The biggest issue with Vancian magic is that at levels beyond, say, 6-7, managing your spell selections becomes a chore without some sort of assistance (whether it's cards or an Excel spreadsheet).

I do like how DCC muddles things up a bit (where you only 'lose' the spell if you botch the casting check), as well as the spontaneous caster system from 3E onwards.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 22, 2022, 08:25:03 AM
The biggest issue with Vancian magic is that at levels beyond, say, 6-7, managing your spell selections becomes a chore without some sort of assistance (whether it's cards or an Excel spreadsheet).

I do like how DCC muddles things up a bit (where you only 'lose' the spell if you botch the casting check), as well as the spontaneous caster system from 3E onwards.

Yeah. I don't really mind "spells per day" as a limiting factor, what I hate is spell preparation and "losing" spells. 5e (amongst other systems) went a direction more to my liking, where you no longer need to prepare multiples of spells; you prepare THE spell and can cast it as many times as your spell slots allow. I'd go a step further and just remove the need to prepare entirely (like the sorcerer class does). I don't think I'm alone in this, since sorcerer and worlock are far more popular options than the wizard.

Vancian magic never fit any fantasy archetype I was familiar with, but is iconic to stock D&D. I see spellbook caster as being able to quick cast from memory or taking longer to cast from the book. Thus, my preference would be that spells take an action to ready out of the book and an action to cast once ready. A caster could preload up to a days worth of spells ahead of time and cast them in one action each, read and cast taking two full round actions, or unload a ready spell to load a different one. Limited spells per day does put a good damper on caster spell abuse, but I would prefer a less certain and variable limit, perhaps a non linear DC as a function of total spells cast. The average would be the prescribed spells per day, but some days would be over while others would come under. Magic ought not to be predictably dependable. If anything it should be more like early gunpowder, powerful, dangerous, and unpredictable.

Quote from: Wisithir on August 22, 2022, 09:18:43 PM
Vancian magic never fit any fantasy archetype I was familiar with, but is iconic to stock D&D. I see spellbook caster as being able to quick cast from memory or taking longer to cast from the book. Thus, my preference would be that spells take an action to ready out of the book and an action to cast once ready. A caster could preload up to a days worth of spells ahead of time and cast them in one action each, read and cast taking two full round actions, or unload a ready spell to load a different one.

I had thoughts along a similar line. 5e already introduced "ritual" spells that can be cast without preparation. I would just make ALL of a wizard's spells Ritual spells. They could read directly from their spellbooks, with a casting time of 1 min per spell level, while also having their regular allotment (albeit reduced in number) of prepared spells and slots. This would make wizards far more utilitarian at the expense of time. Their prepared spells would obviously have a combat-focus, while they can still take 4 or 5 minutes to cast something like passwall when the party needs it.

Quote from: Effete on August 22, 2022, 09:30:19 PM

Quote from: Wisithir on August 22, 2022, 09:18:43 PM
Vancian magic never fit any fantasy archetype I was familiar with, but is iconic to stock D&D. I see spellbook caster as being able to quick cast from memory or taking longer to cast from the book. Thus, my preference would be that spells take an action to ready out of the book and an action to cast once ready. A caster could preload up to a days worth of spells ahead of time and cast them in one action each, read and cast taking two full round actions, or unload a ready spell to load a different one.

I had thoughts along a similar line. 5e already introduced "ritual" spells that can be cast without preparation. I would just make ALL of a wizard's spells Ritual spells. They could read directly from their spellbooks, with a casting time of 1 min per spell level, while also having their regular allotment (albeit reduced in number) of prepared spells and slots. This would make wizards far more utilitarian at the expense of time. Their prepared spells would obviously have a combat-focus, while they can still take 4 or 5 minutes to cast something like passwall when the party needs it.

Did that in my system, except instead of being tacked on with D&D baggage, it's designed into the system foundation.  The default to cast all spells is 2 actions, one to prepare and one to cast.  The character cannot move or talk between the start of preparation and the casting.  Which means a caster can move before preparation or move after casting, but not during.  Some casters have ways around this for a very limited set of spells prepared a head of time.  A handful of weaker spells have no preparation.  A few stronger spells take 2, 3, or more rounds to prepare.

Ranged attacks and drawing weapons have load costs.  Characters dedicated to their weapons can mitigate or even remove those.  (It still takes time to load a heavy crossbow no matter how skilled you are, but you can do it faster than the unskilled can.)  The net effect is that the system doesn't need special rules to handle spell interruption.  Someone starts casting, either have some ammo loaded and ready to go or have a melee guy get up in the caster's grill--if you can.

I've long been a believer that the default time to cast a spell in a fantasy RPG should be 2 actions.  With this system, I decided to see what I could do with it built in, instead of house ruled onto another system.

Quote from: Effete on August 22, 2022, 09:05:20 PM
I don't think I'm alone in this, since sorcerer and worlock are far more popular options than the wizard.

What are you basing that judgement on? https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/10/dd-character-data-breakdwon.html is a few years old, but there Wizards are more popular than either Sorcerers or Warlocks. That's consistent with what I've seen at my tables, but I don't have a huge player pool - is it that you've seen something different, or do you have more than anecdote?

Quote from: Naburimannu on August 23, 2022, 09:07:29 AM

Quote from: Effete on August 22, 2022, 09:05:20 PM
I don't think I'm alone in this, since sorcerer and worlock are far more popular options than the wizard.

What are you basing that judgement on? https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/10/dd-character-data-breakdwon.html is a few years old, but there Wizards are more popular than either Sorcerers or Warlocks. That's consistent with what I've seen at my tables, but I don't have a huge player pool - is it that you've seen something different, or do you have more than anecdote?

This is my impression as well. I can see Sorcerers being more popular in 3e, but in 5e everyone is essentially a "spontaneous" caster now that spell memorization is no longer a thing. Wizards, Clerics, and Druids technically need to "prepare" their spells, but all prepared spells can effectively be casted spontaneously using any available spell slots they want and they know VASTLY (by orders of magnitude) more spells than Sorcerers or Warlocks. Wizards, Clerics, and Druids can also prepare more spells than Sorcerers or Warlocks even know, giving them a bigger selection of spells to cast on the fly.

WotC basically took the Sorcerer's defining feature, gave it to everyone, but left them gimped in their spell knowledge (in fact they learn even less spells than in 3e now), making it almost a purely vestigial class now.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 23, 2022, 09:05:18 AM
Did that in my system, except instead of being tacked on with D&D baggage, it's designed into the system foundation.  The default to cast all spells is 2 actions, one to prepare and one to cast.  The character cannot move or talk between the start of preparation and the casting.  Which means a caster can move before preparation or move after casting, but not during.  Some casters have ways around this for a very limited set of spells prepared a head of time.  A handful of weaker spells have no preparation.  A few stronger spells take 2, 3, or more rounds to prepare.

Ranged attacks and drawing weapons have load costs.  Characters dedicated to their weapons can mitigate or even remove those.  (It still takes time to load a heavy crossbow no matter how skilled you are, but you can do it faster than the unskilled can.)  The net effect is that the system doesn't need special rules to handle spell interruption.  Someone starts casting, either have some ammo loaded and ready to go or have a melee guy get up in the caster's grill--if you can.

I've long been a believer that the default time to cast a spell in a fantasy RPG should be 2 actions.  With this system, I decided to see what I could do with it built in, instead of house ruled onto another system.

I like that.

If I was creating my own game, I'd get rid of vancian magic altogether. The thing I posted was just a thought I once had concerning wizards.

Quote from: Naburimannu on August 23, 2022, 09:07:29 AM

Quote from: Effete on August 22, 2022, 09:05:20 PM
I don't think I'm alone in this, since sorcerer and worlock are far more popular options than the wizard.

What are you basing that judgement on? https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/10/dd-character-data-breakdwon.html is a few years old, but there Wizards are more popular than either Sorcerers or Warlocks. That's consistent with what I've seen at my tables, but I don't have a huge player pool - is it that you've seen something different, or do you have more than anecdote?

Most of my gaming is done through PbP now, with open-enrollment periods for games. Worlocks are the most common arcane caster I see applications for, with sorcerers and wizards probably neck-and-neck. I mean, it's still anecdotal since it's based off my limited observations, but it's a decent litmus test for what people seem to like.

Quote from: Naburimannu on August 23, 2022, 09:07:29 AM
What are you basing that judgement on? https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/10/dd-character-data-breakdwon.html is a few years old, but there Wizards are more popular than either Sorcerers or Warlocks. That's consistent with what I've seen at my tables, but I don't have a huge player pool - is it that you've seen something different, or do you have more than anecdote?

That's an old (2017) dataset of 100,000 characters. For a newer (2020) dataset of 30 Million characters:

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2020/07/dd-and-the-most-popular-class-is.html

Warlock (9%) beats Wizard (8%) but Sorcerer (7%) loses to both.