Typing Out Loud: Vancian 2.0

There has been a LOT of discussion today regarding Vancian magic vs “Non”. It makes sense of course seeing as how the L&L poll put up today was about this subject. As such, my head was spinning with ideas today. Some were terrible, and others I just wasn’t sure of. As such, I’m going to present an idea here that may be okay, or could be terrible… I’m essentially just talking (or typing) out loud is all and this post is by no means an attempt to state what should be done.

Most of you reading this have a good enough understanding (if not years of experience) with what Vancian magic is so I won’t go into too much detail here. Simply put, it’s the idea that a spell caster must memorize his/her spells every day, the number available of which are limited to X amount per day, depending on the level.

One of the things people like about this system is that there is an inherent strategy involved for a spell-caster when he/she selects spells each day – some find this very enjoyable in fact. On the other hand, some people dislike the limitations – casters can quickly run out of magical tools and have to rely on means that they are not well suited for (crossbows, for example). There are a number of other pro’s and con’s to the system, but again – most of you are familiar with them so I don’t need to repeat them.

The word from Wizards of the Coast seems to be that we will see the Vancian system in the “next” version of D&D, but that somehow (we aren’t sure to what degree yet) there will be other ways to incorporate a different system (point-buy, or even using the 4e A/E/U/D system). You will have a choice it seems. Of course this made me think, “what if you combined some or all of these?“.

Combat vs Non-Combat

One of the things my brother didn’t like about 4e powers was that, for example, a character could have multiple combat abilities that allowed them to teleport (literally), but that he/she could not teleport outside of combat. I helped him with some ideas about how it could be explained, but it wasn’t enough for him. These kinds of things stuck out to me as well, but I could over-look them. In fact, in one campaign I actually allowed some of those kinds of things to be used by players outside of combat, so long as it was not abused and they gave a good description of what they were doing, etc.

Today’s discussion on magic, and my brother’s issue of a power having one purpose (combat) had me thinking that you could use the Vancian system of memorizing spells, but add in new “at-will” functions to most/all spells as well. I saw a number of people say today that, “I don’t like Vancian magic – but I could be fine with it as long as I have some at-wills to use too”, but this is not exactly what I’m talking about. In that scenario, some spells could be used at-will, and other (completely different) spells could not. What I’m talking about is looking at each spell and considering that it could have multiple functions, or purposes.

Multi-Functional Spells

With this idea, each spell would have a Primary purpose (ex: Damage, Utility) and a Secondary purpose, the secondary of which may or may not also have another special effect or benefit. Additionally, many spells would have some quick examples of “Tricks”, these being minor things a caster could do very easily because of their experience with said spell.

Finally, for times when a point-buy system is used, the Primary and Secondary purposes could also have a point cost (ignored by casters not using said method)

Let me give a few cases, using those examples above. In these examples “P” is for Primary, and “S” is for Secondary, and the bracketed [] number would display a cost for casters who use a point-buy system (numbers used are merely there as indicators)…

Fireball

Crude example of a "Fireball" (click to enlarge)

(P: Damage, S: Damage)

The Primary use [10] (one time use per memorization) of this spell would be the typical Fireball effect, putting out a lot of damage to a large area.
The Secondary use [4] (at-will) would cause a “moderate” amount of damage, and/or could have (for example) an increased range, or a blinding effect, etc.
Tricks: Ignite combustible materials, quickly warm a small room/area

Telekenisis:

(P: Utility, S: Damage)

The Primary use [8] (one time use per memorization) of this spell would be the typical Telekenisis effect, moving an object with your mind.
The Secondary use [4] (at-will) could allow you to fling objects for a “moderate” amount of damage, and/or could have (for example) an increased range (though lighter weight objects)
Tricks: Move multiple (tiny) objects without concentration

Water Breathing:

(P: Utility, S: Utility)

The Primary use [6] (one time use per memorization) of this spell would be the typical effect, allowing you to breath under water.
The Secondary use [2] (at-will) could allow you to swim at a faster rate than normal.
Tricks: None

UPDATE: To clarify: I imagined that the at-will “Secondary” uses of these spells would be available always, even if the Primary use had been used for the day.

It would likely need to clear that you can not employ the benefits from the Secondary purpose on top of the Primary purpose. In most cases, this would be obvious, but in the case of “Water Breathing” above, a player would likely want to breath underwater (Primary) but also move faster while down there (Secondary). In some cases this would not be that big of a deal, but it others it might – so for simplicity sake, it would be best to stick with keeping them separate (except in cases where the DM saw it to be fitting of course).

I liked this idea because it…

1) Uses the Vancian system of spell memorization and daily limitations (many people like this)
2) Provides the means for casters to have at-will spells (many people want this)
3) Includes point values for casters to refer to if they use a point-buy method (a method I’m guessing we will likely see as an option)
4) Connecting said at-will abilities to spells they have in ways that makes sense. You can cast a massive Fireball? It stands to reason you may have some other ways to manipulate fire, even if to a lesser “Secondary” degree as well as via small tricks (I think this is awesome, and it addresses my “teleport” dilemma from earlier)
5) You can incorporate the effects of many spells into others, which means you could cut down on the huge list of spells. For example, a Levitate spell might have a Secondary purpose of Feather Fall (makes sense, right?) so there’s no need to waste 2 slots (and in some cases, there wouldn’t be a reason to include certain spells in the game at all when they are already aspects of another spell, etc).

With all that said, there are likely any number of downsides to it or problems I am not thinking of. Again, I am just typing out loud here as it is coming to me.

A few notes

No Encounter abilities? As Kevin Kulp mentioned, he was not against Encounter powers, but rather was FOR simplicity, in which case Daily and At-Will seemed a good way to go – and I agree. My initial idea had encounters included, but when I think about how to track that info as well as relate that info visually, I can see the problem. Additionally, there’s only so much you can do with a spell so keeping it simple (2 uses) is nice and clean – a primary which we’re used to, with one additional purpose.

Reminds me a little of Psions augmenting their powers. When I thought of this, I was instantly reminded of the way Psionic powers worked in 4e. Psions could “augment” their power for better effects. This is similar in that it is one Spell (power, etc) that has more than one function, but in the case of the Psion, the effects were mostly the same only slightly better from a numbers point of view. In this case, we would be talking about changing the way something worked (Fire Spear vs Fireball) or even allowing it to do something completely different (breathing under water vs swimming faster).

Spells are not powers. In my teleport argument, it is clear that I am talking about powers or abilities as opposed to something that is memorized and immediately forgotten when cast. It could be argued I’m comparing apples to oranges. As such, it may seem like a stretch that a caster who memorizes and forgets Fireball every day should have any kind of fire manipulation abilities (via Secondary uses and Tricks in my examples) – but I don’t think it’s THAT big of a stretch and… well, I just think it’s damn cool!

Anyway, that’s about it. Forgive any typos or grammar issues as I jammed this out as quickly as possible. Please feel free to comment – let me know what you like and what you don’t… what might be awesome, and what would totally fail.

As always, thanks for reading!

Chat me up on Twitter @theweem!

19 comments

  1. My thought would be, At-wills were a class feature that you get a small suite at say level 1. Things like Detect Magic and such get placed there. You then get an at-will associated with your school of magic.

    Later class features or even feats could be used to expand upon at-wills along with rituals that can boost your power.

  2. How about the daily use of especially attacking spells having multi-round casting times, but doing a lot more damage than using the at-will version each round over that time.

    Gives the caster the ability to affect the combat in a big way by unleashing potent arcane death, while not negating the roles of the other characters, for example the fighter will have to keep the opponents off the caster’s back during those rounds of casting.

    It also allows for the possibility of the caster having his spells disrupted, although I would explore other options – increase the casting time by a round if you are hit once or twice during a casting round, save to maintain spell if you are hit more than that. Only lose the spell on a critical fail on the save, normal fail would indicate you drop the attempt, but don’t lose the memorization.

  3. This would be tricky to balance, and requires rather a lot of text per spell. That said, I think that it’s awesome.

    I’ve always hated the combat/non-combat division in 4ed and the fact that some powers refreshed per encounter. This side steps that neatly.

    You build the thematic feel of your character by choosing your known spells to get the tricks. You have resource management of when to unleash the spell fully and lose the secondary effect.

    Very, very nice work. If WotC sees this, you may have just fixed magic in DnD Next.

  4. My biggest problem with Vancian magic is the “15 minute work day”.
    While spellcasters might be balanced wiith other classes over a full day’s worth of encounters (say, 4 or 5), most casters will blow all of there spells in the first encounter and say “lets rest for the night”. This makes them overpowered compared to other classes. And while a clever DM can ‘push’ them into multiple encounters (e.g. time limits, etc), more-often-than-not it doesn’t happen.

    A point buy (e.g. psionics) or flexible spell system (e.g. sorcerers) does not address this problem (both are based on a ‘daily recharge’).

    1. For point buy system, you need to have a maximum burn rate beyond which there is a further cost. So, you can nova all of your points, at the risk of crippling yourself.

  5. One system mechanic I like from the recently released Azamar RPG, is it’s use of “foci”. Basically, a wand, or staff, or ring, that the magician gains a benefit from use for normal spell-casting, but which generically gives them the ability to focus magic energies into a lightly damage wielding bolt or fireball or how-ever you wanted to describe it’s focus. I think adding a similar capability for magic users would give folks a little protection while still allowing the more complex spells to remain “Vancian”. It also kind of gives you a reason for magic users throughout their depictions in literature and other medias having a wand, staff, amulet or ring. Thanks for the article. Good points throughout.

  6. I do not hate this idea, but it could easily tip into being a virtual clone of 4e. The key would be striking the right balance between main and secondary effects.
    I think the secondary use should to go away after the main effect is used up in order to make the decision of when to use the main effect more interesting. This increases the likelihood of the 15 minute workday rearing its head, but i’d be willing to take that risk.

    1. I have to second this idea: that each spell a wizard memorizes gives him access to lesser effects as long as the spell is still in memory. Perhaps the wizard who memorizes Fireball could channel the effect into something like Burning Hands for as long as he wants, until he actually casts Fireball. Maybe Levitation would allow access to Feather Fall while it’s retained in memory. Things like that.

  7. The best solution would be one which removes levels from spells, adds ‘mana’ cost for casting, requires a casting roll, allows scaling/augmenting.

    Shadowrun still has one of the best magic systems around. Cast until you knock yourself out, or kill yourself.

  8. This is pretty cool!

    Another way they could go about it, shamelessly inspired by your idea, is to have spells 3E-like spell slots (but probably not as many) and, instead of only having daily spells to prepare in them, have spells with different usage frequencies (daily, at-will, etc). Have each type balanced against each other based on usage (similar to how 4E powers are balanced, except with hopefully more variety of effects other than “damage + status condition”.)

    For example, say you’re a level 1 wizard with 2 level 1 spell slots, and 4 known spells. Say those spells are ray of frost (at-will), sleep (daily), scorching burst (at-will) and shocking grasp (daily). You could ignore the at-will spells and only prepare your two daily spells and feel more like a pre-4E wizard, or only have at-will spells to average your damage out more over the day or have a mix to be flexible.

    Perhaps a restriction like “you must have at least one daily spell per level” or “minimum one of each frequency per level” would be required, but perhaps not!

  9. Star Wars SAGA edition has been hacked several times for fantasy, and it works like a champ. It lies between 4E and OS D&D.

  10. Monte Cook did two similar implementations of your concepts in both The Book of Experimental Might and Arcana Evolved.

    In BoEM, you can take a spell-effect related feat that will grant you minor powers as long as you have a related, uncast spell left in your arsenal e.g. Firey Mage might grant you the ability to warm the room or shoot a minor fire ray that does 1d6 damage per use, so long as you have at least one uncast fire-effect spell of at least 3rd level.

    I like its elegant simplicity because it doesn’t matter how many spells are in the game, which class you take, etc, you can still benefit from it without needing to tweak each and every spell.

    The earlier implementation was the magic system in Arcana Evolved. E.g. while you could cast a Fireball spell as a 3rd level spell, you also had the option of under-casting it as a 2nd level spell and reducing it’s effectiveness, or overcasting it as a 4th level spell to gain additional benefits (lighting flamable items, increasing the Save DC, etc).

    While the AE method is more complex, it is also more complete.

    While I do like AE’s magic system, the BoEM method is much simpler to implement and appears to be closer to your primary/secondary usage powers.

  11. I like this concept. As an OSR kind of person, I find this a quite acceptable compromise. Refreshing to see something constructive written rather than the usual arguing. WotC should read this.

  12. I like the idea, I had a similar build for two classes in 2nd and 3rd edition I called the ‘Mentalist’ (Psion alternate) and the ‘Sorcerer’ (alternate build for 3rd edition).

    They both had spells they could memorize and use multiple times to small effect or just blow the whole thing once per day for a big effect.

  13. I love the way you’ve implemented this idea! The elegance of splitting the difference between all the different systems of magic is very well done and strikes a nice balance between all of them. While it’s not my ideal system, I believe it’s enough of a compromise to work for all.

    My personal views on magic are that the user has to “walk before they can run.” So, one has to learn how to light a fire with magic before one can throw a flame spear or blossom a fireball out of thin air. That said, I believe that a power-point system is the way to go, but similar to the concept you proposed. That is, take a single concept and expand upon it.

    Take the following example, in which the # of points required to enact the effect are in []. Assume the character gains 5 points per level (or so).

    Fire Mastery {Invert: Cold Mastery}
    [0]: Ignite small amts of combustible material; change ambient temperature within 5 squares +/- 5°; control how small flames move (dancing flames)
    [2]: Spark Spray (1d4 damage close burst 2)
    [5]: Flame Bolt (1d8 damage, single target)
    [8]: Flame Burst (2d6 damage, burst 1 within 10)
    [+3]: add 1 additional die of damage and increase size of the effect by 1.

    This way, there’s only one power, but it has multiple effects as you described. The fewer power points you have, the less “mastery” you have over the power. As you gain skill with the power, you can “pump” the power as with psionics.

    There could also be a feat or power allowing the “inversion” of a power with that “keyword.” This would allow the user to use the same power, but change the power type to the opposite; fire to cold, in this case. Again, allowing a single power to have multiple applications.

    Hopefully, WotC will take at least some of this ideas to heart. 🙂

  14. The way you have this all thought out is just amazing. I NEVER liked vancian magic, mainly because it made absolutely no sense, and all I ended up doing on my Wizard was standing back after the fireworks I just set off with a darned bow. I always thought that if you know something, you know it. You don’t just magically forget how to do a spell just because you used it, and the system overall left me feeling like artillery. I’m devastating…. when I have ammunition. This brings in the “I know I can do this, but I can only access the nuke version once, but I can always apply my knowlege of the spell to other, more utilitarian uses,” idea. Some of the other ideas here are just as noteworthy, and I just hope that WotC sees this.

Comments are closed.