I'm having a 1000 subscriber giveaway. And here's some important information. There will be multiple ways to enter and each entry gives you a chance for your name to be drawn. One of the ways is by finding Easter eggs I leave in my videos. So, the more videos you watch, the more information you'll have to your advantage when I reveal the details. I'll announce more info over next 2 weeks.
Sounds interesting. I have two more suggestions: (a) The "Sovereign Stone" campaign setting for d20 had a very nice alternative Magic System. I can't remember the title of the Magic book... Might have been "Magic of Loerem". (b) "Gemini: The Dark Fantasy RPG" had a very cool Magic system. This game is long out of print (as Cell Entertainment does not exist anymore), but if you can find a copy somewhere, it might be worth picking it up. Both magic systems go in the same direction Wizards does.
Hi, thanks for the suggestions. Yes, I have the core "Sovereign Stone" book and the magic system is excellent. I may do a video on it at some point but have several others to get through first. I haven't heard of "Gemini: The Dark Fantasy RPG" but it sounds intriguing. I may have to search for a used copy. Thanks for the helpful information!
This is so well presented. Quality video! Thanks. Personally I don't know what to do with magic. It is always a stumble block when I design my system. I often wonder if I should eliminate a magic user class completely.
Right on, I never knew Ralph’s Movie became a TTRPG. Interesting bit of info. Not sure it would ever replace the D&D magic, but anyone who wants to try something different could find this interesting. Thanks for the insight. Was well presented. Game on!
If you want a system where the player can create spells relatively easily with actual rules the D6 Fantasy system seems to works fairly well and it's free in PDF format.
I had been using a roll to cast system until about 2 months ago and really enjoying it - Shadowdark has a fairly straight forward one - the gist of mine is that if you crit you cast for free, if you fumble you waste your mana - regular success casts regularly - regular failure doesn’t waste any mana
I use other game system's magic, skills, etc. for NPCs and BBGs. I have even pitted a Pathfinder party against a DnD party. Same for using other classic RPGs like Rolemaster, Palladium, and Earth Dawn for an interesting encounter. The players are shocked and confused, and they panic because they don't understand what's going on. The multiverse is a wonderful thing!
Adding/replacing the Vancian magic system of D&D with something a great deal more flexible, such as the 'verb & noun' concept in Ars Magica, is a bit more my speed. I prefer a lower magic setting where things can (and will) go very wrong for a caster. It isn't a question of if it will, more of a question of when it will... and to what degree. Dungeon Crawl Classics has a very interesting system as well... where even simple spells can hit with amazing affects if the dice are rolling well and you burn your stats. Then there is something like Lamentations of the Flame Princess. Any spell caster can cast any spell, even summoning spells at 1st level, which can get stupidly off the chain in a quick kinda way. If you take a look at the book entitled, 6x6x6 The Mayhemic Missile Method, which is a supplement(?) for Lamentations, you will see a LOT of examples of how to make spells completely different for each and every caster, as well as the possibility of making each casting of the spell completely different. Magic Missile is never going to be the same again.
in a system in which spells can go very wrong (DCC leans HARD into this) what is the motivation to play a caster unless it's specifically for the madcap lulz/what may happen. Don't these systems penalize casters for simply exisiting?
@@WCPFISH I personally prefer the systems where things can and will go wrong. Far too many game systems (in my opinion) make things an almost automatic success when they hit or happen. Player1: I swing my sword. DM: Sure, roll to see if you hit, and if you did, tell me what happened. Player2: I want to cast a spell. DM: Awesome, roll to see if you successfully cast, and if you did, tell me what happened. Rinse and repeat. If anyone has ever been in an actual fight, with an actual weapon being used in close quarters, people will almost always get hit by accident. Why should spells be treated differently. There has not been a single fight I have ever been in... a physical altercation where there were multiple people slugging it out... where someone does not get accidentally clocked by another person. Now, put pointy sticks in everyone's hand and see how often those accidents happen when people are close to one another. Why should spells be any different? You are chanting, or dancing, or tossing powdered bat guano in the air, or all of the above, and somehow nothing is supposed to ever go wrong? Really? Your buddy just got accidentally skewed in the eye by your other buddy who flinched after getting stuck in arm, but the caster is safe from accidents? It just seems... odd. Really odd. Arcane forces at play, demons being bargained with, strange or potentially toxic ingredients being handled, and the caster is in no danger of screwing up and turning some rando's arm into a tentacle that is suddenly controlled by some eldritch force? Come on... why not? Again, I enjoy playing the caster classes. To me there is something about knowing the potential problems that they can cause, and them weighing those choices. Or, maybe they just do not care who gets what they get, to include themselves.
Some of those spells sound... familiar :) As for more spells, you could look at spells in another systems (i.e. D&D) and then figure out the cost in the Wizards system. That would cover a lot of the basics. It would take out the fun of creating your own spell ideas.
Do you have any idea how much work that would be? Especially considering just how inconsistent WotC was with spell effects and costs. Or just how many places magic spells can be found.
Nah, it doesn't grab me. I would more likely switch to something like DCC's spell rolls, where the roll plus your bonus leads to the differing scales of a spell. Instead of upcasting with spellslots, there is a scale that determines the spell's power. 1-5 failure and you lose the spell for the day, 10-15 on a magic missile roll can lead to a functional spell while getting 20-30 sees you utterly devastate your enemies with a barrage of power.
Our game world is a bit different for magic. Pcs need to find magic stones which they then roll on the Dc for their level, add their INT modifier, if it is good they cam identify the spell(roll on our spell table to find out which spell randomly) Then to use in combat again roll 1d20+INT to meet the CDC (combat dc) if they do then damage is 1d4+INT mod Adding a d6 to that damage as you get to certain higher levels.
Never knew there was a RPG based on Wizards. Spoiler Alert…. It’s been a while since I’ve watched the movie, but if I remember correctly Avatar ended up using “technology” in the form of the “pistol up the sleeve trick” to defeat his brother… not magic… maybe he was out of spirit points by then…
This was very difficult to watch. Please consider: - cutting down on the background; it's nice to have, but it's largely irrelevant to the topic - the video actually started half-way through - provide some actual play examples; you gave some rules but I didn't know what you meant until the end of the video - expand on the concept you're discussing; once you explained how a spell works - the light spell example - you ended the video. Wtf. - provide a way of *actually using it* - great, I can add it to my DnD games, cool.... how?
No, it doesn't sound appealing to me. Sure, it is probably better than the vancian magic in D&D, but I don't use that system either. I currently work on my ow system, that goes for a soft magic approach.And in that regard, the only interesting thing in the magic system presented here was that there is a morality component to it with it being considered good as opposed to technology. That is also my thinking, to have a morality aspect being part of the consideration when it comes to magic, but I don't like that it is just told and feels like it is not really integrated in the system. Of course i could be wrong, since all I have is this video, so if there is more to the morality side to the spell casting, I would be interested to hear about it.
I lke the idea of your magic system. How long have you been using it and what do your players think of it? I'd love to read it if you're willing to share. Also, I don't remember reading details of the morality differences between magic and technology, but I'll do some further research.
Ralph Bakshi. Isn't that the same guy that made the animated movies for Lord of the Rings and Fritz the Cat? *Looks up on Wikipedia* Oh my gosh. He is. I have never seen Wizards. I have only seen two of his movies. I didn't like the cat movie. It indulged in the novelty of the X rating, and didn't have much in the way of substance or even plot. The Lord of the Rings movie is okay. I get some enjoyment from it. However Peter Jackson made an amazing live action trilogy for Lord of the Rings. I highly recommend that for anybody interested and curious about Tolkien. I even like Peter Jackson's Hobbit Trilogy. These two trilogies are so good that they easily overshadow the animated versions that came before. I can enjoy cartoons by both Baskshi and Rankin and Bass. However these cartoons are very inferior. I never touched the Amazon Tolkien show, because it seems like a soulless cash grab. This game is interesting. I don't quite get the whole dice system thing. The video did explain things very well. It is just so different from DND that it takes getting used to. There are a couple of things I like. One is that there is some spell points system instead of spell slots. That is good. That is more flexible and streamlined. I like to call such points mana. Another nice thing is the idea of creating spells. That adds extra flexibility. Some of that is in DND. Some spells get more powerful if they are cast with higher level spell slots. Sorcerers are the class for flexible magic. They have sorcery points on top of the usual spell slots. The two magical resources can be converted. Spell slots can convert to scorcery points, and vice versa. Scorcery points can also be spent when the sorcerer casts a spell. Both spell points and spell slots are spent at the same time. Spending sorcery points this way gives extra bonuses to make the spell better. The extreme of flexible magic is the wild magic subclass of the sorcerer. When a sorcerer casts a spell they have a chance of making a random side effect happin. It would be cool to take flexible magic even further. DC20 is moving in that direction. Similar spells in DND can be united together as one spell with different forms. It is cool how the Wizards game gets into this. It is cool to imagine all magicians getting into this, and not just sorcerers. Wizards game goes so far that there are only a handful of common spells. This makes quite a bit of sense. There are only a handful of basic effects. There is damage spells healing spells, DOT and crowd control etc. All of these can be changed around by flexible magic.
I have things done a bit differently. I do have mana as a magic resource of course. However I do have spells that can't be changed. I do this to make things more clear. I compensate by just having more spells. I have an idea to organize spells in a skill tree. So in order to learn a new spell, a magician has to have enough experience points and know the prerequisite spell. Spells learned at a higher level will be more powerful and expensive than low level spells. At high level some spells are basically like the lower level spells except for cost and power. That is sort of like a flexible change in spells, except the spells are divided up for greater clarity. Having flexibility and inventing new spells does have a cool flavor to it. Maybe my skill trees can have that flavor. One flexible thing I do have is having magicians take on one or two elements as a passive effect on themselves. That affects the elementals of the spells. It also affects how a magician interacts to opponents of certain elements. Getting a an element gives strengths and weaknesses to certain other elements. It is like rock paper scissors. It can get too complicated to make a separate set of spells for every element. So I have changing passive states instead.
The magic system is seriously flawed, there is one component to these kinds of systems you did not cover. And that is the ability for the target to resist magic. When spells are either successes or failures the strength of the target has no influence on the spell. Lets say we are doing a Harry Potter Campaign and we need to have the Death spell AvadaCadavra in our game. The success to kill Ron Weasly or Dumbledoor with this spell is the same. This is immersion breaking when players use it and game breaking when the GM casts a spell against a player. oh look player died because GM rolled well, player has no means of defending themselves against the spell. You do not need a death spell to make players angry, paralyzation, compulsions or anything that limits a players ability to control their own character will be just as frustrating.
Yes!!! Spell "slots" might make no sense from a "biological" (how would magic actually function) sense, but they are a great abstraction in fantasy games. As are "saving throws" and "spell attack rolls". And Armour Classes for that matter. These things make a game function, how it "looks" in the fiction that we collaboratively create at the table is something else entirely.
Oh boy, let me tell you what I think!!! I think I don't need the history of a man who happened to be a filmmaker and "cell polisher" before he somehow went into the TTRPG business in order to realise that this magic system sucks. It doesn't even do what you suggest it will. Nor is it the best implementation of this style of magic system. For instance. D&D 5e has an optional spell point (mana pool) rule set. Where you would gain spell points getting rid of that awful Vancian magic but maintaining the exhustive collection of 5e spells. Or you could look at Ars Magica which does what you describe but astronomically better in every way. And these just two better examples. What else do I think? What about the con that your hacking out the single largest rules subsystem in D&D in favour of an essentially homebrewed alternative??? In D&D 5e, everything eventually makes it's way back to the magic system from racial abilities, magic items, class abilities that let you cast spells to spell casting itself? That is a lot of material to either toss out at which point you might as well be playing GURPS or a lot of magic spells to rewrite but at that point you have simply rewritten them to avoid "Vancian" magic. The benefits you describe don't outweigh the amount of work I propose there actually is to be done. I am a DM of many years and I don't have time to do all that work. Not to mention I can barely get my players to play pathfinder so the chances that they would want to learn this new "system" is slim to none! And lastly, I think this had absolutely nothing to do with D&D and you only put D&D in the title to draw in viewers. No, this was a talk about the Wizards game not how it could ACTUALLY be implemented in a D&D 5e game. To hell with that! You can take your filthy clickbaiting and join my "do not show this content creator" EVER AGAIN list.
@@dnd-and-philosophy And yet @coldstream11 is right here. Magic in D&D 5e (though I suspect this applies to earlier editions too) is so fundamental to how the game works, and so pervasive that to remove it in place of something else, well you might as well play a different game because you surely wouldn't be playing D&D 5e when you're with these rules changes.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 89 | คู่เอก "ยอดไอคิว vs คิริลล์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Z3vYkHJ_5Ig/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm having a 1000 subscriber giveaway. And here's some important information. There will be multiple ways to enter and each entry gives you a chance for your name to be drawn. One of the ways is by finding Easter eggs I leave in my videos. So, the more videos you watch, the more information you'll have to your advantage when I reveal the details. I'll announce more info over next 2 weeks.
Sounds interesting. I have two more suggestions: (a) The "Sovereign Stone" campaign setting for d20 had a very nice alternative Magic System. I can't remember the title of the Magic book... Might have been "Magic of Loerem". (b) "Gemini: The Dark Fantasy RPG" had a very cool Magic system. This game is long out of print (as Cell Entertainment does not exist anymore), but if you can find a copy somewhere, it might be worth picking it up.
Both magic systems go in the same direction Wizards does.
Hi, thanks for the suggestions. Yes, I have the core "Sovereign Stone" book and the magic system is excellent. I may do a video on it at some point but have several others to get through first. I haven't heard of "Gemini: The Dark Fantasy RPG" but it sounds intriguing. I may have to search for a used copy. Thanks for the helpful information!
This is so well presented. Quality video! Thanks.
Personally I don't know what to do with magic. It is always a stumble block when I design my system. I often wonder if I should eliminate a magic user class completely.
Thank you!
Thanks for this awesome review! what a great spell creation system. so ahead of its time breaking away from standard RPG magic approach. cheers
Thank you, sir! Much appreciated.
Right on, I never knew Ralph’s Movie became a TTRPG. Interesting bit of info. Not sure it would ever replace the D&D magic, but anyone who wants to try something different could find this interesting. Thanks for the insight. Was well presented. Game on!
If you want a system where the player can create spells relatively easily with actual rules the D6 Fantasy system seems to works fairly well and it's free in PDF format.
Nice ... Will check it out
Have you looked at the magic system from "Alpha Omega: the beginning and the end", from Mindstorm Labs 2008?
I haven’t, but thanks for letting me know. I’ll check it out!
@@dajavuja will definitely have to look into this magic system. Thanks for the tip!
I had been using a roll to cast system until about 2 months ago and really enjoying it - Shadowdark has a fairly straight forward one - the gist of mine is that if you crit you cast for free, if you fumble you waste your mana - regular success casts regularly - regular failure doesn’t waste any mana
I might have liked this system last week, but I discovered Cairn and i'm spellbound.
"Let me show you something ma taught me while you were away"
I use other game system's magic, skills, etc. for NPCs and BBGs. I have even pitted a Pathfinder party against a DnD party. Same for using other classic RPGs like Rolemaster, Palladium, and Earth Dawn for an interesting encounter. The players are shocked and confused, and they panic because they don't understand what's going on.
The multiverse is a wonderful thing!
That's a cool idea. Meta-Multiverse!
Adding/replacing the Vancian magic system of D&D with something a great deal more flexible, such as the 'verb & noun' concept in Ars Magica, is a bit more my speed. I prefer a lower magic setting where things can (and will) go very wrong for a caster. It isn't a question of if it will, more of a question of when it will... and to what degree. Dungeon Crawl Classics has a very interesting system as well... where even simple spells can hit with amazing affects if the dice are rolling well and you burn your stats. Then there is something like Lamentations of the Flame Princess. Any spell caster can cast any spell, even summoning spells at 1st level, which can get stupidly off the chain in a quick kinda way. If you take a look at the book entitled, 6x6x6 The Mayhemic Missile Method, which is a supplement(?) for Lamentations, you will see a LOT of examples of how to make spells completely different for each and every caster, as well as the possibility of making each casting of the spell completely different. Magic Missile is never going to be the same again.
in a system in which spells can go very wrong (DCC leans HARD into this) what is the motivation to play a caster unless it's specifically for the madcap lulz/what may happen. Don't these systems penalize casters for simply exisiting?
@@WCPFISH I personally prefer the systems where things can and will go wrong. Far too many game systems (in my opinion) make things an almost automatic success when they hit or happen. Player1: I swing my sword. DM: Sure, roll to see if you hit, and if you did, tell me what happened. Player2: I want to cast a spell. DM: Awesome, roll to see if you successfully cast, and if you did, tell me what happened. Rinse and repeat. If anyone has ever been in an actual fight, with an actual weapon being used in close quarters, people will almost always get hit by accident. Why should spells be treated differently. There has not been a single fight I have ever been in... a physical altercation where there were multiple people slugging it out... where someone does not get accidentally clocked by another person. Now, put pointy sticks in everyone's hand and see how often those accidents happen when people are close to one another. Why should spells be any different? You are chanting, or dancing, or tossing powdered bat guano in the air, or all of the above, and somehow nothing is supposed to ever go wrong? Really? Your buddy just got accidentally skewed in the eye by your other buddy who flinched after getting stuck in arm, but the caster is safe from accidents? It just seems... odd. Really odd. Arcane forces at play, demons being bargained with, strange or potentially toxic ingredients being handled, and the caster is in no danger of screwing up and turning some rando's arm into a tentacle that is suddenly controlled by some eldritch force? Come on... why not? Again, I enjoy playing the caster classes. To me there is something about knowing the potential problems that they can cause, and them weighing those choices. Or, maybe they just do not care who gets what they get, to include themselves.
Super interesting video! I hope to find a pdf of the Bakshi’s RPG.
Good stuff, you have a very good presentation style.
I appreciate that!
I love Vanciam magic. I also love Ralph Bakshi
Have you looked at Spheres of Power? I think you will find lots to like there.
I have not. Thanks for the suggestion.
Some of those spells sound... familiar :) As for more spells, you could look at spells in another systems (i.e. D&D) and then figure out the cost in the Wizards system. That would cover a lot of the basics. It would take out the fun of creating your own spell ideas.
Do you have any idea how much work that would be? Especially considering just how inconsistent WotC was with spell effects and costs. Or just how many places magic spells can be found.
Nah, it doesn't grab me. I would more likely switch to something like DCC's spell rolls, where the roll plus your bonus leads to the differing scales of a spell. Instead of upcasting with spellslots, there is a scale that determines the spell's power. 1-5 failure and you lose the spell for the day, 10-15 on a magic missile roll can lead to a functional spell while getting 20-30 sees you utterly devastate your enemies with a barrage of power.
I haven't looked deeply at DCC but what you describe sounds similar to how I'd create a magic system with mana points.
This is very interesting.
Yes, it’s a pretty cool system, especially the spell creation guide.
Our game world is a bit different for magic. Pcs need to find magic stones which they then roll on the Dc for their level, add their INT modifier, if it is good they cam identify the spell(roll on our spell table to find out which spell randomly)
Then to use in combat again roll 1d20+INT to meet the CDC (combat dc) if they do then damage is 1d4+INT mod
Adding a d6 to that damage as you get to certain higher levels.
Never knew there was a RPG based on Wizards. Spoiler Alert…. It’s been a while since I’ve watched the movie, but if I remember correctly Avatar ended up using “technology” in the form of the “pistol up the sleeve trick” to defeat his brother… not magic… maybe he was out of spirit points by then…
I’m using similar elements in the system we’re homebrewing.
This was very difficult to watch. Please consider:
- cutting down on the background; it's nice to have, but it's largely irrelevant to the topic - the video actually started half-way through
- provide some actual play examples; you gave some rules but I didn't know what you meant until the end of the video
- expand on the concept you're discussing; once you explained how a spell works - the light spell example - you ended the video. Wtf.
- provide a way of *actually using it* - great, I can add it to my DnD games, cool.... how?
Thanks for the constructive feedback.
No, it doesn't sound appealing to me. Sure, it is probably better than the vancian magic in D&D, but I don't use that system either. I currently work on my ow system, that goes for a soft magic approach.And in that regard, the only interesting thing in the magic system presented here was that there is a morality component to it with it being considered good as opposed to technology. That is also my thinking, to have a morality aspect being part of the consideration when it comes to magic, but I don't like that it is just told and feels like it is not really integrated in the system. Of course i could be wrong, since all I have is this video, so if there is more to the morality side to the spell casting, I would be interested to hear about it.
I lke the idea of your magic system. How long have you been using it and what do your players think of it? I'd love to read it if you're willing to share. Also, I don't remember reading details of the morality differences between magic and technology, but I'll do some further research.
I saw that movie. It was very weird.
Ralph Bakshi. Isn't that the same guy that made the animated movies for Lord of the Rings and Fritz the Cat?
*Looks up on Wikipedia*
Oh my gosh. He is. I have never seen Wizards. I have only seen two of his movies. I didn't like the cat movie. It indulged in the novelty of the X rating, and didn't have much in the way of substance or even plot. The Lord of the Rings movie is okay. I get some enjoyment from it. However Peter Jackson made an amazing live action trilogy for Lord of the Rings. I highly recommend that for anybody interested and curious about Tolkien. I even like Peter Jackson's Hobbit Trilogy. These two trilogies are so good that they easily overshadow the animated versions that came before. I can enjoy cartoons by both Baskshi and Rankin and Bass. However these cartoons are very inferior. I never touched the Amazon Tolkien show, because it seems like a soulless cash grab.
This game is interesting. I don't quite get the whole dice system thing. The video did explain things very well. It is just so different from DND that it takes getting used to. There are a couple of things I like. One is that there is some spell points system instead of spell slots. That is good. That is more flexible and streamlined. I like to call such points mana. Another nice thing is the idea of creating spells. That adds extra flexibility. Some of that is in DND. Some spells get more powerful if they are cast with higher level spell slots. Sorcerers are the class for flexible magic. They have sorcery points on top of the usual spell slots. The two magical resources can be converted. Spell slots can convert to scorcery points, and vice versa. Scorcery points can also be spent when the sorcerer casts a spell. Both spell points and spell slots are spent at the same time. Spending sorcery points this way gives extra bonuses to make the spell better. The extreme of flexible magic is the wild magic subclass of the sorcerer. When a sorcerer casts a spell they have a chance of making a random side effect happin. It would be cool to take flexible magic even further. DC20 is moving in that direction. Similar spells in DND can be united together as one spell with different forms. It is cool how the Wizards game gets into this. It is cool to imagine all magicians getting into this, and not just sorcerers. Wizards game goes so far that there are only a handful of common spells. This makes quite a bit of sense. There are only a handful of basic effects. There is damage spells healing spells, DOT and crowd control etc. All of these can be changed around by flexible magic.
I have things done a bit differently. I do have mana as a magic resource of course. However I do have spells that can't be changed. I do this to make things more clear. I compensate by just having more spells. I have an idea to organize spells in a skill tree. So in order to learn a new spell, a magician has to have enough experience points and know the prerequisite spell. Spells learned at a higher level will be more powerful and expensive than low level spells. At high level some spells are basically like the lower level spells except for cost and power. That is sort of like a flexible change in spells, except the spells are divided up for greater clarity. Having flexibility and inventing new spells does have a cool flavor to it. Maybe my skill trees can have that flavor. One flexible thing I do have is having magicians take on one or two elements as a passive effect on themselves. That affects the elementals of the spells. It also affects how a magician interacts to opponents of certain elements. Getting a an element gives strengths and weaknesses to certain other elements. It is like rock paper scissors. It can get too complicated to make a separate set of spells for every element. So I have changing passive states instead.
The magic system is seriously flawed, there is one component to these kinds of systems you did not cover. And that is the ability for the target to resist magic. When spells are either successes or failures the strength of the target has no influence on the spell. Lets say we are doing a Harry Potter Campaign and we need to have the Death spell AvadaCadavra in our game. The success to kill Ron Weasly or Dumbledoor with this spell is the same. This is immersion breaking when players use it and game breaking when the GM casts a spell against a player. oh look player died because GM rolled well, player has no means of defending themselves against the spell. You do not need a death spell to make players angry, paralyzation, compulsions or anything that limits a players ability to control their own character will be just as frustrating.
Yes!!!
Spell "slots" might make no sense from a "biological" (how would magic actually function) sense, but they are a great abstraction in fantasy games. As are "saving throws" and "spell attack rolls". And Armour Classes for that matter.
These things make a game function, how it "looks" in the fiction that we collaboratively create at the table is something else entirely.
Oh boy, let me tell you what I think!!! I think I don't need the history of a man who happened to be a filmmaker and "cell polisher" before he somehow went into the TTRPG business in order to realise that this magic system sucks. It doesn't even do what you suggest it will. Nor is it the best implementation of this style of magic system.
For instance. D&D 5e has an optional spell point (mana pool) rule set. Where you would gain spell points getting rid of that awful Vancian magic but maintaining the exhustive collection of 5e spells. Or you could look at Ars Magica which does what you describe but astronomically better in every way. And these just two better examples.
What else do I think? What about the con that your hacking out the single largest rules subsystem in D&D in favour of an essentially homebrewed alternative??? In D&D 5e, everything eventually makes it's way back to the magic system from racial abilities, magic items, class abilities that let you cast spells to spell casting itself? That is a lot of material to either toss out at which point you might as well be playing GURPS or a lot of magic spells to rewrite but at that point you have simply rewritten them to avoid "Vancian" magic. The benefits you describe don't outweigh the amount of work I propose there actually is to be done. I am a DM of many years and I don't have time to do all that work. Not to mention I can barely get my players to play pathfinder so the chances that they would want to learn this new "system" is slim to none!
And lastly, I think this had absolutely nothing to do with D&D and you only put D&D in the title to draw in viewers. No, this was a talk about the Wizards game not how it could ACTUALLY be implemented in a D&D 5e game. To hell with that! You can take your filthy clickbaiting and join my "do not show this content creator" EVER AGAIN list.
Please for the love of god play a different game. Why are you reinventing the wherl?
😂
Huh ?
@@Lucern2112 I know, right?
#thewherl
@@dnd-and-philosophy And yet @coldstream11 is right here. Magic in D&D 5e (though I suspect this applies to earlier editions too) is so fundamental to how the game works, and so pervasive that to remove it in place of something else, well you might as well play a different game because you surely wouldn't be playing D&D 5e when you're with these rules changes.