D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

[CrosshairCollie]

The Eberron HERO thread has me thinking about many things; one of which is the idea of 'metamagic'. For the non-d20 folks, a Metamagic feat lets you alter one of the basic rules of a spell, with a cost of boosting the spell's level. For example, if you apply the Silent Spell feat to a Magic Missile, you cast it without having to speak (no incantations); however, it occupies a second level slot when you do so.

 

With the magic system I'm whipping up, the PCs will be able to buy off the spell-specific limitations with XP, but I was thinking of a way to let them do so 'spontaneously' at an increased END expenditure. Instead of buying a Naked Advantage, though, it'd be more like a Naked Disadvantage that can be suppressed. I don't want to use Variable Limitations, though, as that makes it too easy to circumvent things.

 

Hence, the problem.

 

While it may not be clinically cricket, I was thinking about just making it a Naked Advantage equal to the limitation applied (so 'No Gestures' would be a +1/4 advantage on however-many-active-points-of-spell-they-can muster), with limitations applied to that. Would this screw things up, or is it feasible and balanced?

 

The in-game theory, for me, is that magical energy (mana) is an ambient radiation that pervades all reality (rather like cosmic rays, I suppose), and it's responsive to motions; specific gestures and vibrations (words) channel the power more easily, but in a pinch you can try to channel the power without those elements, but it's much more draining.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

i'd say there's no good current design for this except variable limitation, but since you don't want to use this, feel free to make up your own.

 

I still push the variable limitation though

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Metamagic feats are a non issue in the HERO System.

 

Just allow them to make a version of the Spell with the appropriate effect, and it will have correspondingly higher Active Points, which is analogous to a higher modified "Spell Level" in d20.

[Cantriped]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Fantasy Hero makes mention of somthing similar, essentially you trade in the limitations for Increased Endurance limitations.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Metamagic feats are a non issue in the HERO System.

 

Just allow them to make a version of the Spell with the appropriate effect, and it will have correspondingly higher Active Points, which is analogous to a higher modified "Spell Level" in d20.

 

Actually it won't have increased active points because the limitations (like gestures, incantations, foci) are part of real points but not figured into active points.

[sbarron]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Why don't you want to use variable limitations? They seem to be exaclty what you are looking for, and I don't see the big loophole you seem to think they create. I've been using variable limits for a while to model this exact concept with no trouble.

 

I have another idea, but I'll save it till I hear back from you.

[Cantriped]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Varible limitations isn't bad on its own, but depending on what kind of players you have it isn't always a good idea, because they'll constantly chose the limitations tht are the least limiting in the circumstances, defeating the whole purpose of having limitations at all because they'll never actually suffer from them. In my oppinion if you wanted to ensure that they had the ability to Buy off such limitations, but wanted to make sure they didn't overuse it, Let them trade in the limitations for Increased Endurance Limitations at Double the value of the limitations their getting rid of, Thus -1/4 Gestures would become Increased Endurance (x2, -1/2), and would just get worse from there. I'm a very old fan of DnD (been playing it since I was 4). And I'd love to see a partial conversion of Metamagic Feats over.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Actually it won't have increased active points because the limitations (like gestures' date=' incantations, foci) are part of real points but not figured into active points.[/quote']

That depends on what Metamagic feats are being modeled -- some increase damage or enhance effect.

 

But regardless, whether a particular Metamagic feat causes the RC or the AP or both to go up, the point stands -- just refactor the Power Construct "Spell" to have the desired effect, and make sure your magic system is designed in such a fashion that fluctuations in AP and RC have some appropriate impact.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Why don't you want to use variable limitations? They seem to be exaclty what you are looking for, and I don't see the big loophole you seem to think they create. I've been using variable limits for a while to model this exact concept with no trouble.

 

I have another idea, but I'll save it till I hear back from you.

I imagine that it's a two-fold concern for the original poster -- 1) not all Metamagic feats simply remove restrictions on Spellcasting in d20, and 2) those that do don't trade off restrictions, they simply remove them. Variable Lim doesnt cover the first group whatsoever, and doesnt properly model the second group, making it a less than ideal solution for a direct map.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

Secondarily, and speaking for myself, I find Variable Limitations to be largely non-Limiting in many situations, particularly when used with classic "Spell" oriented Lims like Incantations, Gestures, and Foci that are limiting via situation rather than intrinsically. Personally, I usually discourage the Lim's use unless I think that it's truly limiting in context.

[Citizen Keen]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

I'm curious why you don't let characters buy the following:

 

Naked Advantage: Variable Advantage (Limited Advantages - Only to buy off disadvantages in the power), Costs END (X4 END)

 

So, if he wanted to ignore up to 1/2 of Lims, he'd buy it as a +3/4 Advantage - Double, -1/4 for the limited advantages.

 

Amanda the Aquamancer is a big fan of the following spell:

 

Amanda's Aquatic Attack of Alliteration: EB 5d6, Gestures, Incantations, OIF (Necklace).

 

One day, Amanda the Aquamancer is attacked by an Angry Aardvark of Alliteration, and needs to defend herself. Unfortunately, she finds herself completely naked, as female characters tend to do in role-playing games, because fourteen year olds find it both taboo and hil-frickin-arious. Not having her Necklace, Amanda uses her Naked Advantage (Naked! Get it?) to buy off the OIF. She still has to chant and dance around (naked), but she doesn't need her necklace.

 

After all that dancing, Amanda anticlimactically annihilates the Angry Aardvark, and allows herself an awesome afternoon of All-In-The-Family.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

it sounded to me like he wanted a variable lim that could increase END to trade off for things like gestures and incantations when the mage needed it.

 

He didn't mention the metamagic feats like highten spell, enlarge spell, or maximize spell.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

sounds like a pretty straight foreward use of a power skill stunt (they're not just for superheros ).

If you want to add more flavor or make it more difficult, either make Metamagic a different Power skill from Magic skill, or make a seprate Metamagic skill for each "flavor" of metamagic feat

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

I'm curious why you don't let characters buy the following:

 

Naked Advantage: Variable Advantage (Limited Advantages - Only to buy off disadvantages in the power), Costs END (X4 END)

 

So, if he wanted to ignore up to 1/2 of Lims, he'd buy it as a +3/4 Advantage - Double, -1/4 for the limited advantages.

 

Amanda the Aquamancer is a big fan of the following spell:

 

Amanda's Aquatic Attack of Alliteration: EB 5d6, Gestures, Incantations, OIF (Necklace).

 

One day, Amanda the Aquamancer is attacked by an Angry Aardvark of Alliteration, and needs to defend herself. Unfortunately, she finds herself completely naked, as female characters tend to do in role-playing games, because fourteen year olds find it both taboo and hil-frickin-arious. Not having her Necklace, Amanda uses her Naked Advantage (Naked! Get it?) to buy off the OIF. She still has to chant and dance around (naked), but she doesn't need her necklace.

 

After all that dancing, Amanda anticlimactically annihilates the Angry Aardvark, and allows herself an awesome afternoon of All-In-The-Family.

Personally when I pondered how to handle Metamagic feats a few years ago when I started my conversion from 3e to HERO, I considered and ultimately discarded the NPA route for several reasons, not all of which are fresh in my mind due to the length of time involved, but which included the following:

 

a) Legally you buy NPA's to apply to one Power. Even if a GM is feeling expansive and allows it to cover a base Power, it's still not broad enough to handle a smorgasborg of Spells built, potentially, using every Base Power in the book. If the GM just hand waves that and says, what the hell, apply it freely to all Spells, then the usefulness of of the NPA's will swing wildly based upon the number of Spells a character can cast. This gets particularly broken if the magic system in question utilizes Power Frameworks (especially VPP's).

 

NPA's cost character points, and further the number of character points will vary wildly based upon the number of Active Points involved with the character's Spells. Secondarily, as the character progresses their spellcasting, they must also progress their "Metamagic Feat" NPA's if they want them to maintain their relevancy. The combination of expenditures can make enhancing a character's spellcasting capabilities too painfully expensive to maintain it's footing as a viable means of character progression.

 

c) NPA's cost END to use by default, which is not appropriate to all Magic Systems.

 

 

All of which isnt to say that NPA's aren't appropriate to some Magic Systems -- in fact they could serve as the centerpiece of a style of Magic on their own. However, the drawbacks and peculiarities of NPA's disqualified them from serving as ideal options for modeling the Vancian fire-and-forget X/Day charge oriented D&D style of Magic. YMMV.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

it sounded to me like he wanted a variable lim that could increase END to trade off for things like gestures and incantations when the mage needed it.

 

He didn't mention the metamagic feats like highten spell, enlarge spell, or maximize spell.

IMO, a solution should be elegant, comprehensive, and logically consistent.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

As an aside, one of my Magic Systems allows a character to decide at casting time what Limitations they wish to apply. It's one of the more complicated Systems I've done, and it's not ideal for D&D style Magic IMO, but it is a different way of looking at the idea of selective casting:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/GreyHEROContent/PackageDeals/spellweaverPackages.shtml

 

Also, the Magic System I'm working with now for the Warhammer FRPG 2e conversion I'm wrapping up makes allowances for optional restrictions that when used increase the chance of successfully casting a Spell. If all goes well, I plan to have it all written up in a another week or two as time permits.

 

If you are using any kind of Skill roll system for your Magic System to resolve successful casting, you can also just assert a penalty/bonus chart that gives modifiers to the roll based on whether the character is also incanting, or gesturing, or Pushing, or whatever. In that kind of Magic System, Metamagic feats could be paralleled in the form of PSL's specifically to offset a particular sort penalty. Thus PSL: +X to Offset No Gestures Penalty to Magic Skill Roll would be the equivalent of the Still Spell feat in that sort of set up.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: D20 Conversion: Metamagic Feats?

 

I'm curious why you don't let characters buy the following:

 

Naked Advantage: Variable Advantage (Limited Advantages - Only to buy off disadvantages in the power), Costs END (X4 END)

 

Because I hadn't thought of it? That's why I like posting here ... people look at things from different angles and come up with great ideas.

 

With the magic system I'm trying to make up, Gestures, Incantations, 'Armor Penalty' (penalty to skill roll equal to DEF of armor worn) and RSR are the 'core' limitations, the foundation, as it were. Other limitations can be applied for cost breaks (like Concentration, Focus, Increased End Cost, etc), but can be bought off, but I wanted to make casting spells without the gestures and incantations to be difficult, but not impossible (which is why I wasn't keen on Variable Limitations).