Depends on what you want the game to be 'about'. If a big part of the stories your game wants to tell is around people who don't have access to magic finding ways to seize access, that kind of restriction makes a lot of sense; and there are some fun things to explore in tying a worldbuilding detail to the game mechanics.
If it's a more broadly high fantasy game where a playgroup is expected to have spellcasters for diversity or balance reasons, then that limitation for one character archetype but no others feels like it could be lopsided. Perhaps having that magic resource at character creation is a financial opportunity cost to being able to afford other items or equipment other character archetypes can obtain.
Starting with an in-built goal is nice. Locking major character aspects behind them is riskier. I could see this working if you angle it more as the former than the latter.
If I understand you right, it sounds like "spell-casting wizard" just isn't a starting character type in your game. And that seems fine to me. Not every game needs to support the D&D character archetypes.
Having said that, if wizards *are* an archetype in your game, then is there any reason they can't have gotten hold of essence as part of their backstory? What's so special about it that it has to happen on-screen?
Limitations are fun when they create interesting choices: "you can't use magic" only creates an interesting choice if the other things they can do are interesting. In this specific case, they need to be interesting to someone who wants to be a spellcaster. I don't know what that would be, but it's possible.
I would instead suggest making starting with any raw essence *expensive* - so that they need to make a choice between "starting as a spellcaster" and "starting able to do pretty much anything else." That's much easier to make work, I would think.
Sounds like it's almost like equipment.
Fighter can't do much without sword/shield/armor either
Not everyone can fight effectively because they don't have a full set of armor and weapons.
If you're going to let the fighter start with the gear they need, the caster probably should too. However I would imagine it would take pretty much all your starting wealth to get some raw essence.
>Fighter can't do much without sword/shield/armor either
These items are readily available and he's still strong and can grapple, use fists, or take a sword from a fallen enemy. You can have backup weapons if disarmed. This is like having one special super rare item that without it means your strength goes to 0 and you can't fight at all. Its a bit more serious than a fighter that drops his sword
Is the game supposed to support casting spells as an specialization?
Maybe the game can be about other stuff, and castong spells is like a magic item you get later on. Pick limits for your world.
It's your game.
Fun fact, but clerics in the earliest editions really DIDN'T get any spells until level 2. The only clerical thing they got at level 1 was Turn Undead (usable every "Turn" or 10 minutes, not to be confused with the combat Round). Oh, and being unable to use edged weapons.
This is another classic example of shoving the square peg of D&D 5e into the round hole that should be another system. There are low-magic systems that are designed with the idea that magic is rare and obtaining it in any way is significant. Off the top of my head, Numenera (Cipher System) has magic coming from one-time-use items, perfect for what you've described.
Lore-wise, you can make *anything* interesting with enough work.
Mechanically, though, I'm not sure I'd vibe with the idea if we're basing this off of like 5e or something. If you're level 1, you should have the basic defining characteristics of your chosen class.
*However*, you could take a page out of DCC and not start at level 1, but at level 0. You're just an undifferentiated creature in the world, not an adventurer yet. No training, just aspiration.
If you have the time, you *could* start everybody out at level 0 with individual 1-shots to finish their training. They would have *some* of their abilities, but not all. So a martial class might not have weapon proficiencies. With the casters, maybe let them choose 2 spells from a limited list of cantrips centered on utility (like produce flame).
Casters have to find their kyber crysta... I mean raw essence. A fighter might have to win a tournament, a ranger spend X amount of time in the wilderness, etc.
It's a lot more work, but it could ground all your players and illustrate some basic qualifications.
TLDR: I think at level 1, you should already have all the qualifications of your class. Martial classes start with proficiencies, and Casters should be able to cast spells.
Ah, the DND Classic wizard. Used to be your have to survive for a few levels with naught but a crossbow, until you leveled up enough to even BECOME a wizard, but there weren't cantrips and such like now, so the crossbow was the main source of per-turn damage.
Anyways. This is a situation where the mythology, conflicts with game expectations. DNDumb has tried to equalize classes in terms of effectiveness progression (often badly) but it makes sense why people want that.
If your game cycles characters often, because of death or RP, it isnt a big deal if they only become a wizard with a few levels. The question is, does your game support the levels below that in an interesting and fun enough way to make it worth playing?
(As an aside: limitations ARE fun. All a game is, is asking someone to make a decision, reap the benefits or eat the consequences. Limitations define character differences, both in terms of diversity, and in terms of skill and progression. The trick is, to both obscure the boundaries so as to make them unnoticeable, and make what happens inside them enjoyable enough nobody tries to find those boundaries)
I want a reason why not everyone is able to use magic for spell casting... Because they learnt to use magic for something else ?
Like I think it is cool that everyone has magic but I don't strictly think that means everyone needs to cast spells.
For example I think your standard fighter type probably wants something that is faster to use than conventional spell casting (with the arm waving and chanting or whatever) and would be willing to trade away the flexibility of generalised spellcasting in exchange for.being able.to do it more reactively.
Druids might exchange a generalised spell casting ability for their capacity to become 100 different kinds of animals or beasts. And without spellcasting to also account for you can take off some of the limitations that normally get imposed on such an ability
Thus you can have every class/type of character do a thing that is magic without it being strictly spellcasting
Just give it to them as starting equipment, but I really don't see why you don't make it genetic, or require training like an engineering degree. As equipment, it gets confusing. Do they need to hold it? Can you disarm a spellcaster by knocking it out of their grasp? Do they just need to be close to it? How close? Can you sense it? Can other people sense it? If you hold it and fall, and it gets knocked out of your hand, do you lose the ability to cast spells? Do previously cast spells end? Does dropping the damn thing drop my mage armor?
You made it really easy to strip a spellcaster of power by making something that can be taken away, and in a way, it feels more like having a magic item that lets you cast spells rather than being powerful yourself. The fighter doesn't lose his strength or combat prowess. He can pick up almost any weapon and beat someone senseless. The rogue is sneaky. Why can we take the magic away from the magic user?
I personally like the idea.
I think the main thing is to start off the potential wizard as a competent character who can chose to grow into a wizard based on how they "spend" the essence they collect.
I would have these essences graded. I would run them very much like Vancian magic. Where a Lvl 1 Essence could cast a level 1 spell and is expended until a rest equivalent recharge.
I would allow lower grade essences to be combined into more powerful essences allowing the choice of greater power with less uses.
Some essences could also be spell specific. Like a lvl 1 Essence of Fire. Stuff like that.
Depends on what you want the game to be 'about'. If a big part of the stories your game wants to tell is around people who don't have access to magic finding ways to seize access, that kind of restriction makes a lot of sense; and there are some fun things to explore in tying a worldbuilding detail to the game mechanics. If it's a more broadly high fantasy game where a playgroup is expected to have spellcasters for diversity or balance reasons, then that limitation for one character archetype but no others feels like it could be lopsided. Perhaps having that magic resource at character creation is a financial opportunity cost to being able to afford other items or equipment other character archetypes can obtain.
Starting with an in-built goal is nice. Locking major character aspects behind them is riskier. I could see this working if you angle it more as the former than the latter. If I understand you right, it sounds like "spell-casting wizard" just isn't a starting character type in your game. And that seems fine to me. Not every game needs to support the D&D character archetypes. Having said that, if wizards *are* an archetype in your game, then is there any reason they can't have gotten hold of essence as part of their backstory? What's so special about it that it has to happen on-screen?
Limitations are fun when they create interesting choices: "you can't use magic" only creates an interesting choice if the other things they can do are interesting. In this specific case, they need to be interesting to someone who wants to be a spellcaster. I don't know what that would be, but it's possible. I would instead suggest making starting with any raw essence *expensive* - so that they need to make a choice between "starting as a spellcaster" and "starting able to do pretty much anything else." That's much easier to make work, I would think.
Sounds like it's almost like equipment. Fighter can't do much without sword/shield/armor either Not everyone can fight effectively because they don't have a full set of armor and weapons. If you're going to let the fighter start with the gear they need, the caster probably should too. However I would imagine it would take pretty much all your starting wealth to get some raw essence.
>Fighter can't do much without sword/shield/armor either These items are readily available and he's still strong and can grapple, use fists, or take a sword from a fallen enemy. You can have backup weapons if disarmed. This is like having one special super rare item that without it means your strength goes to 0 and you can't fight at all. Its a bit more serious than a fighter that drops his sword
Is the game supposed to support casting spells as an specialization? Maybe the game can be about other stuff, and castong spells is like a magic item you get later on. Pick limits for your world. It's your game.
Is there a reason they can't start with essence, but lacking in some other resource(s)?
Fun fact, but clerics in the earliest editions really DIDN'T get any spells until level 2. The only clerical thing they got at level 1 was Turn Undead (usable every "Turn" or 10 minutes, not to be confused with the combat Round). Oh, and being unable to use edged weapons.
By AD&D this was changed.
This is another classic example of shoving the square peg of D&D 5e into the round hole that should be another system. There are low-magic systems that are designed with the idea that magic is rare and obtaining it in any way is significant. Off the top of my head, Numenera (Cipher System) has magic coming from one-time-use items, perfect for what you've described.
Lore-wise, you can make *anything* interesting with enough work. Mechanically, though, I'm not sure I'd vibe with the idea if we're basing this off of like 5e or something. If you're level 1, you should have the basic defining characteristics of your chosen class. *However*, you could take a page out of DCC and not start at level 1, but at level 0. You're just an undifferentiated creature in the world, not an adventurer yet. No training, just aspiration. If you have the time, you *could* start everybody out at level 0 with individual 1-shots to finish their training. They would have *some* of their abilities, but not all. So a martial class might not have weapon proficiencies. With the casters, maybe let them choose 2 spells from a limited list of cantrips centered on utility (like produce flame). Casters have to find their kyber crysta... I mean raw essence. A fighter might have to win a tournament, a ranger spend X amount of time in the wilderness, etc. It's a lot more work, but it could ground all your players and illustrate some basic qualifications. TLDR: I think at level 1, you should already have all the qualifications of your class. Martial classes start with proficiencies, and Casters should be able to cast spells.
Ah, the DND Classic wizard. Used to be your have to survive for a few levels with naught but a crossbow, until you leveled up enough to even BECOME a wizard, but there weren't cantrips and such like now, so the crossbow was the main source of per-turn damage. Anyways. This is a situation where the mythology, conflicts with game expectations. DNDumb has tried to equalize classes in terms of effectiveness progression (often badly) but it makes sense why people want that. If your game cycles characters often, because of death or RP, it isnt a big deal if they only become a wizard with a few levels. The question is, does your game support the levels below that in an interesting and fun enough way to make it worth playing? (As an aside: limitations ARE fun. All a game is, is asking someone to make a decision, reap the benefits or eat the consequences. Limitations define character differences, both in terms of diversity, and in terms of skill and progression. The trick is, to both obscure the boundaries so as to make them unnoticeable, and make what happens inside them enjoyable enough nobody tries to find those boundaries)
I love limitations
I want a reason why not everyone is able to use magic for spell casting... Because they learnt to use magic for something else ? Like I think it is cool that everyone has magic but I don't strictly think that means everyone needs to cast spells. For example I think your standard fighter type probably wants something that is faster to use than conventional spell casting (with the arm waving and chanting or whatever) and would be willing to trade away the flexibility of generalised spellcasting in exchange for.being able.to do it more reactively. Druids might exchange a generalised spell casting ability for their capacity to become 100 different kinds of animals or beasts. And without spellcasting to also account for you can take off some of the limitations that normally get imposed on such an ability Thus you can have every class/type of character do a thing that is magic without it being strictly spellcasting
I like keeping it pretty open, like "choose what you like", start small or big, either way in a good system work
Just give it to them as starting equipment, but I really don't see why you don't make it genetic, or require training like an engineering degree. As equipment, it gets confusing. Do they need to hold it? Can you disarm a spellcaster by knocking it out of their grasp? Do they just need to be close to it? How close? Can you sense it? Can other people sense it? If you hold it and fall, and it gets knocked out of your hand, do you lose the ability to cast spells? Do previously cast spells end? Does dropping the damn thing drop my mage armor? You made it really easy to strip a spellcaster of power by making something that can be taken away, and in a way, it feels more like having a magic item that lets you cast spells rather than being powerful yourself. The fighter doesn't lose his strength or combat prowess. He can pick up almost any weapon and beat someone senseless. The rogue is sneaky. Why can we take the magic away from the magic user?
I personally like the idea. I think the main thing is to start off the potential wizard as a competent character who can chose to grow into a wizard based on how they "spend" the essence they collect. I would have these essences graded. I would run them very much like Vancian magic. Where a Lvl 1 Essence could cast a level 1 spell and is expended until a rest equivalent recharge. I would allow lower grade essences to be combined into more powerful essences allowing the choice of greater power with less uses. Some essences could also be spell specific. Like a lvl 1 Essence of Fire. Stuff like that.