|
11 months ago ::
Jul 16, 2012 - 11:13PM
#91
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2012
|
Man, I'm starting to wish the word "streamline" would stricken from the dictionary. Every time I see it thrown around in the design of anything, it ends up being a polite way of saying "we're going to dumb this down so hard that the end result is garbage!"
At any rate, I don't think they were trying to make a new "streamlined" system. They were trying to "recapture the essence" of D&D. I feel like they've been pretty upfront about their intentions of trying to wrangle in older edition fans back into the game (or maybe I've misread their intentions the entire time; *shrug*). Assuming I'm right, Vancian is, speaking historically, how Wizards have delivered their spells. You can argue that there are tens or hundreds or thousands of non-D&D systems out there that have "better" spell systems. But those aren't D&D. And I'm willing to wager that few of those systems come close to being as widely played.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 16, 2012 - 11:18PM
#92
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
Because not everyone wants every class to feel the same except for flavor text.
I'll take a game where the classes feel simialr(despite actually playing wildly different) over a game where most of the classes all use exactly the same spells(don't most of the arcance classes all take from the same spell list?)
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 16, 2012 - 11:21PM
#93
|
|
|
I've removed content from this thread because edition warring, personal attacks and baiting are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here. Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 16, 2012 - 11:21PM
#94
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2012
|
Because not everyone wants every class to feel the same except for flavor text.
I'll take a game where the classes feel simialr(despite actually playing wildly different) over a game where most of the classes all use exactly the same spells(don't most of the arcance classes all take from the same spell list?)
Sorcerers and Wizards do. They're both different outlets for the same type of energy though. And, more importantly, Sorcerers were the answer for people who wanted a less-Vancian approach to casting. Most classes have their own unique spell lists though. There are a lot of spells the bleed over between lists, but they aren't uniform.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 16, 2012 - 11:32PM
#95
|
Date Joined:
Nov 22, 2007
|
English,
Your understanding of the varied spellcaster options of pre 4e seems very limited.
Alternatives were available as far back as 2e where an alternate point system was presented.
3e had sorcerers who had variation in X per day and total known but otherwise the spell list was separate from other casters.
Clerics had their own list with very little overlap.
Bards, Druids, and rangers took a little from both lists.
Warlocks had their own unique list of spells.
Dragon Shamans had unique aura effects and were likely as big an influence on 4e warlords as the Marshal.
In 2 and 3 e the DMG gave great guidelines on creating and balancing new spells, races, and classes.
The variety is there and the options to customize are offered.
Brave Knights of W.T.F. Gryphon Helm Winner.
Edition wars kill players, this will kill Dungeons and Dragons.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 17, 2012 - 1:44AM
#96
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2003
|
to the one who asked what an easy, accessible "default" casting system would be:
- pick X spells, according to what your level dictates
- get Y spell slots, depending on level
- cast your spells according to the cost mentioned in the spell's description
- add restrictions/guidelines for balance
this is basically a "mana" system that many (younger) players already know from their favourite console/computer RPGs. It is logical, easy to understand and comprehend, allows great customization and feels "like home" for many.
edit: is has also been around in D&D for a while, being the basic system behind 3.5 psionics which I loved
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 17, 2012 - 2:05AM
#97
|
|
|
You seem to be missing the point. Kid sits down to play D&D for the first time. He's been weaned on the mother's milk of the LotR movies and HP. He wants to play a wizard, a manipulator of arcane forces, a powerful force.
He gets the vancian, once a day then sleep on it wizard.
True. But the problem isnt the spellslots. The problem is the “once a day”.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 17, 2012 - 2:11AM
#98
|
Date Joined:
May 31, 2012
|
For me it makes sense that a Wizard uses tomes and spellbooks and the so called dread Vancian system and Sorcerer a more innate caster.
But I guess they could use a system based on Magic the Gathering where the planewalker draw mana from the world and environment.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 17, 2012 - 2:30AM
#99
|
|
|
I happen to agree with the OP, but if they didn't go with AEDU or Vancian in the core, then what would they use? What is a simple magic system?
How about a bunch of minor spells or do like the fighter. You get a magic spell that deals X damage. If you want to do cool things you have to improvise...
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 17, 2012 - 2:30AM
#100
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2007
|
Considering that the biggest design goal is "evoke all previous editions of D&D," Vancian casting does a pretty good job of evoking Vancian casting. It's problematic in a lot of ways, but it's D&D's burden. And if Wizards of the Coast is right, it's a burden that D&D can't afford to shake. Too many veterans are attached to it, and it's one of those things that sets D&D apart. Sadly, I suppose the same could be argued for any number of archaic, disfunctional rules that D&D has contained in editions past.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
|
|
|
