Need help mage balancing!

[Yamo]

Here's my problem:

 

How do I balance magic-using and non-magic-using characters in a HERO fantasy game?

 

Making the magic-users buy all their spells with the standard Power rules doesn't seem to be the answer. Even if they purchase just a few moderately useful ones, it seems to require so many points that the fighting characters in the group can buy multiple 5 or 8-point CSLs for each spell the magic-users do. This quickly leads to competent wizards and absolutely GODLIKE swordswingers; an undesirable situation.

 

The main solution I can see to this is utilizing Power Frameworks, with a sizable Variable Point Pool or all spells purchased as part of a magic Multipower. This tends to have the opposite effect, however. The VPP method is a fairly cheap and largly one-time purchase and makes mages unbelievably flexible, even if they can only change during "downtime." The Multipower method has them purchasing powerful new spells for perhaps too little, 3-5 Real Points at most. Here we have mages as gods and everybody else as peons.

 

Any help?

[Old Man]

One thing you might consider is boosting some of the limitations. For example, concentrate 1/2 DCV is a huge limitation in FH that really ought to be worth more than a paltry -1/4, especially if you're playing with optional combat rules like critical hits and hit locations. On top of that, in FH you need to get used to the idea of just heaping on the limitations--incantations, gestures, concentrate, skill roll, foci, side effects, extra time.

 

If you want to go the framework route I'd go with the EC. Multipowers and VPPs make mages much too versatile. The only problem the EC has is it really forces the mage to keep all his spells at the same active point level, which in my book is not a good thing.

 

Another thing I'd like to point out is that mages tend to be far more powerful than any warrior under certain circumstances. They excel out of combat with powers like telepathy, detect, and healing. In combat they have to 'cheat', but can hold their own using flash, flight, desolid, area effects, and so on. In fact, flight and force field are too cheap for FH, IMO.

[Talon]

What Old Man said -- don't forget that mages get access to a huge range of special effects, while fighters do not. If mages can equal fighters in damage and defense, they are going to be too powerful, since they will also have lots of other abilities.

 

Put the fighter up against a mage with Invis, Flight, and Ego Attack and see how his CSLs help him.

[JohnTaber]

Hi Yamo: To refresh...

 

Making the magic-users buy all their spells with the standard Power rules doesn't seem to be the answer. Even if they purchase just a few moderately useful ones, it seems to require so many points that the fighting characters in the group can buy multiple 5 or 8-point CSLs for each spell the magic-users do. This quickly leads to competent wizards and absolutely GODLIKE swordswingers; an undesirable situation.

 

Boy...in my games I have the other problem (i.e. the mages are much grosser and everyone wants to play mystically enhanced fighters). I use the regular power rules, force certain limitations (RSR:Magic), and even force mages to spend a certain amount of points on spells. In my experience spells in FH are often PACKED with Limitations. This brings the cost down and closes the level gap. Especially spells not used in combat or ones started with Trigger where the casting can be "preped". In a way this naturally restricts the amount of big bang mage spells and makes it even easier to buy the out of combat spell...this is a good effect in my mind. Take a fire blast spell. You might get RSR, Focus:OAF w Fragile and Prep Time, Gestures, Incantations, etc. With a 50 Active point spell (maybe 8d6 with Reduced END) that's around 14 or 15 points for a pretty great thing.

 

Another thing that closes the fighter vs mage gap is the stat costs. Mages really only need INT. Fighters need more DEX, CON, BOD, Speed, Running, and WF skills than mages.

 

Just my take...

[AnotherSkip]

Skips suggestions

 

trigger is a good one, actually combining trigger with the D&D spell level system is a decent idea too (if you like that sort of thing).

 

Hmm my suggestion to add to the mix is low level VPPs are cool. in the 15 to 30 point range (i suggest you begin at 15 base for newbies and root up from there with xp) is really a decent level you can perform many minor magics but you are not going to be casting the "KILL ALL GODS" spell . for the real powerhouse spells have them be built and paid just like individual powers.

 

 

And if any of you are shocked by the theory of a caster with different forms of spellcasting (and different power Skills to boot!) just keep in mind I have two of the three different forms of spellcasting in my Gm's game, Arcane (indi powers) and Spritiualism(VPP Sfx spirits)

 

 

almost forgot Spiritualism uses Pre based Power skill, Arcane uses Int based and Mentallism uses Ego based.

 

Ego is good for BOECV attacks, Pre is good for many things and int, Int ROCKS esp when you have scholar and massive numbers of Ks's!!!

[The Mad GM]

Active Point Cap! No spell can have more AP than 1/4 total points in character plus 1/3 INT(that's just an example, many other such ratios exist, like only up to 2xINT or EGO or PRS, or only up to EGO+INT, or whatever). That limits starting mages to about 40 points, roughly 8 damage classes, equal to a decent starting fighter. As they gain experience, it forces them to buy more spells rather than simply beef up the ones they already have, because the AP goes up slower than the points available. Or you could limit it lower, say 1/5 total points, and force them to rely on effects that only magic can do, like Flash, Invis, TK, etc.

 

I've never taken it this far, but you could simulate different colleges by having different ways of calculating the AP max. But you have to be careful, because it takes twice as long for EGO to go up as it does INT or PRS. And using total points means that they don't have to spend it on the required stats, the max goes up regardless, and they can spend points straight away for more spells. As long as the total cost multipliers for the stats are even, with the same fraction of total character points, it could work.

 

And you can enforce such a rule easily on MP or VPP, since the pool cost is the AP limit anyway.

[Chris Goodwin]

If you don't want superhero level mages, and also don't want superhero magically enhanced fighters, try this: require anyone who wants magical abilities to buy like a 10 point Power or Perk. Perhaps it is The Sight, or perhaps it is some funky genetic or spiritual thing. That'll burn up 10 of the mage's points, plus it makes it unlikely a non-mage is going to pay 10 points just for a couple of abilities. You might also see fewer mages overall.

[Legendsmiths]

Seems like everywhere I turn I'm pimping my magic system. Ah well....

 

I feel your pain, and that is one of the reasons I stopped playing FH a while ago. When 5th came out, I really wanted to give it another shake. Me and my group sat down to figure out what we really wanted in a magic system. We already had an idea of the metaphysics of the world, and just needed to decide how the system(s) would work mechanically.

 

In the end we came up with the following types of power:

 

Divine Channels

Psionics

Wizardry

Druidic Power

Innate Power

 

The most common forms of power are Divine Channels and Wizardry. Additionally, we needed to ensure that not only each type was unique, but that they all mechanically were different.

 

For wizardry, this is what we have:

 

http://www.tekhed.com/hero/magic.pdf

 

The other stuff is there as well, but buried. I intend to make the other stuff more accessible, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

 

Feedback is welcome, here or via email. Otherwise, consume and evacuate as necessary.

[Old Man]

Just throwing out some comments on previous posts:

 

I'm starting to not like the idea of active point caps. It would be a good idea if the power costs were balanced for heroic-level fantasy, but they're not. Drains and transfers are just prohibitively expensive, while flight and force field are far too cheap. I understand the concern with mages buying city-smashing spells, but it's incredibly hard to get more than -6 in limitations, even if you try. ECs have a similar effect in that they encourage mages to keep all spells at about the same AP level, without being a hard ceiling.

 

I don't think it's true that mages save points in stats. Every FH character needs to spend points in CON and BODY unless they can somehow be assured of not taking damage.

 

I usually ban the trigger limitation except in unusual circumstances. It makes it too easy for mages to stack lims without suffering any real penalty. Plus it feels like D&D. Charges are usually a better fit for those special effects that might need trigger, like alchemy.

 

I'm hoping 5th ed. FH will have a greatly expanded section on spell limitations. Side effects have lots of potential but the current "30 AP side effect" just doesn't cut it. Foci are another--there need to be guidelines for expensive and/or rare foci limitations.

[Markdoc]

My approach has been:

1) limit the spells magic users have access to - they have to spend considerable time out of the game researching if they want to make new ones, or they have to find them or pry them from the cold dead fingers of other mages. That lets me control what I let into the game, without setting absolute limits, which I detest

 

2) allow mages to use power frameworks. Since the VPP costs real points and the MP can only have the common limitations, that means high active point powers normally mean a significant outlay of points. These are points that the fighter types can spend on Stat.s and CSLs. This gives the mages flexibility at the cost of raw power.

 

3) allow everybody else to use power frameworks too. If the mage has a "powers of the ice gods" spell multipower, the thief can have a "cool thief tricks" multipower, giving him nifty tricks like better stealth, vanishing teleport, etc.

 

4) restrict points. If you give everyone 150-200 points, with power frameworks in the mix, expect heavy-duty characters.

 

5) enforce genre limitations. In my games, there are certain (fairly severe) limitations that all mages (PC and NPC) must take, which reduces their effectivenes sin combat (concentration has already been mentioned). A thiefly multipower could contain cool climbing, hiding and door-opening tricks - but not flight or energy blast. Remember all power frameworks must be approved by the GM. My approach is that it sounds like a cool genre thing, it will probably work. If confronted with a "Ki-energy-wielding mutant tiger-man multipower" I'd just say no.

 

cheers, Mark

[Legendsmiths]

I agree with Markdoc. You have to enforce arbitrary limitations to preserve balance.

 

I use real point limits on spells, not active points. That way if you want to build a city shattering spell, you may need bulky, arranged foci, 1 week to cast and so on.

 

Additionally, for "special" (i.e. cheap) powers, I specify fewer limitaitons and require Difficult to Dispel x4 (+ 1/2). This increases the cost of the power, without being totally arbitrary, and makes those spells as difficult as attacks to dispel. A good solution all around.

[Vondy]

I've been requireing spells to:

 

take at least one full phase to cast

to require concentration

to cost long term endurace

to cost increased endurance for flash and dazzle spells (combat)

Skill roll

 

In addition spells should have other lims on them where appropriate:

 

incantations or gestures, or both

components (often expendable or expensive)

time or material restriction (during the equinox, not versus cold iron)

Side effects (i.e. channeling entropic energies is risky: 1 Pip Major Transformation, Cumulative, BOECV, AVLD "soul corruption")

 

This allows mages to have major hoo-doo spells without being able to cast them every five minutes, though some sort of mana system is a good idea (lotus powder, expendable crystals, whatever).

 

I've found restricting spell and component access to be among the best ways, though.

 

"Hah! I have mastered the spell of major hoo-doo! Now all I need is a fire-opal the size of a baseball with an intricate filligree of runes and dragons that has been dipped in the freshly spilled blood of a dying elven monarch on the night of the winter equinox! Once I have it I shall rule the world! Mwahahahahahahaha!!!!"

[Blue Angel]

Limiting Casters

 

Another way to keep spell casters under control is to use an END reserve (Mana) pool.

 

I stipulate that the Mana reserve cannot have more points than the active VPP size. This automaticly limits casters to no more than 10 of their most powerful spells without rest. Recovery is on a per hour basis.

 

On top of the Mana reserve casters also have to spend personal END. Mana for the magic pool they can tap into and personal END to represent the effort required to channel magical power.

[Legendsmiths]

The only thing I didn't like about END Reserves is that they are so cheap. A 40 pt pool with recovery per hour isn't going to be much more than 5 points.

 

Are you doing something different, Blue?

[Blue Angel]

Originally posted by mudpyr8

The only thing I didn't like about END Reserves is that they are so cheap. A 40 pt pool with recovery per hour isn't going to be much more than 5 points.

 

Are you doing something different, Blue?

 

 

Hey mud,

 

Yes the END reserves are cheap.

 

The point though isn't the points. It's the restrictions I want to place on casters to limit how much casting they can do in any one time interval. The recovery is restricted so that casters take typically 5-8 hrs total to get back all points and must rest or meditate to recover the reserve. So the points don't come back while they are evading the Orc horde.

 

Remember, also that I make them pay personal END as well so in fact, they have payed the extra 5 points or so and get an additional restriction with it. Of course they get the also pays END limitation on spells.

 

It's like when building some spells. In some cases the extra -1/4 limitation doesn't make any difference on the real cost (when you are dealing with disad totals in the 3-6 range). But it is not the cost that matters in Fantasy. It is making the spell behave the way it 'should' regardless of the difference in cost.

 

I didn't care that the reserves were cheap. It just had to be a controling factor.

[Spyritwind]

Some good points posted already. There are sooo many ways you can balance this out and many of them are mentioned. Myself I've never had a problem with multipowers being used. Of course I empliment an AP cap so that the mage can't crank out a 5d6 RKA.

 

I also allow a secondary multipower to be purchased which will stack on top of the first one. It will have all the same limitations as the first main MP, but will add the limitation (only advantages). This helps for purchasing spell concepts that are just too weak to be worth it once you stack all the advantages on it that you need.

 

For 150 pt characters I allow a 40 pt AP cap for the 'raw' power and +20 for advantages only. This doesn't solve all the problems, but it helps a little for spell like 'sleep'. At least you can get in a 6d6 NND for one target or 4d6 NND for a small area for instance.

 

Points well taken on the cost of powers for FH. Defensive and Movement powers are too cheap for FH and as mentioned to aid, drains, tranfers, etc are a bit expensive. Adjustments need to be made on those. NEway ...

 

If your spell caster has enough limitations and RSR there shouldn't be a problem and YES concertrate is a much bigger disadvantage than - 1/4. Spell casters at half DCV and perhaps needing a litle extra time be that full phase, going later in your phase, or next segment, or what ever can hurt a lot.

 

On the issue of MP's. They cost a lot up front if you want a decent power level so that will scare off casual use of them and RSR const a lot of additional points as well if you want to make your rolls most of the time. It ends up being an investment that's for certain. Sure, the mage can then buy a new spell every adventure or two, but then again the fighter can buy a new skill level or MA manuever that often as well right?

 

If it cost END to run the spells then the invisable, flying, ego blasting mage wont be able to keep that up for long. Besides, the mage has to stay alive long enough to power up three spells to put himself in that position and there by give up the entire first turn of combat. This assuming he doesn't get crowned while at 1/2 DCV, or that he had to cancel his spell which required a full phase in order to run away from a charging orc with a battle axe, or what ever.

 

I'm not saying mages may not be usefull in a campaign (all depends on what the GM allows), but even mages with MP's as I've mentioned are not nescisarily gods.

 

Fighters doing 2 1/2 to 3d6 hka with high OCV's while wearing heavy armor can do a whole lot of damage. Heavy long bows fired twice in one round from a high OCV archer can hurt too.

 

The amount of points a mage has to spend on magic and spells usually mean that they have a lower str, dex, con & body, if not also spd & pd/ed. This means lower stun, recovery, easy to stun and knock out as well as having a lower base CV, or at least not usually a high one.

 

It doesn't get much worse than starting combat with little to no armor (if playing DnD style mage), low stun, easy to stun, low body, moderate to low DCV and no more than a 3 spd when you realize your first action will be to use up your entire first phase to try to cast a protection spell on your self, so that you might survive if you are hit even once, while remaining at half DCV until the phase after that one and your not even 100% certain you will even make your Magic Skill Roll.

 

Even if a mage manages to crank out a 2 1/2d6 AP lighting bolt it's likely to be more inaccurate than any figther attack and may even suffer from range penalties.

 

The right powers at the right level used in the right ways can be nasty and this may often be in non combat situtions which could upset game balance. Yes, you have to be careful of what you allow, but most of the time I don't think it should be a problem.

 

Oh, another reason why some might not the use of MP's is because you really miss the deference between the cost of spells. Some spells may, or should have certain limitations put on them do to flavor, but it may not make an actual point difference in an MP slot.

 

Have the mage purchase Spell Points. 10 SP's cost one point. Then spend the SP's on the MP slots with the catch that you pay REAL (SP) points for them instead of the points divided by five or ten. This means that you get what you pay for. No more cheesing the point breaks.

[Checkmate]

My idea

 

I went with the VPP but I limited it by INT. The player had to come up with a number of spells = 1/2 his INT score, and these were the only spells he could use his VPP for. He could increase the number of spells by spending real cost/10 XP's.

 

So a mage with an 18 INT buys his VPP, he then creates 9 spells that fit into that VPP, and these are the only 9 spells he can use.

[James Gillen]

Originally posted by Markdoc

My approach has been:

1) limit the spells magic users have access to - they have to spend considerable time out of the game researching if they want to make new ones, or they have to find them or pry them from the cold dead fingers of other mages. That lets me control what I let into the game, without setting absolute limits, which I detest

 

2) allow mages to use power frameworks. Since the VPP costs real points and the MP can only have the common limitations, that means high active point powers normally mean a significant outlay of points. These are points that the fighter types can spend on Stat.s and CSLs. This gives the mages flexibility at the cost of raw power.

 

Good points. The main 'limitation' of a VPP is the fact that its Base Cost is the limit on Active Points in any one Power; thus if a mage wants a real world-beater spell above his VPP limit, he'd have to buy the spell separately with tons of Limitations; then if the Pool is allowed to be increased to that level, the XP difference reflects the time it took for the mage to 'master' that spell so it isn't as difficult to use.

 

3) allow everybody else to use power frameworks too. If the mage has a "powers of the ice gods" spell multipower, the thief can have a "cool thief tricks" multipower, giving him nifty tricks like better stealth, vanishing teleport, etc.

 

This also accounts for non-magical D&D-type "feats" like backstabbing (+xd6 HKA, OIF/appropriate weapon, only with Surprise).

 

JG

[ShadowRaptor]

Originally posted by mudpyr8

Seems like everywhere I turn I'm pimping my magic system. Ah well....

 

I feel your pain, and that is one of the reasons I stopped playing FH a while ago. When 5th came out, I really wanted to give it another shake. Me and my group sat down to figure out what we really wanted in a magic system. We already had an idea of the metaphysics of the world, and just needed to decide how the system(s) would work mechanically.

 

In the end we came up with the following types of power:

 

Divine Channels

Psionics

Wizardry

Druidic Power

Innate Power

 

The most common forms of power are Divine Channels and Wizardry. Additionally, we needed to ensure that not only each type was unique, but that they all mechanically were different.

 

For wizardry, this is what we have:

 

http://www.tekhed.com/hero/magic.pdf

 

The other stuff is there as well, but buried. I intend to make the other stuff more accessible, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

 

Feedback is welcome, here or via email. Otherwise, consume and evacuate as necessary.

 

I read your magic system and some of it I understand but there is a lot I don't understand at all...POW is limited by the type of mage a person is, that's understandable, it limits the power of the spell a person has, but you really should have a good paragraph or two on exact spell design because I can't figure that out using your system at all. Consider me a newbie for that is what I am, and by the reading of your document it is aimed at hero players that are experienced enough with the system to know what you mean in all areas.

[Legendsmiths]

Loud and clear.

 

I've updated the document. There was a pretty big typo in Dabbler. I've also included a sample mage. The RTF exporter does not include equipment (I don't know why), so he has 3 pts in his personal focus (a spear w/ mage touch) which isn't on the sheet. Other than that, he is a complete 50 pt Dabbler. I will advance him 25 pts and make him a mage, and then make him 100 pts and an archmage.

 

If something is still unclear, let me know. I really want this to be understandable.

 

Thanks.

[ShadowRaptor]

I guess part of my confusion is that you have listed the categories of different kinds of spells fine but when you list the Limitations for them you only provide a number of the total involved and you don't split the Limitations up into each Limitation. I know that to do that would cause you to use more space, but for somebody like me I need to see what's all involved in them and how you get that figure.

 

I also saw that your game is a low powered game, and the way POW works makes a little more sense after seeing the character.

[Legendsmiths]

The reason for not including all of the component limitations is that by-and-large it isn't really that informative, especially because the system isn't 100% "by the book".

 

When you look at it, I'm essentially giving "Based on ECV", an advantage, for free. I'm also making the spellcasting roll part of the attack roll, something that isn't done. The mana used is reduced by the amount of success when casting a spell, for which there are no limitations that provide this. On top of that, standard spells are essentially in a power framework similar to an elemental control. So, when all is said and done it would actually be more confusing to provide all the lims than to simply state what they are. There's a lot of handwaving and fudging going on, but it's not all completely off the deep end.

 

I don't want to include all of this in the normal document, because these limitations are effectively captured when I talk about spellcasting. However, here's what I based it on...

 

The basic lims are:

 

½ Phase Action (-0)

Concentration (-1/4)

Gestures (-1/4)

Incantations (-1/4)

Increased ENDx3 (incl. Long Term END) (-1 1/2)

Side Effects (Extreme, Affects both character/environment, Only on crit fail) (-3/4)

Reduced Range but No Range Penalty (I made this up) (-0)

Combined Attack/Casting Roll based on ECV vs ECV/DCV/3 as appropriate (-0)

Limited by POWER (-1/4)

Personal Focus or Consumable Focus Required (-1/4)

 

Total -3 1/2

 

For Special Spells, Increased END is worth (-2) because while the multiplier is actually x6, the interaction with Limited by POWER prevents them from being high active point spells so I don't feel the full x6 (which would be -3 with long term) is worth it.

 

Total -4

 

Now, where's the -7? Why are additional Standard Lims doubled? The answer lies inside power frameworks. Consider the following:

 

Fire Elemental Control: 20 pts

EC Slot 1 40 - Fire EC (20) = 20 pts

EC Slot 2 40 - Fire EC (20) = 20 pts

EC Slot 3 40 - Fire EC (20) = 20 pts

Apply the limitations to all of those. 20 / 4.5 = 4. So, for 20 points total, you just got three 40 active point powers. 40 / 4 = 10, meaning that the active point cost for each slot was effectively divided by 10.

 

Multipower: 40 pts

MP Slot 1 40 / 5 = 8

MP Slot 2 40 / 5 = 8

MP Slot 3 40 / 5 = 8

Apply the limitations to all of those. 40 / 4.5 = 9. 8 / 4.5 = 2. So, for 15 points total you just got three 40 active point powers. 40 / 2 = 20, which is a huge active point multiplier.

 

Notice what happened to the value of limitations. In each case the limitations value was more than doubled or quintupled. A common restriction on power frameworks is that no "special" powers (defenses and the like) can be put inside them, at least not multipowers, without GM permission. I agree with that, they are cheap enough as is.

 

Now, ECs and MPs have their own quirks associated with them. Additionally, they're very mechanical. That lead me to dream up essentially a new power framework for this spell system, with the restriction that only non-special spells can be placed insided it.

 

I created a POWER stat to reflect the MP reserve or EC base. We've tweaked it a little, but the result is still pretty much the same. It is a limiter on the amount of power you can command. Then, trying to keep things simple, I said to simply double the value of all limitations applied to standard spells. This is very similar to the EC effect, and certainly much more "fair" (IMO) than the cheapness of a MP.

 

Voila. There is a certain amount of fudge-factor here, but all in all I think it is relatively balanced. Like all power frameworks it makes powers cheap, which means that in high-point games they are going to be very effective. The flip side of that is that in low-point games, even normals can have some amount of power. So, with this system, you can actually make a dabbler:

 

POW 2 (2 pts)

No increased magic stats

Spellcasting (3 pts)

Ego 11 (2 pts)

Total: 7 pts. No spell can be more than 2 real points so even if you gave him 4 spells he still will only have spent 15 pts total on magic. His spellcasting is 15-, but none of his spells will be more than 2 motes, 3 if it is a special spell. Thus, on a 13- he pays minimum ESS, no long term, and can command about 15 Active points of power. This is good for TK, an RKA, a small entangle, light, basic detects, skills (e.g. lockpicking 15- is a 15 AP special power), leaping, etc. Pretty effective all-in-all (now I want to build this guy). Using traditional FH, he would have to spend 3-4 pts per spell to do the same thing, and he would still have to buy spellcasting and increased stats.

 

I know I used some abbreviations and some short math. Let me know if this doesn't make sense.

[ShadowRaptor]

it makes a lot more sense now. Thank you for explaining it.

 

It is definately aimed at low character point games compared to what I am used to, but thats only because the only games I have played are champions games, and I want to play in a good fantasy game.

[Legendsmiths]

Yeah, I think a good fantasy game needs to start a low points just to have an element of realism. If you start at 150 pts it is really hard to feel threatened by common-folk.

[Dino]

Way back in 3rd Ed. I figured out how to write up D&D style magic in Hero:

 

Start with a VPP. Give it limitations such as Need spellbooks to change slot and Must be well rested to change slot. Then write up each spell as a slot for the Pool with a single charge limitation (fuel or continuing is ok), as well as things like Incantation or Concentrate.

 

Because the spells are slots for the VPP, a character can acuire new ones in character and add them to his spellbook without spending Character points. Because each one has a single charge, it "goes away" when he casts it (unless he memorized multiple copies of it), and takes up it's real cost in points out of his pool.

 

When the mage buys up his pool, he gains the ability to cast "higher level" spells (more AP) as well as memorize more spells at the same time.