Is there a “Mage Problem�

[RadeFox]

To get back on Discussion topic, I still think folks are misreading some things. In my first post, I spoke of th GM limiting peoples access to spells. I also mentioned some points values. Then folks said the points aren't enough.

 

I should have left that part out. The thrust of my post was that YOU as the GM have every right and I'd even say the duty to responsibly grant out access to new spells. Even for VPP's. If you have a handle on how much and what kind of magical spells your mages are having access to in game, then there is now way for them 'Go rampant" in power as it seems many GM's posting have had experiences of.

 

Call me old fashioned, but I am really having trouble seeing how in a game, run by an attentive and dutiful GM, any character could develop abilities that cause balance trouble in the game. But thats just my last 2 cents on the issue.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by Seenar

Our Holy Warrior in one game, referred to our Illusionist with the 12d6 Mental Illiuons as the team "Howitzer" because he was alywas zapping people from the other side of the field.

 

Ah, yes, the mage as an artillery piece. That's pretty much how they've played out in my games. Lots of firepower, but vulnerable enough to need to be a bit back from the front lines.

 

I think the problem only crops up when the magic system is geared towards easy or extremely cheap magic. Its more of a mistake that comes into play at design time, than anything inherent with the mages themselves.

 

As time progresses mages become extremely powerful no matter what you do. Its the nature of the beast. Its up to the gm to ensure the system being used keeps the other players on par.

 

Just my 2AP

[badger3k]

Originally posted by RadeFox

To get back on Discussion topic, I still think folks are misreading some things. In my first post, I spoke of th GM limiting peoples access to spells. I also mentioned some points values. Then folks said the points aren't enough.

 

I should have left that part out. The thrust of my post was that YOU as the GM have every right and I'd even say the duty to responsibly grant out access to new spells. Even for VPP's. If you have a handle on how much and what kind of magical spells your mages are having access to in game, then there is now way for them 'Go rampant" in power as it seems many GM's posting have had experiences of.

 

Call me old fashioned, but I am really having trouble seeing how in a game, run by an attentive and dutiful GM, any character could develop abilities that cause balance trouble in the game. But thats just my last 2 cents on the issue.

 

I've charged mages to learn every spell they knew (in past campaigns). I've never run into any problems that others seem to have - partly because of the ed factor - most creatures are resistant to physical damage, but not a lot for ed, and I tried to maintain that sort of concept. Yeah, the orc doesn't have resistant PD for the arrow, but armor helps (I went by, and probably still will go that "real" armor is less effective against energy attacks. If I remember, I think I kept ED to no more than 1/2 PD. I also allowed the spellcasters to wield normal weapons and wear armor (unless they bought it as a limitation). About the only control I really placed on the PCs was that I had to approve all spells they wrote up. I also awarded them spells as XP sometimes, if I felt it appropriate.

 

But then I also have to say that my players in those campaigns were more fighter/thief types than mages, so there wasn't a magic-heavy focus on the campaign, so that may have helped too.

[Tim]

Yes, I have a mage problem.....

 

She keeps turning me into a newt!

 

But I get better.

[Markdoc]

The "mage problem" has two sides.

 

This thread - if you read back - was inspired by a variety of threads suggesting ways of making mages more powerful (ie: giving them more spells power) and the question was : do we really need this?

 

Many GMs - including me - replied that man, we don' NEED more powerful mages - if anything the reverse.

 

Your comment about keeping track of what spells you give out as GM is a good one, but in fantasy worlds, even apparently innocuous magics can have a big effect.

 

To take one example: in an FH game I played in long ago, my mage had a spell that allowed him to shrink things (shrinking, usable as attack, not vs living creatures). That doesn't sound too horrible: but I used it on bad guy's helmets, on their weapons, on locked doors (they fall out of their frames)- all kinds of things.

 

So even with care, spells can have unexpected side effects. IMO, the GM should carefully design his magic systems to reduce the ability of mages to cast spells in combat, if he wants fighters to feel useful.

 

cheers, mark

[Kdansky]

Well, it's quite easy to summarize I'd say:

 

Equipment users are far superior to mages in combat. (Armor + Sword + Bow does enough)

 

But we've got the classical "mages do everything else" Problem: They can Teleport, go Invis, use Telekinese, Read Minds, Create Light, have Flight, Summon Demons (for any tasks, true, our current mage can't control demons, but that's another story ), they can see in the Darkness, can analyze magical Items etc etc. And we don't even allow Multipowers at all.

 

Gestures + Incantation + Extra Time + Requires Skill Roll is cheap enough...

[badger3k]

Originally posted by Markdoc

To take one example: in an FH game I played in long ago, my mage had a spell that allowed him to shrink things (shrinking, usable as attack, not vs living creatures). That doesn't sound too horrible: but I used it on bad guy's helmets, on their weapons, on locked doors (they fall out of their frames)- all kinds of things.

 

cheers, mark

 

Part of the problem (and solution) relies on the GM to control the uses described above. I would only allow the spell to work on held items only if they cause no harm - I wouldn't allow the helmets to shrink, but I might let the weapons do that - although I'd probably only allow that as a transform, not shrinking. Basically both the player and GM have to keep each other under control and not let mages be too powerful (or underpowered).

[RadeFox]

We could start a new thread to help with GM's keeping control off spells in their campaigns. We could post spells we are thinking about allowing our PC's access, and and asking herodom at large, how they could envision the spell being used beyond its immediately apparent uses. That way we can either be prepared for the use, or build in limitations to prevent them.

 

Sound like a good idea?

[badger3k]

Originally posted by RadeFox

We could start a new thread to help with GM's keeping control off spells in their campaigns. We could post spells we are thinking about allowing our PC's access, and and asking herodom at large, how they could envision the spell being used beyond its immediately apparent uses. That way we can either be prepared for the use, or build in limitations to prevent them.

 

Sound like a good idea?

 

Not a bad idea. Let the general gamers out there playtest it for all. Too bad I have no spells yet.

[Markdoc]

>>>Well, it's quite easy to summarize I'd say:

Equipment users are far superior to mages in combat. (Armor + Sword + Bow does enough)<<<<

 

This is what many people assume. After all, the equipment users get free stuff, right?

 

But as FH GMs know, alas, it is not true. Many, many, many spells are incredibly useful in combat: Armour+sword+bow = many dead fighters if your mage has easy access to entangle, invisibility, Aid and forcewall. Not to mention flight usable against others or even a boring old mind control.....

 

Not to even dare to consider the dreaded tankmage who has the armour, the sword AND a few combat spells.

 

My approach is not to restrict those spells so much as to heavily handicap mages in combat (ALL spells in my FH game must take extra time, concentration and side effect). Thus a fighter/mage team can be very effective, but a mage without some sort of cover is normally so much chopped liver. I also restrict pretty severely the number of spells that can be cast in a row. Having adopted those restrictions, I find that fighters and mages complement each other nicely, and neither overshadows the other.

 

Oviously, this is not going to give a system enjoyed by people who like to play powerful combat mages, but it works for the kind of sword and sorcery feel I like to run.

 

cheers, Mark

[Seenar]

We had a Metal Mage in one game who used the lighten metal spell to remove the encumbrance from the party. That was an exponential effect.

 

She wore armor, used an axe, and would fire off the iron bolt for ranged effect. She also has a powerful dispell she kept using against other mages. She was the second most powerful fighter after the Palidin in the group.

[AnotherSkip]

It really depends upon the Active point total.

 

a 22 point Actuive point total and that mage will be toting a broadsword, bow and armor (like mine).

60 point active total and that mage will be sneering at the week fools around him IMNSHO