Limitations

[Crypt]

During my Fantasy Hero campaign two of my players (magic-users) asked if it was possible to ignore some limitations like Gestures, Incantations or Concentration on the fly.

 

The general idea is that some RPGs (for instance RM or Ars Magica) allow this kind of things.

 

I thought about the "Endurance as a substitute for other limitations" option from FH page 246: (for every 1/4 worth of limitation the character wants to avoid the effects of, the power's END cost increases by one step down the increased Endurance cost table...)

 

Because i really fear it may become unbalancing i think i will add a cumulative -2 to magic Roll and a 5 pts Side Effect per 1/4 ==>

 

Limit. / END / ROLL / SideEffect

1/4 / X2 / -2 / 5 pts

1/2 / X3 / -4 / 10 pts

3/4 / X4 / -6 / 15 pts

1 / X5 / -8 / 20 pts

etc.....

 

Even then it worries me because it may be easy to cast a very low level without the bought limitations.

(note: they have one Magic skill per school. One of the player has Divinitation at 21- .)

 

Do you think this is ok ?

 

Do you think i should limit it to gestures, incantations and concentration or allow it for any limitations ?

 

Do you think i should forbit it and say them to sold back gestures, incantations and concentration and buy a Variable Limitation instead ?

 

 

(or should i buy a Mental Defense against Players ?)

[ghost-angel]

Re: Limitations

 

Two Options:

 

1) Variable Limitation, it's worth half the value of the Limitations you can take on. But you can change around which Limitations you use any given use.

 

FREX: Variable Limitation at -1/2 means you must have -1 with of Limitations each use (like Gestures, Incantations, RSR or change it to RSR, Increased END Cost).

 

2) Allow a "metamagic" Perk to be Purchased that effectively 'buys off' the Limitation's value on the Spell.

 

15 Points buys off a +1/4 Advantage for up to 60 Active Points of Power. (basically treat it a lot like a Naked Advantage that does nothing but buy off Limitations on Powers).

 

It's harder to do generically as the points don't always match exactly - especially with multiple Limitations or varying power levels. You could just set an appropriate Point Cost and let it work however you see fit.

 

 

Are they paying points for the spells?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Limitations

 

2) Allow a "metamagic" Perk to be Purchased that effectively 'buys off' the Limitation's value on the Spell.

 

15 Points buys off a +1/4 Advantage for up to 60 Active Points of Power. (basically treat it a lot like a Naked Advantage that does nothing but buy off Limitations on Powers).

 

A similar structure could also allow -1/2 of fixed limitations to be converted to -1/4 of variable limitations. On 60 points, -1/2 saves a maximum of 20 points and -1/4 saves a maximum of 12, so for 8 points, you gain the ability to change -1/2 of limitations on up to 60 AP on the fly.

 

-1 saves 30 and -1/2 saves 20, so for 10 points, you can change -1 of limitations on the fly.

 

-2 saves 40 and -1 saves 30, so 10 points is also right for changing -2 of limitations.

 

-3 saves 45 and -1.5 saves 36, so now the value is down to 9 points.

 

-4 saves 48 and -2 saves 40 - cost keeps dropping

 

[no, this is not the result I expected when I started this analysis, but it makes sense - limitations have a diminishing return]

 

Given this, allowing, say, a 15 point Perk that allows limitations to be changed on the fly (converted from Fixed to Variable limitations) for one spell at a time seems reasonable in a game where most spells will have 60 or less AP. Maybe it's even expensive and 10 points would be more appropriate, but the ability to use it on different spells, and spells with more than 60 AP, makes 15 seem reasonable to me.

[Crypt]

Re: Limitations

 

Are they paying points for the spells?

 

Yes. At full cost.

 

They play characters i've converted from HARP to HERO.

Characters are built on 200 pts.

Average magic level.

The most powerful spell they have is a Retrocognition at 50 Active points.

Spells basically have Gestures and Incantations. About 30 % of their spells has Concentration.

Attacks spells has the Spell limitation.

As a default all spells need a half phase.

1 Power Skill per magic school. (the same schools as in the Grimoires)

 

A fairly standard FH magic system, i guess.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Limitations

 

Pretty standard - I would definitely suggest if you want to allow on the fly changes to use Variable Limitation. It's what it's for after all.

[Crypt]

Re: Limitations

 

Pretty standard - I would definitely suggest if you want to allow on the fly changes to use Variable Limitation. It's what it's for after all.

 

 

maybe i will use the following only for Gestures, Incantations and Concentration =

Limit. / END / ROLL / SideEffect

1/4 / X2 / -2 / 15 pts

1/2 / X3 / -4 / 20 pts

3/4 / X4 / -6 / 25 pts

1 / X5 / -8 / 30 pts

etc.....

 

and the player must choose another limitation of the same value.

If he doesn't choose one then he get the effect of twice limitation.

For instance: he want to cancel a Gestures 1/4 and an Incantation 1/4. He must choose 1/2 of alternate limitation and END is multiplied by 3, his ROLL is at -4 and if he fails he will suffers a 20 AP side effect.

If he choose to ignore taking an alernate limitation then he suffer the penalties of a 1/2+1/2 = a 1 limitation (=X5/-8/35.)

 

It only works for gestures, incantations and concentration.

It reminds me of Merlin (the movie) where it's said that a true master of magic may cast spell without speaking nor making gestures. It may be seen as a ground campaign rule.

As a side effect Gestures and Incantations, which are default for every spells, can not be sold back.

 

For other ones the only solution would be the standard Variable Limitation (or a framework, but i do not allow frameworks right now)

 

Do you think it's balanced enough ?

[Hierax]

Re: Limitations

 

Allowing this flexibility is a great concept!

 

I agree with GhostAngel, either use a Variable Limitation or a Naked Power Advantage.

 

I think that they're better since they are mechanics already built into the system and are easier to reflect on a character sheet rather than some hand-wavy thing or an adhoc add-on.

 

Also they are more consistent with the pay-for-what-you-get HERO philosopy, if you use them you can have some spellcasters/schools have this flexible advantage and others not have this useful option -- i.e., it seems like something that is worth points that should be paid for.

 

The Variable Limitation is probably best as you can have the xEND and Side Effects, RSR, + whatever in there as options but not with the Naked Advantage (which would be a good way of simulating D&D Feats, but not so much for RM/HARP).

 

Also, however you do it, consider what you'll do with Powers that don't cost END, they will have to take Costs END first and then apply the additional END x.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Limitations

 

maybe i will use the following only for Gestures, Incantations and Concentration =

Limit. / END / ROLL / SideEffect

1/4 / X2 / -2 / 15 pts

1/2 / X3 / -4 / 20 pts

3/4 / X4 / -6 / 25 pts

1 / X5 / -8 / 30 pts

etc.....

 

and the player must choose another limitation of the same value.

If he doesn't choose one then he get the effect of twice limitation.

For instance: he want to cancel a Gestures 1/4 and an Incantation 1/4. He must choose 1/2 of alternate limitation and END is multiplied by 3, his ROLL is at -4 and if he fails he will suffers a 20 AP side effect.

If he choose to ignore taking an alernate limitation then he suffer the penalties of a 1/2+1/2 = a 1 limitation (=X5/-8/35.)

 

It only works for gestures, incantations and concentration.

It reminds me of Merlin (the movie) where it's said that a true master of magic may cast spell without speaking nor making gestures. It may be seen as a ground campaign rule.

As a side effect Gestures and Incantations, which are default for every spells, can not be sold back.

 

For other ones the only solution would be the standard Variable Limitation (or a framework, but i do not allow frameworks right now)

 

Do you think it's balanced enough ?

 

I think it is well balanced and allows for some decent flexibility. It allows for some change out of Limitations at a penalty, and the mage can ignore them at their peril. A fair exchange for the most part.

 

If there is an Active Point Penalty to the Skill Roll I do hope this stacks with it.

 

I had a similar concept in a game I recently ran. Mages could freely swap out Limitations - and even Advantages - to either cast more freely or get bonuses to casting (taking on more Limitations provided a bonus)... It worked rather well to let Mages feel powerful in what a low point game (I didn't charge Mages for spells, only Skill Rolls).

 

I would try this system out for a while and see how it works in actual play. If you find that the players can almost freely ignore the penalties and drawbacks because of high skill rolls - increase it.

 

What you want to do it reach a balance between fun, playability, and not making it feel too easy (i.e. Mages because superheroes in fantasy which is what happens sometimes without "mage like" Limitations).

[Crypt]

Re: Limitations

 

 

Also, however you do it, consider what you'll do with Powers that don't cost END, they will have to take Costs END first and then apply the additional END x.

 

 

or start at X1 END, as in the FH option

[Crypt]

Re: Limitations

 

I agree with GhostAngel, either use a Variable Limitation or a Naked Power Advantage.

 

Actually me too.

 

But i will try the modified FH option only for Incantations, Gestures and Concentration because of three reasons:

 

- Their characters are already built. I prefer not making too much modifications during the campaign.

 

- The Merlin laws (cf previously) It may be nice, i think.

 

- Even if it's possible to ignore I or G during a casting those limitations still are mandatory.

With a Variable Limitation it would not be the same.