| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
 Posted - 04 Jun 2013 : 06:10:59
|
As you scribes can see by the title of this thread, I would like to know from all scribes of Candlekeep, what alternatives there are to the Vancian Casting System. This has been bugging me for a long while and I would like to read your responses and suggestions.
It is not to say that I do not respect the system but first off the Vancian system has been with DND for a long time. Im amazed at what WOTC did to 4e they did not change Vancian system. Although I have read 5e is remaining Vancian
|
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2013 : 11:39:57
|
| Hmm I have been reading up...maybe a spell point system or some other variant along this line...? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
 |
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1607 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2013 : 12:11:13
|
Xar Zarath, a sage recently posted this article in a thread regarding an alternative magic system, see if it pleases you. It is not as free as the Ars Magica system, or as the World of Darkness' Sorcerer or Mage rules, but it is quite nice.
The Skills & Powers 2e rulebook brings a spell point system developed specifically to D&D. However, they usually ruled that the Vancian system and its limitations were the result of Mystra's changes in the Weave after the fall of Netheril. The Netheril: Empire of Magic 2e boxed set shows us that the greater flexibility of a spell-point system with some non-Vancian characteristics is what made Netheril highly magical, the legendary "glorious past" of magic. |
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12253 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2013 : 13:13:48
|
| Personally, I like the memorize and use system, but I know many don't. However, I've got to say that I found the reserve feat concept to be a nice dovetail concept to work with Vancian magic and still have some basically at will abilities. Now, whether "reserve feats" should continue as feats, class abilities, or something else entirely could be a good discussion. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2013 : 15:36:51
|
| My favorite is vitalized spell points. Though I like the idea of vitalizing psionics as well. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Bladewind
Master of Realmslore
Netherlands
1280 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2013 : 17:43:06
|
| Whoa, nice find! It captures the novel lore on Faeruns spellcasting quite adeptly. Ed likes to describe certain spells as taxing the wizard to the point of exhaustion (some even faint after casting their highest level spells). Vitalised spellpoints capture that in that excellent fatigue based system of spellcasting (especially the one where a spellcaster can cast spells that overreach his current available spell points and takes both lethal and subdual damage equal to the level of the spell). |
My campaign sketches
Druidic Groves
Creature Feature: Giant Spiders |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jun 2013 : 10:27:41
|
The vitalized spellpoints is good, very nice way of saying the price of magic and all that, though the spell point system is not bad as well.
How do I put the spell point in terms of LORE though? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1607 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jun 2013 : 11:58:04
|
I'm with sleyvas, for I see no problem in the memorization system. However, I do have my house rules. First of all, I understand that the Vancian way of explaining things is a bit weird, but then again, it is magic, not logic. But I prefer to think of things using Earthdawn's explanation, that the "memorization" is rather a ritual preparing the spell in the weave, and prompting its later access through a spellcasting trigger.
In my house rules, there is greater flexibility than in traditional Vanciam system, bur less than in the Netherese Spell Point system. Being so, Netheril is still a reference of power and flexible and indiscriminated use of magic. Basically, PCs can cast any combination of the spells they studied/prepared that day, within their limit of spells of that level that day. So, a 4th level wizard can study as many 1st and 2nd level he has in his book, and cast then in any combination, as long as he casts up to three 1st level spells and up to two 2nd level spells. He doesn't need to study a spell more than once to cast it repeatedly, but if it is not cast it is not "saved for later casting".
The problems are: if you try to cast a spell you haven't prepared that day, there is a chance of failure of 5% per day in the past you prepared it. Since higher level spells take a lot of time to study, PCs must administrate the time of their preparing, and track which spells they prepared at the previous days.
Finally, I allow them to cast beyond the normal allotment, but doing so causes damage (mostly - 75% - non-lethal). Besides, a priest casting beyond his limit can unplease his deity. Wizard spells cause 1d3/spell level and priest spells 1d4/ spell level of damage. Of course, my game is under 2e rules. Personally, my players only cast spells beyond the limit in a few, desperate situation, especially at low level, and at least once the mage fell unconscious after casting a spel (she was already hurt before the casting). Until now, this system has served me well.  |
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
|
|
|
JohnLynch
Learned Scribe
Australia
243 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jun 2013 : 13:00:52
|
There are sorcerers who are spontaneous casters and thus not Vancian.
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
Although I have read 5e is remaining Vancian
You've heard incorrectly. 5th ed is a merge between Vancian and spontaneous casting of 3.5e. It is not true Vancian as it has some enhancements and benefits taken from the spontaneous casting system that 3.5e sorcerers use. |
DM of the Realms: A blog for my Forgotten Realms adventures. |
|
|
|
Kyrel
Learned Scribe
151 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jun 2013 : 22:50:02
|
Personally I've never been very fond of the Vancian system, so I've been playing around with some different ideas for alternative systems. In terms of Mages I've recently been considdering something along the following lines:
To cast a spell, the caster must make a spellcraft check at a DC15+3*Spell level.
A success means that the spell is cast as intended and functions as normal in the rules.
A failure means that the spell does not go off.
A natural 1 on the test means that the caster has miscast the spell in some way, and something unintended and potentially disastrous and harmful has happened. Roll on the Miscast Table. (A modified variant of the table used for the Wand of Wonder might serve as a basis for such a table, with the added possibility of having the miscast spell cause damage or worse to the mage).
There is no limit to how many spells the caster can try to cast per day.
(Sorcerers can use the same system but with Concentration in stead of Spellcraft possibly. Bards might use Perform in stead.)
The goal of the rules here is to turn spellcasting into a skill related matter where the ability to cast an unlimited amount of spells each day is limited by making it uncertain that you will succeed. One required change is that all feats and the like that boosts Spellcraft has to disappear from the game, and INT modifiers could also become problematic, if allowed to go too high.
The idea here is untested, but one possible issue is that at higher levels, casting lower level spells become too easy. Hopefully, however, it will be somewhat balanced out by tough monsters being less suceptible to lower level spells, and the permanent possibility of miscasting. There are undoubtedly further problems with my idea, but anyway...
|
|
|
|
Emma Drake
Learned Scribe
USA
206 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2013 : 02:02:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
Personally I've never been very fond of the Vancian system, so I've been playing around with some different ideas for alternative systems. In terms of Mages I've recently been considdering something along the following lines:
To cast a spell, the caster must make a spellcraft check at a DC15+3*Spell level.
A success means that the spell is cast as intended and functions as normal in the rules.
A failure means that the spell does not go off.
A natural 1 on the test means that the caster has miscast the spell in some way, and something unintended and potentially disastrous and harmful has happened. Roll on the Miscast Table. (A modified variant of the table used for the Wand of Wonder might serve as a basis for such a table, with the added possibility of having the miscast spell cause damage or worse to the mage).
There is no limit to how many spells the caster can try to cast per day.
(Sorcerers can use the same system but with Concentration in stead of Spellcraft possibly. Bards might use Perform in stead.)
The goal of the rules here is to turn spellcasting into a skill related matter where the ability to cast an unlimited amount of spells each day is limited by making it uncertain that you will succeed. One required change is that all feats and the like that boosts Spellcraft has to disappear from the game, and INT modifiers could also become problematic, if allowed to go too high.
The idea here is untested, but one possible issue is that at higher levels, casting lower level spells become too easy. Hopefully, however, it will be somewhat balanced out by tough monsters being less suceptible to lower level spells, and the permanent possibility of miscasting. There are undoubtedly further problems with my idea, but anyway...
At first level a mage has to make a DC 18 spellcraft to cast 1st level spells? For the average mage that has a +7 Spellcraft at first level (16 intel, 1 rank, +3 for class skill), that's a 50% failure rate (need an 11 or better) and the possibility of blowing yourself up. At 3rd level, a mage has to make a DC 21 check to cast a 2nd level spell and now only has a +9 spellcraft, which means you need to roll a 12 or better. At 5th level, a mage has to make a DC 24 spellcraft check to cast a 3rd level spell and now only has a +11, requiring a 13 or better to successfully cast. If you jump up to 13th level, a mage has to make a DC 36 spellcraft check to cast a 7th level spell. A 13th level mage probably now has an 18 intel, 13 ranks, and the class skill bonus, bringing it to +20 spell craft, requiring a 16 or better roll to cast the spell. By the time you get to 9th level spells, you have a DC 42 check and around a +25 spellcraft. You need a 17 or better to successfully cast your highest level spells, an 80% chance of failure. (Calculations based on PF.)
Am I missing something? Because that seems pretty harsh. I don't think I'd ever play a mage with that system and mages are the class I prefer to play whenever possible.
Unlimited magic missiles don't help you one whit when the dragon is laughing at you (after it eats you) because a few bad rolls meant you did absolutely nothing for the entire combat. |
"I am always here, all about you. You are never truly alone. I flow wherever life flows, wherever winds blow and water runs and the sun and moon chase each other, for there is magic in all things."
- Mystra (Ed Greenwood, Silverfall) |
Edited by - Emma Drake on 06 Jun 2013 02:03:15 |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2013 : 09:59:34
|
| Ok those seem like credible methods and alternatives. I only want to frame it in terms of the lore...somehow making the lore is tougher than the system... |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Kyrel
Learned Scribe
151 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2013 : 14:15:46
|
Emma Drake. No, you are not missing anything, and I agree, it can be somewhat harsh. The challenge is that I'm aiming for a reasonable difficulty for casting the highest level spells available to the caster, while still leaving an actual chance to fail at the casting rolls of some of the lower level spells. I've tried the calculation with the casting DC as 15+2xSpell level in stead. That means that you are casting infinite 9th level spells at 17th level on a DC33, most likely meaning 1d20+24 or more, meaning 9+ or less. Possibly fair enough for a a 9th level spell, but as you go down the spell levels, you very quickly end up with a situation where the mage can only fail on a "1" on the d20. And even then he might still get a positive effect, depending on how you design the miscast table. A 5th level spell, for instance would then be cast at a DC25, meaning that you likely would have automatic success, except on a "1".
For the sake of the argument, let's take a level 20 mage. Assuming INT16 at start, at 20th level he's minimum got INT19, and most likely he'll have 24-26. That'll give him Spellcraft 23 + INT bonus of minimum +4, and quite likely +8, bringing him up to a Spellcraft 27-31. Rolling against DC42 that means a roll of 15+ or more likely 11+. Somewhere in the 25-50% odds of casting a 9th level spell, every round. A 17th lvl. mage with INT19 and spellcraft 20 is admittingly aiming for an 18+ to cast a 9th level spell, but again, he is likely to have at least INT20 at this point, meaning that the DC will be 17 or less.
As pointed out, this is something I've just been kicking around in my own head. So far I've had no chance at trying to playtest anything, so frankly I have no idea about whether this might work in real life. My aim has been around 25-50% chance of casting spells of your highest level, whilst still being able to fail at mid level spells during high level play.
Edit
One thing that could be done with the system would be to provide a bonus to the Spellcraft check for spending longer on casting the spell (making sure that you are casting the spell right). I.e. +1d4 or 1d6 extra on the check, for each round beyond the first, spend casting the spell. Thus a 1st lvl. mage casting a 1st level spell with his effective Spellcraft of 7 could spend an additional round to roll 7+1d20+1d4/1d6 vs. the DC of 18.
Another alternative could be to allow taking feats that boost your Spellcraft skill. |
Edited by - Kyrel on 07 Jun 2013 11:58:49 |
|
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1607 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2013 : 20:33:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
Ok those seem like credible methods and alternatives. I only want to frame it in terms of the lore...somehow making the lore is tougher than the system...
Well, since my system is basically still Vancian, I see no problem with the lore. About the other systems, what's the issue with lore, exactly? Most of the systems keep the spells formulae (specific spells like "magic missile", "fireball" and "wish"), unlike the World of Darkness and Ars Magica free systems, and so they are not significantly different from the original Vancian system.
Is there any difference that must be explained, and that I cannot see? Maybe the possibility of a low-level caster employing a more powerful spell? They can just be rarer, or maybe more powerful casters usually keep those spells from inexperienced casters for security, and for political (knowledge is power) or mystical reasons. |
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
Edited by - Barastir on 06 Jun 2013 20:36:02 |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2013 : 05:29:13
|
More of the spell point system, Barastir. I know how to frame it in terms of sorcerers, as spell points can be attributed to their innate power and connection with magic, supernatural bloodline etc.
How do I explain wizards using spell points?
And as a side question, if anyone uses spell points in their games, how do you handle metamagic for both sorcerers and wizards? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Kyrel
Learned Scribe
151 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2013 : 11:37:54
|
Xar. I'd explain spellpoints for mages as a representation of how much magical energy a mage can channel over the course of a day. Magic is taxing on the body and mind, and hence there is a limit on how much of it you can channel through yourself in a day, without having it physically burn you out. The more practiced you get, the more you get used to doing it, and the more ways to do in it a less taxing manner you learn.
As for metamagic and spellpoints I'd simply run with it as turning the spell into a full round action, and then increase the cost of casting the spell, in terms of spellpoint cost, to the spell level the spell would normally equal under the Vancian system. I.e. a lvl. 3 Fireball with a +1 level metamagic effect applied would be cast as a Full Round action and would cost the number of spellpoints you'd normally have to spend for a 4th level spell. |
|
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1607 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2013 : 12:22:21
|
| That's a good explanation by Kyrel. I think the only problem is: if casters can do magic with this flexibility, what makes Netherese magic so different and special? Maybe the feats they could access, and maybe metamagic or epic spells could be limited to the casters of this legendary past. |
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
|
|
|
Kyrel
Learned Scribe
151 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2013 : 14:38:58
|
In that regard Barastir, I'd say three things set Netheril apart from the "modern" Realms:
1) The "saturation" of magic in Netherese society. Per the old Netherese set, every class could do some form of magic, though admittingly it was cantrip stuff like polish a sword, knit some dough if you were a baker etc., but still. Everybody could do magic. Also, the quasi-magical items that drew their power from the...sorry, the name eludes me for the moment, but the magical "power generators" that were heart of every enclave (and which happened to be bad for the Weave, but anyway...)
2) The ease of access to epic level magic. True 10+ level spells. Not 8+ level spells boosted with metamagic effects. Not silly more or less one-off spells that are essentially ritual type spells with huge costs to them. But actual spells you could realistically cast on a regular basis (if needed). (Sorry, but my memory of the Epic level casting rules are somewhat rusty. I've never had an excuse to use the rules, as my normal player troupe hardly ever run campaigns above 14th level.)
3) The number of epic level mages and thus the incidence of epic level magic.
Finally I'll pose the question: Why should a mid-level Arcanist of Netheril be any more powerful than a "modern" Mage? I don't believe that there is any reason that should be the case at all. The real difference is in the amount of magic in society, and the truely epic level magical stuff.
|
Edited by - Kyrel on 07 Jun 2013 14:44:06 |
|
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1607 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2013 : 12:27:21
|
This is a good answer, Kyrel, thank you. I'll still have the difference between spell points and my semi-vancian system in my game, but now I better comprehend how can netherese magic be seen with awe in a spell-point setting. Besides, maybe the legends about Netheril also grew with time, of course. By the way, the word you were searching for is "Mythallar".
|
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2535 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jun 2013 : 20:00:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Barastir
Xar Zarath, a sage recently posted this article
403 - Forbidden
quote:
they usually ruled that the Vancian system and its limitations were the result of Mystra's changes in the Weave after the fall of Netheril. The Netheril: Empire of Magic 2e boxed set shows us that the greater flexibility of a spell-point system with some non-Vancian characteristics is what made Netheril highly magical, the legendary "glorious past" of magic.
Yup. As any primitive spell levels -only system, it quickly gets relatively overpowered, but it's Netheril.
Of course, for the same reason such a thing would make d20 utterly ridiculous. 
Either way, see Net Wizard's Handbook for a few other examples.
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Personally, I like the memorize and use system, but I know many don't.
It's not like they are hard to hybridize fire&forget, spellpoints and/or checks.
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
Finally I'll pose the question: Why should a mid-level Arcanist of Netheril be any more powerful than a "modern" Mage? I don't believe that there is any reason that should be the case at all.
The Weave wasn't in shreds? |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1607 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jun 2013 : 11:36:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Barastir
Xar Zarath, a sage recently posted this article
403 - Forbidden
(...)
Just tested it here and it is working. Maybe there's a filter there, TBeholder? I think it is a bit big to post here, but maybe I can send it to you by PM. Want it? |
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2535 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2014 : 10:09:48
|
As an example, if you can find Green Ronin version of Thieves' World, it got some very good ideas on this issue.
quote:
Originally posted by Barastir
Xar Zarath, a sage recently posted this article in a thread regarding an alternative magic system
(now that networks unstuck )
Aside of multiple logical and linguistical fallacies and plain wrong statements (e.g. about Dark Sun), the valid points are:
- xD&D flavour of Vancian magic leads to "Linear Warriors, Quadratic Wizards" effect.
We also know that linear attempts to offset the curve, being prohibited from actually counteracting it (higher level must not be worse in any way), expectably drop lower end into "unplayable" and/or raise higher into "ridiculous".
- "Utility belt" approach forces to make choices, but this boils down to either minimax or maximin, neither of which is too interesting.
Usually it's variations of either shield/fireball package or illusion/divination package in less warlike environment. Carrying more than 1 quirky utility spell at all times is a viable option only on higher levels and even then these are taken mostly for flavour or because square wizard finally can afford it.
- "memorization" is a very unfortunate term.
A problem not addressed in the article, but very obvious in d20 with all those custom spellcasting classes: lack of interaction between powers of different classes. Multiclassing leads to sets of spells and limits - X as bard and Y as wizard - being just dropped in two completely separate piles, and that's it.
In the end, the winning criteria here are "playable" and "fits into the setting's look&feel".
But there are many options to consider and many pre-existing features to adapt.
|
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1608 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2014 : 11:00:58
|
Vancian magic isn't the problem. The issue is that spells and class features can invalidate classes and the economy (druid animal companion, wizard conjuration shenanigans (blood money too in PF), cleric DMM), divine casters know their entire spell list and there are so many ways to completely get around the issue of limited spell slots.
The 13th level wizard has a very high chance of turning the 20th level fighter into a bloodstain because he has spells, not because he's vancian. The other issue is that noncasters are reliant on caster shenanigans so a nerf to casters is a nerf to the whole party, thus Kyrel's suggestions don't just kick the casters in the balls, they also kick the entire party in the nuts.
Therefore, either you nerf spells or you restrict your spellcasters to non-T1 or T2 classes. |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6456 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2014 : 12:05:19
|
In making my own system i tried to solve the overpowered caster problem in several ways.
1 - Link the power of a spell directly to the spell slot used to memorise a spell (spells can now be memorised in any slot and im so annoyed WoTC already used that method as everyone will think i stole it).
2 - Allow characters the freedom of choice over class abilities. So each class gets a list of class abilities (pertinent to their class) that they can choose.
3 - Ensure each class can choose a number of abilities at each level. Caster classes (cleric, druid, wizard) get 1 ability per level. Martial classes (fighter, barbarian, paladin, ranger) get 1.5 abilities per level. Skill classes (Rogue, Bard, and Monk - although the monk doesnt have many skills) get 2 per level.
That way all the classes operate out of the same mould, they all have access to a variety of abilities to draw upon and so all have similar power ranges at the same level.
Of course its a lot more complicated than that but thats the basics. Point systems are fine, but it just doesnt feel right for me, i've always played with the vancian method since 2nd edition so its stuck with me. |
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9
Alternate Realms Site |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1274 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2014 : 12:37:04
|
| Although it was broken. I think with some love, the Binder class could be modified to make a workable magic system. I loved that class. |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
xaviera
Learned Scribe
Canada
149 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2014 : 14:56:42
|
I was also going to mention the Ars Magica system.
Outside of a Vancian system or some other variant where you choose from a fixed list of spells (e.g. D&D Sorcerors), the options seem to me to be limited to some sort of point-based system where the costs for parts of a spell are added up. Such systems could be 'grammatical', with a subject-verb-object structure and/or a set of categories for which values must be specified (target, distance, area of effect, element, etc.). The devil, of course, is in the details.
It might be interesting to play in a low-magic world where High (i.e. Ritual) magic is the main form of casting (a combination of the Deryni novels and the Chivalry & Sorcery system for making items), but some sort of point-based system still needs to be used to determine how much time/effort is involved in the casting.
|
Writings on Sharess: Thoughts & Prayers by Xaviera ~ High Priestess of Sharess |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2014 : 20:25:34
|
There are already enough points and numbers to add up, keep track of, count and multipy. And as my group does not meet very regularly to play we are all very happy about this system as it is just "easy to play" imo.
True, the Vacian System might not be the most interesting system for players, as it limits the potential of the wizard. However, I always liked it it's easy handling. And furthermore - I use this option already for many many years through 1st, 2nd, 3rd and now 3.5 ed. that I don't recall if it actually is an official rule or house rule - a wizard in desparate needs of a certain spell might always read it straight out of his spellbook like a scroll, destroying the pages on which that spell is written on in the process.
But hey - he can always copy it back into his spellbook from the next scroll he get his hands on. |
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1608 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2014 : 09:49:25
|
| Wizards are among (if not) the most powerful classes in the game, how can their potential be limited by Vancian casting? |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
37018 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2014 : 15:03:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
Wizards are among (if not) the most powerful classes in the game, how can their potential be limited by Vancian casting?
I wonder about things like that, myself... The character I'm playing now is a gun mage, a variant sorcerer. He can do some nasty damage from a distance -- but the big battle we had Thursday night, he got stuck in melee and had his butt handed to him. He would have been reduced to 0 hp or less if not for a couple of breaks and getting to shoot enemies with a vampiric touch. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Xal Valzar
Learned Scribe
Argentina
214 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2014 : 18:51:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Barastir
but then again, it is magic, not logic.
OH NO! (' ')
well its not that bad but it is a grave metaphysical mistake, the one that leads to most of the confusion about magic.
also logic is mans way of surviving, we owe our life to our use of logic as it is our way of understanding reality, even a fantasy reality. saying magic is illogical means that we either throw out the real world or we throw out fantasy, both of which are precious.
alas don't worry i have a resultion and an explanation.
Magic must have a nature, everything in fact must have an exact definite nature. The alternative to something not having a nature is for it to both be itself AND not be itself IE nothing. I mean literally nothing.
It as if I were to roll a 14 and not a 14. Well... what did i roll? nothing, that is a contradiction, something that is and is not.
we can see that there are 2 axioms involved (an axiom is what is a fundamental fact that all other facts and arguments rest on). The axiom of existence. that: it IS.
the flip side of that is that it posses a definite nature. an identity. this is another aspect of the same thing. that: IT is.
whatever it is it is itself. A is A.
so whatever magic is IT IS magic.
now what does this have to do with logic?
well logic is a human invention - invented by Aristotle - of a way of thinking to follow thought in accordnce to the laws of reality. the most fundamental law is the law of non-contridiction. when thinking about magic(or anything else for the matter) one must think of what he is aware of there being and then identify it in a way that does not cause contradictions.
though magic is very much different from our sciences the same general method of induction must be applied to it to discover its exact nature by logic. |
Knowledge is Power |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1608 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2014 : 19:01:39
|
| Logic goes out the window with magic, unless you really think you can apply logic to the wish spell. Magic follows its own laws. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Alternatives to Vancian Casting System
