A looot of people are tired of the wizard being the one true caster for D&D. It was horrible enough seeing them just pile on the wizard options in 4E.

Woot? are we looting people now? I don't understand what's your point...

Warder