Endurance and spells

[Brian Stanfield]

I like the idea of a wizard being worn out after using magic and needing a rest. My inclination is to use LTE rules for magic, but that seems a bit too costly and limiting. A warrior could swing a sword all day, but a wizard could only cast spells until his LTE is drained, and wouldn't be able to do anything even more mundane to be useful because he'd be too exhausted, with no recovery until much later. It seems too punitive. Is there a way to manipulate the LTE rules so that it returns at a rate faster than REC/5 hours (if I remember the rule correctly)?

 

So I'm thinking an Endurance Reserve with the Double Endurance Limitation. This would draw END from the reserve as well as personal END. The END could be recovered, but the Reserve would only recharge as a slower rate. This way a wizard could cast spells until the Reserve is spent, but still have the END to do other non-magical things. He wouldn't become totally useless to the party. The drawback with this is that it doesn't make using magic costly enough for my taste. Is there a way to allow for END to be used when LTE is spent, but then only recovered at the rate of LTE? 

 

If I do go with the Endurance Reserve, what's a good number for that? Any ideas? I'm thinking spells in the 40 AP range for beginners, with some of them, like defense spells, being constant. It seems the Reserve would have to be big enough for defense to be practical for several Turns while also using attack spells. But what's a good number for the Reserve? I have no idea on this one.

 

Any suggestions are most welcome!

[Christopher R Taylor]

I did it with a new stat called "Mana" that's basically a separate END pool.  However, I do recommend costing at least 1 LTE for each spell because magic is so much more flexible and often powerful than a weapon.

 

As for using END Reserve, I'd key it based on the active cost limits you put on effects in your game, and how many you want being cast.  If the average warrior has 30 END, then 30 END reserve for the mage seems reasonable; they do roughly the same thing.

[Old Man]

Yes, and then build an area effect Transfer END to Mana, and the mage can burn the warrior's END instead! 

 

Virtually every FH game I've played in has run magic out of END or a Mana stat (typically figured as EGOx2). I detest tracking either so I have a tendency to buy spells down to 0 END anyway.

 

I did write up one Dark Sun campaign where I was going to have spells run off environmental mana, wherein casters would be equipped with an area effect Transfer Mana (or vegetation Body) to an internal Mana that would then power their spells.  It would have been cool as it would have forced casters to move around to hexes that hadn't yet been drained, but it was also going to be a hell of an exercise in bookkeeping.

[Crusher Bob]

Be careful with things like magic requiring an END reserve and similar, or you are just making mages pay more points to suck more.

 

An example:

Grainwind can

throw fire: 2d6 RKA

 

turn invisible (invisibility vs sight group)

 

and fly (12m flight)

 

He has to buy a bunch of END reserve, etc etc

 

Jack can:

'Shoot things with a bow: 2d6 RKA (OAF, etc)

 

is really sneaky: stealth 16-

 

and can 'Jump good'

+8m leaping (12m total)

12m gliding

 

-----------------

 

Grainwind's abilities are a bit more useful than Jack's, but we presume that they also cost more points.  If, in addition, you make Grainwind have to pay a bunch of extra points so that he ends up being worse off than Jack, no one will want to play Grainwind.

 

-----------------

 

If you want to limit magic make sure it ends up cheaper than 'unlimited' magic.

[Old Man]

In my experience Fantasy Hero mages do require additional cost and limitations to prevent them from becoming to versatile and taking over the campaign.  A mage with an RKA, Invisibility, and Superleap can be somewhat approximated by a normal.  A mage with Telekinesis, Teleport, and Desolid can't.  Even a few inches of Flight can make a wizard completely invulnerable to a majority of fantasy encounters, forcing the GM to equip everyone with bows and populate the countryside with harpies and dragons.

[MrKinister]

Nice... Samurai Jack "Jump Good". =)

[Crusher Bob]

One thing I can think of is an END battery that is more symbolic that 'needed'.  You build the main spell power framework, and then add a minor disad that it has to use something like 1/end per spell level (or whatever) and then slap some form of limited recovery condition on the END battery REC.  That should make your END battery pretty cheap in points, and mostly do what you want.

 

Basic example:

Definition:

Spell levels, every 20 active points of a spell indicates it level.  For example, a 15 active point spell is level 1; a 30 active point spell is level 2, etc.

 

Spell multipower x point reserve (limitation, must draw 1 point of END per spell level from END battery (-1/4))

 

Spell battery

20 END (5 points)

3 REC (some limited recovery limitation (-1/2)) (1 point)

 

---------------------------

 

Assuming your spell multipower is 40 active points, you spend up to 8 points less on the multipower.  You pay 6 points for the END battery, and can cast 10 full power spells or 20 weak spells (or some combination) before you have to meet your recovery condition.

[Wardsman]

I like the idea of a wizard being worn out after using magic and needing a rest. My inclination is to use LTE rules for magic, but that seems a bit too costly and limiting. A warrior could swing a sword all day, but a wizard could only cast spells until his LTE is drained, and wouldn't be able to do anything even more mundane to be useful because he'd be too exhausted, with no recovery until much later. It seems too punitive. Is there a way to manipulate the LTE rules so that it returns at a rate faster than REC/5 hours (if I remember the rule correctly)?

 

So I'm thinking an Endurance Reserve with the Double Endurance Limitation. This would draw END from the reserve as well as personal END. The END could be recovered, but the Reserve would only recharge as a slower rate. This way a wizard could cast spells until the Reserve is spent, but still have the END to do other non-magical things. He wouldn't become totally useless to the party. The drawback with this is that it doesn't make using magic costly enough for my taste. Is there a way to allow for END to be used when LTE is spent, but then only recovered at the rate of LTE? 

 

If I do go with the Endurance Reserve, what's a good number for that? Any ideas? I'm thinking spells in the 40 AP range for beginners, with some of them, like defense spells, being constant. It seems the Reserve would have to be big enough for defense to be practical for several Turns while also using attack spells. But what's a good number for the Reserve? I have no idea on this one.

 

Any suggestions are most welcome!

 

First question why isn't the fighter facing LTE if is pushing himself?

 

One thing I haver been thinking for a setting is Mages must gather the spell energy into an END reserve that does not recover.

That costs LTE but all other spells must use that reserve.

 

Assuming 6th still uses 1 END per 10 active points, make every spell use 1 END per 5 active pointsas a campaign rule.

Or require LTE at 1 per 20 active points.

[Surrealone]

In my experience Fantasy Hero mages do require additional cost and limitations to prevent them from becoming to versatile and taking over the campaign.  A mage with an RKA, Invisibility, and Superleap can be somewhat approximated by a normal.  A mage with Telekinesis, Teleport, and Desolid can't.  Even a few inches of Flight can make a wizard completely invulnerable to a majority of fantasy encounters, forcing the GM to equip everyone with bows and populate the countryside with harpies and dragons.

Charges (a la limit on spells per day) is the easy way to address the problems described by Old Man ... and also simulate the effects of LTE (diminishing returns of spell use) without the headaches or hassles associated with LTE.  If, however, END use is desired from a cinematic standpoint (as per the OP's preference), then a combination of Charges and a Limitation that requires half END to Activate a spell (in addition to gestures, incantations, etc.) may make sense ... while keeping mage REC and END characteristics deliberately low.

 

Using such an approach results in a max number of spells per day that simulates the debilitating effects of channeling magic ... while also tying spell use to END so that END must be managed by mages for spell use, movement, carrying/lifting things, etc. (just like everyone else). 

[eepjr24]

I use a modified LTE system. You can find details in a couple of posts in the forum addressing my magic system for current FH campaign.

 

- E

[Christopher R Taylor]

In my experience Fantasy Hero mages do require additional cost and limitations to prevent them from becoming to versatile and taking over the campaign.

 

I agree, you need to be careful with that kind of thing.  For example, I don't allow just plain flight for the reason you describe.  You can turn into a bird (and lose spellcasting) but you cannot just fly around like superman.  I don't allow 0 END (mana) cost spells, I require all spells to have a magic skill roll so something can go wrong, etc.  

 

Magic has to be controlled for another reason though: it has to feel like magic or you damage the campaign as well.  If your mage is just an energy projector with a robe on, now it feels like a strange champions campaign where everyone else is a loser with a sword.

[Tom Cowan]

Charges (a la limit on spells per day) is the easy way to address the problems described by Old Man ... and also simulate the effects of LTE (diminishing returns of spell use) without the headaches or hassles associated with LTE.  If, however, END use is desired from a cinematic standpoint (as per the OP's preference), then a combination of Charges and a Limitation that requires half END to Activate a spell (in addition to gestures, incantations, etc.) may make sense ... while keeping mage REC and END characteristics deliberately low.

 

Using such an approach results in a max number of spells per day that simulates the debilitating effects of channeling magic ... while also tying spell use to END so that END must be managed by mages for spell use, movement, carrying/lifting things, etc. (just like everyone else). 

Some thing like this? So each spell costs 4 END to use.  the Dart of Ice spell costs up to 12 END, 4 for each dart.

 

22 points: Spell Pool Multipower, 45-point reserve, (45 APs); all slots Restrainable (-½), Costs Endurance (-½)

1f Fire Jet Blast 7d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +¼) (44 APs); 4 Charges (-1), Costs Endurance (-½), No Range (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

1f Bolt of Fire Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6 (45 APs); 2 Charges (-1 ½), Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

1f Bolt of Lighting Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6 (45 APs); 2 Charges (-1 ½), Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

2f Dart of Ice Killing Attack - Ranged 2d6, Autofire (3 shots; +¼) (45 APs); Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼), 32 Charges (+¼)

[Tom Cowan]

What do the non spell casters look like?  Are the swordsmen bricks with brick trick power pools?

[Tom Cowan]

What do the non spell casters look like?  Are the swordsmen bricks with brick trick power pools?

Should have been in: Creating a magic system with Multipowers? thread, oops.

[womble]

Be careful with things like magic requiring an END reserve and similar, or you are just making mages pay more points to suck more.

 

An example:

Grainwind can

throw fire: 2d6 RKA

 

turn invisible (invisibility vs sight group)

 

and fly (12m flight)

 

He has to buy a bunch of END reserve, etc etc

 

Jack can:

'Shoot things with a bow: 2d6 RKA (OAF, etc)

 

is really sneaky: stealth 16-

 

and can 'Jump good'

+8m leaping (12m total)

12m gliding

 

-----------------

 

Grainwind's abilities are a bit more useful than Jack's, but we presume that they also cost more points.  If, in addition, you make Grainwind have to pay a bunch of extra points so that he ends up being worse off than Jack, no one will want to play Grainwind.

 

-----------------

 

If you want to limit magic make sure it ends up cheaper than 'unlimited' magic.

Magic doesn't have to  be the most efficient way of doing things, but it can be attractive (even if it's inefficient) if it allows you to do things that can't be done without magic. In your example, maybe the RKA is a waste of points tou buy with magic, but a human can't Glide without some sort of assistance, and +8m Leaping is, IMO, more than even a Hero should be able to buy "straight". Magic can also be more flexible and attract more modifiers to make the same AP cheaper, even if you do have to buy a separate END pool to be able to use it. And you could also make the END pool a "custom stat" that everyone starts with some of, even if they can't use magic. It's free so if they get a story reason to buy some magic later, even the unGifted won't start off sucking wind, and starting magical specialists don't have to buy it up from zero any more than your athletics specialist has to buy "regular" END up from nought.

[Brian Stanfield]

a Limitation that requires half END to Activate a spell (in addition to gestures, incantations, etc.) may make sense ... while keeping mage REC and END characteristics deliberately low.

 

What do you mean by "requires half END?" I can't quite envision what you mean here. I'm interested . . . .

[Brian Stanfield]

I use a modified LTE system. You can find details in a couple of posts in the forum addressing my magic system for current FH campaign.

 

- E

 

Can you point me to those posts? I'd really appreciate it.

[Brian Stanfield]

Some thing like this? So each spell costs 4 END to use.  the Dart of Ice spell costs up to 12 END, 4 for each dart.

 

22 points: Spell Pool Multipower, 45-point reserve, (45 APs); all slots Restrainable (-½), Costs Endurance (-½)

1f Fire Jet Blast 7d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +¼) (44 APs); 4 Charges (-1), Costs Endurance (-½), No Range (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

1f Bolt of Fire Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6 (45 APs); 2 Charges (-1 ½), Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

1f Bolt of Lighting Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6 (45 APs); 2 Charges (-1 ½), Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

2f Dart of Ice Killing Attack - Ranged 2d6, Autofire (3 shots; +¼) (45 APs); Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼), 32 Charges (+¼)

 

Forgive my ignorance here, but can you really take a "Costs Endurance" limitation on powers that already should cost END? Or is that a reference to an endurance pool?  

[Tom Cowan]

Forgive my ignorance here, but can you really take a "Costs Endurance" limitation on powers that already should cost END? Or is that a reference to an endurance pool?  

Charges remove the END cost, so the cost END adds the END cost back in.

 

Fire Jet Blast 7d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +¼) (44 APs); 4 Charges (-1), Costs Endurance (-½), No Range (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

 

This spell can only be used 4 time per day and it cost END. Oh and this spell uses normal damage and not killing so the 7d6 is not as killing as it could look like.

 

This would make it draining to cost a lot of spells fast and also Limitation total number of spells per day with out LTE tracking.

[eepjr24]

Can you point me to those posts? I'd really appreciate it.

Here you go.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93703-magic-system-comments-welcome/

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93884-divine-magic-system/

[Chris Goodwin]

Be careful with things like magic requiring an END reserve and similar, or you are just making mages pay more points to suck more.

 

I'm all about not paying to suck.  END Reserve in that respect has bugged me forever.  That leads me to a house rule: if you have an END Reserve that has its REC Limited in some way, you can take a Limitation on the Powers that draw on it.  Call it something like Draws On END Reserve With Limited REC, and its value is related to the value of the Limitation on the REC.  Half that Limitation's value?  I'm not sure yet, but that feels right.

[Cantriped]

Personally, I think the easiest ways to ensure that spellcasting is tiring are to:

1)  Require that all tiring forms of spellcasting cost END, and perhaps even require Increased END Cost (between x2 to x4); especially on Instant Attack Powers. I can see allowing Half-END for Constant (and especially Uncontrolled) Powers.

2)  Enforce the standard LTE rules across the board; for ease of book keeping I think you can safely ignore the first three step on the Long-Term Endurance Table (CC 19, FHC 22).

3)  Strongly encourage (or require) both warriors and sorcerers not to exceed the Normal Characteristic Maxima on END & REC.

[Wardsman]

Posted Today, 08:47 PM

Crusher Bob, on 13 Dec 2016 - 11:01 PM, said:

Be careful with things like magic requiring an END reserve and similar, or you are just making mages pay more points to suck more.

 

I'm all about not paying to suck.  END Reserve in that respect has bugged me forever.  That leads me to a house rule: if you have an END Reserve that has its REC Limited in some way, you can take a Limitation on the Powers that draw on it.  Call it something like Draws On END Reserve With Limited REC, and its value is related to the value of the Limitation on the REC.  Half that Limitation's value?  I'm not sure yet, but that feels right.

 

 I must respectfully disagree with crusher bob. I can Remember when END reserve was a limitation. I remember when it changed too(4th Ed). And I agree with the change. Broke my heart to rebuild him but I understand why.

 

The Amazing Starfire (Light Elemental) had all his powers bought through that.

Here was the problem. Since all of Starfire's powers  ran on an END battery. He could get knocked out, recover with just 2 stun and END, groggily stand up and cut loose with a laser attack that would slice open a tank.

That is why it is no longer a limitation. That is why your not paying points to suck if you use end reserves!

[Brian Stanfield]

Charges remove the END cost, so the cost END adds the END cost back in.

 

Fire Jet Blast 7d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +¼) (44 APs); 4 Charges (-1), Costs Endurance (-½), No Range (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

 

This spell can only be used 4 time per day and it cost END. Oh and this spell uses normal damage and not killing so the 7d6 is not as killing as it could look like.

 

This would make it draining to cost a lot of spells fast and also Limitation total number of spells per day with out LTE tracking.

 

Got it. Thanks for the clarifications!

[Brian Stanfield]

 

Here you go.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93703-magic-system-comments-welcome/

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93884-divine-magic-system/

 

 

Thanks!  Your comment below caught my attention because I'm concerned with the same effects (exhaustion, etc.). What I didn't see (and I may have missed it) is whether using LTE for spells is a Limitation for the spells. 

 

Honestly, I think LTE will be a significant issue but not a crippling one. .If a Mage has full END for NCM we are talking about 50 LTE they would have to burn. And they could recover up to 30 in a full day of rest (two 5 hour long rests plus 8 hours of sleep). What it stops is having zero carry over from exhausting yourself with spells the previous day. And ties in physical exertion as well.

 

- E

 

 

This is what I'm considering for my campaign. Let me know how you think this compares. I'd like to combine LTE with an Endurance Reserve in this way:

• All spells casters will have suffer the effects of LTE as per RAW, with a REC every 5 hours.
• All spells casters will have an Endurance Reserve with the following characteristics:
  • 40 END reserve (10 AP)
  • 9 REC (6 AP) (I'm thinking of rounding this up to 10 for cleanliness in bookkeeping)
  • Slow REC: every 5 hours (to match the LTE time scale) (-5 Limitation on REC)
  • Total starting cost of Endurance Reserve is 11 CP.
  • Every spell will take the Double Endurance Cost Limitation (-1/2), so they draw from BOTH personal END and the Endurance Reserve.

It costs 11 points, so it's a bit of a penalty during character creation, but it can be bought up with XP. 

 

Case 1 Let's assume a beginning spell costs 3 END and the character has a base of 30 END, 3 SPD, and 10 REC:

• In the first Turn, the character may cast 3 spells for a total of 9/9 END (personal/reserve). If he moves, or is carrying weight, etc., lets assume 1 END per phase, for a total of 12/9 END spent. That will leave the character, after post-segment 12 REC, with 28/31 (personal/reserve totals).
• Turns 2, same thing, resulting in a total END of 26/22.
• He can continue at this rate for 2 more Turns, ending out with 22/4 END after 4 Turns. After casting 12 basic level spells, he's tapped out magically, but not completely incapacitated for other activities.
• As for the LTE, he's been going at a constant rate for almost a minute, but he loses only 1 point of LTE, which brings him down to 29 LTE.

 

Case 2 I'd like it to be a bit more costly here, but I don't want to do a x2 END Limitation because he'd be wiped out after a very short period. Given the same as above, with a x2 END cost Limitation:

• Turn 1: 3 spells cost 18 END, and other activities add to that. Let's round it to 20 END per Turn for simplicity. With a post-segment 12 REC, he's at 20/22 END (personal/Reserve).
• Turn 2: same arrangement, ending after segment 12 with 10/4. He's done with spells after casting only 6 basic ones, and is teetering on exhaustion. 
• LTE rules have him using 2x his REC per turn, so he loses 2 LTE after his 2 turns, capping him at 28 LTE.

The end result with the LTE in both scenarios is that he can't keep going long enough to lose any significant amount of LTE.

• Is there a way to modify the Double END Cost so that it is variable which END it draws from?
• Perhaps more from the personal and less from the Reserve? 
• Can you double the END cost just on the regular END usage in addition to the Double END Cost Limitation? This would seem to combine these two cases in a more desirable way.

Case 3 Or maybe I can simply draw magic from the LTE itself, as you have suggested. Is that worth a limitation on the spells? Let me redo the 2 examples above, drawing from LTE and see what the result is:

• Turn 1: 3 spells at 9 END and other activities totaling 12 END. LTE is now at 21, with personal END at 18 and the END Reserve at 31. Recovery only affects personal END, so the final totally are 21/28/31 (LTE/Personal/Reserve). However, personal END can't exceed LTE, so it's 21/21/31
• Turn 2: same: END 12/12/22
• Turn 3: same: LTE 3/3/13

Again, after 3 Turns of basic spell usage, this guy is wiped for any kind of activity, spells or otherwise, and will need at least a full day or more of REC just to be able to do normal stuff again.

 

I'm not satisfied with any of these!

 

I'm thinking of connecting the END Reserve to LTE, to be calculated in total after the battle. As per case 1 above, after the battle, personal END would be 22 and the Endurance Reserve would be 4. If I compare the total use of the Endurance Reserve of 36 to his normal REC of 10, it is 4x his REC. He'd lose 4 LTE per Turn, and after 4 Turns this drops his LTE from 30 to 14. This seems to be the effect I'm going for, but it is contrived, and really doesn't follow the LTE rules as written (using total END expenditure rather than averaged over extended usage). The LTE RAW don't accomplish what I'm looking for, although my house rule here does. But in the end, it's just too contrived and too hard to explain to someone new to the system. 

 

I'm leaning towards doubling the END cost just on the personal END, while keeping the Double Endurance Cost on each spell as well. Is this kosher?

 

Going back and looking at your quote above, I'm thinking of going with just an LTE rule like you suggest. Is there a Limitation associated with this? -1/2?

 

Thanks again for your suggestions! Sorry for the ridiculously long post. If you made it through, +3 skill levels to your KS: crazy rules discussions.