I'm having a 1000 subscriber giveaway. And here's some important information. There will be multiple ways to enter and each entry gives you a chance for your name to be drawn. One of the ways is by finding Easter eggs I leave in my videos. So, the more videos you watch, the more information you'll have to your advantage when I reveal the details. I'll announce more info over next 2 weeks.
The way it was explained to me, by my first DM way back in the hoary mists of 1992, was that early wizards had to store their powers in physical form, carved in stone or water written on scrolls. A wizard couldn't cast anything from memory. Then, one ancient enchanter figured out how to etch the magic into his own mind, turning himself into a living spell scroll. The technique was refined over generations, but still follows the same expendability rules. The slots in your caster's mind are just like individual scrolls. You scribe them into your memory, and when you cast them, they're erased just like the physical versions. This makes magic hard to copy and impossible to economically proliferate. Then WoTC went and invented Sorcerors, switch Bards from Int to Cha based casters, and cobbled together the Warlock to appease the instant-gratification-seekers of the Videogame-crossover gamers. And now the old ways are lost and forgotten in favor of more transactional magic. Not necessarily a bad thing. I'd like to see more High Fantasy systems where all magic is explicitly transactional.
I really like the way your first DM describe magic. It provides a solid background and reason for Vanvian magic. It also reminds me of Avicenna. Avicenna, the Persian polymath and philosopher from the Islamic Golden Age, was known for his immense intellectual capacity. One story describes how he could read quietly, absorbing information without the typical practice of subvocalizing, which was common in his time. This ability to read silently was considered extraordinary and contributed to the awe surrounding his brilliance and learning methods.
In my dream game, where everyone rolls pools of dice and uses the results differently, the magic user has less control over magic but is more spontaneous with it. Mechanically, they play Yahtzee and interpret the results as effects. This mirrors the character reading the patterns of the Universe and then pressing their will.
Flexible systems like Spell Points exaggerate existing balance problems with 5e D&D. A lot more rules have to change if you want to use them and avoid “Ultra-Powerful Magic.”
Excellent survey! Thanks for the history lesson. So many new players need these resources to add understanding to why D&D developed into the game the next gen plays. Cheers!
In my homebrew I mix it up; different casters use different resource systems. Helps to limit the power of multiclassing casters, as you can't use one class's resource for another class's abilities unless your features state such, and the resource is the trigger for some of the features. Easy example is the split I put between Wizards, Warlocks & Sorcerers. While the first two still use their current resources (Spell Slots & Pact Magic), you can no longer use spell slots for warlock spells nor pact magic slots for wizard spells (likewise, you can't use pact magic for any non-warlock casting). Sorcerers, on the other hand, use spell points, making their magic feel a lot more innate and powerful (also dropped 5e's "spell point to spell slot" conversion and casting limits. It's just straight up casting from spell points on the fly now), while also cutting the ability for sorcerer spells to be cast by non-sorcerers (and vice-versa, the ability for sorcerers to cast non-sorcerer spells)
@@dnd-and-philosophy None of them are multiclassing, so they haven't given many any feelings in that regard. Thus far they are somewhat wishy-washy on it (more so because they are used to the old system and dislike changing things, than because they think my system is bad, at least so far). No major issues so far; at most the spell points have the issue of being rough to calculate on the fly, but I've provided a table with how many spell points it costs to cast a spell of each level and things have so far gone smooth in that regard (though a VTT would make it much easier). Outside of that, running out of slots/points before the next long rest is a bit of a concern, but that's already the case and something I'm trying to remedy with all casters regaining a bit of their resources on short rests (the Arcane Rest method used by Wizards basically, but as a standard for all casters and with the limited number of uses per Long Rest removed).
I've used spell slots, spell points and magic as learned skills at different points. The spell slot system has the advantages of simplicity and being widely known. Spell points give flexibility. Magic as learned skills is more difficult to balance but is doable. Empire of the Petal Throne (TSR 1975) used magic as learned skills and involved rolls to see if you succeeded at casting and had limits on how many times you could cast. I'm fond of the EPT system modified for D&D myself. Different subclasses (enchanter, necromancer, illusionist etc.) have different skill trees and different bonus spells they van learn. You can also combine spell points with memorization, keeping the flexibility but the need to prepare beforehand as well. Homebrewing / tinkering with magic has always been fun but complex. How the different systems affect the rest of the magical ecology (magic items, creatures etc.) is a lot of work.
On another note, and perhaps your next [awesome] video will touch on other game systems, but Rolemaster ditched spell slots on day 1. It was the main competitor with D&D back in the day (before running into Tolkein licensing issues/etc). All spells were cast with "power points" (i.e. mana) and you learned entire spell lists where spells grew in power the higher level they were and the more PP they cost. It was both great, and quite crude, but I played it for many years. You could have a hundred spells by level 5, all ready to cast and only limited by PP.
I played Rolemaster and MERP for a bit too. The system is a lot more cumbersome than AD&D in many regads but I always like dthe magic system and the slow combat. My next video will be about the Magic System in Ralph Bakshi's Wizards RPG that came out in 1992 from Whit Publications.
@@dnd-and-philosophy for sure AD&D 1E and even 2E were much easier to run at the table than RM or MERP! We played those a lot too. MERP was probably the best written set of books ever (due to Tolkien's canon lore being so deep and consistent). Sad I.C.E. lost the licensing, we might all be playing that to this day and giving WotC a run for their money. I didn't mind all the tables in RMv2. And now with VTT like FGU, it's all automatic so combat is quite fast (and STILL wicked deadly). We have homebrewed a tons of stuff on top of the magic system because, unlike slots being so limiting like you point out, the Power Point method swung too far the other way and casters are way OP in Rolemaster. There needs to be some balance. RM does have Extraordinary Spell Failures for rushed spells/etc that will kill a caster quickly if abused. They made it too complicated though. I personally do like magic to be "dangerous". Yeah sure you can cast fly (out of combat) to go to the top of this wall and anchor a rope for the group, completely trivializing the thief and years of training they had for climbing walls. But do you want to when their is always a chance the magic can backfire? Why not send up your party member and save your magic for more dire circumstances? Of course adding consumable material components achieves a similar thing (i.e. a "cost"). I am quite fascinated by magic systems and really look forward to more of you videos on the history of how we got to where we are and what alternate systems could be better!
Love the channel so far. I also don't like spell slots, but I find spell points just a more complicated version of spell slots. I prefer systems that require a roll to cast and have more material components, personally.
Ive been usung spell points in my game, (Mana points) since the later 70's when Dave Hargrave (Arduin) came up with the idea. It's part of the mechanics of the game I developed for my own group in 1982
Took me a while to watch this. This is such a good video! Instant bookmark. Thank you a lot for your research and presentation! I'm astounded how much I didn't knew.
Thing I’m building has casters mostly using the same resources everyone has. Actions, spendable reserves, stances that are like concentration mechanics for everybody. There are a couple of additional mechanics I’d like to test, but it’s too early to say if “motes” or “shroud” have any legs. Slots have this benefit of keeping the wizard casting low level spells rather than saving all points to max out their best option. I tend to use attrition more sparingly on players’ proactive abilities, but I hope in the long term to accomplish a similar effect.
I would love to see you explore some of the alternative magic systems from 3.5. Tome of Magic, Tome of Battle, Complete Arcane, Magic of Incarnum, and the Expanded Psionics Handbook all had alternative resource structures.
@@dnd-and-philosophy Good to hear. If you want advice on any of the systems I've mentioned, I've played or GMed for characters that use most of them and would be happy to explain how they work to you.
Even though its been a part of the game for forever, I always thought it was a bit 'unfair' that if a Wizard looses his spellbook, he becomes far less powerful. Then again, take away a Fighter's Armor and Weapons, and the same thing happens....but a Cleric still has access to her spells (just fewer of them than a wizard).
I love my basic vancian magic for wizards. Partially because no matter the edition the power balance always seems to be in their favour with the sheer scope of the spells written for them. In 3.5/PF1 few things can compete with a wizard in the median flexibility + power. But I love my 3.5 psionics and playing with the base Vancian framing and see how it can be played with and bent based on a class or setting. Tome of Magic and Pathfinder did a lot of interesting experiments with the form or going completely outside of it. And it's always interesting what else can be done while repurposing the traditional mechanics, rather than throwing them out with a bathwater. Sorcerers and wilders are arguably simpler classes to use as they are built around smaller number of abilities they can use more often, giving them more firepower, but not overall making them more powerful. Warlocks go even further with their limited number of on tap magical abilities. While Binders combine flexibility akin to wizard's with unlimited magic fuel of warlocks.
Spell slots are a little more relaxed now, because most casters have a “prepared” list and can choose to cast any of them as long as they have slots. In BECMI, iirc, you had to have a complete list of memorized spells
I think Arnesons system of consumables is great, reminds me of old firstperson shooters, where your most powerful weapons have the least amount of ammunition, because there is not much lying around.
I miss the 3.5 specialty sorcerers; they had large spell lists, but only had access to a couple of schools of magic (plus the universal spells). For example the Beguiler used illusion and enchantment, Could use light armor, and shared some skills with the rogue. Currently I just use the standard 5.5e rules, as I have players from multiple different editions (original boxed set, 2E AD&D, 3/3.5, and 4E); I found it's an easier system for everyone to pick up. Unfortunately WotC's quality in their D&D products has been constantly diminishing, so we've been eyeing switching over to 3rd party materials (Grim Hollow, etc.) where I am hoping to be able to introduce better systems.
Great summary. As a gen Z DM with a lot of new players, spell slots are complicated to introduce (usually, viewed as "ammunition") but offer a very clear, linear progression: the numbers/power creep in D&D is still an issue but early level combat is easier with this very defined magic toolbox. You can still be more flexible and intuitive while enhancing the ludonarrative for your players: you can adopt the V,S,M components as ammunition and turn them into bonuses too, e.g., using the blood of a dragon for a spell that requires any blood can result in advantage or a flat bonus, or completely take away requirements for spells and put each of them on a standard cooldown (1 per rest, 1 per day, etc) to represent strain. If you hate keeping tabs on arrows and spell slots: the World of Darkness games and the 5 points/dice system show spell tiers by the number of success results in a spell roll, in a similar way to the DCC philosophy for mercurial magic, without any "ammunition" for them. You can also look at 100% systems such as Aquelarre with the warlock/cleric paradigm, being better in one domain makes you worse at rolling the other but relies more in physical components for spellcasting.
I've been running Mazes: Fantasy Roleplaying lately, and I really like their take on magic. Mechanically - Each role in the game has 1, 2, 3, or 4 Stars that they can use to do Special Stuff with, and if you've chosen to be a spell casting magic user, the Special Stuff you do when you spent a Star are Spells. A Spell being quite literally whatever you can convince the DM to let you do. The Stars are fully replenished whenever you take a rest, which takes no more than a single turn and a successful die role, with the downside that resting always gives you one in a series of negative conditions. (The game is built to run quick, dirty, dungeon crawls) Thematically - Mages known as Sorcerers specialize in one of the 5 elements, with each element being weak to the previous, and strong against the next in the cycle. Mages known as Wizards specialize in one of 5 particular Disciplines of magic, which vaguely correspond to some of the traditional DnD disciplines. So, think of a spreadsheet of the 5 elements and 5 disciplines, and having a whole column of Disciplines to bend one Element with, or having a whole row of Elements to use one Discipline on. You are limited by how many Stars you have, and how often you choose to rest, but you have a very wide variety of what you can do with that limited resource.
Greetings from North East Japan! In my current game, I established a spell/mana point system for casters. Arcane pts. for wizards, warlocks & sorcerers. Divine points for clerics, paladins & druids. 1 point for 1st level spell, 2 points for 2nd level and so on. The number of points on hand is based on the spell slot chart. Example: Wizard at 3rd level has (4) first level slots (4 arcane points). (2) second level slots (2 arcane points). Intelligence modifier is added. So let's say intelligence modifier is (+3). So this wizard has 9 arcane points. 1st level spell will use 1 point and 2nd live uses 2 points and so on. 1 point will regenerate after 1 hour. I roll a 4 sided die and that determines how many hours passed and points regenerated. If the party is on a short rest I just roll a 4 sided die and multiply X2. Casters have already used up most of their points if not exhausted them altogether after regular combat. After every 3 to 4 hours I roll random encounters. I got them working hard....... Everyone is having fun. Besides they have the AC, HP, spell & feats to handle everything I'm throwing at them for now........... (suspenseful guitar riff in the background).
This sounds a lot like the spell point system from the 2014 DMG. We tried it, but found that at high levels it got too powerful. I really like your steady mana regeneration system. :)
Interesting. I didn't realize that so many other people had thought of trying the spell-point system. I found my own spell-point system to be well-balanced and my players generally liked it (I totally missed the TSR one, so I guess I should re-read the old DMG...unless you just meant the nonsensical 5E spell point system...). I've wanted to try the old Dragon Magazine psionicist class as an alternate wizard class, as it also used a point pool to fuel the magic powers and gave the character a gradual shift from an ascetic warrior to a mystic sage as they leveled up. I've also considered the material-focused system, as I thought it would be easy to incorporate as some kind of alchemy, would fit the resource management type of play-style of magic-users, and does match up with some depictions of wizards.
Also, it seems that 5e half-way converted into spell points. You just have 9 sequential tiers of spell points and you can't combine lower ones into higher ones. You can spend your spell "slots" on any of the Spells you know (Bard, Warlock, Sorcerer) or have memorized (Cleric, Druid, Wizard) and they won't disappear until you go for long day's rest, as long as you have high enough level "slots" you can cast these spells with. And many of those spells get more powerful the higher level "slot" you give them. But this is not a "slot" behavior. It's ammo or fuel behavior, as long as you have enough of the the right type of fuel, magic can be activated. Vancian magic on the contrary links "fuel" and a corresponding spell together. Wizard in 5e can cast Magic Missile he prepared as many times as he has spell slots of 1st level and higher. Wizard in 3,5 d&d is going to cast as many Magic Missile spells as she has prepared from her available 1st level slots. In Pathfinder the closest analogue to 5e memorized casting would be Arcanist. Not that 3e-3,5 didn't try to provide Vancian casters with options to make up for their lack of flexibility. From item crafting to Reserve feats to prestige classes, like Cerebromancer and Eldritch Theurge.
I use a magic point and energy point system in my ttrpg. Spells can either cost mana or energy or both. Some spells even use hit points. For instance, a Levitate spell could cost 12 mp, a fireball could cost 35, etc. All characters regardless of class receive max mana equal to their Intelligence score x 2
My system is a bit more freeform. You can play any type of "mystic", from a Vancian caster to generic mystic with access to a "domain of power". But my system uses the fiction first trinary outcome engine, similar to PbtA. But, more like World of Dungeons from John Harper. We are still in the playtesting phase of my very rules-lite system, but things seem to be going very well. Great video!
The original D&D actually evolved from tabletop miniature wargames. The Magic User was the analog for artillery, so the spell slots with their "fire and forget" mechanic equated to limited rounds for the artillery pieces.
True, but the early Chainmail rules didn't state the Wizard's limitations with regards to "ammo." That was added later when players thought they had unlimited spells in a game. Gary got a ton of letters and phone calls about it. 🙂
@@dnd-and-philosophy, that's because the "wizards" in Chainmail did have unlimited spells. That is also the reason Gary made them "glass cannons," starting off so fragile that they would die if a "fighter" tripped over them.
At my table, an oddball roll-to-cast system is used. Spells are created by rolling on two d66 tables, one for Descriptor (an adjective), one for Shape (a noun). A recent example is _Boiling_ _Sphere_. Rolling a natural 1 can result in an arcane backlash. Casting fast spells (one round) should be dangerous. Casting ritual spells should lessen the danger, especially if there are assistant spell casters, but disrupting any ritual should almost certainly trigger backlash on everything in the area. Magic items can be useful in mitigating these risks, but are highly expensive to manufacture, and are ultimately consumables that cannot be recharged.
Abridged Mechanical explanation: This is from my own experience and doesn't delve into the excelent history of this video, but also mentions some things it doesn't. Old Vancian: The knowledge of the spell's workings are consumed upon casting. Slots are predetermined to the spells put in them. 'MMO Vancian' D&D4E: Spells have per Day, Per encounter, and at will as categories. A Daily spell can only be cast once per day, an encounter power can be cast once per encounter, refreshing when the next encounter starts, and At will can be cast as many times as you would like. 'Modern' Vancian (5E): A spell slot is akin to ammunition or fuel, but instead of a bullet that fits one level, higher level slots can be used in lower level spells for extra effect. More freedom, but still restrictive in that lower level slots can't be pooled to cast higher level spells. Personally i have played in games that mixed these are a bit. Having some ancient, more powerful spells be old Vancian and disappear when used along side the 'modern vancian' with spell slots as fuel. I have also played with a system where you had to come up with a rhyme for the spell to use it, and the more variations and rhymes you came up with was how many times you could use the spell a day. Also have hacked in spell roles Where you had to get over or under a target number.
1. Chapters, Man! CHAPTERS!!! 2. OMG- ANYTHING BUT VANCE!!! Thanks for this. I know I play this game and have to deal with it, but I like the Spell point system in the DMG better. Because sometimes you will have to cast that 5th and 6th shield spell. 3. RoleMaster had some Mana Points as a fuel to their "Spell Lists" and I love that system. 4. Mage: the Ascension - another beautiful system. I just wish White Wolf didn't get rid of it. I just don't know how I would implement that in D&D.
I despise spell slots. It's clunky and unintuitive. The spell point system is far more versatile and easier to manage. It feels like spell slots are there out of tradition more so than design.
Honestly I love the studious wizard style casting. I just think to balance it Sorcerer's can have the flexibility, but Wizards should be able to prepare many more spells each adventuring period
In 5E, wizards have the largest spell list. They also have the spellbook ability. That allows them to learn a lot of spells. They can also copy spell scrolls into their spellbook. Sorcerers are more flexible due to their sorcery points and meta magic feature. However wizards have assess to more kinds of spells. So there is a tradeoff to provide some balance.
I use spell slots for now. I don't like them. I'd rather spell points, but most essentially agree with Dave Arneson. I want my players to have to have components for thier magic I want 25% of my adventures just getting components
I like spell slots because I like the idea of preparing spells. I don’t like memorization as the fluff for it. But I do like that each spells needs to be carefully prepared
@@dnd-and-philosophy No, it gave a higher chance of learning a spell and it gave the maximum number of spells learned per spell level higher but not the daily number of spells (not sure I explained this properly)...The table of spell slots did not increase with higher intelligence. A first level Wizard with 18 intelligence still could only memorize (and therefore cast) 1 first level spell. What was increased is the total number of spells (in this case first level spells) that he could have in his spell book available to memorize but it was still only one spell memorized (and castable) per day. This is different from D&D 3e and higher where the higher the intelligence the more spells that can be cast per day.
I think my one question is about the idea of spell slots punishing wizards. But in 5e there all spellcasters use spell slots innate and learned casters, the only difference is do you have the option to change your spells each long rest or not. Eapecially as in 5e unlike earlier editions there is no this spell slot is attached to this spell. So while yes spell slots are used it is no longer vancian.
Great point. I like the idea of practiced spells and spintaneous spells. Meaning, as a wizard, you have spells that you've prepared for the day, but you also have the ability to "recall" a spell you know, and attempt to cast it without preperation. You'd have to make a spellcasting check of some sort to correctly recall and cast it, but each round you prepare (up to some max) would give you a bonus to the check.
@dnd-and-philosophy would that be maybe a bit like the Fantasy AGE system and how they do spellcasting? If I recall it's very much to cast any spell you have to make a skill rolls against that spell's difficulty number (more powerful spells having higher casting difficulty) and then on a successful test the effect happens. I think they may have had an additional effect of you rolled alive that number but it has been some time since I looked at the system.
@@ak318 I'm not familair with the Fantasy AGE system, but the system I'm thinking of sounds familiar to what you describe. My next video will be out later today and I cover an obscure magic system from a 1992 RPG. Stay tuned!
I never liked Vancian magic and changed it 35 years ago and never looked back. I use a simple spell point system which makes more sense and is infinitely more fun. I will never go back to the horrible Vancian magic. Balance can easily be achieved in a wide other variety of ways. Gygax was wrong in this case.
A number of years ago I tried a few other systems, but in the end I came back to the Vancian system. My reason for not liking Vancian magic was mostly a narrative one. I didn’t like the idea of the M-U studying their spellbook everyday while the rest of the group was breaking camp. I reframed the way I thought about it though. M-Us don’t memorize and forget their spells. Vancian preparation, instead, is the ritual by which a M-U invites/summons the living magical energies to reside in their mind. When the spell is cast, the energy is released. I like the restrictions of Vancian magic. I think the reasons Gygax gives in the Strategic Review are still valid. It all depends on what kind of a game you want to run. Do you want casters to be equal to fighters in damage output in combat? I don’t. Casters can have a couple powerful nukes at their disposal, but I want most of the damage coming from fighters. I should say I don’t generally play 5e. I prefer OD&D. That might give some context for my preferences.
Thanks for this comment. I've come to a similar conclusion about Vancian magic and I like how you reframed the wizard reading their spell books. It's almost like meditation and preparing the mind to accept the magic power. Very nice idea!
I have hated Vancian magic since just a few years after learning to play back in the 80s. A Mana or spell point system should have replaced it. The sorcerer is a direct result of that need to replace the out dated system.
Have to say, I much prefer the spell slot system--I like the restriction vis-a-vis non-casters (especially at mid to high levels), and the expenditure of slots is a constant reminder to the player that magic is FINITE. That said, 3.0/3.5 gave me an opportunity to help the wizard out. I decided back in 2E that clerics can cast anything on the fly, so long as they had slots available. To give wizards their own boost in flexibility when 3.0 came around, I created a new entry on the character sheet: "Spells MEMORIZED per Level". While castable per day remains RAW, the new MEMORIZED entry for each level = castable per day + # of spells (by level) based on Intelligence modifier (to a limit of +5). Example: per day, a 3rd level wizard with an 18 Intelligence (+4 mod) can memorize 7 1st level spells (but cast only 3 per RAW), and memorize 6 2nd level spells (but cast only 2 per RAW). My players have appreciated the increase in versatility.
Vancian magic I don't necessarily hate but I don't really like it either. I more tolerate it than anything else. In terms of magic systems, my favorite has probably been the ones found in games like Warhammer 40: Imperium Maledictum. Psychic powers in the game are very powerful and can be flexibly used. But they're dangerous and come at a cost. Namely when you use the powers you build up a series of warp charges which will need to be purged or very, very bad things will happen to you and everyone in the immediate vicinity. And purging the warp charges can be dangerous. My group ended up with several broken limbs after a warp charge purging and a purging gone wrong later on could have killed everyone but the psyker had they been in the same zone as her at the time. That kind of system isn't really what a lot of people are looking for in their magic, admittedly. But I like the danger of it all. I like that the game will let you use these frankly absurd powers but at the cost of knowing that this time you might fuck up so bad you end up possessed by a super powerful daemon. It lets magic be terrifyingly powerful and creates a sort of tension. It also makes for interesting social stuff! Like if you aren't a sanctioned psyker and are seen using the powers you may well end up on the shitlist of a witch hunter who is much more powerful than you and your ragtag bunch.
I think Vancian magic lost its ways when it became possible to prepare one spell two times or more. If you can prepare every spell only once, it makes every spell unique and worth learning. Because of this Sublime Way from Tome of battle for 3.5 is more Vancian than normal D&D magic. The most limiting part of D&D magic is not spells slots, its that you can prepare spells only once per day. My favorite magic system is Ritual Path magic from GURPS4. It combines the ability to create and cast spells on the fly (like Mage: the Ascension) and prepare them in advance. But for my Conan-inspired campaign i chose Vancian magic, because i wanted it to be powerful but hard to control and poorly understood thing.
Once again I hear Spellcasters whining, meanwhile fighters Struggle for Relevance in the long game due to the fact their progression is Linear while Spellcasters is Quadratic... We do need a new system to bring everyone to a happy level playing field...maybe giving Martial Classes some manner of cool abilities that function similar to Spells...then we could break these Abilities and Spells into fairly weak ones you can use any time (almost At-Will you could say), stronger ones that take a short rest to recover (so, maybe once per Encounter?), powerful ones that require a Long Rest to use again (you will likely only use those once Daily), and maybe a few non-combat ones (abilities that serve a sort of Utility I suppose...). It throws out the Vancian Magic and it stops the game from becoming "Guy with spells bends reality into knots, guy with sword goes to raid the fridge and watch TV for the next four hours"... ...wait a minute...
I've played many different magic systems from AD&D to gurps, l5R, AD&D Spell points, Dragonlance 5th age with those damn cards, Exalted, 4E D&D, Mage the Ascention, and 5E D&D. And 5E has it the best it is basically the 3E sorcerer, expanded to fit all classes. no more forgetting spells the most annoying thing about vancian magic. And the more limited spell slots brought casters into a more respectable balance for play. IE a 20th level vancian wizard could prepare 4 or 5 different 9th level spells, and cast each one once. but a 5E wizard might prepare four 9th level spells but be able to only cast one once. When Wizards can just cast Meteor swarm 5 times well then why do you need anyone else?
You keep using the term "spell slots"... but as someone who has been playing the game since it basically came out... we never called them spell "slots". They were simply spells you could cast because you had them memorized. Thing is, when you do a search for the origin of the term, spell slot, the results are some amalgamation of odd bits and pieces from all over the place, from different years and versions, with the term spell slot(s) tacked on as though it was always there. I'm not trying to cause issue, but I don't recall it being a thing until a good bit later in the hobby, and it feels like people just automatically associate the term due to how 5e has really pushed it. Maybe 4e and 3e did as well, but definitely 5e has. Regardless, I am more of a 1e/2e kind of guy, but I just don't think it was as common a term in the earlier stages as it is being suggested.
You're right, the term spell slots came well after 1e/2e. I use it now because many seem to recognize what it is. I think WotC added the term to 3.0 because they needed to call it something in order to describe and use Metamagic feays.
@dnd-and-philosophy that makes sense. As far as magic systems that are "different"... have you ever given thought to Ars Magica with how it is implemented? Verb & Noun and make it free-form... or at least more free-form than always going with pre-designed spell 'recipes'.
@dnd-and-philosophy I can wholeheartedly recommend Ars Magica with regards to how it handles the concept of spell creation. Trevor over at MeMyselfAndDie is doing a kickstarter for his Broken Empires... which has a similar magic system that is based off of the concepts used in Ars Magica... noun and verb... I 'create fire'... etc.
I'm having a 1000 subscriber giveaway. And here's some important information. There will be multiple ways to enter and each entry gives you a chance for your name to be drawn. One of the ways is by finding Easter eggs I leave in my videos. So, the more videos you watch, the more information you'll have to your advantage when I reveal the details. I'll announce more info over next 2 weeks.
The way it was explained to me, by my first DM way back in the hoary mists of 1992, was that early wizards had to store their powers in physical form, carved in stone or water written on scrolls. A wizard couldn't cast anything from memory. Then, one ancient enchanter figured out how to etch the magic into his own mind, turning himself into a living spell scroll. The technique was refined over generations, but still follows the same expendability rules. The slots in your caster's mind are just like individual scrolls. You scribe them into your memory, and when you cast them, they're erased just like the physical versions. This makes magic hard to copy and impossible to economically proliferate.
Then WoTC went and invented Sorcerors, switch Bards from Int to Cha based casters, and cobbled together the Warlock to appease the instant-gratification-seekers of the Videogame-crossover gamers. And now the old ways are lost and forgotten in favor of more transactional magic. Not necessarily a bad thing. I'd like to see more High Fantasy systems where all magic is explicitly transactional.
I really like the way your first DM describe magic. It provides a solid background and reason for Vanvian magic. It also reminds me of Avicenna. Avicenna, the Persian polymath and philosopher from the Islamic Golden Age, was known for his immense intellectual capacity. One story describes how he could read quietly, absorbing information without the typical practice of subvocalizing, which was common in his time. This ability to read silently was considered extraordinary and contributed to the awe surrounding his brilliance and learning methods.
In my dream game, where everyone rolls pools of dice and uses the results differently, the magic user has less control over magic but is more spontaneous with it. Mechanically, they play Yahtzee and interpret the results as effects. This mirrors the character reading the patterns of the Universe and then pressing their will.
sick
Wow! That's awesome. So, I assume the rules around this are vague, and that makes magic more fun and unpredictable?
*give us the rule system*
Thank you for your efforts in compiling this! I hope in your upcoming take on spell systems that you address the 'Roll-to-Cast' systems.
Yes! In fact, there's a cool Roll-to-Cast system in Sovereign Stone by Margaret Weiss. Have you seen it?
Flexible systems like Spell Points exaggerate existing balance problems with 5e D&D. A lot more rules have to change if you want to use them and avoid “Ultra-Powerful Magic.”
Excellent survey! Thanks for the history lesson. So many new players need these resources to add understanding to why D&D developed into the game the next gen plays. Cheers!
Thanks for the insight and encouragement!
Hi all, thanks for watching. By popular request I've added chapter markers to the video.
In my homebrew I mix it up; different casters use different resource systems. Helps to limit the power of multiclassing casters, as you can't use one class's resource for another class's abilities unless your features state such, and the resource is the trigger for some of the features.
Easy example is the split I put between Wizards, Warlocks & Sorcerers. While the first two still use their current resources (Spell Slots & Pact Magic), you can no longer use spell slots for warlock spells nor pact magic slots for wizard spells (likewise, you can't use pact magic for any non-warlock casting). Sorcerers, on the other hand, use spell points, making their magic feel a lot more innate and powerful (also dropped 5e's "spell point to spell slot" conversion and casting limits. It's just straight up casting from spell points on the fly now), while also cutting the ability for sorcerer spells to be cast by non-sorcerers (and vice-versa, the ability for sorcerers to cast non-sorcerer spells)
I like the limitations you put on multi-classing with your system. How do your players like it and have you found any major issues with it?
@@dnd-and-philosophy
None of them are multiclassing, so they haven't given many any feelings in that regard. Thus far they are somewhat wishy-washy on it (more so because they are used to the old system and dislike changing things, than because they think my system is bad, at least so far).
No major issues so far; at most the spell points have the issue of being rough to calculate on the fly, but I've provided a table with how many spell points it costs to cast a spell of each level and things have so far gone smooth in that regard (though a VTT would make it much easier). Outside of that, running out of slots/points before the next long rest is a bit of a concern, but that's already the case and something I'm trying to remedy with all casters regaining a bit of their resources on short rests (the Arcane Rest method used by Wizards basically, but as a standard for all casters and with the limited number of uses per Long Rest removed).
I've used spell slots, spell points and magic as learned skills at different points. The spell slot system has the advantages of simplicity and being widely known. Spell points give flexibility. Magic as learned skills is more difficult to balance but is doable. Empire of the Petal Throne (TSR 1975) used magic as learned skills and involved rolls to see if you succeeded at casting and had limits on how many times you could cast. I'm fond of the EPT system modified for D&D myself. Different subclasses (enchanter, necromancer, illusionist etc.) have different skill trees and different bonus spells they van learn. You can also combine spell points with memorization, keeping the flexibility but the need to prepare beforehand as well. Homebrewing / tinkering with magic has always been fun but complex. How the different systems affect the rest of the magical ecology (magic items, creatures etc.) is a lot of work.
On another note, and perhaps your next [awesome] video will touch on other game systems, but Rolemaster ditched spell slots on day 1. It was the main competitor with D&D back in the day (before running into Tolkein licensing issues/etc). All spells were cast with "power points" (i.e. mana) and you learned entire spell lists where spells grew in power the higher level they were and the more PP they cost. It was both great, and quite crude, but I played it for many years. You could have a hundred spells by level 5, all ready to cast and only limited by PP.
I played Rolemaster and MERP for a bit too. The system is a lot more cumbersome than AD&D in many regads but I always like dthe magic system and the slow combat. My next video will be about the Magic System in Ralph Bakshi's Wizards RPG that came out in 1992 from Whit Publications.
@@dnd-and-philosophy for sure AD&D 1E and even 2E were much easier to run at the table than RM or MERP! We played those a lot too. MERP was probably the best written set of books ever (due to Tolkien's canon lore being so deep and consistent). Sad I.C.E. lost the licensing, we might all be playing that to this day and giving WotC a run for their money.
I didn't mind all the tables in RMv2. And now with VTT like FGU, it's all automatic so combat is quite fast (and STILL wicked deadly). We have homebrewed a tons of stuff on top of the magic system because, unlike slots being so limiting like you point out, the Power Point method swung too far the other way and casters are way OP in Rolemaster. There needs to be some balance. RM does have Extraordinary Spell Failures for rushed spells/etc that will kill a caster quickly if abused. They made it too complicated though.
I personally do like magic to be "dangerous". Yeah sure you can cast fly (out of combat) to go to the top of this wall and anchor a rope for the group, completely trivializing the thief and years of training they had for climbing walls. But do you want to when their is always a chance the magic can backfire? Why not send up your party member and save your magic for more dire circumstances? Of course adding consumable material components achieves a similar thing (i.e. a "cost").
I am quite fascinated by magic systems and really look forward to more of you videos on the history of how we got to where we are and what alternate systems could be better!
Love the channel so far. I also don't like spell slots, but I find spell points just a more complicated version of spell slots. I prefer systems that require a roll to cast and have more material components, personally.
Thanks @Chris-io4iz for the comment and I'm glad you love may channel!
Ive been usung spell points in my game, (Mana points) since the later 70's when Dave Hargrave (Arduin) came up with the idea. It's part of the mechanics of the game I developed for my own group in 1982
I've heard of Arduin but never read or played it. Thanks!
Took me a while to watch this. This is such a good video! Instant bookmark. Thank you a lot for your research and presentation! I'm astounded how much I didn't knew.
Thanks for watching and commenting. It too me a while, but it was worth it.
Thing I’m building has casters mostly using the same resources everyone has. Actions, spendable reserves, stances that are like concentration mechanics for everybody. There are a couple of additional mechanics I’d like to test, but it’s too early to say if “motes” or “shroud” have any legs.
Slots have this benefit of keeping the wizard casting low level spells rather than saving all points to max out their best option. I tend to use attrition more sparingly on players’ proactive abilities, but I hope in the long term to accomplish a similar effect.
I would love to see you explore some of the alternative magic systems from 3.5. Tome of Magic, Tome of Battle, Complete Arcane, Magic of Incarnum, and the Expanded Psionics Handbook all had alternative resource structures.
@@matthewdaley4403 thanks for the suggestions. My next video will be on a Magic System from an obscure RPG from 1992. Stay tuned!
@@dnd-and-philosophy Good to hear. If you want advice on any of the systems I've mentioned, I've played or GMed for characters that use most of them and would be happy to explain how they work to you.
Even though its been a part of the game for forever, I always thought it was a bit 'unfair' that if a Wizard looses his spellbook, he becomes far less powerful.
Then again, take away a Fighter's Armor and Weapons, and the same thing happens....but a Cleric still has access to her spells (just fewer of them than a wizard).
You make some great points for sure. Thanks for contributing to the conversation!
Great video! Looking forward to the next one.
Thank you!
Great work. Thanks. Lots to think about.
All of the images/ pics ….. fantastic!! Brings back memories.
Box of Grenadier miniatures ….still using them.
Awesome! Might have to tinker with my magic system now, can't wait to see your Source of Arcane Magic video.
Thanks for watching my videos! Much appreciated.
Great video - I really enjoyed the history
@@jamesschultz3 thanks for watching, James!
I love my basic vancian magic for wizards. Partially because no matter the edition the power balance always seems to be in their favour with the sheer scope of the spells written for them. In 3.5/PF1 few things can compete with a wizard in the median flexibility + power.
But I love my 3.5 psionics and playing with the base Vancian framing and see how it can be played with and bent based on a class or setting. Tome of Magic and Pathfinder did a lot of interesting experiments with the form or going completely outside of it. And it's always interesting what else can be done while repurposing the traditional mechanics, rather than throwing them out with a bathwater.
Sorcerers and wilders are arguably simpler classes to use as they are built around smaller number of abilities they can use more often, giving them more firepower, but not overall making them more powerful. Warlocks go even further with their limited number of on tap magical abilities. While Binders combine flexibility akin to wizard's with unlimited magic fuel of warlocks.
Spell slots are a little more relaxed now, because most casters have a “prepared” list and can choose to cast any of them as long as they have slots. In BECMI, iirc, you had to have a complete list of memorized spells
I think Arnesons system of consumables is great, reminds me of old firstperson shooters, where your most powerful weapons have the least amount of ammunition, because there is not much lying around.
I miss the 3.5 specialty sorcerers; they had large spell lists, but only had access to a couple of schools of magic (plus the universal spells). For example the Beguiler used illusion and enchantment, Could use light armor, and shared some skills with the rogue. Currently I just use the standard 5.5e rules, as I have players from multiple different editions (original boxed set, 2E AD&D, 3/3.5, and 4E); I found it's an easier system for everyone to pick up. Unfortunately WotC's quality in their D&D products has been constantly diminishing, so we've been eyeing switching over to 3rd party materials (Grim Hollow, etc.) where I am hoping to be able to introduce better systems.
Great summary. As a gen Z DM with a lot of new players, spell slots are complicated to introduce (usually, viewed as "ammunition") but offer a very clear, linear progression: the numbers/power creep in D&D is still an issue but early level combat is easier with this very defined magic toolbox. You can still be more flexible and intuitive while enhancing the ludonarrative for your players: you can adopt the V,S,M components as ammunition and turn them into bonuses too, e.g., using the blood of a dragon for a spell that requires any blood can result in advantage or a flat bonus, or completely take away requirements for spells and put each of them on a standard cooldown (1 per rest, 1 per day, etc) to represent strain. If you hate keeping tabs on arrows and spell slots: the World of Darkness games and the 5 points/dice system show spell tiers by the number of success results in a spell roll, in a similar way to the DCC philosophy for mercurial magic, without any "ammunition" for them. You can also look at 100% systems such as Aquelarre with the warlock/cleric paradigm, being better in one domain makes you worse at rolling the other but relies more in physical components for spellcasting.
I've been running Mazes: Fantasy Roleplaying lately, and I really like their take on magic.
Mechanically - Each role in the game has 1, 2, 3, or 4 Stars that they can use to do Special Stuff with, and if you've chosen to be a spell casting magic user, the Special Stuff you do when you spent a Star are Spells. A Spell being quite literally whatever you can convince the DM to let you do. The Stars are fully replenished whenever you take a rest, which takes no more than a single turn and a successful die role, with the downside that resting always gives you one in a series of negative conditions. (The game is built to run quick, dirty, dungeon crawls)
Thematically - Mages known as Sorcerers specialize in one of the 5 elements, with each element being weak to the previous, and strong against the next in the cycle. Mages known as Wizards specialize in one of 5 particular Disciplines of magic, which vaguely correspond to some of the traditional DnD disciplines.
So, think of a spreadsheet of the 5 elements and 5 disciplines, and having a whole column of Disciplines to bend one Element with, or having a whole row of Elements to use one Discipline on. You are limited by how many Stars you have, and how often you choose to rest, but you have a very wide variety of what you can do with that limited resource.
Nice history lesson
I like the standard magic casting system of D&D but have considered using points or mana
Thanks Rivers. Yes, there are pros and cons to both in my opinion.
I literally almost spit out my coffee when you showed that clip for somatic components ... holy hell that was funny.
I have a great D&D story about my friend laughing so hard when I was DMing that Orea came out of his nose.
I'm making my own system, and what I realized is that I don't have to only use one system. So I'm using 3 magic systems at the same time
Super well evidenced, good multimedia use. You just gotta change that music man, use something else or pull some clips from classic video games
Greetings from North East Japan! In my current game, I established a spell/mana point system for casters. Arcane pts. for wizards, warlocks & sorcerers. Divine points for clerics, paladins & druids. 1 point for 1st level spell, 2 points for 2nd level and so on. The number of points on hand is based on the spell slot chart. Example: Wizard at 3rd level has (4) first level slots (4 arcane points). (2) second level slots (2 arcane points). Intelligence modifier is added. So let's say intelligence modifier is (+3). So this wizard has 9 arcane points. 1st level spell will use 1 point and 2nd live uses 2 points and so on. 1 point will regenerate after 1 hour. I roll a 4 sided die and that determines how many hours passed and points regenerated. If the party is on a short rest I just roll a 4 sided die and multiply X2. Casters have already used up most of their points if not exhausted them altogether after regular combat. After every 3 to 4 hours I roll random encounters. I got them working hard....... Everyone is having fun. Besides they have the AC, HP, spell & feats to handle everything I'm throwing at them for now........... (suspenseful guitar riff in the background).
This sounds a lot like the spell point system from the 2014 DMG. We tried it, but found that at high levels it got too powerful. I really like your steady mana regeneration system. :)
That's a cool way to do spell points. Thanks for sharing. Also, I love Japan and want to visit again. My daughter just said this to me yesterday too.
Interesting. I didn't realize that so many other people had thought of trying the spell-point system. I found my own spell-point system to be well-balanced and my players generally liked it (I totally missed the TSR one, so I guess I should re-read the old DMG...unless you just meant the nonsensical 5E spell point system...).
I've wanted to try the old Dragon Magazine psionicist class as an alternate wizard class, as it also used a point pool to fuel the magic powers and gave the character a gradual shift from an ascetic warrior to a mystic sage as they leveled up.
I've also considered the material-focused system, as I thought it would be easy to incorporate as some kind of alchemy, would fit the resource management type of play-style of magic-users, and does match up with some depictions of wizards.
Also, it seems that 5e half-way converted into spell points.
You just have 9 sequential tiers of spell points and you can't combine lower ones into higher ones.
You can spend your spell "slots" on any of the Spells you know (Bard, Warlock, Sorcerer) or have memorized (Cleric, Druid, Wizard) and they won't disappear until you go for long day's rest, as long as you have high enough level "slots" you can cast these spells with. And many of those spells get more powerful the higher level "slot" you give them.
But this is not a "slot" behavior. It's ammo or fuel behavior, as long as you have enough of the the right type of fuel, magic can be activated. Vancian magic on the contrary links "fuel" and a corresponding spell together.
Wizard in 5e can cast Magic Missile he prepared as many times as he has spell slots of 1st level and higher.
Wizard in 3,5 d&d is going to cast as many Magic Missile spells as she has prepared from her available 1st level slots.
In Pathfinder the closest analogue to 5e memorized casting would be Arcanist.
Not that 3e-3,5 didn't try to provide Vancian casters with options to make up for their lack of flexibility. From item crafting to Reserve feats to prestige classes, like Cerebromancer and Eldritch Theurge.
I use a magic point and energy point system in my ttrpg. Spells can either cost mana or energy or both.
Some spells even use hit points.
For instance, a Levitate spell could cost 12 mp, a fireball could cost 35, etc.
All characters regardless of class receive max mana equal to their Intelligence score x 2
@@austindavid7155 that’s what I’m talking about! Nice.
My system is a bit more freeform. You can play any type of "mystic", from a Vancian caster to generic mystic with access to a "domain of power". But my system uses the fiction first trinary outcome engine, similar to PbtA. But, more like World of Dungeons from John Harper. We are still in the playtesting phase of my very rules-lite system, but things seem to be going very well. Great video!
@@actortimmah42 wow! Your system sounds versatile. I’d love to see it if you’re willing to share?
I was a big fan of the PSP (psionic spell point).
Math and tracking, tho…..
The original D&D actually evolved from tabletop miniature wargames. The Magic User was the analog for artillery, so the spell slots with their "fire and forget" mechanic equated to limited rounds for the artillery pieces.
True, but the early Chainmail rules didn't state the Wizard's limitations with regards to "ammo." That was added later when players thought they had unlimited spells in a game. Gary got a ton of letters and phone calls about it. 🙂
@@dnd-and-philosophy, that's because the "wizards" in Chainmail did have unlimited spells. That is also the reason Gary made them "glass cannons," starting off so fragile that they would die if a "fighter" tripped over them.
@@LeeCarlson haha. Nice visual!
At my table, an oddball roll-to-cast system is used. Spells are created by rolling on two d66 tables, one for Descriptor (an adjective), one for Shape (a noun). A recent example is _Boiling_ _Sphere_. Rolling a natural 1 can result in an arcane backlash.
Casting fast spells (one round) should be dangerous. Casting ritual spells should lessen the danger, especially if there are assistant spell casters, but disrupting any ritual should almost certainly trigger backlash on everything in the area. Magic items can be useful in mitigating these risks, but are highly expensive to manufacture, and are ultimately consumables that cannot be recharged.
Abridged Mechanical explanation: This is from my own experience and doesn't delve into the excelent history of this video, but also mentions some things it doesn't.
Old Vancian: The knowledge of the spell's workings are consumed upon casting. Slots are predetermined to the spells put in them.
'MMO Vancian' D&D4E: Spells have per Day, Per encounter, and at will as categories. A Daily spell can only be cast once per day, an encounter power can be cast once per encounter, refreshing when the next encounter starts, and At will can be cast as many times as you would like.
'Modern' Vancian (5E): A spell slot is akin to ammunition or fuel, but instead of a bullet that fits one level, higher level slots can be used in lower level spells for extra effect. More freedom, but still restrictive in that lower level slots can't be pooled to cast higher level spells.
Personally i have played in games that mixed these are a bit. Having some ancient, more powerful spells be old Vancian and disappear when used along side the 'modern vancian' with spell slots as fuel.
I have also played with a system where you had to come up with a rhyme for the spell to use it, and the more variations and rhymes you came up with was how many times you could use the spell a day.
Also have hacked in spell roles Where you had to get over or under a target number.
The psychic component has returned in 5e edition, through the concentration mechanic.
Sounds like the sequel should just cover _Player's Option: Spells and Magic_ D&D died for me when TSR did.
1. Chapters, Man! CHAPTERS!!!
2. OMG- ANYTHING BUT VANCE!!! Thanks for this. I know I play this game and have to deal with it, but I like the Spell point system in the DMG better. Because sometimes you will have to cast that 5th and 6th shield spell.
3. RoleMaster had some Mana Points as a fuel to their "Spell Lists" and I love that system.
4. Mage: the Ascension - another beautiful system. I just wish White Wolf didn't get rid of it. I just don't know how I would implement that in D&D.
@@Zr0din LOL. Yes, I always forget about the chapters. Sorry, just excited to hit publish after editing.
I despise spell slots. It's clunky and unintuitive. The spell point system is far more versatile and easier to manage. It feels like spell slots are there out of tradition more so than design.
I use vancian. It's all I've known.
Honestly I love the studious wizard style casting. I just think to balance it Sorcerer's can have the flexibility, but Wizards should be able to prepare many more spells each adventuring period
That was more or less the tradeoff back in 3rd edition.
In 5E, wizards have the largest spell list. They also have the spellbook ability. That allows them to learn a lot of spells. They can also copy spell scrolls into their spellbook. Sorcerers are more flexible due to their sorcery points and meta magic feature. However wizards have assess to more kinds of spells. So there is a tradeoff to provide some balance.
I use spell slots for now. I don't like them. I'd rather spell points, but most essentially agree with Dave Arneson. I want my players to have to have components for thier magic I want 25% of my adventures just getting components
It's also another reason to fight monsters. They have unique components.
I like spell slots because I like the idea of preparing spells. I don’t like memorization as the fluff for it. But I do like that each spells needs to be carefully prepared
Primal spellcasters: Am i a joke to you?
In the original AD&D and AD&D 2e, High Intelligence did not yield more Arcane spells.
@@DeltaDemon1 didn’t high Intelligence in AD&D yield more spells known?
@@dnd-and-philosophy No, it gave a higher chance of learning a spell and it gave the maximum number of spells learned per spell level higher but not the daily number of spells (not sure I explained this properly)...The table of spell slots did not increase with higher intelligence. A first level Wizard with 18 intelligence still could only memorize (and therefore cast) 1 first level spell. What was increased is the total number of spells (in this case first level spells) that he could have in his spell book available to memorize but it was still only one spell memorized (and castable) per day. This is different from D&D 3e and higher where the higher the intelligence the more spells that can be cast per day.
I think my one question is about the idea of spell slots punishing wizards.
But in 5e there all spellcasters use spell slots innate and learned casters, the only difference is do you have the option to change your spells each long rest or not.
Eapecially as in 5e unlike earlier editions there is no this spell slot is attached to this spell. So while yes spell slots are used it is no longer vancian.
Great point. I like the idea of practiced spells and spintaneous spells. Meaning, as a wizard, you have spells that you've prepared for the day, but you also have the ability to "recall" a spell you know, and attempt to cast it without preperation. You'd have to make a spellcasting check of some sort to correctly recall and cast it, but each round you prepare (up to some max) would give you a bonus to the check.
@dnd-and-philosophy would that be maybe a bit like the Fantasy AGE system and how they do spellcasting? If I recall it's very much to cast any spell you have to make a skill rolls against that spell's difficulty number (more powerful spells having higher casting difficulty) and then on a successful test the effect happens. I think they may have had an additional effect of you rolled alive that number but it has been some time since I looked at the system.
@@ak318 I'm not familair with the Fantasy AGE system, but the system I'm thinking of sounds familiar to what you describe. My next video will be out later today and I cover an obscure magic system from a 1992 RPG. Stay tuned!
I never liked Vancian magic and changed it 35 years ago and never looked back. I use a simple spell point system which makes more sense and is infinitely more fun. I will never go back to the horrible Vancian magic. Balance can easily be achieved in a wide other variety of ways. Gygax was wrong in this case.
You’re my new best friend.
A number of years ago I tried a few other systems, but in the end I came back to the Vancian system. My reason for not liking Vancian magic was mostly a narrative one. I didn’t like the idea of the M-U studying their spellbook everyday while the rest of the group was breaking camp. I reframed the way I thought about it though. M-Us don’t memorize and forget their spells. Vancian preparation, instead, is the ritual by which a M-U invites/summons the living magical energies to reside in their mind. When the spell is cast, the energy is released. I like the restrictions of Vancian magic. I think the reasons Gygax gives in the Strategic Review are still valid. It all depends on what kind of a game you want to run. Do you want casters to be equal to fighters in damage output in combat? I don’t. Casters can have a couple powerful nukes at their disposal, but I want most of the damage coming from fighters. I should say I don’t generally play 5e. I prefer OD&D. That might give some context for my preferences.
Thanks for this comment. I've come to a similar conclusion about Vancian magic and I like how you reframed the wizard reading their spell books. It's almost like meditation and preparing the mind to accept the magic power. Very nice idea!
I have hated Vancian magic since just a few years after learning to play back in the 80s. A Mana or spell point system should have replaced it. The sorcerer is a direct result of that need to replace the out dated system.
Have to say, I much prefer the spell slot system--I like the restriction vis-a-vis non-casters (especially at mid to high levels), and the expenditure of slots is a constant reminder to the player that magic is FINITE.
That said, 3.0/3.5 gave me an opportunity to help the wizard out. I decided back in 2E that clerics can cast anything on the fly, so long as they had slots available. To give wizards their own boost in flexibility when 3.0 came around, I created a new entry on the character sheet: "Spells MEMORIZED per Level". While castable per day remains RAW, the new MEMORIZED entry for each level = castable per day + # of spells (by level) based on Intelligence modifier (to a limit of +5).
Example: per day, a 3rd level wizard with an 18 Intelligence (+4 mod) can memorize 7 1st level spells (but cast only 3 per RAW), and memorize 6 2nd level spells (but cast only 2 per RAW). My players have appreciated the increase in versatility.
@@homebrewisthebestbrew5270 that sounds very versatile without being overly powerful. Nice work!
Vancian magic I don't necessarily hate but I don't really like it either. I more tolerate it than anything else. In terms of magic systems, my favorite has probably been the ones found in games like Warhammer 40: Imperium Maledictum. Psychic powers in the game are very powerful and can be flexibly used. But they're dangerous and come at a cost. Namely when you use the powers you build up a series of warp charges which will need to be purged or very, very bad things will happen to you and everyone in the immediate vicinity. And purging the warp charges can be dangerous. My group ended up with several broken limbs after a warp charge purging and a purging gone wrong later on could have killed everyone but the psyker had they been in the same zone as her at the time.
That kind of system isn't really what a lot of people are looking for in their magic, admittedly. But I like the danger of it all. I like that the game will let you use these frankly absurd powers but at the cost of knowing that this time you might fuck up so bad you end up possessed by a super powerful daemon. It lets magic be terrifyingly powerful and creates a sort of tension. It also makes for interesting social stuff! Like if you aren't a sanctioned psyker and are seen using the powers you may well end up on the shitlist of a witch hunter who is much more powerful than you and your ragtag bunch.
I think Vancian magic lost its ways when it became possible to prepare one spell two times or more. If you can prepare every spell only once, it makes every spell unique and worth learning. Because of this Sublime Way from Tome of battle for 3.5 is more Vancian than normal D&D magic. The most limiting part of D&D magic is not spells slots, its that you can prepare spells only once per day.
My favorite magic system is Ritual Path magic from GURPS4. It combines the ability to create and cast spells on the fly (like Mage: the Ascension) and prepare them in advance. But for my Conan-inspired campaign i chose Vancian magic, because i wanted it to be powerful but hard to control and poorly understood thing.
Once again I hear Spellcasters whining, meanwhile fighters Struggle for Relevance in the long game due to the fact their progression is Linear while Spellcasters is Quadratic...
We do need a new system to bring everyone to a happy level playing field...maybe giving Martial Classes some manner of cool abilities that function similar to Spells...then we could break these Abilities and Spells into fairly weak ones you can use any time (almost At-Will you could say), stronger ones that take a short rest to recover (so, maybe once per Encounter?), powerful ones that require a Long Rest to use again (you will likely only use those once Daily), and maybe a few non-combat ones (abilities that serve a sort of Utility I suppose...). It throws out the Vancian Magic and it stops the game from becoming "Guy with spells bends reality into knots, guy with sword goes to raid the fridge and watch TV for the next four hours"...
...wait a minute...
#800
THANKS!
I've played many different magic systems from AD&D to gurps, l5R, AD&D Spell points, Dragonlance 5th age with those damn cards, Exalted, 4E D&D, Mage the Ascention, and 5E D&D. And 5E has it the best it is basically the 3E sorcerer, expanded to fit all classes. no more forgetting spells the most annoying thing about vancian magic. And the more limited spell slots brought casters into a more respectable balance for play. IE a 20th level vancian wizard could prepare 4 or 5 different 9th level spells, and cast each one once. but a 5E wizard might prepare four 9th level spells but be able to only cast one once. When Wizards can just cast Meteor swarm 5 times well then why do you need anyone else?
666 subscribers. Oof.
You keep using the term "spell slots"... but as someone who has been playing the game since it basically came out... we never called them spell "slots". They were simply spells you could cast because you had them memorized. Thing is, when you do a search for the origin of the term, spell slot, the results are some amalgamation of odd bits and pieces from all over the place, from different years and versions, with the term spell slot(s) tacked on as though it was always there. I'm not trying to cause issue, but I don't recall it being a thing until a good bit later in the hobby, and it feels like people just automatically associate the term due to how 5e has really pushed it. Maybe 4e and 3e did as well, but definitely 5e has. Regardless, I am more of a 1e/2e kind of guy, but I just don't think it was as common a term in the earlier stages as it is being suggested.
You're right, the term spell slots came well after 1e/2e. I use it now because many seem to recognize what it is. I think WotC added the term to 3.0 because they needed to call it something in order to describe and use Metamagic feays.
@dnd-and-philosophy that makes sense. As far as magic systems that are "different"... have you ever given thought to Ars Magica with how it is implemented? Verb & Noun and make it free-form... or at least more free-form than always going with pre-designed spell 'recipes'.
@@keithmathews4605 I need to look deeper at the Arc Magica magic system.
@dnd-and-philosophy I can wholeheartedly recommend Ars Magica with regards to how it handles the concept of spell creation. Trevor over at MeMyselfAndDie is doing a kickstarter for his Broken Empires... which has a similar magic system that is based off of the concepts used in Ars Magica... noun and verb... I 'create fire'... etc.