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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jsaving" data-source="post: 5882501" data-attributes="member: 16726">Our gaming group split in two primarily over the issue of Vancian casting versus the 4e power system.  Each side felt it fairly evaluated the pros and cons of the two systems, and I think for the most part they did.  While some in the 4e group accuse the other of "grognard nostalgia" and really believe 4e is so objectively superior to what came before that nothing else can explain why anyone would like Vancian magic, I think it's important to give both sides the benefit of the doubt here.A key difference comes down to which system is more flexible.  A lot of people in my 3e/Pathfinder group like to spend time away from the gaming table optimizing their characters for the next session.  Reacting to what they've seen on the adventure so far and what threats they believe are around the corner, they like being able to dramatically change their memorized spells to solve the "puzzle" with which their characters are currently confronted.  There may not be a great deal of flexibility within a battle, but with proper preparation that kind of flexibility isn't needed anyway(they would say).On the other hand, a fair number of people in my 4e group just want to dive in and start playing.  To them, pre-commiting your spell slots the way Vancian magic compels you to makes little sense.  What's important is to be able to cycle between, say, fireball and cone of cold as you see fit during the battle rather than having to spend time outside the gaming table guessing which one you might need.  There may not be a great deal of flexibility regarding the powers you bring to the table on any given day, but with proper battlefield tactics that kind of flexibility isn't especially important anyway (they would say).I think there's something to be learned from both groups, personally.  And I hope the 5e team will feel the same way.</blockquote>

Verification