[merged] Vancian Magic System and cooldowns

[Merin]

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

In the end, I too will be happy with any system they use ....UNLESS they settle for an action/DPS system that makes mages feel like nothing more than archers with colorful arrows. because nothing can be more stupid than that.

 

Agreed.

 

As I said before - spells should NOT be like ammunition for guns or bows (got my fireblast / incendiary rounds / flame arrow; my magic missile / armor piercing rounds / razor arrow; etc.)

 

Magic should be fantastic and do things that no mundane things can.

 

All the blasts and buffing kind of take the magic out of magic for me, really.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Merin

[mikayel]

What about the system in Knights of the Chalice and the first Wizardry games where you could learn all the spells, but had a limited number of spell points for each level of spells. So you might have 5 points for level 1 spells and 4 spell points for level 2 spells. Once you ran out of spell points you would have to rest. This gives you the ability to adapt on the fly by having the spells in your spell book, while also limiting you from wasting and overusing magic.

 

KotC used the d&d sorcerer rules for casting.

[diablo169]

What about the system in Knights of the Chalice and the first Wizardry games where you could learn all the spells, but had a limited number of spell points for each level of spells. So you might have 5 points for level 1 spells and 4 spell points for level 2 spells. Once you ran out of spell points you would have to rest. This gives you the ability to adapt on the fly by having the spells in your spell book, while also limiting you from wasting and overusing magic.

 

KotC used the d&d sorcerer rules for casting.

 

For the record if there has to be a compromise I see having spell charges ala Sorcerers as far more appealing then a mana pool mechanic.

Edited September 30, 2012 by diablo169

[Silver6986]

I hate having to rest to use spells or recharge. All that does is force you to spam resting which is stupid. I am for cooldowns or a quick way to recharge without forcing resting. This might be one they need to set up optional choices in options for the players to decide what they prefer.

 

I'm not a fan of cooldowns, they're too arcadey. Memorization at least has a rationale explanation for it, and reflects a Character's engergy level. Cooldowns are the equivalent of...

 

Party: It's still moving! Quick, cast Fireball again!

Wizard: I can't. Not for another 47 seconds. That spell can only be cast once every 60 seconds!

 

IMO "Rest spamming" is a player trying to keep a full complement of spells rather than using them judiciously.

 

Exactly this. A lot of people are posting how much they hate being limited by memorization yet this is a very efficient way of keeping combat tactical, as already said, if you are smart and think about battle prep then you would save spells for later obviously.

 

Imo cooldowns are a very lame way of keeping casters in check, I like the D&D method, simple spells can be cast quickly and somewhat efficiently whilst amazingly powerful spells take time to cast but can turn the tide of battle in your favour.

[Hypevosa]

I agree that a straight cool down system is arcadey, but the ability for casters to slowly recover memorized spells outside combat. 5 minutes of ingame time per spell level, lower level spells recovered first with combat interrupting the timer would work to me. So example:

 

Your epic wizard goes into a battle and casts 3 spells, a level 1, a level 4 and a level 9 spell.

 

After 5 minutes outside of combat, the level 1 spell is recovered. Unfortunately, before another 20 minutes of in game time occur so he can get his 4th level spell back, he is ambushed resetting the timer. He casts a level 3 spell during that fight. After 15 minutes pass outside the fight, he gets that level 3 spell back. Another 20 minutes pass and he gets his 4th level spell back. Before he can finally recover his 9th level spell, another massive battle occurs, and he expends all his spells.

 

The rest of the party is fatigued now as well, so everyone sleeps and he gets all his spells back in the morning.

 

So this allows mages to get their default spells back more easily, but it's not like you can easily fire off the same high level spells every battle.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Hypevosa

[BasaltineBadger]

Just make mana pool extremely short and let it refill after every combat, but not during one. It will save you from mages making encounters a joke by spamming dozens of spells at bosses and being useless after using-up their spells. Problem solved.

Edited September 30, 2012 by BasaltineBadger

[Delterius]

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

[FlintlockJazz]

I like the idea of casting times, that way you can then be interrupted from casting a spell, and I always liked that 'spellcasting' animation in the IE games.

[Delterius]

Just make mana pool extremely short and let it refill after every combat, but not doing one. It will save you from mages making encounters a joke by spamming dozens of spells at bosses and being useless after using-up their spells. Problem solved.

 

Regenerating mana pools is the major part of the problem. Essentially, if you always have all resources at disposal, you're still spamming magic. Not only magic may be nerfed for the game's good (to be in line with those who don't rely on it), but the strategic concerns (saving spells, etcetera) are no more.

[FlintlockJazz]

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model. Something that takes into account the difference of playing on a PC as opposed to around a table.

[Delterius]

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model.

 

With regards to setting-building, you're preaching to the choir - though I'd like to point out its not hard at all to fit a magic system in a world's workings. As for the part of ditching the Vancian system, I disagree wholeheartedly.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Delterius

[BasaltineBadger]

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

Edited September 30, 2012 by BasaltineBadger

[Delterius]

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure, not necessarily during the entirety of a encounter but you're spellcasting during every encounter. If Magic is limited for a entire day, then you won't just 'carefully' choose who to buff with each given spell (which ends up being a obvious choice, regardless), but rather when to buff - if at all.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Delterius

[BasaltineBadger]

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure.

 

Well there's nothing wrong with mages actually doing something all of the time.

[FlintlockJazz]

Just make mana pool extremely short and let it refill after every combat, but not doing one. It will save you from mages making encounters a joke by spamming dozens of spells at bosses and being useless after using-up their spells. Problem solved.

 

Regenerating mana pools is the major part of the problem. Essentially, if you always have all resources at disposal, you're still spamming magic. Not only magic may be nerfed for the game's good (to be in line with those who don't rely on it), but the strategic concerns (saving spells, etcetera) are no more.

He says for it not to regenerate during combat. It restoring after battle is no different to how people would just rest their parties after every battle and as long as the mana pools are kept to a reasonable size and no mana potions it will have the same effect.

[FlintlockJazz]

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model.

 

With regards to setting-building, you're preaching to the choir - though I'd like to point out its not hard at all to fit a magic system in a world's workings. As for the part of ditching the Vancian system, I disagree wholeheartedly.

 

To me, the rules should be built around the lore, I find that not all magic systems work well in all settings and I tend to pick up on the dissonance when a magic system has been blagged into a setting. I don't see why you wouldn't want to see a new system, the Vancian system is not perfect and trying out alternate systems would be good.

Edited September 30, 2012 by FlintlockJazz

[Delterius]

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure.

 

Well there's nothing wrong with mages actually doing something all of the time.

 

That would make Mages and non-Mages (ideally) equally useful in every encounter. As opposed to the IE games, where well placed spellcasting (in mid-lower game, since in higher levels things are different) could and would save your party almost single-handely. I highly doubt that in your system, you'll have something like Sleep, that triggers instant kills out of most everything for its level.

 

 

rest their parties after every battle

 

Try not doing that. Unfortunately, the games were shy of really punishing you for being obtuse, but they were still designed around rational resting - and they gain actual quality if you don't exploit the weak ambushes.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Delterius

[Delterius]

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model.

 

With regards to setting-building, you're preaching to the choir - though I'd like to point out its not hard at all to fit a magic system in a world's workings. As for the part of ditching the Vancian system, I disagree wholeheartedly.

 

To me, the rules should be built around the lore, I find that not all magic systems work well in all settings and I tend to pick up on the dissonance when a magic system has been blagged into a setting. I don't see why you wouldn't want to see a new system, the Vancian system is not perfect and trying out alternate systems would be good.

 

To me, new rules should be built around the lore. But when neither rules or lore have been estabilished, then you make good rules first and build the lore around it. Though it seems Obsidian has a older vision for the lore than it did for the rules, it is still time to adjust both to each other.

 

Regardless, magic systems are amongst the most easily justifiable things. Discussions about the internal consistency of settings generally revolve around other things.

 

And why I'd prefer the Vancian system? Well, its both strategic and tactical as opposed to pretty much everything else. All they need to do is implement a decent rest system (that keeps you from resting in every encounter) and voilá.

Edited September 30, 2012 by Delterius

[FlintlockJazz]

Try not doing that. Unfortunately, the games were shy of really punishing you for being obtuse, but they were still designed around rational resting - and they gain actual quality if you don't exploit the weak ambushes.

 

I tried not to use the rest feature but that was something me as a player did to restrict myself, not something the rules did, and so for the purposes of comparing systems I would not take it into account. The rules allowed me to do so and in fact forced me to do so in order to get the right spells when I realised I didn't have the right selection for a specific battle. A restricted mana pool would probably have done a better job as it could be set to a size that seriously limits the number of spells cast per battle. If someone resorts to using fireball in every battle then they would probably have just memorised a whole bunch of fireballs in a Vancian system and done the same anyway, in that case I'd say it's more an issue with the spells and their effectiveness.

Edited September 30, 2012 by FlintlockJazz

[Delterius]

Try not doing that. Unfortunately, the games were shy of really punishing you for being obtuse, but they were still designed around rational resting - and they gain actual quality if you don't exploit the weak ambushes.

 

I tried not to use the rest feature but that was something me as a player did to restrict myself, not something the rules did, and so for the purposes of comparing systems I would not take it into account.

 

From personal experience (I only recently played the IE games and refused to spam-rest from the start, no problems there) and taking into consideration that A) The Rules tried to limit resting (but were too shy about it) and B) The actual Vancian system (as in PnP) doesn't need to explicitly limit resting (the GM's going to make you suffer if he wants to), I'd say that's unwise.

[FlintlockJazz]

To me, new rules should be built around the lore. But when neither rules or lore have been estabilished, then you make good rules first and build the lore around it. Though it seems Obsidian has a older vision for the lore than it did for the rules, it is still time to adjust both to each other.

 

Regardless, magic systems are amongst the most easily justifiable things. Discussions about the internal consistency of settings generally revolve around other things.

 

And why I'd prefer the Vancian system? Well, its both strategic and tactical as opposed to pretty much everything else. All they need to do is implement a decent rest system (that keeps you from resting in every encounter) and voilá.

 

Wouldn't you come up with a concept of a world first and then select the rules that fit with the themes? I find that I would end up coming up with the same worlds if I did the rules first. Magic systems are easy to justify when they are not given internal consistency, but if you want it to actually fit in with the world and feel like a part of it rather than some other force then it needs to be built in with the themes I think. Ever play Mage: The Ascension? A Vancian would not have worked for that game. Likewise, Call of Cthulhu would not work with a Vancian system, the spells would need to avoid the stereotypical D&D spells and therefore the role of magic in the system changes and you also need to include sanity and the like. There are many different magic systems out there that have very different flavours, some good some bad but I wouldn't expect the good ones to work in all systems.

 

They've spoken a lot about souls in interviews and how they are going to be used for powers and the like. I would expect them to therefore build the magic system around this concept since it seems to be where they are going with it.

Edited September 30, 2012 by FlintlockJazz

[BasaltineBadger]

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure.

 

Well there's nothing wrong with mages actually doing something all of the time.

 

That would make Mages and non-Mages (ideally) equally useful in every encounter. As opposed to the IE games, where well placed spellcasting (in mid-lower game, since in higher levels things are different) could and would save your party almost single-handely. I highly doubt that in your system, you'll have something like Sleep, that triggers instant kills out of most everything for its level.

 

What's exactly wrong with that. Battles would be more interesting if everyone used spells all the time instead of using slingshot most of the time waiting for that special encounter when he can just fire everything at enemies and win the battle easily.

Edited September 30, 2012 by BasaltineBadger

[Jandor]

The vancian system is pretty rubbish for cRPG's. It seems to encourage rest-spamming, reloading and powergaming.

[metiman]

So it appears that a true Vancian system is not currently favored by Mr. Sawyer. Most of my favorite cRPGs have used a Vancian system, but that does not mean other systems cannot be as good. Arx Fatalis and Ultima Underworld used a mana system combined with glyph stones. Arx Fatalis added in mouse gestures as well and I thought it had one of the most enjoyable casting systems of any game I've played. I liked that active participation aspect of mouse gestures and how they were traced in the air. I wanted to include a fatigue system that some people have described here, but didn't consider myself sufficiently familiar with it. From what I have heard it sounds good. A nice variation on a mana system.

 

1) Vancian. A spells per level per day memorization system.

 

Advantages: Well understood mechanic with much history. Obsidian has used it before and is familar with balancing it. Many of the greatest cRPGs have used it. More examples of succesful implementation than any other system. Complex enough to require real strategy and uses multiple mechanics: a quantity limit of spells per level per day and a timer as well as a location requirement. It is necessary to find a sufficiently secluded spot to avoid being randomly woken up by monster attacks. It encourages an adventuring party to sleep at least once a day which is more realistic than the alternative.

 

Disadvantages: It's not possible to have a 100% optimal spell selection for every battle without either some kind of scouting system or reloading after being defeated due to your mage's lack of preparation. Finding a secluded spot to rest can be tedious, sometimes requiring you to exit an entire dungeon to do so. In situations where resting is not possible mages become useless or nearly so. If finding a safe spot to rest is easy and you know what foes you will be facing there is not much of a difference between this system and an unlimited one for the length of a single battle. This might be considered an advantage by some. Some argue that this method lacks a convincing narrative explanation.

 

2) Mana. Basically a points system. Each spell is assigned a certain number of points and withdraws those points from a 'pool' of them which regenerates over time, often the same amount of time to fully regen as the Vancian system--8 hours or more. The pool typically gets larger as the character levels up allowing a greater number and more powerful spells to be cast per battle or day. Potions (or refill stations) are sometimes available to instantly refill the pool by a fixed amount.

 

Advantages: Is arguably a finer grained system than the Vancian one so that a mage's power can be adjusted more precisely. Has a long history of use and is well understood. Some argue that the system is easier to explain than the Vancian one--that it makes more narrative sense. Its greater simplicity compared to Vancian may make it slightly easier to code and debug when problems arise.

 

Disadvantages: Obsidian has less experience with this system. I don't think they have ever used it in a fantasy setting. A pure Mana system is a simpler (solely time base) system and may require less strategy than Vancian to use optimally. This lack of complexity is somewhat mitigated by systems which use additional mechanics such as glyph stones.

 

3) Cooldowns. An in-between action delay system. What makes it different from other timer mechanics is that the delay occurs between individual actions instead of groups of actions. The delays are also usually short, typically occuring within a battle and measured in seconds or minutes instead of hours. Usually used in real time game systems. In a RTwP system would more likely be measured in rounds instead instead of seconds/minutes. This mechanic was introduced to the PC world by MMORPGs which wanted to 100% perfectly balance every class so that there would be no advantage of one over another in PvP combat. It allows combat efficacy to be measured in Damage Per Second for easy comparisons in the MMOG PvP setting.

 

Advantages: The simplest of all systems. Probably somewhat easier to code and debug than most other systems. Although a relatively new game mechanic, it is well understood by developers that use it. Allows DPS measurements to precisely measure the potential power of each class. Some find it to be the most narratively sensible mechanic, perhaps conceptualized as the time it takes to cast a spell or perform a ritual. The most common system used in the most popular MMORPGs and most popular cRPGs. Younger and casual gamers are far more familiar with this system. Can greatly reduce the power of mages or any other class for that matter. Relatively easy to combine with other systems.

 

Disadvantages: Waiting is in real time and can be considered boring and frustrating to some. May interfere with the ability to solo a class that uses them because while you are waiting around for the cooldown to end you might be getting pummeled by your foes. Not a single great cRPG has ever used such a system. At least not for actual combat. Obsidian is probably less familiar with this mechanic than with any other. As arguably the simplest mechanic it may also be the least strategic although this can be mitigated if combined with other mechanics. Those who dislike this system for whatever reason seem to have a greater tendency to dislike it very strongly and may not play the game at all if this mechanic is present. This can be mitigated by not being such a person.

Edited September 30, 2012 by metiman

[TimMc]

I would prefer a diverse array of spell types. Maybe some spells require components, maybe some entire schools require you to sleep while others allow for just a cooldown. Maybe certain classes operate differently than others in regards to spells.

 

Keep things diverse, basically. One answer to everything is boring.