Community

Feb 21, 2012 -- 1:54PM, Polaris wrote:

Not only that, but the only way to really balance Vancian casting mechanics is to give them to everyone because of the 15 min workday and the fact they tend to make power curves non-linear.    

Power curve shape is independent of Vancian-ness.  3.5 Vancian casters were nonlinear because in addition to getting more spells per day, nearly every spell they already had increased in power at the same time.

You're still operating under some assumptions that Vancian casting (limited daily usage of spells) must operate under the same conditions as prior editions.  You cannot claim that anything that you've seen in a prior edition is "the only way."  Have you explored all the design space, to make that sort of authoritative claim?

As far as the 15-minute workday, many classes in prior editions also had daily resources.  There were tons of them in 3.5.  The question of the 15-minute workday is best answered by addressing the round-to-round variance of spellcaster power, rather than the day-long average.  If a caster feels satisfied with non-Vancian-cast options, instead of with the "I shoot it with my crossbow at -1," then that does a lot to curtail the "FIRE ZE MISSILES!  Now I am le tired."

You're dismissing out of hand the possibility that improvements to Vancian casting could me made.  I'm at a loss for understanding why.

Feb 21, 2012 -- 1:54PM, Polaris wrote:

Just because a bad mechanic has existed from the start does not make it iconic.  In fact in the 1970s especially on the west coast you were as likely to have non-Vancian DnD as Vancian DnD.  Hardly iconic IMO. 

I can't really comment on this part as I wasn't even alive in the 70's,  but if I could say anything it is that maybe that was your personal experience with your gaming circle in the 70's.  However even in your own post you mention that Vancian casting has been the core unaltered rule since before AD&D.  This time they are even going to do the work and make up an alternative system to vancian casting and include it as an option.  What is so wrong with that?

Feb 21, 2012 -- 1:54PM, Polaris wrote:

Not only that, but the only way to really balance Vancian casting mechanics is to give them to everyone because of the 15 min workday and the fact they tend to make power curves non-linear.  Of course, if you even HINT at that for non-wizards (or cleric) then you are "urinating on EGG's grave" or such non-sense.  This is why the Vancian mechnic contaminates everything it touches even if you don't use it directly.  Time to get rid of it already, or make it completely optional.  That is give Vancian mechanics to everyone or no one.


-Polaris
    

Some examples and/or proof here would be useful.  I have seen you say this before, but you give no examples of this happening or what you even mean by it.  You say a bunch of arbitrary jargon that basically sums up to, "I think it is imbalanced therefore it is imbalanced here are some words so you will agree with me."  Basically, How does Vancian magic contaminate everything it touches?

Feb 21, 2012 -- 1:41PM, Polaris wrote:

Chris,

Agreed and this is why what is traditional and iconic is NOT always good, and killing off good and REAL progress for nostalgia is a mistake.

-Polaris  

Nostalga for nostalga's sake is as deadly to effective development as new for new's sake. 

Case in point, my dad's PC just updated itself to ie9 where they changed the layout on things AGAIN, including doing away with the quick search bar on the same line as the address bar (that he relies to find EVERYTHING). Why the change? Well, because apparently they decided it needed to look different so you could tell it was different and know that they've put a lot of work into making it different (thankfully a system restore put everything back for him except the color of the icon, but I had to turn off automatic updates to keep it from happening again).

To my mind the key to creating a new edition of, well, ANYTHING should be to put everything on the table and then try to justify each part's existance. Nothing is sacred.

That includes 4E. AEDU class balance, minor action healing, alignments as fluff, and simple monster stat blocks should be up on the chopping block right alongside older edition concepts like different advancement structures, standard action healing, mechanical alignment effects and monsters with class levels.

The difference between those two lists I gave of course, is that I think its a lot easier to justify those 4E elements than it is to justify including the older edition concepts. But this doesn't mean that there isn't some better concept for any and all of the above either.

For example, while I think alignments should be purely fluff, I'd also rather see that fluff replaced with something more like the concept of Allegiences. One could swear an allegience to concepts like being good or following the law, but also to a god, government, organization, or even an individual and then ranked the importance of each.

Thus, in terms of role playing hooks, there's a difference between a PC whose allegiences are good, family, and law (in that order of importance) and another PC whose allegiences are law, family, and good (in that order of importance). While they both value the same things, they difference in priorities would put them at odds in cases where law and good , law and family, and good and family conflict.

Such a system is not significantly more complex than the fluff alignment system of 4E, but it provides a LOT more roleplaying hooks than the traditional alignment system ever could (where both of the above PC's would be lawful good).