POLL: Poll: Preferred spell system

Remove all ads!

The first question was inspired by a comment by Late-Night Thinker. Would you rather memorize spells like the classic D&D mage, get spells per day like a BG2 sorcerer, or get mana or magic points?

I'll expand on the second question here so the poll choices doesn't get too long. From item means you need to use something in order to cast a spell (think materia in FF7, or even wands). Create spell means you have to get ingredients to mix the spell (think Ultima). There are lots of other systems, like the Blue magic / enemy skill or the Draw system in FF8, or rune/card combinations in Ultima Underworld/Septerra Core. I didn't think either of those would garner enough votes by themselves, so they're all stuffed inside the "other" category.

Poll Information
This poll contains 2 question(s). 33 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Poll: Preferred spell system (33 votes.)

How to cast spells? (Choose 1)
* Memorize - 33% (11)
* Spells per day - 30% (10)
* Mana / magic points - 36% (12)
* See results - 0% (0)

How to learn spells? (Choose 1)
* Scribe scrolls - 42% (14)
* Level up - 27% (9)
* Buy spells from shops - 15% (5)
* From items - 0% (0)
* Create spell - 12% (4)
* Other - 3% (1)
* See results - 0% (0)

 

When I was playing BG1 for the first time I really wanted back that mana system from Diablo, but when I thought of it Mana makes less sense than memorizing and spells per day. Especially when you have mana potions that you could just drink, and then cast another ten spells....

 

Yeah, i've always thought that the spellsystem in BG was the most sensible of all.

 

I still prefer the mana system, it's for me the most logical.

 

Mana system and scribing scrolls found wheresoever or bought in shops.

This seems especially reasonable for divine casters. Whether they're just praying and being heard or some power has been vested in them, they still seem to draw from their deity's source to accomplish some goals in accordance with their faith. It's ridiculous when a priest or paladin has to foresee which of his prayers he will want to use the next day as though the deity wouldn't grant his other prayers, but only the one selected by the unimportant mortal follower.

 

I also like mana points system, it is the most logical. Sorcerers in D&D are quite strange: in my opinion they shouldn't be limited by spell levels.

Best way to learn spells is from scrolls/books or make a spell for arcane spellcasters. Divine spellcasters should just get their spells from gods.

 

I prefer the mana point style as well. A good way to prevent abusing this system is just don't give any "potions of mana recovery"... then it will eventually force the mage to sleep as often as D&D mages. (This is what Might and Magic does)

Memorizing spells seemed weird for me at first. I just didn't understand how these highly intelligent wizards could forget a spell right after chanting the incantation.

I like the learn spell on level up thing the best. Furthermore, I like one new spell per level up like the sorcerer. But I can see why clerics gain all possible spells when they level up - see Harkle's and Chevalier's comments about divine spellcasters.

No one mentioned druids yet - they too get all spells on level up. Maybe some intervention from the forces of nature? I think druids should mix their spells using natural ingredients... like find ginseng to cast cure wounds or something. Seems more natural to them.

 

I believe the Baldur's Gate series as a whole would have become a much better game with a mana point system. You always read in reviews how a negative about the game is that you have to either have preconcieved knowledge of a battle or replay after gettting your butt whooped and then figuring out which spells you needed. I totally agree. If you could cast any spell at any time (with a limiting factor such as mana) the game as a whole would have been much more fun, and fun is what we are after, correct?

Edit...

You could even break spell points up into different levels so that it would still provide the spell level bottleneck that D&D loves so much.

 

Hmmm... I think it would be enough if they just increased mana cost per increasing spell levels.

A nice idea would be to allow some subtler work on spells: for example tampering with parameters at some mana per cast cost. For example breach 10' for twice as many mana points as the standard single-target one.

 

I personally don't like the mana system, no real reason, I just don't.

 

I'm not crazy about the mana system, either. The idea of drinking blue potions and then shooting out magic is lame to me and doesn't seem terribly reasonable. It just screams "Nintendo" to me for some reason. I'd rather earn/memorize my spells and count on strategy, rather than just lobbing things out like mad and being ok with it as long as you have a belt full of instantly absorbable blue potions to keep the frenzy going.

 

I agree with the above, but I would like to see the creation of spells used more in games instead of going down to the local Spell Market and purchasing Power Word: Kill.

 

I prefere the memorising system. I agree with what DR said. And, in FR games atleast, it wouldn't be right to have mana points, if you read the books you would know that the mages have to scribe/memorise spells like in BGs. After they have casted it the spell sort of fades from their mind. It means you have to stratigise (sp?) more as well. You have to predict what spells you will need. I understand divine spell system has a bit to be desired but... yeah.

 

Chev said it. When it comes to prayers, it's true that a memorization system is rediculous. There is a considerable improvement to this in 3:rd edition rules (ones that NWN is using), but priest spells in general should be more sorcerer-ish. Perhaps even taken to the sacrifical side as many Forgotten Realms novels suggest (as in, in desperate situations a priest can ask for power from their deity through sacrifice of own blood etc). There is a half-reasonable explanation to why mages must memorize their spells. But there is no reasonable explanation whatsoever why priestly classes should do the same.

As for sorcerers, there's one thing in particular that I find strange about them. Why would a sorcerer be the same as the mage in every single aspect save the difference in memorization and numbers of spells? To me it seems as obvious that a sorcerer inherently talented with magic does not possess the slightest bit of theoretical information a mage does. Their ability to read scrolls is debatable, in my opinion. As well, I don't see why the spells they get, and their castings should work the same way either. The instinctial magics they get should be more directed towards wild magic (only partially though), and the spells themselves should be limited to simpler, more raw and power-based spells. Complex magical webs and chain-contingencies etc that require complex thinking and obviously an ability to create and direct magic according to one's own will are things for mages, not sorcerers. Not only that, I also feel that sorcerers should be allowed slightly different feats. Going into specifics would get things too complicated even for my liking, but let's just say that I don't quite agree how sorcerer actually has to make the same gestures, use the same words and require the same casting time a mage does while doing the same spells. Some creatures have bonuses to their casting times, and some are naturally able to cause spell-like or actual spell effects without using any vocal components at all. The same rule should apply to sorcerers. I can see a mage weaving a spell with his hands, and speaking arcane symbols aloud as he's casting a fireball. In the case of a sorcerer, however, I see him concentrating hard while pointing his hands at the target, while not making any fine gestures at all. His will and magical blood alone will grant him the power to bring forth the fireball. Perhaps depending on the strength of will or level of emotional stress (urgent need for protection etc), the fireball will be cast faster than with a mage. The way I see it, a wizard is an intelligent magic-user with a broad range of skills and an ultimately (note) immense amount of power. While a sorcerer is a simple, unpredictable and powerful one, up to the point where the mage's ability to control the magic exceeds a sorcerer's natural strength.

Also, while the memorization system a mage has seems balanced and proper for normal D&D use, I do think a mana-based system more logical. In case of D&D, it's good that the 3.5 edition ruleset allows for feats that grant a mage a more deeper understanding of any spell of their choosing. Effectively meaning that they always remember this particular spell even without their spellbooks. I also seem to remember that there is an ability which allows for mages to improvise by casting these particular spells on a sorcerer-like manner, without preparing them beforehand. With a certain cost, of course. This sounds like a good and working solution, for mana or memorization, it doesn't make a difference to me as long as there's a logical and practical way to make those work. As sorcerers' system already represents "mana", I can't see why wizards shouldn't work the way they already do.

These were mainly my own opinions of D&D system and the changes that should be made there in order to make it closer to my preferations. The truest-to-my-views spell-system that I would want to see isn't too far off from this one, so it'll do.

 

Mana sucks. All those "Blue potions" take up way to much space and gets heavy. You have to think about your characters health

 

@Fora - So what you are saying is that sorcerers should have a wild magic effect?

 

I'm a fan of spell components. A good but crude example of this would be a snes game called: Secret of evermore.

In this game the protonagist must look or buy for spell components like roots, water, oil etc etc. During his adventure he would learn components combinations and can cast the spell when/if he has the components. In SoE this wasn't complemented in the most perfect way but it does makes sense and it would make the inventory much more alive. Think about hundreds of different components.

Arcanum used this with it's technology schemes not with it's magic but it worked really really well I thought.

 

@Velve

More like, the development of a sorcerer's abilities should happen in a wild magic -like effect. Where a mage usually has to at least have a moderate idea of whatever it is he's doing (I like to use the Dragonlance example where you simply cannot manifest magic unless you have complete control over every little syllable, way of pronounciacion, even thought, as you're weaving a spell), a sorcerer mainly learns things by acting on instinct. He doesn't know what sort of spells and magics he can control, so just "choosing them" as happens in a game is rediculous. Realistically speaking the powers come as wild magic, a surprise after another until after enough experience the sorcerer can learn to control most of these powers. Even an experienced sorcerer who has not yet reached his full power should be able to have the option to summon more power than he can control, which would, in a way, behave as wild magic would.

A simplified example:

A sorceress discovers she has some strange magical gift. She makes an attempt to use a form of telekinesis on an object to pull it to herself. But since this is her first (or one of her first) tries, she has no idea how to control this telekinesis, if, in fact, she even has such a power. As a result, the object explodes/grows plantlife/macig missiles erupt from her hand/ etc.

A mage, with some very minor talent in the art, comes up with the same idea as the sorceress did. But instead of trying randomly to manifest some effect with his will, he knows his only way of controlling magic is through actual spells. So he goes and gets himself a scroll of telekinesis he reads, rehearses, and studies as much as possible, until he is at last prepared to make the attempt. Now, unlike with a sorcerer, the mage cannot manifest unknown effects without somehow managing to actually get his components, thoughts, words, AND gestures -all four- aligned equally wrong. And each of those wrong ways would be exactly like with another, common-to-all-four-ingredients, spell. The chance for this is so incredibly small that I've never heard it happening in any book. What this means is, that either the mage will succeed in the spell and the object will levitate to him, or he will not succeed, meaning that nothing happens. There will be no random effects, there will be no quessworks by the mage what would work and what wouldn't. He knows exactly what the spell does, and how it works, and assuming he does everything right, that's exactly how the spell will work. With the logical random factors counted out of course.

From a gaming standpoint I realise this is stupid, as it forbids the player from controlling what abilities they would learn, and how they would use them. But it is more realistic, given the described origin and nature of sorcerers.

 

I like to memorize the spells and have them stay memorized until you cast them.

 

I tend to favor the mana point system, altough the fatigue system shadowrun uses is more logical to me. As I understand it, the number of spells available depends on the constitution and/or willpower of the caster. The more spells he uses the more fatigued he gets. He even can hurt himself by excessive spellcasting.