Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Vancian Magic


D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond)

451 to 458 of 458 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Laurefindel wrote:

Page jump!

icarr757 wrote:

Vancian magic simply needs to die.

The "guess which spells you MIGHT need today and if you guess wrong you are screwed" just screams at me "NOT FUN!" Add to that, if your gm has you in a "fast and furious" segment of a adventure and you dont have time to take the required study time to swap out to new spells, whats your option...? A wand, a crossbow?

Why is the concept of a ponts based mana pool and a feedback/stress penalty for mages getting to spell happy so difficult to grok when it comes to d&d/pathfinder?

Not sure if I'm biting to trollbait here (poster's history is short but looks serious however)...

Looks that you have a bone with spell preparation, which is admittedly one of the three main ingredients of Vancian casting.

From your post, I'm not quite sure if you like or dislike the second part of Vancian magic which is magic as a finite resource. It doesn't matter if you're using magic points, mana pool or spell slots, a vancian mage can run out of spell (and will indeed have to rely on other methods thereafter).

Actually, few people have an issue with the first element of Vancian casting; magic is packaged into spells, which IMO works well from a RPG perspective.

Like everyone, you're entitled your opinion, but Vancian magic doesn't need to die. It provides a self-contained system with precise parameters to work with. The fact that D&D uses spell slots and a quadratic progression isn't Vancian in itself; one could create a linear, spell-point driven magic system based on the Vancian principles that 1) magic is packaged into spells, 2) spellcasting uses a finite amount of energy and 3) spells need to be prepared in order to be cast in combat/rushed/distracting situations.

'findel

Ya know, I just leveled up my Aasimar Cleric of Kossuth (v3.5) to 5th level and as I go through my spell slots, I find myself often going to one 'always' spell (being Prayer), one 'useful/utility' spell (being Invisibility Purge), and one Domain spell which varies greatly from level to level (in this case Recitation). But I'm still not happy that we might never fight invisible monsters and the lurking fear of dreaded Disease/Blindness/Curses that I can cure will undermine my decision. It's a requirment of the class, and I trudge on, but it's not one I'm happy with.

So I'm ok with a limited resource aspect, (please give me some basic prayer at-will though) but the preparation of spells that I might never use is a bit bothersome. I don't know if there is an equal aspect to it or if just leaving slots open to use and taking out the preparation completely would be an "OK" factor?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Diffan wrote:
Ya know, I just leveled up my Aasimar Cleric of Kossuth (v3.5) to 5th level and as I go through my spell slots, I find myself often going to one 'always' spell (being Prayer), one 'useful/utility' spell...

I think that one can make a Vancian system that "stretches" the conventions of Vancian magic a bit (personally, I'm not in favour of doing so, but I understand that compromise are sometimes required in order to meet the expectations of many). For example, Pathfinder grants at-will cantrips, which directly goes against the principle that vancian magic is finite and limited. There's also the whole 3rd ed sorcerer/favoured soul route, where limited selection offers no need for spell preparation. An hybrid is also conceivable, whereas caster know a limited amount of spells that they can cast spontaneously, and a wider selection that need to be prepared in order to be cast in rushed/threatened/combat situation. That or give all spells a casting time of 10 minutes, which can be shortened to 1 round with preparation or a specific feat/ability/power for that particular spell.

Conceivable, there should also be (cheap) ways of granting spell-caster an easy way to "store" a favourite spell without taxing their magical output without breaking the game. Scribing scrolls does that to a great extent, but I agree that the flavour of scrolls is mostly geared toward wizards...

Personally, I'm not in favour of at-will magic or magic that consumes a negligible quantity of spell slots/magical energy/mana cost (in the frame of a Vancian magic system that is). Instead, I'd prefer if the Cleric (for example) was granted a non-magical bless ability that confers a +1 moral bonus to attack and against fear. Give the Wizard a non-magical way to detect magic etc. Ideally, designe the system mechanically so that this bless ability complete (rather that compete with) the bard's inspire courage ability etc.

At any case, I'm not a fan of the wizard spamming puny spells, in parts because I find that it demote magic to something inferior in power and "awesomeness" than a crossbow. And if the at-will magic attack is superior to that of a crossbow, than it tends to offset the balance between the caster and the guys who's stuck with the crossbow in the first place. I much prefer (in terms of consistency with the principles of Vancian magic) spells like produce flame which create a reusable magic attacks over several rounds (stretching into minutes in that case).

[edit] Aside from the above, why didn't you make an Aasimar favoured soul of Kossuth, it looks to me like that class would match your gaming style better?

'findel

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

I think if Vancian magic is to work well then D&D Next will have to give a good bit of GM advice. Basically if players are going to feel its worth preparing those "very useful but only in rare circumstances" spells, then the GM needs to allow the players to get an idea of what they are likely to face well beforehand.

So for example, if a GM can allow the players to do a bit of research, or listen to stories about the monster that lives in the woods, and that reveals that the monster "can hide itself from plain view, appearing out of nowhere to strike its victims down", then the PCs may think "invisibility" and prepare Faerie Fire or See Invisibility.

Equally, if the PCs know that part of the dungeon they are likely to be exploring is going to be underwater ahead of time they may prepare Water Breathing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Plenty of gamers have used Vancian magic quite happily through many editions of the game. I don't think there's any reason to think it's so fundamentally broken that special measures have to be taken to help it out.
When you know something specific and can prepare, that's great. When you don't there are a lot of generally useful spells to prepare. It's not like a D&D-style Vancian caster is completely useless unless he knows exactly what he's up against.
In 3.x & PF, scrolls are a good way to cover the rarely used but essential utility spells.


Laurefindel wrote:
Diffan wrote:
Ya know, I just leveled up my Aasimar Cleric of Kossuth (v3.5) to 5th level and as I go through my spell slots, I find myself often going to one 'always' spell (being Prayer), one 'useful/utility' spell...

I think that one can make a Vancian system that "stretches" the conventions of Vancian magic a bit (personally, I'm not in favour of doing so, but I understand that compromise are sometimes required in order to meet the expectations of many). For example, Pathfinder grants at-will cantrips, which directly goes against the principle that vancian magic is finite and limited. There's also the whole 3rd ed sorcerer/favoured soul route, where limited selection offers no need for spell preparation. An hybrid is also conceivable, whereas caster know a limited amount of spells that they can cast spontaneously, and a wider selection that need to be prepared in order to be cast in rushed/threatened/combat situation. That or give all spells a casting time of 10 minutes, which can be shortened to 1 round with preparation or a specific feat/ability/power for that particular spell.

Conceivable, there should also be (cheap) ways of granting spell-caster an easy way to "store" a favourite spell without taxing their magical output without breaking the game. Scribing scrolls does that to a great extent, but I agree that the flavour of scrolls is mostly geared toward wizards...

Personally, I'm not in favour of at-will magic or magic that consumes a negligible quantity of spell slots/magical energy/mana cost (in the frame of a Vancian magic system that is). Instead, I'd prefer if the Cleric (for example) was granted a non-magical bless ability that confers a +1 moral bonus to attack and against fear. Give the Wizard a non-magical way to detect magic etc. Ideally, designe the system mechanically so that this bless ability complete (rather that compete with) the bard's inspire courage ability etc.

At any case, I'm not a fan of the wizard spamming puny spells, in parts because I find that it demote magic to something inferior in power and "awesomeness" than a crossbow. And if the at-will magic attack is superior to that of a crossbow, than it tends to offset the balance between the caster and the guys who's stuck with the crossbow in the first place. I much prefer (in terms of consistency with the principles of Vancian magic) spells like produce flame which create a reusable magic attacks over several rounds (stretching into minutes in that case).

[edit] Aside from the above, why didn't you make an Aasimar favoured soul of Kossuth, it looks to me like that class would match your gaming style better?

'finde

I hear ya, and I understand the concept of magic being special and not just an every-day tool for Wizards to spam (like 4E's at-will or Pathfinder Cantrips) but they should be given something that allows them to be useful every battle. Shooting a crossbow isn't something I enjoy doing if I'm a wizard, even when the targets are lowly Kobolds (or at some higher levels, Orcs). And it's not like a wizard is very 'proficient' with it either. Oh, they can use it without penalty, but the disparity between the Ability modifier in using it effectively and most monsters ACs put the act equal to to doing nothing every round. It gives the illusion that I'm doing something pro-actively, but really it's not.

As for why I didn't go Favored Soul with my Aasimar, well the class is just so sub-par that I'd be hurting my group as well as being ineffective too. The cleric offers a TON more support (spontaneously cast heal spells, turn attempts for various buffs, domain spells and powers) that Favored Souls could never keep up. The class is just so under-rated and poor that I was willing to trudge through the "pick before you go" aspect of Vancian spellcasting because it can, in a way, be mitigated via Feats.


Diffan wrote:
As for why I didn't go Favored Soul with my Aasimar, well the class is just so sub-par that I'd be hurting my group as well as being ineffective too. The cleric offers a TON more support (spontaneously cast heal spells, turn attempts for various buffs, domain spells and powers) that Favored Souls could never keep up.

Fair enough.

To be honest, I like Vancian magic... for wizards. There's something rational and arcane behind spell preparation that other classes like the cleric and druid aren't really made for. If I had to do 3.5 over again (and as a matter of fact I am), the wizard would be the only prepared caster.

Vancian casting works better for types of divine magic that aren't really supported by D&D, like rune-casting or something of the sort. Miracle workers and thaumaturge like the cleric work better as a spontaneous caster IMO (and spontaneous casting doesn't have to equal a ridiculously small selection and superior number of spells per day à la sorcerer). Besides, the fact that every cleric has access to all spells can get overwhelming, especially when you start counting supplements, campaign settings, class option books each granting new spells... But that's a rant for another thread I guess.

Personally, I still prefer the crossbow over the toned-down magic attack, but I'm convinced that one could devise a system that wouldn't rely on neither except under the most dire conditions, the same way that a fighter should be constrained to fight with is fists, under the most dire conditions.

'findel


Actually prepared casting can IMO work as runecasting and other such twists (rifled scrolls and so on, but I aree that spontaneous would be better for druids. For clerics... praying for your miracles somehow sits well with the class, but if there were some combat spells and the rest of the garbage went to ceremonious rituals...

Perhaps it would also be a good idea to replce spells from general list of cleric spells with some from the supplements to create individualized lists for various deities.

451 to 458 of 458 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gaming / D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond) / Vancian Magic All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond)

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.