What 4E fans want out of the 5E Wizard.

What is it that 4E fans want from the 5E Wizard or a class named a different name With an AEDU spell progression that feels like the 4E Wizard?

What I want is a bookish feeling controller type caster that can swap out spells and get At-Will, Encounter, and Daily spells. I want a caster that can be versatile when the situation calls for it. I want them to be able to stand in for another class, but not replace them. I want slight durability, but not the ability to blast enemies, or wade into combat...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I want a caster that can be versatile when the situation calls for it. I want them to be able to stand in for another class, but not replace them.

A jack-of-all-casters?  That's actually really interesting.  Everyone else is focused on doing their own thing, but the wizard is the one who actually understands what's going on and how it's all connected.



The metagame is not the game.

What I want is an AE mechanic. Daily spells could be the sole domain of Vancian casters. Encounter powers would be scaled down Daily spells serving as the encounter spells. Utility spells would be scrapped, as a separate spell group, and non-combat Utility spells take up Encounter spell slots. Some, which take an hour or so to resolve (such as comprehend languages) can be encounter spells, like how combat spells are, and because of their long durration, they could not be quickly replaced with a combat spell (the full durration of the spell would have to be up). Spells like Knock, however, have a very short duration, essentially the round used to cast it, so they would take up the slot for the rest of the day, essentially "burning out" that slot, the same way vancian casters do, or else they could be cast as rituals. Spells could be swapped or filled into empty, but not "burnt out" spell slots, during a short rest.

I don't want them to be very durable, but I want the core rules to make sure that they don't die easily, and that they can heal fairly easily. They need to be squishy, but not really death prone.

I don't think the bookish-feel should be baked into the class. After all, that's what the Backgrounds are for.

If they have to have a separate spell list, I'd lean on heavy control, and AoE powers. Almost no purely damage powers.

I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.

What about some Weak(ish) Vancian spells that have the Encounter characteristic so they can be memorised like normal each day but can be refreshed and cast again after a short rest. That way it's the best of both worlds.
You've already got At-Wills in the system and most of the spells are Dailys and Utilities.
What about some Weak(ish) Vancian spells that have the Encounter characteristic so they can be memorised like normal each day but can be refreshed and cast again after a short rest. That way it's the best of both worlds.
You've already got At-Wills in the system and most of the spells are Dailys and Utilities.

That could work (assuming I understand you correctly), assuming there are enough Encounter and Daily spells to suit different playstyles. For example, I should be able to use illusion spells if I use daily spells or Encounter spells. Same with other sorts of spells. Another problem I can potentially see, however, is that spell-slots can get out of control. Encounter-based wizards need much fewer spell-slots, or else their spells begin to become almost like at-will spells. However Vancian wizards need much more spells, or else they run into that standard problem of running out of spells after one fight. I think someone stated 9 spells/day would do it, however, to keep them balanced. Maybe Encounter spells take more slots than Daily spells. However if we were to do that, I'd let them swap out those spells on a limited basis.

I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.

My opinion probably differs from many 4e fans but I would like purely encounter based Vancian magic for wizards. I way wizards to have to study spells quickly then fire and forget them in a way that actually makes sense instead of being arbitrarily limited by days. Then I want at-will 4e style non attack cantrips. Maybe the wizard will have the ability to memorize 5 spells at once only but risks running out in any given fight and he must actually choose between buffs (flight, invisibility, Mage armor, etc) and attacks. I would be fine if this wizard could learn as many spells rituals as they can acquire. The wizard will be a real utility caster but their power would be significantly toned down.
I would also like to see a primarily encounter-based caster. However, I'd prefer to leave the possibility of having a couple of spell slots open for Daily use. I'm talking very few here, even as low as ONE. Basically, this Daily spell just acts as a floating reserve for emergencies.
What is it that 4E fans want from the 5E Wizard or a class named a different name With an AEDU spell progression that feels like the 4E Wizard?

All I want from any class is that it be balanced and playable with all others.  The playtest characters fail that test completely.  Heck, so do some Essentials classes.

AEDU was nothing special.  That all classes used AEDU was the innovation. 

5e could improve upon 4e - or at least, avoid being substantially worse than 4e - if it just picked /something/ and stuck with it.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

Well, certainly, they COULD have allowed interchangeable resource management subsystems. Instead they went with the 'class equals subsystem' route once again.

This will surely end well. /sarcasm
Well, certainly, they COULD have allowed interchangeable resource management subsystems. Instead they went with the 'class equals subsystem' route once again.

True.  Even having several system in different modules, so you could make the game daily-based or encounter-based or something else - so long as there was resource parity and balance among the classes - could have worked, too, while theoretically giving everyone what they wanted (just not at exactly the same time).  



 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

What do I, as a 4e fan, want out of the DDN wizard?

Parity between casters and non-casters.

The ability to always have something magical I can do (which the current at-wills do nicely).

To not be left out of non-magical combat (always having something magical to do is great, but it doesn't help if your concept is a fire mage and you run into creatures with fire resistance).

Ritual Magic.  All utility spells, except for stuff like feather fall that can be cast as a reaction to something hazardous, should really be rituals IMO, so I want them to be castable as rituals (that way people can still prep them in slots if they want to, but no one is forced to).

As a side note, ritual magic needs to be able to accommodate multiple casters cooperating on the same spell, and blood sacrifices.  They can put it in a module if they want, reducing the cost or the difficulty of casting the ritual, but these things are the very embodiment of ritual behavior and any system that doesn't leave room to accommodate them are doing themselves a disservice.

Implements would also be a cool carryover, as orbs, wands, etc, are classical wizard fare.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Ritual Magic.  All utility spells, except for stuff like feather fall that can be cast as a reaction to something hazardous, should really be rituals IMO, so I want them to be castable as rituals (that way people can still prep them in slots if they want to, but no one is forced to).



Acually, I'd want even MORE spells as rituals, even beyond utility magic. That way, if magic becomes dominant once more, worse comes to worse spellcasters would no longer have the monopoly to it.

The way I see this working is this.

A 10th Level 4E mage has 2 At-Wills/3 Encounter/3 Dailys/3 Utility spells. The utility spells can be either a Daily Utility or an Encounter Utility. These are levels as appropriate (1st Level At-Wills/ 1 Encounter/1 Daily etc.

A 10th Level Next mage could have:-
4x  Zero Level At Wills or Encounters
4x  1st Level ; Some could be Daily castings, other Encounter
4x  2nd Level; Some could be cast Daily, other Encounter cast
3x  3rd Level; Some could be cast Daily, other Encounter cast
3x  4th Level; All Daily Casting.
2x 5th Level; All Daily Casting.

In effect, no different from the 4E has different levels of Daily and Encounter spells, the Next spells could be either a Daily Cast or Encounter and the mage must memorise Daily spells that are either Daily or Encounter. Fireball is a spell that is powerful so I see that as a Daily cast spell, the spell Heroism(from 3E) could be an Encounter spell.
The way I see this working is this.

A 10th Level 4E mage has 2 At-Wills/3 Encounter/3 Dailys/3 Utility spells. The utility spells can be either a Daily Utility or an Encounter Utility. These are levels as appropriate (1st Level At-Wills/ 1 Encounter/1 Daily etc.

A 10th Level Next mage could have:-
4x  Zero Level At Wills or Encounters
4x  1st Level ; Some could be Daily castings, other Encounter
4x  2nd Level; Some could be cast Daily, other Encounter cast
3x  3rd Level; Some could be cast Daily, other Encounter cast
3x  4th Level; All Daily Casting.
2x 5th Level; All Daily Casting.

In effect, no different from the 4E has different levels of Daily and Encounter spells, the Next spells could be either a Daily Cast or Encounter and the mage must memorise Daily spells that are either Daily or Encounter. Fireball is a spell that is powerful so I see that as a Daily cast spell, the spell Heroism(from 3E) could be an Encounter spell.



Fireball is weak. 4d6 is 14 average, exactly the same as the fighters average 14 from their basic attack. If they can do that once per encounter against X number of targets, then if its less than the number of targets than the fighter can attack, then the fighter is still better off.

I already posted somewhere an easy way to convert any spell into an encounter or even an at-will by simply adding saving throws, allowing no effect on spells that already have saves, and lowering the damage dice size and number of dice.

The problem is that you would have to convert 2-3 spell slots per spell level into encounter spells to even out the parity. You would also have to know how many encounters the game assumes per day to really balance it.

They really just need to find an alternative to the daily mechanic. In the game I'm designing (linked in my signature) you start out each encounter with a number of 'action' points. You can spend them to use powers/spells that have an action point cost, or you can save up to your level in action points for later encounters. This way you can have any number of encounters and it won't matter, you won't run out of 'dailies'...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
They really just need to find an alternative to the daily mechanic.

Agreed. I'd rather they include an option for a non-extended rest refresh of spells. 2 hours of light activity (e.g.: travel in mild weather) should restore roughly 10-15% of your spellcasting potential, up to a max of 50%. Most casting styles could just use a formula. This could be done with special abilities as well (instead of X/day).

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
Ritual Magic.  All utility spells, except for stuff like feather fall that can be cast as a reaction to something hazardous, should really be rituals IMO, so I want them to be castable as rituals (that way people can still prep them in slots if they want to, but no one is forced to).



Acually, I'd want even MORE spells as rituals, even beyond utility magic. That way, if magic becomes dominant once more, worse comes to worse spellcasters would no longer have the monopoly to it.


Utility spells really are the only ones that make sense as rituals.  Ritual casting is entirely impractical in combat.  That means that combat spell rituals would have to somehow be held after being cast.  And if you can do that with ritual effects, then you'll need to establish a limit on the number of them you can hold.  At this point, every ritual caster basically becomes a vancian caster who hold ritual effects instead of prepping spell slots.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I want magic users to be relatively balanced against non magic users, in combat and out of combat. So, if class gives you combat skills, and background gives you out of combat skills, the being a magic user who can cast magic missile and fly is both a background and a class. So, no getting a background if you're a caster, and backgrounds need to be balanced against "can cast fly, tree shape, etc".
Similarly, "skill monkey" isn't a class - its a background.
I also want a game where when planning the attack on the castle, *everyone* has character related skills that can help.
I want magic users to be relatively balanced against non magic users, in combat and out of combat.



This.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I'd like all your needs to be met but not exclusively.  I hope alternate options for all of us are available.



My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

I may not be speaking for every 4E fan in the world, but here's my answer to the original question:

As a player, I would like to be able to build the character I want, within the confines of the world as created by the DM, regardless of complexity or simplicity, without finding out later on that my character's usefulness or fun can and would be either diminished or nullified completely by a mechanically superior class choice (even if the player who chose that class was building his character out of fun, and zero optimization taken into consideration).  I want it so that creating a pure daily Wizard with nothing else to do after all dailies have been expended is my choice, and not because someone arbitrarily decided that all Wizards *must* have daily spells.

As a DM, I would like to be able to develop a campaign as I see fit, without having to create circumstantial circumvention using story as padding.  If there is an adamantium castle in the astral plains, I want it to be there because it is the castle of Moradin, not because I secretly want to block any attempts for players to game the system and keep them on railroads.  If there is a save-or-die spell, I want it to be there because it is part of the story, and the consequences for its existence to be my responsibility... not because the developers thought it would be a cool spell to implement, and then I have to either houserule it away or create spell-resistant or death-spell-immune creatures to avoid player abuse.

And sadly, I'm not seeing that in D&D Next.  At least, not in this playtest. 
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
Implements are in based on the playtest wand of binding.

Perhaps they will not function exactly as 4e but they are there.

So far the classes seem very well balanced as a group.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

Implements are in based on the playtest wand of binding. Perhaps they will not function exactly as 4e but they are there. So far the classes seem very well balanced as a group.


I don't care if they use implements, scrolls, books, or what not.  I want to be able to play my wizard the way *I* envisioned him to be, without having to worry about "balance". I want to be able to min-max like absolutely crazy (with GM consent of course) and the game still won't put me so far ahead of the average person's build.

So regardless if I use wands, staffs/staves, orbs, holy symbols, spell components, etc., my character concept would still work, even when standing next to the guy who is using a simpler class chassis for his character.

It's not about representing 4E as close to 4E as possible.  It's about equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.

Even if D&D Next has none of the mechanics of 4E as presented in 4E -- or any edition for that matter, like how they removed a relatively iconic Fortitude/Reflex/Will save/defense in favor of ability-based saving throws -- as long as the spirit of 4E is there, I'll be fine.

So if we have Mr. Vancian Wizard alongside Mr. Simple Fighter,  nobody will complain because the guy playing Vancian Wizard *chose* to be Vancian, the guy playing Simple Fighter *chose* to be Simple, and in spite of their choices, one cannot negate the other's usefulness in a party, regardless if they are in or out of a combat situation. 
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
I want to be able to, using the rules as written, play the Wizard archetype(bookish int-based arcanist) without having to use mechanics I detest(vancian magic).
...whatever
I want to be able to, using the rules as written, play the Wizard archetype(bookish int-based arcanist) without having to use mechanics I detest(vancian magic).



exactly...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
But it is hardly the vancian casting that you claim it is.

You have rituals and at wills.

The only thing you don't have is an encounter power.

Why are encounter powers so necessary to your vision of non vancian?

It's exactly the same as 4e otherwise.

You have an ADU system instead of AEDU or the traditional vancian D.

It is actually far closer to 4e style casting than it is to any previous style.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

But it is hardly the vancian casting that you claim it is. You have rituals and at wills. The only thing you don't have is an encounter power. Why are encounter powers so necessary to your vision of non vancian? It's exactly the same as 4e otherwise. You have an ADU system instead of AEDU or the traditional vancian D. It is actually far closer to 4e style casting than it is to any previous style.


While that's true, players should have a choice of resource management systems.  There's no good reason why we shouldn't be able to choose the wizard class, but with spell-points instead of spell slots, or skill-check to cast instead of slots, etc.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

But it is hardly the vancian casting that you claim it is. You have rituals and at wills. The only thing you don't have is an encounter power. Why are encounter powers so necessary to your vision of non vancian? It's exactly the same as 4e otherwise. You have an ADU system instead of AEDU or the traditional vancian D. It is actually far closer to 4e style casting than it is to any previous style.

Encounter powers were actually the only thing I really wanted from 4e casters. I didn't really care for rituals, the way they were, and still are now. At wills are definitely an improvement, but I could have house-ruled that so easily (essentially take a crossbow, base its' attack bonus off int, and call it a wand with X charges equal to the ammo. Instead of buying ammo, you buy spell components to recharge it, for an equal price). Even daily powers, I didn't really like. Daily powers are just too swingy for my taste: you get a cool power, which upstages everyone else, then you spend the rest of the day being upstaged by everyone else. I'd rather have some resource that's more stable, even if it's less powerful. To me, 4e wizards weren't about AEDU, it was about a system which allowed wizards to have a greater impact in each encounter, which essentially comes down to Encounter powers.

I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.

But it is hardly the vancian casting that you claim it is. You have rituals and at wills. The only thing you don't have is an encounter power. Why are encounter powers so necessary to your vision of non vancian? It's exactly the same as 4e otherwise. You have an ADU system instead of AEDU or the traditional vancian D. It is actually far closer to 4e style casting than it is to any previous style.


While that's true, players should have a choice of resource management systems.  There's no good reason why we shouldn't be able to choose the wizard class, but with spell-points instead of spell slots, or skill-check to cast instead of slots, etc.



Exactly, other than a little extra work for the developers, there's not real reason not to do this...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Ok so it isn't a problem with vancian casting (since the playtest wizard is ADU). It is a problem of not having even more options.

This is completely different and while I can understand the desire for spell points or alternate mechanics I think you have now crossed out of the range of 4e fans wanting for 5e and into a realm of just wanting new options.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

I want to be able to, using the rules as written, play the Wizard archetype(bookish int-based arcanist) without having to use mechanics I detest(vancian magic).



exactly...


Seconded.  Going Vancian should be an option, not a requirement, to being a Wizard.

Show
Here's a suggestion: why not give the slot management of Vancian as an option, then at the same time balance the spells according to power?  I mean, you could have Vancian spellcasting as follows:

Class Level / Level 1 slots / Level 2 slots / Level 3 slots / Level 4 slots / Level 5 slots / Level 6 slots / Level 7 slots / Level 8 slots / Level 9 slots
1 / 3
2 / 4
3 / 3 / 1
4 / 2 / 2
5 / 1 / 3 / 1
6 / - / 3 / 2
7 / - / 2 / 2 / 1
8 / - / 1 / 2 / 2
9 / - / - / 2 / 2 / 1
10 / - / - / 2 / 2 / 2
11 / - / - / 1 / 2 / 2 / 1
12 / - / - / - / 2 / 2 / 2
13 / - / - / - / 1 / 2 / 2 / 1
14 / - / - / - / - / 2 / 2 / 2
15 / - / - / - / - / 2 / 2 / 2 / 1
16 / - / - / - / - / 1 / 2 / 2 / 2
17 / - / - / - / - / - / 2 / 2 / 2 / 1
18 / - / - / - / - / - / 1 / 2 / 2 / 2
19 / - / - / - / - / - / - / 1 / 2 / 2 / 2
20 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 2 / 3 / 2

Each spell slot can contain a spell that is of that level or lower.  Then, balance all spells so that the weakest are at-will, those slightly more powerful are rechargable, those substantially more powerful are encounter, then the most powerful are dailies (although note that spells aren't required to level up as they are placed in a higher level slot).

Mr. AEDU Wizard can choose two at-will, one encounter, and one daily spell, and replace them as he goes along.  Mr. Vancian can choose to get any spell he wishes, and swap them in and out of his spellbook as desired, with the simple explanation that at-will spells are easy to keep in memory and require virtually no prep-up, rechargable spells need some level of memorization but are quick to reuse once the key portions of the spell can be recalled, encounter spells are easy to memorize but easy to leave the mind, and daily spells take a very specific state of mind to retain in the mind.  So Mr. AEDU gets a more consistent, yet limited, spell repertoire, whereas Mr. Vancian can have a more varied spell list, yet in both cases the reusability of spells is system-balanced, so that neither AEDU Wizard nor Vancian Wizard are significantly ahead of one or the other.

Then you just have to make sure that Mr. Fighter's abilities (or lack thereof, if the player chooses) aren't surpassed or equaled by any other spell in the game.
Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
Ok so it isn't a problem with vancian casting (since the playtest wizard is ADU). It is a problem of not having even more options. This is completely different and while I can understand the desire for spell points or alternate mechanics I think you have now crossed out of the range of 4e fans wanting for 5e and into a realm of just wanting new options.

Who says that this can't be the same as what the thread was originally seeking? Just because I play 4e doesn't mean I want a 4e redux as 5e. I want some of the same design goals as 4e: relative parity between casters and non-casters, more stable power level, for wizards, and similar goals, with regards to the wizard. I like 4e, not because of the AEDU mechanic, per se, but because the designers focused on certain goals that lead up to the creation of the AEDU mechanic.

I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.

Ok so it isn't a problem with vancian casting (since the playtest wizard is ADU). It is a problem of not having even more options. This is completely different and while I can understand the desire for spell points or alternate mechanics I think you have now crossed out of the range of 4e fans wanting for 5e and into a realm of just wanting new options.


In a way, it's the same thing.  4e moved away from the traditional means of resource management.  This pleased some people while evoking cries of "it's not really D&D without Vancian" from others.  While I can't speak for all the fans of 4e, I can say that, after experiencing what I feel was a better way of managing resources, I don't want to be saddled with anything that I don't think is fun to use.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Ok so it isn't a problem with vancian casting (since the playtest wizard is ADU). It is a problem of not having even more options. This is completely different and while I can understand the desire for spell points or alternate mechanics I think you have now crossed out of the range of 4e fans wanting for 5e and into a realm of just wanting new options.

Who says that this can't be the same as what the thread was originally seeking? Just because I play 4e doesn't mean I want a 4e redux as 5e. I want some of the same design goals as 4e: relative parity between casters and non-casters, more stable power level, for wizards, and similar goals, with regards to the wizard. I like 4e, not because of the AEDU mechanic, per se, but because the designers focused on certain goals that lead up to the creation of the AEDU mechanic.



I liked it not specifically because of the AEDU, but because every battle the caster had something to do and didn't have to worry about running out of spells. They had interesting things to do in combat without having to worry about being a peasant for the rest of the day...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
And that's fine. I was responding to the particular comments of some other posters.

I feel that we are seeing that balance so far to a very large degree.

If you disagree I'd like to know where in particular you feel that the parity has failed.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

But it is hardly the vancian casting that you claim it is. You have rituals and at wills. The only thing you don't have is an encounter power. Why are encounter powers so necessary to your vision of non vancian? It's exactly the same as 4e otherwise. You have an ADU system instead of AEDU or the traditional vancian D. It is actually far closer to 4e style casting than it is to any previous style.



At will spam is boring, what I witnessed playing this game in regards to them was boring. At wills are merely less crappy than a crossbow or darts, not an end in themselves. It really is encounter powers combined with a stong de-emphasis on daily spells that is key, and I would describe the game as I witnessed it at a public playtest as resembling the Vancian magic I detest more than AEDU.

In addition, I find the flavor distasteful, specifically forgetting the spell after it is cast and having to memorize it more than once to cast it more than once.  I also dislike how cumbersome Vancian magic becomes at higher levels when you have dozens of spells in your book and can memorize 20+ of them.
...whatever
And that's fine. I was responding to the particular comments of some other posters. I feel that we are seeing that balance so far to a very large degree. If you disagree I'd like to know where in particular you feel that the parity has failed.



The parity fails when the caster uses all their spells up in the first few combats and is left with at-wills that are equivalent to cross bow bolts for the rest of the day...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
And that's fine. I was responding to the particular comments of some other posters. I feel that we are seeing that balance so far to a very large degree. If you disagree I'd like to know where in particular you feel that the parity has failed.

It's not so much that I disagree, as that I'm not exactly confident in the designers. We've only seen 3 levels so far. That leaves at least 17 levels where any slight disparity can be magnified. I want to see that casters are balaced with non-casters not only at levels 1-3, but at 4-20, or beyond.

I am currently raising funds to run for President in 2016. Too many administrations have overlooked the international menace, that is Carmen Sandiego. I shall devote any and all necessary military resources to bring her to justice.

Ok so it isn't a problem with vancian casting (since the playtest wizard is ADU). It is a problem of not having even more options. This is completely different and while I can understand the desire for spell points or alternate mechanics I think you have now crossed out of the range of 4e fans wanting for 5e and into a realm of just wanting new options.



I don't need more options so much as I need not to be forced into something I dislike in order to play a classic D&D class. 
...whatever


Please remember to keep your comments positive, productive, and on topic. Remember we are trying to create a
mutually beneficial and productive community for everyone to take part in. At the end of the day we are all in this thing together,
and if we don't work together we will never get anywhere!


If you have any questions or would like to read the CoC you can find it here:


company.wizards.com/conduct


Remember, Keep it clean, Keep it nice, and of course Keep it fun!


Thank you for your understanding!

And that's fine. I was responding to the particular comments of some other posters. I feel that we are seeing that balance so far to a very large degree. If you disagree I'd like to know where in particular you feel that the parity has failed.



That Wizards get the Daily spells they get while Fighters are stuck with nothing more than at-will spam(which wizards also get)and second rate stuff like surges, combined with wizard spells again being encounter smashing in and out of combat while Fighters dont get "I win" buttons of their own is plenty failure enough.
...whatever
When fighting the orcs the wizard used 2 dailies and the fighter still dropped more enemies and finished off more stragglers than the wizard.

It's a difference that is mostly your preference on playstyle it seems than any true disparity in what was presented.

That's fine I have strong opinions on other subjects as well and a stance here that is based on my play experience.

What I'm questioning is why encounter powers are so important to you. It is basically an opener like the double pawn move in chess. It amounts to each side getting a few more turns right off the bat each encounter. Now that encounters aren't as long running they really aren't necessary.

5e just took that opening round of everyone using an encounter power out by making combat last fewer rounds.

Edition wars kill players,Dungeons and Dragons needs every player it can get.

Sign In to post comments