Points for Spells vs Items, and the Money Perk

[tiger]

Here's a interesting question for you.

 

When characters find magic items do you make them play points for them. I don't it's part of the pay off vs risk thing.

 

However, what if a mage finds a spell book? Do they gain the use of the spells in the book or do they have to pay for them?

[pinecone]

I've always treated found items as equipment, but if a mage wants to add a spell he has to pay...unfair?....thats just what feels right to me....

[tiger]

unfair? perhaps

 

I can see it both ways. While the a fighter finding a magic sword and being able to use it all the time is like a mage finding a new spell, it's different as well.

 

 

Just wondering other GMs perspective

[Guest joen00b]

I posed this question sometime back (or something very similar) and it was explained OAF for the sword, but the magic, well, hmmmm. Since it could be conceivable that the spell could be handed around for other spell casters to use, but they don't actually lose it, it does seem unfair.

 

I guess you could go with the old D&D style spell learning, or a version of it, where the caster would have to study or memorize spells at the beginning of the day. That way, if the Spellbook was lost, so are their powers. That seems a bit unfair as well. The cost for their spells would certainly decrease, giving them potentially more power.

 

I guess it would come down to what you feel would be 'fairest' in the situation. This may cause a bit of grief to the casters, making them find new and inventive ways to hiding their spellbooks or such.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by tiger

Just wondering other GMs perspective

My own thought would be that if a mage found a scroll he has two options: Use it as a one-time spell and activate it off the scroll (in other words it is a new power which the mage can use only one time), or, use the scroll as a template to allow the player to spend the character points on the new spell, but say with a +5 Spell Research roll because he has the scroll (in this case the character can buy the spell, but loses the scroll in the learning process). I could see allowing a player to do either one. This is assuming you are not using a VPP spell system. In that case I would just allow the mage to add the spell as one of his possible learned slots (in other words he has added the spell to his "spellbook").

[tiger]

I had toyed with the concept of making players pay a reduced cost for items they find when FH first came out.

I never found a system I really liked so I didn't.

 

I'm uncertain about using MP, EC or VPP for mages. I can see where they wuld work. I've just alwyased favored the "buythe spell" method. When I get the new FH book I'll decide for sure. Been looking over the PDF, so I have a bit of time to mull over and myabe have it worked out before the book comes out.

[Alcamtar]

I don't require points for magic items, although I would allow payment as an option. Essentially if you pay points it becomes a permanent aspect of the character (probably removing them Independent limitation) -- you may lose it, but you'll always recover it or be able to build a replacement at no point cost. OTOH if it stays independent, it could be destroyed or lost.

 

Well, if you use a VPP then the spells are essentially free. But otherwise I'd make the wizard pay for spells acquired.

 

Some things to think about:

 

If a fighter finds a "Training Manual" that can give him a +1 CSL with All Combat, do you make him pay points if he wants to acquire it? I would -- it takes time and effort, and is a permanent addition to the character. Same for the wizard: learning a spell is not a trivial thing like brushing your teeth, and permanently changes the character.

 

You can always let a wizard cast a spell out of a book -- either treating the book as a magic item, or just as an ordinary book -- but make him take extra time and maybe a penalty to his Magic skill. This way they *can* use a book without memorizing it, but if they want to make it a permanent part of the character, like a skill, they can pay points for it.

 

Finally, I'd point out that magic is FAR more useful than a +1 sword. With magic you can not only kill stuff, you can kill stuff at a distance, kill lots of stuff at once, fly, turn invisible, summon critters... IMO it needs to be limited far more than a mere sword. If magic is limited to making touch attacks then sure, let'em have it for free!

 

I'd let a wizard use the Cramming talent to acquire a spell temporarily.

 

It occurs to me that an interesting way to build a wizard would be to take all spells with the Independent and IIF Focus:Spellbook limitation -- you have to own the spellbook to cast the spell. You can leave it at home, but if you *lose* it, you lose the spell. In that case, I'd allow found spellbooks to grant new spells for free... if you steal a spellbook, the victim loses the spells and you gain them! Of course the GM can always steal them back again, or destroy the book.

 

Anyway that's my take on it.

 

Mike

[Nightshade]

I count all found equipment, be it a magical item, spellbook, or sword, as part of the experience given. I don't require players to spend points on them.

 

I only allow wizards to get new spells with research, and spellbooks count as that. I also make more physical characters learn from others and practice as well, so it doesn't imbalance things. I added a perk for my fantasy game called "library" to represent the wizard's capability to research spells.

 

I try to intersperse magical items that will help everyone in the party, so if there are magical weapons, there will be magical wands, magical capes, helmets, etc. as well. I don't give out many magical items, and if they are truly powerful, they very likely have some sort of drawback as well.

 

Nightshade

[JohnTaber]

In my world mages pay for spells they might find in a book. I guess since in my game once mages learn something they can't unlearn it I personally see this as a higher value. Almost like gaining a magic item without a focus. Anyway... Granted it may not be fair...but that's how it is handled in my campaigns.

[Chris Goodwin]

I treat magic items in much the same way as Champions treats Foci. If you pick it up, you can use it (rule of thumb is until the end of the current session, or for all of the next one if you find it near the end of this one). If you want to keep it, pay points. If you don't pay points, you will lose it at some point. Items are not built with the Independent Limitation. Instead, at the time you pay points for it, you may choose whether or not to buy it Independent.

 

As for spells -- it is exactly as if you were buying any other Power. If you don't pay points, you don't get the spell.

[Herolover]

Good question and one that has been argued and thought over for a long time. Officially there is no official rule so it always comes down to the campain and the GM.

 

For me, I have two types of Magic Items. The ones players pay points for and the ones the players find. Players don't pay points for items they find. If they have bought the item they are assured that if they loose it or something happens they will get it back or something equivalent.

 

As for spells, I really feel that it would depend upon the campaign and the magic system in use. However, I look at Magic as science. With that in mind then should a character be able to undstand a science just by finding an item. Nope. They have to pay points. Magic, IMO, is far more versatile and powerful than many magic items you coud find.

[Markdoc]

Two different beasties. At least in my game.....

 

Magic items are things you find. Spells are things you know.

 

If Gnort the Obscene finds a +3 Axe, he can use it to merrily lop off heads without paying a point. But since he knows nothing about magic, a magic ring that allows the caster to use the Spell of Fleet Feet won't do him much good: he lacks the required magic skill, so he gives it to Frum the Mysterious, complaining that they never find any good magic items.

 

A spell book is a list of spells and how to cast them. Neither Frum nor Gnort can do anything with it But if Frum wishes to learn the spells in the book he can do so. He pays the points, he gets new powers and he can sell the book, or stash it in his library or whatever.

 

Hell, Gnort could learn the spells, if was prepared to spend the points on learning magic instead of another 2 point CSl with axe. :-)

 

cheers, Mark

[Nightshade]

I agree with what most have said so far. However, it does depend on the style of magic the GM has for his world. If spells were handled in a fashion where they were used on scrolls, and all you needed was to know how to use them properly for the spell to work, then finding more scrolls would be akin to finding a magic axe, etc. I think that then it becomes a much more complicated question.

 

In other words, it depends on the campaign. Overall, I think that most GM's probably use the "you find it, its yours, forget the point cost" approach, but the pay points for what you get approach may be appropriate, too.

 

Nightshade

[ShelleyCM]

I'm in the if you want to keep it, you'll need to pay the points for it camp -- otherwise, you may lose it. (Of course, even if you do pay the points for it, you may lose it, but you'll end up getting it back.)

 

-Shelley

[NuSoardGraphite]

In my Heroic level games, I treat it like this:

 

If it is an inherent part of the character, such as a skill, an inborn ability or Talent, or an item integrated with the Characters body so as to become a part of him/her, it cannot be easily taken from the character (without use of a Power of some sort) then the Character pays points.

 

If it is not an inherent part of the character, such as an item, book, weapon etc, then it can be fairly easily taken from the character (as per the Focus rules) then the character does not pay points for the item.

 

Exception:

 

Special magical or technological items that a Player wants to have his character start play with must be paid for, however, both the Focus and Independant limitations will apply, making the item very affordable.

 

Thats how I've always treated it, and have had no problems in doing so. I've had very few individuals wish to start play with something special, and when they do, its usually something minor so the point cost stays reasonable and there is not threat to game balance.

[Killer Shrike]

It depends on the Magic System you have in effect. In most VPP based magic systems Ive seen the Spellcaster usually just needs to "learn" the spell to his "known spell list"; this is the way I usually run Magic as well so it all works out.

 

 

In an EC/MPP/or Raw system, then yeah the Spellcaster would need to pay points for any of the spells in the book that he wanted to learn. Thats 1 of the problems I have with doing Magic Systems outside of a VPP; Spellcasters know very few spells and those spells come at the expense of something else.

 

 

The FH Playtest doc, among its 12 sample systems and copious advice, includes several alternate systems that dont fall into the traditional Powers mechanic, including Talent and Skill based methods. I have not yet had a chance to playtest/logically model all of them so Im not sure how the points will balance (in most cases it seems like a really cheap means of doing a Magic System, so it will take some monitoring before Im comfortable with the points band that they work best at). In some of those systems each spell costs points (but relatively few in general), but other Systems are handled more like mini-VPPs.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by NuSoardGraphite

In my Heroic level games, I treat it like this:

 

If it is an inherent part of the character, such as a skill, an inborn ability or Talent, or an item integrated with the Characters body so as to become a part of him/her, it cannot be easily taken from the character (without use of a Power of some sort) then the Character pays points.

 

If it is not an inherent part of the character, such as an item, book, weapon etc, then it can be fairly easily taken from the character (as per the Focus rules) then the character does not pay points for the item.

 

Exception:

 

Special magical or technological items that a Player wants to have his character start play with must be paid for, however, both the Focus and Independant limitations will apply, making the item very affordable.

 

Thats how I've always treated it, and have had no problems in doing so. I've had very few individuals wish to start play with something special, and when they do, its usually something minor so the point cost stays reasonable and there is not threat to game balance.

 

Ditto, except for the learning of spells to a known spell list (but done in a VPP Magic System, so no points are directly involved -- either the spellcaster has a VPP large enough to handle the spell and can make an appropriate skill roll to learn, or the spellcaster just cant learn it yet -- its too 'high level' of a spell for the caster at that time or he cant quite understand the theory of the spell yet.).

[Killer Shrike]

As far as items go:

 

In the past in a Fantasy setting using the HERO System I ruled that "Ephemeral Magic Items", meaning FOCI with Non Recoverable Charges and the SFX: Magic, could be paid for with money rather than character points because it would be retarded for any Mage/Wizard/Whatever to burn Character Points to create Scrolls, Potions, and other such items; there is no percentage in it.

 

IIRC the monetary cost used was Real Cost x Active Cost in gold to make and the Market Price would be a 150% markup or more, which was very very expensive relative to the game economy, and of course modified by in character (In-C) bartering and applicable skill rolls and/or use of PRE.

 

Non ephemeral items were paid for in points (for the mechanic) AND money (the in-game materials and labor (P&L will cost you in any timeframe)). The same cost formulae was used for P&L IIRC. As far as points go, a Wizard paid points and money to make items unless the item was commisioned, in which case the commisioning party paid the points and the money. This helped take the burden off a Wizard getting hit up by all of his PC friends to make items for them; they had to pay the points AND whatever monetary cost the Wizard set as his price for P&L (and profit should he see fit).

 

As an important note, all Magic Items were required to take the Universal FOCI and IND limitation, and acquired magic item were essentially 'found points' but were also unalterable. These items did not cost money obviously, because they are not bought, but rather "found", but could also be sold for money lik any other commodity; most merchants would pay RC x AC or trade at 125-150% markup, modified up or down by bartering In-C, applicable skill rolls and/or use of PRE. Some items always sold at a premium however, and were strictly a sellers market, like Rings of Power, some powerful Staffs, or any beneficial item with 200 or more Active Points (which would be regarded as near-artifacts) and would sell at top dollar in a big enough market, and even more powerful items were effectively priceless and would sell for whatever the market could bear.

 

Private buyers usually would buy at a higher rate, but were usually harder to find. Some bigger metropolitan cities would have 1 or more Consignment Agents and/or an Auction House which could be used to find potential buyers at a higher rate, but which would of course take a percentage cut or some other renumeration.

[Wyrm Ouroboros]

Okay, going to finally wade in on this topic.

 

In general, I would require the characters to pay for major magic items. Minor ones -- things to make life easier, a magical lighter or a fish-filleting knife (or a fishhook that summons fish ) -- I would not make them pay for. Powerful mystic swords, axes, bows, etc. I would.

 

On the other hand, I would also be willing to 'balance out' how such things are given out; if part of the 'treasure' found was a magic item for everyone (and the experience necessary to buy them), but there wasn't a magic item for the mage, I would instead include some object that would help the mage increase his mystic repertoire -- a book, spell components, whatever is necessary to contain the character points designed to let the mage gain a new spell and/or expand his MPow or VPP.

 

Any magic items gained as treasure should automatically have the 'Independent' limitation, with the mage gaining character points equivalent to that gained by the magic items. Is this fair? Yes and no; while the mage's enhancement isn't going to be equivalent to that given to the rest (i.e. he doesn't get a 3d6 HKA or some such), his is going to be permanent. Everyone else, their magic items can be taken away; you can't rob the mage of his power.

 

In essence, this is 'just' another way of giving out XP, albeit earmarked for specific expenditures. There's another way of acquiring a magic item, of course...

 

If a character is going to go to market, my ruling would be that they both a) have to pay the cash price and have to pay the Real Cost for the item up front. Depending on your world, most mystic items just aren't available for purchase. Oh, maybe you'll find a collector willing to part with a Mouse Knife or a Rat Blade (see the Magic Items thread), or maybe you'll get taken in by three guys pulling a scam. (Happened to a player of ours once who wanted to buy a magic sword. Got sold a regular, not-particularly-good blade.) Finding a '+3 Defender' on the open market? Just not likely to happen. (Wanting to SELL your +3 Defender on the open market? First, find a buyer...) If it's a real magic item, though, I'd make the player pay both costs up front, and out of their regular XP.

 

I'd also allow them to NOT have the Independent limitation on the weapon they buy -- or, in fact, buy off the Independent limitation on any magic item they acquire in the course of their adventuring. Why? Because some things you just always get back. Indiana Jones always gets his hat back; James Bond always keeps his cool. (Okay, so that isn't a magic item.) If they lose it, great, another RP/Plot hook. No, they don't automatically find it stuck in a tree, but they should be able to get it back, sometimes through peculiar chains of events...

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Getting back Magic Items: Applying IND consistently and uniformally does not prevent PCs from "keeping" thier pet items. If an IND item is taken and a PC REALLY wants it back, then they can get off thier duff and chase down whoever took it. If they succeed at catching the culprit before they dump or lose the item, and can take it from them, then they get it back.

 

I dont see any benefit to allowing the players to buy of IND on magic items, as it just adds an inconsistent element and confuses the matter when they go to take loot and implies meta-game determined decisions. For example, if PCs can and do buy off the IND lim, then so can NPCs. This would lead to unusual circumstances where 2 identical items have 2 write ups, 1 with IND and 1 without, and the 1 without implies that if you divest the current owever of it they will perforce get it back whether it fits the flow of the storyline or not ("Oh, you stole the XYZ Widget from Lord Stompy's castle? Well guess what fool, he bought the IND off of the XYZ Widget! Its just a Universal FOCUS, and therefore he WILL most assuradly track you down and have his revenge, mwah ha ha!").

 

YMMV

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

This would lead to unusual circumstances where 2 identical items have 2 write ups, 1 with IND and 1 without, and the 1 without implies that if you divest the current owever of it they will perforce get it back whether it fits the flow of the storyline or not ("Oh, you stole the XYZ Widget from Lord Stompy's castle? Well guess what fool, he bought the IND off of the XYZ Widget! Its just a Universal FOCUS, and therefore he WILL most assuradly track you down and have his revenge, mwah ha ha!").

 

YMMV

 

I don't see why any of this necessarily follows.

 

If a PC pays points for an item, he is now the "current owner". Whether it is Independent or not, it is entirely possible that a previous owner wants it back, which is a plot hook. Either way, it doesn't mean he's going to get it back.

 

Think about how it works in Champions. If you defeat Foxbat and take his gun, you don't really get to keep it unless you pay the points for it. If you pay the points then it's yours, and if Foxbat wants it back, he's going to have to come take it from you (at which time either you take it back from him or you get the points back to use for something else -- unless it's Independent).

 

[rant]

 

This confusion stems from treating points as if they were some kind of currency used to buy Powers and other stuff, and the cognitive dissonance caused by the fact that they don't act like a currency -- you can't pay some of your points to another character for a magic item. They're not a currency. They're just a measure of how powerful a character is. Which is why I go back to the Champions method -- it doesn't treat points like a currency. The idea that points are a currency has begotten the idea that someone has to pay points for a magic item, because otherwise Assembly Lines Will Flood The World With Magic Items!!!! Well, no, that wouldn't happen even if you don't treat points this way, and there are many other ways to ensure that the assembly line thing doesn't happen (like requiring it to take a long time to create magic items).

 

And besides, what if you want a world where assembly lines can flood the world with magic items?

 

Independent came about because of this fear, and Independent has been the cause of this attempt to turn points into currency -- and in so doing, has caused more problems than it has solved, namely this discussion. Trying to reconcile Independent vs. non-Independent, and the idea of paying for magic items vs. not, and the idea of points-as-currency vs. points-as-not, brings us here.

 

[/rant]

 

Whew. Rant over. Sorry if it's a bit disjointed, but it's late.

 

Post-Rant: Okay, I won't say that points are not not not a currency. If you want them to be one in your game, more power to you. If so, then your problems will mostly be solved if you make them act like one -- if you let characters trade them back and forth like gold pieces. But then there will be other ramifications that I haven't taken the time and energy to figure out; you're on your own there.

[Killer Shrike]

What Im saying is either make all magic items IND, or make none of them IND. Being inconsistent with applying the rule violates common sense and leads to strange meta-game driven outcomes.

 

 

In a Fantasy campaign, particularly High Fantasy, magic items are a lot more fluid than power constructs are in other genres, PARTICULARLY supers. In a supers campaign, a character's powers are thier powers. Each character is the expression of a schtick, and come with thier own powers. Fantasy is not like that; fantasy characters are individuals, and magic items are tools. Just as anyone can use a hammer without interfering with other tool-users idioms, so to can any character acquire a magic item.

 

Making magic items IND has always worked extremely well for me for many years, and cleanly differentiates the characters from their swag. A magic sword is not a part of a character, it is bit used by that character FOR NOW; it can go away at any time, be replaced, be traded in for a new one, etc. IND basically says "this power construct is self-contained and not owned by any character". Enforcing IND generally but allowing characters to "buy IND off" is still giving them free poitns (the original real cost of the item with IND), and its giving the points to them forever (without IND the item cant be permanently removed from the character legitimately). It also introduces an anomolous state to magic items (is it IND, is it not IND?) that is purely metagame driven but which has impact on in-game decisions and the way things play out. In all it just confuses a straightforward means of handling magic items with situational and arbitrary logic.

 

EDIT: That'll teach me to post things late at night -- clarified my half-asleep ramblings.

[Markdoc]

I agree with Shrike. And I speak from experience here because when we started using Hero system for fantasy games, FH was still far in the future. So we played "champions-style". If you wanted to keep a magic item you found you had to pay for it. Hell, if you wanted to use a normal sword you had to pay for it.

 

It was just too wierd. You get situations like: the party is attacked by zombies.

Player1 "Hey, where's that incredibly powerful mace of undead-slaying we took from the high priest a couple of weeks ago?"

Player2 "Oh, we left it at the inn. Or it melted. Maybe the cat got it...."

 

Or in other heroic genres:

"OK, officer, handcuff him to the railing."

"But I don't have any handcuffs. Do you know how many points those are? They only issue handcuffs to really powerful officers."

 

Seriously though, most people now assume that you can come by mundane items for free, but in the appropriate fashion.

 

PC Plod can get handcuffs for free in a dark champions game, but Ortan the Magnificent cannot in a FH game. PC Plod can't get a flaming sword at any price, but Ortan can. But - remember the use of the word appropriate - he can't normally go to Bob's Swords and Cutlery for it: he'll have to cross the Desert of Doom, scale the Peaks of Peril and trade concepts of physical injury with whoever currently owns it.

 

The conceptual leap most people cannot seem to make is that magic items ARE MUNDANE IN A FANTASY WORLD. Sure, someone normally has to pay points to make them in the first place, but if the Sword of Mighty Hacking was crafted by the long-vanished Ducklords of Preen, then to all intents and purposes those are simply free points from nowhere - the same as the ones that haul the sun across the sky or for that matter created the sun long ago.

 

Cheers, Mark

[tiger]

Originally posted by Markdoc

The conceptual leap most people cannot seem to make is that magic items ARE MUNDANE IN A FANTASY WORLD.

 

Maybe in your world but not in mine. A sword is mundane, a dagger, bow, shield, these thing are mundane. Magic and magic items while they do exist are not munane.

 

But the question is really more like this. If your running a police/agent campaign. Do the agents have to buy their equqipment?

 

While I can see buying found items I can also see not buying them. It really can go either way.

 

To be the devils advocate here, if you have to pay points for things you find, why come up with a true money system. If they want a sword, horse, armor etc, they pay points.

 

Short of food, cloths and lodging what's the point? By the same token, if you have to pay points for everything you get, remembering EP runs 2-6 per adventure, what's the point of being an adventurer? Anything you find, other than money, you can't keep or use for quite a long time. Now I will say I had toyed with the idea of having characters pay points at a 1 per 10 ratio.

 

The question I had originally was about spells. Most GM I've been in games with allowed you to keep items found as equipment, not that alot was ever found. I was just wondering how people veiwed spells.

 

 

On a different topic, why does paying points mean your always get it back? If a thief is caught stealing and has to break out of prison. Does he get back all his equipment or does he have to replace them himself?

[Nightshade]

Money

 

How about this for a twist:

 

Say the heroes find a really rare item (like, say a phoenix feather, or dragon skull), which is really valuable, but not to them, so they sell it for mulitudes of money. Do they now have to buy the Perk Money?

 

Again, I think that the best way to handle this is to count found objects, money, etc. as part of the experience system. Not everything the characters get as rewards are better and more skills, spells, etc.

 

Nightshade