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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5884157" data-attributes="member: 996">It's impossible to look into the mind of a proponent of the old vancian system and see what they're thinking.  You might speculate that they simply want the nostalgia of the system they learned when they started gaming, or that they are drawn to the radical class imbalance that let their casters lord it over lesser beings, or that they are just big fans of the Dying Earth (a classic of science-fiction, afterall).  But that would just be speculation, and might well be found insulting, at that.  You could also try to rationalize it.In the AD&D DMG, I think it is, EGG briefly discusses the choice of the 'relatively short spoken spell' inspired by Vance's work.  The alternatives were complex spells of immense power taking long periods of time to complete and requiring substantial material outlays (rituals, really) or spells of minor power that could be used without limitation or the 'Vancian' alternative of relatively easy-to-cast spells of substantial power that could be used only once each.  Given those choices, 'vancian' looks pretty good.  It allows casters to participate in combat, do something dramatic and magical (because spells are powerful), but not overwhelm the sense of magic by doing it every round (because spells are few and must be conserved).That worked to some degree at low levels, but as the game expanded into much higher levels, the sheer number of spells casters got made the fire-and-forget limitation all but meaningless.The modern approach is still partially 'vancian' in that it uses daily spells that can be cast only once and that are easy to cast and quite potent.  But, it also adds 1/encounter and at-will spells of lesser potency.  So it's a very good system for keeping the caster playable, and thus his player involved and entertained, at all levels and in both very short and very long 'days.'  Now, you might think the inclusion of at-wills would 'cheapen' magic and make it seem less magical, but, as you observe, the fans of vancian magic are fine with their magic-users getting more magic, even if it is lower-power at-will magic.  Where 4e fails the fans of vancian magic is in it's use of the same system for more than just spells.  Specifically, martial characters, like fighters, who also get dramatic daily exploits, as well as 1/encounter and at-will exploits.  If martial characters aren't distinctly inferior to magic-wielding ones, the sense of magic being special and powerful - thus 'magical' is lost.  While 'vanician' is something of a rallying cry, I'm sure many would be just as happy with AEDU, if it were a caster-exclusive system (and if rituals were a lot cheaper and faster).</blockquote>

Verification