Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

[ioticus]

RPG.net has a review of the original FH Grimoire and points out a flaw, which seems valid:

 

"Since Hero System uses a 3d6 system and defines Skill levels as Competent (11-), one of the best in the World (18-); and one of the best of all time (20-), then one of the best wizards of all time is going to have sod-all chance of casting a spell with a skill penalty of -18. A 3 always works, so he's going to have slightly less then a 1-in-200 chance of it working - the same as someone with mere familiarity (8-) with Magic. Oh, mighty mage indeed. Best buy the "Master's Version", then it always works. Alternatively, buy enough points in Magic skill to become a demigod of magic... though that may not fit your character concept.

 

Here's why in metagame point-break terms: let's take Selgar's Spell of the Leafy Shackles (the D&D 'Entangle" spell, remember?). It's got a skill penalty of -5. If I have a 'very skilled' mage (say a Magic roll of 14, as defined in the Hero 5th Core Rules), then I succeed in casting 'Leafy Shackles' on a 9 or less -- 37.5 per cent of the time. The spell costs 8 points to learn (3 points, given that Turakian Age spells cost one-third the usual amount). For 9 points I can have the Master's Verion, which always. No need to roll at all. (And, in the Turakian Age, this still also only costs 3 points - it's free!)"

 

I was wondering what posters here think of the perceived flaw and what they propose as solutions (if they even think there's a problem). Here's the link to the full review:

 

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10021.phtml

 

Please read the full review as the above was taken somewhat out of context. Thanks.

[Eodin]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

I never create spells at -1/10 for that reason. If you ever see my posted stuff with RASR, it's always -0 Lim, No Active Point Penalty. I personally would rather increase the END cost and or time as an indicator of difficulty.

[Curufea]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

Extra time, multiple casters, magical items and equipment that help with the casting of the spell (ie Magical Dagger of Summon Cthulhu, +10 to summon Cthulhu spell skill rolls, OAF)

[dbsousa]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

I have not run a game with Turakian Magic, but I think the way to use a system in which every spell requires a high skill roll, is to encourage the PC's to improve their odds. Taking extra time, using complementary skills, using the circumstances at hand to your advantage, should all increase your chances of casting successfully. I tend to Feng Shui the pluses and minuses; if it makes the story more interesting, I give generous pluses, and if it feels like powergaming, no soup for you!

[Rapier]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

RPG.net has a review of the original FH Grimoire and points out a flaw, which seems valid:

 

"Since Hero System uses a 3d6 system and defines Skill levels as Competent (11-), one of the best in the World (18-); and one of the best of all time (20-), then one of the best wizards of all time is going to have sod-all chance of casting a spell with a skill penalty of -18. A 3 always works, so he's going to have slightly less then a 1-in-200 chance of it working - the same as someone with mere familiarity (8-) with Magic. Oh, mighty mage indeed. Best buy the "Master's Version", then it always works. Alternatively, buy enough points in Magic skill to become a demigod of magic... though that may not fit your character concept.

 

Here's why in metagame point-break terms: let's take Selgar's Spell of the Leafy Shackles (the D&D 'Entangle" spell, remember?). It's got a skill penalty of -5. If I have a 'very skilled' mage (say a Magic roll of 14, as defined in the Hero 5th Core Rules), then I succeed in casting 'Leafy Shackles' on a 9 or less -- 37.5 per cent of the time. The spell costs 8 points to learn (3 points, given that Turakian Age spells cost one-third the usual amount). For 9 points I can have the Master's Verion, which always. No need to roll at all. (And, in the Turakian Age, this still also only costs 3 points - it's free!)"

 

I was wondering what posters here think of the perceived flaw and what they propose as solutions (if they even think there's a problem). Here's the link to the full review:

 

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10021.phtml

 

Please read the full review as the above was taken somewhat out of context. Thanks.

I think the problem starts to come when you classify the Rolls. 11- is 50/50. I'm not sure I would call that competent. I know if my job performance was 50/50 my boss wouldn't call that competent. You also have to look at what kind of character is going to be tossing around spells. Your average magical schlub is not going to have access to those spells. The people that will be casting SHOULD be "one of the best in the world."

 

However, besides all that. First of all a -5 on an RSR means that the power has some 50 AP. That's a chunk of change for your average FH mage and a very high AP cost for that level also.

 

Secondly, it fails to take into account environmental effects. Spending Extra Time, devices (Mage's Staff +3 with Magic Skill, etc) and levels (+3 with Combat Magic).

 

I'm a little looser with my restrictions on Magic Skill Rolls. Since the skill is an RSR requirement for all spells, it gets used an awful lot and is very vital to your average mage. The level of magic is also very controllable by the RSR limits. You want magic to be a little flakey and not rock solid reliable? Lower the Skill cap.

 

Plus thems at RPG.net is punks. Look at the way they talk about Hero. Punks I say, Punks!

[Outsider]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

I just toss the "18- is world class" reasoning.

 

My skill progression :

11- Apprentice (make by 0 with comliment)

14- Journeyman (make by 5 with compliment)

18- Master (make by 10 with compliment)

21- High Master (make by 15)

25- Grand Master (make by 20)

28- Legendary Master (make by 25 with compliment)

31- Mythical Maseter (make by 30 with compliment)

(etc, come up with your own titles)

 

There was also a 'normal skill maxima' after each increment of which levels that applied to a particualr skill cost double.

 

Then I tossed penalties onto most skill rolls based on how hard they are.

 

Skills that were opposed by a perception rolls had hard caps on skill levels (4 or 5 IIRC) Even the worlds most stealthy burglar will have an extremely difficult time dealing with the -10 penalty of wearing bicycle horns on his shoes.

[arcady]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

The problem I see with the Grimoires is that the spells are too powerful for Heroic level play.

 

However, I have no issues with the skill penalties.

 

I use a number of methods in Fahla to let casters temporarily boost skill. Chief among these is ritual magic where a group of mages use their pools of power to Aid a central caster's pool and skill.

 

http://home.pacbell.net/arcady0/fahla/Gaming/magic_Hero.html#ritual

[Curufea]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

The problem I see with the Grimoires is that the spells are too powerful for Heroic level play.

 

'tis the nature of generic gaming. Writers must try to second guess what the most common use will be and attempt contingencies for special cases.

All spells in the grimoires need not be used. Some would suit low level campaigns, and some superheroic.

In many cases, because of the nature of the underlying system, you can change the special effects of a spell to fit other types, and therefore increase the variety of spells to make up for the too-high or too-low ones you choose not to have in your setting.

 

Plus, gearing Fantasy Hero more towards the Champion setting would be the desired format. Because Champions was first, and is still the largest market - and those playing it will be able to easily incorporate the Fantasy resources in their games. The same can be said for Star Hero - The Terran Empire setting is definitely aimed at the superhero level, rather than heroic.

 

But you are forgetting the beauty of a balanced point based system. You can modify it:-

 

Lower the active costs by making the spells weaker.

[Greatwyrm]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

'tis the nature of generic gaming. Writers must try to second guess what the most common use will be and attempt contingencies for special cases.

 

In addition, it's just not really worthwhile to complain about the specifics of how the spell works in the specific magic system. I'd wager that, as with most things in the HERO system, there are as many different ways to do it as people who want to do it. I don't really like the Turakian rp/3 thing either, but that's hardly a fault of the Grimoires.

[CourtFool]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

I think the problem starts to come when you classify the Rolls. 11- is 50/50. I'm not sure I would call that competent. I know if my job performance was 50/50 my boss wouldn't call that competent.

Agreed. This always irked me.

[Markdoc]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

I think the problem starts to come when you classify the Rolls. 11- is 50/50. I'm not sure I would call that competent. I know if my job performance was 50/50 my boss wouldn't call that competent. You also have to look at what kind of character is going to be tossing around spells. Your average magical schlub is not going to have access to those spells. The people that will be casting SHOULD be "one of the best in the world."!

 

Just to quibble - but 11- is about a 60% chance and that's off the top of your head, in one phase, on task of ordinary difficulty, with no help. That's actually pretty damn good - I only wish the people I worked with were so good.

 

So the skill scale is fine with me: 14- means a correct response 80% of the time, without any additional resources, which is pretty damn professional. The problem with skill rolls and spells is the reduction with active points for big spells. In general as a GM I LIKE that - I don't want mages easily flinging 4d6 RKAs in combat. The minuses, as noted by others, more or less require big spells to take extra time, wizardly adjuncts and helpers, etc.

 

The problem cited from in the review revolves around the fact that the spells in the Grimoire are generally too high powered for most FH games. I bought the first grimoire, but ignored the second for that reason. This problem is exacerbated by the Turakian magic system which distorts the points balance in Hero system. Put those two together, and it's not surprising the reviewer has a problem - hell, I have a problem with it and I love Hero system.

 

Cheers, Mark

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

Just to quibble - but 11- is about a 60% chance

Just out of curiosity, Markdoc, how do you arrive at that conclusion?

[Doug Limmer]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

Not that I'm Markdoc or anything, but if you look at all the numbers from 3 to 18:

3 4 5 6 | 7 8 9 10 | 11 12 13 14 | 15 16 17 18

 

The numbers 3 through 10 make up half the numbers, and the numbers 11 through 18 make up the other half. A 10- roll is 50%. [Assuming fair dice, so that the distribution is symmetric.] 11- is greater than 50%. (Specifically, 62.5%.)

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

Yes, I know...I've got a degree in math, too. The problem here is that even though I quoted it, I missed the "about" in his post, and thought he was saying it was 60%, not about 60%. I suppose it'll vary by individual definition whether or not 62.5% is considered "about" 60% or not, but that wasn't the case here...the case here was just my misreading his post, and wondering how he managed to get 60% even as an answer.

 

Sorry about that, Markdoc...not enough coffee yet this morning, I guess.

[Doug Limmer]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

Yes' date=' I know...I've got a degree in math, too.[/quote']Sorry about that. I've seen enough people who seem to think 11- is 50%/50% that I felt I had to point out why it wasn't. (At least I didn't go off into probability density functions this time...)

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

Sorry about that. I've seen enough people who seem to think 11- is 50%/50% that I felt I had to point out why it wasn't. (At least I didn't go off into probability density functions this time...)

No need to apologize, Doug...first off, I'm the one who made the initial error in reading his post, and secondly...though I've said before that one of my degrees is in math, I certainly don't expect people on this board to keep a running scorecard of such.

[Eosin]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

TO chime in as a Johhny come lately.

 

I don't see a problem but then I don't really follow the 18- is darn near perfect for games that have something other than humans. In a game that did not have "fantastic stuff" as part of its make up, I would agree that it would strech the genre. However, since Fantasy & Sci-Fi traditionally have people who are much more than even the most gifted human could possibly hope for it is a non-issue to me. Mages with a 25- skill roll are just another facet of that fantastic stuff permiating the setting just as a fantasy based Hercules or Beowulf would blow the cap off of the strength chart. The inculsion of magic into a game automatically infers that things will violate the normal human standards IMO at least.

[Markdoc]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

My problem is not with a roll of 25-. After all, in my fantasy game, I have NPC characters hundreds of years old who do have totally whacked skill rolls.

 

But if you suggest that 18- is "pretty good", then that's the benchmark that your players will use. In the end that means that either you have to start giving out more XP.s, which can distort the other facets of the game (Hmm. I can be "pretty good" with stealth or I can buy +5 OCV with my sword) or your players will be frustrated that they can't measure up to "pretty good" characters. It also makes it hard to challenge the players unless you start stacking arbitrarily huge minuses onto skill rolls.

 

The only place where skill rolls really become an issue in FH is with big spells - and as noted, I see that as a feature - not a bug.

 

cheers,Mark

[Barwickian]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

As the person who wrote the review in question, I've a few points to make.

 

First off, as others have pointed out, you can mitigate the casting penalty by taking extra time, using additional casters and working other bonuses (using a magic item, say, or casting in some kind of laboratory/sanctum) - basically, turning the powerful spells into rituals.

 

Having come to a better understanding of Hero since I wrote the review, I'm also more prepared to tinker with the penalties for RSR - dropping the penalities to -1 per 20 active points, for instance.

 

But the main realisation I've come to is that adding lots of modifiers to a power diminishes the point cost of each individual modifier. Why does Master's Version come so cheap? Because grimoire spells come with lots of limitations, so dropping one (RSR) has very little effect on the overall point cost.

 

Why use the limitation, then? The answer, of course, is for colour and flavour. It's just not a rules issue, it's a mood and atmosphere issue.

 

If it boils down to it, I'd just forbid the Master's Version option. If spells require a skill roll, then they require a skill roll. If the penalty's too tough, take time, get help, or do whatever else you can think of to make it easier.

[Greatwyrm]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

But the main realisation I've come to is that adding lots of modifiers to a power diminishes the point cost of each individual modifier. Why does Master's Version come so cheap? Because grimoire spells come with lots of limitations' date=' so dropping one (RSR) has very little effect on the overall point cost.[/quote']

 

Very true. IIRC, most spells would be affected more by dropping the expendable spell components. Many of them have some kind of expendable, inconvenient, and/or rare focus.

[CTaylor]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

One of the notes I put in the Fantasy Codex is that spell rolls (and all required skill roll powers) are typically higher than other skills in a campaign simply because of the modifiers for each spell. 18- is extreme for stealth (and usually pointless) but for a mage, that's not an unreasonable roll. A good rule of thumb I've found is take the most difficult spell you can cast or know, and add that roll modifier to 11-. That's what your skill level should be at as a minimum for a player.

 

That said, people tend to overlook the low level spells for the more gaudy, spectacular spells. It's not as impressive to trip your opponent so he falls off a cliff instead of sizzling him with a lightning bolt, but the end result is usually the same and the trip spell is probably much cheaper and easier to cast. Real magical power will often come from cheaper, more utility spells than big damage combat spells.

 

The problem comes mostly from philosophy - magic in a lower end heroic game will usually be far better as enhancement, support, and utility. Everybody wants to blow up the world, but you won't have the points for that, and if you do, it will be hellish to cast that spell in any case.

[AlHazred]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

I once had the idea of using this facet of the system in an Urban Fantasy game. The reason that there were few mages in the world today is precisely because you need to have ultra-high skill rolls in magic to succeed, which requires singular dedication of mind, unfettered access to the best magical tomes, a high-mana "background energy," and mystical focuses of accuracy. Being that the "background energy" had dimmed to low-mana except for a few areas, and many mystical focuses had lost their power due to this, and due to the rarity of accurate magical tomes, it was much more difficult to reach the vaunted levels of skill required to cast spells.

 

What they hey, the players bought it...

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

The reason that there were few mages in the world today is precisely because you need to have ultra-high skill rolls in magic to succeed' date=' which requires singular dedication of mind, unfettered access to the best magical tomes, a high-mana "background energy," and mystical focuses of accuracy.[/quote']

 

Not to mention the power of the Internet in distracting people from what they really should be doing....

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Fantasy Hero Grimoire review discussion

 

For those who don't have it memorized.

 

3 or less is 0.46% 4 or more is 99.54%

4 or less is 1.85% 5 or more is 98.15%

5 or less is 4.63% 6 or more is 95.37%

6 or less is 9.26% 7 or more is 90.74%

7 or less is 16.2% 8 or more is 83.8%

8 or less is 25.92% 9 or more is 74.08%

9 or less is 38.50% 10 or more is 62.50%

10 or less is 50.00% 11 or more is 50.00%

11 or less is 62.50% 12 or more is 37.50%

12 or less is 74.06% 13 or more is 25.94%

13 or less is 83.78% 14 or more is 16.22%

14 or less is 90.72% 15 or more is 9.28%

15 or less is 95.35% 16 or more is 4.65%

16 or less is 98.13% 17 or more is 1.87%

17 or less is 99.52% 18 or more is 0.48%