Vancian Magic is DND -- It Does Not Cause the 5 Minute Work Day, the DM Does...

155 posts / 0 new
Last post
I've been reading a lot of angst against Vancian style magic for wizards and how it forces players to nova and then rest after a 5 minute work day, it is a backwards step, that is poor game design for there to be resources that aren't renewable after each encounter, etc.

I disagree.

First, Vancian magic has been the core differentiator for the wizard class in ODD, Basic DND, ADD, 2d Ed DND, 3rd Ed DND and 3.5 ed DND.  It was only banished in 4th ed DND when they decided to try a different class balancing mechanism. It may have been balanced, but the class lost its feel and its differentiation. Which is why I welcome it back it Fifth Ed as do my players.

Second, Vancian magic is balanced against other classes as long as the DM wants it to be.  Let me explain, this is not an attack on how people DM or parties who play differently.  If you want one or two encounters per day and for the wizard to use all his spells and then rest each day after each, and you are having fun, then you are playing the way your group wants to. 

However, intrinsic in the design of the Vancian wizard is the idea that the wizard has to make choices and each choice has a consequence.  Removing the consequences also gives the wizard more power than the class is designed to have.  If the DM allows 5 minute work days, if the adventure does not require the players to act, if the world does not continue forward each time the party chooses to lose 24 hours so the wizard can top off, then the class is able to function in a way it is not really intended to.

This is not railroading, it's narrative tension and reflects a living world rather than a static world.  When Gandalf and the Fellowship went into Moria, they weren't able to rest after each encounter with orcs.  When they tried, they were attacked, because Moria was the orcs' home and they reacted to the Fellowship. They could not just retreat out of the mines and rest, either, because in the adventure the way back had been blocked by a creature they encountered.  The story arc and narrative tension required the Felowship to move forward with a time limit and a consequence for delay. The wizard had to be strategic about when and how to use spells.

DND adventures are not a string of isolated encounters.  They are driven by a narrative purpose.  Rarely does the world stay so static that a party can go into three rooms, leave, rest for 24 hours, and come back to find that everything just stopped while they were gone: the same bodies laying on the floor, the same orcs waiting patiently in the next room, enemy leaders unaware and taking no steps, etc. Even when you can rest outside and away, it can be dangerous with random encounters, and it costs resources, resources besides spells. Every decision a party makes can have big or small consequences -- for every action there is a reaction -- the world reacts to what the party does. This is the DM's job. She makes the adventures, and part of making the adventure is ensuring the party has to use resources and make decisions with consequences.

The wizard is a strategic character, who has to make choices on what spells to prepare before knowing the encounters, and then when to use them.  Pick the wrong spells, and you may be sub-optimal for a particular encounter or even the whole day (better use that high intelligence and pick skills that help you learn how to identify and get ready for what may be ahead). Use it too soon, and you may not be strong enough.  Use it too late, and you may end up letting other party members use up too many resources.  This balance is what differentiates the wizard from the other classes.  Their tactical power without their spells is weak (although at will spells help them keep their magical character), but they can turn the tide of a battle when they do use one of their precious spells.  So when to use their spells is a critical decision with consequences (as long as the adventure has consequences built in).

Fighters are tactical; they do less damage than a mage using a high damage spell, but their hardiness and reliable attacks let them use their abilities most every encounter.  Same thing with the rogue. In the long run, their resource is hit points.

Clerics are operational (with a role that overlaps the strategic and the tactical); they have tactical resources -- armor, melee combat, etc. -- but they also have resources that require choices like the wizard -- heal now or heal later, don't heal and use spells instead to cause damage or for utility.  

Wizards are too powerful if they can always choose to enjoy a five minute work day; but the existence of the five minute work day is completely a DM's choice.  Allow it if it is fun -- you may just have to use fewer, bigger encounters. Just understand that the design of the class is to work strategically and to have to make a choice of when to use a spell and for there to be consequences for using the spell now instead of later.  

The adventure provides the consequences and the dynamic tension for a wizard casting spells.  This is not a design flaw, it is the design of the class and what makes it fun and balanced.

I, for one, heartily welcome Vancian magic back and the feel it gives the wizard and the rest of the game.

 

If you've been reading carefully, you will notice that there are issues with Vancian magic other than the 5 minute workday.
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls. God of ownership and possession.
I agree. A Magic-User/Wizard (I do love the Magic-User title over Wiard lol), is NOT meant to use his spells every encounter. There are other things you can do to help out, including fight hand to hand. A MU is supposed to conserve his Magic until it is necessary to use.
You Learn Something New Every Day!
I agree. A Magic-User/Wizard (I do love the Magic-User title over Wiard lol), is NOT meant to use his spells every encounter. There are other things you can do to help out, including fight hand to hand. A MU is supposed to conserve his Magic until it is necessary to use.



I disagree.  A magic user, uses magic.  I prefer the wizard to cast a spell every round, to falling back to melee attack and throwing darts.  I'm glad they ditched the @will, encounter, daily power structure, but I am also glad they retained @-will spells.  I am a fan of using vancian magic system, but I am not everyone.  I hope they also offer an approach similar to the 3e sorcerer for the many fans of using magic with out prepared spells. 
I've been reading a lot of angst against Vancian style magic for wizards and how it forces players to nova and then rest after a 5 minute work day, it is a backwards step, that is poor game design for there to be resources that aren't renewable after each encounter, etc.

I disagree.

First, Vancian magic has been the core differentiator for the wizard class in ODD, Basic DND, ADD, 2d Ed DND, 3rd Ed DND and 3.5 ed DND.  It was only banished in 4th ed DND when they decided to try a different class balancing mechanism. It may have been balanced, but the class lost its feel and its differentiation. Which is why I welcome it back it Fifth Ed as do my players.

Second, Vancian magic is balanced against other classes as long as the DM wants it to be.  Let me explain, this is not an attack on how people DM or parties who play differently.  If you want one or two encounters per day and for the wizard to use all his spells and then rest each day after each, and you are having fun, then you are playing the way your group wants to. 

However, intrinsic in the design of the Vancian wizard is the idea that the wizard has to make choices and each choice has a consequence.  Removing the consequences also gives the wizard more power than the class is designed to have.  If the DM allows 5 minute work days, if the adventure does not require the players to act, if the world does not continue forward each time the party chooses to lose 24 hours so the wizard can top off, then the class is able to function in a way it is not really intended to.

This is not railroading, it's narrative tension and reflects a living world rather than a static world.  When Gandalf and the Fellowship went into Moria, they weren't able to rest after each encounter with orcs.  When they tried, they were attacked, because Moria was the orcs' home and they reacted to the Fellowship. They could not just retreat out of the mines and rest, either, because in the adventure the way back had been blocked by a creature they encountered.  The story arc and narrative tension required the Felowship to move forward with a time limit and a consequence for delay. The wizard had to be strategic about when and how to use spells.

DND adventures are not a string of isolated encounters.  They are driven by a narrative purpose.  Rarely does the world stay so static that a party can go into three rooms, leave, rest for 24 hours, and come back to find that everything just stopped while they were gone: the same bodies laying on the floor, the same orcs waiting patiently in the next room, enemy leaders unaware and taking no steps, etc. Even when you can rest outside and away, it can be dangerous with random encounters, and it costs resources, resources besides spells. Every decision a party makes can have big or small consequences -- for every action there is a reaction -- the world reacts to what the party does. This is the DM's job. She makes the adventures, and part of making the adventure is ensuring the party has to use resources and make decisions with consequences.

The wizard is a strategic character, who has to make choices on what spells to prepare before knowing the encounters, and then when to use them.  Pick the wrong spells, and you may be sub-optimal for a particular encounter or even the whole day (better use that high intelligence and pick skills that help you learn how to identify and get ready for what may be ahead). Use it too soon, and you may not be strong enough.  Use it too late, and you may end up letting other party members use up too many resources.  This balance is what differentiates the wizard from the other classes.  Their tactical power without their spells is weak (although at will spells help them keep their magical character), but they can turn the tide of a battle when they do use one of their precious spells.  So when to use their spells is a critical decision with consequences (as long as the adventure has consequences built in).

Fighters are tactical; they do less damage than a mage using a high damage spell, but their hardiness and reliable attacks let them use their abilities most every encounter.  Same thing with the rogue. In the long run, their resource is hit points.

Clerics are operational (with a role that overlaps the strategic and the tactical); they have tactical resources -- armor, melee combat, etc. -- but they also have resources that require choices like the wizard -- heal now or heal later, don't heal and use spells instead to cause damage or for utility.  

Wizards are too powerful if they can always choose to enjoy a five minute work day; but the existence of the five minute work day is completely a DM's choice.  Allow it if it is fun -- you may just have to use fewer, bigger encounters. Just understand that the design of the class is to work strategically and to have to make a choice of when to use a spell and for there to be consequences for using the spell now instead of later.  

The adventure provides the consequences and the dynamic tension for a wizard casting spells.  This is not a design flaw, it is the design of the class and what makes it fun and balanced.

I, for one, heartily welcome Vancian magic back and the feel it gives the wizard and the rest of the game.

 





Makes sense. I too would welcome the Vancian system to 5e.

The "5 minute workday" problem was a 3.x issue because of the second level spell Rope Trick.  It made it so that you didn't have to worry about random monsters eating your head while you sleep.

In older editions, Magic Users were usually forced to wait and ration out their spells, just in case some bigger nasty was around the corner.  Meaning that they rarely used magic, because it was too precious to waste.  Sort of defeats the purpose of being a caster, though.
IMO, it just doesn't feel like D&D without at least some elements of Vancian magic.  I do appreciate the idea of some at-wills coupled with more powerful Vancian spells.  Our wizard tends to be very reliant on Magic Missle, only breaking out the bigger spells when it seems dire.  He tends to use Magic Missle the same way the Figher uses his axe..."old reliable".

As a DM I find that the auto-hit mechanic for certain at-will spells causes player disengagement far more than the "I use Magic Missle" every round.  Players like to roll dice.
Howdy folks,

I have moved this thread to D&D Next General Discussion, where it is more on-topic.

Thanks.  

All around helpful simian

100% agree with OP. Vancian IS Dungeons and Dragons. And while I hope they do come up with an alternative, to apease the vocal minority, I am glad its in the CORE of D&D5e
Always excuse the spelling, and personal opinions are just that personal and opinions. Getting Down with the playtesting of 5th http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/go/thread/view/75882/29139253/Complilation_of_Playtest_Feedback Compilation of Feedback post /bump please
Throwing darts is so magical... 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I agree. A Magic-User/Wizard (I do love the Magic-User title over Wiard lol), is NOT meant to use his spells every encounter. There are other things you can do to help out, including fight hand to hand. A MU is supposed to conserve his Magic until it is necessary to use.



Yes, how dare a spell caster want to cast spells. They should do stuff that makes them useless instead. This is good design.

/end sarcasm 
I've been reading a lot of angst against Vancian style magic for wizards and how it forces players to nova and then rest after a 5 minute work day, it is a backwards step, that is poor game design for there to be resources that aren't renewable after each encounter, etc.

Mostly true, yes.

I disagree.

OK.

First, Vancian magic has been the core differentiator for the wizard class in ODD, Basic DND, ADD, 2d Ed DND, 3rd Ed DND and 3.5 ed DND.  It was only banished in 4th ed DND when they decided to try a different class balancing mechanism. It may have been balanced, but the class lost its feel and its differentiation.

Actually, even the 4e wizard was 'Vancian.'  He had daily spells that he could prepare from a spellbook, while other classes couldn't switch out spells.  It was Vancian, it was differentiated - it just wansn't broken.  It was even more faithful to the inspiration - Jack Vance's "Dying Earth" - in that wizards could only prepare 4 or so (as many as 10 if you include daily utilities) such spells at a time, while the greatest of Vance's magicians could memorize half a dozen or so spells at a time.  Classic D&D magic-users and 3.x wizards exceeded that by 7th level or so.

Besides, how did Vancian distinguish the AD&D magic-user from the AD&D Cleric, Druid, Bard, or Illusionist, who all used the same fire-and-forget mechanic?


Second, Vancian magic is balanced against other classes as long as the DM wants it to be.  Let me explain, this is not an attack on how people DM or parties who play differently.

Nod.  Not an attack, just pointing out that they're playing the game 'wrong.' ;)  But, yes, Vancian magic /can/ be balanced against other non-Vancian classes.  Depending on the ed, it takes some extreme distortion of the campaign or great restraint by the players, or both, and, no matter how hard you try, any such balance tends to evaporate by the early teen levels, but yeah, it balances, at a point or two, with great effort, and with story, character concept & development, and even the precious and subjective 'verisimilitude' sacrificed in the attempt.  

That's part of why people call it a 'bad' system - because it forces you to run/play the game in a very narrow and specific way, if you want any semblance of balance.


Want to see the best of 4e included in 5e?  Join the Old Guard of 4e.

5e really needs something like Wrecan's SARN-FU to support "Theatre of the Mind."

"You want The Tooth?  You can't handle The Tooth!"  - Dahlver-Nar.

"If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly"  - E. Gary Gygax

 

 

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

Vancian magic is so disconnected with fantasy literature, legend and mythology basically you cant really emulate any of those because of it. 

 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Vancian isn't broken, you just have to set your game to the wizard's clock!
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules 4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers

"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
  Actually, even the 4e wizard was 'Vancian.'  He had daily spells that he could prepare from a spellbook, while other classes couldn't switch out spells.  It was Vancian, it was differentiated - it just wansn't broken.  


This...  4e magic was stilll too Vancian. 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Your argument is nothing more than the Good DM fallacy. Yes, in theory a good DM will be able to create a game experience that avoids the frustration of the 5MW. This does not change the fact that there is no current system solution to the 5MW. Class design with asymmetric resource management results in some classes running out of their resource long before other classes (i.e. spellcasters run out of spells before anyone in the party runs out of HP). It is absurd to claim game balance because classes without resources gain relative power when others are out of their resource. Even more absurd is to claim spellcasters are balanced because they choose which encounters they dominant. 

Vancian casting puts a heavy burden on the DM to build and manage an adventure. And what is the benefit... nostalgia?
I'm personally in favor of Vancian casting. I do feel that it feels like D&D, but I'm also very glad that at-will spells are sticking around from 4e. 

First, Vancian magic has been the core differentiator for the wizard class in ODD, Basic DND, ADD, 2d Ed DND, 3rd Ed DND and 3.5 ed DND.

That doesn't mean it's good game design.  And, as others have mentioned, 4E is a slight improvement because of at-wills and encounter powers, but it's still just a variation of Vancian.

The wizard is a strategic character, who has to make choices on what spells to prepare before knowing the encounters, and then when to use them.  Pick the wrong spells, and you may be sub-optimal for a particular encounter or even the whole day (better use that high intelligence and pick skills that help you learn how to identify and get ready for what may be ahead).

This is one of the biggest problems with the whole spellbook thing.  There are tons of spells that never get used because they are so situational.  Most DMs aren't too keen on giving away their plans, so you're not likely to know what you're going to face.  So it's not really strategy; it's just a guessing game.  And most wizards choose the safest guess of memorizing mostly damage spells and ignoring all those other interesting effects.

This is by far the biggest reason I hate Vancian magic.  It is also why utility powers are separated out in 4E -- to force people to take some non-attack powers.  The problem is, you still have the problem of not knowing what lies ahead, so you take the most generic, most broadly applicable spells you can, nine times out of ten.  What worse, in 4E your spellbook is a lot thinner, so there's even less room for the more situational spells.  So don't mistake that I'm advocating for a 4E-style spell system.  I am absolutely not.

A truly strategic magic system would involve knowing many spells, but having them all be more situational.  Using the right spell at the right time would far outweigh raw firepower.  In fact, I am of the opinion that the wizard class needs to be rethought from the ground up with this in mind.
If your position is that the official rules don't matter, or that house rules can fix everything, please don't bother posting in forums about the official rules. To do so is a waste of everyone's time.


A truly strategic magic system would involve knowing many spells, but having them all be more situational.  Using the right spell at the right time would far outweigh raw firepower.  In fact, I am of the opinion that the wizard class needs to be rethought from the ground up with this in mind.



The fact is that like it or hate it, without Vancian magic Wizards just don't feel like D&D Wizards.  IF WOTC is trying to appease the widest fan base possible then they need to include it as well as rules for a more "modern" take on spell casting.  Its not hard to envision a "module" that allows for a spell point system, where Wizards know "X" number of spells and can cast them by expending mana, or one in which there's a system for free form spontaneous magic.

As has been pointed out, even 4E uses a variation on Vancian and that's not likely to change.  Especially when so much of what we've seen so far seems to be about getting back to the basics of D&D (for better or worse).

It could be worse.  Elf, Dwarf and Halfling could be your class
The "5 minute workday" problem was a 3.x issue because of the second level spell Rope Trick.  It made it so that you didn't have to worry about random monsters eating your head while you sleep.



Rope Trick goes back all the way to 1st Edition, and possibly before, but I don't have the original D&D books handy to check.

In older editions, Magic Users were usually forced to wait and ration out their spells, just in case some bigger nasty was around the corner.  Meaning that they rarely used magic, because it was too precious to waste.  Sort of defeats the purpose of being a caster, though.



This is true, but that wasn't due to the lack of Rope Trick (though it could be, if you just didn't have it in your spellbook at all).  Honestly, it was just fun that way.  I always loved playing low-level wizards, specifically because you had to carefully manage your resources and pick your moments to strike.  But don't think that meant I wasn't useful in every fight or was just sitting back watching everyone else have fun.  

To the OP's point, though, I agree that Vancian (original D&D style, without quibbling over whether that is faithful to the original source of the name) has to be in there for it to be D&D.  But I think the inclusion of at-will spells was a positive change, and I also agree with the decision to add other casting methods, as they've indicated.  I'm no fan of 4E, but I look forward to trying out a more 4E-style caster.

Your argument is nothing more than the Good DM fallacy. Yes, in theory a good DM will be able to create a game experience that avoids the frustration of the 5MW. This does not change the fact that there is no current system solution to the 5MW. Class design with asymmetric resource management results in some classes running out of their resource long before other classes (i.e. spellcasters run out of spells before anyone in the party runs out of HP). It is absurd to claim game balance because classes without resources gain relative power when others are out of their resource. Even more absurd is to claim spellcasters are balanced because they choose which encounters they dominant. 

Vancian casting puts a heavy burden on the DM to build and manage an adventure. And what is the benefit... nostalgia?



But it doesn't have to be a heavy burden.  Vancian doesn't really become an issue until higher levels, so it shouldn't be a "novice" gm issue...unless novice gm's are generally starting their campaigns at level 15 or so.  And a lot of gm's never even see the problem.  I never did.  So it seems like some simple gm advice in the DMG could be enough.  You're having this problem, try this or that or this other thing.  And solving the problem really isn't hard.  You don't have to trot out klunky random encounters (and I can attest to this, because I never use random encounters, I hate them), you just let the story move on while the players are resting.  Then the players will figure it out and solve the problem themselves.

The alternative is to come up with a system that just doesn't feel like D&D, a system that plays like another game altogether.  It might be a nice, fun game, but it isn't D&D.  And that's what me and a lot of other people come to play, D&D, with everything that name implies.  There are many other fantasy rpg's with much better mechanics, but none of them really capture the feel of D&D.  You may dismiss it as "nostalgia", but whatever you want to call it, it's what's fun for me - and that's no less valid than the reasons that make you want to play D&D.

Vancian daily fire and forget spell is a signature element of D&D.

But it is also one of the most newbie unfriendly elements of D&D as well. For both DMs and players.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Throwing darts is so magical... 



Now a days we throw magic darts of force!

Its completely different then throwing mundane darts because magic.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
OP: Excellent post and I agree wholeheartedly.

Unfortunately the problem is generational.  Those of us who grew up with roleplaying games understand that a believable, living, breathing world continues on when the party does not.  As a player, I demand nothing less.  However, those who decry vancian don't understand how the narrative is supposed to drive the campaign.  They are playing a table-top war game and they see mechanics only.  Essentially they see:

Problem: Out of resources
Solution:  Rest 8 hours
Resolution: Cast Rope trick
Repeat.

They will never understand you.  Probably best to just hope that WotC do.
OP: Excellent post and I agree wholeheartedly.

Unfortunately the problem is generational.  Those of us who grew up with roleplaying games understand that a believable, living, breathing world continues on when the party does not.  As a player, I demand nothing less.  However, those who decry vancian don't understand how the narrative is supposed to drive the campaign.  They are playing a table-top war game and they see mechanics only.  Essentially they see:

Problem: Out of resources
Solution:  Rest 8 hours
Resolution: Cast Rope trick
Repeat.

They will never understand you.  Probably best to just hope that WotC do.


I didn't get into the game until around '07, and I'm in total agreement. Though I am relatively new to the game, I have always been in favour of narrative being dynamic.
Those of us who grew up with roleplaying games understand that a believable, living, breathing world continues on when the party does not.



Aaaaah!

There it is again. Utterly BLEEP! elitism.

Congratz, you just invalidated every little thing you'll ever say, do or have done until now.



You slow.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Those of us who grew up with roleplaying games understand that a believable, living, breathing world continues on when the party does not.



Aaaaah!

There it is again. Utterly BLEEP! elitism.

Congratz, you just invalidated every little thing you'll ever say, do or have done until now.



I thought he did that weeks ago, but, yeah, snobby elitism is just icing on the cake.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I don't believe it is fair to say a preference of Vancian magic is elitism any more than anyone else expressing their preference.  That's the system the OP prefers and welcomes its return.  I would be OK with multiple magic systems so different players can find the style they enjoy for their games.  

In our games, I use the idea of daily spells per level and a wizard can cast spells from their spell book, though I do enforce a limit of spells one can learn per level.  Thus, a 1st level wizard may only get 1 spell per day, but if he or she has 5 spells in his spell book, when he decides to cast, he can use any of those 5 spells.  I approach magic as a wizard is a highly educated, trained individual who has studied for years to understand magical theory and how to cast his/her spells.  He or she can draw upon that ability only a certain number of times per day but has the flexibility to use all the various spells in their spell book when needed without pre-selecting spells.  Yes, it does make magic users more powerful, but wizards have enough weaknesses that I don't feel it is over-powered.  For us it works well, but that is our preference.
Am I missing something here?  What could -possibly- be so damning about a statement that a living, breathing world carries on when the party doesn't?  And how is it 'elitist'?

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."

It is very much a difference in approach.

Whether that difference is generational or game style choice or just being elitist for newer mechanics there is a divide.

Some of us like the older style of play. Some of us would like TSR style, some 3e, some 4e.

Whatever the reason we view the wizards limited resources differently.

I'd actually wager it is far more likely that our opposition prefers mechanical solutions that don't involve DM interference or party dynamics to prevent one player from being a total **** and walking all over the group "because wizard!".

I get it. You don't want the storyline and character driven fix for the five minute work day.

But at least try to understand that we actually desire the characters having to make those decisions within their world.

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

you'll notice that there's a pattern with the same old pathetic dudes who have tens of thousands of posts who are rude, ascerbic and unfriendly ALWAYZZZ that think elitists are anyone who has a fond memory of dnd and wants to preserve it. its just the way it is around here.
It is very much a difference in approach.

Whether that difference is generational or game style choice or just being elitist for newer mechanics there is a divide.

Some of us like the older style of play. Some of us would like TSR style, some 3e, some 4e.

Whatever the reason we view the wizards limited resources differently.

I'd actually wager it is far more likely that our opposition prefers mechanical solutions that don't involve DM interference or party dynamics to prevent one player from being a total **** and walking all over the group "because wizard!".

I get it. You don't want the storyline and character driven fix for the five minute work day.

But at least try to understand that we actually desire the characters having to make those decisions within their world.

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

Sorry for the double post my phone wigged out again.

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

Sorry for the double post my phone wigged out again.


Get that thing to a doctor, it be a'needin' surgery!

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."

Do you know what they charge for iPhone surgery?

It's worse than the cost of using a poorly worded Wish is for a human.

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

Am I missing something here?  What could -possibly- be so damning about a statement that a living, breathing world carries on when the party doesn't?  And how is it 'elitist'?


That's not what is being decried as elitist (although assuming a particular way of playing the game is better than the one has a bit of it too). What is being criticized is his assumption that there's a group that grew up with the roleplaying game and as such, understands how it is meant to be played, opossed to this new generation of players that only like mechanics and play it like a tabletop wargame.

I'm not really a fan of pre-4E vancian casting, espically at low levels. It's practically what kept me from playing a wizard until 4E came along (again, at low levels). I was "meh, ok" with it as a cleric because they at least had alternative options to casting spells. For Vancian magic to return in it's full *cough* glory *cough* is something I'm not all that happy to see. But I'm willing to see people happy for their own, IMO, misguided so long as I have non-vancian options to fall back on as well. And that would mean placing those options inside the same book, no "futher in XX supplement or DDI article".

At-Will magic really helps because I feel it's far more interesting to throw bolts of magic called Magic Missile that uses Intelligence as it's core than mundane dart that based off of a (probable) low Dexterity score. Additionally, they're going to need to increase the uses and abilities of At-Will cantrips to be more on-par with the versatility I saw with 4E. I don't care if the damge is mitigated due to X, Y, Z factors, just something with a little more diversity would be nice too (like a AoE).  

you'll notice that there's a pattern with the same old pathetic dudes who have tens of thousands of posts who are rude, ascerbic and unfriendly ALWAYZZZ that think elitists are anyone who has a fond memory of dnd and wants to preserve it. its just the way it is around here.



I have fond memories of playing Zelda for my old Nintendo Entertainment System and when I play it for a short while it's FUN and RETRO and nostalgic, but it fades as it's problems crop up again and I'm on to games like Mass Effect. And I sure wouldn't pay $40.00 for the old Zelda game and $120.00 for the NES JUST based on limited nostalgia and re-hashing old memories. Really, they released all the old 1E stuff and are re-printing the 3E stuff FOR THIS EXACT REASON. Which is awesome. But don't try to pawn those questionable mechanics on the current fan-base and call it "new, exciting, bridging the gap of edition" because it's not. Not even with a smattering of 4E stuff thrown in.


But I hold all the rights to change that opinion when we see more information, more options, and more differences.
lol

Thanks for that, it's always nice to add someone else to the blocked list.

Interesting OP though.

Thinly veiling a series of attacks on other play styles, which are totally valid but don't mesh with Vancian casting, likely isn't going to help with keeping the conversation productive and friendly though.

It's absolutely true that Vancian casting is iconic D&D, thus has a place in Next. 

It's utterly wrong to think that 4th wasn't Vancian, in fact it's probably the only iteration of the game where EVERY class has had Vanican elements from 1st level onwards.  That's what a lot of us who dislike Vancian mechanics didn't like about 4th edition.

There are a lot of other issues with Vancian casting beyond the five minute work day too, people often forget that low level Wizards were the original "I improvise an action" class thanks to few spells and only daily options.





But the great thing about Next is that we can both get what we want.

You can have Vancian casting, someone else can have unlimited casting in limited slots (like the 3.X Sorcerer), another can have a power point system and those who want can have AEDU. 

Me... I'm hoping for something along the lines of AEU and getting rid of Daily powers forever for EVERY class.

The trick is that for you to get what you want you need to accept that other people will also get what they want.  We can both play the game we want at our own tables if we both accept that our preference might be in a module or it might be core... but we can't just ragequit because something we don't like is made optional for other people to use.

I'm happy to accept Vancian being in the game, in a module if not in core.

Are YOU happy to accept other systems in the game, in a module or core, as long as you have Vancian casting to use at YOUR table?                      
Vancian doesn't define D&D, imo.  It should stick around, by all means, but it isn't the meaning of the game.  Having a subjective game that embodies your world of fantasy is what D&D is about to me.  We've seen it pop up here and there.  And, one of the best things about D&D today is there are so many ways to play and so many versions of D&D to promote that play.  D&D to you may be Mordenkainen and Vancian, but to me it's GRIMDARK horror infused fantasy where magical slasher villains will hack you into a sushi special at night and psychotic warlocks will eat your liver while you sleep.  Anyway, I want more than vancian to be available.  Sure, I don't mind playing vancian, but there's more than that.  Plus, I really digged the vancian a la 2e and 3e meets the at-wills of 4e (one of my favorite parts of 4e) that showed up in Next.  And, I'll say one more thing.  The rules are there as guidelines, it's up to the table to interpret as they see fit for their game.  Plus, I've never bumped into "5 minute work day" at any pre-4e games I've been in, just like I've never run into "Everyone's the same/whatever criticism 4e has been hit with" at my 4e games.  Too bad my crew doesn't want to do 4e anymore.  Ah, whatever (at least we can all agree on Savage Worlds, Pathfinder/3.75, and WoD.)

The Knights of W.T.F. may as well be ghosts, but the message still stays;

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
  • PRAISE THE SUN!
Throwing darts is so magical... 



Now a days we throw magic darts of force!

Its completely different then throwing mundane darts because magic.




Who we white boy, thunder waves at minimum.... heck even a hypnosis attack from the Mage (make them attack themselves or a friend for fun) 

Magic missile bleah... 
If I liked MM ..I would have argued...   That is an unerrring mystical force dart.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."