8
\$\begingroup\$

I've got to admit, I'm somewhat confused by the option to keep Vancian-style spell slots for the Shaman and Tactician casting tracks. Most tracks in Legend either provide abilities that are at-will or once per encounter, and the exceptions outside the casting system tend to be once per [blank], where [blank] is also the duration of the ability.

Why, in a game supposedly not about attrition, does the limitation of spell slots still exist? Is it for balance purposes?

Note that I'm not questioning why a spellcaster can only learn a certain number of spells in their list: having a limited set of options makes sense within the Legend system. I'm just curious about why spellcasters have a resource system that diminishes over time when other classes and tracks don't.

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Vancian is a misnomer in this instance. Spellcasting in Legend is spontaneous, as a Sorcerer, not prepared, as a Wizard. Here's some more information. \$\endgroup\$
    – PD - whee - whim - wish
    Aug 30, 2013 at 16:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ Possibly because thats what the game designers wanted? Wouldnt this question be better addressed to the actual game designers rather than here? \$\endgroup\$
    – GrandmasterB
    Aug 30, 2013 at 16:15
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Metool The spell slots thing is still very Vancian, even if casting is spontaneous. In this case, I'm referring more to the fact that spell slots are a depletable resource that doesn't refresh often, something fairly uncommon in legend. GrandmasterB "Because that's what the game designers wanted" is not really an answer. I'm asking here because someone may have insights I don't into why the system is the way it is. Hey, if someone asked the game designers and presented their answer, that would also be excellent. \$\endgroup\$
    – user5834
    Aug 30, 2013 at 16:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
10
\$\begingroup\$

Like a few things in Legend, the answer is legacy. Legend is based on Dungeons and Dragons 3.5, despite the many massive changes that have been made, and some things exist for no other reason than to make 3.5 players comfortable. In this case, there was also a desire on the part of some portions of the Legend to show that Legend could handle traditional spellcasting well, despite its unusual advancement system.

Historically, there was a point when Legend did not have any spellcasting tracks; the original magical class was Sage, and other spellcasters were going to follow the same pattern: each circle would give some Spell-like Abilities, or a choice of Spell-like Abilities, which would be per-round, per-encounter, or per-scene as appropriate to their power and utility.

However, quite early on, before the 2010 alpha even, there were a lot of requests for a “proper” spellcasting track, complete with Vancian(-ish, in deference to the valid points made in the comments) mechanics. So the Shaman and Tactician spellcasting tracks were added in response to player demand.

This all took place very early in Legend’s lifetime. I first became involved in Legend several months prior to the November 2012 beta release, and the spellcasting tracks were well-established by that time; I heard this history from the original creative director, Jake Kurzer. The original May 2010 alpha did not have the Shaman and Tactician tracks, though it does refer to the fact that it is a “non-casting classes only” release, despite including the Sage, so even then there was acknowledgement that spellcasting would be inevitable.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.