Modified version of Elemental Control for spell system

[slaughterj]

For me, the particular form that magic takes in the campaign setting suggests the method for spell buying in the campaign, e.g., VPPs, MPs, ECs, point-buys, or other. Each of these methods have particular issues associated with them, for better or worse.

 

For VPPs, my issue is the vast amount that has to be dealt with to run VPPs: this includes "free" spells - alternative methods are necessary to control learning new spells, as well as many issues raised in controlling VPPs.

 

For both VPPs and MPs, the Active Point limits are an issue, because it makes it difficult to create powerful ritual magic or certain basic constructs that while they are not overpowering, they happen to require a lot of AP.

 

For both VPPs and MPs, particularized limitations on spells are not of much valve - for instance, to get a Fire Vision spell in an MP of Fire Spells, where the Fire Vision only particularly requires concentration, a large fire, and extra time, the Power Framework barely provides any value for the limitations taken.

 

For ECs, the issue is with everything having to be of the same Active Points, or at least a certain minimum level of AP, which creates skewed results with cheaper defensive powers compared to trying to include offensive powers.

 

For point-buys, they solve all the aforementioned problems, e.g., they don't create issues as to free spells, they allow for higher AP rituals and other spells, they allow the flexibility for particular limitations to be directly valuable (unlike VPPs & MPs), and they allow for offensive and defensive powers to be bought at flexible levels from one another (unlike ECs). However, point-buys have an issue with the overall cost, making it hard to add new spells.

 

One idea I had was to utilize a modified version of an EC, which doesn't require all the powers within to be at the same AP or higher, but rather halved the cost of the powers within it, with the cost of the EC being the same as the cost of the most expensive power within it. Here's an example for comparison:

 

Typical Superheroic Fire Powers EC:

EC: 15pts

- Flight, 15" - 15pts

- FF, 15PD/15ED - 15pts

- EB, 10D6 - 35pts

(Bought Separately) Heat Vision (IR Vision) - 5pts

 

Fire Spells Modified EC:

EC: 10pts

- EB, 8D6, G&I, RSR (-1 total lims), 40AP, 20RP after lims - 10pts with EC "halving"

- Flight, 8", G&I, RSR (-1 total lims), 16AP, 8RP after lims - 4pts with EC "halving"

- FF, 6PD/6ED, G&I, RSR (-1 total lims), 12AP, 6RP after lims - 3pts with EC "halving"

- IR Vision, G&I, RSR (-1 total lims), 5AP, 2RP after lims - 1pt with EC "halving"

 

As can be seen, all the fire-power appropriate effects could be included, regardless of AP. I would enforce the requirement that the powers in the modified EC were of a particular spell category, based on the categories available in a given setting, e.g., Fire Magic, Necromancy, Enchantment, or whatever. Spells that did not fit within the EC for its sfx would have to be separately under a point-buy system (e.g., the Fire Mage seeking to buy a Summon Undead spell), or conceivably if someone were a significant practitioner in 2 magic areas, they could get 2 separate modified ECs to reflect that.

 

This modified EC solves all the same frameworks issues above that the point-buy method does, but also solves the issue with the point-buy method of prohibitive cost, with the cost reduction still requiring that the spells bought fit a particular concept, e.g. Fire Mage.

 

The idea for cost "halving" is based on the standard EC, which typically halves the costs of the powers within it, provided they are all bought at the same cost (typically the case). I based the cost "halving" of the EC on the RP rather than AP because: (1) If half the AP of the highest spell had to be paid without limitations, the costs would be ridiculously high (examples can be provided if necessary), (2) If the EC were given the common limitations of the spells underneath (like ECs and MPs typically do), it would limit the flexibility of the spells underneath, in that this method allows someone to have a spell or two which might not have a Gestures or Incantations limitation (due to the particular nature of the spell not waranting such), without the mage being penalized because most of the spells in the modified EC had a particular limitation but for one or two exceptions. Note that someone can't be too tricky here, because if they freed up the limitations too much on any particular spell, that spell might then have the higher RP, requiring the modified EC to be bought higher, and further, the less limitations on the spells, the more they will still cost, which isn't seen really in VPPs and MPs, (3) the RP was used because it is a readily available number, so it makes it easy to keep up with from a mathematical perspective, i.e., if someone buys up a particular spell, the RP goes up, and it might become the highest one, requiring the modified EC to be bought up as well, and it is simple and elegant to look at the RPs rather than figuring out the math, and finally (4) if all the spells have the same underlying limitations (and they likely will), then the EC would have them as well, and end up the same cost as the RP method anyway.

 

Conceivably in a world where characters could have these modified ECs, a totally general practitioner could still be made under the standard point-buy system, getting the benefits of flexibility but losing the point savings of the modified EC which reflects the overlap in learning spells of a similar background.

 

Thoughts? Questions?

[eepjr24]

Point savings?

 

The points savings seem high with this method, as they would be in an MP, but without the restrictions of the pool limiting what powers could be maintained simultaneously. That could be somewhat unbalancing without some other restrictions (eliminating reduced end, or limiting active powers at a time, etc). In general, I am finding that the problem with giving frameworks to mages is that they gain power in a more exponetial fashion, whereas other characters tend to move more linear. The restriction of the EC for SFX is not that limiting to someone who is creative, I (and I am sure most other regular readers here) can think of many defensive, offensive and utility spells for even EC's based on unusual realms such as mirror magic, cloth magic, paper magic, etc.

 

Mages in my campaigns have never had the problem of not being powerful enough. More the opposite. I am leaning more towards letting mages buy their spells as per powers with whatever restrictions they need to get the RP down to a reasonable number, but I am going to put more thought into the idea.

 

- Ernie

[slaughterj]

Re: Point savings?

 

Originally posted by eepjr24

The points savings seem high with this method, as they would be in an MP, but without the restrictions of the pool limiting what powers could be maintained simultaneously. That could be somewhat unbalancing without some other restrictions (eliminating reduced end, or limiting active powers at a time, etc). In general, I am finding that the problem with giving frameworks to mages is that they gain power in a more exponetial fashion, whereas other characters tend to move more linear. The restriction of the EC for SFX is not that limiting to someone who is creative, I (and I am sure most other regular readers here) can think of many defensive, offensive and utility spells for even EC's based on unusual realms such as mirror magic, cloth magic, paper magic, etc.

 

Mages in my campaigns have never had the problem of not being powerful enough. More the opposite. I am leaning more towards letting mages buy their spells as per powers with whatever restrictions they need to get the RP down to a reasonable number, but I am going to put more thought into the idea.

 

- Ernie

 

I don't think the point savings would be too high compared with other frameworks actually, and it makes spell limitations still meaningful. As for the "types" of magic, that'd be pre-established based on the specific campaign and probably involve a lot of pre-created spells to illustrate the theme for the particular ECs available, as well as information as to what is excluded (e.g., healing spells for some, or even partial limits such as for nature magic where healing magic couldn't exceed half the AP of the highest spell or some such).

 

As for letting mages buy the spells per powers, that sounds like the point-buy method to me, which tends to be too much in my experience, even when loaded down with disads.