In D&D 3rd edition, there were two classes of Mages that used spells: Magic Users had to prepare their spells in advance, and Sorcerers had a more limited selection, but could cast any spell they had available of that level.

In general, the "Memorize your spells" part of D&D was something I never really liked. I always played the Magic User, and tended to have almost entirely combat spells, and a very small variety of those, because of the problems already mentioned.

There is the possibility of two classes of spells, one that is fast casting and one that has to be prepped before use.

What solution so far sounds most fun to you guys?

Im leaning toward spells that can be cast and the 'saved' to a gem that could be discharged later, but also allow the spells to be cast in the fight with the timer mechanism I mentioned earlier. A few big spells that have a long timer might not specificly force the player to prep them, but still encourage it.

Quote:

Im leaning toward spells that can be cast and the 'saved' to a gem that could be discharged later, but also allow the spells to be cast in the fight with the timer mechanism I mentioned earlier. A few big spells that have a long timer might not specificly force the player to prep them, but still encourage it.

For my part, I think this is the right track.
The two concepts we're trying to balance here are foreknowledge and strategy vs. reaction and improvisation. An action game will be mostly the latter, and D&D spellcasting as described earlier is mostly the former. For my pet game design, I want both of these, and have been thinking hard about how best to approach it, and the conclusion I've reached so far is tiered preparation.

My design is really more about equipment rather than magic, but I think it will apply as well. Let's say you have 3 types of items from which spells can be cast.

- Rings on your fingers
- Wands on your belt
- Scrolls in your pack

Rings are for things you know you will absolutely need, and hold a few charges of a spell ready for use at the flick of a wrist. Wands might have more charges, but each use is slower than it would be from a ring, plus you have to grab it from your belt which might take a couple seconds. Scrolls can be used as many times as you want, but a full scroll reading takes the longest of any casting, and since they're in your pack, they're utterly inaccessible in the thick of combat.

Using the D&D example again, things like cure light wounds and magic missile are bread-and-butter spells and will almost certainly be cast, and cast often. These spells have good utility and are prime candidates for rings. More varied spells like elemental attacks or defense penetrating debuffs would be in wands, as they might not apply to every creature. Exotic spells like something to unlock a chest or see through walls would be in your pack for when the occasional use presents itself.

I think this approach creates a good balance between allowing you to make the most of any information you might have ahead of time about your quest, and allowing for visceral combat once you're in the thick of it. If you're treking into a volcano lair, you'll probably want some ice attacks and fire protections in your rings. If the rogue who sold you the information about the lair was lying though, you'll want some fire attacks and ice protections in your wands. This avoids the utterly irritating circumstance of the battle being lost before you even fight it. After an unexpected encounter with some ice golems, you could fall back and transfer some of the fire spells in your wands into your rings, and pull out a scroll of elemental detection to see what's up ahead.

Basically, I'm doing both.

My current design has two main types of magic; Wizardry and Sorcery (Pisonics is in as well, but it works the same as Sorcerers).

Wizards have to memorize their spells, but once memorized they can cast them as long as they have the strength to. The longer they keep them memorized, the better they become at casting them. Wizards' spells are generally single-function, though some may have secondary functions (cold spells can freeze bodies of water or fountains, etc...). Spells scale with the Wizard in a couple of ways, the individual Wizardry skill grants bonuses, as does extended use of a single spell. Finally, higher levels of skill can invest more stamina into a single spell, amplifying it's effects.

Sorcerers have a few set powers, that are generally more versatile than wizardry spells. They can use these few powers as long as they have the stamina to. Something like Ignite can melt weapons and armor, destroy flammable obstacles like doors or wooden walls (or buildings), or act as a torch light in addition to just incinerating enemies. Like the Wizard, the effects can be amplified with more strength at greater levels of skill, and higher levels of skill also add a direct bonus when applicable.

Of course, this means there is little incentive to change a Wizard's selection save very early on, unless I limit the number of spell they can memorize to the point of uselessness. Wizards are more useful for the healing and utility spells they have, but I have to make sure the rest of the design supports using them as such. Otherwise the Sorcerer will be the class of choice.

Each type has specific influences that drove the design. For the Wizard, it was Raistlin Majere. He could hardly cast spells due to his poor endurance (in the books). It's also influenced by Gandalf in LotR. Most RPG designs have wizards as pathetic weaklings. Gandalf handled physical combat just as well as any Dwarf.

The sorcerer is influenced by Dr Strange. He can toss out eldritch bolts and shields with ease.

Making two types of spells is just silly.
If you don't need to prepare some spells beforehand, just set the preparation time to 0.

my system wouldn't have two different types of spells. It would have a set of spells that can be cast and have a timer system for casting them, and an optional storage system such that you can cast a spell into a gem to store it and release it later without going through the casting timer again. Or you can cast it without storing it and release it at a target.

Yes I understood that.
If you read up on the topic, it's what I've been suggesting since the beginning.

My mistake, I forget who says what sometimes and didn't remember that was your post before.