PDA

View Full Version : Which spellcasting do you prefer?



TSGames
2007-04-01, 11:01 AM
Recent supplements have allowed for the creation of several new magic systems. Which ones do you prefer to use? Are there any you would like to see developed more completely?

Galathir
2007-04-01, 11:21 AM
Although I generally use the standard PHB magic system, I really like the spell point system and I'll probably end up houseruling it for all casters in my next campaign. It seems a lot more balanced and "realistic".

Innis Cabal
2007-04-01, 11:25 AM
sorcerer..dont mind spells per day ive dealt with it a long time, annoying but tried and true

Fax Celestis
2007-04-01, 11:26 AM
I have a thing for Shadowcasters. Don't ask why, I don't know either.

Morty
2007-04-01, 12:09 PM
Standard. It's much more original, interesting, and flexible than spontaneous or (*spits*) power points. I love the fact that I can cast any spell, I just have to find a scroll and copy it into spellbook. I'm sick of power points after playing computer RPGs(or, more accurately, games that pretended to be RPGs)- it's abstract and boring. I have no clue how anyone can prefer it over preparation system. I can't say anything about skill-based casting or Shadowcasters, because I havent played them.

Latronis
2007-04-01, 12:48 PM
Standard

I like shadowcasters too but i wouldnt wanna adapt that for all casters

I despise spellpoint systems

Maryring
2007-04-01, 12:49 PM
I prefer the spellcasting that allows everyone in the group to have fun, and not the one where the Wizard wins.

TSGames
2007-04-01, 01:40 PM
I have a thing for Shadowcasters. Don't ask why, I don't know either.
I feel the same about Shadowcasters.

18 votes and no loves the Truenamer.

ObsidianRose
2007-04-01, 01:43 PM
I like the other option, Blade Magic. It's so anti-nova that it's awesome. And it's like monk, part 2

Dausuul
2007-04-01, 02:36 PM
It really depends on what type of spell you're looking at. Out of the listed options, I voted for the Warlock model, because I like that for combat-type spells and other "day-to-day" casting. None of this power point or spells-per-day crap. If you have the power to turn invisible, then you can freakin' turn invisible. Any time, anywhere. It's easier to learn, it's less bookkeeping, and it makes casters feel more like supernatural beings and less like accountants.

Of course, this approach doesn't work for more powerful spells. For those, I would prefer some kind of option where you have to get together a lot of specific and expensive components, then perform an elaborate ritual. Still no spells-per-day or power points, though.

Talya
2007-04-01, 03:04 PM
Spontaneous from 3.5, bard or sorceror.

Ranis
2007-04-01, 03:30 PM
I really like the Spellpoint system.

Dark_Wind
2007-04-01, 06:58 PM
Vancian magic is my favorite. I like the planning involved in spell preparation, even if it does get frustrating sometimes.

That said, it's be nice if some of the other systems saw a little more splatbook love. Psionics could use developement, for example, as could the Warlock.

I have to say, the only new system that I truly dislike is Truenaming, because it's so hard to work with at higher levels. Pity, really, because I liked the concept, and not just because I like Earthsea, either.

Rad
2007-04-01, 07:09 PM
I guess I'll go for the truenaming, even if the class has some serious problem. As somebody noticed, if you can do somehting there is no reason to have it limited to x times per day.
On the other hand, D&D spells are probably too powerful to be handed over in this way, such a change would mean completely rewrite the spell list.

I kind of liked the concept of GURPS' spell system, although it had some serious problems as well. If I were to write a magic system I'd start from there.

Dhavaer
2007-04-01, 07:18 PM
I like Shadowcasters. I'd like to alter them to cast /encounter instead of /day.

Thexare Blademoon
2007-04-01, 07:19 PM
Varies on what I want to play. The preparatory system used by Wizards is fitting for the class, but I don't understand why a Sorcerer or Bard uses spell levels... power points, like the Psion, seems much more fitting for a Sorcerer (or any other "natural" rather than "learned" casting)

And I don't touch divine casters - Ranger and Paladin don't count - so I won't comment there.

Fizban
2007-04-01, 08:55 PM
I think I'd like a combination of blade magic and sorcerers most, like the adaptation example for the swordsage. Right now, though I've never really gotten to play any of them, I think I'd have to go with plain old sorcerer style spontaneous vancian, since it's so familiar.

I think I'll vote for hybrid, that should cover blade magic style.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-01, 09:58 PM
I like Shadowcasters. I'd like to alter them to cast /encounter instead of /day.

You could probably replace "per day" with "per encounter" in the class description and not unbalance them much at all, particularly when coupling Shadowcasters with Martial Adepts.

Dhavaer
2007-04-01, 10:01 PM
You could probably replace "per day" with "per encounter" in the class description and not unbalance them much at all, particularly when coupling Shadowcasters with Martial Adepts.

I'm not sure what to do with the out of combat mysteries, though. They might be unbalanced because they'd essentially be /at will. Maybe a recharge time, like /hour or similar.

Ramza00
2007-04-01, 10:03 PM
I voted for spell/power points, though I don't like the UA spell point system. It is a great idea, but you have to redo alot of spells, and just reducing the number of points your character get doesn't really help. Psionics on the other hand is great from the get go. Thus I prefer psionics then spells then spell points.

And on another note WTF at Fax's new avatar.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-01, 10:03 PM
I'm not sure what to do with the out of combat mysteries, though. They might be unbalanced because they'd essentially be /at will. Maybe a recharge time, like /hour or similar.

You could use the skill trick method: 1/encounter, or 1/minute in noncombat situations.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-01, 10:04 PM
I voted for spell/power points, though I don't like the UA spell point system. It is a great idea, but you have to redo alot of spells, and just reducing the number of points your character get doesn't really help. Psionics on the other hand is great from the get go. Thus I prefer psionics then spells then spell points.

And on another note WTF at Fax's new avatar.

Tasha Levantine happens to be a very nice person catgirl. She's currently a Paladin 3/Monk 2, seeking entrance to the Order of the Sun Soul, and really really really prefers you to not talk about Science In D&D in her presence.

Ramza00
2007-04-01, 10:11 PM
Tasha Levantine happens to be a very nice person catgirl. She's currently a Paladin 3/Monk 2, seeking entrance to the Order of the Sun Soul, and really really really prefers you to not talk about Science In D&D in her presence.
Oh she is a catgirl. I was guessing a feral female half orc or something :smallsmile:


These will always be my favorite cat-girls
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jennyr/naria_eriya.gif

Swordguy
2007-04-01, 10:15 PM
I feel the same about Shadowcasters.

18 votes and no loves the Truenamer.


Absolutely prefer a skill-based casting. Caster should have to roll a d20 to do thier "signature thing" just like Fighters and Rogues do.

ImperiousLeader
2007-04-01, 10:16 PM
I like Vancian, for all it's faults. That said, I also really like the idea of a per encounter based system like Martial Adepts.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-01, 10:20 PM
Oi. I almost want to go create 3 other accounts so I can vote for everything except Vancian casting. Never have I seen a system so tremendously shoddy in every dimension, from crunch to fluff, as preparative casting. Spontaneous casters are a step above at least, as long as you can avoid the seemingly-intended-pitfall of constantly parading about, yodeling about how you're Draco Dragonsblood, Draconic Dragoner of the Dragons of Dragonia.

We'll escape Gygax's shadow eventually - I'd be surprised to see preparative casting survive the eventual, inevitable 4E - but the fact that it's stuck around this long is utterly mind-boggling.

Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick
2007-04-01, 10:22 PM
Delicious delicious shadowcasters make my day.

I'm making use of Pact Binders as NPCs in my campaign, so clearly I like em'; it's such a strong concept that I can ignore its faults (mostly).

Honestly? I don't dig on the standard/Vancian system. I've never liked and never played wizards. Sorcerors, okay, sometimes. Wizards never.

I'm also pretty happy with truenamers....so, basically, the whole tome of magic gets a big thumbs-up from me.

If I ever get around to picking up Incarnum, I expect I'll like that, too.

jjpickar
2007-04-01, 10:42 PM
I like the spell/power points. More balance (psions) and more versatility (also psions). I'm not saying its the best either mechanically or flavor wise (I have no idea), I just like it better.

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-02, 12:38 AM
I prefer the spellcasting that allows everyone in the group to have fun, and not the one where the Wizard wins.

^
|
|

Yeah, that.

Quietus
2007-04-02, 01:08 AM
I voted spell points, though I may be a little biased, due to just recently restatting a char to cast as a Psion30...

Matthew
2007-04-03, 04:30 PM
I prefer Spell Point systems, but not the variant presented in Unearthed Arcana. Spell Points even work better for Vancian Spell Casting, in my opinion.

Morty
2007-04-03, 04:35 PM
Actually, point-based interpretation of Vancian system would look quite intersting, normal point-based system are boring and uninventive. If I were to use non-vancian system of spellcasting, spell/power point system would be the last.

Rad
2007-04-03, 04:49 PM
I liked pretty much the ideas under the "blood sword" gamebooks' system.
Roughly translated in d20 terms, the random element is the casting time. Basically you need to make a skill check that factors in your level and the spell level; this check is hard, so you might well fail except on a very good roll, but that does not mean that the spell fails, merely that you are not done yet. On the second round of casting the DC decreases by one and so on... so you know that eventually you will cast the spell but are still very exposed to waste rounds (as fighters do when they miss their attacks).

LoopyZebra
2007-04-03, 05:24 PM
Vancian. It's simple. Spell points just requires lots of bookkeeping, and because of it's increased mobility, is easier to exploit than Vancian.

That said, I've never touched the other three, but thought that the Warlock was intriguing when I glanced over it at Barnes and Noble.

Draz74
2007-04-03, 06:11 PM
Gyzaninar (see sig) has no Vancian casting.

Some casters, including most arcane casters, work on a Magic Points system. It's much closer to Psionics, mechanically, than to the UA variant. And adopts little bits of psionic flavor, too.

Some divine casters work with MP too, but most of them are on a Skill-based casting system like the Truenamer ... with a couple Truenamer problems fixed. And of course the relevant casting skill, Faith, is Wisdom-based instead of Intelligence-based.

And then there are Pact Casters, which are kind of like a Binder/Warlock hybrid.

Obviously, these are my favorite casting systems. Though the Shadowcaster idea was OK ... though IMHO it needs to be "fixed" even more than the Truenamer idea.

Erom
2007-04-04, 08:52 PM
I prefer anything but Vancian spellcasting. In fact, the stupid spellcasting is the reason I left PnP games as a kid for video games, and only came back to pnp much later in life.

Annarrkkii
2007-04-04, 09:07 PM
...I prefer low-magic settings.

From my scans of the Tome of Magic, and my wholehearted adoration of Tome of Battle, I can conclusively say that, with the publication of Tome of Piety and Tome of Skilljunkity, I will rip out the base class sections of my PhB, Complete Warrior, Complete Divine, Complete Arcane, and any other base classes I can find, actually get off my ass and buy the hardcovers of the Tomes, and just use those.

I prefer Tome of Magic. Truenaming is great—as is the general idea of skill-based casting. Shadowcasting is much like Tome of Battle's system of refreshing moves. And Pact Magic, with the addition of about 50 more vestiges, is just way cool.

Fizban
2007-04-05, 01:27 AM
Am I evil for thinking that this thread should be remade with a different poll, in order to represent them all equally? So far we've got:

Prepared Vancian (Wizard, Cleric)
Spontaneous Vancian (Sorcerer, Favored Soul)
Spell/Power Point (Psions, Wilders, Psychic Warriors)
Skill based (Truenamer)
At will (Warlock)
At will with recharge time (Binders)
Uses per day (Shadowcaster)
Uses per encounter (Warblade, Swordsage, Crusader)

Any I've missed?

Matthew
2007-04-05, 01:30 AM
Spell Point Prepared (Vancian Style)
Spell Point Spontaneous

Merlin the Tuna
2007-04-05, 01:32 AM
Prepared Vancian (Wizard, Cleric)
Spontaneous Vancian (Sorcerer, Favored Soul)Spontaneous casting isn't Vancian. "Vancian" specifically refers to the preparation and expenditure, not to the spell levels. Blade Magic (Tome of Battle maneuvers) is Vancian in nature, whereas spontaneous casters like the Sorc and Favored Soul are not.

Draz74
2007-04-05, 01:42 PM
Spontaneous casting isn't Vancian. "Vancian" specifically refers to the preparation and expenditure, not to the spell levels. Blade Magic (Tome of Battle maneuvers) is Vancian in nature, whereas spontaneous casters like the Sorc and Favored Soul are not.

You're right, in terms of the original meaning of the term. Nowadays, though, "Vancian" has been adapted to mean anything with Spell Slots, because all the truly Vancian casters have such spell slots.


Am I evil for thinking that this thread should be remade with a different poll, in order to represent them all equally?

You're missing the fact that the forums can only support 5 options in a poll.

PlatinumJester
2007-04-05, 04:31 PM
All spells suck in the wake of a level 20 babarians in rage who is wielding a full blade.

Dark_Wind
2007-04-05, 05:23 PM
All spells suck in the wake of a level 20 babarians in rage who is wielding a full blade.

...?

Is there a joke here that I missed or something?

Morty
2007-04-05, 05:30 PM
That's what many people think when they don't know much about wizards... or it's a joke.

Mordieth
2007-04-05, 07:27 PM
It is very difficult to vote for one specific system, I think they all have their ups and downs. Many are simply in place for the sake of mechanical game balance while still creating new source material to keep people happy. I would prefer a system that allowed a caster to have the flexibility of spontanious casting in a spell point system. Not the standard spell point system either. The slot system's seem rediculous when you consider them thematically. Spell slots/Points are a representation of the amount of power a caster can generate, both at one time (max spell level) and per day (magical stamina so to speak). Saying those should be limited to a specific spell level, reserved in advance, seems wrong somehow. If I'm a caster and I have power level X I should be able to cast any combination of spells up to the limit of X in any given day or rest period, whatever that happens to be. Does it really affect game balance that much to allow the spell system to be that free form? I don't think so. Spells are usually more powerful tan granted abilities or your BAB, that's why there is a limit in the first place. It doesn't really need further restrictions above that.

TheOOB
2007-04-05, 07:30 PM
I like the martial adept style, it's not technically magic, but it's close enough.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-05, 07:44 PM
I like systems that limit the number of spells/powers known.

Ulzgoroth
2007-04-05, 09:41 PM
I think a lot of them have potentially nifty aspects. But at base, I can't appreciate a magic system in which knowing spells is a class feature rather than something collectible. So always back to the wizard.
Poring over a library of tomes to find the right spells for the job: awesome.
Calling yourself a mage and only being able to do 6 specific things: A bad joke.

I actually think the Spirit Shaman's approach of spontaneous casting from a set of spells that they reselect every day might be the coolest approach I've seen. Too bad they cast druid spells and don't have anything more interesting (or logical) than spell slots.

What's the source for Shadowcaster?

Draz74
2007-04-05, 10:04 PM
I like the martial adept style, it's not technically magic, but it's close enough.

My lingering hesitancy to embrace this system with whole heart is ...

What, exactly, is keeping these classes from spamming these abilities every 2 minutes or so, throughout the day, as long as they're not on a tight schedule like currently being in combat?


What's the source for Shadowcaster?

Tome of Magic.

Fizban
2007-04-05, 10:07 PM
You're missing the fact that the forums can only support 5 options in a poll.
I remember a few polls with a lot more than 5 options, when did this happen?