How to build a mage

[Michael Hopcroft]

Steve will probably have a few answers to these questions, but I thought I'd get a few opinions. What, in your opinion, is the best way to build a heroic-level mage in the Hero System 5?

Some possibilities that come to mind:

1. Take a VPP and have the player pre-generate a spellbook with as many spells as he likes. This would create a versatile but less powerful mage, as the control cost could mean he couldn;t cast excessively potent spells.

2. Buy the mage's powers as a Multipower with ultra slots for each spell, for the character who knows a small-to-moderate number of powerful spells. This might be a good combination for battle mages.

3. Build and buy each spell as an individual power. The character either knows only a few spells or can do nothing else but cast spells. To get a decent variety, each spell would need to have massive amounts of limitations stacked onto it.

Is there some other option I'm not considering?

[Yamo]

2. Buy the mage's powers as a Multipower with ultra slots for each spell, for the character who knows a small-to-moderate number of powerful spells. This might be a good combination for battle mages.

I want to use this method SO BAD (along with a "mana pool" END Reserve to fuel the Multipower), but I have one problem. That problem is utility and defensive spells.

Player: Goblins! I cast my Mage Shield spell!

GM: Okay. Your Light spell is extinguished.

Player: Crap! Well, uh, now I blast the leader with my Fire Bolt, I guess.

GM: Okay. Your Mage Shield vanishes. A goblin arrow hits you in the head. Better go make up a new character.

Player: %&#@!

Any ideas on how I could get around this? Reasonable-sized VPPs have a similar problem. And buying all the Powers individually is just too expensive. Either that, or the spells all end up with -4 or more in Limitations and just feel buggy and weak.

I just don't know how to handle Constant and Persistant defenses and utility spells with the Multipower method. They vanish as soon as the mage tries to do more than one thing at once!

[Mavnn]

Have a higher limit on the MP reserve than on the individual spells. (This assumes you either have AP limits, or pre-generate spells - I would strongly recommend one or the other in a heroic campaign). That way, you pay for how many spells you want to be able to run at once (MP reserve) - which is expensive, and should be IMHO. You then pay a cheap cost for the actual spells (the ultra slots), allowing a wide variety of effects for a low cost (also desirable IMO - YMMV).

Alternative number two only works if your magic system requires charges - continuing charges keep working after you've swapped out of the slot. This only works with some magic systems, though.

Hope you like,
Michael

[Captain Obvious]

If the Multipower pool is large enough, activating a new slot won't shut down other slots. Similar logic applies to VPPs...if you have enough points to work with, you can set up an effective defense, cast attack spells, and still run a few utility type spells at the same time.

Personally, I've never found the "buy each power individually" method to be a problem. Sure there are a lot of limitations attached, but most of them are part and parcel of what most people consider to be spell-casting norms: Gestures, Incantations, RSR, focus. Others suggest themselves based on the special effects, like fire spells that can be shut down with water.

Granted, this method tends to yield less magic than many people like to see, but I'm no fan of high magic games. Too many players want to apply modern tactics to their magic use. Using telepathy to call in an airstrike from a fireball wielding mage mounted on a hippogriff isn't what I think of when I think of fantasy....

[BNakagawa]

Why not use an elemental control?

Provided you have a common set of limitations, then spells bought through an EC, in addition to the EC itself, would be pretty affordable.

Personally, I've never thought mages needed any sort of help. Their access to high-value low-cost abilities and powers (Force Field, clinging, flight, enhanced senses, healing, entangle, flash, etc) make them much more dangerous than simply having lots of skill levels and damage classes.

I've had characters who spent lots of points on being nearly unhittable completely snookered by some punk mage with an area effect 1 hex entangle that must've cost him all of what, 9 points?

Gah.

[ShadowRaptor]

I am glad somebody asked this question because I was about to. It seems that there are many options available, each with its own bonuses and negatives...it can make it hard to decide.

[Markdoc]

How you build 'em depends on what you want.

VPP - ultimate flexibility, but reduced power - gotta buy the pool cost at full points. Since most spells have limitations on them you can usually cram several into a VPP at once, so the mage can have his forcefield and his "turn the enemy into frogs" spell - just not a very big forcefield, and not very small frogs.

This system is good for the kinds of fantasy sorcerors who can do all kinds of "magical stuff", with a few mystical gestures and a few chants like the mages in the Earthsea series.

MP - like a VPP, but with more power (you can limit the reserve, so you get more bang for your gold piece, but you pay for each spell and don't have the possibility of making up spells on the fly). Again, you can usually have one or two spells active at the same time. This system is good for sorcerors who have a list of spells with names like Kujon's spell of the Whirling Hound (much beloved by postmen) and spend time hunting out new - good for simulating Vancian mages, or classical Dand D style fantasy game mages.

A word of warning: it would be a good idea for both these systems to make up a list of spells and let players acquire them, rather than let them make up their own, since you run the risk of 30PD forcefields and similar obscenities.

Next, you have the "buy a power straight" approach. Spells can be limited down to make them cheaper, but it is a gven that mages will have fewer spells than in the first two systems and some of them could be quite powerful (one powerful attack spell is normally better than two weak ones). This system is good for simulating Conan style mages, by Crom! where the mage often seems to have two spells - some kind of magical vision and Summon Unholy Thing. If Conan kills the Unholy Thing, the mage doesn't fly away or cast a lightning bolt him (although this may be because he knows he can't hit with an OCV of 4) - he normally makes a feeble attempt to run away. He doesn't even cast forcefield!

Finally there is the "spells as skills" approach that goes like this. A fighter can have any weapon up to 2d6 KA (30 active points) for free - but he has to buy the WF to use it. Therefore mages should be able to buy Spell Familiarities (SFs) to use their spells - which they get for free - and these should also be limited to about 30 active points. I don't like this system - it's easily unbalanced, since fighters effectively get to choose from HA/KA and Armour, while a mage gets a wider range. Also to keep it even remotely balanced the spells need to be kept below 30 active points, which is restrictive.

The key is not what system you use - any of these would do - but how you set the limitations up.

For example: I am currently designing a magic system where I want magic to be common, but weak, and heavily restricted in how it can be used.

I wil use a VPP, but then stack on limitations - which ALL magic users will have to use - that means each casting of a spell will render the caster magically weaker.

Decide what you want in terms of flavour and then enforce that with limitations: once you have decided what flavour you want, what framwork is best is relatively obvious. You can have multiple different magic systems - the only thing I do nOT recommend is letting players just make up their own system. Then you end up with a flavourless hodge-podge.

cheers, mark

[Arthur]

I always went with the "no Power Frameworks" approach. However, I like to see the magic levels under control.

I do find the VPP approach intriguing, though, but I like to see it built such that each individual spell is its own KS. That would be Lim on the VPP Control Cost; I rated it at -1.

That seems to simulate a lot of literary magic pretty well. A wizard has a certain amount of power in reserve, and has to learn each spell to tap it in a specific way.

I first saw this approach in an issue of AC. If I still had it, I would credit the author.

[MarkusDark]

I always go with the Multipower. The VPP scares me too much - I have witnessed too many perversions of it to ever trust one of any real size. I am allowing a friend of mine to run a 10 point Gadget pool because I trust him.

The Elemental Control costs too much, IMO. You'll get only a couple of spells and that's it.

The Multipower helps to keep the powers defined so that I know what my mage can and cannot affect and use those areas to help build the events. For example, a SuperHero level mage would usually have a 90 point Multipower reserve but only be allowed to have 60 Active in any one slot - thus getting rid of the Light, armor, blast *thunk*.

[DrFurious]

I want to use this method SO BAD (along with a "mana pool" END Reserve to fuel the Multipower), but I have one problem. That problem is utility and defensive spells.

Any ideas on how I could get around this? Reasonable-sized VPPs have a similar problem. And buying all the Powers individually is just too expensive. Either that, or the spells all end up with -4 or more in Limitations and just feel buggy and weak.

The use of the Continious (+1/2 ?) and Uncontrolled (+1/2) advantages should do the trick. Generally, the utility and defensive spells are quite cheap for a fantasy game so you can afford a higher active point total for spells based on these effects. The advantage is that you can freely switch slots once these powers have gotten rolling - provided you've allocated some END to running them.

In the end, it boils down to how much END you allocate to each spell. I use a variant of the Reduced END advantage called Duration for spells: Pay END every Turn (+1/2), each step down the time chart is an additional +1/4. Basically, you wind up paying more than the 0 END advantage but I generally disallow that for spells anyway

!DrFURIOUS!

[Checkmate]

I went with a VPP the player had to come up with a list of powers that could go into the VPP, and the list could only contain INT/2 number of spells. Looking back, I think that I like the KS idea better. The player would have to roll the INT skill at the begining of each day to be able to put that skill into the VPP. The skill roll couldn't me modified by time or by skill levels. Hmm that might work.

[tiger]

In the past I've worked up each spell seperately. While this is a bit more expensive than a MP, it also limits the number of spells a mage can have very affectively. It also removes the problem of having 2 spells going at the same time.

VPP can work as well although they can get expensive real quick.

[coach]

In general I would never allow power frameworks in a FH game. They are just too powerful. One thing mentioned in another thread is that the best use of mages is out of combat. Sure, your fighter can do 6DC at 13OCV with his greatsword, but if he's dying, he's really going to want that healing that the mage has. Or, if he needs to get some info, he's gonna be calling for the telepathy or clairsentience. And who's gonna get him across that 1000' chasm but the mage with flying. You let a mage have a 4d6 Flash in your campaign and you're gonna see what a pain the butt that is. Make it AE and for 40AP you have all your bad guys floundering around all the dang time. I mean, how many people actually have flash def.

So, in general, I would say you would want to limit your mages to buying each power individually. They can layer up the limitations to -2 or -3 pretty easily and that keeps it more or less in line. If they are smart enough to take utility spells (Tunneling, Aid, Invisibility, Desolid are some others that are particularly useful), then you will see that they really are not that underpowered. They are just differently powerd than the fighters.

[Seenar]

I agree with the "each spell" crowd. My experience is that the mages end up plenty powerful as it is buying each "spell" individually. Even a multipower scare the pants off of me.

I had to give all sorts of magic items to my loan non-spell slinger in one game, just do he could do more than fence and swing across the room Flynn fashion.

Besdies, using the one at a time method, you can pack on the limitations and have uber out of combat spells with powerful effects. Varipools don't let you easily have a spell with 80 active poinst for a mere 13. (Don't botch the skill roll, the side effect is a doosy)

[Enforcer84]

I'd Cast my vote with the pay for each spell crowd. Save VPP for the Archmages. Not necessarily NPC's only, but wait until the point is reached that the character should be able to control the very fabric of magic itself. It works fine if you keep VPP's low or don't use them at all.