Latest try at a HERO magic system. Simpler is better?

[Yamo]

Well, after strugging for ages with a magic system for my Fantasy HERO campaign (75 +75), I finally had a two-fold epiphany:

 

a) It's not that worth worrying about so much. It's a game and the point is to have fun. Some of my drafts were pages long and read like legal documents. Blah.

 

Simpler is better.

 

So, here's my magic system. All of it.

 

a) All magic is handled through the Magic VPP except for permanent magic items (ones without Charges or with many Charges). No Advantages or Limitations can be applied to the Magic VPP other than the ones it begins with. Similarly, none of its initial Limitations may ever be bought down or off. All player-proposed Magic VPP Powers and magic items are subject to GM veto or modification.

 

VPP Powers representing expendable magic items such as potions and scrolls must be purchased with the Trigger Advantage and the following Limitations: Extra Time (one day per ten Active Points in the item with a minimum of one day), 1 Charge (not Fuel or Recoverable and lasting no more than six hours if Continuous), OAF Expendable (Difficult To Acquire). Additionally, if the item's Charge is not Continuous, the following Advantage is required: Uncontrolled (can be deactivated by physically destroying the item). In order to prevent abuse, the GM should decide which components are necessary to create a particular item and strictly control their availability within the campaign.

 

c) Magic items without Charges, with more than one Charge, or with Charges that otherwise violate the parameters allowed for expendable items are purchased as seperate Powers (outside the VPP) and require the following Limitations: Focus (any type, Very Difficult To Acquire), Independent. The total Active Points of such an item cannot exceed the Pool Cost of its creator's Magic VPP and a work period of one week per ten Active Points (minimum of one week) is required to successfully create it. As with expendable items, the GM should decide which rare materials are necessary to create each one and strictly limit their availability within the campaign.

 

d) All starting mage characters are required to purchase the following Package Deal. The Magic VPP cannot be "bought up" beyond this point during character creation, only later with the character's earned experience points.

 

Mage Package Deal

 

Skills:

 

KS: Arcane Lore, Total Cost: 3 points

Languages: Literacy For Native Language, Total Cost: 1 point

Power: Magic (INT-Based), Total Cost: 3 points

 

Ability:

 

Magic: Variable Point Pool, 40 Pool + 20 Control Cost, Powers Can Only Be Changed In Given Circumstances (Character Requires His/Her Spellbook And Thirty Minutes To Study It Per Power Changed; -1/2), Only Magic (-1/4), Variable Limitations (Requires -2 Worth Of Limitations; -1) Total Cost: 47 points

 

Total Cost Of Package: 54 Points

[Lord Liaden]

With all the options in the HERO System it's easy to get lost in the details, and lose sight of the "fun" part. Glad you found that again, Yamo.

 

What you've got looks pretty reasonable; limited enough to not exceed the bounds of the genre, but with plenty of room for variety. I've always liked Variable Lim myself; gives mages flexibility in how they can trade off their Limitations, so that they don't necessarily have to be powerless if you gag them or bind their hands.

 

Hope this works for you.

[Killer Shrike]

Im hammering out a similar VPP Magic Pool as we speak. Ill post it as soon as I get the creases out. The only real difficulty Im having now is getting the total cost of ownership in line with the character points available at certain points in a characters career. Ie, its well and good to have a working system, but if a character cant actually afford it when it is appropriate for them to have access to more powerful spells in-game its not a working model.

 

Will post more soon......

[bjbrown]

Designing a good magic system isn't easy.

 

The only way to really tell if it will work is to playtest it. Staying simple at first is probably the best way to approach it. Let your players use and abuse it, and tweak as necessary.

[Nolgroth]

At the risk of taking this thread off-topic, I would like to congratulate you Yamo. You have been struggling with this whole magical system very hard and it could have been real easy to just shelve the HERO system and revert to D&D for your fantasy needs. It seems to me that you have a pretty good tenacity in giving new ideas a shot. Kudos to you. Now back to your regularly scheduled topic.....

 

Now your magic system seems to be one that fits your particular style. I think that you are on the right track. The fact that it is reasonably priced also helps. Strict control from the GM is a must and you seem to have incorporated a very specific limitation in the number of points the VPP can start out with. I like it.

[tesuji]

If it does what you want... fabulous.

 

From an outsider point of view, not being privy to the obvious internal back-n-forth you have already gone thru, i would question one basic element.

 

Isn't "how many spells i know" an important element in the assessment of a mage character's power? isn't it relevent at all?

 

With the VPP system you described, a mage who has a spell book with 100s of spells in it will cost exactly the same CP (or spend exactly the same cp for the magic stuff) as one with maybe a dozen spells total in his spellbook.

 

A fighter trained in a few weapons spends less (fewer weapon proficiencies as well as cheaper skill levels since they cover fewer attacks) than a fighter who is as good with lots of weapons. The lack of breadth is seen and reflected in the costs.

 

Shouldn't this also be the case with the mage's "weapons"... spells known?

 

Are you comfortable with telling the player who is running a character who "by concept" has only say six spells in his spellbook that he SHOULD and WILL pay the same price in cp for this as the other player sitting right next to him who has a character who starts with dozens of spells? If so, how do you see that balancing out in play? Are you comfortable telling your mage players that "what spells or how many spells you know won't matter?"

 

Or are you assuming that all mages have spellbooks of the same size, containing the same spells if only in number (with one possibility being that this number is "all spells known") thus making spells known a defined constant regardless of experience?

 

These would be the questions my players would ponder and ask me and take into consideration if i listed for them the system you defined. I figure you already have answers for these and took them into account when you decided this system worked for you. So i am curious as tyo what your replies would be.

 

Thanks!

[Yamo]

I see the spellbook as more of a collection of the mage's notes and a guide to his overall knowledge of magical workings than a rote listing of a finite number of spells that he knows. It's more of a toolkit (not unlike our beloved FREd ), a collection of general magical knowledge that he uses to prepare the spells he needs on a case-by-case basis.

 

Not knowing how to use a particular spell is not so much a matter of not knowing the right formula as of not having attained the general level of understanding needed to craft a spell that complex (i.e. with that high an Active Point cost).

 

In other words: Magical knowledge is highly abstracted, and the mage is assumed to know how to accomplish anything that the AP limit on his VVP would allow for.

 

Make sense?

 

If it does what you want... fabulous.

 

From an outsider point of view, not being privy to the obvious internal back-n-forth you have already gone thru, i would question one basic element.

 

Isn't "how many spells i know" an important element in the assessment of a mage character's power? isn't it relevent at all?

 

With the VPP system you described, a mage who has a spell book with 100s of spells in it will cost exactly the same CP (or spend exactly the same cp for the magic stuff) as one with maybe a dozen spells total in his spellbook.

 

A fighter trained in a few weapons spends less (fewer weapon proficiencies as well as cheaper skill levels since they cover fewer attacks) than a fighter who is as good with lots of weapons. The lack of breadth is seen and reflected in the costs.

 

Shouldn't this also be the case with the mage's "weapons"... spells known?

 

Are you comfortable with telling the player who is running a character who "by concept" has only say six spells in his spellbook that he SHOULD and WILL pay the same price in cp for this as the other player sitting right next to him who has a character who starts with dozens of spells? If so, how do you see that balancing out in play? Are you comfortable telling your mage players that "what spells or how many spells you know won't matter?"

 

Or are you assuming that all mages have spellbooks of the same size, containing the same spells if only in number (with one possibility being that this number is "all spells known") thus making spells known a defined constant regardless of experience?

 

These would be the questions my players would ponder and ask me and take into consideration if i listed for them the system you defined. I figure you already have answers for these and took them into account when you decided this system worked for you. So i am curious as tyo what your replies would be.

 

Thanks!

[Victor]

Another simplified option would be to treat spells as equipment rather than powers, and require the purchasing of a familiarity in order to use them (-1/4 Lim "Real Magic"?), perhaps in addition to a perk for "magical ability".

 

I've never been fond of the "casting a spell erases it from your mind" concept, but I guess it's a valid balancing mechanic. If someone were looking for the "D&D feel", the spells could be written up with recoverable charge(s)... requiring the user to re-memorize them before casting again. Also, one would limit the number that can be memorized at a given time based on active points or some other mechanic... a "mental encumbrance" effect, of sorts.

 

Provided that spells are somewhat balanced with existing armor and weapons in the game, this seems like the easiest way to balance their use/cost compared to non-casters.

If spells are only slightly better than normal equipment, not allowing proficiency groups (i.e., all spells are "uncommon" proficiencies) should make up for the difference.

If spells are significantly better than normal equipment, each may require purchase of an additional perk of some kind before they can be used.

[Killer Shrike]

GRRRRRRRR.

My fiance has me running around cleaning up the place in preperation for entertaining this evening so I probably wont be able to get my Magic System posted tonight as planned

 

BUT

 

It will be sometime soon, come hell or high house chores!

[Al_Beddow]

I see the spellbook as more of a collection of the mage's notes and a guide to his overall knowledge of magical workings than a rote listing of a finite number of spells that he knows. It's more of a toolkit (not unlike our beloved FREd ), a collection of general magical knowledge that he uses to prepare the spells he needs on a case-by-case basis.

 

I agree. I really don't care for the systems which insist that a mage must "memorize" a spell for each time it will be cast. HackMaster does this but they at least give a REASON that makes a modicum of sense.

[AnotherSkip]

Take that BACK!

 

Hackmaster does not make sense!

 

 

 

Yes, i like them too if in spirit only.

[tesuji]

gotcha.. so from my list its the

 

"Or are you assuming that all mages have spellbooks of the same size, containing the same spells if only in number (with one possibility being that this number is "all spells known") thus making spells known a defined constant regardless of experience?"

 

with all spells known being the constant.

 

OK! gotcha.

 

thats cool.

 

Originally posted by Yamo

I see the spellbook as more of a collection of the mage's notes and a guide to his overall knowledge of magical workings than a rote listing of a finite number of spells that he knows. It's more of a toolkit (not unlike our beloved FREd ), a collection of general magical knowledge that he uses to prepare the spells he needs on a case-by-case basis.

 

Not knowing how to use a particular spell is not so much a matter of not knowing the right formula as of not having attained the general level of understanding needed to craft a spell that complex (i.e. with that high an Active Point cost).

 

In other words: Magical knowledge is highly abstracted, and the mage is assumed to know how to accomplish anything that the AP limit on his VVP would allow for.

 

Make sense?

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by Victor

I've never been fond of the "casting a spell erases it from your mind" concept,

Me neither, which is why i was glad when they dropped it from DND in favor of the prepared rituals (what is it in hero again? Delayed effect?) where the bulk of the spell is cast in prep time out of combat and only a few releasing or triggering components are used at "casting" time.

 

Still, i personally prefer the "until you run out of magic juice" throw any spell you know sort like you get from slow recovering mana reserves and multipowers. Call me a traditionalist but i much prefer to have spells be a commodity and not just an assumption. (Not to mention having gotten seriously tired of unrestricted VPPs as a cure all... we need a scout...mage turn billy invisible...we need a steed... mage turn billy into a horse.... we need to get thru this wall ... mage dial up a transform... we need an X... mage dial-an-answer... why are the rest of us here?... to cover the mage while he dials the answer...)

 

The danger from an unrestricted (all spells known) VPP is not its tactical use but its strategic use and with just a few VPPs able to be arranged on a moments notice most any challenge other than direct immediate combat has a dial-a-spell answer. Heck, the potential for aid abuse is worrisome enough.

Originally posted by Victor

but I guess it's a valid balancing mechanic. If someone were looking for the "D&D feel", the spells could be written up with recoverable charge(s)... requiring the user to re-memorize them before casting again.

or with variations on delayed effect. Thats closest to the current DND model.

Originally posted by Victor

Also, one would limit the number that can be memorized at a given time based on active points or some other mechanic... a "mental encumbrance" effect, of sorts.

I think HERO recommends actually a char/5 or some sort.

[Vondy]

I think it would work well.

 

I like the idea of magic being theory more than hammered out spells. The only thing I might do to it is have magic broken down into a wheel of forces that can be channeled, with a grey area in the middle of course, and require mages to take a KS for the types of areas they want to manipulate. The KS can be used to determine whether or not they get negatives to a certain casting roll or not, in that it could be used as a complemetary roll to offset the negatives to the skill roll for high AP powers. The higher the KS the easier big spells become.

[tesuji]

Yamo...

 

A followup on my earlier post...

 

In my experience, unlimited VPPs (the choose any spell) are grossly potent when it comes to overall game impact (as opposed to tactical impact.) At 40 ap. in a fantasy game, such a pool would enable the mage to be the wonder-tool-kit deisgning a spell of the moment (or of the half-hour or whatever the time frame is) to solve most any physical or strategic problem with summoning horses, creating food, fly spells for everyone, ghost form spells and things like clairvoys and mind scans again on the fly (a cumulative mind scan is potent even at lower levels.)

 

Now, if you are envisioning your game in an Ars MAgica or MAGE style, where it is intended for mages to be head-n-shoulders above the rest in terms of their influence and capabilities in solving the myriad problems the PCs will encounter, then this VPP thing wont be a problem, after all, you would expect most PCs to actually be mages and the fighter/rogue types to be more minion-esque.

 

However, if you are wanting a more traditional fantasy novel/movie approach where when there are PC mages they are on par with the other character types such as fighter and rouge in terms of capabilities, then the unrestricted VPP approach is in my experience a less than optimal approach.

 

just my thoughts.

 

enjoy your games.

[tiger]

If I allow VVP one of the limitation I will put on it is that they only can only use set spells. At the beginning of the campaign give them 5, 8, 10 spells. These are all they know how to cast at the time.

 

As they adventure and find/buy/trade for more spells they can add them into their pool of spells that they have access to. I don't care for the theroy of mages being able to throw whatever magic they need whenever they need it. I prefer the "learned" theroy. First you have to learn the spell and the workings of it, then you can use it.

 

Even if they find a spell they will need some study time with it to use it properly. Mages would have minus to their rolls when using the spell until the "master" it.

 

Otherwise, as was mentioned before, while what use is the rest of the party.

[Nolgroth]

Playing the Devil's Advocate

 

The unlimited VPP can cause all sorts of problems. I personally had two mage types kick the living heck out of my campaign by not putting the proper constraints on them. On the other hand, if the GM takes control and defines unbreakable Laws of Magic (as in Ars Magica), then a lot of your problem is solved. It doesn't necessarily mean that the GM must go down the list of powers and power modifiers, but some general rules would curtail a lot of abuse.

 

My one suggestion about this system is that, being that the spellbook represents the wizards collected magical theory, then a Skill roll based on INT should be added to reflect the "trial and error" nature of spellcrafting.

 

Just my thoughts.

[Victor]

Originally posted by tesuji

I think HERO recommends actually a char/5 or some sort. [/b]

 

For active/sustained spells, I would use INT/5 (or whatever), but for inactive spells that are simply part of the character's repetoir at the moment, capping that at INT/5 is too restrictive, IMO.