[merged] Vancian Magic System and cooldowns

[Infinitron]

I'm hoping it's something like this: You cast a spell *if* you have enough mana to cast a spell (or have the spell memorized), mana doesn't regenerate on its own inside or outside combat and the spell will have a cooldown - BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE TOO F. POWERFUL.

 

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

Edited October 1, 2012 by Infinitron

[Valorian]

I'm all against too many abilities that can be spammed too often, for reasons I already explained... But that doesn't rule out cooldowns entirely.

 

The same line of thought applies to abilities and stamina, of course.

[Valorian]

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

 

What if mana potions were rare and worked only outside combat by slowly regenerating some mana? Hardcore enough?

 

Call mana "soul energy" or whatever if it makes it sound more hardcore for you.

[Merin]

Pathetic maybe, but it might be effective.

 

Remember, Obsidian's pitch for this game is substantially if not entirely based on nostalgia for some old games that played in a certain way. It's entirely natural to hold certain expectations.

i don't want to support this game based on nostalgia, I want to support it because I expect it to be good. Because the games they are taking as inspiration were good.

Hell, they still are good today, in fact.

 

 

I donated based on this -

 

"Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment.

Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success. The world map is dotted with unique locations and wilderness ripe for exploration and questing. You’ll create your own character and collect companions along the way – taking him or her not just through this story, but, with your continued support, through future adventures. You will engage in dialogues that are deep, and offer many choices to determine the fate of you and your party. …and you'll experience a story that explores mature themes and presents you with complex, difficult choices to shape how your story plays out."

 

When that ceases to be true I might reconsider my donation.

 

Nowhere in there, however, did I see "Vancian" or "no cool downs" mentioned.

 

You read into that what you wanted to read into that. If you saw "Vancian" or "D&D", well, that's your interpretation but it's not stated as such.

 

Just like BG2 and IWD2 are never mentioned on that front page as inspiration. Maybe you can see them as being implied, but they aren't mentioned specifically. What is: Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Planescape: Torment.

 

And they aren't in this picture on the front page -

 

Now, later, they DO mention all the stuff they've worked on in the "who is Obsidian" section, but if you are looking there for what PE will be like, couldn't we expect 2D cut-outs (South Park), newspapers and steamworks (Arcanum), and FPS mechanics (New Vegas) as well?

 

Me, for example - I want to be able to create my whole party myself. They mention IWD specifically, should I be expecting that? Or pull my donation because "it was implied" even though (I'd argue) it actually seems to imply the opposite?

 

No. If that's the breaking point for me, I shouldn't have donated to start.

 

 

----

 

If you like the part I quoted and donated based on that, and you feel that it was a lie in there... fine, pull your pledge.

 

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Merin

[Jasede]

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

 

What if mana potions were rare and worked only outside combat by slowly regenerating some mana? Hardcore enough?

 

Call mana "soul energy" or whatever if it makes it sound more hardcore for you.

Would work for me. But it'd be hard to balance and rarely is something that's supposed to be rare in theory actually rare in practice in a game.

 

You know what'd be interesting? If casting spells drained Soul Energy, and when you run out, you die. So you can only cast so many spells. Ever.

 

You'd end up managing your soul energy very carefully, always worrying if you should expend some to win a tough fight or abstain and possibly lose the battle. That'd make an interesting setting.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Jasede

[Infinitron]

Holy crap, Merin. The reason Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Infinitron

[Merin]

Holy crap. Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's. Don't try to reach some esoteric conclusion from that.

 

And way to zone in on something unimportant and misinterpret it.

 

Yes, you caught me. The crux of my whole argument was on BG2 not being in that picture. The entirety of my post is now wrong!

 

Or...

 

"Now, later, they DO mention all the stuff they've worked on in the "who is Obsidian" section, but if you are looking there for what PE will be like, couldn't we expect 2D cut-outs (South Park), newspapers and steamworks (Arcanum), and FPS mechanics (New Vegas) as well?"

Edited October 1, 2012 by Merin

[Infinitron]

Holy crap. Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's. Don't try to reach some esoteric conclusion from that.

 

And way to zone in on something unimportant and misinterpret it.

 

Yes, you caught me. The crux of my whole argument was on BG2 not being in that picture. The entirety of my post is now wrong!

 

The entirety of your post, which is what? That we shouldn't expect a game inspired by D&D games to share their mechanics because those mechanics aren't specifically mentioned in a one-paragraph introductory pitch?

 

Uh, okay.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Infinitron

[mikayel]

Well, it seems to me he knows exactly what he doesn't want -

 

I fiercely dislike the low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D, but I recently I heard a very nice variant to the same idea: Chaos Chronicles' developers are implementing in their new turn based RPG a slot system similar to the D&D one, but instead of memorizing every single spell a caster wnats to use, he simply has a limited number of slots for each spell level, and then as far as slots are available, he can cast freely *any* spell in that level range.

 

To put it simple:

- In D&D a mage who knows six "level 3 spells" and that can cast three of them every day needs to choose exactly which ones he want to memorize for the day.

- In Chaos Chronicles a mage who knows six "level 3 spells" and that can cast 3 of them every day doesn't need to memorize crap, he just can cast any of these spells for a max amount of three of them.

 

He's describing Vancian vs. non-Vancian. He doesn't say "I fiercely dislike all magic in D&D." He said "I fiercely dislike the low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D."

 

I never said he was, go back and read my original post if you are incapable of recalling what I said.

 

Is he talking about 4E? Is he talking about D&D Next? Are you?

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

 

The are two points being debated -

Vancian ("fire and forget")

and

cool downs.

 

He doesn't know the name of the system or the fact that's been in D&D games all along, he barely just found about it through Chaos Chronicles which is a game that isn't even out. I'd say it's pretty apparent he doesn't know enough about the system to be proposing a fix to a very well working and established system like Vancian casting. How the hell is that lost on you?

 

You gave me one example that is exactly what I've been saying, and none showing using D&D against D&D. I see another game system's magic mechanics being contrasted to Vancian style mechanics.

 

It's clear what he wants and doesn't want.

 

It's clear he doesn't understand the nature of the argument he's in because he doesn't even know the origin, common use-of, or name of the system he's proposing. Aside from that, my biggest complaint wasn't that it was an argument out of ignorance, but that it was an argument out of ignorance THAT KEPT GETTING REPEATED for over a dozen pages.

 

Tuco is one example, there are plenty of other examples in this thread alone -- I'm not going to reread a 20 page thread to pick out two names to give to you. Get over yourself.

 

The fact that Sorcerers in BG2, IWD2, a couple other classes in 3E, and ALL OF 4E, isn't Vancian is irrelevant.

 

What are you even on about? The reason I brought up Sorcerers in BG 2 and IWD 2 is because you said there are no sorcerers in IE games when clearly two of the five IE games have sorcerers.

Edited October 1, 2012 by mikayel

[Elerond]

IE games weren't detemined by their magic system and I don't think that PE will be either, even if it uses some kind of event-based magic sytem.

 

But still I hope that PE will use some unique system or mixed system from typical magic system (memorization, point-based, event-based, as powers, skill-based or cost/reagent based). And one should remember that there is good and bad implementation of every common approach for magic system, so overall mechanic ideas should not be blamed for bad magic systems.

[Valorian]

No, that wouldn't be enough either. We'd still be mad (at least with mana and especially mana potions)

 

What if mana potions were rare and worked only outside combat by slowly regenerating some mana? Hardcore enough?

 

Call mana "soul energy" or whatever if it makes it sound more hardcore for you.

Would work for me. But it'd be hard to balance and rarely is something that's supposed to be rare in theory actually rare in practice in a game.

 

You know what'd be interesting? If casting spells drained Soul Energy, and when you run out, you die. So you can only cast so many spells. Ever.

 

You'd end up managing your soul energy very carefully, always worrying if you should expend some to win a tough fight or abstain and possibly lose the battle. That'd make an interesting setting.

 

It entirely depends on what developers have in mind - if they want to have mana potions being rare, they'll be rare. Unless they do something dumb as having herbs that are needed for the potion to be brewed respawn after a certain period.. endlessly. Or shops with endless supplies of potions and this kind of stuff.

 

I wouldn't like soul energy to be drained permanently. This would make wizards worthless. I'd like (a portion of) soul energy to be replenished after resting... or we can call it "meditation".

 

You'd only be able to meditate in quiet places, for example. The ones who use stamina would "rest" to replenish it.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Valorian

[Tuco Benedicto]

He doesn't know the name of the system or the fact that's been in D&D games all along, he barely just found about it through Chaos Chronicles which is a game that isn't even out. I'd say it's pretty apparent he doesn't know enough about the system to be proposing a fix to a very well working and established system like Vancian casting. How the hell is that lost on you?

Says who? You?

Go and re-read my post. I stated that the novelty was that they are applying the system to the mage (and every other class of casters, clerics included, in fact). They are ditching the memorization system entirely, and I'm all for that.

 

Are you actually trying to imply that I didn't know about sorcerers? I played Baldur's Gate 2 form start to finish seven time, and two of these playthrough were with a Sorcerer and with a Bard. What would you like to hear to be convinced? That sorcerers are based on Charisma instead of INT? That they don't need to memorize spells but they can't learn form scrolls and that at parity of level they have more level limitations on the spells they can use compared to the mages?

 

I played pretty much any relevant RPG available on PC today since the late '80s, starting from Ultima IV.

I don't need you to teach me how games work. In fact, I can probably teach something to you.

 

It's clear he doesn't understand the nature of the argument he's in because he doesn't even know the origin

 

Tuco is one example

No, what's clear here is just that you are jumping to conclusions and making wrong statements. Factually wrong, I mean. Not just different opinions.

 

EDIT: but the most interesting thing, thinking about it, is that even if you were right (and you aren't) that's irrelevant anyway.

Even if someone was unaware of exceptions like sorcerers, doesn't matter. People have any right to talk about the system they prefer, even if they can't exactly name it in a proper manner.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Tuco Benedicto

[mikayel]

Says who? you?

If the quote is by me, then yeah.

 

Go and re-read my post. I stated that the novelty was that they are applying the system to the mage (and every other class of casters, in fact). They are ditching the memorization system entirely, and I'm all for that.

 

There's no novelty there -- point per level casting has been used on Divine classes, Arcane classes, and every combination there-of prior to Chaos Chronicles. The game is just opting to use it as its main mode. If I misunderstood your post, my apologies, but it seemed like you weren't too familiar with the three magic systems in D&D (I'm counting Warlock casting in there as well, even tho it's not quite the same as Arcane or Divine magic).

 

Are you actually try to imply that I didn't know about sorcerers? I played Baldur's gate 2 form start to finish seven time, and two of thse playthrough were with a Sorcerer and with a Bard.

I played pretty much any relevant RPG available on PC today since the late '80s, starting from Ultima IV.

I don't need you to teach me how games work.

 

Bard's used Vancian casting in BG 2. Good for you dude, then you should know the name of the casting system and that Chaos Chronicles isn't doing anything new with it -- if I mistook that to mean you weren't aware of spell-points-per-level then I apologize.

 

No, what's clear here is just that you are jumping to conclusions and making wrong statements. Factually wrong.

 

Hardly. If you don't know the name of the system, or its history, then you don't know enough about the system other than saying what you like or what you don't like -- which is fine -- but many people posted that they basically want spell-points-per-level casting without knowing what to call it or what its like, nor its limitations. "Sorcerer" style casting has many limitations that Vancian casting is superior to, the only thing Sorcerer style casting is better at is allowing one to be more of a piece of artillery in blasting magic (and even then Wizards can be just as good if they decide to only pre-memorize damage spells). Otherwise, Vancian is superior to it.

Edited October 1, 2012 by mikayel

[Tuco Benedicto]

Hardly. If you don't know the name of the system, or its history, then you don't know enough

That's one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on this forum so far, and that's something.

So you are saying that -for instance- no one should propose a skill-based system similar to the one used on Fallout 1 and 2 if he isn't aware that's called S.P.E.CI.A.L.?

Do you realize that isn't just a wrong concept, but it's also very stupid?

 

Also, are you at least aware that two threads were merged and that when I made that first reply it wasn't part of this very same thread dedicated to the Vancian system, but it was part of the other one?

Edited October 1, 2012 by Tuco Benedicto

[Merin]

Holy crap. Baldur's Gate isn't in that image because it's Bioware's game, not Black Isle/Troika/Obsidian's. Don't try to reach some esoteric conclusion from that.

 

And way to zone in on something unimportant and misinterpret it.

 

Yes, you caught me. The crux of my whole argument was on BG2 not being in that picture. The entirety of my post is now wrong!

 

The entirety of your post, which is what? That we shouldn't expect a game inspired by D&D games to share their mechanics because those mechanics aren't specifically mentioned in a one-paragraph introductory pitch?

 

 

Not precisely, but I'm going to hazard a guess that this is as close as I'm going to get with you... so yeah, sure.

 

Context is important. So is language. They didn't say Dungeons & Dragons, nor mention rules mechanics. All they said was - "Project Eternity is an isometric, party-based computer RPG set in a new fantasy world developed by Obsidian Entertainment" (yep, no D&D mentioned in there) and "Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment." Nothing bolded implies D&D - and that's the context of what they were offering.

 

"Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success. The world map is dotted with unique locations and wilderness ripe for exploration and questing. You’ll create your own character and collect companions along the way – taking him or her not just through this story, but, with your continued support, through future adventures. You will engage in dialogues that are deep, and offer many choices to determine the fate of you and your party. …and you'll experience a story that explores mature themes and presents you with complex, difficult choices to shape how your story plays out." Which, again, doesn't say D&D anywhere.

 

"We are excited at this chance to create something new, yet reminiscent of those great games and we want you to be a part of it as well." Original but with the feel of. No mention of D&D. This is like "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" giving you DA:O, or "spiritual successor to Wasteland" giving your Fallout. Different mechanics, similar feels in game design theory.

 

If you insist on reading "D&D" into the project, that is your prerogative. But I promise you - you are going to be very disappointed.

[Zinn]

I don't really understand how people can argue this much over such a small thing. Everyone is basically splitting hairs about the exact same concept: Resource use vs resource gain.

 

There really needed to be an "I don't care" option because it isn't really different either way, as the designers will obviously balance the game around the system of choice. People act like it's set in stone that there must be exactly 10 enemies between point A and point B in the game and whatever system is chosen will dramatically alter the outcome of the difficulty in the area. The only thing that matters is that it's balanced, and there goes a lot of different things into it besides simply picking how to spend and gain resources. D&D (and especially the videogames based on it) is notorious for it's extremely faulty magic system where magic is very hard in the beginning but eventually lets you replace virtually any other party member if you min/max correctly. Likewise, systems with mana potions are usually way too generous with them and let you buy a ridiculous stack, leading to severe imbalance because the developers haven't thought about the economy in spending all of your gold on potions and simply living off the loot you find (which is usually better anyway).

 

The D&D system hinges entirely on a DM deciding when something is and isn't appropriate or simply cut down the wizard by adding enemies that do nothing but laugh in the face of spells. This can never be reality in a videogame, which is why a game like BG can be immensely easy and hard at the same time for a spellcaster: If you play it completely blind with little knowledge of the core system, you are likely going to have a very hard time. However, if you're great at D&D or have played the game before, you'll breeze right through it because you already know which spells to pick to be able to get out of anything it can throw at you. The other systems tends to be exploited because the developers generally don't give any consideration to the economy of a singeplayer game: You can buy heaps of potions and with the right upgrades/spells, you can cast indefinitely.

 

There are lots of potential fixes for each possible system but arguing whether you'd rather have a blue mana orb or a scroll icon that says "5" is a bit silly, IMO. All systems you can ever think of are easy to break by either ignoring the in-game economy or failing to consider the options available upon spell selection and how many you can choose at any given point in time. Why is it of the utmost importance that it's done like in D&D, Dragon Age or Diablo, when the only thing that matters is that you can only gain X resources between point A and B, with only Y potential spells to use?

Edited October 1, 2012 by Zinn

[Tuco Benedicto]

just to back Merin's last post, one of the first times they talked about real time with pause, they also said that it's a system that can be messy when it's an adaptation of a turn based system, but this won't happen for this game as it's going to be designed as real time from the start.

So yeah, that pretty much rules out D&D.

[Vampero]

If they make this game a job to play and take the fun out leveling this game will have a fast death .

Edited October 2, 2012 by Vampero

[Infinitron]

just to back Merin's last post, one of the first times they talked about real time with pause, they also said that it's a system that can be messy when it's an adaptation of a turn based system, but this won't happen for this game as it's going to be designed as real time from the start.

So yeah, that pretty much rules out D&D.

 

Did I say I was expecting D&D? Licensing issues alone ruled that out from the start.

 

In fact, I never said I personally was expecting anything at all. I only defended the idea of expecting certain mechanics - in isolation, not necessarily as part of a greater system.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Infinitron

[Malcador]

Would RTwP really interfere with the magic system though ?

[Tuco Benedicto]

Would RTwP really interfere with the magic system though ?

Nah, it's hardly related.

[mikayel]

That's one of the most ridiculous statements I've read on this forum so far, and that's something.

So you are saying that -for instance- no one should propose a skill-based system similar to the one used on Fallout 1 and 2 if he isn't aware that's called S.P.E.CI.A.L.?

 

Not in the least -- Spell-points-per-level isn't a brand name or an operationalized term for a specific game, it's a generic concept used for all games that use similar magic systems like, for instance, Knights of the Chalice (D&D) or Suikoden 1 and 2 (console jRPGs). If you wanted to refer to a skill based system I would expect you to use the words "skill based system" -- then again, the name is only one small part of my original point -- if you don't know where it's been used or how, that's far more important... no? And if you don't know the name, then I would imagine you wouldn't easily identify it every time you saw it.

 

Also, you overlook that SPL (spell points per level) systems have severe limitations over Vancian casting. KotC failed to fix this by allowing Wizards to scribe spells into their book and still using SPL, which resulted in wizards being ridiculously overpowered (Clerics too) compared to Knights.

 

Do you realize that isn't just a wrong concept, but it's also very stupid?

 

I'm going to avoid the ad hominem and simply say that you are overlooking points of my argument.

 

Also, are you at least aware that two threads were merged and that when I made that first reply it wasn't part of this very same thread dedicated to the Vancian system, but it was part of the other one?

 

No, I joined in this discussion after it was 17+ pages long (after merging, I'm guessing). If your posts were interpreted out of context or in wrong-context then I apologize but that is no fault of mine.

Edited October 2, 2012 by mikayel

[Vampero]

just to back Merin's last post, one of the first times they talked about real time with pause, they also said that it's a system that can be messy when it's an adaptation of a turn based system, but this won't happen for this game as it's going to be designed as real time from the start.

So yeah, that pretty much rules out D&D.

 

Good good and good I don't want D&D rules In PE. Go play a D&D game if you want that.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Vampero

[Malcador]

Would RTwP really interfere with the magic system though ?

Nah, it's hardly related.

 

Then it doesn't really rule out D&D's magic system, no ?

Edited October 2, 2012 by Malcador

[Vampero]

hi

Edited October 2, 2012 by Vampero