Controversial opinions

[Anon]

Literally argued about this before with Runats because I said something similar to what I said here. Russians just hate Pashinyan because, in their minds, Armenia would be more pro-russian if not for him.

Well, russians are a very diverse group of people. There are these more aligned to Turkey, these more aligned to jews, these who don't like either of them, and more.

I think putting the blame on Pashinyan is childish because russian moves towards deepening an alliance with Azerbaijan and Turkey were done independently of Pashinyan, and it's obvious that Russia is leaning more towards the turks as they have interests in their huge oil market while Armenia is a poor country that has nothing of substance to offer, that's mostly supported by countries that have historic rivalry with turkmen, eg India and Iran.

I don't really buy that they are moving towards turkey thanks to its deals with ukraine and staunch nato membership but that's a whole other topic. I do know that Pashinyan was educated via the west, worked at western NGOs (aka the worst people you can imagine), that he cucked on Artsahk, and that he is a liberal fag, and that's plenty for me to hate him and deduce his leadership will be a net negative for the region.

Geopolitics are way more intricate and complicated than it seems superficially. Plenty of jews also support Ukraine but they still have immense power over Russia. There are also plenty of turkish billionaires working closely with Russia and sewing alliances between them.

In one aspect there is Turkey in NATO, but in the other there are a lot of common interests between turkish and russian oligopolies.

Agreed that Pashinyan is a huge POS, but he's nothing more than a scapegoat for russian's deeper interests.

[Anon]

I'll also add that I don't want Armenia to be wiped out and assimilated by Turks. The loss of a long and established culture is still a loss even if they aren't my own kind, but idk why that means I have to deny reality to own le turkroaches over pogroms that happened 100 years ago

It wasn't only pogroms, but a true genocide. Plus their ethnic cleansing project is still ongoing, considering Azerbaijan recent 2020 offensive, taking of Nagorno Karabakh, and ongoing plans to take more armenian territory.

The big issue for turkmen is that Armenia is the country effectively separating Turkey from the Azerbaijan-Turkmenistan-Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan-Kyrgyzstan axis, effectively deterring the forming of a huge continuous turkish empire. With Armenia gone that objective would be possible, and that's why Azerbaijan and Turkey want Armenia gone so badly.

That would also be bad for Russia but they're betting that they can be buddies with Turkey and it would all end well and favourable for them. I have my doubts but anyway.

And that's also why China and Iran support Armenia, because these countries have turkish populations that would cause huge problems if such an empire would be formed.

refer to the original comment that started the chain (which wasn't made by me btw). Not sure why I have to recognize this one but not any others. It certainly won't help Armenia either way. The Turks smell blood in their weakness, and if they don't start making deals with Iran, it's over regardless.

The other guy was trolling, you were the one who started taking shit seriously (and you're the first one who specifically mentioned the armenian genocide, so?)

And I'll agree with you there, it's most likely over for Armenia, I don't see a bright future for them. They should've been like North Korea and made an ultramilitarized enclave, that's the only way you survive in such conditions.

I mentioned that India, China and Iran support Armenia but I highly doubt any of them are risking their own skin for that.

[Nammu Archag]

It wasn't only pogroms, but a true genocide. Plus their ethnic cleansing project is still ongoing, considering Azerbaijan recent 2020 offensive, taking of Nagorno Karabakh, and ongoing plans to take more armenian territory.

The big issue for turkmen is that Armenia is the country effectively separating Turkey from the Azerbaijan-Turkmenistan-Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan-Kyrgyzstan axis, effectively deterring the forming of a huge continuous turkish empire. With Armenia gone that objective would be possible, and that's why Azerbaijan and Turkey want Armenia gone so badly.

That would also be bad for Russia but they're betting that they can be buddies with Turkey and it would all end well and favourable for them. I have my doubts but anyway.

And that's also why China and Iran support Armenia, because these countries have turkish populations that would cause huge problems if such an empire would be formed.

refer to the original comment that started the chain (which wasn't made by me btw). Not sure why I have to recognize this one but not any others. It certainly won't help Armenia either way. The Turks smell blood in their weakness, and if they don't start making deals with Iran, it's over regardless.

The other guy was trolling, you were the one who started taking shit seriously (and you're the first one who specifically mentioned the armenian genocide, so?)

And I'll agree with you there, it's most likely over for Armenia, I don't see a bright future for them. They should've been like North Korea and made an ultramilitarized enclave, that's the only way you survive in such conditions.

I mentioned that India, China and Iran support Armenia but I highly doubt any of them are risking their own skin for that.

He wasn't trolling, at least not entirely but okay. Ask him if you want. The topic is that genocide is a bogus term, which I still stand by.

The majority of the Armenian population lives outside of Armenia. It was over from the start, though that's what happens when you become a happy merchant/striver people. Iran offered military support during the last crisis and Pashinyan declined. China is quite far away and probably lacks the will like you said. And don't make me laugh with India lol.

[Emphyrio]

The other guy was trolling, you were the one who started taking shit seriously (and you're the first one who specifically mentioned the armenian genocide, so?)

lol we got a "genocide" believer here

[Oldtimer]

BG1 and 2 are the only rpgs that get wizards right, because those guys are behind a million protections to render themselves unassailable by martialcels. You need a wizardchad of your own to peel back those protections. I don't think any other game/system has wizard duels of that caliber.




-Humbaba

Well, yes and no: Sure, high-level wizards always have lie a Chobham level of protection, and you really need a wizard of your own, so that I agree with. I am not a fan of the 2E magic system though where you have to memorize spells and fire them off as one-shot spells, that never sat right with me and didn't make sense. A better system would be mana/equivalent, where you can cast spells until the mana has run out and slowly replenishes itself - so today the lowlevel wizard can cast ten Magic Missile, tomorrow it will be two Shield, one Magic Missile and one Protection from Evil for example.

Sorcerers are kinda like that but not exactly.

I appreciate DnD system because it makes low lvl spells have uses even very late in the game. Mana system would mean you only use your high level shit, replenish your mana when you can't anymore, then repeat. DnD system makes spells be like cards in your hand where you have to consider each of them.

Not really - if mana is tied to the level of the spell, you'd soon run out, and since it takes time to replenish, you'd have to conserve mana to be able to cast the top tier stuff for top-tier situations. Sorcerers are a middle ground, but they are tied down by the slower progression and smaller range of spells they can take. I do like them however, since they are more iconic than the cliché 'old man with a beard and a color to his name.'

[Anon]

Well, yes and no: Sure, high-level wizards always have lie a Chobham level of protection, and you really need a wizard of your own, so that I agree with. I am not a fan of the 2E magic system though where you have to memorize spells and fire them off as one-shot spells, that never sat right with me and didn't make sense. A better system would be mana/equivalent, where you can cast spells until the mana has run out and slowly replenishes itself - so today the lowlevel wizard can cast ten Magic Missile, tomorrow it will be two Shield, one Magic Missile and one Protection from Evil for example.

Sorcerers are kinda like that but not exactly.

I appreciate DnD system because it makes low lvl spells have uses even very late in the game. Mana system would mean you only use your high level shit, replenish your mana when you can't anymore, then repeat. DnD system makes spells be like cards in your hand where you have to consider each of them.

Not really - if mana is tied to the level of the spell, you'd soon run out, and since it takes time to replenish, you'd have to conserve mana to be able to cast the top tier stuff for top-tier situations. Sorcerers are a middle ground, but they are tied down by the slower progression and smaller range of spells they can take. I do like them however, since they are more iconic than the cliché 'old man with a beard and a color to his name.'

I've never seen a game where your only way to replenish mana is by waiting, there's always a way to replenish it artificially and immediately.

[BobT]

Sorcerers are kinda like that but not exactly.

I appreciate DnD system because it makes low lvl spells have uses even very late in the game. Mana system would mean you only use your high level shit, replenish your mana when you can't anymore, then repeat. DnD system makes spells be like cards in your hand where you have to consider each of them.

Not really - if mana is tied to the level of the spell, you'd soon run out, and since it takes time to replenish, you'd have to conserve mana to be able to cast the top tier stuff for top-tier situations. Sorcerers are a middle ground, but they are tied down by the slower progression and smaller range of spells they can take. I do like them however, since they are more iconic than the cliché 'old man with a beard and a color to his name.'

I've never seen a game where your only way to replenish mana is by waiting, there's always a way to replenish it artificially and immediately.

Not always in battle tho.
WoW had a mana gem and evocation, but the former was single use (especially when they stopped you using lower level ones) and the latter was on a decently long cooldown.
Granted it was 'a' way though. But then you'd just have to manage your usage, once both used. Using cheaper spells until recharged a bit. (I hate how they removed the ability to use lower-level spells, it was cool just using cheaper variants when low on mana, or slinging off a low damage but quick frostbolt when you needed a quick slow on a warrior, to buy more time for a bigger one. Fuck "dumbing down for wider audiences").

I do dislike the "can only use x fireballs, y stinking clouds" etc. in D&D. Feels unnatural that a well-versed mage would only be able to use a SET number of each spell. Sorcerer feels more apt where they can use a number of spells of each tier, but it's their choice on WHAT to use. I'd also be ok with each spell being assigned a number (mana), so say you get 10 mana points (variable) for a tier, fireball is 3, stinking cloud is 2, missiles is 1 (pretend they're all on the same tier as I cba), it's then up to you whether you use 3 fireballs & 1 missile, or 2 fireballs, 4 missiles, or 2 fireballs, 1 stinking cloud, 1 missile etc.

Totally ok with "memorising" as in "choose which spell to equip" for a time, but not then "can only cast a set amount of each spell" too.
"How many" to equip makes more sense for physical weapons, not fucking magic.

[Anon]

Not really - if mana is tied to the level of the spell, you'd soon run out, and since it takes time to replenish, you'd have to conserve mana to be able to cast the top tier stuff for top-tier situations. Sorcerers are a middle ground, but they are tied down by the slower progression and smaller range of spells they can take. I do like them however, since they are more iconic than the cliché 'old man with a beard and a color to his name.'

I've never seen a game where your only way to replenish mana is by waiting, there's always a way to replenish it artificially and immediately.

Not always in battle tho.
WoW had a mana gem and evocation, but the former was single use (especially when they stopped you using lower level ones) and the latter was on a decently long cooldown.
Granted it was 'a' way though. But then you'd just have to manage your usage, once both used. Using cheaper spells until recharged a bit. (I hate how they removed the ability to use lower-level spells, it was cool just using cheaper variants when low on mana, or slinging off a low damage but quick frostbolt when you needed a quick slow on a warrior, to buy more time for a bigger one. Fuck "dumbing down for wider audiences").

I do dislike the "can only use x fireballs, y stinking clouds" etc. in D&D. Feels unnatural that a well-versed mage would only be able to use a SET number of each spell. Sorcerer feels more apt where they can use a number of spells of each tier, but it's their choice on WHAT to use. I'd also be ok with each spell being assigned a number (mana), so say you get 10 mana points (variable) for a tier, fireball is 3, stinking cloud is 2, missiles is 1 (pretend they're all on the same tier as I cba), it's then up to you whether you use 3 fireballs & 1 missile, or 2 fireballs, 4 missiles, or 2 fireballs, 1 stinking cloud, 1 missile etc.

Totally ok with "memorising" as in "choose which spell to equip" for a time, but not then "can only cast a set amount of each spell" too.
"How many" to equip makes more sense for physical weapons, not fucking magic.

Well so you admit wow mana system ultimately also encourages spamming the highest level spells instead of using more mana-effective ones. It's always the natural destiny of a mana system, there's no helping it.

Btw 5e is more like the way you're suggesting, you can freely prepare your spells outside combat, only being really limited by spell slots.

[BobT]

I've never seen a game where your only way to replenish mana is by waiting, there's always a way to replenish it artificially and immediately.

Not always in battle tho.
WoW had a mana gem and evocation, but the former was single use (especially when they stopped you using lower level ones) and the latter was on a decently long cooldown.
Granted it was 'a' way though. But then you'd just have to manage your usage, once both used. Using cheaper spells until recharged a bit. (I hate how they removed the ability to use lower-level spells, it was cool just using cheaper variants when low on mana, or slinging off a low damage but quick frostbolt when you needed a quick slow on a warrior, to buy more time for a bigger one. Fuck "dumbing down for wider audiences").

I do dislike the "can only use x fireballs, y stinking clouds" etc. in D&D. Feels unnatural that a well-versed mage would only be able to use a SET number of each spell. Sorcerer feels more apt where they can use a number of spells of each tier, but it's their choice on WHAT to use. I'd also be ok with each spell being assigned a number (mana), so say you get 10 mana points (variable) for a tier, fireball is 3, stinking cloud is 2, missiles is 1 (pretend they're all on the same tier as I cba), it's then up to you whether you use 3 fireballs & 1 missile, or 2 fireballs, 4 missiles, or 2 fireballs, 1 stinking cloud, 1 missile etc.

Totally ok with "memorising" as in "choose which spell to equip" for a time, but not then "can only cast a set amount of each spell" too.
"How many" to equip makes more sense for physical weapons, not fucking magic.

Well so you admit wow mana system ultimately also encourages spamming the highest level spells instead of using more mana-effective ones. It's always the natural destiny of a mana system, there's no helping it.

Btw 5e is more like the way you're suggesting, you can freely prepare your spells outside combat, only being really limited by spell slots.

Well no you start with the biggest spells while you have the most resources, then tone it down to mid then low level spells as those resources dwindle, and depending on what you need to cast.
Mid-low mana and enemy almost dead? May as well finish them with one big spell, as you can recover resources after the battle.
But mid-low mana and the fight would still be ongoing? Better conserve those resources by using multiple versatile low-mid level spells.

I always play mages in games, and one of the points for me is having a wide arsenal of versatile spells that I can choose from, all depending on the situation at hand and the resources I have to cast them. There should be no "ammo" for individual spells, only my own innate resource that I should have to manage that allows me to cast 'something'.


5e did improve on it more yeah. Gets a bit weird with the split between Wizard & Sorcerer at that point, where they were very different in 3rd(?). I've not much exposure to D&D besides the Baldur's gate series, though.
Comparitively, I always hated the "Draw" system in FF8 for the same reasons, even though it wasn't that much of a problem. Consumable magic just doesn't do it for me.

[Acrux]

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

[rusty_shackleford]

I do dislike the "can only use x fireballs, y stinking clouds" etc. in D&D. Feels unnatural that a well-versed mage would only be able to use a SET number of each spell. Sorcerer feels more apt where they can use a number of spells of each tier, but it's their choice on WHAT to use. I'd also be ok with each spell being assigned a number (mana), so say you get 10 mana points (variable) for a tier, fireball is 3, stinking cloud is 2, missiles is 1 (pretend they're all on the same tier as I cba), it's then up to you whether you use 3 fireballs & 1 missile, or 2 fireballs, 4 missiles, or 2 fireballs, 1 stinking cloud, 1 missile etc.

But it has an actual explanation given. They memorize how to cast the spell, and the nature of magic in D&D is that casting a spell causes you to forget how to cast it so it must be memorized again.

I don't think I've ever seen a good one for mana pools.

[BobT]

I do dislike the "can only use x fireballs, y stinking clouds" etc. in D&D. Feels unnatural that a well-versed mage would only be able to use a SET number of each spell. Sorcerer feels more apt where they can use a number of spells of each tier, but it's their choice on WHAT to use. I'd also be ok with each spell being assigned a number (mana), so say you get 10 mana points (variable) for a tier, fireball is 3, stinking cloud is 2, missiles is 1 (pretend they're all on the same tier as I cba), it's then up to you whether you use 3 fireballs & 1 missile, or 2 fireballs, 4 missiles, or 2 fireballs, 1 stinking cloud, 1 missile etc.

But it has an actual explanation given. They memorize how to cast the spell, and the nature of magic in D&D is that casting a spell causes you to forget how to cast it so it must be memorized again.

I don't think I've ever seen a good one for mana pools.

Which is a bit weird really. Why would you "forget" how to cast it only after SPECIFICALLY 5 times or whatever?
I totally get only being able to keep so many spells in your head at once (choosing a selection of spells for the fight), but not "running out" of them individually.
Surely casting something repeatedly would make you REMEMBER it instead? After the third fireball you'd be doing it from muscle memory, not then suddenly develop Alzheimer's and forget it existed after the 5th or whatever lol.

I know they've got some bullshit "arcane" reason for that, and this isn't meant to be based on reality, but it doesn't make sense.

[Acrux]

I feel like the origins of why Gygax chose Vancian magic is lost to a lot of newer players. It goes to what @WhiteShark was saying about the need for things like the passage of time in games: it was a magic system that was quick and not too complex to take place during a fight, but also made the player think about stratgic decisions for using a spell.

The magic system used by the original Dungeons & Dragons (1974) drew inspiration from the Dying Earth novels by Jack Vance, for whom the Vancian magic system is named. In those books, wizards need to memorize a spell to use it, which wipes itself from the caster's mind after it was cast.

The origins of D&D's magic system are described in issue 6 of The Strategic Review, The Dungeons & Dragons Magic System, by Gary Gygax. The term "Vancian" was used in that article. Gygax decided to emulate Vance's magic system as he felt its versatile and short spoken spells were best suited to the realities of dungeon adventuring. Other magic systems in fiction were often too complex or time-consuming to take place during a melee battle, too powerful relative to the abilities of D&D's other character classes, or too weak.

In 2007, Gygax wrote:

"The "memorize then fire and forget" principal for casting spells Jack Vance assumed in his fantasy stories seemed perfect to me for use by D&D magic-users. It required forethought by the player and limited the power of the class all at once. I still like the concept even though I have gone to a manical energy point system in the Lejendary Adventure RPG."

Jeff Goad, writing for Goodman Games, specifically attributes Gygax's inspiration as the short story Turjan of Miir, which originally appeared as the first entry in his 1950 short story collection The Dying Earth. In this first story, the wizard Turjan must study spell books to memorize spells:

These were volumes compiled by many wizards of the past, untidy folios collected by the Sage, leather-bound librams setting forth the syllables of a hundred powerful spells, so cogent that Turjan's brain could know but four at a time.

In the second story, Mazirian the Magician, it is clarified that each spell can be cast only once before being forgotten or used up:

For all Mazirian's magic he was helpless. The mesmeric spell had been expended, and he had none other in his brain. In any event he could not have uttered the space-twisting syllables with that mindless clutch at his throat.

[Anon]

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

I prefer DnD system because it forces you to use your brain to select which spells are better for X situation. Mana system even with all these convolutions will still be "cast these meta spells until thing is dead, repeat".

[Nammu Archag]

Sorcerers are kinda like that but not exactly.

I appreciate DnD system because it makes low lvl spells have uses even very late in the game. Mana system would mean you only use your high level shit, replenish your mana when you can't anymore, then repeat. DnD system makes spells be like cards in your hand where you have to consider each of them.

Not really - if mana is tied to the level of the spell, you'd soon run out, and since it takes time to replenish, you'd have to conserve mana to be able to cast the top tier stuff for top-tier situations. Sorcerers are a middle ground, but they are tied down by the slower progression and smaller range of spells they can take. I do like them however, since they are more iconic than the cliché 'old man with a beard and a color to his name.'

I've never seen a game where your only way to replenish mana is by waiting, there's always a way to replenish it artificially and immediately.

Mana potions and their consequences were a disaster for mage gameplay

[rusty_shackleford]

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

It's magic, come up with a magical solution. I have no idea why game designers insist upon making game mechanics without a narrative attached to them.

"Each spell borrows the power of a separate djinn for a brief moment. The link works both ways, and the magician must be careful not to repeatedly invoke the same djinn without sufficient time to recuperate. If a djinn is summoned too frequently, its malevolent nature grows stronger with each call, exploiting the weakening barriers of the magician's will. Without adequate recovery time, the magician's defenses become compromised, making it increasingly difficult to control or resist the djinn's sinister influence. This escalating vulnerability manifests as exponentially increasing costs for the magician, risking their control over the spell and potentially their own mind to the djinn's dominion"

Wow, that was hard.

[Anon]

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

It's magic, come up with a magical solution. I have no idea why game designers insist upon making game mechanics without a narrative attached to them.

"Each spell borrows the power of a separate djinn for a brief moment. The link works both ways, and the magician must be careful not to repeatedly invoke the same djinn without sufficient time to recuperate. If a djinn is summoned too frequently, its malevolent nature grows stronger with each call, exploiting the weakening barriers of the magician's will. Without adequate recovery time, the magician's defenses become compromised, making it increasingly difficult to control or resist the djinn's sinister influence. This escalating vulnerability manifests as exponentially increasing costs for the magician, risking their control over the spell and potentially their own mind to the djinn's dominion"

Wow, that was hard.

And all that will translate into "you've casted your spell twice, it'll be more expensive now" and nothing more?

I mean, fantasy is a important, but too much fanciful and convoluted explanations for simple things is counterproductive.

(I get it was only an example)

[rusty_shackleford]

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

It's magic, come up with a magical solution. I have no idea why game designers insist upon making game mechanics without a narrative attached to them.

"Each spell borrows the power of a separate djinn for a brief moment. The link works both ways, and the magician must be careful not to repeatedly invoke the same djinn without sufficient time to recuperate. If a djinn is summoned too frequently, its malevolent nature grows stronger with each call, exploiting the weakening barriers of the magician's will. Without adequate recovery time, the magician's defenses become compromised, making it increasingly difficult to control or resist the djinn's sinister influence. This escalating vulnerability manifests as exponentially increasing costs for the magician, risking their control over the spell and potentially their own mind to the djinn's dominion"

Wow, that was hard.

And all that will translate into "you've casted your spell twice, it'll be more expensive now" and nothing more?

I mean, fantasy is a important, but too much fanciful and convoluted explanations for simple things is counterproductive.

(I get it was only an example)

Yes, game mechanics should be tied to the narrative.

[Anon]

It's magic, come up with a magical solution. I have no idea why game designers insist upon making game mechanics without a narrative attached to them.

"Each spell borrows the power of a separate djinn for a brief moment. The link works both ways, and the magician must be careful not to repeatedly invoke the same djinn without sufficient time to recuperate. If a djinn is summoned too frequently, its malevolent nature grows stronger with each call, exploiting the weakening barriers of the magician's will. Without adequate recovery time, the magician's defenses become compromised, making it increasingly difficult to control or resist the djinn's sinister influence. This escalating vulnerability manifests as exponentially increasing costs for the magician, risking their control over the spell and potentially their own mind to the djinn's dominion"

Wow, that was hard.

And all that will translate into "you've casted your spell twice, it'll be more expensive now" and nothing more?

I mean, fantasy is a important, but too much fanciful and convoluted explanations for simple things is counterproductive.

(I get it was only an example)

Yes, game mechanics should be tied to the narrative.

Fair enough

[OnTilt]

But it has an actual explanation given. They memorize how to cast the spell, and the nature of magic in D&D is that casting a spell causes you to forget how to cast it so it must be memorized again.

I saw a better explanation for the same system somewhere. The implication was that casting a spell takes a long time, and most of the casting was done as part of the preparation, leaving only the final "trigger" portion of the spell to be completed later. Your limit to the number of spells you can prepare was restricted by how many spells you can hold in suspense in this way.

[BobT]

I feel like the origins of why Gygax chose Vancian magic is lost to a lot of newer players. It goes to what @WhiteShark was saying about the need for things like the passage of time in games: it was a magic system that was quick and not too complex to take place during a fight, but also made the player think about stratgic decisions for using a spell.

The magic system used by the original Dungeons & Dragons (1974) drew inspiration from the Dying Earth novels by Jack Vance, for whom the Vancian magic system is named. In those books, wizards need to memorize a spell to use it, which wipes itself from the caster's mind after it was cast.

The origins of D&D's magic system are described in issue 6 of The Strategic Review, The Dungeons & Dragons Magic System, by Gary Gygax. The term "Vancian" was used in that article. Gygax decided to emulate Vance's magic system as he felt its versatile and short spoken spells were best suited to the realities of dungeon adventuring. Other magic systems in fiction were often too complex or time-consuming to take place during a melee battle, too powerful relative to the abilities of D&D's other character classes, or too weak.

In 2007, Gygax wrote:

"The "memorize then fire and forget" principal for casting spells Jack Vance assumed in his fantasy stories seemed perfect to me for use by D&D magic-users. It required forethought by the player and limited the power of the class all at once. I still like the concept even though I have gone to a manical energy point system in the Lejendary Adventure RPG."

Jeff Goad, writing for Goodman Games, specifically attributes Gygax's inspiration as the short story Turjan of Miir, which originally appeared as the first entry in his 1950 short story collection The Dying Earth. In this first story, the wizard Turjan must study spell books to memorize spells:

These were volumes compiled by many wizards of the past, untidy folios collected by the Sage, leather-bound librams setting forth the syllables of a hundred powerful spells, so cogent that Turjan's brain could know but four at a time.

In the second story, Mazirian the Magician, it is clarified that each spell can be cast only once before being forgotten or used up:

For all Mazirian's magic he was helpless. The mesmeric spell had been expended, and he had none other in his brain. In any event he could not have uttered the space-twisting syllables with that mindless clutch at his throat.

Interesting. So the bullshit "magically wipes itself from your mind" on cast was a power limiting thing then. Because otherwise those 50 IQ warriors swinging tree trunks around and buttfucking rogues would get dunked on by the true power with superior intellect.

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

I prefer DnD system because it forces you to use your brain to select which spells are better for X situation. Mana system even with all these convolutions will still be "cast these meta spells until thing is dead, repeat".

I'd prefer increasing spell cost (and a cooldown for it to reset) over a complete global (or spell) cooldown though tbh. That way you're always casting rather than sat with your thumb up your ass, and it's your choice whether to risk the high-cost because you need it, or switch and use something else.

A wide array of spells with varying effects and cost, and enough pressure & weaknesses on the mage, will always result in you using "what's best in the moment" anyway. That's why I like playing mages.

[BobT]

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

It's magic, come up with a magical solution. I have no idea why game designers insist upon making game mechanics without a narrative attached to them.

"Each spell borrows the power of a separate djinn for a brief moment. The link works both ways, and the magician must be careful not to repeatedly invoke the same djinn without sufficient time to recuperate. If a djinn is summoned too frequently, its malevolent nature grows stronger with each call, exploiting the weakening barriers of the magician's will. Without adequate recovery time, the magician's defenses become compromised, making it increasingly difficult to control or resist the djinn's sinister influence. This escalating vulnerability manifests as exponentially increasing costs for the magician, risking their control over the spell and potentially their own mind to the djinn's dominion"

Wow, that was hard.

That specific implementation sounds a little warlocky, but in-universe rulesets are indeed superior. That's one reason I liked Mass Effect 1, they really tried to give an in-universe explanation for everything that might have been bullshit in reality, but sounded plausible enough within the story.

But it has an actual explanation given. They memorize how to cast the spell, and the nature of magic in D&D is that casting a spell causes you to forget how to cast it so it must be memorized again.

I saw a better explanation for the same system somewhere. The implication was that casting a spell takes a long time, and most of the casting was done as part of the preparation, leaving only the final "trigger" portion of the spell to be completed later. Your limit to the number of spells you can prepare was restricted by how many spells you can hold in suspense in this way.

Ehh that does't make as much sense though when "spell trigger" and Sequencers are literally a thing?
The magical Alzheimers for power limiting reasons makes a little more sense than that conflict.

[OnTilt]

Ehh that does't make as much sense though when "spell trigger" and Sequencers are literally a thing?

I don't even know what those are. Also, I have no idea where I read that, probably would make more sense in its proper context. I just think that it makes more sense than magical Alzheimer's to explain the core rule of "you must choose how many magical missiles to prepare".

[BobT]

Ehh that does't make as much sense though when "spell trigger" and Sequencers are literally a thing?

I don't even know what those are. Also, I have no idea where I read that, probably would make more sense in its proper context. I just think that it makes more sense than magical Alzheimer's to explain the core rule of "you must choose how many magical missiles to prepare".

These. It's literally pre-prepping & storing specific spells, so they can just be "fired off" at will and simultaneously:
https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Minor_Sequencer
https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Spell_Sequencer
https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Spell_Trigger

Then you've also got contingencies (where they're stored & cast automatically when a condition is met):
https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Contingency
https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Chain_Contingency

Either way I think LIMITED magic is good, but I haaaaate "consumable" magic, as that's just not what magic is. They just forced it to be that way in certain contexts for power limiting, because Mages are clearly superior otherwise.

[Emphyrio]

Vance dropped vancian casting in Cugel's Saga, and in Rhialto the Marvelous he replaced it with this, which is more more consistent with mythological and folk tale magic:

► Show Spoiler

Magic is a practical science, or, more properly, a craft, since emphasis is placed primarily upon utility, rather than basic understanding.

This is only a general statement, since in a field of such profound scope, every practitioner will have his individual, style, and during the glorious times of Grand Motholam, many of the magician-philosophers tried to grasp the principles which governed the field.

In the end, these investigators, who included the greatest names in sorcery, learned only enough to realize that full and comprehensive knowledge was impossible. In the first place, a desired effect might be achieved through any number of modes, any of which represented a life-time of study, each deriving its force from a different coercive environment.

The great magicians of Grand Motholam were sufficiently supple that they perceived the limits of human understanding, and spent most of their efforts dealing with practical problems, searching for abstract principles only when all else failed. For this reason, magic retains its distinctly human flavor, even though the activating agents are never human. A casual glance into one of the basic catalogues emphasizes this human orientation; the nomenclature has a quaint and archaic flavor. Looking into (for instance) Chapter Four of Killiclaw's Primer of Practical Magic, Interpersonal Effectuations, one notices, indited in bright purple ink, such terminology as:
Xarfaggio's Physical Malepsy
Arnhoult's Sequestrious Digitalia
Lutar Brassnose's Twelve-fold Bounty
The Spell of Forlorn Encystment
Tinkler's Old-fashioned Froust
Clambard's Rein of Long Nerves
The Green and Purple Postponement of Joy
Panguire's Triumphs of Discomfort
Lugwiler's Dismal Itch
Khulip's Nasal Enhancement
Radl's Pervasion of the Incorrect Chord

A spell in essence corresponds to a code, or set of instructions, inserted into the sensorium of an entity which is able and not unwilling to alter the environment in accordance with the message conveyed by the spell. These entities are not necessarily 'intelligent,' nor even 'sentient,' and their conduct, from the tyro's point of view, is unpredictable, capricious and dangerous.

The most pliable and cooperative of these creatures range from the lowly and frail elementals, through the sandestins. More fractious entities are known by the Temuchin as 'daihak,' which include 'demons' and 'gods.' A magician's power derives from the abilities of the entities he is able to control. Every magician of consequence employs one or more sandestins. A few arch-magicians of Grand Moth-olam dared to employ the force of the lesser daihaks. To recite or even to list the names of these magicians is to evoke wonder and awe. Their names tingle with power. Some of Grand Motholam's most notable and dramatic were:
Phandaal the Great
Amberlin I
Amberlin II
Dibarcas Maior (who studied under Phandaal)
Arch-Mage Mael Lei Laio (he lived in a palace carved from
a single moon-stone) The Vapurials
The Green and Purple College Zinqzin the Encyclopaedist Kyrol of Porphyrhyncos Calanctus the Calm Llorio the Sorceress
The magicians of the 21st Aeon were, in comparison, a disparate and uncertain group, lacking both grandeur and consistency.

I speculate that given Vance's sense of humor, the vancian casting system was meant to be both a joke and a storytelling device, but it failed as a joke and it ran out its usefulness as a plot contrivance.

[Kalarion]

Ehh that does't make as much sense though when "spell trigger" and Sequencers are literally a thing?

I don't even know what those are. Also, I have no idea where I read that, probably would make more sense in its proper context. I just think that it makes more sense than magical Alzheimer's to explain the core rule of "you must choose how many magical missiles to prepare".

Most likely Dragonlance. It's a description of Raistlin memorizing spells found in one or the other of the series he's involved in.

[WhiteShark]

That's also basically how it worked in The Chronicles of Amber. The magician would work a spell to near completion and 'hang' it for future use; all it took to activate was for the caster to finish whatever bit was left undone.

[Red7]

There are mana pool/spell point systems that increase the cost of casting the same spell (or sometimes same spell tier) repeatedly. That does help curb the tendency to just go for the highest level until you run out.

That feels too arbitrary for my taste. Repetition should make things easier, not harder.

It's magic, come up with a magical solution. I have no idea why game designers insist upon making game mechanics without a narrative attached to them.

"Each spell borrows the power of a separate djinn for a brief moment. The link works both ways, and the magician must be careful not to repeatedly invoke the same djinn without sufficient time to recuperate. If a djinn is summoned too frequently, its malevolent nature grows stronger with each call, exploiting the weakening barriers of the magician's will. Without adequate recovery time, the magician's defenses become compromised, making it increasingly difficult to control or resist the djinn's sinister influence. This escalating vulnerability manifests as exponentially increasing costs for the magician, risking their control over the spell and potentially their own mind to the djinn's dominion"

Wow, that was hard.

djinn is arab term of alien craft.

[Red7]

Well, russians are a very diverse group of people. There are these more aligned to Turkey, these more aligned to jews, these who don't like either of them, and more.

I think putting the blame on Pashinyan is childish because russian moves towards deepening an alliance with Azerbaijan and Turkey were done independently of Pashinyan, and it's obvious that Russia is leaning more towards the turks as they have interests in their huge oil market while Armenia is a poor country that has nothing of substance to offer, that's mostly supported by countries that have historic rivalry with turkmen, eg India and Iran.

I don't really buy that they are moving towards turkey thanks to its deals with ukraine and staunch nato membership but that's a whole other topic. I do know that Pashinyan was educated via the west, worked at western NGOs (aka the worst people you can imagine), that he cucked on Artsahk, and that he is a liberal fag, and that's plenty for me to hate him and deduce his leadership will be a net negative for the region.

Geopolitics are way more intricate and complicated than it seems superficially. Plenty of jews also support Ukraine but they still have immense power over Russia. There are also plenty of turkish billionaires working closely with Russia and sewing alliances between them.

In one aspect there is Turkey in NATO, but in the other there are a lot of common interests between turkish and russian oligopolies.

Agreed that Pashinyan is a huge POS, but he's nothing more than a scapegoat for russian's deeper interests.

after jews did a little showcase with the earthquake relations with russia was chilled a bit. btw i have read turk gov admitted it was man made quake

fukushima was also jewish energy weapon inducing quake.

[Vergil]

Dane Cook was extremely funny and better than most comedians people circlejerk over.