For those curious, Vancian magic is derived from the magic of Jack Vance's novels. In Jack's fiction, and also in Gygax's fiction, spells are effectively magic ideas a wizard has collected in his or her mind that when released (cast) are lost. Gygax felt worked well for the purposes of dungeon crawling, both promoting preparation and limiting the utility of the wizard. We haven't had real Vancian since 3rd edition however, since 4th didn't have it at all and 5th separated the concepts of "prepared" and "slots", where originally it was "prepared in slot" which can still be found in Pathfinder (1e/2e). I think Vancian still teaches us an important lesson: magic must be limited. Especially when trying to keep martials feeling useful without having to resort to just making them magical too.
Thank you for having a nuanced opinion! Its weird to see all these 5e players act like they hate DnD. Its far from perfect and Im down with people making their own rules but the critiques are bananas sometimes.
I've been making my own game and there's other ways to fix the caster/martial divide. There's a soft cap to the number of actions that can be taken in a turn. Technically a character can take any number of actions in a turn but each action costs stamina equal to the number of actions you've taken in the turn before that one. Spells take multiple actions to cast so while martials always have useful actions casters need to either spend time or spend stamina on "useless actions" to prepare their spells
@TheDungeonCoach , this has been a great video. I love these ideas! I'm also having fun, because watching you talk at 1.5x speed is super entertaining. It amps up the passion so much.
I think it does a lot that is good, it fixes more than need fixing. However there are things it does not fix and will still need fixing. Perhaps over time these will be addressed, or someone else will that have significant backing too.
That said, over the last 8 years Ive moved from spell point system to a cast for success system. A caster can cast a spell if they make their Spell check. If they fail, the spell fails. They can try as much as they want, just like a warrior can fight as long as they want. That said, I have Spell domains, instead of actual spells. This gives the caster full control of the magic effects (with a skill check). You have a Prime Domain of Fire, you can throw a ball of fire, you can heat a room, you can do an explosive ball of fire, if you make the Skill Check. (of course my system doesnt have levels and classes so players get even more options, and is easier to balance)
Spell preparation in DnD is based on the magic system in Jack Vance's "The Dying Earth" series. The idea was that these spells were not something you learned by rote, but more like entities of power that you forced into your brain, and you could only force in a few at once. Once expended, they leave the brain until the caster can return to their books and force them in again. I'm reading the books right now. It's an interesting plot hook, and it makes sense in that context. Not suggesting that a TTRPG needs to work like this, but it makes sense when you understand Vance as the basis for a lot of DnD mechanics.
Dont get me wrong, Im perfectly aware that vancient magic is a fascinating concept and makes perfect sence when put in context with the lore and setting of the Dying Earth Series. My problem is...DnD and most other TTRPG's dont follow the lore and mechanics of the Dying Earth magic system😅 Vancient magic, as interesting as it is, is also very specific and consteictive in its mechanics, usage, and worldbuildin, and thats why it often unintuative or even compleatly inpractcle for emulating different settings that use magic. There's a reason why mana and concepts that work similar to it (Ki, chakra, magical stamina ...) have such a far reaching presence in video games, anime and shows alike, while the vibes of Vancient Magic are relagated almost exclusively to TTRPG's these days.
I think Vancian magic works when you have a small number of slots (like the 5e Warlock), but when it's 20+ spread across 9 levels the concept breaks down. I mean sure, have 1 full caster and 1 half-caster work that way for those who don't mind the bookkeeping, but it's always been my least favorite thing about the game. Esp as upcasting is barely worthwhile for most spells.
I personally preferred having spell focuses around. it's basically the sword of wizards and feels a bit off having them do spells without it. I would definitely make casting with no spell focus a high level ability showing that your knowledge of spells is so intricate that you don't need anything to assist you
I actually think that Foci and spell components can serve a purpose game design wise. They keep the casters hands occupied and give a good explanation why they cant use shields or weapons. And of course you can always make exceptions when a specific caster needs to be able to use shields (cleric paints their holy symbol etc). Having a staff or wand or spell book is definitely part of the fantasy of being a spell caster.
I agree. I also think it can help balance the game. If the party goes to prison it can feel arbitrary to just have a mage cast an anti magic spell to keep the casters in check. It's far more interesting to take their weapons away, which are their wand or staff.
I think that it depends on the type of magic and the experience level of the user. A focus for Clerics and Warlocks to connect with their source of magic is a must. Occasionally needing sacrifices or incense to gain "extra" benefits. Artificers and alchemists are all about harnessing materials as conduits or sources of magic power. Druids often utilize natural components for a deeper connection to primeval forces. I go back and forth with sorcerers. I think that a focus would be something that beginners use like a mandala, but then internalize it. Wizards approach magic through intellect and would use anything that follows a recipe.
Also, when the party gets captured, and the Fighter is a fraction of their normal Self without their Armor/Weapons.... But ALL the casters are at Full Power...?? There should be *some* penalty to most classes for getting caught unprepared [Monks bypassing this is a unique Features that "proves the negative"].
@@peterterry7918 I think sorcerers, clerics, and warlocks are the obvious ones not in need of a focus. If a god gives you magic powers why should you need a symbol to channel that? Yes that can be explained away and in a lot of the stories that the game pulls do have the cleric like figures using a symbol, but many don't. For example Moses uses a staff for every miraculous thing he does. On the other hand Jesus doesn't (look at the cleric spell list and tell me its not inspired by Jesus). Sorcerers I think makes sense since the whole idea with them is that they are brimming with to much magic. Wizards and artificers are messing with cosmic forces so needing the right tool for the job sounds good to me. Druids and rangers (if rangers cast spells) should just use magic components. Though a druid could use a staff. My brother and I are working on a system of our own and have set it so that all spell casting requires a focus because this way just like the fighter can lose his sword a mage can lose his wand. It balances that edge that mages have on non mages.
All Martial in dc20 are fine without weapons. Because all Martial class are balanced that they are fine when they use fist. There Damage are 2 Damage lower in average per hit if they losse ther weaposn. And if you use ligth armor your PD Physical Defense sink 1 point at lv 1-4 and 2 points above. Only Charakter how has bad dex and counts for havy armor snd str. have there PD by a concernig amount. But all caster can use ligth wepons or havy wepons at lv two if they invest a feat. So the PD decrease is the same for Casters.
I actually like to enforce Spellcasting Focuses. In my D&D5e game, Spellcasters need their Focus on hand to Cast Spells at all. It gives it a more fair feeling when both the Fighter and Wizard could get Disarmed of their Weapon/Focus, and makes them want to find a Magic Weapons/Focuses or gain a Feature that can teleport to their hands or make them immune to Disarm.
I believe the same thing. But with an exception for cantrips. Since they have learned them so well that they know them at all times and don't cost mana to cast. Also Sorcerers can cast without a focus at the cost of a sorcery point per level.
@q267scott I feel that Cantrips should also require a Focus, otherwise it feels weird that they can't cast Fireball, but can cast the equivalent of a shotgun blast (Fire Bolt). I do make Sorcerers count as their own Focus for free, just like a Monk is always armed, a Sorcerer is always with its Focus.
@@gtasaleon the way I think about is like this, a spell that has become second nature to you that you could just flick it out like a bugger because it's so nothing to you. That's a cantrip, the most basic of basic, it's weak it's easy, it's second nature to you to cast.
I'm pretty strict about making sure I have a focus in hand. But then I'm playing an artificer and I can use a wand, one of my four sets of tools (one of which is stored in my gloves), my satchel, my cloak, and one custom focus so in practical terms I can't really be disarmed.
My best spell caster goes to great lengths not to allow anyone within disarming range and primarily uses eldritch blast to accomplish this. You understand, she doesn’t need MORE advantages than she already has.
Prepared spells for wizards is a game balance mechanic because they have no limit on the number of spells they can learn. As for spell focuses, they're not required - except possibly holy symbols for clerics. A spell focus (or component pouch) can replace the material component for a spell in the component has no cost. A for mana vs. spell slots, I've long used the spell point system in the DMG.
Came here to say this. There's already a mana system for D&D, and I've always preferred using that one. The only problem with it is that Warlocks are excluded.
@@Strider_ITwarlocks are so problematic to balance. Give them normal spellslots/spellpoints, and they are op with invocations and stuff. Don't give them anything and they are dependant on short rests and good in small easy fights (what's the point of being good in easy combat anyway?). Grant them even 1 more warlock spellslot and they will blast everything with upcasted fireball. I like their theme and non combat gameplay, but i hate spamming eldritch blast forever because doing anything with their spellslots breaks the game.
I think by default Wizard should know all the spells that they've learned so far and be able to use them freely. that said, you can have a condition that causes the spellcaster to temporarily (or permanantly😈) forget how to perform some spells (perhaps the complicated ones), like 'head trauma' if they get hit really hard on their head. you can have conditions like 'dizziness' or 'exhaustion' that sure can affect one's mind and limits the capability to cast spells.
For the Wizard part, that's just weird, like he said. Why would I have 30 spells on my book, that is by the way currently in my hand, and then be able to cast only 6 of those? If you want to give the Wizard limitless spells through their grimoire, then just have them be able to cast all of those. Otherwise, limit the amount of spells the book can handle
@@dyegoeduardosantossilva3659 @orelbarak3131 Why do people use recipes after the first time the cook a dish? Why do performers rehearse? Why do speakers use teleprompters? Just because you learn something, it doesn't mean you'll be able to recite specifics without brushing up. You may have 30 spells in your book, but you can't recite the exact formula for all 30 off the top of your head. Sure, you could try reading out of the book, but good luck doing that in the middle of a fight with an orc swinging an axe at you.
Well, I'm Brazilian and I have to say, our Tormenta 20 used a system pretty much similar to this one with mana points. And my playthrough with it was so much more liberating than the spell slot crap. I really recommend adapting it to your game, it is at least simpler and refreshing.
To be fair, spell slots are an old relic from the days of Vancian spellcasting. The idea was that you store up the magic in your mind when you study a spell, and then casting the spell causes it to leave your mind. To represent this, you used to have to determine which spell was being used with which spell slot at the start of each day. It also seems appropriate for Clerics that pray for specific miracles at the beginning of the day, as well as inventor classes that have to create the ammo for each spell. This is also the explanation for the weird spell prep idea they reintroduced at the beginning of OneDND. They were trying to bring back Vancian casting as a way of balancing casters and martials... but then everyone pitched a fit. That was part of what used to nerf casters: they had to prepare the exact number of uses for each spell at the start of the day, and once you ran out you were done using that spell. This is what used to make the sorcerer special. They had fewer spells known, but they could cast them using any available slot. It played into their theme of being magical mutants that did a few things very well. Then they gave the sorcerers casting system to everyone in 5e.
100 %, been using "Spell Points" since 3.0 Unearthed Arcana, then created a Mana Point system for my homebrew game and never looked back, that was 2002. **** Spell Slots and "Vancian" Magic entirely
Mana is a simple concept but lead to quadratic caster problem that is very difficult to circumvent from a game design point of view. There are certain spells that are ok to be cast once, but became a problem if you can cast it multiple times. The minor image cantrip, from some 5e playtest was a great example of this fact. As players we can prioritize game balance less, but as a designer we must to take it in consideration very seriously.
I like the scaling aspect of spells. It allows for having other elemental/etc. affinities instead of just fire or lightning. I've got a character who I want to have a wind theme, but there aren't many attack spells with wind. So with this, I could see a base cast of a blast of wind (maybe just shoving instead of damage), and adding damage with more mana. Maybe even changing from a bludgeoning punch of wind to a slicing wind with added mana. As for the spell slot rant, I agree with the whole explaining why you're out of slots issue, but I still enjoy coming up with fitting explanations for it. My favorite is for my Artificer. He doesn't actually "cast" spells, since the common flavor is they replicate spell effects with gadgets. So when he's out of slots, that's just because a given gadget had a few cogs or springs get loose or break, which he would fix the next morning as he "prepares" the spell. If a given gadget was prepared, but not used that day, then me being out of slots would be that gadget had a piece bend out of place while sitting in his bag. So it's also tapped out for the day, until I can fix it. It gives his gadgets more of a flimsy vibe which fits his spur of the moment building style. As for prepared spells, some gadgets need a piece from another gadget, so those aren't in use today, or they need an arcane jolt to juice up their "battery" and I didn't have time to charge it that morning.
7:32 oooo just had the thought of how cool it would be for a player to sacrafice some of their own physical strength (like spell burn in Dungeon Crawl Classic) to cast a spell higher than they would typically be able to cast. You might have covered this idea already but the image that came to mind was cool and I wanted to share xD
This is a cool idea, although Druids for example should have access to Dominate Beast (or be better at it), but maybe not have access (or as easily) to Dominate People. I suppose they could get something like a 1 mana reduction on casting Dominate to target beasts, although that doesn't handle whether they should have access (or at what cost) to non-beast uses of it.
Hell dnd even has a optional variant rule that’s just better than spell slots spell points it’s a little complex in how the spells cost and how many you have it just makes more sense
An interesting way of visualizing spell slots came to me from a Michael G. Manning book series called the Art of the Adept. The wizard would prepare a spell by assembling the arcane diagram and then store it inside their own body. When cast, you expended the energy. A new or weak wizard could only prepare and "hold" one or two spells...this is basically slots. I applied that to my D&D immediately. Now the book magic system also had a mana concept as well. You could always cast any spell you knew but it may take 10 minutes. So prepared spells were critical for speed. After a long time and many thousands of casting, a wizard could eventually learn to reflex cast a spell...basically instant like a prepared spell. Cool magic system.
Hey man. I am brazilian and we have a TTRPG called Tomenta 20 That use a similar mana point system. It work very well, so much better then the clunky spell slot. With possible I recomend you to speak with some of the audience that knows this system to get some insght in the game that have a well stabilish base and to get some ideas for the itemization of the game. The itemization of Tomenta 20 is one of the best, I would love to see some one like you to review it
I'm really quite a fan of spell foci being a major component of the game, though I did dislike their absolute necessity with no way to cast without them. Provided a balance of being able to limit a spellcaster by disarming them, similar to disarming a martial. I understand eliminating the necessity of them, but perhaps it could still be an optional rule? Perhaps as well there could be some benefit to casting with them? Such as a free spell enhancement or similar.
Only 90 second in, but this sounds nearly identical to the magitech system in the rules I made for my kids' TTRPG adventures. Sounds like a great system!
I don’t mind wands/staffs/etcetera not being required for spell casting. My only suggestion to add is to make sure that wielding such items is compatible with somatic component requirements.
This makes me incredibly excited by the prospect of artificers that can build items that have either spell toggles (scrolls, arcane gun, etc) and permanently on spells (portal arch, eternal fire, etc)
I love how the magic system with Mana points and condense spells sounds, tho I gotta say spell components can be a cool way to differentiate Wizards and Warlocks from Bards and Artificers, or Clerics and Paladins, maybe there is a case for Druids but specially Sorcerers as a class or subclass to bypass those restrictions. Its worth considering as a thematic and mechanical tool, but maybe not on every spell xd
I love what you're doing with DC20 , and while I personally prefer Spell Points (SP) in my own system, I think there is a place for Spell Slots. Whenever I've considered adding an element to a system I think about what level of complexity it may bring, or the type of book keeping (if necessary). Spell Slots in my opinion are much simpler because it's a checklist you're looking over rather than having to track a running total. SP is something that allows you to cast more spells, but you'll have to keep track of if you subtracted from your maximum, and with a spend limit you have to make sure you haven't spent too much either. These things could be simple on their own, but depending on what is around it, it could be tedious to keep track of. In DC20 I don't think this is an issue. For those more experienced in the system, I think that it's fine to bring in an SP system but I think slots are more new-player friendly. In systems like DnD and Pathfinder, since they revolve around mainly tracking uses (the running total you do track obv being your HP) Spell Slots fall in line with that design convention, and while you can use alternatives in the system like SP, the spells aren't designed with that in mind. Now, what I'm saying is that Spell Slots are likely the better choice in systems like Pathfinder or DnD, considering the other book keeping you have to do. I also think some of the "Spell slots make no sense" may also have to do with how the fiction defines what spell slots are, but that part is really just conjecture on my end. I think it's fine in DC20, because the system is pretty straightforward (to me at least), I'm usually someone trying to mind tedium with the systems I want to introduce to people, and DC20 has been a system I've been wanting to introduce people to, just haven't had the chance to yet. I just wanted to put some thoughts on the table that pushes back (in good faith of course) against the notion that Spell Points are universally better than Spell Slots, I think that they both have their merits and disadvantages, and it ultimately comes down to what kind of game feel you're going for.
SP is just one number that you're subtracting from which is exactly like health points. With spell slots you're managing 5 or more categories with spells scattered across all of them Personally I think managing an HP style resource is a lot easier than the hot mess that is spell slots- especially for new players
Years ago I built a magic system where you used mana points and built spell with components. For an example you have an three components air + fire + motion and you have a fireball. As a base the number of components gave the base mana point cost. If you researching a new spell, you don't have any idea how the spell behave so when you test it, you can get hurt and killed in the worst case.
One amazing benefit of this is it eliminates the concept of “spell levels”. I am so ready to be done explaining that being 3rd level does not mean you can cast 3rd level spells because spell levels are completely different from and unrelated you character levels and you have to reference a table to know how many spells of a given level up can cast at a certain character level. Now I can just say “more powerful spells use more mana and your mana pool increases as you level”. Boom. Done. Bless you Dungeon Coach!
Magic making no sense to a logical mind, honestly, makes perfect sense to me. This works just fine in my mind. That being said, a more flexible system of casting isn't necessarily bad. But one thing I think you aren't keeping track of is how mathematical complexity in TTRPG can quickly lead to spending 10 minutes doing math at the table and that's NOT as fun.
I LOVE this system! I've been re-reading the Dresden Files by Jim Butcher, and this system seems like it could really work within the world of Harry Dresden. The ability to manipulate a spell and change it. To mold it to whatever the situation calls for is something I've been wanting from a TTRPG for a LONG time.
18 minutes and 23 seconds of satisfaction. You scratched every itch I had about DnD's spellcasting. But casting spells together? Now you went beyond and above, I'm very very interested. Synergy and actual teamplay is everything.
We've been working on a spell points system. This approach has been around since (from my experience) about 1982. That's when I started. Homebrew campaigns for yrs have been implementing spell points. We've been working on subdivisions of spell points for arcane & divine Dungeon Coach. Mages & Priests draw upon spell power in different ways but in our lore it comes from the same source. It's simple and easy to learn. Only 1 page of rules.
Only 20 seconds in, but YEAH BUDDY! My table has given up Spell Slots for the Spell Point Variant in the DMG long ago, and explaining it to new players still takes a moment, but is MUCH BETTER than watching their eyes glaze over when we tried to explain the "core Rules"... 😩
I love this. I have not backed a new system in over thirty years, and I'm excited about what you are doing. I would guess that I'm old enough that I first hated spell slots when you were in diapers. What you have created is in my very opinionated opinion the second best magic system I've ever seen, and it shares a lot of the features of the best magic system I've seen. The best system, like yours, uses rolls for spell casting with benefits for higher rolls. One of those features that I don't know if you've considered is the flexibility to cast spells without verbal and somatic components; in the system I love, you can do that, but each component you leave out imposes penalties to your spellcasting roll. If DC20 doesn't have a rule like that, I will likely homebrew one.
I hear you. One my favorite 5e characters is a Fathomless Warlock, and one of his spells is the thematically appropriate 3rd level spell, Hunger of Hadar. Unfortunately, the spell has no upcast option, so if I want to cast it, I have to use a spell slot that far exceeds the level of the spell, for no additional benefit.
ooooo, I love this take on spellcasting! much more flexible and fun then Spell slots of DnD. it does remind me a bit of how the 5e unearthed arcana class Mystic handled it sort of casting abilities
I’m here because I’m creating my own version as well and very much so like that you attribute it to old school dnd made by Gary. One of my close HS friends has a step dad who played with some of the original 2e makers so Iv only really been accustomed to 2e. I love spell slots when you put the time into them and create a spell book and such. I think it adds even more grit and the wizard will feel one with his spell book if done correctly.
OMG!!!! I love this! I've been working on how magic works in my world and I love how you've approached it. It's more intuitive and "real" in my opinion. Definitely gave me some ideas. I've been watching BwB for a hot minute but have only found your channel. This is the second video I've watched. The first one was about combat. Subscriber most definitely
I also create my own ttrpg and though long about magic because of the same mentioned problems. Mana was also one of my ideas and honestly it might be better from a mechanical point of view. But I instead decided to use an item based system. So I don't have mana but my players have to acquire runes, either buy them or create them. I got rid of classes all together and everyone can do everything they have learned. My game in general evolves heavily around items in general as a means to encourage players to pick up talents/crafts and have an impact on the Gameworld even if they are not fighting. Again, this might not be the best way mechanically to create a good game, but it's what I wanted and I now try to make it interesting. Your approach is way closer to regular DND and honestly it addresses most of my concerns with DND so if my system fails I will gladly fall back to Dc20 as it sounds really good. And it's easy. It's so hard to create something logical that is easy. It's not hard to improve Combat from DND in a logical way, but to improve it in a way it doesn't impact the fun, that's way harder, I know this out of experience, and you kind stranger did an amazing job. So far I would even recommend your system over mine in most cases.
4:49, YUP. That's exactly what one of my players brought up a while back. I told him it was for balancing and mechanic purposes, but he didn't like how didn't make sense despite that. I had to figure out a lore reason why. Eventually we found out D&D does have an alternative rule for it in the form of spell points in the DMG.
There was a system that came out in the 90's called Earthdawn. They used something similar to spell slots. If I remember correctly they were spell matrix. The cannon reason was if you cast from raw magic evil creatures from beyond would find you and eat your pitiful little charechter. Basically you prepared in a safe way and then held in stasis and released it when needed. You could also attack a charechters stored spells from the astral plane
Awesome! I wish I could play this now lol & I like every aspect about the changes you’ve done, the only thing I would like to see added, is a flushed out how to lead extra spells from spell scrolls for each spell caster class, like each time you use a spell scroll, you make a spell casting ability check to see if you retain that knowledge & each time you cast it without learning it, the next check gets a little easier
This system is great. I think another fun system, would allow spell casters to weave spells from the ground up. It would be slightly more complicated, but adds more flexibility. Of course, the more effects you add, the more mana/spell points it costs to cast.
I like your pitch for mana points and metamagic-esc enhancements. As you mentioned, it ties up all the lesser and greater spells. Also, I am a still a fan of spell focuses, but making them bonuses instead of mandatory is good. Here's some 5e spell evolutions I thought of: Float: Feather Fall -> Levitate -> Fly Swift: Longstrider -> Haste -> Timestop Vanish: Blur -> Invisibility -> Greater Invisibility Heal: Cure Light Wounds -> +Lesser Restoration -> +Greater Restoration Smokescreen: Fog Cloud -> Darkness -> Hunger of Hadar
Big fan of hyper-modular systems like this. Also makes it feel like actual spell mastery. Of course my character could slightly transmute a spell effect if they had the mana and knowledge about it.
Ive never liked the fact that wizards "forget" how to cast then suddenly the next day he "remembers" after studying the spellbook. I disagree with doing away with spell foci though. Spell foci add to the role-playing aspect of D&D. Its not hard to implement a spell foci for each MU class and do it in such a way that compliments the spell points system. We as designers of the game should always keep the role-playing aspect of the game ahead of the mechanics of the game. The two should compliment one another so you discourage players from playing the game in a mechanical way. Thats how the video game culture has influenced D&D in a negative way imo. But what do I know? Ive only been doing the game since the late 70s. 😂
I have spellcasting take 2 actions/rounds, the first round is to focus the mana and the second is the cast. This means that spellcasters can be disrupted before the cast. A physical Spell focus (like a wand) means the Spell can be cast with 1 action. So in 1 action the Wizard focuses a mote of elemental fire into their hand, in the second action they can throw it (20ft like a grenade) at no cost OR they can use mana to cast it 60ft etc
I love EVERYTHING u just said and have been trying to create a system like this for an all Wizard party. But i actually LOVE spell focuses cause I give spell focuses effects. Like if ur spell focus is made out of red dragons tooth u get bonus damage on fire spells and what not.
Wow, I have been rewriting the magic system as well, strangely enough, it seems we are heading down the same path. It seems you have arrived before me. Which is cool. I have went down a slightly different path, but very similar. Mana points, yes. Part of my rewrite is a classless system based on skill proficiency, which allows you to use mana to impact, range, AOE, damage, effect, duration, etc. Skill proficiency is also used for martial skills and any and all skill sets. I enjoyed what you had to say and it has reinforced my decision to re-invent the wheel, so to speak. happy gaming, I look forward to examining DC20
I've been working on making a game system and some things are similar yet others are different. In the system I'm making you can technically use all your mana on a single spell, if you've developed your character in a way to do that. A spell takes ability points to learn and each spell has a list of modifiers (with some spells taking up multiple pages cause they have so many modifiers) that you have to spend ability points to learn and increase in effectiveness. There's also some generic options that can be added based on how high your skill is in the relevant element but they're less efficient
literally everything you said about spell slots and prepared spells is so true. i've been hating on both of them for a long time i'm glad somebody finally agrees with me about how lame they are.
How I did it in 5e: Spells cost two times their level in mana to cast (2 for first level, 4 for second, 6 for third, so on); Full casters start with 4 Spell points at level 1 and gain 2 points per level; Half casters start with 2 spell points at level 2 and gain 1 per level (So at level 2 they will have 4); Third caster start with 1 spell point at level 3 and gain 1 per level (So at level 5 they will have 5 spell points); Sorcerers have a number of charges equal to half their level rounded down but at least 1. They can use the charges to recover 2 spell points out of combat, and regain charges on a long rest. They also use spell points to use metamagic rather than sorcery points; There's other ways to spend mana other than spell slots (such as paladin smites or a ranger's mark) so classes with uneven progression won't have leftover, useless spell points in odd levels;
You kidding me!? I'm only like 2 minutes in and a lot of what you are talking about is a system I have been toying with over the last like 20 years lol. Originally I started it for 3rd edition D&D. I've followed you I think not long after you started your youtube channel and we come up with a lot of the same ideas and seem to be of similar mind on a lot of homebrew ideas
@@TheDungeonCoach finished the video, love and agree with it all of course! I just wish my area was more open to playing or trying new games. I'd love to be able to back and play your system but even my own group has a hard enough time getting together and doesn't want to deviate from the norm. Local shops are the same
I like how every spell you mentioned is now a valid choice! . . Except for the friends cantrip, which is still only useful when you make it a "leveled spell", AKA pour mana points into it. I find it hard to believe someone would use the cantrip version of the friends spell, since it has such a major downside. Other than that, nicely done! Very streamlined version of the spell system from dnd!
They DnD something like this with the Nethril box set. I like the idea of returning to this process. I never explain casting as you have magic in you. I explain it as you are pulling magic from the weave that is all around you.
Great video Coach! I was wandering if it would not be better for lore and playable for players to give the wizard a reason to hold his book near him. I think that maybe if he loose his Spell Book, he can cast only few spells from his level, and later in cmapagine he could collect all his spells if he would find a new book to write his spells down.
A while ago I combined the spells Find Steed and Find Greater Steed into one spell. If you cast it with a 2nd or 4th level spellslot, it does the exact same thing as Find Steed or Find Greater Steed, respectively, but then I added a 3rd and 5th-9th level version. At 9th level you can summon a giant ape or a liondrake or a young black dragon to ride into combat. Not sure you would ever waste a 9th level spell slot on that but you could in my games
I love the way this is fleshed out. I've thought it dumb that classes are restricted by spell level and number of casts. I like when a character can choose between a high number casts and a few massive spells. I would love to know if there will different kinds of spell enhancements that each class can do.
Gosh mana has always made so much more sense to me. Any spellcasters in my world who manage to understand manage greater than your average joe, gets rewarded with the ability to use spell points :3 It is suuuch a restricted system
If you lift weights you understand and feel spell levels. You can lift higher weights less times and no amount of first level spell slots can give you energy for another max effort lift
This is a perfect analogy and wish the spell slot system was explained to new players in this way. It would clear up a lot of the questions as to why you cant equivocate two 1st-level spell slots as being the same as a single 2nd-level spell slot. Spell casting as a measure of "maximum effort" put in a single instant to channel magical energy and produce some sort of magical effect is exactly what the spell slot system represents.
Spell foci are important for the game. How come you can neutralize a martial by disarmimg them but casters are always as dangerous even when naked as long as they have a free hand? Only the Monk should be able to function perfectly with zero equipment. Also, I'd love rules to prevent spellcasting by grappling and gagging an enemy in combat to block somatic and verbal components respectively.
Preventing/disrupting spell casting used to be reflected in 1E with the Combat Turn Sequence where time was broken down into rounds and segments with factors of dexterity modifiers, weapons speeds, and casting times could allow an opponent's physical attacks or spell against you to resolve before you could finish casting your own spell, even on the same initiative order. In the BECMI/1E/2E edition basically if you were trying to cast a spell and you are hit, grappled or are subjected to anything that required a saving throw/ability check (regardless of damage) before the spell's casting time had elapsed, the spell was interrupted.
Part of the problem with spell slots is that they’re based off a book most dnd players haven’t read. In the Jack Vance novels, spells are kind of living creatures, and a magic user trains themself to capture these creatures in their mind. So, when they cast a spell, what they’re literally doing is letting that creature out, meaning they don’t really know that spell anymore until they recapture that creature. This is a perfectly fine concept with setting lore and flavor… for a game where that’s communicated well and which the players and dm are signing up for that. Dnd doesn’t really have that lore and is ultimately sacrificing a more universally elegant and applicable system like the one in this video.
On Spell Focuses... I kinda like them. I think it's sill that in Harry Potter, (almost?) no one can cast magic without their Wand, but this little bit of Lore and History has an Origin. It makes sense that it's *easier* to direct your Power and Intent with a Tool. And it's neat, lore-wise, for different Styles of Casters to have different Tools they typically use. Yes, it makes sense that Gandalf can still lay down the Hurt without his Staff... But it ALSO makes sense that such Hurt can be more efficiently/better directed, if he has his accustomed Tool at hand to focus it!
Spell Enhancements are similar to an idea I had for an rpg I'm making but the system I had was far too clunky, I love how this sounds so far but the one concern is obviously decision paralysis during combat with min-maxing dmg versus area effect, etc.
I know I’m late, but I feel a nice balance is to have prepared spells which require no focus to cast, and spells that are not prepared will need you to focus for the allotted time.
My world has no spells at all. To weave magic into an effect, you have to put it together at the time of casting. You would take an aspect like fire. Add distance, area or targets, effect like damage, how much damage, which would give you a DC to roll against to weave the magic together. If you pass, then you are good to go. If you fail, then you find out that all magic is wild magic.
only watched the first 90 seconds so far, and you summarized exactly my problems with dnd, what to improve and gave an example similar to the system i am working on myself. I think i am watching the correct video! Good job!
While my table has never used it, this is how I do Mana Points - Slot level * total slots = Mana Points. So, if you have 4 level 1 spell slots, you have 4 mana points. If you have a level 4 and a level 9, you have 13 mana points. It's simple, and works for all casters. So, the breakdown at max level works like this: Primary Casters get 4 first level slots (4 MP) + 3 second through fifth level slots (42 MP) + 2 sixth and seventh level slots (26 MP) + 1 eighth and ninth level slots (17 MP) = 89 total mana Secondary Casters get 4 first level slots (4 MP) + 3 second through fourth level slots (27 MP) + 2 fifth level slots (10 MP) = 41 total mana Tertiary Casters get 4 first level slots (4 MP) + 3 second and third level slots (15 MP) + 1 fourth level slot (4 MP) = 23 total mana Warlocks get 4 fifth level spell slots (20 MP) It's that simple. One formula for all charts. It is a direct 1:1 with your spell slots, but is more flexible instead of the weird chart in the DMG.
In my opinion, the most important thing is to define just and only ONE lore to follow. There are to many scenarios in D&D and I thing that the system works side by side with the story of the world/universe we are playing.
For those curious, Vancian magic is derived from the magic of Jack Vance's novels. In Jack's fiction, and also in Gygax's fiction, spells are effectively magic ideas a wizard has collected in his or her mind that when released (cast) are lost. Gygax felt worked well for the purposes of dungeon crawling, both promoting preparation and limiting the utility of the wizard. We haven't had real Vancian since 3rd edition however, since 4th didn't have it at all and 5th separated the concepts of "prepared" and "slots", where originally it was "prepared in slot" which can still be found in Pathfinder (1e/2e).
I think Vancian still teaches us an important lesson: magic must be limited. Especially when trying to keep martials feeling useful without having to resort to just making them magical too.
Even so, in both third and pathfinder there are spontaneous spellcasters, who do not use that system.
Thank you for having a nuanced opinion! Its weird to see all these 5e players act like they hate DnD. Its far from perfect and Im down with people making their own rules but the critiques are bananas sometimes.
Part of the limits in spell slots was derived from Gygax not liking magic-users. He was more into Conan type heroics.
I've been making my own game and there's other ways to fix the caster/martial divide. There's a soft cap to the number of actions that can be taken in a turn. Technically a character can take any number of actions in a turn but each action costs stamina equal to the number of actions you've taken in the turn before that one. Spells take multiple actions to cast so while martials always have useful actions casters need to either spend time or spend stamina on "useless actions" to prepare their spells
Dc20 is everything I did in my homebrew system but 100x better and I love it.
Wow! Thank you for that!!
@TheDungeonCoach , this has been a great video. I love these ideas! I'm also having fun, because watching you talk at 1.5x speed is super entertaining. It amps up the passion so much.
I've been saying the exact same thing since I found out what it was!! Especially the roll to cast. These ideas are great!
I think it does a lot that is good, it fixes more than need fixing. However there are things it does not fix and will still need fixing. Perhaps over time these will be addressed, or someone else will that have significant backing too.
That said, over the last 8 years Ive moved from spell point system to a cast for success system. A caster can cast a spell if they make their Spell check. If they fail, the spell fails. They can try as much as they want, just like a warrior can fight as long as they want. That said, I have Spell domains, instead of actual spells. This gives the caster full control of the magic effects (with a skill check). You have a Prime Domain of Fire, you can throw a ball of fire, you can heat a room, you can do an explosive ball of fire, if you make the Skill Check. (of course my system doesnt have levels and classes so players get even more options, and is easier to balance)
Spell preparation in DnD is based on the magic system in Jack Vance's "The Dying Earth" series. The idea was that these spells were not something you learned by rote, but more like entities of power that you forced into your brain, and you could only force in a few at once. Once expended, they leave the brain until the caster can return to their books and force them in again. I'm reading the books right now. It's an interesting plot hook, and it makes sense in that context. Not suggesting that a TTRPG needs to work like this, but it makes sense when you understand Vance as the basis for a lot of DnD mechanics.
except DnD spellcaster is nothing like spell use in Vance
Dont get me wrong, Im perfectly aware that vancient magic is a fascinating concept and makes perfect sence when put in context with the lore and setting of the Dying Earth Series.
My problem is...DnD and most other TTRPG's dont follow the lore and mechanics of the Dying Earth magic system😅
Vancient magic, as interesting as it is, is also very specific and consteictive in its mechanics, usage, and worldbuildin, and thats why it often unintuative or even compleatly inpractcle for emulating different settings that use magic. There's a reason why mana and concepts that work similar to it (Ki, chakra, magical stamina ...) have such a far reaching presence in video games, anime and shows alike, while the vibes of Vancient Magic are relagated almost exclusively to TTRPG's these days.
I think Vancian magic works when you have a small number of slots (like the 5e Warlock), but when it's 20+ spread across 9 levels the concept breaks down. I mean sure, have 1 full caster and 1 half-caster work that way for those who don't mind the bookkeeping, but it's always been my least favorite thing about the game. Esp as upcasting is barely worthwhile for most spells.
I personally preferred having spell focuses around. it's basically the sword of wizards and feels a bit off having them do spells without it. I would definitely make casting with no spell focus a high level ability showing that your knowledge of spells is so intricate that you don't need anything to assist you
Or some spells require material components. Because that's what spellcasting is for
I actually think that Foci and spell components can serve a purpose game design wise. They keep the casters hands occupied and give a good explanation why they cant use shields or weapons. And of course you can always make exceptions when a specific caster needs to be able to use shields (cleric paints their holy symbol etc). Having a staff or wand or spell book is definitely part of the fantasy of being a spell caster.
I agree.
I also think it can help balance the game. If the party goes to prison it can feel arbitrary to just have a mage cast an anti magic spell to keep the casters in check. It's far more interesting to take their weapons away, which are their wand or staff.
I think that it depends on the type of magic and the experience level of the user. A focus for Clerics and Warlocks to connect with their source of magic is a must. Occasionally needing sacrifices or incense to gain "extra" benefits. Artificers and alchemists are all about harnessing materials as conduits or sources of magic power. Druids often utilize natural components for a deeper connection to primeval forces. I go back and forth with sorcerers. I think that a focus would be something that beginners use like a mandala, but then internalize it. Wizards approach magic through intellect and would use anything that follows a recipe.
Also, when the party gets captured, and the Fighter is a fraction of their normal Self without their Armor/Weapons.... But ALL the casters are at Full Power...??
There should be *some* penalty to most classes for getting caught unprepared [Monks bypassing this is a unique Features that "proves the negative"].
@@peterterry7918 I think sorcerers, clerics, and warlocks are the obvious ones not in need of a focus. If a god gives you magic powers why should you need a symbol to channel that? Yes that can be explained away and in a lot of the stories that the game pulls do have the cleric like figures using a symbol, but many don't. For example Moses uses a staff for every miraculous thing he does. On the other hand Jesus doesn't (look at the cleric spell list and tell me its not inspired by Jesus).
Sorcerers I think makes sense since the whole idea with them is that they are brimming with to much magic. Wizards and artificers are messing with cosmic forces so needing the right tool for the job sounds good to me.
Druids and rangers (if rangers cast spells) should just use magic components. Though a druid could use a staff.
My brother and I are working on a system of our own and have set it so that all spell casting requires a focus because this way just like the fighter can lose his sword a mage can lose his wand. It balances that edge that mages have on non mages.
All Martial in dc20 are fine without weapons. Because all Martial class are balanced that they are fine when they use fist. There Damage are 2 Damage lower in average per hit if they losse ther weaposn. And if you use ligth armor your PD Physical Defense sink 1 point at lv 1-4 and 2 points above.
Only Charakter how has bad dex and counts for havy armor snd str. have there PD by a concernig amount.
But all caster can use ligth wepons or havy wepons at lv two if they invest a feat. So the PD decrease is the same for Casters.
I actually like to enforce Spellcasting Focuses. In my D&D5e game, Spellcasters need their Focus on hand to Cast Spells at all. It gives it a more fair feeling when both the Fighter and Wizard could get Disarmed of their Weapon/Focus, and makes them want to find a Magic Weapons/Focuses or gain a Feature that can teleport to their hands or make them immune to Disarm.
I believe the same thing. But with an exception for cantrips. Since they have learned them so well that they know them at all times and don't cost mana to cast.
Also Sorcerers can cast without a focus at the cost of a sorcery point per level.
@q267scott I feel that Cantrips should also require a Focus, otherwise it feels weird that they can't cast Fireball, but can cast the equivalent of a shotgun blast (Fire Bolt). I do make Sorcerers count as their own Focus for free, just like a Monk is always armed, a Sorcerer is always with its Focus.
@@gtasaleon the way I think about is like this, a spell that has become second nature to you that you could just flick it out like a bugger because it's so nothing to you. That's a cantrip, the most basic of basic, it's weak it's easy, it's second nature to you to cast.
I'm pretty strict about making sure I have a focus in hand. But then I'm playing an artificer and I can use a wand, one of my four sets of tools (one of which is stored in my gloves), my satchel, my cloak, and one custom focus so in practical terms I can't really be disarmed.
My best spell caster goes to great lengths not to allow anyone within disarming range and primarily uses eldritch blast to accomplish this. You understand, she doesn’t need MORE advantages than she already has.
The more I learn about DC20, the more I am in love.
That really does mean a lot to me! Thank you!
It's funny how Tormenta 20 has been doing this system since 2020... good thing more ppl is doing it.
Tormenta since 2020 making martials actually work, and a brawler look broken. Crazy Mana Deflagration to Star Shattering Punches, they got it all.
The only thing I see as a downside in Tormenta is how slowly mana replenishes
Prepared spells for wizards is a game balance mechanic because they have no limit on the number of spells they can learn. As for spell focuses, they're not required - except possibly holy symbols for clerics. A spell focus (or component pouch) can replace the material component for a spell in the component has no cost.
A for mana vs. spell slots, I've long used the spell point system in the DMG.
Came here to say this. There's already a mana system for D&D, and I've always preferred using that one. The only problem with it is that Warlocks are excluded.
@@Strider_ITwarlocks are so problematic to balance. Give them normal spellslots/spellpoints, and they are op with invocations and stuff. Don't give them anything and they are dependant on short rests and good in small easy fights (what's the point of being good in easy combat anyway?). Grant them even 1 more warlock spellslot and they will blast everything with upcasted fireball. I like their theme and non combat gameplay, but i hate spamming eldritch blast forever because doing anything with their spellslots breaks the game.
I think by default Wizard should know all the spells that they've learned so far and be able to use them freely.
that said, you can have a condition that causes the spellcaster to temporarily (or permanantly😈) forget how to perform some spells (perhaps the complicated ones), like 'head trauma' if they get hit really hard on their head.
you can have conditions like 'dizziness' or 'exhaustion' that sure can affect one's mind and limits the capability to cast spells.
For the Wizard part, that's just weird, like he said. Why would I have 30 spells on my book, that is by the way currently in my hand, and then be able to cast only 6 of those? If you want to give the Wizard limitless spells through their grimoire, then just have them be able to cast all of those. Otherwise, limit the amount of spells the book can handle
@@dyegoeduardosantossilva3659 @orelbarak3131 Why do people use recipes after the first time the cook a dish? Why do performers rehearse? Why do speakers use teleprompters? Just because you learn something, it doesn't mean you'll be able to recite specifics without brushing up.
You may have 30 spells in your book, but you can't recite the exact formula for all 30 off the top of your head. Sure, you could try reading out of the book, but good luck doing that in the middle of a fight with an orc swinging an axe at you.
I think the selling point is NOT simplicity but flexibility! It's not simple. But it is fantastically flexible. I like the condensed spell list!
Well, I'm Brazilian and I have to say, our Tormenta 20 used a system pretty much similar to this one with mana points. And my playthrough with it was so much more liberating than the spell slot crap.
I really recommend adapting it to your game, it is at least simpler and refreshing.
Mano, eu sempre quis jogar Tormenta, ou a versão que fizeram pro Ghanor do Jovem Nerd, só que nenhum dos meus amigos quer experimentar. 😢
BR invadindo DC20 =D
eu tava pesquisando ontem sobre o sistema de magia do dc20 kkkk
único problema do sistema de mana de tormenta é que a recuperação de mana é MUITO lenta
É aqui que os BR se reúnem pra fazer mesa de T20?
I thumbed up immediately for "spell slots suck"
Same
Same
Same
To be fair, spell slots are an old relic from the days of Vancian spellcasting. The idea was that you store up the magic in your mind when you study a spell, and then casting the spell causes it to leave your mind. To represent this, you used to have to determine which spell was being used with which spell slot at the start of each day. It also seems appropriate for Clerics that pray for specific miracles at the beginning of the day, as well as inventor classes that have to create the ammo for each spell. This is also the explanation for the weird spell prep idea they reintroduced at the beginning of OneDND. They were trying to bring back Vancian casting as a way of balancing casters and martials... but then everyone pitched a fit. That was part of what used to nerf casters: they had to prepare the exact number of uses for each spell at the start of the day, and once you ran out you were done using that spell.
This is what used to make the sorcerer special. They had fewer spells known, but they could cast them using any available slot. It played into their theme of being magical mutants that did a few things very well. Then they gave the sorcerers casting system to everyone in 5e.
100 %, been using "Spell Points" since 3.0 Unearthed Arcana, then created a Mana Point system for my homebrew game and never looked back, that was 2002. **** Spell Slots and "Vancian" Magic entirely
Mana is a simple concept but lead to quadratic caster problem that is very difficult to circumvent from a game design point of view. There are certain spells that are ok to be cast once, but became a problem if you can cast it multiple times. The minor image cantrip, from some 5e playtest was a great example of this fact. As players we can prioritize game balance less, but as a designer we must to take it in consideration very seriously.
I like the scaling aspect of spells. It allows for having other elemental/etc. affinities instead of just fire or lightning. I've got a character who I want to have a wind theme, but there aren't many attack spells with wind. So with this, I could see a base cast of a blast of wind (maybe just shoving instead of damage), and adding damage with more mana. Maybe even changing from a bludgeoning punch of wind to a slicing wind with added mana.
As for the spell slot rant, I agree with the whole explaining why you're out of slots issue, but I still enjoy coming up with fitting explanations for it. My favorite is for my Artificer. He doesn't actually "cast" spells, since the common flavor is they replicate spell effects with gadgets. So when he's out of slots, that's just because a given gadget had a few cogs or springs get loose or break, which he would fix the next morning as he "prepares" the spell. If a given gadget was prepared, but not used that day, then me being out of slots would be that gadget had a piece bend out of place while sitting in his bag. So it's also tapped out for the day, until I can fix it. It gives his gadgets more of a flimsy vibe which fits his spur of the moment building style.
As for prepared spells, some gadgets need a piece from another gadget, so those aren't in use today, or they need an arcane jolt to juice up their "battery" and I didn't have time to charge it that morning.
DC20 spell system ❤ Great video. Thx Coach. And new icon looks amazing. 😉
I'm glad I'm not the only one who had that thought about prepared spells
7:32 oooo just had the thought of how cool it would be for a player to sacrafice some of their own physical strength (like spell burn in Dungeon Crawl Classic) to cast a spell higher than they would typically be able to cast. You might have covered this idea already but the image that came to mind was cool and I wanted to share xD
14:59 oh yeh here we go :D
This is a cool idea, although Druids for example should have access to Dominate Beast (or be better at it), but maybe not have access (or as easily) to Dominate People.
I suppose they could get something like a 1 mana reduction on casting Dominate to target beasts, although that doesn't handle whether they should have access (or at what cost) to non-beast uses of it.
We are so synced up, you dont even know! Yes yes yes :)
IMO, it should just be 'dominate', and the amount of mana you need to spend is dependent on the level of the enemy, not what kind of creature it is.
People are just complex animals after all
Hell dnd even has a optional variant rule that’s just better than spell slots spell points it’s a little complex in how the spells cost and how many you have it just makes more sense
An interesting way of visualizing spell slots came to me from a Michael G. Manning book series called the Art of the Adept. The wizard would prepare a spell by assembling the arcane diagram and then store it inside their own body. When cast, you expended the energy. A new or weak wizard could only prepare and "hold" one or two spells...this is basically slots. I applied that to my D&D immediately. Now the book magic system also had a mana concept as well. You could always cast any spell you knew but it may take 10 minutes. So prepared spells were critical for speed. After a long time and many thousands of casting, a wizard could eventually learn to reflex cast a spell...basically instant like a prepared spell. Cool magic system.
Hey man. I am brazilian and we have a TTRPG called Tomenta 20 That use a similar mana point system. It work very well, so much better then the clunky spell slot.
With possible I recomend you to speak with some of the audience that knows this system to get some insght in the game that have a well stabilish base and to get some ideas for the itemization of the game. The itemization of Tomenta 20 is one of the best, I would love to see some one like you to review it
I'm really quite a fan of spell foci being a major component of the game, though I did dislike their absolute necessity with no way to cast without them. Provided a balance of being able to limit a spellcaster by disarming them, similar to disarming a martial.
I understand eliminating the necessity of them, but perhaps it could still be an optional rule?
Perhaps as well there could be some benefit to casting with them? Such as a free spell enhancement or similar.
Only 90 second in, but this sounds nearly identical to the magitech system in the rules I made for my kids' TTRPG adventures.
Sounds like a great system!
All of this sounds really freaking cool. Cannot wait for the Kickstarter.
I don’t mind wands/staffs/etcetera not being required for spell casting. My only suggestion to add is to make sure that wielding such items is compatible with somatic component requirements.
This makes me incredibly excited by the prospect of artificers that can build items that have either spell toggles (scrolls, arcane gun, etc) and permanently on spells (portal arch, eternal fire, etc)
The more i listen your idea the more i love your dc20 world.
I love how the magic system with Mana points and condense spells sounds, tho I gotta say spell components can be a cool way to differentiate Wizards and Warlocks from Bards and Artificers, or Clerics and Paladins, maybe there is a case for Druids but specially Sorcerers as a class or subclass to bypass those restrictions. Its worth considering as a thematic and mechanical tool, but maybe not on every spell xd
I love what you're doing with DC20 , and while I personally prefer Spell Points (SP) in my own system, I think there is a place for Spell Slots. Whenever I've considered adding an element to a system I think about what level of complexity it may bring, or the type of book keeping (if necessary).
Spell Slots in my opinion are much simpler because it's a checklist you're looking over rather than having to track a running total. SP is something that allows you to cast more spells, but you'll have to keep track of if you subtracted from your maximum, and with a spend limit you have to make sure you haven't spent too much either. These things could be simple on their own, but depending on what is around it, it could be tedious to keep track of. In DC20 I don't think this is an issue.
For those more experienced in the system, I think that it's fine to bring in an SP system but I think slots are more new-player friendly. In systems like DnD and Pathfinder, since they revolve around mainly tracking uses (the running total you do track obv being your HP) Spell Slots fall in line with that design convention, and while you can use alternatives in the system like SP, the spells aren't designed with that in mind. Now, what I'm saying is that Spell Slots are likely the better choice in systems like Pathfinder or DnD, considering the other book keeping you have to do.
I also think some of the "Spell slots make no sense" may also have to do with how the fiction defines what spell slots are, but that part is really just conjecture on my end.
I think it's fine in DC20, because the system is pretty straightforward (to me at least), I'm usually someone trying to mind tedium with the systems I want to introduce to people, and DC20 has been a system I've been wanting to introduce people to, just haven't had the chance to yet.
I just wanted to put some thoughts on the table that pushes back (in good faith of course) against the notion that Spell Points are universally better than Spell Slots, I think that they both have their merits and disadvantages, and it ultimately comes down to what kind of game feel you're going for.
SP is just one number that you're subtracting from which is exactly like health points. With spell slots you're managing 5 or more categories with spells scattered across all of them
Personally I think managing an HP style resource is a lot easier than the hot mess that is spell slots- especially for new players
Years ago I built a magic system where you used mana points and built spell with components. For an example you have an three components air + fire + motion and you have a fireball. As a base the number of components gave the base mana point cost. If you researching a new spell, you don't have any idea how the spell behave so when you test it, you can get hurt and killed in the worst case.
One amazing benefit of this is it eliminates the concept of “spell levels”. I am so ready to be done explaining that being 3rd level does not mean you can cast 3rd level spells because spell levels are completely different from and unrelated you character levels and you have to reference a table to know how many spells of a given level up can cast at a certain character level. Now I can just say “more powerful spells use more mana and your mana pool increases as you level”. Boom. Done. Bless you Dungeon Coach!
True, color spray is basically “offensive light cantrip”
Magic making no sense to a logical mind, honestly, makes perfect sense to me. This works just fine in my mind.
That being said, a more flexible system of casting isn't necessarily bad. But one thing I think you aren't keeping track of is how mathematical complexity in TTRPG can quickly lead to spending 10 minutes doing math at the table and that's NOT as fun.
Thank you Coach! This is literally one of my biggest annoyances with D&D
Honestly evolving magic like this feels way better than what I did for my system
I LOVE this system! I've been re-reading the Dresden Files by Jim Butcher, and this system seems like it could really work within the world of Harry Dresden. The ability to manipulate a spell and change it. To mold it to whatever the situation calls for is something I've been wanting from a TTRPG for a LONG time.
18 minutes and 23 seconds of satisfaction. You scratched every itch I had about DnD's spellcasting. But casting spells together? Now you went beyond and above, I'm very very interested. Synergy and actual teamplay is everything.
We've been working on a spell points system. This approach has been around since (from my experience) about 1982. That's when I started. Homebrew campaigns for yrs have been implementing spell points.
We've been working on subdivisions of spell points for arcane & divine Dungeon Coach. Mages & Priests draw upon spell power in different ways but in our lore it comes from the same source. It's simple and easy to learn. Only 1 page of rules.
Only 20 seconds in, but YEAH BUDDY!
My table has given up Spell Slots for the Spell Point Variant in the DMG long ago, and explaining it to new players still takes a moment, but is MUCH BETTER than watching their eyes glaze over when we tried to explain the "core Rules"... 😩
I love this. I have not backed a new system in over thirty years, and I'm excited about what you are doing.
I would guess that I'm old enough that I first hated spell slots when you were in diapers. What you have created is in my very opinionated opinion the second best magic system I've ever seen, and it shares a lot of the features of the best magic system I've seen.
The best system, like yours, uses rolls for spell casting with benefits for higher rolls.
One of those features that I don't know if you've considered is the flexibility to cast spells without verbal and somatic components; in the system I love, you can do that, but each component you leave out imposes penalties to your spellcasting roll.
If DC20 doesn't have a rule like that, I will likely homebrew one.
I hear you. One my favorite 5e characters is a Fathomless Warlock, and one of his spells is the thematically appropriate 3rd level spell, Hunger of Hadar. Unfortunately, the spell has no upcast option, so if I want to cast it, I have to use a spell slot that far exceeds the level of the spell, for no additional benefit.
I don't have idea why they keep such a cool spell from being upcasted. Especially that it is exclusive for class that can only upcast their spells
yeah, always homebrew that one, its so cool, themathic and warlock unique, there is no reason why the damage should not scale
Really love it. This will work very well with the combination casting. Totally agree about the merging speel pike dominate X or hold X.
ooooo, I love this take on spellcasting! much more flexible and fun then Spell slots of DnD. it does remind me a bit of how the 5e unearthed arcana class Mystic handled it sort of casting abilities
Reminds me of a Brazilian RPG called Tormenta 20! It has a similar system.
I’m here because I’m creating my own version as well and very much so like that you attribute it to old school dnd made by Gary. One of my close HS friends has a step dad who played with some of the original 2e makers so Iv only really been accustomed to 2e. I love spell slots when you put the time into them and create a spell book and such. I think it adds even more grit and the wizard will feel one with his spell book if done correctly.
I love the idea. It sounds amazing. No, better: It sounds like something I'm looking for a loooong time.
OMG!!!! I love this! I've been working on how magic works in my world and I love how you've approached it. It's more intuitive and "real" in my opinion. Definitely gave me some ideas. I've been watching BwB for a hot minute but have only found your channel. This is the second video I've watched. The first one was about combat. Subscriber most definitely
It sounds like a lot of fun for players. It’d be interesting to hear you share player feedback.
I also create my own ttrpg and though long about magic because of the same mentioned problems. Mana was also one of my ideas and honestly it might be better from a mechanical point of view. But I instead decided to use an item based system. So I don't have mana but my players have to acquire runes, either buy them or create them.
I got rid of classes all together and everyone can do everything they have learned. My game in general evolves heavily around items in general as a means to encourage players to pick up talents/crafts and have an impact on the Gameworld even if they are not fighting.
Again, this might not be the best way mechanically to create a good game, but it's what I wanted and I now try to make it interesting. Your approach is way closer to regular DND and honestly it addresses most of my concerns with DND so if my system fails I will gladly fall back to Dc20 as it sounds really good. And it's easy. It's so hard to create something logical that is easy. It's not hard to improve Combat from DND in a logical way, but to improve it in a way it doesn't impact the fun, that's way harder, I know this out of experience, and you kind stranger did an amazing job. So far I would even recommend your system over mine in most cases.
4:49, YUP. That's exactly what one of my players brought up a while back. I told him it was for balancing and mechanic purposes, but he didn't like how didn't make sense despite that. I had to figure out a lore reason why. Eventually we found out D&D does have an alternative rule for it in the form of spell points in the DMG.
There was a system that came out in the 90's called Earthdawn. They used something similar to spell slots. If I remember correctly they were spell matrix. The cannon reason was if you cast from raw magic evil creatures from beyond would find you and eat your pitiful little charechter. Basically you prepared in a safe way and then held in stasis and released it when needed. You could also attack a charechters stored spells from the astral plane
Awesome! I wish I could play this now lol & I like every aspect about the changes you’ve done, the only thing I would like to see added, is a flushed out how to lead extra spells from spell scrolls for each spell caster class, like each time you use a spell scroll, you make a spell casting ability check to see if you retain that knowledge & each time you cast it without learning it, the next check gets a little easier
This system is great. I think another fun system, would allow spell casters to weave spells from the ground up. It would be slightly more complicated, but adds more flexibility. Of course, the more effects you add, the more mana/spell points it costs to cast.
I like your pitch for mana points and metamagic-esc enhancements. As you mentioned, it ties up all the lesser and greater spells. Also, I am a still a fan of spell focuses, but making them bonuses instead of mandatory is good.
Here's some 5e spell evolutions I thought of:
Float: Feather Fall -> Levitate -> Fly
Swift: Longstrider -> Haste -> Timestop
Vanish: Blur -> Invisibility -> Greater Invisibility
Heal: Cure Light Wounds -> +Lesser Restoration -> +Greater Restoration
Smokescreen: Fog Cloud -> Darkness -> Hunger of Hadar
This is vaguely reminiscent to kids on brooms making spells. I love the customization to magic.
Big fan of hyper-modular systems like this. Also makes it feel like actual spell mastery. Of course my character could slightly transmute a spell effect if they had the mana and knowledge about it.
Dude you just described Savage Worlds Magic System... Drop 5e
He's talking about he's own system. Not 5e
There's so many similarities here with Savage Worlds' magic system.
I was going to say the same thing about Savage Worlds. Very much the same thing.
This video It's a summary of almost everything I think about the D&D magic system. Thanks for confirming that I'm not crazy alone! 😂
Ive never liked the fact that wizards "forget" how to cast then suddenly the next day he "remembers" after studying the spellbook.
I disagree with doing away with spell foci though. Spell foci add to the role-playing aspect of D&D. Its not hard to implement a spell foci for each MU class and do it in such a way that compliments the spell points system.
We as designers of the game should always keep the role-playing aspect of the game ahead of the mechanics of the game. The two should compliment one another so you discourage players from playing the game in a mechanical way. Thats how the video game culture has influenced D&D in a negative way imo. But what do I know? Ive only been doing the game since the late 70s. 😂
I have spellcasting take 2 actions/rounds, the first round is to focus the mana and the second is the cast. This means that spellcasters can be disrupted before the cast. A physical Spell focus (like a wand) means the Spell can be cast with 1 action.
So in 1 action the Wizard focuses a mote of elemental fire into their hand, in the second action they can throw it (20ft like a grenade) at no cost OR they can use mana to cast it 60ft etc
I love EVERYTHING u just said and have been trying to create a system like this for an all Wizard party. But i actually LOVE spell focuses cause I give spell focuses effects. Like if ur spell focus is made out of red dragons tooth u get bonus damage on fire spells and what not.
Let the cool ideas work!😄
Wow, I have been rewriting the magic system as well, strangely enough, it seems we are heading down the same path. It seems you have arrived before me. Which is cool. I have went down a slightly different path, but very similar. Mana points, yes. Part of my rewrite is a classless system based on skill proficiency, which allows you to use mana to impact, range, AOE, damage, effect, duration, etc. Skill proficiency is also used for martial skills and any and all skill sets. I enjoyed what you had to say and it has reinforced my decision to re-invent the wheel, so to speak. happy gaming, I look forward to examining DC20
I've been working on making a game system and some things are similar yet others are different. In the system I'm making you can technically use all your mana on a single spell, if you've developed your character in a way to do that. A spell takes ability points to learn and each spell has a list of modifiers (with some spells taking up multiple pages cause they have so many modifiers) that you have to spend ability points to learn and increase in effectiveness. There's also some generic options that can be added based on how high your skill is in the relevant element but they're less efficient
literally everything you said about spell slots and prepared spells is so true. i've been hating on both of them for a long time i'm glad somebody finally agrees with me about how lame they are.
How I did it in 5e:
Spells cost two times their level in mana to cast (2 for first level, 4 for second, 6 for third, so on);
Full casters start with 4 Spell points at level 1 and gain 2 points per level;
Half casters start with 2 spell points at level 2 and gain 1 per level (So at level 2 they will have 4);
Third caster start with 1 spell point at level 3 and gain 1 per level (So at level 5 they will have 5 spell points);
Sorcerers have a number of charges equal to half their level rounded down but at least 1. They can use the charges to recover 2 spell points out of combat, and regain charges on a long rest. They also use spell points to use metamagic rather than sorcery points;
There's other ways to spend mana other than spell slots (such as paladin smites or a ranger's mark) so classes with uneven progression won't have leftover, useless spell points in odd levels;
You kidding me!? I'm only like 2 minutes in and a lot of what you are talking about is a system I have been toying with over the last like 20 years lol. Originally I started it for 3rd edition D&D. I've followed you I think not long after you started your youtube channel and we come up with a lot of the same ideas and seem to be of similar mind on a lot of homebrew ideas
Honestly my FAVORITE comments are when I hear exactly this! It’s wild to be so synced up with someone you’ve never met! I love it!!
@@TheDungeonCoach finished the video, love and agree with it all of course! I just wish my area was more open to playing or trying new games. I'd love to be able to back and play your system but even my own group has a hard enough time getting together and doesn't want to deviate from the norm. Local shops are the same
I like how every spell you mentioned is now a valid choice!
.
.
Except for the friends cantrip, which is still only useful when you make it a "leveled spell", AKA pour mana points into it. I find it hard to believe someone would use the cantrip version of the friends spell, since it has such a major downside.
Other than that, nicely done! Very streamlined version of the spell system from dnd!
Spell points are intuitive. Ive used them homebrewed in my campaigns for the past 30 or so years
This reminds me a lot of the Spheres of Power system. I like it.
The topic alone made me subscribe. I love magic systems
They DnD something like this with the Nethril box set. I like the idea of returning to this process. I never explain casting as you have magic in you. I explain it as you are pulling magic from the weave that is all around you.
I gotta disagree on focuses. If a fighter needs a sword why can't the wizard need a wand?
Normally the wizard needs his hands, and also his voice. That normally isn't implemented as well as a weakness, but I think that's more on us
Great video Coach!
I was wandering if it would not be better for lore and playable for players to give the wizard a reason to hold his book near him.
I think that maybe if he loose his Spell Book, he can cast only few spells from his level, and later in cmapagine he could collect all his spells if he would find a new book to write his spells down.
A while ago I combined the spells Find Steed and Find Greater Steed into one spell. If you cast it with a 2nd or 4th level spellslot, it does the exact same thing as Find Steed or Find Greater Steed, respectively, but then I added a 3rd and 5th-9th level version. At 9th level you can summon a giant ape or a liondrake or a young black dragon to ride into combat. Not sure you would ever waste a 9th level spell slot on that but you could in my games
I love the way this is fleshed out. I've thought it dumb that classes are restricted by spell level and number of casts. I like when a character can choose between a high number casts and a few massive spells. I would love to know if there will different kinds of spell enhancements that each class can do.
Dude, I absolutely LOVE this!!!
Gosh mana has always made so much more sense to me. Any spellcasters in my world who manage to understand manage greater than your average joe, gets rewarded with the ability to use spell points :3
It is suuuch a restricted system
If you lift weights you understand and feel spell levels. You can lift higher weights less times and no amount of first level spell slots can give you energy for another max effort lift
This is a perfect analogy and wish the spell slot system was explained to new players in this way. It would clear up a lot of the questions as to why you cant equivocate two 1st-level spell slots as being the same as a single 2nd-level spell slot. Spell casting as a measure of "maximum effort" put in a single instant to channel magical energy and produce some sort of magical effect is exactly what the spell slot system represents.
The Nimble 5e alternate rules has a simple Mana system for people to check out as well.
Spell foci are important for the game. How come you can neutralize a martial by disarmimg them but casters are always as dangerous even when naked as long as they have a free hand? Only the Monk should be able to function perfectly with zero equipment.
Also, I'd love rules to prevent spellcasting by grappling and gagging an enemy in combat to block somatic and verbal components respectively.
Preventing/disrupting spell casting used to be reflected in 1E with the Combat Turn Sequence where time was broken down into rounds and segments with factors of dexterity modifiers, weapons speeds, and casting times could allow an opponent's physical attacks or spell against you to resolve before you could finish casting your own spell, even on the same initiative order. In the BECMI/1E/2E edition basically if you were trying to cast a spell and you are hit, grappled or are subjected to anything that required a saving throw/ability check (regardless of damage) before the spell's casting time had elapsed, the spell was interrupted.
This is one of my favorite things this game brings to the table.. 💙
Part of the problem with spell slots is that they’re based off a book most dnd players haven’t read.
In the Jack Vance novels, spells are kind of living creatures, and a magic user trains themself to capture these creatures in their mind. So, when they cast a spell, what they’re literally doing is letting that creature out, meaning they don’t really know that spell anymore until they recapture that creature. This is a perfectly fine concept with setting lore and flavor… for a game where that’s communicated well and which the players and dm are signing up for that. Dnd doesn’t really have that lore and is ultimately sacrificing a more universally elegant and applicable system like the one in this video.
On Spell Focuses... I kinda like them.
I think it's sill that in Harry Potter, (almost?) no one can cast magic without their Wand, but this little bit of Lore and History has an Origin.
It makes sense that it's *easier* to direct your Power and Intent with a Tool.
And it's neat, lore-wise, for different Styles of Casters to have different Tools they typically use.
Yes, it makes sense that Gandalf can still lay down the Hurt without his Staff...
But it ALSO makes sense that such Hurt can be more efficiently/better directed, if he has his accustomed Tool at hand to focus it!
Love the idea and look forward to trying it out! Just an FYI: the link to the 5e conversion takes you to a page with no actual text.
Take a shot every time he says dominate
Spell Enhancements are similar to an idea I had for an rpg I'm making but the system I had was far too clunky, I love how this sounds so far but the one concern is obviously decision paralysis during combat with min-maxing dmg versus area effect, etc.
I know I’m late, but I feel a nice balance is to have prepared spells which require no focus to cast, and spells that are not prepared will need you to focus for the allotted time.
Comment posted before finishing video: 5e on release had a clunky but usable variant rule for casting called Spell Points that harken to mana points.
Oh nice it is just like in Tormenta 20!! I love that in T20
At least this video is more than " What if spell points?" as if it isn't LISTED IT THE DAMN DMG!
My world has no spells at all. To weave magic into an effect, you have to put it together at the time of casting.
You would take an aspect like fire. Add distance, area or targets, effect like damage, how much damage, which would give you a DC to roll against to weave the magic together.
If you pass, then you are good to go. If you fail, then you find out that all magic is wild magic.
Never can find the edit button on my phone for UA-cam.
I have also never liked Vancian magic.
only watched the first 90 seconds so far, and you summarized exactly my problems with dnd, what to improve and gave an example similar to the system i am working on myself. I think i am watching the correct video! Good job!
While my table has never used it, this is how I do Mana Points - Slot level * total slots = Mana Points. So, if you have 4 level 1 spell slots, you have 4 mana points. If you have a level 4 and a level 9, you have 13 mana points. It's simple, and works for all casters. So, the breakdown at max level works like this:
Primary Casters get 4 first level slots (4 MP) + 3 second through fifth level slots (42 MP) + 2 sixth and seventh level slots (26 MP) + 1 eighth and ninth level slots (17 MP) = 89 total mana
Secondary Casters get 4 first level slots (4 MP) + 3 second through fourth level slots (27 MP) + 2 fifth level slots (10 MP) = 41 total mana
Tertiary Casters get 4 first level slots (4 MP) + 3 second and third level slots (15 MP) + 1 fourth level slot (4 MP) = 23 total mana
Warlocks get 4 fifth level spell slots (20 MP)
It's that simple. One formula for all charts. It is a direct 1:1 with your spell slots, but is more flexible instead of the weird chart in the DMG.
Spell slots were invented in Jack Vance’s Dying Earth pulp dark fantasy series. A completely different genre than the standard dnd campaign.
I instantly see a place for arcane focuses in your game: items that increase your cast limit.
In my opinion, the most important thing is to define just and only ONE lore to follow. There are to many scenarios in D&D and I thing that the system works side by side with the story of the world/universe we are playing.
D&D rules: you CANNOT cast 2 levels spells in the same turn... unless you are a 2nd level fighter.
Just Yes. To everything you said.....