Would you play in a spontaneous-only spellcaster game? FT: Should complexity vary...

[Mallus]

Since I prefer the joy of coming up with solutions on the spot, I'd really enjoy an all-spontaneous caster game. I find the pleasure in choosing/intuiting/lucking into the 'right' spell is far outweighed by the not-pleasure of thinking up a brilliant usage on a spell on the fly only to realize you don't have it memorized.

As a general rule in RPG's I like doing more than planning.

 

[RFisher]

Well, would you play? Would you be a spellcaster? Why or why not?

I would play. If a friend of mine wants to run a game, and I’m available, then I’m in. Rules are GM’s-choice in my book.

I might play a spellcaster. Probably depends most on what I’ve played recently than anything else.

Now, if he tried to sell me this as the new, improved D&D to make all others obsolete...then I might chafe. (But even then, it hardly matters what specific changes he’s made.)

 

[billd91]

I answered no opinion because i have no strong preference between caster or non-caster in such a campaign. I'd probably participate in some way, though. Part of the fun of playing a spontaneous caster is making the choices you made at spell-learning time work for you in all sorts of situations.

I know one DM who always makes his convention one-shot adventures with spontaneous- rather than prep-casting pregens. When you have a limited time for players to review and understand their PCs, spontaneous casting makes things easier.

 

[Dragonbait]

I've played both kinds of casters, and both divine and arcane. The percieved versatility of a wizard and cleric is severely muted when the GM does not allow characters to learn about where they are going and what they will be facing. Unfortunately, every campaign I have played in, that is usually the case. I've found that spontaneous casting with a feat like Elemental Substitution for an arcane blaster-type is far more reliable and useful.

 

[Victim]

Our group ended up doing this, at least as far as PCs went. Our spellcasters were a sorcerer and favored soul - the player started as a cleric, but switched because he didn't like prepping spells.

As someone mentioned above, there can be advantages to having spontaneous casters. If you do want a given spell that they know, you can have tons of it on demand. Whole party invisibilities, D-door hopping without typically sacrificing it as an anti-grapple, etc. You can really see the difference at level 12, when suddenly the favored soul has potentially 6 Heals. Sure, a cleric can also prep all Heals - but there are other good level 6 spells that you probably don't want to lose out on either. A favored soul will have exactly as many Heals as the situation requires and no more, so he's free to use the 2 spells he knows. Same thing for protective spells - especially if something gets dispeled.

And, I think that the versatility for wizards is slightly overstated. A wizard who acquires no new spells barely knows more than the sorcerer, and has to prep in advance. So a wizard needs to buy/find scrolls to have a fat spellbook. But if he can get scrolls, a sorcerer can too. And the sorcerer can often just use utility scrolls when needed to cover situations outside his known spell spells. So between scrolls and a decent initial spell selection - for the love of god, DON'T PICK A THEME, a theme -> redundancy in your spells; just pick good ones - a sorcerer can do a job covering the arcane caster role.

The roughest part in that game was that our Favored Soul didn't have Divination or Commune, so our strategic information gathering ability sucked. He actually had them at one point, and then switched out because he didn't like talking to the divine intermediary that answered his questions.

 

[Oni]

I played a sorcerer for a while in 3e and enjoyed it for the most part.

Playing a sorcerer you have a tendency to use the same spell repeatedly because it best fits the situation, while with a prep caster you would have to use a variety, I consider that a downside for the spontaneous caster as it can get a bit dull, but it does tend to alleviate itself as you get higher level. The flip side of this is that there is pretty much always something you can do, i.e. I once got immobilized by a hold person and kept throwing silent still magic missles when otherwise I would have just been sitting around twiddling my thumbs.

I missed having the greater number of skills that wizards enjoy due to their high intellect.

I like the built in motivation to adventure that wizards have due to wanting to add new spells to their spellbook, and I kind of wish sorcerers had something of that nature.

Overall I think I not having to deal with prepping spells improved my overall enjoyment of the game, but in 3e I still played wizards many times an a sorcerer only once because something about the inherent flavor of the wizard class appeals to me more.

 

[Fenes]

I've played and ran this game. It was fine, no issues.

We have much more spontaneous casters in all my games than preparation classes. We used spontaneous casting with spell slots in 2E already, and in 3E, no one ever played a wizard, and just one played a cleric - all the rest used spontaneous casters.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

I'd play in that game, and I think it'd be a fun game to play in. It'd certainly help sort out the problem whereby you're waiting for the casters to pick their spells for the day!

 

[Fenes]

As a side note, I did not vote on the poll since my option - "I'd play in that game, caster or non-caster" - was not possible.

 

[amethal]

I don't care what class restrictions are imposed. I'll play anything.