Is there a “Mage Problem”

[Seenar]

I have seen a lot of discussion that a mage purchasing spells. I am not sure I understand the problem. I have had many mages in games, and they all paid for their spells. With any level of experience, they quickly started to outstrip the growth of the fighters. I just don’t see that the mages end up power poor.

Also, the whole idea a fighter only spends a couple of points on a WF and uses a sword is not what happens. That fighter buys marital arts, or skill levels, and usually honkin’ stats. In my games they spend at least 30 points on fighter related stuff. Just like the 30 or so points spent by the mages. I just don’t see it as a problem.

[Talon]

There's often a mage problem -- though as you point out, it often involves the mages getting too powerful. My preference is to make mages weaker in combat than fighters -- after all, they get all sorts of cool special effects.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Seenar
I have seen a lot of discussion that a mage purchasing spells. I am not sure I understand the problem. I have had many mages in games, and they all paid for their spells. With any level of experience, they quickly started to outstrip the growth of the fighters. I just don’t see that the mages end up power poor.

Also, the whole idea a fighter only spends a couple of points on a WF and uses a sword is not what happens. That fighter buys marital arts, or skill levels, and usually honkin’ stats. In my games they spend at least 30 points on fighter related stuff. Just like the 30 or so points spent by the mages. I just don’t see it as a problem. I agree. Ive seen the same behavior on multiple occasions. A wizard in the hands of a competant player is like a fine wine......it gets better with time......until it far outstrips other classes.

[Killer Shrike]

Of course, a wizard in the hands of an incompetant player is just sadly pathetic. ;)

[tiger]

To me it seems that alot of it is the fact that a player coming from D&D. They are use to a mage in a set way and have a bit of a time grasping a different method.

[Catseye]

Really, thats what it comes down to IMO.

How powerful or versatile mages are in your game is controllable by you as the campaign designer according to how you set up your magic system.

I wanted mage casts to be powerful, but dangerous and unpredictable, so the mage-casting system in my house campaign requires the "skill roll" and "side-effect" disadvantages. In addition, you don't get to chose your side effect, all side effects come off of a master chart I roll on when you flub.

I also seriously limit the spells available and make mages work to get them ;)

[Lord Liaden]

I know that the spell colleges from the 2nd edition of Fantasy HERO are often maligned, but in my experience they did a solid job of balancing the capabilities of the spell-slingers with the sword-swingers. They included spells of incredible power, but with enough Limitations on when, how and how easily they were used that magicians never came across as bipedal mobile artillery.

[tgaptte]

Hey Catseye,

Care to post your Side Effects chart? I'm sure we'd all be interested!

Tim

[Shaddakim]

Originally posted by tgaptte
Hey Catseye,

Care to post your Side Effects chart? I'm sure we'd all be interested!

Tim

Yes, please do. I would be very interested in seeing a spell mishaps list.

[Tim]

Ditto

[Seenar]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
I know that the spell colleges from the 2nd edition of Fantasy HERO are often maligned, but in my experience they did a solid job of balancing the capabilities of the spell-slingers with the sword-swingers. They included spells of incredible power, but with enough Limitations on when, how and how easily they were used that magicians never came across as bipedal mobile artillery.

Our Holy Warrior in one game, referred to our Illusionist with the 12d6 Mental Illiuons as the team "Howitzer" because he was alywas zapping people from the other side of the field.

[Markdoc]

Couldn't agree more. As far as I can work out, the idea that mages are disadvantaged compared to fighters is propagated by people familiar with the rules, but who never run FH games.

The flexibility of magic more than compensates. I wanted fighters to be the best at, well, at fighting and so I had to load the mages down with compulsory disadvantages to even the field (extra time, concentration, skill roll, and even mandatory side effects)

What that means is the mages get mucho power for their points, so they can toast a whole village from a kilometer away, but if the fighter types get close, they're in big trouble.

cheers, Mark

[tetsujin28]

Markdoc,
I agree. There seems to be a lot of "armchair anthropology" regarding mages being weak in FH. As I mentioned in another post on letting mages use VPPs, I've run fantasy games with Hero since before the original FH was published, and the problem has always been how to rein in the mages, not the non-magic types. My solution was to convert WW's Exalted - that way, everyone uses magic in some form or another.

[GamePhil]

Really, it's very simple. Mages have to pay full cost for everything. Skill/equipment based characters get everything cheaply, or even for free. At first glance, this can cause problems, similar to the problem of the Tank Fighter vs. the Finesse Fighter.

At second glance, it can continue to cause problems. If the mage is overly restricted, and I've seen this happen, he often ends up having abilities no greater than the fighter's, but has to pay full cost for them or be greatly restricted in their use. If the GM likes the "Magic Resistance" concept from other games, and uses it often, we end up with a character paying a high price for power only to have it reduced to nothing special. Again. Sure, he can pick up that sword for free, but he'll never use it as well because he sank points into spells, instead. And all this to do damage the fighter could do with a bow. And he still can't use as many different types of spell as other systems, because buying each individual spell is expensive (no longer a general restriction, but it is still a source of complaint). And this is only a sampling of potential problems.

Is this a flaw in the system? No. But it is perfectly understandable why people have a problem with mages in FH, especially if they're familiar with it of old and have never been in a game that handled it better.

[Catseye]

Originally posted by Tim
Ditto

I have a simple one I'm using now that I'll clip out of my setting book (which ofcourse I;m also still working on) and post.

I really want to extend it, but this has been good enough for my runs to date.

(Apologies that its in percentiles. I've been meaning to convert to d6 equivalents eventually...)

(From the Dragon Dreams manual)

Wizard Spell Failure Chart:

This chart is based on the limitation Requires Skill Roll:Magic(-1/2). If the spell in question was created with the more serious limitation Requires Skill Roll:Magic(-1) then double the effect listed.

This is just a starting point. The judge should feel free to add to it. In general the effects are all based on the release of uncontrolled positive or negative energy. Whimsical effects should be avoided. (These are reserved for the planned Wild Magic expansion.)

[I had to unformat it to paste it, sorry, in the doc its a nice table]


01-30
Flash of light
Lose 3 END or half the END cost of the spell, whichever is greater

31-40
Flash of light, thunderclap.
Lose 6 END or the END cost of the power, whichever is greater

41-50
Blinding Flash of Light
Take 2D6 or
((Spell Active Points)/15)D6
Explosive Flash, whichever is greater.

51-60
Flash of Flame
Take 6D6 or
((Spell Active Points)/5)D6
Energy Blast, whichever is greater.

60-64
Ball of Flame
Take 4D6 or
((Spell Active Points)/7.5)D6
Explosive Energy Blast, whichever is greater.

65-74
Circle of Darkness
Create a 3” radius or
((Spell Active Points)/10)” radius Darkness circle, whichever is greater.
Lasts 1 phase.

75-84
Anti-magic Circle
Create a 3D6 or
((Spell Active Points)/10)D6 Explosive Magic Dispell, whichever is greater.
(All magical effects.)

85-94
Shockwave,
Implosive
Take 6D6 or
((Spell Active Points)/5)D6
Physical Energy Blast, whichever is greater.
Make a DEX roll or fall down

95-100
Shockwave ,
Explosive
Take 4D6 or
((Spell Active Points)/7.5)D6
Explosive Physical Energy Blast, whichever is greater.
Everyone effected must make a DEX roll or fall down

[RadeFox]

It seems to me that the only way mages can get out of hand in FH if their GM's let them. Whether or not the campaing is using spells as skills, Mulipowers, or VPP's, there is a core truth to magic that Im not wondering if some of the GM's having trouble are forgetting: MAGIC SPELLS MUST BE LEARNED.

The GM has every right (and duty) to fairly control access to new magical spells for the PC's. Gods may gift their priests new spells as they continue to serve them well. Mages can either find a scroll or spell tome with one or a few spells in them ready to learn, or they may research new spells on their own.

In either case I would always install an abosolute minimum of 1 pt be spent on learning the spell (even for a VPP slot) to symbolize the time and effort spent committing the spell to memory. This cost should be set with regards to the difficulty of magic being learned. I could see a priest being granted a new Blessing while in prayer, and spending only 1 pt to learn the benediction, while at the same time charging 5 pts for a mage to decipher a scroll from an ancient race of dark sorcerors who wielded alien magics in times primeavil. (The above costs were made assuming VPP's)

If you are using Multipowers or spells as skills, the costs are preset in game, but that doesnt mean that they have to be accessible. A spell must still be found or researched. Unknown magics deciphered, other languages understood. (IMO, using a spell of Universal Translator would not allow someone to learn a spell in a foregin language. It wouldnt convey the depth of understanding of the words/runes or aid in understanding subtle influences or nuances often portrayed in mystical writings.) So the quest for the spells is what I see most mages being focused on, or learning how to cast ones they have found!

How fun it must be to have to summon an elder deamon to help you learn the spell written in the abyssal tongue, one for controlling daemons!....not that you KNEW thats what this particular tome taught. Heehee

PS- Dont forget that many mages in literature, and those magi of our own reality almost always kept their personal spellbooks written in unique codes and shorthands, which would not even be readable with a UnvrslTrnslr spell. Hope your mage pc's have been keeping up with that Cryptography skill. And hope they make the roll when copying down that incantation! :P

[AnotherSkip]

Actually Rade Fox I think that _might_ be a _core Rule_ for your theory of magic for many others it does not work so well.

There are _many_ other limits than xp in any game system and anyone that chooses to value a character soly upon the basis of points has been far too hampered by sheer munchkinism for far too long.

If I had to expend a CP for every spell thing my Spirit Servant did i would be a hellaf a lot more sucky than I am now with my Druid character. If you read the http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6777 thread, you will notice two characters built by me. The second was in part a response by myself to the constant chiding by the other players of how my first character(Dyson) never killed anything (about 20-30 xp back, not that _that_ changed anything) the razzing by the other players got so bad I had to build the fighting machine you see. She is severly modified by magic at this point (points respent) to make her semi-social in response to another player taking her as a Hunted (see the Verichne Psy Lim) otherwise she had 18's+ in all her combat stats, 8 Com, 8 Ego and almost no skills except Gm minimum requirements for her Race/Class. She Daily uses magic in the form of her enchanted battleaxe (2d6HKA Pen, Returns when thrown)

Which brings up another point Rade Fox do _you_ charge Fighters/thieves/whatever to "learn how to use Magic Items"? if not you are cheating your mages even moreso, if so, how are they dealing with paying essentialy for more Weapon familiarites for weapons that at their _base_ they allready know how to use?
Frankly IMNSHO i find the concept of paying for every spell revolting, and unless you charge points for every knife, magical Sword, flask of oil, backpack and suit of armor you are just overrestricing you Mages into the dust.

[Catseye]

I still think you are all over-analyzing this. Decide how important/powerful you want mages to be in your game and design appropriately. In my case the balance is real simple:

Mage go BOOM!

he he he

CQ

[Catseye]

BTW.

has anyone else mentioned that mages burn lots and lots of END?

I only let them recharge once per day.

CQ

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by AnotherSkip
Frankly IMNSHO i find the concept of paying for every spell revolting, and unless you charge points for every knife, magical Sword, flask of oil, backpack and suit of armor you are just overrestricing you Mages into the dust.

That doesn't follow, for one simple reason: the mage doesn't have to pay for those things, either, even if he has to pay for every spell. He may not be as good at using them (and it wouldn't be too hard to build a mage that was, simply by using spells to be a swordsman instead of skills), but use them he can. If he's not being allowed to get them for some reason, though, then you start heading for problems.

[RadeFox]

I would not charge to learn to use a magic item, only to learn spells. Items can be taken away, spells cannot, short of some serious mindwiping magic, which I would be abhored to do to any player.

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by RadeFox
Items can be taken away, spells cannot, short of some serious mindwiping magic, which I would be abhored to do to any player.

And here is the reverse problem: A spell, or any personal ability, costs points. If it is completely replaced by equipment that does *not* cost points, it is possible that this is unfair to the mage.

For example, I have a Mage Bolt spell: it requires a full phase, a magical staff, gestures, incantations, and can throw it six times a day. I gain little if any advantage over the wielder of a heavy long bow bow, and must pay points for the power. This is not fair in all cases, though if the given setting gives some advantage to the spell it swings back the other way again.

In fact, if I can throw a spell without Limitations that does the same damage as a bow, barring other advantages this can be unfair: yes, the guy with the bow can have it taken away, but didn't pay anything for it, while I paid a large chunk of points for mine. Again, this may or may not be fair depending on other factors.

The old Star Hero book had a Limitation called Replacable that addressed this: if a purchased Power was not significantly different from devices to be had free of charge, the Limitation was applied. I miss that. Of course, it doesn't help much with spells, which are usually heavily Limited, anyway.

[Lupus]

Originally posted by GamePhil
And here is the reverse problem: A spell, or any personal ability, costs points. If it is completely replaced by equipment that does *not* cost points, it is possible that this is unfair to the mage.

For example, I have a Mage Bolt spell: it requires a full phase, a magical staff, gestures, incantations, and can throw it six times a day. I gain little if any advantage over the wielder of a heavy long bow bow, and must pay points for the power. This is not fair in all cases, though if the given setting gives some advantage to the spell it swings back the other way again.Of course, the mage can do all kinds of things that the dude with the longbow can't. The dude with the longbow has likely sunk all kinds of points into it - weapon familiarity, levels, fast draw, etc. There are problems associated with using it (need to load the arrows, concentration, or penalties to hit if firing defensively). And, of course, it takes time to string that sucker. Or it degrades if you carry it strung.

A mage, meanwhile, can throw a fire bolt in battle, move quickly here, teleport there, read minds back in town, fly to the magic shop, etc etc etc. The mage can do all kinds of things that equipment-using characters can't.

So, for me, wizards not keeping up in the damage stakes (without spending points) is not a problem. Of course, as a player, I don't like being able to keep up in a fight. I like to be a useful member of the party. So when I play mages in HERO games, I go for odd abilities. I throw entangles. I flash. I heal. I do things other than dealing straight damage. Essentially, in a fight, straight damage is all most people dan do. A mage can do aaaalll kinds of things. But they spend points for everything. So that's where the balance comes from.

'Course, it varies by system and genre. Some genres may see it as vital that mages are powerful in all reas. The FH book provides magic systems for that. In my own game that I'm planning, mages are relatively low-powered. I'm not shooting for anyone to be a primary spellcaster, but rather to have magic possessed by most PCs, though only to a limited degree.

But don't assume that just because mages have to spend points to equal a fighter, they're weak. :) You have to take the whole character into account. And remember that it's not about who can beat up who. A much better measure is how much a particular character contributes to the success of the team.

[GamePhil]

Originally posted by Lupus
Of course, the mage can do all kinds of things that the dude with the longbow can't. The dude with the longbow has likely sunk all kinds of points into it - weapon familiarity, levels, fast draw, etc. There are problems associated with using it (need to load the arrows, concentration, or penalties to hit if firing defensively). And, of course, it takes time to string that sucker. Or it degrades if you carry it strung.


First of all, the only reason I post to this thread at all is to try to explain the various reasons that people complain about FH in my experience, which I believe was the original question. They are not my complaints, although I do not approve of the uses for the system that I am speaking of.

Now, please re-read the spell I described. With the exception of Real Weapon, it has the problems of a bow, just with a magical effect. And all those skills the archer sunk into his bow? Well, that doesn't really help, because the mage could have used those skills, too, but had to buy the spells and Magic Skill to use them.

It is an example of a danger I've seen (this spell and other, replacable abilities like it, came from a game I witnessed), that I believe is part of the cause for complaints: characters being restricted to abilities little or no greater than what can be gotten from equipment, but having to pay for them, just because it's Magic. I've seen it happen.

Mind you, I think the larger part of the cause is comparisons to other systems, which I further conjecture comes about because of the excising of certain core rules from the old 2nd Edition Fantasy HERO. This is no longer the case, but effects linger.

Here's a funny thing about all those other abilities you spoke of: In a D&D like game, people can end up with plenty of free stuff that duplicates the mage's abilities. I've seen that happen, too, though in D&D, where the mage then just pens a new spell into a book to make up for it, even in 3rd Edition. But if I had to pay for that new spell in points every time, it might start to wear thin. This is an extreme example, and I've never seen it in FH, but I can imagine it.

Obviously, if the mage has *unique* abilities (which doesn't even have to be part of his own powers: being able to take advantages of Limitations and Disadvantages would be sufficient), then all is fair. Equally obviously, however, this must not always be the case, because if it were we wouldn't see complaints.

[Jeff]

Say, has anyone found that unarmed martial artist monk characters are terribly unpopular in FH? They too aren't taking advantage of character-point-free equipment, but I don't think they're condemned as ineffective or punished because they have to pay more for martial arts than the armed sorts have to pay for weapon familiarities.

[RadeFox]

To get back on Discussion topic, I still think folks are misreading some things. In my first post, I spoke of th GM limiting peoples access to spells. I also mentioned some points values. Then folks said the points aren't enough. :(

I should have left that part out. The thrust of my post was that YOU as the GM have every right and I'd even say the duty to responsibly grant out access to new spells. Even for VPP's. If you have a handle on how much and what kind of magical spells your mages are having access to in game, then there is now way for them 'Go rampant" in power as it seems many GM's posting have had experiences of.

Call me old fashioned, but I am really having trouble seeing how in a game, run by an attentive and dutiful GM, any character could develop abilities that cause balance trouble in the game. But thats just my last 2 cents on the issue.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Seenar
Our Holy Warrior in one game, referred to our Illusionist with the 12d6 Mental Illiuons as the team "Howitzer" because he was alywas zapping people from the other side of the field.

Ah, yes, the mage as an artillery piece. That's pretty much how they've played out in my games. Lots of firepower, but vulnerable enough to need to be a bit back from the front lines.

I think the problem only crops up when the magic system is geared towards easy or extremely cheap magic. Its more of a mistake that comes into play at design time, than anything inherent with the mages themselves.

As time progresses mages become extremely powerful no matter what you do. Its the nature of the beast. Its up to the gm to ensure the system being used keeps the other players on par.

Just my 2AP

[badger3k]

Originally posted by RadeFox
To get back on Discussion topic, I still think folks are misreading some things. In my first post, I spoke of th GM limiting peoples access to spells. I also mentioned some points values. Then folks said the points aren't enough. :(

I should have left that part out. The thrust of my post was that YOU as the GM have every right and I'd even say the duty to responsibly grant out access to new spells. Even for VPP's. If you have a handle on how much and what kind of magical spells your mages are having access to in game, then there is now way for them 'Go rampant" in power as it seems many GM's posting have had experiences of.

Call me old fashioned, but I am really having trouble seeing how in a game, run by an attentive and dutiful GM, any character could develop abilities that cause balance trouble in the game. But thats just my last 2 cents on the issue.

I've charged mages to learn every spell they knew (in past campaigns). I've never run into any problems that others seem to have - partly because of the ed factor - most creatures are resistant to physical damage, but not a lot for ed, and I tried to maintain that sort of concept. Yeah, the orc doesn't have resistant PD for the arrow, but armor helps (I went by, and probably still will go that "real" armor is less effective against energy attacks. If I remember, I think I kept ED to no more than 1/2 PD. I also allowed the spellcasters to wield normal weapons and wear armor (unless they bought it as a limitation). About the only control I really placed on the PCs was that I had to approve all spells they wrote up. I also awarded them spells as XP sometimes, if I felt it appropriate.

But then I also have to say that my players in those campaigns were more fighter/thief types than mages, so there wasn't a magic-heavy focus on the campaign, so that may have helped too.

[Tim]

She keeps turning me into a newt!

But I get better.

[Markdoc]

The "mage problem" has two sides.

This thread - if you read back - was inspired by a variety of threads suggesting ways of making mages more powerful (ie: giving them more spells power) and the question was : do we really need this?

Many GMs - including me - replied that man, we don' NEED more powerful mages - if anything the reverse.

Your comment about keeping track of what spells you give out as GM is a good one, but in fantasy worlds, even apparently innocuous magics can have a big effect.

To take one example: in an FH game I played in long ago, my mage had a spell that allowed him to shrink things (shrinking, usable as attack, not vs living creatures). That doesn't sound too horrible: but I used it on bad guy's helmets, on their weapons, on locked doors (they fall out of their frames)- all kinds of things.

So even with care, spells can have unexpected side effects. IMO, the GM should carefully design his magic systems to reduce the ability of mages to cast spells in combat, if he wants fighters to feel useful.

cheers, mark

[Kdansky]

Well, it's quite easy to summarize I'd say:

Equipment users are far superior to mages in combat. (Armor + Sword + Bow does enough)

But we've got the classical "mages do everything else" Problem: They can Teleport, go Invis, use Telekinese, Read Minds, Create Light, have Flight, Summon Demons (for any tasks, true, our current mage can't control demons, but that's another story :D), they can see in the Darkness, can analyze magical Items etc etc. And we don't even allow Multipowers at all.

Gestures + Incantation + Extra Time + Requires Skill Roll is cheap enough...

[badger3k]

Originally posted by Markdoc

To take one example: in an FH game I played in long ago, my mage had a spell that allowed him to shrink things (shrinking, usable as attack, not vs living creatures). That doesn't sound too horrible: but I used it on bad guy's helmets, on their weapons, on locked doors (they fall out of their frames)- all kinds of things.

cheers, mark

Part of the problem (and solution) relies on the GM to control the uses described above. I would only allow the spell to work on held items only if they cause no harm - I wouldn't allow the helmets to shrink, but I might let the weapons do that - although I'd probably only allow that as a transform, not shrinking. Basically both the player and GM have to keep each other under control and not let mages be too powerful (or underpowered).

[RadeFox]

We could start a new thread to help with GM's keeping control off spells in their campaigns. We could post spells we are thinking about allowing our PC's access, and and asking herodom at large, how they could envision the spell being used beyond its immediately apparent uses. That way we can either be prepared for the use, or build in limitations to prevent them.

Sound like a good idea?

[badger3k]

Originally posted by RadeFox
We could start a new thread to help with GM's keeping control off spells in their campaigns. We could post spells we are thinking about allowing our PC's access, and and asking herodom at large, how they could envision the spell being used beyond its immediately apparent uses. That way we can either be prepared for the use, or build in limitations to prevent them.

Sound like a good idea?

Not a bad idea. Let the general gamers out there playtest it for all. Too bad I have no spells yet.

[Markdoc]

>>>Well, it's quite easy to summarize I'd say:
Equipment users are far superior to mages in combat. (Armor + Sword + Bow does enough)<<<<

This is what many people assume. After all, the equipment users get free stuff, right?

But as FH GMs know, alas, it is not true. Many, many, many spells are incredibly useful in combat: Armour+sword+bow = many dead fighters if your mage has easy access to entangle, invisibility, Aid and forcewall. Not to mention flight usable against others or even a boring old mind control.....

Not to even dare to consider the dreaded tankmage who has the armour, the sword AND a few combat spells.

My approach is not to restrict those spells so much as to heavily handicap mages in combat (ALL spells in my FH game must take extra time, concentration and side effect). Thus a fighter/mage team can be very effective, but a mage without some sort of cover is normally so much chopped liver. I also restrict pretty severely the number of spells that can be cast in a row. Having adopted those restrictions, I find that fighters and mages complement each other nicely, and neither overshadows the other.

Oviously, this is not going to give a system enjoyed by people who like to play powerful combat mages, but it works for the kind of sword and sorcery feel I like to run.

cheers, Mark

[Seenar]

We had a Metal Mage in one game who used the lighten metal spell to remove the encumbrance from the party. That was an exponential effect.

She wore armor, used an axe, and would fire off the iron bolt for ranged effect. She also has a powerful dispell she kept using against other mages. She was the second most powerful fighter after the Palidin in the group.

[AnotherSkip]

It really depends upon the Active point total.

a 22 point Actuive point total and that mage will be toting a broadsword, bow and armor (like mine).
60 point active total and that mage will be sneering at the week fools around him IMNSHO