Retain the versatility via spell-swapping, and you still get Vancian. That's what they *tried* to do with 4E (the spell-swapping), but it's obvious that the fact that wizards have no say on what type of spells they can place in their spell slots was very.... disillusioning.
You do realize in 4E PHB the wizard did have choices of which daily and encounter spells to prepare right? and later they even came out with a book option that further expanded the number of spells know. Please don't spread rumors that aren't true about 4E...
No I'm not being strung along like this. Either the stuff I want is in at release or this edition won't be for me.
OK, let's go over this again:
As far as we know, at least some modules (such as tactical grid vs Theatre of the Mind combat options) will be in on day 1.
I don't know about anyone else, but I expect there to be a playtest that explicitly asks us to compare and contrast some of the basic alternative modules.
Of course there are going to be other modules published in later books. I don't expect to be able to go ogre-hunting with an AK47 and a Jeep on day 1, or play a magical demigod-angel like Gandalf.
But 'wait for the modules' does not intrinsically mean 'wait until after the launch of the full game'.
Z.
Your 'wait for modules' is a little to close to WotC 'soon'...
Don't like this playtest? Give negative feedback and don't play it. Wait till next playtest is out. Is it good? No, reiterate. Yes, look, here comes what you want!
If a playtest that you liuke will never come out just take a look at a friend's core book of next. Is what you like there? Yes, play or stick with your game if you prefer. No, stick with your game.
Don't like this playtest? Give negative feedback and don't play it. Wait till next playtest is out. Is it good? No, reiterate. Yes, look, here comes what you want!
If a playtest that you liuke will never come out just take a look at a friend's core book of next. Is what you like there? Yes, play or stick with your game if you prefer. No, stick with your game.
That's ewasy, really.
Maybe your not familiar with my reference.
WotC promised that the DDi tools would be out on release of 4E, this included a VTT, A character builder, and a character visualizer, they vaguely hinted at map makers and things like that. Now after the thing was late three months they started saying 'soon' when asked when it would come out. A stripped down simplified version came out last year. The character builder was late by about 1 year. The other parts never materialized.
So now when someone says "go SOON yourself" on the forums they are using profanity.
Retain the versatility via spell-swapping, and you still get Vancian. That's what they *tried* to do with 4E (the spell-swapping), but it's obvious that the fact that wizards have no say on what type of spells they can place in their spell slots was very.... disillusioning.
You do realize in 4E PHB the wizard did have choices of which daily and encounter spells to prepare right? and later they even came out with a book option that further expanded the number of spells know. Please don't spread rumors that aren't true about 4E...
Vancian entails that you get to choose the number of times you can cast a spell. If, in an average adventuring day, you had 4 instances of a situation where your prepared spell could be of use, memorizing that spell 4 times effectively makes it an encounter power (because you'd want to reserve each use of it). If in each instance, rounds were counted and fights lasted 2-3 rounds, the ability to cast the spell 8-12 times a day effectively made it at-will, like how a Wand of Cure Light Wounds effectively created at-will healing given its low gp cost and 50 casts per wand.
On the other hand, 4E PHB wizards can only choose 2 at-wills, 1 encounter power, and 2 daily powers (only one of which can be prepared and used on a given day), and a third at-will if you were human (or a second encounter power [actually at-will-as-encounter power] if you were half-elf). You didn't have a choice rules-wise between getting at-wills, encounters or dailies: you took it all and you had to like it. Just like how you had no choice prior to PHB 3 for anything BUT 2 at-wills, 1 encounter power, and 1 daily power at level 1 as any other class; there was no player input in the matter without DM houseruling, so even if you *liked* doing just basic attacks and improvisation galore, there was no real incentive for it. You NEEDED to take those powers, otherwise the DM would likely say "that's not a legitimate character" or worse the group would berate you for "doing it wrong".
D&D Next in this playtest hamfists to us both the classic Vancian brokenness *and* the restriction of player choice in character development. The latter is understandable, as we do not have the character generation rules yet. But the former, that is certainly a potential source of travestry for those who want balance, yet at the same time if we go the 4E route of enforcing the "you must take these types of powers", then you remove some of the most loved things about casters in D&D history: their versatility in built-in options, their "magic"-ness.
13th Age shows how you can have the good parts of Vancian spellcasting without the bad parts. By providing a more controlled form the slot mechanics and balancing the spells, you remove the problems of too many spells per day (turning dailies into at-wills), trap option spells (by allowing frequency of use to be a determining factor in gauging spell power within the same spell level), and wild spell scaling (like how D&D Next does it)... but at the same time, you still provide the iconic flexibility of Vancian spellcasting.
It's like you turned all the 4E Wizard powers into spell slots, and then told the player: "Alright, here are your 5 level 1 spell slots, and here are your spells. You can't take the same spell twice, but if you want to do something more than once per day, there are encounter spells you can pick, and if you want spells that are usable all day, go for the at-will spells".
By the way, I believe you are referring to the Mage from Heroes of the Fallen Lands, and not the Wizard, because the Wizard only got his spell flexibility via Arcane Power, and had no way of swapping encounter powers prior to that book. The Mage on the other hand, could swap encounter powers from the get-go.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
Retain the versatility via spell-swapping, and you still get Vancian. That's what they *tried* to do with 4E (the spell-swapping), but it's obvious that the fact that wizards have no say on what type of spells they can place in their spell slots was very.... disillusioning.
You do realize in 4E PHB the wizard did have choices of which daily and encounter spells to prepare right? and later they even came out with a book option that further expanded the number of spells know. Please don't spread rumors that aren't true about 4E...
Vancian entails that you get to choose the number of times you can cast a spell. If, in an average adventuring day, you had 4 instances of a situation where your prepared spell could be of use, memorizing that spell 4 times effectively makes it an encounter power (because you'd want to reserve each use of it). If in each instance, rounds were counted and fights lasted 2-3 rounds, the ability to cast the spell 8-12 times a day effectively made it at-will, like how a Wand of Cure Light Wounds effectively created at-will healing given its low gp cost and 50 casts per wand.
On the other hand, 4E PHB wizards can only choose 2 at-wills, 1 encounter power, and 2 daily powers (only one of which can be prepared and used on a given day), and a third at-will if you were human (or a second encounter power [actually at-will-as-encounter power] if you were half-elf). You didn't have a choice rules-wise between getting at-wills, encounters or dailies: you took it all and you had to like it. Just like how you had no choice prior to PHB 3 for anything BUT 2 at-wills, 1 encounter power, and 1 daily power at level 1 as any other class; there was no player input in the matter without DM houseruling, so even if you *liked* doing just basic attacks and improvisation galore, there was no real incentive for it. You NEEDED to take those powers, otherwise the DM would likely say "that's not a legitimate character" or worse the group would berate you for "doing it wrong".
D&D Next in this playtest hamfists to us both the classic Vancian brokenness *and* the restriction of player choice in character development. The latter is understandable, as we do not have the character generation rules yet. But the former, that is certainly a potential source of travestry for those who want balance, yet at the same time if we go the 4E route of enforcing the "you must take these types of powers", then you remove some of the most loved things about casters in D&D history: their versatility in built-in options, their "magic"-ness.
13th Age shows how you can have the good parts of Vancian spellcasting without the bad parts. By providing a more controlled form the slot mechanics and balancing the spells, you remove the problems of too many spells per day (turning dailies into at-wills), trap option spells (by allowing frequency of use to be a determining factor in gauging spell power within the same spell level), and wild spell scaling (like how D&D Next does it)... but at the same time, you still provide the iconic flexibility of Vancian spellcasting.
It's like you turned all the 4E Wizard powers into spell slots, and then told the player: "Alright, here are your 5 level 1 spell slots, and here are your spells. You can't take the same spell twice, but if you want to do something more than once per day, there are encounter spells you can pick, and if you want spells that are usable all day, go for the at-will spells".
By the way, I believe you are referring to the Mage from Heroes of the Fallen Lands, and not the Wizard, because the Wizard only got his spell flexibility via Arcane Power, and had no way of swapping encounter powers prior to that book. The Mage on the other hand, could swap encounter powers from the get-go.
I looked it up its 2 daily and utility spells. Each time you level up you and gain a daily or utility spell you get 2 and prepare one. Then they came out with the book option (instead of the orb, wand, or staff) which allowed you to know even more spells. They were very versatile especially if you chose the book option... Also you can change out a spell every time you level which on average was about once every 12 encounters or something like that... 4 encounters per day equals 3 days per level...
I looked it up its 2 daily and utility spells. Each time you level up you and gain a daily or utility spell you get 2 and prepare one. Then they came out with the book option (instead of the orb, wand, or staff) which allowed you to know even more spells. They were very versatile especially if you chose the book option... Also you can change out a spell every time you level which on average was about once every 12 encounters or something like that... 4 encounters per day equals 3 days per level...
Point taken, but you explicitly stated the PHB 4E Wizard having the ability to swap out encounter powers out of the box, without clarifying that it was UTILITY ENCOUNTER POWERS that could be swapped. Hence, my reaction.
Seriously, 4E's the first TRPG I've learned, so I *think* you don't need to preach to the choir.
Here's my point though: yes, we get it, Vancian spellcasting stays. Now the devs better *fix* Vancian spellcasting, because the fix is already 30+ years overdue.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
