Magic system search

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system search

 

Wow! What have I ignighted here?

 

Actually everyone is making very valid points and I appreciate all the input. Many of these thoughts have never occured to me. I know that I have never been a fan of basing things strictly from the AP's and agree that limitations converting them to RP's have to be weighed in the mix to get a true idea of how powerful the spell is.

 

That being said however, in a perfect world that would exist. But I can put enough limitations on a very powerful spell that would still allow thespell to be more powerful than its RP's would indicate. Anyone who is or has had a good rules lawyer in their game knows what I am talking about.

 

That is why I originally thought to somehow take a sampling of both and tie them together to get a spell power value. Folks obviously do nto like the (AP/10)+(RP/10) so let me ask this next question of all you great thinkers out there. If I wanted to tie them together somehow, what ideas for modifying this eqation do you think would be the most fair?

 

 

It depends on what kind of a Magic System you are using and what you are trying to measure.

 

You would be better off first defining the general mechanics of how your Magic System works, and then start applying different methods of determining a "Spell Level" until you find one that seems right for you.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system search

 

Thank you for agreeing with me. Yes' date=' a combat spell that takes days to cast is not useful, because [b']that's what limitations do--limit the usefulness of the spell.[/b]

In case it escaped your attention, Im not agreeing with you. Sorry if you were confused.

 

There is a difference between Limiting a Spell and designing a Spell in such a way as to make it effectively useless, which is to say so impractical that it will never be used; which is an idea that seems to be lost on you.

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter what the special effects are--a 30 AP spell with -10 in limitations is clearly not as powerful as a 30 AP spell with -1/2.

Who is talking about SFX? The example I gave was two Powers with different builds, but their SFX very well could be the same.

 

And who is talking about -10? The example I gave compared a -1/2 to a -2.

 

You seem to like to think in extremes, which is a very illogical means of analysis. The majority of cases tend to fall closer to the middle.

 

 

Then we can simply agree to disagree here. I am surprised that you aren't concerned with any of the practical aspects of the spellcasting in your measurements--that in your mind, Kill With A Word is the same 'level' as Kill With A Book, Staff, Candle-lit Pentagram, And Five Hours Of Chanting.

Some of the Magic Systems I've designes are concerned about the means of casting, others aren't. It depends on the intended feel. However, the Systems Ive designed that care about it don't care about "Spell Level" -- it's a meaningless concept in that sort of a model.

 

 

I'm not coupling them, I'm pointing out that neither type of level is adequately measured by AP alone.

Not adequately for you, perhaps.

 

 

So the limitations of the spell don't factor into the complexity at all? Really? Okay.

Not in the way I mean complexity. When I say complex Spells, Im talking about Spells made up of several base Powers as part of a Compound Power.

 

As stated multiple times, I'm concerned about effects; you can apply as many Limitations as you want to an xd6 vanilla RKA, and it's still a simple effect.

 

A complex Spell in my book is one that is constructed of two or more Power Constructs in an attempt to model some more complicated behavior.

 

 

 

I don't see why you can't impose an arbitrary level system based on real cost, but you can impose one based on active points.

You can impose whatever you want; as can I. It is your game.

 

I was just pointing out that basing your measurement solely on RC means that two Spells of very different magnitudes can be the same Spell Level, which is not intuitive to most people. To determine which of two Spells is more powerful, you end up having to compare their Active Points anyway. Seems kind of silly to me to not factor that in at the beginning; but again if what you are measuring is difficulty to use and not how good it is once used then so be it.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

You could simulate this by using the AID power to boost known spells, requiring a ritual (which might take extra time) for each casting of AID until the spell reaches maximum efficiency. (Which is maybe double or so the normal campaign limits.) Thus a mage with a normally 60 active point cap could cast a 120 point spell if they knew the proper type of ritual, but are still a 60pt mage.

 

Rob

 

Great point, Rob, That is a very nice, in-game way to handle that. I still have issues with allowing things like mega-scale without some ritual lim and such, but that can be handled by adding a lim: linked Ritual Magic -1/4 (assuming the spell will be greater in power than the ritual spell).

[Glupii]

Re: Magic system search

 

OK, I am rapidly feeling that the best way for me to handle this is to just judge each spell on its own and arbitrarilly grant it a level. Some spells which I can write at different levels will be easier than others. But it seems the only fair way.

 

What I was looking at using levels for is assigning what spells a character could cast depending on the in game degree to which he/she has advanced in the "arts". I might even scratch that as it is rapidly getting to complex.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system search

 

OK, I am rapidly feeling that the best way for me to handle this is to just judge each spell on its own and arbitrarilly grant it a level. Some spells which I can write at different levels will be easier than others. But it seems the only fair way.

 

What I was looking at using levels for is assigning what spells a character could cast depending on the in game degree to which he/she has advanced in the "arts". I might even scratch that as it is rapidly getting to complex.

 

There are no "wrong" answers to this, but there are "better" answers. Youre going to be better off basing it on something concrete -- otherwise it gets random fast.

 

As you can see from this thread, there's no consensus on how to do it, so just pick some variation of AP and / or RC or some other consistent method that makes sense to you and go with it.

 

 

Also, you never answered my question earlier....you asked me something about playing a system, and I asked you to clarify what system you meant.

[AnotherSkip]

Re: Magic system search

 

Played which system?

 

Hey KS I think G means the system listed in the book as a ranked system (pg 2?? ) thats just my macro guess, from reading the thread backwards from your question.

[Glupii]

Re: Magic system search

 

Oops, sorry bout that, didn't mean to ignore ya KS. The system I am developing is a mutant of several already published systems in the FH rulebook along with my own attempts to make it a little more like the D&D model so that folks who only know D&D (or d20) will be able to pick it up easier. I am putting the final touches on the second draft of it now and will email it to you (hopefully today) for perusal. It is pretty long so unless others want to see it, I won't bore the readers here with posting it.

 

Basically it uses different systems for different casters. It uses the 5 point talent to buy a 25 point VPP in a school of magic (I forget what that was called in the FH book and don't have it here with me at work) for Wizards, and a more traditional unstructured system for Sorcerers where by their spells cost less and are unlimited in their active points and design but that they have limitations in how many spells they can have. Divine casters are similar to Wizards but have a different spell list using spheres rather than colleges. Druids, Bards, Runecasters, and Witches are all closer to the Sorcerer model with slight differences and different spell lists.

 

The premise of the world as it stands right now (subject to change before I actually try to run it) is that The known world is under the thumb (talon?) of the Dragon Lords who keep a close eye on magic weilding humans and halflings. The only sanctioned spell casters are the Wizards who study at the Academy and are members of the official guild. But there are hedgewitches and sorcerers who are sort of underground. And the divine casters are all underground except for a few darker churches (again, sanctioned by the DL's). Druids are largely left alone because they are not understood by the DL's but they have never directly threatened them either. Bards are used seen as a giant spy network of such usefulness that they put up with them being largly on their own and out of direct control of the DL's in exchange for their communication and spying information.

 

I am trying to make this system as close to the d20 system as I can without losing the benefits of the Hero system that are promtping me to convert.

 

I hope this answers some of the questions I missed answering earlier?

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

I think what you are trying to do is something many of us have done before, and I came to the conclusion that wasn't the best way to approach it. I recognize the value of having a similar structure to d20 but I think that won't serve you well in the long run. More than structure I think the main thing people enjoy is diversity or number of spells a single caster can know but having a more limited pool that they can cast a single time.

 

I would focus on making a system that allows a mage to have a decent spell list of varied spells and then define just how many of those he can have at the ready at any given time (and what it takes to change the readied list). Then just use standard Hero constructions and END as normal to keep things simple.

 

If you deviate too far from the core rules your players that do read the rules will find themselves confused as to why what you are doing isn't like it is in the book.

 

Just my advice.

[Glupii]

Re: Magic system search

 

Mud,

 

I agree with you. And the wizard system I have in place does that. They have VPP's for each college of magic they know and they can switch the spells in each of them with other spells from that college in their spellbook. There is no limit to the number of spells they can know, just to how many they have available at any given time. The size of their VPP's is up to them. They can specialize in a specific college and build up that VPP to accomodate more powerful spells from that college. Or they can spread out and get the less powerful spells from many different colleges. Of course they still have to aquire the spells for their spellbook in some fashion (bought, found, treasure, traded, researched, etc.).

 

Sorceres on the other hand have a limited number of spells they can know but those spells can be much more powerful.

 

Does this fit with the advice you were giving me? I want to make sure to give hard thought to everyone's wisdom who is gracious enough to share it with me here. So if I misunderstood what you were saying, please clarify. Thanks again!

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

Pretty much. One way to handle known spells would be to use a Spell Familiarity. 1 point lets them know a spell and they can put it into their pool. Or you could charge points for their spellbook, like 1 point per 3 or 5 spells.

 

Are you allowing sorcerers to change their spells over time as they can in d20?

[Glupii]

Re: Magic system search

 

As it stands right now, Any spell they know can be altered only if it increases the power. (ie more dice of effect, applying AP, or something of the sort). If they alter it in any other way (Add AoE, etc) they have to purchase the spell all over.

 

Also worth note, Socrerer spells are all RP/5 for actual cost.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

Sounds good. I just know that every level in d20 a socerer can drop his current spell selection and select new ones. You might think about allowing a similar change but it takes a PRE roll at -1 per 10 active points in the new spell with a base time of 1 hour. Each step down the time chart adds +1 to the roll. On a failure the bonus resets and they have to start over again. Sounds good.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system search

 

Sounds good. I just know that every level in d20 a socerer can drop his current spell selection and select new ones.

 

? Is that new to 3.5? That wasn't the case in 3.0.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Magic system search

 

? Is that new to 3.5? That wasn't the case in 3.0.

I don't think it's true at all, unless someone has adopted it as a house rule. However, I believe there is a spell that basically allows you to completely remake your character (though I think there are some restrictions--such as requiring you to ultimately have the same class levels in the end--even if you do choose a different order for having, "obtained," them).

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

3.5: PHB 54, at 4th level and every even-numbered level they may drop one known spell and learn a new one.

 

I find it odd to discuss d20 rules on this board. I suddenly feel dirty....

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system search

 

3.5: PHB 54, at 4th level and every even-numbered level they may drop one known spell and learn a new one.

 

I find it odd to discuss d20 rules on this board. I suddenly feel dirty....

Oh, that's a little different than completely redoing their spell list

 

Makes sense -- a problem for Sorcerers in 3e was that higher level Spells could render lower level Spells redundant.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

Right, that's why they did it. Yeah, it should be something they can do every now and then, especially if its just adding/removing limitations. A wizard, as stupid, er glupii (you do know that glupi in Russian means stupid, right?) has presented would simply add another spell to his spell book, but have a limited number to cast from in his pool. A sorcerer otoh would be able to alter a known spell over time (e.g. burning hands into flame bolt, into fireball) if he so chose, but obviously could change his spells at a drop of the hat. I used 1 hour as the base time but really it's something that should be done during adventures and only 1 spell at a time or so.

[Glupii]

Re: Magic system search

 

Actually, my Russian wife tells me it means "Silly" more than stupid. She said Stupid in the mean way would be more like the word "Durock" But yes, I knew Glupii had a Russian meaning. It was why I came up with it. I had a character concept (originally for Evercrack) for a Goon natured but extreamly simple Troll and she helped me with the name. It stuck. It is even on my License plate. LOL

 

As for the differences I am trying to achive between wizards and sorcerers is that Wizards can know any number of spells but are limited in their power and the number of spells they can have access to at any given time. While a Sorcerer has fewer spells but those spells can be more powerful and can cast them pretty much at will. I am trying to simulate the spellcaster that discovers his magical ability by trial and error, force of will, and with no specific understanding of how it actually works. Since the sorcerer does not understand the mechanics of the spell, he can not change any integral parts of it. However he CAN learn how to focus harder, push himself, control more power channeling it in the same way. Thus he can increase the POWER of the spell (Extra dice, maybe making it AP, longer range if it already had range, etc.) but not the effect (changing the AoE, NND, etc).

 

Does that make sense or am I rambling?

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Magic system search

 

Makes total sense, although it is different than d20. I don't care one way or another, just that you had stated you wanted to make it as much like d20 without giving up Hero-ness. I'd hate for some d20 fan-boy to sit down and start giving you a hard time about him changing his Sorcerer's spells, but as long as the system is clear up front I don't think it'll be a problem.