Western Shores Magic-multipower

[Ninja-Bear]

Hello good Hero folks,

 

I'm in the process of updating/adapting the Western Shores (to 5thr) for the fantasy game I am running. I love the magic college concept. However when looking at the point structure, it seems very expensive for the little amount of power you actually can use. The magic user can do just about the same amount of damage as a warrior but the magic user must make an activation roll and many of the spells have a nasty side effect if you miss the roll.  In the book, there is a paragraph noting why frameworks shouldn't be used and the biggest warning seems to be that it makes magic users too versatile. So here is the question that has been nagging me, would using a power frame work with the common limitations really be that unbalancing? And as the title says, I'm looking at using multipower per spell college. The down side is that of course if i set the pool at say 40 pts and have the slots be variable slots the magic user cannot have a full powered defensive running at the same time as a full powered offensive spell, which may not be a bad thing. Fwiw I choose multipower because its cheaper than a VPP initially although I could see a powerful magic user switch to a VPP doen the road.

 

Thoughts? Experiences?

[Ndreare]

Not really,

In our fantasy games we use multi-powers all the time with no issue.

 

But we have thieves with invisibility that requires a stealth roll, and shape change that requires a disguise roll. Fighters that use deadly blow or extra strength only to use bow, and monks with martial arts.

 

The power system is natural in hero and as long as character powers have a similar number of limitations you will see relative balance.

 

What I do see that can be game breaking is the mage whose multipower has gestures -1/4, incantations -1/4, concentration 1/2 DCV -1/4, extra-time full phase -1/2, requires a skill roll -1/4, variable limitation -1/2 (-1 in OAF or x3 endurance). All of a sudden the wizard who “is protected by the front line warriors” gets to buy all of his powers with -2 ½ in limitations. While the other characters normally only have -1/2 or perhaps -1. The wizard then effectively gets more points than the other characters which can often be placed in Aid, or uncontrolled defenses (shield spells) that really aren’t so limited.

 

How we temper this in our games is “group approval” basically when you make a character everyone in the group gets to review it and raise concerns.

 

PS: Funny thing is sometimes you see suggestions for fantasy to get rid of multi-powers, but then apply a cost divider… I do not like this approach myself as it makes the characters incompatible with the published monsters in the bestiary.

[Ninja-Bear]

Ndreare I was converting Earth college and noticed the concentrate 1/2 DCV. I think that that is burdensome to the.magic user. P.s. as of now I don't use encumberence rules for armor.

 

Oh and I changed the skill roll from -1/2 to -1/4. I know fourth ed. didnt have this option but I feel the -1 roll per 10 act. pts is also alittle severe.

[Ninja-Bear]

What I'm aiming for is magic to be competent with warrior skills without overshadowing them. Plus magic should have some minor perks if you will to differentiate it from mundane equipment.

[Ndreare]

That should be workable, especially if you maintain an active point range.

Are you allowing non mages to take super skills (talents to represent awesome training)?

[Ninja-Bear]

Yes. I really like some of the feats I've seen from dnd 3rd. And for active points I'm keeping them around 40 pt. as the book suggest.

[Markdoc]

I've been using multipowers for magic for decades, and it hasn't been a problem. That said, it can be a problem if the GM doesn't pay careful attention. Here's my general guideline with regards to magic multipowers.

 

Don't let players design their own spells. With a multipower, it's very easy to generate some abusive combos and also to very rapidly get enough points to be able to do pretty much anything: for many powers you end up paying only 1 or 2 points for a slot. So the mage can get (for example) Flight, Mind control and Invisibility for the same cost that the fighter pays for +1 to hit with swords. If the spellcasters can do pretty much anything, they tend to overshadow the rest of the group. I handle this by differentiating schools of magic. One of the things I disliked about western shores was the fact that every college of magic has essentially the exact same spells, just with different special effects. If you restrict the powers available to the colleges, you get both more variety and also deal with the wizard-who-can-do-everything problem. So fire mages can blow stuff up real good, shadow mages are good for stealth and deceit, air mages can fly and control weather - and so on. Specialisation leaves space for everyone to contribute.

 

I let non-casters also use multipowers, so that they can compete. So the fighter can get an awesome sword skills multipower, the monk can get a martial arts multipower, the rogue can get a stealth multipower, etc.

 

This has always worked pretty well for us.

 

cheers, Mark

[Ninja-Bear]

Thanks also Markdoc. Onething about the colleges to me and my limited imagination was that it really showed me the concept of special effect. And yes I plan on creating all the spells.

[Ternaugh]

I've been using the RC/3 method (from some FH 5e settings) on the various spell colleges, with few issues. I allow characters to research spell modifications that change things like Concentration, or the penalty for RSR, and it's common for "master" level mages to have custom spells that are easier for them to cast.

[The Weapon]

Hello good Hero folks,

 

I'm in the process of updating/adapting the Western Shores (to 5thr) for the fantasy game I am running. I love the magic college concept. However when looking at the point structure, it seems very expensive for the little amount of power you actually can use. The magic user can do just about the same amount of damage as a warrior but the magic user must make an activation roll and many of the spells have a nasty side effect if you miss the roll.  In the book, there is a paragraph noting why frameworks shouldn't be used and the biggest warning seems to be that it makes magic users too versatile. So here is the question that has been nagging me, would using a power frame work with the common limitations really be that unbalancing? And as the title says, I'm looking at using multipower per spell college. The down side is that of course if i set the pool at say 40 pts and have the slots be variable slots the magic user cannot have a full powered defensive running at the same time as a full powered offensive spell, which may not be a bad thing. Fwiw I choose multipower because its cheaper than a VPP initially although I could see a powerful magic user switch to a VPP doen the road.

 

Thoughts? Experiences?

So just let the fighters use frameworks.  There's lots of things they want to do that should be OK in frameworks.  I'll have a think about it and get back with some details.

[Lucius]

One of the things I disliked about western shores was the fact that every college of magic has essentially the exact same spells, just with different special effects.

I can see your point, but that's one thing I've always liked - maybe because it illustrates the whole concept of special effects so well.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Dispel Magic: Summons a palindromedary to eat the spell or item. If the Dispel dice fail to overcome the points of the effect, the palindromedary coughs it up again.

[Markdoc]

True, but it not only meant that mages were a bit same-y in terms of playstyle, but also that they were all swiss-army-mages with a fully diverse skillset - defence, attack, flight, etc. In a Western Shores style game, there's really very little reason to play anything except a mage, other than pure dogged love for a nonmagical archetype.

 

Western Shores presents both the good and the bad with open play systems for Fantasy: the power of special efffects, as you note, but also the fact that "magic" is such a broad special effect that it ceases to be a meaningful special effect at all. That's why I recommend cutting down what's actually permitted under a given special effect.

 

Cheers, Mark