Vancian Magic System

First of all, I'm sorry I made this thread, I'm sure there are plenty of others already, I just didn't have the time and energy to read them all.

**

I hate the Vancian Magic System. The whole. It's illogical, it's hard to use, and it's very very limiting. For all our sakes, I want the D&D Next without the Vancian Magic. Why?

The spellcasters in nearly all fantasy settings sacrifice nigh everything. They are weak in body, and their only power is Magic. Magic, which is useless, as it is in D&D now. A first level caster can barely cast anything at all (Altough in the 5e they can deal significant damage with cantrips alone) but even on higher levels, they have very limited capabilities. A few spells per day, yes they are powerful enough... there is nothing wrong with the spells (except the material components. Seriously, why???) but there is a slight problem. They need to know what situations they will face. Yes, for the average dungeon crawler, that is pretty predictable. Some damage, some escape, some utility, and they are done. But what about the people who roleplay, and barely go dungeons? Or what about the NPC-s? What spells does an NPC use? They wake up in the morning feeling like P. Diddy, and prepare whatever spell they feel like?
Actually, that was just angry ranting above...

Spellcasters, Wizards mostly are very limited. First: they HAVE TO know what's going to happen that day... Call me when you can always predict the future. Second: they have to have expensive, hardly aquireable material components for nearly every spell. Third: They have spellbooks to memorize spells from. No comment needed.

This above is not logical. Why would anyone spend 3d6 YEARS to learn wizardry in exchange to cast cantrips, with such limitations? They can't cast them whenevery they can, they can't cast them as many times they want, it costs them money, and yet again, they have to know which day what will happen.
It's not logical at all. Neither is that they forget the spells once cast. I have serious problem understanding, why is it working this way. Imagine. You are a wizard, quite experienced, let's say you are around your mid 50's, and you learnt your craft for over 2 decades. You wake up in the morning, and you prepare the spells, you've been preparing for long long years every day. Suddenly, after you rise from the meditation, you realize two orc warriors are attacking you. You can dispatch them easily with a spell you prepared just in case, but you didn't really expect anybody to attack you. Later in the day, you get ambushed again. You don't have any spell prepared which is good for the situation. You know a spell which is exactly for the situation you are experiencing right now, and you have prepared ten thousand times before, it could save your life, as it did in the past, you are fresh and apart from the spell in the morning you didn't use any magic all day. You are bursting from magical energies. Yet you die.
Or. Same situation. You have the spell readied. You could use it freely. But you lack the component for it. You die again.
Let's not even mention what happens if you lose your equipment. You lose all your components, your spellbook, everything. In any other game, the most dangerous captive is the magician, because he can wreak havoc without his sword, staff, armor, or bow. Not in DnD. If a wizard loses his equipment, he becomes nothing. You can even let him free, 'cause he won't cause any trouble. He can't. An exotic weapon specialist can still kill a lot of enemies without his favoured weapon, with just a mundane sword, an archer could still use his skills, and feats without his favourite bow... Not a wizard.

I know a lot of reasons are in favor of the vancian magic, mainly tradition, but please please don't let it be....
Too late.
A lot of people state that spells with numbered levels and columns of spell slots numbers feels magical.

And when you have the privilege to be able to wear efficiently a pointy hat in battle, you shouldn't complain for having some downsides.
Sounds like you want to play the sorcerer.

It sounds as if playing a wizard might not be your thing.  That's all right, because fighters and rogues get to have nice things too in this edition.

It doesn't make any sense to you to spend all that time and energy learning magic as it exists in the game system, so don't.  Leave it to people who do see the sense in it.  People who can more accurately predict consequences (or even act in ways that shape the future into predictable patterns) will be able to use prepared magic to great effect.  Those are the sort of people magic is supposed to appeal to in this system, and that's all right.

"When Friday comes, we'll all call rats fish." D&D Outsider
First of all, I'm sorry I made this thread, I'm sure there are plenty of others already, I just didn't have the time and energy to read them all.

**

I hate the Vancian Magic System. The whole. It's illogical, it's hard to use, and it's very very limiting. For all our sakes, I want the D&D Next without the Vancian Magic. Why?



It doesn't matter why.  It's not for you to take it away from those of us who like it and want to use it.  If you don't like it, you don't have to play with it.  There will be plenty of other casting styles for you to use.
So, in the most recent playtest spells are handled a little bit differently. Wizards don't need to get their cleric buddy to ask the gods if a spell is a good call or not. Wizards are more like 3.x sorcerers and don't need to pick/prepare the right spell. I'm sure some people hate it, but it seems to be a decent compromise. Two wizards could play at the same table w/ one playing strict vancian if he/she so pleases... while the other doesn't. Both are good.
As for the physical toll/frailty/limited magic at higher levels, I imagine a module in the future might give magic rules which you'd dig more.
"What's stupid is when people decide that X is true - even when it is demonstrable untrue or 100% against what we've said - and run around complaining about that. That's just a breakdown of basic human reasoning." -Mike Mearls
It's not that you forget the spells and have to learn them again in the morning.    The way it works is that you're imprinting the magical tracing in your mind.  It's almost like pre-casting part of the spell.     you don't simply forget something that have you learned.  In fact in AD&D you had to roll to learn the spell and then scribe it into your spell book.    Learning the spell was very different than "memorizing it"   

What they should do in next is explain this a little more clearly and drop the word "memorization".   Call it pre-casting or something like that.  

IMO, the mechanic is great, because it explains why wizards with powerful spells save them for those critical times when they are needed.    It explains why Gandalf didn't just call his Eagles to fly over the mountains earlier in the day and why he saved that spell for when the party needed it. 

One thing I really hate about systems that don't reward those who prepare is that knowledge gained in the adventure means nothing.    If you're party spends time researching the old keep on the hill and learn that it was once the home a powerfull Fire Elementalist.  That knowledge should mean something.   In fact, it might cause the party to prepare spells to protect from and deal damage to fire based creatures.     When the party is always prepared for every situation the game becomes dull.   Even divination magic becomes less usefull.   If there is no reason to find out what is behind the door with evil pulsating runes the game is less challenging.  

As for wizards losing their spell book, that's a good thing.   That's a great adventure based (non-combat) disadvantage to being a wizard.      As a wizard, when you are catpured you're most likely gaged and your hands are bound anyway (along with the cleric).   At that point, you are not the star of the show, the martial classes are and it's their time to shine.     IMO, the best campaings are those in which each character has a chance to shine on their own.


I'm not sure that we can really complain about any magic system not being realistic.  It's magic . . .

How do I know if a wizard would need to prepare a spell and then not be able to cast it again? Why *shouldn't* a wizard need a spell book? 

I was never a fan of vancian magic, but mostly because I felt past iterations made the spellcasters the super classes.  So far DDN seems to be trying to balance this.  It's much appreciated. 
I'm not sure that we can really complain about any magic system not being realistic.  It's magic . . .

How do I know if a wizard would need to prepare a spell and then not be able to cast it again? Why *shouldn't* a wizard need a spell book?   

"Vanican" magic always stood out as a bit rediculous, I think.  At first I figured that it was just a rule compromise, maybe because artillery units might have limited ammunition, so to fit magic into a wargame they treated it like artillery.  I hadn't read Jack Vance's "Dying Earth," so it didn't seem particularly like any sort of magic I'd ever heard of.   Once I did read some of it, the similarity was obvious.  But, Dying Earth wizards cast very few spells of relatively high level compared to D&D magic-users.

- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

If casting non-minor spells was lowering the power of the next one, wizards would make each of these spells count. Without having to limit the number of spells per day.

Vancian magic is already gone. Ezren from pathfinder is an example of a Vancian mage. He is chiseled with a crossbow on his back. He has the look of someone who has survived for years with a handful of daily spells. The current Next wizard has a frost gun, slot spells, and rituals. He doesnt have to touch weapons or worry half as much about memorizing the wrong spell.

I dont like the current Wizard. It doesnt make the extremes happy. For me its not close to being a Vancian tradition while the OP wants to do away with it because its too Vancian. If you are going to have multiple traditions you might as well make everyone happy. The Cleric arcanist is an AEDU wizard and I have suggested a pure atwill wild mage so all that is left is a pure vancian. The current mold can handle specialist and Sorcerer's can round out the rest.

It's not that you forget the spells and have to learn them again in the morning.    The way it works is that you're imprinting the magical tracing in your mind.  It's almost like pre-casting part of the spell.     you don't simply forget something that have you learned.  In fact in AD&D you had to roll to learn the spell and then scribe it into your spell book.    Learning the spell was very different than "memorizing it"



That. What he said.
In the Vancian system spells are supposed to be so complex and demanding that you can't just cast one out of the blue, immediately.
In fact, you do, but to do that you pre-cast your selected spells when you "memorize" them (yeah, not a good term), so when you need the spell on the next day, you can simply "finish" the casting by unleashing the spell.

What always lacked on the Vancian system was a method for casting the spell without the "pre-casting".
I've always had a house-rule for that which I called Ritual Casting, where you can cast any spell you have access to (by means of a spellbook or scroll so you can read the steps), except it takes a long while for the spell to be cast.

Funny enough, it seems 5ed is now implementing just that. And they're also calling it Ritual Casting.
[paranoia]*looks around for the Men In Black*[/paranoia]


But anyway... I don't know man, maybe it's just nostalgia, or maybe I'm just accustomed to it, but I don't dislike the Vancian system.
I don't really have any argument pro-Vancian and I do have some house-rules for Magic Points and such alternatives, but it doesn't bother me at all to play a Wizard with the traditional Vancian system. I kinda like it.




I hate the Vancian Magic System. The whole. It's illogical, it's hard to use, and it's very very limiting. For all MY sake, I want the D&D Next without the Vancian Magic.



There, corrected that for you.

Why?
The spellcasters in nearly all fantasy settings sacrifice nigh everything. They are weak in body, and their only power is Magic. Magic, which is useless, as it is in D&D now. A first level caster can barely cast anything at all (Altough in the 5e they can deal significant damage with cantrips alone) but even on higher levels, they have very limited capabilities. A few spells per day, yes they are powerful enough... there is nothing wrong with the spells (except the material components. Seriously, why???) but there is a slight problem. They need to know what situations they will face. Yes, for the average dungeon crawler, that is pretty predictable. Some damage, some escape, some utility, and they are done. But what about the people who roleplay, and barely go dungeons?


Well, the game doesn't force you to put your poorest scores into Str. & Con.  So maybe your D&D caster will resemble whatever scrawny mages you've read about.  Or maybe they won't.

As for the bolded part?
They say knowledge is power....  You can always try & find out what your going to be walking into.
Sometimes you can do this by casting various divinations/scyings/other recon type spells.  Or having them cast for you.
Other times?  It's called Role-Play.  You/other characters go around seeking rumors, etc. about ____ .....

For the underlined part?  Knowledge is still power.... 
My best advice here is to pay attention to the game your actually in.  And how the DM runs things.
You'll figure out spell mixes that work well after awhile.


Or what about the NPC-s? What spells does an NPC use?



(speaking as a DM)
Oh, that's easy!  Any spell the DM thinks will add to the story.
The only limitation I place on myself NPC-wise is how many spells of a certain Lv. can be cast according to the NPCs xp chart.
I NEVER bother to plot out what an NPC actually has memorized/prepaired.

I do tend to write down what the NPC has in their spell book though if I think there's a chance it might be falling into the players hands.
And if it comes to looting the caster?  Then I'll randomly determine (after combat of course) how many "sets" of spell componants they had left for any spells they had cast.

Spellcasters, Wizards mostly are very limited. First: they HAVE TO know what's going to happen that day... Call me when you can always predict the future.....



Read what I've posted above again.

 
Second: they have to have expensive, hardly aquireable material components for nearly every spell. Third: They have spellbooks to memorize spells from. No comment needed.



Spell components - most aren't that expensive.  Or hard to aquire.  Some are, sure.  But just think of those as being an excuse for some more adventuring/RP.  Sometimes you might even find them as treasure.
At the extreme?  Consider spell components as a form of ammo.  Afterall, longbow + arrows = damage to target.  So why not Spell + component = effect?

Spell books - why not?  Ok, so you might lose it somehow.  Well, the fighter might lose his weapons....  They also make good treasure to hand out.   And really?  how big an issue carrying a spell book around is depends alot upon the DM.   
 




LOL. 
Lots of hypotheticals in there.  And maybe that's how your games go....  But on the whole?  It's not what happens to this Vancian caster.  





LOL.
& LOL x2 at the bolded part.

It's true.   The weapon users do have an easier time of it once they've grabbed some other weapon. 
That's mostly because they have a higher BaB thanks to their class than I do. 

But if you think I'm unable to cause trouble just because I'm not waiving a staff & slinging spells?     Remember, knowledge is power.  And I am playing a guy with an 18+ INT.  Who makes his living adventuring.  Trust me, there's still plenty of havoc to be caused.
I've come to accept Vancian magic as a style of magic. But it's far from what I want. I think there should be an alternative magic using class (or system) available, because I'm sure it will make more sense to me (and others).
Personally, I think that the best solution is, in addition to having at-will cantrips, MORE THAT 3 or 4!

is to have both encounter and daily spells of each level.

Then a wizard while preparing spell can choose power over sustainability.

Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.

I'm hoping for no default wizard, with multiple approaches.  Maybe a quick conversion guide for adapting AEDU powers of 4e to an AEDU-style mage.  This way, 4th ed books are VERY useful in 5e.  This would be another reason for PoD (print on demand) of 4e titles.  Plus, a list of Vancian spells/guide to transfering Vancian style spells would be sweet too.  Another thing I want to explore is power point and Alternity FX style magic options are modules as well.

As for me, I won't use the encounter power option, but... BUT, I want it to be available, because I KNOW there are plenty of people who want to utilize such a mechanic, as well as benefitting them greatly in their characters.  So yes, leave it as a valid option, either as others have proposed or my proposal.

Crazed undead horror posing as a noble and heroic forum poster!

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.



How can you say that? There are PLENTY of people on the forums pining for encounter powers and rallying against the 5MWD. I see plenty of candidates for those options. Remember, not every person will feel pressured to do soemthing because it may seem more powerful. Deffinately not 99%.

My two copper.
Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.



How can you say that? There are PLENTY of people on the forums pining for encounter powers and rallying against the 5MWD. I see plenty of candidates for those options. Remember, not every person will feel pressured to do soemthing because it may seem more powerful. Deffinately not 99%.




and I'm one of those also, I would even want to see NO or very few per day spells as wizard.(I hate crossbows)

But if you are not expecting, as a wizard, to explore and battle whole day long, what would you choose?

Encounter power, or in a case of emergency spell that will make the opponent regret even trying to attack you?


Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.



How can you say that? There are PLENTY of people on the forums pining for encounter powers and rallying against the 5MWD. I see plenty of candidates for those options. Remember, not every person will feel pressured to do soemthing because it may seem more powerful. Deffinately not 99%.




and I'm one of those also, I would even want to see NO or very few per day spells as wizard.(I hate crossbows)

But if you are not expecting, as a wizard, to explore and battle whole day long, what would you choose?

Encounter power, or in a case of emergency spell that will make the opponent regret even trying to attack you?






How about the Encounter power that will make the opponent regret even trying to attack you?

:P



Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.



How can you say that? There are PLENTY of people on the forums pining for encounter powers and rallying against the 5MWD. I see plenty of candidates for those options. Remember, not every person will feel pressured to do soemthing because it may seem more powerful. Deffinately not 99%.




and I'm one of those also, I would even want to see NO or very few per day spells as wizard.(I hate crossbows)

But if you are not expecting, as a wizard, to explore and battle whole day long, what would you choose?

Encounter power, or in a case of emergency spell that will make the opponent regret even trying to attack you?






How about the Encounter power that will make the opponent regret even trying to attack you?

:P






that would be the best variation Cool

but if they do the E/D variation from 4E, I expect for daily to have atleast twice the power of an encounter power of equal level.



The spellcasters in nearly all fantasy settings sacrifice nigh everything. They are weak in body, and their only power is Magic. Magic, which is useless, as it is in D&D now.

Mostly just curious, but where are you seeing these wizards?  What setting has a spellcaster sacrifice everything, to be weak in body and unskilled with weapon, in order to master magic?  It's not the majority of them.

Most of the settings I can think of allow their spellcasters to be fairly competent with weapons.  I mean, there's obviously Gandalf.  The Heralds of Valdemar are all psionic paladins, while the actual spellcasters of the setting can at least hold their own in a fight.  Of the Shadowrunners with magical ability, about 90% could kill you just as easily with a gun or sword as with a spell.  Sorcerers in the Belgariad don't sacrifice anything.  Lina Inverse can use a sword, even though she has little reason to.  Louie is a wizard who prefers punching people to casting spells.

I was watching someone play Lunar yesterday, just beating up some random cyclopes, and Nash and Mia were doing ~35 damage with staff attacks, compared to Alex and Kyle hitting for ~42.  Crono and the gang lose nothing when they gain magic.  Rosa from FFIV has a bow, Celes from FF6 has a sword, Brian from Quest 64 is a solo wizard who mostly makes staff attacks.  Everyone knows how to fight.
 

The metagame is not the game.
The spellcasters in nearly all fantasy settings sacrifice nigh everything. They are weak in body, and their only power is Magic. Magic, which is useless, as it is in D&D now.

Mostly just curious, but where are you seeing these wizards?  What setting has a spellcaster sacrifice everything, to be weak in body and unskilled with weapon, in order to master magic?  It's not the majority of them.

Most of the settings I can think of allow their spellcasters to be fairly competent with weapons.  I mean, there's obviously Gandalf.  The Heralds of Valdemar are all psionic paladins, while the actual spellcasters of the setting can at least hold their own in a fight.  Of the Shadowrunners with magical ability, about 90% could kill you just as easily with a gun or sword as with a spell.  Sorcerers in the Belgariad don't sacrifice anything.  Lina Inverse can use a sword, even though she has little reason to.  Louie is a wizard who prefers punching people to casting spells.

I was watching someone play Lunar yesterday, just beating up some random cyclopes, and Nash and Mia were doing ~35 damage with staff attacks, compared to Alex and Kyle hitting for ~42.  Crono and the gang lose nothing when they gain magic.  Rosa from FFIV has a bow, Celes from FF6 has a sword, Brian from Quest 64 is a solo wizard who mostly makes staff attacks.  Everyone knows how to fight.
 





Harry Dresden: he can use a sword, kinda, and can melee scrap pretty well.

Michael Carpenter, Murphy, Charity Carpenter: Could all whip his ass no problems (barring the use of magic).

Harry Dresden: Terrible shot. 

Murphy: Amazing with guns.

Dresden is a Wizard.  He can scrap a bit because he is a big guy with a decent strength score and even a slight bit of skill.  He can shoot a gun because anyone can shoot a gun.  He isn't as good at these things as other people in the story because he spends the bulk of his time dealing with magical things.  The others however don't spend their time doing that and instead spend their time training these other skills.  So while dresden can do these things a bit he can't really compare to those that put the time and effort and training in to be great at it.

It isn't that you must be weak it is that you will not be as skilled as someone fully dedicated to being a fighter (those with main character syndrome need not apply).
It isn't that you must be weak it is that you will not be as skilled as someone fully dedicated to being a fighter (those with main character syndrome need not apply).

Exactly! A wizard shouldn't be as good at fighting as a fighter is, but an adventuring wizard, who tends to go on quests and get into a lot of fights, is still going to be an objectively decent fighter.  A fifth-level wizard in any edition (with the possible exception of Next) can take a few hits and dish it out in return, and since wizards aren't actually weak or objectively bad at fighting, they shouldn't need super-convenient all-powerful magic to "balance" it.

The metagame is not the game.
I hate the 'Vancian' system because each 'spell' is it's own exclusive set of rules that don't need to interact with any other of the rules, and they always work.  You declare it, and it happens, any saving throw is done on the target's(s) side.
Why is it a big deal DDN is using Vancian magic?  Every edition of D&D I've ever played has always used Vancian magic (sorcerers as an exception in 3e, not a replacement of the wizards who still used Vancian).

4e is Vancian too.  You had to chose which Dailies and Utilities to have prepared that day.  Worked the same way, even if there's no "spell slots" it still followed Vancian rules (preparing spells, and being "pre-loaded" with spells you could only cast so often per day).  Encounter spells were a little less Vancian-like since you had the potential to cast them multiple times per day, but were still Vancian in nature (they had to be pre-prepared).

So how is continuation of Vancian going to stop anyone from playing D&D?  It's not a change, it's continuing the status quo.  If you're playing D&D now, why stop? 
If you're playing D&D now, why stop? 

Why would you assume that anyone on these boards is a current player of D&D, as opposed to an interested potential customer for a game that is not like previous editions?

The metagame is not the game.
Why is it a big deal DDN is using Vancian magic?  Every edition of D&D I've ever played has always used Vancian magic (sorcerers as an exception in 3e, not a replacement of the wizards who still used Vancian).

4e is Vancian too.  You had to chose which Dailies and Utilities to have prepared that day.  Worked the same way, even if there's no "spell slots" it still followed Vancian rules (preparing spells, and being "pre-loaded" with spells you could only cast so often per day).  Encounter spells were a little less Vancian-like since you had the potential to cast them multiple times per day, but were still Vancian in nature (they had to be pre-prepared).

So how is continuation of Vancian going to stop anyone from playing D&D?  It's not a change, it's continuing the status quo.  If you're playing D&D now, why stop? 

I've tried to point this out to people as well.

4th Edition is even more limited Vancian than pre-4th Edition. The 2 At-Will spells basically equate to all the lowest level Vancian spell slots, with only two spells usable with those slots; while the (up to 4) Encounter spells roughly equate to the mid-level Vancian spell slots, with only 1-4 spells usable with those slots; and the Daily spells equate to the higher level Vancian spells slots.

Pre-4th Edition Vancian just held more options for the wizards, because they had the option to memorize a larger variety of spells that were only usable once per day. I could have memorized my spells in the same pattern as a 4th Edition wizard (and came close sometimes, when I knew exactly what I would be facing), if I had wanted to.

If you're playing D&D now, why stop? 

Why would you assume that anyone on these boards is a current player of D&D, as opposed to an interested potential customer for a game that is not like previous editions?




Touché! Laughing
Personally, I think that the best solution is, in addition to having at-will cantrips, MORE THAT 3 or 4!

is to have both encounter and daily spells of each level.

Then a wizard while preparing spell can choose power over sustainability.

Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.




There was a poll done.  3 out of 4 people never encountered the 5MWD with vancian casters in the group.  Vancian does not equal the 5MWD.  Some other issue like DM playstyle is the cause.
Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.

How can you say that? There are PLENTY of people on the forums pining for encounter powers and rallying against the 5MWD. I see plenty of candidates for those options. Remember, not every person will feel pressured to do soemthing because it may seem more powerful. Deffinately not 99%.


I'm one of them. I'd go 100% encounter and 0% daily because I loathe daily anything.
Personally, I think that the best solution is, in addition to having at-will cantrips, MORE THAT 3 or 4!

is to have both encounter and daily spells of each level.

Then a wizard while preparing spell can choose power over sustainability.

Of course, 99% of wizards will choose power and again force 5MWD, but WotC can at least say: we tried and we gave you options.




There was a poll done.  3 out of 4 people never encountered the 5MWD with vancian casters in the group.  Vancian does not equal the 5MWD.  Some other issue like DM playstyle is the cause.

LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...


LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...




No, it's not insignificant.  However, it implies that the cause is not the rules, but how some playstyles interract with the rules.  That means that rather than needing a rules change, the issue simply needs a corrective module or two for those who encounter the problem to use.

LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...




No, it's not insignificant.  However, it implies that the cause is not the rules, but how some playstyles interract with the rules.  That means that rather than needing a rules change, the issue simply needs a corrective module or two for those who encounter the problem to use.

OR it just implies that it only effects 25% or users. Nothing in that poll suggested the CAUSE of those 25% of issues, so it'd be YOU that infered that it was playstyle. IMO, something that affected 25% of the people I expect to use my product might need something more than a patch of two. Looking at the forums, I've seen threads about the 5MWD, so I'm guessing that 5e hasn't found one of those modules/patches you were talking about yet.

LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...




No, it's not insignificant.  However, it implies that the cause is not the rules, but how some playstyles interract with the rules.  That means that rather than needing a rules change, the issue simply needs a corrective module or two for those who encounter the problem to use.



True, it is an interaction issue.
5MWD is not possible in RPGA adventures (or mandatory, depending on your POV :P) because they write practically every adventure with insufficient time between the first combat encounter and the end of the adventure to stop and rest (their are some exceptions, but most are double-length adventures with only time for one night's rest). The result is pretty much every adventure you face 3-4 combats per game day. (or 1-2 really tough ones.)

It's generally "sandbox" type games that risk being disrupted by 5MWD. Anytime you leave the PCs free to act on their own schedule, they are strongly incentivized to rest frequently and face every enemy at full strength. Even in a sandbox game though, some players will chose to press on relentlessly rather than resting frequently, simply as a matter of personal preference.    

LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...




No, it's not insignificant.  However, it implies that the cause is not the rules, but how some playstyles interract with the rules.  That means that rather than needing a rules change, the issue simply needs a corrective module or two for those who encounter the problem to use.



True, it is an interaction issue.
5MWD is not possible in RPGA adventures (or mandatory, depending on your POV :P) because they write practically every adventure with insufficient time between the first combat encounter and the end of the adventure to stop and rest (their are some exceptions, but most are double-length adventures with only time for one night's rest). The result is pretty much every adventure you face 3-4 combats per game day. (or 1-2 really tough ones.)

It's generally "sandbox" type games that risk being disrupted by 5MWD. Anytime you leave the PCs free to act on their own schedule, they are strongly incentivized to rest frequently and face every enemy at full strength. Even in a sandbox game though, some players will chose to press on relentlessly rather than resting frequently, simply as a matter of personal preference.    

I guess you could strong arm your way out of the 5MWD. I never really thought of using 'brute force' to make rest always unavalible. I guess it could work to 'fix' 5MWD.

What is important is the representativity of the people who participate to a poll.

And it seems that these boards opinions are not representative from the results of the international surveys Smile

LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...




No, it's not insignificant.  However, it implies that the cause is not the rules, but how some playstyles interract with the rules.  That means that rather than needing a rules change, the issue simply needs a corrective module or two for those who encounter the problem to use.

OR it just implies that it only effects 25% or users. Nothing in that poll suggested the CAUSE of those 25% of issues, so it'd be YOU that infered that it was playstyle.



If it were purely a rules issue, it would affect 100% of everyone who didn't house rule it away.  It's not purely a rules issue.

IMO, something that affected 25% of the people I expect to use my product might need something more than a patch of two. Looking at the forums, I've seen threads about the 5MWD, so I'm guessing that 5e hasn't found one of those modules/patches you were talking about yet.



Why would it?  It hasn't even finished the first of the classes yet.  Working on the 5MWD module would be premature as there are much bigger fish to fry right now.

LOL 1 in 4 isn't a statisticaly insignificant percentage. If 1 in 4 cars exploded when starting up, would you hop right in and turn the key? Well, 25% feel the same way about playing with Vancian...




No, it's not insignificant.  However, it implies that the cause is not the rules, but how some playstyles interract with the rules.  That means that rather than needing a rules change, the issue simply needs a corrective module or two for those who encounter the problem to use.



True, it is an interaction issue.
5MWD is not possible in RPGA adventures (or mandatory, depending on your POV :P) because they write practically every adventure with insufficient time between the first combat encounter and the end of the adventure to stop and rest (their are some exceptions, but most are double-length adventures with only time for one night's rest). The result is pretty much every adventure you face 3-4 combats per game day. (or 1-2 really tough ones.)

It's generally "sandbox" type games that risk being disrupted by 5MWD. Anytime you leave the PCs free to act on their own schedule, they are strongly incentivized to rest frequently and face every enemy at full strength. Even in a sandbox game though, some players will chose to press on relentlessly rather than resting frequently, simply as a matter of personal preference.    

I guess you could strong arm your way out of the 5MWD. I never really thought of using 'brute force' to make rest always unavalible. I guess it could work to 'fix' 5MWD.




Those 75% that don't encounter it also do not strong arm it away........because it simply does not exist for them.  There is nothing to "fix".
Those 75% that don't encounter it also do not strong arm it away........because it simply does not exist for them.  There is nothing to "fix".

Did that poll ask 'does the 5MWD' exist for them or did it ask 'Do you have a problem with the 5MWD'? If the DM strongarms it away, they they don't have a problem with it do they? And if they play modules/adventures with that strongarming build it, they again don't have that issue. So how can you KNOW that it just plain doesn't exist for 75% of players?

Isn't the 5 minute workday dependent on spells like Rope Trick, Teleport, Greater Teleport, and Gate.  I thought with the exception of Greater Teleport they had fixed these spells so that you can no longer run to safety and hope back into the dungeon at a moments notice.  Sure you can leave anytime you want, but you can't get back so easily.  And, while you are walking back to the dungeon you teleported away from the monsters inside are replenishing and adjusting their defenses.

I never really was a DM of games with a lot of combat encounters, I always did better at running the interactions and social part of the game.  I haven't really had to deal with 5MWD or munchkins much.  I may just be naive about what a party might try.
Isn't the 5 minute workday dependent on spells like Rope Trick, Teleport, Greater Teleport, and Gate.  I thought with the exception of Greater Teleport they had fixed these spells so that you can no longer run to safety and hope back into the dungeon at a moments notice.  Sure you can leave anytime you want, but you can't get back so easily.  And, while you are walking back to the dungeon you teleported away from the monsters inside are replenishing and adjusting their defenses.

I never really was a DM of games with a lot of combat encounters, I always did better at running the interactions and social part of the game.  I haven't really had to deal with 5MWD or munchkins much.  I may just be naive about what a party might try.

Rope trick lasts forever so once you can cast it, you're golden. To explain, rope trick has no duration, only the entrance does. The only way to stop a rope trick is to dispel it from the inside.

Vancian was not a bad idea in 1974, as it really does make resource managment fairly simple.  The downsides of spellslots took several years to become obvious.
Isn't the 5 minute workday dependent on spells like Rope Trick, Teleport, Greater Teleport, and Gate.

No.  It's dependent on any daily resource existing.