Balancing a Mage?

[i3ullseye]

Ok, I haven;t really seen this discussed anywhere, but I thought some of the ways I have balanced mages in my games in the past may be helpful to others out there.

 

See, the problem with mages is they buiy a lot fo magic inherent to themselves... meaning, they pay the HPs for them. The fighter or rogue of the group just buys stats and skills, and can run to the local shop to pick up a sword. Maybe the local alchemist for some Greek Fire or a potion of Invisibility.

 

The end result is you have a fighter type based on the core amount of points in your game (we will assume 150 from ehre on out), and THEN he gets all his nifty weapons on top of that. The Mage is mostly self contained. So where the mage may indeed do some things no one else can, he has less active points available to him overall.

 

So a 150 pt fighter with a abttle ate (45a/15r) and a dagger 24a/9r) is actually at 174 real... and potentially 219 active... points!

 

And the mage is at 150.

 

So how can we rectify this? I for one LOVE the idea of item/equipment pools. If you set a pool limit in your game of 50 for example, then no character can have more than 50 real points of equipment. Some people set an active point limit, but this gets a bit rough on the bookwork. And it also gets restrictive when magic items come into play. So being strict with this is not the way to go. Also, you can't put a mages spells on the equipment pool completely, because then he has inherent abilities in this pool that no one else does.

 

So first off, the characters need never know how many pool points they have. This coudl be an estimate you run in your head. They get over... and items suitable for them may stop appearning. Maybe you force their hand to trade items out. It is not easy, but you SHOULD think in terms of equipment pool overall when you look at each character balance wise. Even a 200 pt character will seem useless next to a 100 pt character with 200+ points in gear.

 

Which brings us back to the mages......

 

Now I really favor spell colleges, but I normally like putting them all into a multipower. The mage is indeed pating for them this way, but if they find a spell, this allows them to use 1 pt for 10 in an ultra slot. This is simply the most efficient use of points available. So the thing to do is factor ACTIVE point totals on the characters and gaugge from there.

 

We need nto worry about the ultras not being used at the same time. This is a non-issue. The warrior can also not swing 2 axes, a sword and 5 daggers at once either. But when XP time rolls around, always give your mage a few points less and let him know it is intended for character growth. Then during the course of play, when he finds that dusty old tome and sees an invisibility spell, he can instantly scribe that spell and pay those 3 points for 30 active.

 

Another approach to this is the power amplifier. If things do start to get a bit out of sync, maybe the mage finds an artifact that ADDS to his multipower reserve while worn. It coudl also have inherent abilities that draw from this pool now. In this way the mage can actually have an 'equipment pool' item that helps him be betetr at his inherent magic.

 

it can be tricky, but if you keep real and active point costs of items on par wbetween characters, and then make the effort to allow your mages the same actiove point totals, your game will be more balanced and your players will probably have more fun.

[sbarron]

Your ideas here have merit. I was thinking about something similar the other day. If your average fighter benefits from x number of points worth of equipment, then whatever spell framework that I come up with for the mage should provide a point discount only to make up the difference. I haven't fleshed this out much, but I'm thinking.

 

However, it is important to note that in the Hero system, there is nothing preventing the mage from using equipment as well. So while he may not have as many skill levels w/ swords, there is nothing preventing him from using one, and taking advantage of the "real points" that using a regular sword provides.

 

I 've seen the whole skill level thing blown out of the water before, though. I played in a FH game based on RuneQuest, where mages could cast spells like Bladesharp, that provided skill levels for a limited time, and Strength. It turned out the "Battle Mages" were the baddest guys going, because they could increase their stats and skill levels during Segment 12, and then they were way better fighters than the fighters. And they got to take limits on the levels.

 

Balance in FH depends on the rules that the GM sets for magic. It is difficult to find a good balance. I think this is an excellent idea for a thread, by the way.

[tiger]

2 problems I see with this theroy.

 

1 Mages would be to overpowering.

2 Mages would then have to pay for all their equipment just like the rest. Which would limit them again.

 

Also. So what if the fighters/roques don't have to pay for their weapons and armor. Nether do the mages. They get their staff for free as well. There is also encumberance issuse that balance walking around with a dagger in a robe and walking around with a 20-30 pound sword in 100 lbs of armor.

 

There is no set rule that say you get these things. You could instead give the x amount of starting money and have them buy what they can. You can make them pay points for it if you wish.

 

I don't see the need to come up with special rules for mages. Seems to me if you gonna do this then you have to do the same for the other profession. Thiefs should be able to gain new thiefing abilities if they find the right book.

 

It just starts more problems than it solves.

 

If you gonna use active cost as a balancing point figure up the active cost of your fireball compared to a sword or daggar.

 

I have found that in game play when you see the two in action any advantage of getting a sword for free is offset by the offensive and defensive spells the mage has access to.

 

As a player in a heroic campaign I always prefered buy the spells seperately. Then I can use more than one spell at full effect. I have also met DMs that would allow mages to by familiar with a spell. Then save up the EP to buy it. Thus showing the necessary time and studing to gain the use of the spell. Something your multipower example doesn't.

 

But all this is just my opinion, it's your campaign. As long as the GM and player's are happy with the way thing play out. Then go for it!

[Talon]

I balanced the two via special effect. A fighter was pretty much limited to normal weapons and armor, while a mage could do all sorts of crazy stuff. (I in fact limited mages to the point where their combat potential was much lower than that of a fighter; if you wanted to be a combat monster, you played a fighter.) This was in a low-magic setting, though, so the fighters couldn't pick up lots of magic to compensate.

[bjbrown]

I've considered the idea of an equipment pool too. Utilmately, though, I decided that I didn't want to do the extra bookkeeping, and if I ever do another fantasy game, I'll just use low-powered super rules, so that the fighters have to pay points for their swords, armor, horses, even magic items. (You can use the magic item in the session when you find it, but if you don't pay points for it, you won't have it next session.) I don't think there's a lot of power-level difference between a 150-pt. Heroic level character who doesn't have to pay for equipment, mounts, and magic items, and a 250-pt. super who does have to pay for all of those things.

 

Even your example is for 150 pt. characters and 50 pts. in equipment, or 200 pts. Why not throw in the extra 50 for a super game and let the players decide how much equipment they need or don't need?

 

The kinds of things that FH mages can do though more than make up for non-use of equipment. Your warrior or rogue can't pull off a Flash, Drain, Ego Attack, Illusion, Mind Control, or the dreaded BOECV Entangle.

 

I played one FH game in which I played the only warrior in a group full of mages. My warrior decked himself out fully with with chainmail, military pick (for the STUNx +1 or AP, and 23 STR for the extra DC), and shield. And yet the mages were far more combat effective, often taking down monsters with their Ego Attacks long before my warrior could connect with a hit. In the game of which I am currently GM, there is one dedicated mage among the five player characters. The mage is even about 20 points behind the other characters because he hasn't spent all his xp, and yet he's always saving the day in combat with either an Ego Attack or a Flash. Those spells are so much more meaningful than a great sword. I just don't see anything about FH that makes mages inherently weak.

[i3ullseye]

Never said they were 'weak' per se.... and remind me not to try to type so fast so late at night again. Sheesh.

 

No, rogues do not get to learn new skills cause they read it in a book, but the rogue does not forfeit a point or two in XP each session for the GM to work with either. In my system the Mage always recieved 1 or 2 lower than anyone else, but in game these were made available to them again with the expansion of magical knowledge. Sure, I could just let them spend it.... but this gave a story and game related basis as to how thier abilities increased, and how the acquired a new spell.

 

Now the equipment pool is NOT much extra book-keeping, because as I stated, you use it as an estimate. Another reason I like spell colleges were the inherent restrictions. I always apply limitations to mages based on the amount of armor worn, and in some cases, the amount of metal on their person. There are many other ways to keep mages from being armor wearing sword mages, and restrictions on the magic itself is the most effective.

 

I don't track it point for point with equipment, I use it as a rough estimate. If the warrior has 2 magic swords and magic armor, he is less likely to find anything tailored to HIM in the next treasure trove. If it is there, the forces on the items conflict or cancel each other out, or I come up with some other creative way to remove the item from them. And if you are open with your players about the balance aspect of the pools, they normally agree pretty readily to stay within reason.

 

I just really don't like games of this nature to have characters PAY for their items. Takes the whole treasure finding aspect right out of it.

 

Also, I often have players in many of my games pick a type of character they want to be, and then set a few basic rules for point distrobution. Warriors can have 100 pts of stats and 50 for skills, etc... Rogues get 50 for stats (or thereabouts) and 100 for skills. And mages get 50 for each, and use the last 50 for their magic. This again is never a strict MUST DO rule, but a guideline to ensure not all characters cover every aspect of the game. You might have the 100 pt stat rogue if it fits the concept, but the concept is what needs to be most important.

 

None of this matters in my henchman games anyway.... where I start them at 75, then let them earn 10 a week till they hit 125.... and have to justify where they learn everything form there.