[merged] Vancian Magic System and cooldowns

[mikayel]

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

 

I do, quite commonly. In fact, some such D&D games were made in this particular "Infinity Engine" that were rather pleasant, especially the first Icewind Dale. Great art, neat encounters, loved the music. Now, I am told there is some such game by some of the developers of Icewind Dale who wish to make a game that is a spiritual descendent of those Infinity Engine games.

 

Pray tell sir, would you happen to know where I may go to discuss this game and whether or not it has mechanical similarities to its influences?

[Merin]

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

 

(...)

 

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.

 

Okay -

 

people keep using D&D Sorcerer and Bard casting rules in an effort to refute "D&D style casting"

 

Tuco isn't using Bard's and Sorcerers to refute D&D style casting. For one, he's only talking about the "low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D" which isn't all of D&D casting. For two, he was contrasting that (Vancian) against a different game system entirely.

 

Your wrong statement is wrong. People are discussing Vancian and cool downs. Not Bards vs. Wizards. And I think, as Tuco himself says to you later, the people who dislike "fire and forget" know that sorcerers and bards didn't use that system.

 

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

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

 

"D&D style casting"

 

 

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.

 

First off - wow. The italicized part is just...

 

Wow.

 

Secondly, it's not repeated over a dozen pages. He tells you himself that he knows what he didn't like - because he didn't know the Vancian term has zero bearing on the validity of his opinion or taste. He clearly stated he doesn't like "fire and forget" "Vancian" "low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D."

 

It's clear. You are digging a deeper hole, and now you've gone so far as to start saying that your one example didn't mean what he, himself, says he meant, and that he doesn't know what he says he does know.

 

You can't admit you were wrong. He says he knows of the things you said he didn't know. And then you have to try and pretzel twist your argument into...

well...

the Wow part.

 

As for plenty of examples and trusting you - I trust you have your proof you won't show me as much as I trust Mitt Romney about his tax returns. Both of you have said one thing is true and have been proven false about it already, so trust is gone. Hard proof, not your word.

 

And - I've had far better people than you tell me to "get over myself."

 

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.

 

Straw man. What I said was -

refering back to specifically Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment. All use 2nd ED D&D - no Sorcerers nor Bards with non-Vancian casting

 

So, yeah, straw man is full of straw.

 

-------------------------

 

On a lighter note

 

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.

 

MIng Ming is right!

Edited October 2, 2012 by Merin

[Hypevosa]

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.

 

Great points ! I feel if you want D&D play what's out there now don't try to make PE into a D&D game.

 

Because people who like certain features of old games aren't allowed to have new games with those features, right?

 

The issue is any D&D labeled game coming out now pretty much sucks... I was excited when the D&D game was coming out for the xbox 360 - but that was quickly squashed when I played the demo... yuck.

[Vampero]

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

 

I do, quite commonly. In fact, some such D&D games were made in this particular "Infinity Engine" that were rather pleasant, especially the first Icewind Dale. Great art, neat encounters, loved the music. Now, I am told there is some such game by some of the developers of Icewind Dale who wish to make a game that is a spiritual descendent of those Infinity Engine games.

 

Pray tell sir, would you happen to know where I may go to discuss this game and whether or not it has mechanical similarities to its influences?

 

I want it to be more like Fallout..I don't want it to be dice roll skills.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Vampero

[Tauron]

I want magic book, the old style look, like a reall book, or plain that is more easy to navigate through. At least few options and that it is modder frendly UI. But yeah, Vancian, memorisation, defently one way or the other. It makes sense, how many "hafiz - wiz" can there be to just now all the spells on the go and why restrict "knowledge"? Isnt that puropse of the mage in lore. I always missed system for mage in Forgotten Realms to pick up some of divine magic's. There were several unique spells that were really awsome and that there wasnt a mage who thought..."hmmm, that might be usefull" let me figure those energies and make something similiar. One can implemnt several casting ways, I am for combination of these, if implemented right way it might work. Devs can work on combination of all these, memorisation, point based, etc.

 

I am advocating for vancian also becouse it was half fun to find the spell scrolls for your mage character. It felt like reall hunt for knowledge/power. I used to argue on forums that that late lvl should have been something like quest based. You search for lost knowledge in ruins, find one piece or old tome, than you have to find all parts, get some components and than figure it out. A good story teller can make it great. Just like some tugs can see your group and think, now that is some fancy equipment, they are few we are dozen, lets kill them. So can another mage go for your spellbook.

 

I dont see what is fuss all about. With spell book you can cast all spells available, but those your character has memorised /studied you get bonus, faster casting, less %mana cost. This way you are not handicapped and still game slightly rewards you if you choose right spells for encounter. If not, you are still not gimped, just that your character pays slightly higher cost, duran of casting, more %mana, power to cast, becouse you are acually reading from the book or scroll. There is just so many ways to make it work.

In my mind it looks AWSOME :D hahaha, I am not sure how it can be implemented in game, as I am not coder and I have no clue how it can fit with their game engine.

[Jasede]

I'd be happy if the game used OGL D20 3.5 rules but I guess that's just a pipe-dream. KotC was amazing.

[Vampero]

I hope that won't happen because I won't play the game.

Well, good riddance.

Thank you !

[salty]

Vancian magic doesn't make any more sense than mana pool magic. Why can a 180 IQ wizard who's been studying all their life only memorize 2 spells? How many do you think YOU could memorize. I understand that maybe you'd screw it up from lack of practice, but I remember things I was forced to memorize as a child without thinking about them for 5 years.

 

Note that I never read the books it was based on.

[mikayel]

Okay -

 

people keep using D&D Sorcerer and Bard casting rules in an effort to refute "D&D style casting"

 

Tuco isn't using Bard's and Sorcerers to refute D&D style casting. For one, he's only talking about the "low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D" which isn't all of D&D casting. For two, he was contrasting that (Vancian) against a different game system entirely.

 

Your wrong statement is wrong. People are discussing Vancian and cool downs. Not Bards vs. Wizards. And I think, as Tuco himself says to you later, the people who dislike "fire and forget" know that sorcerers and bards didn't use that system.

 

 

Sigh. Bard and Sorcerer casting is inferior to Vancian. I'm tired of repeating why -- I have said at least 3 times the tactical differences there-in and even made analogies. If you don't like Vancian, that's fine, but that's just your view. In terms of versatility and possibility, Vancian trumps Spell-Points.

 

 

First off - wow. The italicized part is just...

 

Wow.

 

Wow indeed, I too am constantly amazed at people who don't know the names of the things they are talking about. I mean, google is right there, why not just look it up?

 

Secondly, it's not repeated over a dozen pages. He tells you himself that he knows what he didn't like - because he didn't know the Vancian term has zero bearing on the validity of his opinion or taste. He clearly stated he doesn't like "fire and forget" "Vancian" "low flexibility on the memorization system in D&D."

 

There's nothing low-flexibility about Vancian, which as I've said many times now, is a constant mistake people keep remaking. Vancian is more flexible than SPL --- far more flexible, because if you forgot to memorize something like Protection from Evil or Chaotic Commands in an SPL system you're boned if you can't find a scroll when you need, where-as in a Vancian system you can just change your spells as appropriate.

 

It's clear. You are digging a deeper hole, and now you've gone so far as to start saying that your one example didn't mean what he, himself, says he meant, and that he doesn't know what he says he does know.

 

You can't admit you were wrong. He says he knows of the things you said he didn't know. And then you have to try and pretzel twist your argument into...

well...

the Wow part.

 

Hardly, like I said to him that if I misunderstood his post then I apologize for doing so. You do read my actual words, yes?

 

As for plenty of examples and trusting you - I trust you have your proof you won't show me as much as I trust Mitt Romney about his tax returns. Both of you have said one thing is true and have been proven false about it already, so trust is gone. Hard proof, not your word.

 

And - I've had far better people than you tell me to "get over myself."

 

Hahahahahahaahaha is this a modified Godwin's law or something?

 

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.

 

 

Straw man. What I said was -

refering back to specifically Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment. All use 2nd ED D&D - no Sorcerers nor Bards with non-Vancian casting

 

So, yeah, straw man is full of straw.

 

Dude, just because you for some reason are refusing to include Baldur's Gate 2 and Icewind Dale 2 into the list of "Infinity Engine games" doesn't mean the rest of the world is going as well. How is this point even an issue? Sawyer even worked in IWD 2 how the hell would the game he worked on in the IE engine not be a key point in what influenced this particular game?

 

 

 

On a lighter note

 

MIng Ming is right!

 

so quit arguing?

[mikayel]

 

 

I want it to be more like Fallout..I don't want it to be dice roll skills.

 

I can't even... I ...

 

So go play Fallout?

[Merin]

This might help a little to see where Josh's mind is at... if only a little -

 

http://ingenre.com/2012/09/an-interview-with-josh-sawyer/

 

]IG – Many of the games you worked on used versions of the Dungeons & Dragons rules. What is your opinion on how that translated into video games and what experiences from that do you feel are affecting the systems being designed for Project Eternity?[/b]

JE – Translating a turn-based game into real-time is a challenge, but I’m glad we didn’t have to do it in reverse! A lot of rules slide over without much difficulty, but others get complicated (e.g. Attacks of Opportunity). And because you’re simulating virtual rounds, the pacing can feel really awkward in real-time. For Project Eternity, I’d like to keep the overall feeling of pacing and management, but we don’t need to be bound by rounds or the timing rules of the AD&D games. This should allow the characters to feel more responsive to commands and to have more flexible timing windows for the use of abilities.

[mikayel]

Vancian magic doesn't make any more sense than mana pool magic. Why can a 180 IQ wizard who's been studying all their life only memorize 2 spells? How many do you think YOU could memorize. I understand that maybe you'd screw it up from lack of practice, but I remember things I was forced to memorize as a child without thinking about them for 5 years.

 

Note that I never read the books it was based on.

 

Because a magic system is a mechanical set of rules that are necessary to allow for (hopefully) balanced gameplay and whether or not they are explained in fluff or plot is a bonus, not a necessity.

 

Aside from that, let us assume that when you are able to shape the very physical nature of matter, time, space, and everything inbetween with words alone (or words and gestures) that maybe those words are of a different nature than common words and holding too many in mind will cause you to die, or something.

 

I mean, really, what's more important that the game system be balanced, effective, and fun, or that there be a satisfying one paragraph explanation in a manual?

[septembervirgin]

Knock and its old friends spider climb and invisibility are part of a classic family of spells that made rogue and thief players say, "Hey, why do I exist?"

 

Throughout PnP of a more thoughtful sort, magic is caught in boundaries whereby its function is limited, noticeable, and potentially dangerous to the caster. Sometimes magic can gather attention of the gods (who might be vain and easily angered) or incite other spirits (and not always to assist the magician). Magic is sometimes subtle (and easier animated that way) so that spells are invisible but their effects have a stated game effect that appears in the dialog box as dice roll bonuses, can stoke passions and ease passions, can call upon spirits, can instill illness and allow health. That's sometimes done too. Occasionally, magic can only be done by spirits, with humans being able to call their attention, accentuate the power of elements or aspects in an area (which alters the fortunes and situations that occur in an area). Magic is sometimes working with a system of philosophy, increasing ones awareness and control over minutiae that seem to evade the senses of others (ala The Last Illusion by Clive Barker).

 

I don't believe their inclusion in pre-4E editions of D&D and AD&D was a great thing. That sort of spell design is good if you're making a game specifically about how awesomely powerful wizards are (e.g. Ars Magica), but I don't think it's good in a class-based system where the classes are supposed to have different strengths and weaknesses. Also, I think the high-level design of rituals in 4E is a good thing because allows casters to retain the ability to use classic spells like speak with dead with a time and material cost. It just doesn't force players to choose, daily, between the spells they use constantly and the spells they use once every three to five sessions (in tabletop terms). It's pretty rare that someone "expects" to cast speak with dead, so any occasion where the player would have a good reason to use it is likely to catch the player unprepared under normal pre-4E conditions.

 

I'm not sure 4e is entirely a good model, but that's beside the point. It might be best to come up with a cosmogeny and structure for how magic (and special power) works and why. Derive from that what is possible. It might just be that "special power" is how magic works for anyone anyway and everyone has special power, albeit not everyone has the wherewithal and training for magic. Role-playing games usually don't consider the *why* of magic, not entirely, it's just there because it's cool. Even Ars Magica is at odds trying to pluck out *why* someone is a mage and someone else isn't -- and it sounds like a set of paltry excuses. So make your world and construct simple workable rules (with sensible mathematical formulas) based on your fictional world-structure.

 

I prefer Runequest. At the very least, it's not that some people are magical and others aren't: the world is magical and the runes are summaries of the divine presences as well as their tools (and also the tools of any being capable of using a rune properly). The magic system and the game world work well together also.

Edited October 2, 2012 by septembervirgin

[ogrezilla]

It sounds to me like souls could be connected to magic in a way that makes magic use more of a physiological ability similar to strength than a mental ability of learning spells in the form of words and gestures.

Edited October 2, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Shevek]

This is an academic discussion at this point. They do not want Vancian magic and they do not want rest. They will not budge on this (at least according to what JE said last). This doesn't leave much else except mana (or some other resource) and cooldowns as far as what will work in a video game. I am a bit disappointed here but we can do nothing but wait and see.

 

They will have to discuss amongst themselves those systems and discuss how to place those in the world while making magic feel, well, magical (as opposed to gimmicky) and not insanely overpowered nor weak. Once they come up with a system, we can debate on perceived strengths/weaknesses once they release that information. At that point, they can again choose whether or not to accept our feedback.

 

Honestly, we have put rationale behind our suppport of assorted spell systems. They will take that information and do what they will. Maybe we should all take a breath and leave the developing to the developers.

 

It will be interesting to see where they go with THAC0, Attack Bonus, etc as far as martial types go after this discussion, lol.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Shevek

[Tauron]

Vancian magic doesn't make any more sense than mana pool magic. Why can a 180 IQ wizard who's been studying all their life only memorize 2 spells? How many do you think YOU could memorize. I understand that maybe you'd screw it up from lack of practice, but I remember things I was forced to memorize as a child without thinking about them for 5 years.

 

Note that I never read the books it was based on.

 

A mage in that setting has learned several ancient languages. So intelligence can determine how many spells per lvl you can memorise, but even if you have extreme photographic memory, you still have to channel that energy correctly. Too much too fast and KAAABOOM, you just made fire arrow to fireball..in your face! It is metaphysics we talk about, some restriction has to be made, even if you know all spell book by heart, game needs some balance. What I was saying in my previous post is way to merge all these elements.

[Tuco Benedicto]

Sigh. Bard and Sorcerer casting is inferior to Vancian. I'm tired of repeating why

But you didn't explained why. You think you did, but you didn't.

What you actually did was arguing about the *balance* of these specific classes, which is *completely* irrelevant, as we aren't talking strictly about these specific classes (that most likely won't even be in P.E), but just about the mechanics they rely on for spell memorization/use.

 

I already pointed it to you, but you ignored my point and you preferred venting about how outraged you were by me namedropping Chaos Chronicles.

No one needs your explanation about on why a mage is superior to a sorcerer (learning from scrolls, using higher level spells at parity of level, etc) because no one cares and that's not the point.

The point, instead, is: which mechanic of spell memorization/use is more fun and rewarding gameplay-wise. And that's exactly why all your rant about knowing where the name "Vancian" comes from was completely pointless from the start.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Tuco Benedicto

[Merin]

And that's exactly why all your rant about knowing where the name "Vancian" comes from was completely pointless from the start.

 

Not just that part. Every part of the rant that ignores what the interlocutor is saying. Completely misrepresenting not only the opponents arguments, but their own as well.

 

If mikayel can't admit error in using you as an example, can't admit that misquoting me is wrong, there's no point in engaging.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Merin

[salty]

Because a magic system is a mechanical set of rules that are necessary to allow for (hopefully) balanced gameplay and whether or not they are explained in fluff or plot is a bonus, not a necessity.

 

Aside from that, let us assume that when you are able to shape the very physical nature of matter, time, space, and everything inbetween with words alone (or words and gestures) that maybe those words are of a different nature than common words and holding too many in mind will cause you to die, or something.

 

I mean, really, what's more important that the game system be balanced, effective, and fun, or that there be a satisfying one paragraph explanation in a manual?

 

I get that the explanation is something like that, from some book. It just doesn't make sense to *me*. I find Vancian casting really, really dull in low levels and really silly in high levels. I'll still play a mid-level wizard and enjoy it, but at the two extremes it's not remotely enjoyable.

 

And how in the world does "holding" copies of the same spell in your mind and it takes up more than one spell slot make any sense? If you can memorize a certain number of spells based on your level, why can you only cast them once? What? Guess I'll hit the rest button after every battle.

 

Basically, I would like them to craft their own magic system, but for me: Finding and crafting spells instead of just suddenly knowing them when you level is good. Having to prepare things for spells before you are ready to fight is good, because maybe there are ingredients that are used. Being able to cast more based on fatigue (not "mana") makes the most sense to me. And potions that restore fatigue (CAFFEINE) makes sense if it's a little dangerous to use without real rest for several days, like it definitely is irl. But basing your whole system off a book most people haven't even heard of, and are thus unable to wrap their heads around? Not good.

 

I feel like people only want it because that's how it used to be. Let them think up their own system. For the record, I don't like the concept of mana and I don't like cooldown timers, either.

[ogrezilla]

 

 

I feel like people only want it because that's how it used to be. Let them think up their own system.

I think this could be said in half the threads on this board. I hope they don't limit their own good ideas by trying to stay too faithful to the old games. As good as they were, the old games all had flaws. The combination of the magic and rest systems was a pretty major one.

[salty]

I feel like people only want it because that's how it used to be. Let them think up their own system.

I think this could be said in half the threads on this board. I hope they don't limit their own good ideas by trying to stay too faithful to the old games. As good as they were, the old games all had flaws. The combination of the magic and rest systems was a pretty major one.

 

Yeah, like I said I trust Obsidian to come up with something that's both fun and makes some kind of sense.

 

Something I forgot to add is that I don't think casters should be physically weak. Casting spells would be physically demanding, imo. That's the one explanation I could understand with Vancian stuff - the wizard's been sitting around reading all their life and can't do more until they've gone on an ~adventure~ and are getting more in shape.

[Infinitron]

COOLDOWNS CONFIRMED

 

Time to rage

 

http://www.kickstart...ernity/comments

 

 

Creator Obsidian Entertainment 15 minutes ago

 

@David Holmin What we are moving forward with right now is a system that does not require a pure round system. In the IE games, each person was running their own six second round and spells were based on whether they were memorzied. How we look at it, rather than going with a memorization system for spells, in particular, we can use a cool down system. It's a similar balancing system without requireing the whole resting for spells. As for ablities being on that timer, D&D also had certain abilities that could only be used a certain number of times per day - again we want to mimic that with a cool down system.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Infinitron

[ogrezilla]

I feel like people only want it because that's how it used to be. Let them think up their own system.

I think this could be said in half the threads on this board. I hope they don't limit their own good ideas by trying to stay too faithful to the old games. As good as they were, the old games all had flaws. The combination of the magic and rest systems was a pretty major one.

 

Yeah, like I said I trust Obsidian to come up with something that's both fun and makes some kind of sense.

 

Something I forgot to add is that I don't think casters should be physically weak. Casting spells would be physically demanding, imo. That's the one explanation I could understand with Vancian stuff - the wizard's been sitting around reading all their life and can't do more until they've gone on an ~adventure~ and are getting more in shape.

I said it a few post up, but I hope this soul concept allows them to get away from magic being purely intellectual. Tying it to some internal soul could make it more of a physical ability instead of a function of memorizing spells.

[mikayel]

Sigh. Bard and Sorcerer casting is inferior to Vancian. I'm tired of repeating why

But you didn't explained why. You think you did, but you didn't.

 

Very well sir, in the spirit of fairness I shall try to explain myself thoroughly here.

 

What you actually did was arguing about the *balance* of these specific classes, which is *completely* irrelevant, as we aren't talking strictly about these specific classes (that most likely won't even be in P.E), but just about the mechanics they rely on for spell memorization/use.

 

Well, the classes rely uniquely on those casting mechanics -- as such, talking about those classes is also talking about the mechanics. But ok, I'll drop referring to the classes and refer to Vancian or SP exclusively.

 

Going back to what I summarized in my Batman V Superman point -- it boils down to this. Vancian allows you to not only limit player over-kill by limiting high end spells, but it also allows for players to switch what spells they are using apropos to what encounter or dungeon they are going into. SP systems limit how many spells you can potentially cast by having a lower number of spells known, but allow for more castings of the relevant spells at that time. The problem here is if you choose to pick bad spells that have limited use (like perhaps elemental Direct Damage or Hit-Die capped insta-kills) then you can no longer opt to drop those spells in favor of a previously unused one because you had chosen to permanently take the damage/kill spell instead.

 

Now, the flexibility of Vancian casting is not only that, but it also allows for the idea of "scribing" scrolls into your book, which if you do with an SP system, will make Wizards or Casters even more ridiculously overpowered because now, the previously only thing holding them in balance (their limited repertoire of known spells) can grow so long as they get their hands on spell-scrolls. KotC did this, and it made Wizards overpowered (more so than usual D&D). However, KotC was a simple dungeon crawling hack n slash that specifically was about killing, looting, and more killing and never pretended to take itself seriously in anything other than turn-based combat.

 

I already pointed it to you, but you ignored my point and you preferred venting about how outraged you were by me namedropping Chaos Chronicles.

No one needs your explanation about on why a mage is superior to a sorcerer (learning from scrolls, using higher level spells at parity of level, etc) because no one cares and that's not the point.

 

You think the above and the below are separate, I disagree, the better a system is in its use the more fun it is to play.

 

The point, instead, is: which mechanic of spell memorization/use is more fun and rewarding gameplay-wise. And that's exactly why all your rant about knowing where the name "Vancian" comes from was completely pointless from the start.

 

And I think Vancian is the more fun system because it is more flexible. Also, I never ranted about you not knowing what "Vancian" was, but rather, Spell-Ponit-per-Level. You don't even know what I thought you didn't know, :D

[ogrezilla]

so in function it could be very similar to the old IE games. Just without the idiotic rest spamming.

Edited October 2, 2012 by ogrezilla