D&D 4E Why Vancian spellcasting is good for the game (and should mostly be in 4e)

[Rechan]

well the idea that they will have stuff that they can do in terms o per encounter and per day.

You mean like a Barbarian Rage? That's x/day, nonmagical, and that rage usually lasts the entire encounter.

Or Stunning Fist? A feat that a fighter can take as a bonus feat if he meets the ability/BAB requirements, that he can only use x number of times per day

 

[Rechan]

I don't like that crappy style of magic system. I prefer spell points like they were in second edition.

3.5 Psionics. It literally is just a spell-point magic system.

 

[Horacio]

3.5 Psionics. It literally is just a spell-point magic system.

And it works really well...

 

[shdwrnr]

When you describe it like that, it sounds almost exactly like the spellcasting system created for Dungeons and Dragons Online... a part of me has been dreading that game the second I heard about 4e and that dread has just gotten stronger.

 

[Gloombunny]

Action points, per encounter and at will abilities aren't Vancian though.

Have you ever actually read any of Vance's work?

Though I don't know why I'm bringing that up. When people start calling D&D wizards "Vancian" the conversation has already become almost completely detached from anything Vance ever wrote.

 

[Alt Boy!]

A lot of skills and powers ideas were incorporated almost directly into 3rd edition. Like touch attacks.

3rd Edition killed S&P and BXCMI and took their stuff.

4th Edition has apparently a higher search score and kinda pulled out some more stuff from BXCMI, like Fighter's Powers from Weapon Mastery, and the expanded levels.

(This should be under Charwoman Gene...)

 

[Rechan]

Have you ever actually read any of Vance's work?

Though I don't know why I'm bringing that up. When people start calling D&D wizards "Vancian" the conversation has already become almost completely detached from anything Vance ever wrote.

D&D's magic system is almost completely detatched from anything Vance ever wrote. Magic in D&D is like sneezing.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I like "spell slot" systems (for those who don't like the term "Vancian" which should really mean memorization + fire & forget rather than spell slots). They force some resource management of big ticket spells, and they don't allow the caster to "go nova" like some point-based systems do.

There is the downside of losing functionality once all spell slots are expended. Wizards with crossbows have never bothered me, but substituting a few "at will" arcane abilities is a pretty good solution.

 

[Moggthegob]

I agree with Olgar.I didnt have a problem with Reserve feats because while useful,they werent the most powerful thing you could take. It also added a whole new level of resource management,(do i let the fire ball go or do i keep it in reserve to be continue to have a little magic?) But it shouldnt just be a part of the class. it should take some kind of special study.

As for stunning fist that is drawing upon chi, rage drawing upon your pent up agression. Those make sense. The arbitrary ones do not(ie maneuvers).

 

[Merlion]

I agree with Olgar.I didnt have a problem with Reserve feats because while useful,they werent the most powerful thing you could take. It also added a whole new level of resource management,(do i let the fire ball go or do i keep it in reserve to be continue to have a little magic?) But it shouldnt just be a part of the class. it should take some kind of special study.

Why? Isnt the years spent in Wizard training enough?

This is exactly the kind of thing I want in a magic system....it gives Mages the ability to manipulate their magical resources in more than one way. Rather than "I fill this 3rd level slot with Fireball, and all I can do with it is cast Fireball."

As for stunning fist that is drawing upon chi, rage drawing upon your pent up agression. Those make sense. The arbitrary ones do not(ie maneuvers).

Well, we dont really know that since we havent seen any of them.