A Response to a Response to 5 Problems With "Magic" in D&D

Since someone took the time to make a post responding to my article 5 Problems With "Magic" in Dungeons & Dragons, I figure I should make my own response post (because if I just leave a comment I'm likely to forget about it in case they want to keep the dialogue rolling).

Here we go:

"I should start by saying that while D&D magic may have started out influenced by Jack Vance's work, it has become something completely separate that stands on its own.  It is... D&D magic."

However it might have been influenced by The Dying Earth before the actual release of Dungeons & Dragons, I'd say that the end result has always just been D&D "magic".

Bizarre, lazy, nonsense D&D magic.

I think it would have worked out much, much better if Gary had just used Vancian magic. This is not to say that he should have only used it: there are plenty of other magic systems out there that are not Vancian and still make sense. You could have removed levels, had spells take x turns to re-prep, it would've avoided the 15-minute adventuring day, and ideally there would have been less reliance on magical healing to get by.

"As such, unlike the poster in the article linked above, I see a direct correlation between the game mechanic and the in-game explanation of how magic works."

That's the crux of my problem: there is no in-game explanation. I've asked proponents of pseudo-Vancian magic to come up with one, and they never do (when they even bother to try: plenty just parrot "it's magic, doesn't need to make sense").

You can cast some spells whenever you want without any problem (and all wizards start with the same amount, and learn more at the same rate), you can cast some spells whenever you want with enough time (only certain spells, for some reason), and other spells can only be cast x times per day using whatever the hell a spell slot is.

Is it magical energy? Then how come you can't use a bunch of lower level slots to cast a higher level spell? How come, when you use a higher level slot to cast a lower level spell, that it only sometimes gives it any extra punch and/or there isn't any energy left over?

Is it "mind space"? Well, then how come I can't just opt to not bother with lower level slots once I get to a higher level, and instead use that space for higher-level slots?

Then there's mention in the Player's Handbook of magic being wild, enigmatic, and both mentally and physically taxing, but there's nothing in the rules that supports any of that. It, like most of 5th Edition, comes across as very half-assed.

"In fact, the wizard's only true power is in knowing how to lock a spell's inherent magical energy into his or her mind, so that it can be unlocked later."

Note that in 5th Edition you don't to memorize/prepare a specific number of spells. You I guess "ready" a number of spells (the spell's level doesn't matter), and spend spell slots to cast them. So, instead of memorizing/preparing 2 magic missile spells, you just ready it, and each time you cast it you use up a 1st-level spell slot.

Going with previous editions, then why can't you use your "mind space" to just hold onto larger spells? Why do you have to stick with the lower level stuff? Why does a 1st-level spell completely occupy the "mind space" of a 9th-level spell slot?

"Now, granted, in the game a wizard has no idea of a spell's level.  Not in the sense of the game mechanic, at least."

Why not? A wizard player should be able to tell people that she can only cast x combination of y spells in a given day. She should also know that by using a higher level spell slot, the spell will (sometimes) have an increased effect.

"Certainly they would have a hierarchy and know that some spells are easier to "memorize" than others, and they would probably have some idea of their own capabilities and how they relate to that hierarchy."

In 2nd and 3rd Edition yes, in 5th Edition no: wizards ready a number of spells without any regard to their level.

On the note of lapsed editions, I would have to ask why a wizard cannot memorize/prepare, say, another 3rd-level spell instead of any 1st- and 2nd-level spells. And, again, if I use a 9th-level slot to memorize/prepare a 1st-level spell, why isn't there any, I dunno, "mind space" and/or magic energy left over?

"Cantrips, then, are the minor magics taught to apprentice wizards which teach the fundamentals of capturing a spells energy in one's mind.  They themselves require very little arcane energy to be locked into the wizard's mind."

Again, in 5th Edition you don't memorize or prepare individual spells based on your number of slots: you ready a number based on your Intelligence mod and wizard level, then use spell slots to cast them.

Personally I look at cantrips as more akin to rotes from The Dresden Files, though it still doesn't make any sense that a wizard can only ever learn a set number, and that all wizards know the exact same amount. I could see a wizard wanting to learn more, or less, in exchange for more or less spell slots.

"Divine magic, well, honestly I'm with the linked article's poster: I think divine magic should not use the same mechanical system and should be a bit more fickle based upon the cleric's patron at the time of the casting.  I'm not real happy with the cleric kneeling down with a holy symbol every morning and praying for the god to grant spells.  Seems like a... magic drive-thru to me:"

Precisely. I think that people seeing clerics channeling power from their gods should be viewed as more miraculous, and less...predictable and expected. It should be at least somewhat unreliable. A cleric shouldn't have absolute knowledge of how and how often their god will respond to their whims.

But, nope. We get the same lazy, nonsense system that we've always had. Coming up with something fresh and explainable would have taken time and involved actual game design. Why should WotC go through all that trouble when they know people will just buy the same game all over again?