Magic system opinions

[Erkenfresh]

Alright, I'm coming up with a magic system for my campaign. I've looked over Killer Shrike's awesome web site and read his posts here and it's all very helpful. My first idea was this:

1. Each spellcaster must purchase an Endurance Reserve and the Recovery must take (Extra Time: 6 hours). All spells must cost endurance either naturally or by taking the limitation.

2. Magic is split up into 6 schools. Each school is purchased as a multipower pool and has a separate RSR limitation such as RSR Magic:Restoration, RSR: Protection, etc.

3. Limitations can be loaded up on the multipower, I found it fairly easy to get -1 1/2 since RSR is -1/2.

4. Spells are then purchased into the multipower and can have their own advantages/limitations in addition to the multipower's.

5. Players can make up any spells they want as long as it fits the theme of the school of magic.

 

My goal is magic shouldn't get too powerful. If the character wants a 80 point EB, I want him to put a lot of points to get there. I also like the idea that a character shouldn't be able to dabble in too many schools of magic. But, I've already met with a couple of concerns.

 

New spells are extremely cheap. 60 active point spells cost a mere 3 points in the multipower. This is both good and bad. It makes diversification more attractive to the player which is good. What's bad is that limitations like "Only works against fire" are completely worthless. Why purchase "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED), Only against fire" for 1 point when you can have "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED) for 2 points?

 

I imagine I can create spell lists that the players have to choose from but I really want them to be creative on their own. It's much more interesting to have the player have to think "Hmm, I wonder if that dragon's breath is fire or if it's cold so maybe I should cast Protection from Ice" as opposed to "Yeah, I know the dragon is dangerous so just put up the invinci-shield".

 

Any thoughts on this?

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

That is the major drawback of a multipower magic system...new spells are cheap and don't need much in the way of limitations. It's fine if you want powerful mages, but it's not for every system.

 

Have you tried ditching the multipower and seeing what a few sample characters would look like without it? They may end up being too weak, but it's worth a look.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

If you look at it from a thematic point of view Limitations like "Only vs Fire" would fit within schools of magic like you wanted. Sure the price cost isn't much different but it fits character more.

 

Mutlipowers are a good way to go - however I would suggest instead of Ultra Slots you should use Variable Slots. Ultra Slots are great for Offensive MPs, but once you introduce constant and other powers then you really want the capability of varying your power level.

 

That doubles the cost of a slot and now Limitations like "Only vs Fire" start to mean something again.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

Well, I did a run-through the other night with both a Priest (VPP modified from Killer Shrike's version slightly, but at the end of the day, still a VPP) and a Sorceror (a stack of Multipowers with charges on the multipower). My original build (somewhere in that thread) is very similar to yours - they buy spells, they have an END reserve. Foom, done. However, the major trick (and part of the 'work' that comes from playing HERO) is maintaining the balance across the map.

 

I know now that in HERO, a 250 pt. HEROIC build character, while powerful, can still get creamed by a pure combat build that doesn't have to worry about it's chewy roleplay capabilities, and could reasonably be built on 50 (or 100) points less. That's just how it goes.

 

Steve had posted about a Talent based system which is outlined somewhat better in Fantasy Hero in Chapter 4; "The Gift" I believe its called, which has PCs pay for the ability to draw on certain elements of magic; you could easily blendo the two concepts - KS's MP or VPP with forcing the PC to buy access to various "schools" - and that could get you where you're going. If you do a Multipower, yes, the spells are remarkably cheap, but it's not a good way to curtail their overall power level.

 

One of my PCs put together a Sorceror; gave him 3 circles of magic (15, 30 & 45 point multipowers; each Multipower is designed to have one 'group' of spells in it, obviously) and he fired off a 2d6 RKA w/AP & Autofire against a mook and tattooed him against a back wall. Hardly a game breaking spell, but it was a great example of what basic magic can do in a HERO campaign.

 

If you're concerned about Limitation types, than the normal VPP structure might be a better fit (forcing people to take their RP levels into account when structuring their abilities). In an MP format, you're right - the stuff is cheap and the variations only apply for flavor purposes. You might, though, also put in "Must have -1 (or more) in limitations (-1/2)" which would force your PCs to think before they build. If you want more (Gestures, Incants and Foci alone make up a good chunk of change) then by all means, do more. Multipowers aren't generally the best way towards thematics, though.

 

Using the Tiered system, though, as Killer Shrike built, it's extremlely useful and replicates the 'feel' of d20 magic very well.

 

Hope that gets you started, and if you need more, let us know.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

This is very similar to the Metier Magic System on my web site:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/Metier.shtml

 

I addressed the issue regarding the pointlessness of most Lims in a Multipower Magic System by making the definition of Limitations on the MP Pool itself an intrical part of the Magic System's design and paired them directly to Advantages.

 

The example styles are based around concepts, but they could just as easily be based around more defined schools. The mechanic is independent of the specific application. It also allows players to invent their own styles, which is always fun.

 

 

Also, as an aside, the limiting of the REC on a END Reserve is rarely worth the bother. The Extra Time lim on such a small number of points has very little effect in the actual cost, and all limiting it does is encourage players to find ways to work around it in clever / degenerate ways.

 

There are several better approaches:

 

a) Don't allow REC at all, or restrict REC to a bare minimum, and require some other means of restoring the END Reserve. The END Reserve I used in my Thanomancy Magic System is an example of this in action --

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/adeptologyThanomancy.shtml

 

-- their END Reserve REC is capped at their character points divided by 150, rounded in their favor. So a 125 pt character can have 1 REC, while a 425 pt character can have 3 REC. Each Thanomancer must also have a "Drain Life" ability that is Transfer based defined as BODY to END Reserve REC. The actual design of the Drain Life power is left to the player, such things as number of dice, fade rate, ease of use and what not vary from Thanomancer to Thanomancer.

 

That basic idea is very morphable to suit a lot of different variations.

 

Rather than restricting REC, restrict the size of the Reserve instead. You could do something like limit the size of the Reserve based on character points, skill level, a custom talent, some combination of Characteristics, or some combination thereof.

 

In other words, you could state a guideline that the Reserve cannot exceed the characters Total Points / 5 rounded to the nearest 10's; in which case a 150 pt character could have 30 END and a 175 pt character could have 40 END.

 

Or you could state that no more points than the character's (INT + EGO + PRE) / 10 can be spent raising the Reserve; Thus a character w/ 20 INT, 15 EGO, 10 PRE could spend 45/10 = 4 pts on their Reserve -- for 40 END.

 

Or if a single Skill Roll of some sort applies to the Magic System you could state that no more than the (Skill Roll - 10) points can be spent on the Reserve. So a Skill Roll of 15- would allow up to 50 Reserve. Alternately (Skill Roll - 7) could be used to allow dabblers to have up to 10 Reserve (the 15- guy would have a limit of 80 END in that case)

 

And so on.

 

If you limit the END Reserve instead of the REC, you are basically saying that in any given encounter the caster will start with some juice, which is a good thing since it allows them to participate instead of the down side of an expended method where if they blow thru their Magic in an encounter they are screwed for the whole day. However, in a given encounter they must husband their resources -- depending on how much END their Spells average they will have to exercise discretionary judgement.

 

 

c) Bring Long Term Endurance into the picture in some fashion, whereby even though the character pays for the END for Spells from their END Reserve, the LTE rules are still applied.

 

You could just use the normal method of accruing LTE, just including END spent from the Reserve into the total END spent.

 

You could require the use of the "Fatigue" Limitation I discuss in this document:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/GeneralSpellRestrictions.shtml#FATIGUE

 

You could keep it simple and just state a ground rule that every casting of a Spell accrues 1 LTE.

 

What linking it to LTE loss does in gameplay is allow a character to cast pretty freely, but become increasingly fatigued. Using the by the book LTE, constant spells tire a caster very quickly. By the two variants I mentioned volume matters but duration doesnt.

 

 

Any of those 3 options work better than limiting the Recovery of the END Reserve, IMO.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

1. Each spellcaster must purchase an Endurance Reserve and the Recovery must take (Extra Time: 6 hours). All spells must cost endurance either naturally or by taking the limitation.

I actually prefer the (optional; some spellcasters may get physically tired by spellcasting) use of a second End stat (call it, "Mana," or whatever) to an End Reserve, and putting a Limitation on most spells that make them take Long Term End (even if I don't normally track LTE in the game). I make this an additional -2 Limitation on most Powers, but only a -1 on Constant Powers that Cost End Only to Activate. This also helps drive down the cost of spells or VPPs so you don't have to do the usual 1/3 cost break for spellcasters or anything. It also means you can have some spells that don't cost LTE, so they can be less (magically) exhausting.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

All very good suggestions so far! I like the idea of using LTE to limit spells per day over just capping their REC. Considering REC is really cheap (especially at the -3 or so granted by Extra Time 6 hours), it might not be very limiting at all.

 

Captain Obvious: I may try making a spellcaster without the MPP's to see what happens. I think I'd need a divisor for the real cost in this case but it definitely gives a huge reason to take conditional power limitations.

 

Ghost-Angel: Yes, I see what you mean with the flexible slots. Still, the difference is something on the order of 3 or 4 points.

 

Thia: I think you've got a good suggestion there. As a ground rule, every spell should have at least -1 worth of "Conditional Power" limitations. You can't build a Protection from everything spell under these conditions and the player would have to be creative to make spells like Force Field (only in sunlight). I'm worried that this might be too limiting for certain powers. Like, if I want to "Heal BODY", it really should work. So, perhaps the required Conditional limitations could vary from school to school. I'm not quite sure yet. Now the tiered system you mention, this is where you have a VPP and the spells inside take Charges 1? This is a great system but I want to avoid preparation. I'm going for a more D&D "sorceror" like feel.

 

Killer Shrike: I read the Metier system earlier and it is cool. So, basically the more limitations you take, the more advantages you can take too. That could work very well here. Basically, you can have your Force-Field-against-everything but if you want a Reduced Endurance Force Field, you'll have to find a Conditional Power limitation to balance it. Not too shabby. The Thanomancy idea is awesome, perhaps the magic-users in my world are dependent on some substance like "magic water" (cheesy sounding yes but I'm sure I can come up with a better name). Perhaps it could be in limited supply... This would be an interesting point in my campaign's story where some magic users are rejected as being evil (even though they really aren't).

[Rapier]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

Sounds roughly similar to how i've set mine up.

 

There is also a meditation/recharge skill (whatever that school would like to call it). The theory is that just standing around your END Reserve get a 1 or 2 END REC every phase. The skill is additional REC bought down with limitations (0 DCV Concentrate, Required Blood Sacrifice etc) dependent on the requirements of the school of magic.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

"Meditation to gain mana" sounds like UO. Did you ever play it? I played mainly on Siege Perilous.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

This is a great system but I want to avoid preparation. I'm going for a more D&D "sorceror" like feel.

I think by tiered Multipower he's talking about my Sorcery Magic System, which I designed specifically to mimic the D&D style Sorcerer:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/sorcery.shtml

 

 

Killer Shrike: I read the Metier system earlier and it is cool. So, basically the more limitations you take, the more advantages you can take too. That could work very well here. Basically, you can have your Force-Field-against-everything but if you want a Reduced Endurance Force Field, you'll have to find a Conditional Power limitation to balance it. Not too shabby.

 

To some extent yes, but not entirely.

 

Basically every Style is defined by a selection of Mandatory Modifiers and Restricted Modifiers.

 

Styles are defined as so:

 

STYLE DEFFINTION

 

* Mandatory Modifiers

o At least -1/4 in specific Limitations on all Matrixes

o At least +1/4 in specific Advantages on all Matrixes

+ The Limitation and Advantage total must be equal

o If a selected Modifier only applies to specific types of Powers then only Powers that may use that Modifier are permitted for the Style

* Restricted Modifiers

o A total of +/-1 in Modifiers that may not be taken, sympathetically split as desired between Advantages and/or Limitations.

+ This could be -1/2 in Limitations and +1/2 in Advantages, +1 in Advantages, or -1 in Limitations, or any combination in between.

* Each Style must Require a Skill Roll: Style Skill, and a character must have the associated Power Skill.

 

 

So an example style:

 

Préciat

Préciat (preh-SEE-at) is a quick, dangerous and flashy style focusing on immediate gain and application. Highly direct, this Style is never subtle and never lasting.

Signature: The Style is renowned for its aggresiveness; Matrixes of this Style are effortless but ephemeral, and feel "furious", "temporary", or "fleeting" to those with Mystic Senses.

Required Advantages: Reduced Endurance (0 Endurance; +1/2)

Required Limitations: Incantations (-1/4), Side Effects (-1/4)

Restricted Advantages: Uncontrolled (+1/2)

Restricted Limitations: Extra Time (-1/4), IPE (-1/4)

Common Modifers: Reduced By Range, Gestures, Incantations, Visible

 

What this means is that EVERY slot in the Style MP MUST have 0 END and Incantations and Side Effects. NO slot in the Style may have Uncontrolled or Extra Time or Invisibile Power Effects.

 

However, there is no restriction keeping individual slots from having other Modifiers and in fact Reduced by Range, Gestures, more restrictive forms of Incantations (Complex, Throughout), and Visible (the option to use Visible on a Power that is already Visible to represent an excessively Visible Power) are quite common.

 

 

 

However, instead of going with the Styles that Ive defined as Examples, you could easily morph the model to suit your purposes. For instance you mentioned a Protection School.

 

 

Protection

The Protection school offers Spells that provide defenses.

 

Signature: Matrixes of this Scool are all grantable to others and thus feel "generous" or "inanimate" to those with Mystic Senses -- many have said that they seem similar to magic items in their basic patterns.

 

Required Advantages: Usable By Others (+1/2)

Required Limitations: Gesture (-1/4), Concentration (-1/4)

Restricted Advantages: Usable As Attack (+1)

Common Modifers: Persistant, IPE, Hardened

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

The tiered approach you just linked is very interesting. One main thing I want is splitting up schools of magic to prevent too much versatility. If a player wants to dip into several schools of magic, it's gonna get costly. Perhaps I could do something similar but add a RSR to it with a seperate roll for each school. Charges gets rid of worrying about endurance reserves and having a seperate set of charges on each "spell level" guarantees that a player will have a large set of spells at various active point levels. I'll have to think about this some more. This is all very helpful info.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

The tiered approach you just linked is very interesting. One main thing I want is splitting up schools of magic to prevent too much versatility. If a player wants to dip into several schools of magic' date=' it's gonna get costly. Perhaps I could do something similar but add a RSR to it with a seperate roll for each school. Charges gets rid of worrying about endurance reserves and having a seperate set of charges on each "spell level" guarantees that a player will have a large set of spells at various active point levels. I'll have to think about this some more. This is all very helpful info.[/quote']

 

That document already contains detailed rules about Spell School Skills; under "Magic School Skills". It is not an RSR to Cast system though -- the Spell Schools are used to control the ability to learn and create Spells.

 

I discuss the idea of Control Factors at great length in this document:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/shrikeMagicDesign.shtml#ControlFactors

 

and RSR is just one form of Control. I don't mind RSR Magic Systems where it makes sense (I have several on my site, including the afore discussed Metier), but I avoid it where it doesnt make sense or isnt necessary.

 

I dont think it is fair to put people on Charges and then make them take an RSR or Activation Roll -- the number of Charges is already a stiff control. Also, that Magic System is designed to throw around some large Active Point Spells, so RSR does not work well with it unless the "No AP Penalty To Roll" modifier is taken, which reduces the RSR to a -0 and thus really sucks.

 

If you click on the GM NOTES section of the various Magic Systems on my site, they all have a section on "Control Factors" which explicitly notes what intrinsic constraints are designed into the System.

 

In this case:

 

Sorcery has a hard limit of how many Spells per "Spell Level" they can cast in one day, which is a form of Volume & Frequency Control. Sorcery has an Opportunity Cost Control in the form of an expensive series of Multipower Pools. The School Skill model and time required to learn and make new Magic is a form of Acquisition control. Finally, Sorcery requires a minimum of -1 in Limitations on each Spell which is a Castability Control.

 

As you can see, the Magic System is quite constrained w/o the need for something like RSR.

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

What's bad is that limitations like "Only works against fire" are completely worthless. Why purchase "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED), Only against fire" for 1 point when you can have "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED) for 2 points?

 

I imagine I can create spell lists that the players have to choose from but I really want them to be creative on their own. It's much more interesting to have the player have to think "Hmm, I wonder if that dragon's breath is fire or if it's cold so maybe I should cast Protection from Ice" as opposed to "Yeah, I know the dragon is dangerous so just put up the invinci-shield".

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

 

There are several ways to avoid the "invinci-shield" problem.

 

1) Enforce a forcefield maxima (5 DEF?), after which costs are doubled if they are not specialized. This will make pure Fire/Ice Shields much more powerful per active points than Invinci-shields and the choice will be a low Invinci-shield or a much more powerful specialized shield.

 

2) The other way is to say that a forcefield only covers a particular limited element and that it costs a +1/4 Advantage for each special effect after that. Fire(heat) , Earth(physical), Water(including acids), and Air (Lightning, Sound) for example. This is simular to buying an RKA and having to define if it is a lightning bolt, a fire bolt, or a flying sword.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

I like the idea of a spell possibly fizzling. I am thinking of magic being a force of will. The harder you push yourself, the more chance of it not working the way you want it to, unless you've mastered the ability to control it. But, at the same time, it may slow the game down or be less fun for everybody.

 

I'm thinking of a couple of possible options here. One would be the Turakian Age method of the player paying Real Cost/3 points per spell. In this case, I'd need to keep endurance in play as a Frequency Control. It's a bit rough, a player could easily dump all their points into just a few spells which leaves little room for anything else.

 

Looking at your adeptology system seems promising too. LTE and END provide good Frequency Control. The "Set Spell List" option would probably be in effect for my campaign providing Acquisition Control with required research, maybe even spending a few character points per spell even though they are part of the VPP. I can still have my schools of magic idea by requiring a seperate research roll for each school. It's sounding so good, I might just dump the whole RSR idea. This system seems really expensive but I think it will allow the character to get many different spells without going overboard.

 

One more question, how do you encourage players to take "Conditional Power" limitations without providing a spell list that they have to choose from? I can probably do it on a case by case basis as the player makes them up but a general rule would be helpful.

 

Thanks again, you guys are very helpful. Getting the brain juices flowing.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

There are several ways to avoid the "invinci-shield" problem.

 

1) Enforce a forcefield maxima (5 DEF?), after which costs are doubled if they are not specialized. This will make pure Fire/Ice Shields much more powerful per active points than Invinci-shields and the choice will be a low Invinci-shield or a much more powerful specialized shield.

 

2) The other way is to say that a forcefield only covers a particular limited element and that it costs a +1/4 Advantage for each special effect after that. Fire(heat) , Earth(physical), Water(including acids), and Air (Lightning, Sound) for example. This is simular to buying an RKA and having to define if it is a lightning bolt, a fire bolt, or a flying sword.

 

Ahh, that is another excellent idea. I'll pick #2! You could even say the "Variable SFX" advantage would be acceptable so you could choose at the time of casting. This keeps getting better and better.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

Err, I think I read the "Set Spell List" wrong initially. What I meant was, the player would have to research new spells to add to the VPP. Each spell might cost a few points just to prevent someone from covering all possible powers too quickly. So, it's like a combination of adeptology and wizardry. I don't like the idea of my players coming up with powers on the fly, I could see that slowing play down quite a bit.

[i3ullseye]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

With regards to spell usage, and keeping it in check, I tend to favor increased endurance cost. Now I know charges covers the feel of the D20 magic systems a bit more accurrately, but then we run into these issues we have here.

 

I like to set an end reserve, and have the usual recovery limitations (like sleep time or prayer) and then i calculate how many spells can be cast out fo this reserve. Basically, I limit the number of spells by ensuring the end reserve can only accomadate a specific number of castings in a given day.

 

This also helps simulate spell levels also. I try to make minor spells cost roughly 3 end or so... and each jump form there increases this by 2 or 3 points. The most powerful spells should cost around 20 End to use. When your reserve is at 100, thats 5 castings of your biggest, or multiple castings of smaller spells.

 

In one game I had a character with 5 distinct levels of spells... End cost on each were 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25. He had a 100 pt reserve when the game began, and got it up to 150 by campaign end. I limited how quickly he could build this so it was a gradual climb.

 

For recovery, it had a 5 Rec, with the limitation you had to be fully asleep for 2 hours before it woudl kick in. Normally 3 hours of sleep got him back to full, but anything less than 2 would not let it kick in fully.

 

So, in summary, I like using End... and especially increased End where warranted, as my limitation tool rather than charges. Charges often end up way mroe advantageous in the long run. Plus having the End reserve gives another way to influence the magic in your world by lettign ley lines or artifacts influece his reserve... or even reduce the casting cost of certain spells.

 

Like taking a Necromancer talent, and now all Necromancy spells cost 1 end less per level, making the new costs 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20. This alone really lets the primary focus on a school of magic have a major influence on how the character works.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

I like the idea of a spell possibly fizzling. I am thinking of magic being a force of will. The harder you push yourself, the more chance of it not working the way you want it to, unless you've mastered the ability to control it. But, at the same time, it may slow the game down or be less fun for everybody.

Its certainly appropriate for some Magic Systems -- Im just saying that I wouldnt mix RSR w/ Charges. It's too severe of an impediment.

 

 

 

I'm thinking of a couple of possible options here. One would be the Turakian Age method of the player paying Real Cost/3 points per spell. In this case, I'd need to keep endurance in play as a Frequency Control. It's a bit rough, a player could easily dump all their points into just a few spells which leaves little room for anything else.

Personally, I am very much against the divide by 3 method. Not only is it unfairly priced, its also extremely boring and styleless. Its like the burlap sack of Magic Systems; functional but unaesthetic and generally shapeless.

 

Looking at your adeptology system seems promising too. LTE and END provide good Frequency Control. The "Set Spell List" option would probably be in effect for my campaign providing Acquisition Control with required research, maybe even spending a few character points per spell even though they are part of the VPP. I can still have my schools of magic idea by requiring a seperate research roll for each school. It's sounding so good, I might just dump the whole RSR idea. This system seems really expensive but I think it will allow the character to get many different spells without going overboard.

Adeptology is more "Will & Word" styled. I play around w/ the Active Points available for different types of Powers and how many AP can be used with out burning LTE to inject some flavor, but once you get past that its just a Cosmic VPP with some Limitations on it.

 

If you are hard core on the "School" model, check out Volomancy -- an Adeptology variant. It is set up to require Talents to use types of Powers (Adjustment, Attack, Body-Affecting, Defense, Mental, Movement, Sense-Affecting, Sensory, and Size) but if you preferred you could easily change that to be SFX or School based.

 

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/adeptologyVolomancy.shtml

 

One more question, how do you encourage players to take "Conditional Power" limitations without providing a spell list that they have to choose from? I can probably do it on a case by case basis as the player makes them up but a general rule would be helpful.

 

In a partially Cosmic VPP like Adeptology I don't generally allow many Limitations on effects, unless they have some kind of automatic impact. In otherwords, Lims like Incant and Gesture are inappropriate since they are situational -- when it would be inconvenient the player can just switch around to a version without those Lims so its never really limiting. Other Lims like Activation, Concentration, Side Effects (Always Occurs), Increased END, Extra Time, and so forth CAN be limiting because their effect isnt situational and thus Ill generally allow them on the fly.

 

 

The main thing is if you dont want players having a Cosmic VPP (even a limited one), then you can either add a -1/4 Known List Only Lim to the VPP's control Cost, indicating that only spell effects that have been preapproved are allowed, or just not use a Cosmic VPP model at all.

 

 

As an aside, you might want to check out the Magecraft Magic System on my web site -- it is Skill & END based, is very flexible and powerful, can support a bewildering array of different character builds, is easy to learn and use, and individual Mages get a tolerable amount of Spells but not too many. The model isnt too friendly to "Spell Schools" out of the box, but that idea could be grafted on to the basic mechanic if you were of a mind to do it.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

Bullseye, I'm also leaning towards END over Charges. It will be a refreshing difference from D&D style magic. The main benefit I see is that the player can choose a few big spells or lots of little spells every day. He'll have to think about loosing his most powerful spells too early and losing all his little ones.

 

Killer Shrike, the Volomancy thingy is just about right. That's looking pretty good.

 

I'm gonna let this stew while I'm at work tomorrow. Sometimes a break is all you need (especially when you have an awesome book called Feast for Crows to read).

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

Hrm. *slurp* Cool. My turn again. So let's pick up in the midst of the melee here; obviously you've got full access to Killer Shrike's material, and to be totally honest, I'm going to tell you what ghost-angel told me back in the day, which is that ultimately you'll probably wind up using a build like his or absurdly similar to his; he just wrote it down on the 'net first. Feel free to shake your fist at him. I do.

 

Thia: I think you've got a good suggestion there. As a ground rule' date=' every spell should have at least -1 worth of "Conditional Power" limitations. You can't build a Protection from everything spell under these conditions and the player would have to be creative to make spells like Force Field (only in sunlight). I'm worried that this might be too limiting for certain powers. Like, if I want to "Heal BODY", it really should work. So, perhaps the required Conditional limitations could vary from school to school. I'm not quite sure yet. [/quote']

 

The actual mechanics for that I realized I wanted, I learned how to do the math right from Killer Shrike, which is where I needed the most assistance. Like you, I know precisely what I'm going for, I just needed assistance getting from here to there without making my head explode. So you're looking for a variation on a theme; you want to replicate the feel of d20 sorcery. Straight.

 

NB: I'll tell you what Savinien told me, but it took a while for the advice to sink in; don't try and play d20 in HERO. Play HERO. Rebuilding a magic system and all that is fantastic, but remember that d20 does handwaving, and HERO does not, because it doesn't have too. So don't box out ideas because they don't fit in the first box. It's the difference between buying Windows & LINUX. Windows: It's all prepackaged and that's that. LINUX: You want access to the source code? Go nuts.

 

Where was I? Oh yes!

 

Well, in any magic system I've found that I generally prefer the concept of the Framework, although in Grimoire Steve makes a perfectly valid magic system just by having you do the whole 1/3rd thing, and then draw on your own END, which really makes you a super hero, and that's something I actively wanted to avoid. My casters have to work at it. If you're going for Sorcery, the ability to cast on the fly, here are some obvious suggestions:

 

- Dump the framework and let they buy free-standing spells or talents for spells (Steve put this up in my original thread), and put a cap on the END Reserve (i.e., never more than 10x your controlling skill, so if you have a 14- skill, you'd cap at a 140 pt. END Reserve). It controls the amount of slinging your casters do in a day, and you know when they'll refresh.

 

- My method of Sorcery is different Killer Shrike's, although he did something similar, my plan was to use an Elemental Control, which would demonstrate the Sorceror's inner mastery and their ability to improve both finitely and across the spectrum of their power. You could build charges into it (which makes sense, since most of your powers will have roughly equilateral Active Costs) or you could use an END Reserve. With Charges, you'll have replicated d20 magic pretty much smack on, but with varying levels of power in the spells that you chuck.

 

- My Wizards pre-prep (assigning their VPP by spell, only spells known, yadda yadda, using Killer Shrike as a reference, because as I said, he wrote it down first and he was a huge help when I did this) and my Sorcerors cast on the fly, using a Charged Multipower (which I sent directly to the player to see how it worked; we're still shaky on how Sorc's afford higher level slots, so Killer Shrike while we're on the topic, explanation on that?)

 

Now the tiered system you mention' date=' this is where you have a VPP and the spells inside take Charges 1? This is a great system but I want to avoid preparation. I'm going for a more D&D "sorceror" like feel.[/quote']

 

Your Sorc's could either:

 

- Tap END and call it good (END refreshes after sleep/meditation/blah)

- Tap a Charge and call it good (same concept, but the charges are on the framework, not the individual spells)

- You build a normal VPP and have them burn points out of the pool every time they cast a spell. You do this by assigning (wait for it) a Charge to the spell, noting that once it's cast, the 'spell' is consumed, and the points in the VPP are consumed for the day. This build keeps the PC from slotting in a power in their VPP and then using it perpetually. You can use the exact same mechanics, and simply say "And you cast on the fly, remove the points from your VPP." Killer Shrike probably has a more eloquent way of saying that (or may correct me, which happens ) but that's a perfectly valid way of doing it. I'm not positive a charge can be used that way (it begs the argument, "how do I cast the spell again?") but the mechanics are similar.

 

I like the idea of a spell possibly fizzling. I am thinking of magic being a force of will. The harder you push yourself' date=' the more chance of it not working the way you want it to, unless you've mastered the ability to control it. But, at the same time, it may slow the game down or be less fun for everybody.[/quote']

 

On the topic of limitations (a poor segue, but hey, it's early) I do not use RSR, but I make sure that everyone has the appropriate casting skill because if they get distracted/interrupted, then they have to make a check or fizzle. My concept is simply that magic always works, unless. It's the unless you have to watch out for.

 

In the rules (don't ask where) it specifically states that in something like a VPP, if you're limited from using your normal lims, you can still cast by shuffling the lims elsewhere. So if you build your VPP at (-1/2) which is always (-1) or more of lims, they can move those under duress to other lims. A very cool inherent push rule. Just an FYI.

 

I was also drafting Push rules for Wizards, in short, that they can make a Skill Roll to tap their own STUN once the END Reserve and/or Charges and/or VPP were expended. It requires a skill roll (hence, unless) but it could save your butt, and it allows for drama. And I already have one drama queen in my party.

 

And remember a pretty standard rule of thumb that I use: drama is inherently fun; drama which is bogged down in a half hour worth of mechanics just to get to the goodness is bad. If you want dramatic, you want clean. Do everything possible to keep your math in the background.

 

I'm thinking of a couple of possible options here. One would be the Turakian Age method of the player paying Real Cost/3 points per spell. In this case' date=' I'd need to keep endurance in play as a Frequency Control. It's a bit rough, a player could easily dump all their points into just a few spells which leaves little room for anything else.[/quote']

 

This is why I use the VPP for Wizards; in Steve's Turakian setting, Wizards know fewer spells than in a high fantasy/spell bookian D&D type setting, but they use them far more often (personal END). As you can imagine, when you're nerfing the party Wizard, everything goes straight to hell when you threaten to take away even one of his spells. Under a VPP he can keep all of his spells no sweat, and his only limits now are rebuilding them and tossing them within his VPP x 2. Cause 180 Real Points of spells in a day is pretty freaking powerful.

 

Insofar as power-dumping to a few spells, again, this is HERO, not d20. If that's how they roll, let them do it. Seriously. The points are the same; the points a caster burns on a VPP - even a limited one - are the points they burn for the right to tell physics to sit down & shut up, to quote Varsuvius a moment (although I don't know a wizard who hasn't said that, that's just an immediate reference). If they opt to be a skill-less wonder, hey! No skills for you! It's not d20, so there's no change there anyway (other than they no longer get +5 skill points per level from their INT).

 

Like taking a Necromancer talent' date=' and now all Necromancy spells cost 1 end less per level, making the new costs 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20. This alone really lets the primary focus on a school of magic have a major influence on how the character works.[/quote']

 

I hadn't even thought of this yet. That's genius. Repped. He's got a great idea here; you're a specialist? Pay points, less cost. I can't do it because I'd have people point dumping to it like mad; it'd have to cost 10 points to not be unbalanced I think, but I have a very strict sense of balance, my cohorts may have a different opinion. But the core idea is brilliant.

 

I think that's all I've got at this moment. I may edit for clarity. Hope that helps.

 

Good morning!

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

That's quite a long post there Thia! Throughout the day, I was thinking some more about it. I might go something like this:

1. Magic-users buy a Cosmic VPP. The control cost has: Cosmic (+2), Variable Limits (-1 worth, -1/2), Concentration (-1/4), Delayed Phase (-1/4), Slightly Limited Class of powers (Magic, -1/4), Side effects (LTE, -1/2), Only from a list of known spells (-1/4). How convenient, the limitations and advantages are equal. So, 10 points of pool = 15 character points.

2. All spells must cost endurance.

3. The LTE side effect is as from KS's web site:

http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/Adeptology.shtml

4. Magic-users get the amount of VPP points divided by 5 in spells in the "known list" (perhaps this could be based on stats instead, EGO/5 + INT/5 or some such thing). They can add additional spells at the cost of 2 points each, regardless of it's active or real cost.

5. Magic-users must practice learning the new spell before they can add it to their "known list". This would be based on a Magic skill roll, a seperate one for each school of magic. Failure means they have to try again, success means they can add it. Bonuses/penalties apply like a -1 penalty for each 10 points of Real Cost, +1 if they already have a similar spell, +1 if they make an appropriate complimentary skill roll (like PS:Blacksmithing for a spell to summon a sword). Just because the VPP increases in size doesn't mean all the spells within do as well. The Magic-user will have to practice upgrades for them but will be much faster than starting from scratch. Perhaps 1 day per 10 Real Cost of practice would be fitting.

How's it sounding so far?

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

Ahh, also, I might add an endurance reserve. It has many benefits pointed out by Thia such as a way to limit spells per day. But maybe the LTE side effect is enough for this?

[austenandrews]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

New spells are extremely cheap. 60 active point spells cost a mere 3 points in the multipower. This is both good and bad. It makes diversification more attractive to the player which is good. What's bad is that limitations like "Only works against fire" are completely worthless. Why purchase "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED)' date=' Only against fire" for 1 point when you can have "Force Field (0 PD/20 ED) for 2 points?[/quote']

I'm of the firm opinion that numbers are wholly inadequate to coax people into designing spells the way you want them to be. If you want them to buy specialized defenses, tell them they have to buy specialized defenses. Don't beat around the bush by fiddling with the numbers to create "paths of least resistance." That creates a bigger mess than you might think.

[Old Man]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

I'm surprised no one has yet suggested the EC as a framework for FH spellcasters; it's certainly my favorite. If the character takes many spells it's effectively a 50% cost break, which eliminates the need for the out-of-thin-air 1/3 cost break in 5th ed. FH, and also encourages the spellcaster to take more than one or two spells, and have all those spells at about the same power level. It also makes it worthwhile to have spell-specific limitations, and it eliminates the problems of excessive versatility that VPPs and MPs have. I'd much rather just use an EC than go through all these contortions with END reserves and whatever to make VPPs or MPs work.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Magic system opinions

 

- My method of Sorcery is different Killer Shrike's' date=' although he did something similar, my plan was to use an [i']Elemental Control[/i], which would demonstrate the Sorceror's inner mastery and their ability to improve both finitely and across the spectrum of their power. You could build charges into it (which makes sense, since most of your powers will have roughly equilateral Active Costs) or you could use an END Reserve. With Charges, you'll have replicated d20 magic pretty much smack on, but with varying levels of power in the spells that you chuck.

 

I did. Easy to miss, but I did. I don't use the END Reserve, although I like it as a basic idea, Elemental Controls were my solution for Sorcery in my campaign; it makes sense, you 'gain power' as a Sorceror, the whole shebang. It's a great build, and as Killer Shrike said, it's one of the few that increases in value over time.

 

The VPP is pretty easy once you wrap your brain around the general concept of it; using it for Wizards has proven entirely suitable. I had a Sorceror use an MP as I mentioned, and that got ugly fast. However, Markdoc made a point on another thread, which is that it is important to charge folk for the spells they take, to avoid them picking a single ub3r sp3ll and hosing the deck with it.

 

I also think I'm going to have to impose a limit on the max points in a given spell, but I don't know where it is yet. Hrm.

 

Good morning!