6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Heh. I'll go against the flow. Getting your players to develop histories and personas, develop the character in-depth .... with the players you have described, that sounds like a recipe for disaster. Either they'll fight every step of the way, or they'll generate "histories" that explain why their character is focused on fighting and bad-assery to the exclusion of all the things they don't want to buy. That sounds like a lose-lose situation.

 

My advice: pick up what you have and run run with it. If you can throw situations at your players where they perceive having skills other than combat is useful for them, they will buy those skills of their own free will. I've converted many D&D players to Hero, and have gone through this "combat skills only" phase many times. As NuSoardGraphite noted, PC's tend to round out over the course of the game ... if there's a reason for it. Right now, it sounds like they don't believe that they have a reason for it.

 

It's OK if they like fighting: I like a good fight scene myself. But even hardcore combat monsters like it if the fights mean something. If you can embed your fight scenes in an interesting narrative, they'll start to develop an interest in moving that narrative forward ... and that means they'll spend points to help them do that. What you have looks like a pretty good start in that regard.

 

It's not reasonable to expect players to spend points on skills or background fluff that for all they know, they'll never use or need, especially when they are new to the system. Give them time to grow into it.

 

cheers, Mark

[Barwickian]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Also, I just noticed the link you had at the bottom of at least one of your previous posts: "How to Build Hero System Characters and Evaluate their Powerlevels". WHAT A GODSEND!!! I wish I had seen this sooner! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! (bookmarked the blog page)

 

I think this is the single most useful guide in all herodom. I ought to rep Tasha over and over again for it. However, I need to spread some rep first.

 

Killer Shrike's pages are also gold.

[Pegasus40218]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Tuala Morn is very full featured, and contains a lot of Do. It. This. Way. Which means it shows you how to balance things by setting limits, which gives you clues as to what sorts of things need to be limited (like Combat Luck).

Wouldn't you know it...one of the few I haven't picked up yet. I do have "The Valdorian Age" which you referenced, but it didn't quite have the feel I was looking for -- but I'll go back and give it another look. I also picked up "Kamarathin: Kingdom of Tursh" at GenCon last year. My impression is that it's OK, though it's written for HS5e. I have held off on picking up "The Turakian Age" so far because it's obviously high-fantasy, which is not what I was looking for.

 

Perhaps I should explain that...Over 30 years of gaming, even with good role-players, under most systems I've played, I've watched the campaigns slowly devolve into "how's the spell-caster(s) going to deal with (x)." If you weren't a spellcaster, by the end of the campaign, you were pretty much a side-kick. I wanted to avoid that, and HERO looks like a system that, with appropriate limits on spellcasters (e.g. low-fantasy) could easily accomplish that WITHOUT making spellcasters significantly weaker than their counterparts. I basically wanted the spellcasters to stay in-line with the pure warriors and rogues as far as raw combat effectiveness -- they just might have a few more options with their spells.

 

I'll have to give Tuala Morn a look. I'll let you know what I think.

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Perhaps I should explain that...Over 30 years of gaming' date=' even with good role-players, under most systems I've played, I've watched the campaigns slowly devolve into "how's the spell-caster(s) going to deal with (x)." If you weren't a spellcaster, by the end of the campaign, you were pretty much a side-kick. I wanted to avoid that, and HERO looks like a system that, with appropriate limits on spellcasters (e.g. low-fantasy) could easily accomplish that WITHOUT making spellcasters significantly weaker than their counterparts. I basically wanted the spellcasters to stay in-line with the pure warriors and rogues as far as raw combat effectiveness -- they just might have a few more options with their spells.[/quote']

 

Ahhh. OK, this we can work with!

 

I've been running Fantasy Hero for nigh on 30 years now, and I feel exactly the same. I want spellcasters to have flavour and utility: but not dominate the game*. I was lucky enough back in college to have several talented GMs and once I introduced them to Hero, we all adopted it for our fantasy games (and we used to sit round and have BS sessions after each game, discussing what did and didn't work, bouncing spell and build ideas off each other, etc). So we had 3 quite distinct GM'ing styles, three very different games, and multiple games running at once, so we got a lot of experience.

 

However, one common thread emerged: any game that ran for any length of time rapidly became dominated by spellcasters, and pretty much every character soon became a spellcaster. Hero system didn't solve this problem: it made it worse and it was frustrating for any player who didn't want to play a spellcaster.

 

The reason for this was the way we were designing characters. Spellcasters could simply get and use spells like they were superhero powers: they were always available and always reliable. Hero made things worse because if you wanted a Fly spell, you could just buy it. You didn't have to fight your way through 5 levels of puniness before getting Flight and Fireball At the same time Hero system lacks built in controls that say (for example) that mages can't use armour and decent weapons. So a spellcaster could have decent armour, decent weapons and still do all the cool magic stuff.

 

And in conventional fantasy games, fighters and rogue types have exactly two things going for them: they can hit things with pointy bits of metal. And they might be good at skill-related stuff. Spell casters, OTOH can do almost anything: fly, cast lightning form their fingertips, turn invisible, change form, turn their skin to invulnerable iron, divine the future ... you name it. Without direct GM oversight, spellcasters will be good to great in combat and also superior to non-spellcasters outside combat.

 

The price of the flexibility that Hero provides is that it becomes the GM's role to provide the balance between "classes" that games like D&D build in. In Hero "free access to powers" is the default setting.

 

The key to getting a game where spellcasters are one option, but not the only viable one, is to design your magic system to hobble your spellcasters. Exactly how you do that, will define your game. There is, literally, no decision you can make, as a GM, that will do more to define your game than deciding what magic system(s) you will use.

 

The good news is that this snot hard. A few months back I wrapped up a campaign we had played for 5 years: the PCs had gone from 125 to 300+ points, and we had a mix of effective characters, some of whom were spellcasters, some of whom were not. All of them remained effective throughout the course of the game. The game before that also ran 4-5 years and that one actually had only one PC spellcaster (of sorts: he was actually a shapeshifter rather than a spellcaster per se)

 

I've tossed some thoughts together on this: I'll post them from home tonight. Killer Shrike has a detailed breakdown of the same thing on his site. But in the meantime, maybe you can toss some ideas down for how you would like magic to function. Not mechanics: just ideas for "feel" and how you would like things to function. We can probbaly give some decent advice on how to shape that feel.

 

cheers, Mark

 

*Note: in most cases. I have run a few games where I expected every character to be a spellcaster of sorts, and then I designed the magic system accordingly.

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

OK, found the link to my old comments. Re-reading them, the tone is embarrassingly jejune: please ignore that. I think the basic advice is sound though. It's certainly stood me in good stead.

 

http://reocities.com/TimesSquare/castle/9529/Gaming_stuff/Grimoire/designing_magical_worlds.htm

 

cheers, Mark

[Tasha]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

BTW I use wider Skill levels for a couple of reasons.

 

1. There are circumstances where the characters may have to use a different weapon from their Signature weapon (ie attending a function where wearing a sword is forbidden, or places that make you put your large weapons in storage, being disarmed during combat). So you may need to use a Dagger or Knife to fight. Perhaps they are trying to capture someone alive, using a club instead of a sword would be better.

 

2. you can use 3pt or larger levels to increase the Damage class of a weapon. 2 Skill levels get you one damage class. It's a really great deal for getting those 1d6+1 weapons to 1d6 1/2 or 1 1/2d6 to 2d6. Heck even adding 1d6 to a club or a punch is nice.

 

3. Also, I don't allow 2pt levels apply to any maneuver but strike. Disarm, block etc should be done with a 3 pt or larger level IMHO. Dunno if this is official, but it's really implied by saying 2pt for one maneuver in the rules.

[Pegasus40218]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

But inthe meantime, maybe you can toss some ideas down for how you would like magicto function. Not mechanics: just ideas for "feel" and how you wouldlike things to function. We can probbaly give some decent advice on how toshape that feel.[/Quote]

 

OK...Let's give it a try; although, I probably won't be able to avoid (resist)at least mentioning my thoughts on some of the mechanics.

 

1. 
   
2. Since I’m trying to go for a gritty low-fantasy feel, I think I’d like magic – and spellcasters in particular – to be fairly rare. I’d like magic to be difficult to learn and wield, but in addition to that, it shouldn’t be something that everyone can learn to do. Someone would have to have an innate “gift” to even begin to be able to use it.
   
3. Since it’s difficult to control, direct attacks should be somewhat difficult and slow – perhaps with the length of time required to cast the spell increasing as the power of the spell increases (not necessarily linearly). Spells should also be interruptable, though the caster should still have at least a chance to get the spell off in spite of attempts to interrupt.
   
4. The simplest spells shouldn’t be exceptionally difficult to cast, but as the spells become more powerful, certain components/reagents (appropriate to the spell) might be required.
   
5. Spellcasters should be able to develop new spells, or learn them from other sources (books, scrolls, other spellcasters).
   
6. While magic can be used to solve many problems, certain things should not be made easy. For example, instantaneous travel (teleport) shouldn’t be possible – it negates the need for too many things: stealth, climbing, horses, etc…If I’m running a “race against the clock” scenario, teleport makes it way too easy.
   
7. Due to the fact that so few people can wield magic, most people won’t understand it, and will fear or be somewhat in awe of it. When people are afraid of something, they don’t always act rationally. Consequently, at least some magic should be relatively subtle – capable of being used without drawing attention to the fact that it’s being used…which can make it all the more dangerous!
   
8. Instead of magic weapons and armor, particularly for low-powered items (such as the typical +1 in most gaming systems), I’d rather have slightly enhanced items be a reflection of the quality of the craftsmanship used in making the item. Only if the effect of the item cannot be produced by improved quality (materials, craftsmanship, etc), should the item be REQUIRED to be magical. So, while magic items will exist, they will be rare.
   
9. One old computer game that seems to come close to the feel I want is an old Microprose game called “Darklands”. It’s basically set in medieval Germany, and most of the magic was based on alchemy (in fact, I think all of the magic avaialble to the player was alchemical). Some sort of hybrid between this and Robert Jordan’s “The Wheel of Time” (where people had to have an innate gift inorder to “channel”, and their maximum potential was quantifiable) would probably come close to what I’m after (though Jordan’s work had far more common occurrences of magic than what I’m looking for).
   

Well…that’swhat I come up with off the top my head.

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

BTW I use wider Skill levels for a couple of reasons.

 

1. There are circumstances where the characters may have to use a different weapon from their Signature weapon (ie attending a function where wearing a sword is forbidden, or places that make you put your large weapons in storage, being disarmed during combat). So you may need to use a Dagger or Knife to fight. Perhaps they are trying to capture someone alive, using a club instead of a sword would be better.

 

2. you can use 3pt or larger levels to increase the Damage class of a weapon. 2 Skill levels get you one damage class. It's a really great deal for getting those 1d6+1 weapons to 1d6 1/2 or 1 1/2d6 to 2d6. Heck even adding 1d6 to a club or a punch is nice.

 

3. Also, I don't allow 2pt levels apply to any maneuver but strike. Disarm, block etc should be done with a 3 pt or larger level IMHO. Dunno if this is official, but it's really implied by saying 2pt for one maneuver in the rules.

 

I agree that a 2 point level is only for one maneuver, but in my games you could use a 2 pt maneuver for block ... as long as it was only for Block. Same for disarm or any other single maneuver.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

OK...Let's give it a try; although' date=' I probably won't be able to avoid (resist)at least mentioning my thoughts on some of the mechanics.[/quote']

 

 

Since I’m trying to go for a gritty low-fantasy feel' date=' I think I’d like magic – and spellcasters in particular – to be fairly rare. I’d like magic to be difficult to learn and wield, but in addition to that, it shouldn’t be something that everyone can learn to do. Someone would have to have an innate “gift” to even begin to be able to use it.[/quote']

 

OK. This is a fairly common ground-rule in fantasy books, and in Hero you simply set a ground rule for your game that to use magic you have to have a perk "Magic in the blood" or something similar. If you want magic to be rare, the perk needs to cost enough that it gives a starting character pause - but if you want any mages at all, it needs to be affordable. 10 points sounds about right, but you may want to tweak that depending on your group. One trick I have used to set an entry barrier is not just to require a perk being to use magic, but also some powers that are attractive but not game-breaking. That way you still have to spend (say) 20 points to be a mage, but it doesn't become something for nothing. Things like contacts, enhanced senses, life support, Power skill, etc, work here.

 

The flip side, of course is that if magic is supposed to be rare, it should be rare, so that the players who choose to buy the perk actually get something for it. They shouldn't run into magical defences and other spellcasters all the time.

 

Since it’s difficult to control' date=' direct attacks should be somewhat difficult and slow – perhaps with the length of time required to cast the spell increasing as the power of the spell increases (not necessarily linearly). Spells should also be interruptable, though the caster should still have at least a chance to get the spell off in spite of attempts to interrupt.[/quote']

 

Skill roll and extra time. Probably a difficult skill roll (-1/5 active points). This serves several purposes. If you require that all spells take the extra time limitation (at least an extra segment) that gives people a chance to interrupt, but unless they successfully stun or KO the caster, he should still have a chance of success (as GM you can penalize the roll depending on damage dealt, etc). The difficult skill roll can be offset to some extent simply by taking extra time, so you get your increased time for big spells right there. It also requires that anyone with more than minor spellcasting prowess invest significant points into their power skill roll, further differentiating spellcasters from other folks (see comments about perks, above)

 

The simplest spells shouldn’t be exceptionally difficult to cast' date=' but as the spells become more powerful, certain components/reagents (appropriate to the spell) might be required.[/quote']

 

Requiring a skill roll will do this for you. So casting a small spell invokes a small penalty. Casting a big spell invokes a big penalty. That's standard in the description. What many GM's forget is that it's a skill roll, not an activation roll. I treat skill rolls to activate powers the same way I treat any other skill roll. So performing the skill in inappropriate conditions (middle of a bar fight, or while falling down a cliff in a snowstorm, etc) invokes a further penalty. The flip side is that good conditions or tools can give a bonus. So you can get a bonus for performing a skill in a well-equipped magical lab or consecrated place, and another if you have your magical athame and a rack of pre-prepared elixirs ... etc.

 

So to give an example, a necromancer wants to raise an army of corpses from a nearby battlefield. That's a 100 point summon, and requires a difficult spell roll (-20 to roll). Under normal conditions, there's no way he could make it. He's gonna need to do some research. A few months later, he has worked out a simple ritual of desecration, which will give him the "Excellent conditions for performing the Skill" bonus at the +2 level and he has learned enough about the dead soldiers and their enemies to qualify for the "extensive knowledge of the object of the Skill Roll" at the +2 level. Last of all, he has procured a nubile virgin sacrifice (always helpful) - which gives him the +3 for "good equipment in connection with the Skill Roll". Now he's down to -13 on the skill roll. He still doesn't like his chances. But if he designs a 6 hour ritual, that gives him 6 steps down the time chart from the minimum full phase that it takes to cast a spell, for a +6 to the roll. Now he's at -7. Not great, but he is afraid that if he takes any longer over the ritual, he'll be discovered. He'll have to chance it, or else wait 'til all-hallows eve, when casting dark magic gets a +3 bonus ...

 

There's a fair amount of GM fiat in a spell system like this, but it allows you build in a lot of flavour. You can, for example, decide that the seed of a hanged man gives a +3 to necromantic spells, or similar things. If the spellcaster works this out, he can gain a one-time bonus to his roll. This approach to skill use encourages your would-be mages to seek out arcane objects and knowledge to boost their spellcasting prowess and to spend points on related skills so that they can research rituals and helpful tools. I'd also check out the rule son complementary skills which I use a lot in my games, if you decide to go this route. Basically you can use a related skill roll to get a bonus on another skill roll. It can be as mundane as PS: Lockmaking to gain a bonus on a security systems roll to open a lock, or as complex as a coven of witches all rolling against necromantic lore to try and give a good bonus to the warlock casting "Raise undead army". Hint: don't let complementary bonuses stack - allow the best one only to assist. Also, when making complementary rolls, I take failures into account and apply penalties: bad advice is worse than no advice at all, and there's a reason that the master craftsman doesn't ask his raw apprentice for help.

 

The nice thing about using this approach is that the players themselves will work out where the bonuses are, and go looking for them. An internally-consistent skill system for magic gets your PCs to behave like fantasy book mages of their own accord.

 

Spellcasters should be able to develop new spells' date=' or learn them from other sources (books, scrolls, other spellcasters).[/quote']

 

This is actually the default in Hero, so no problem. One thing I would strongly recommend is that as GM you make up all the spells yourself and let players discover and then modify them. There are plenty of free spell-resources available: just ask here on the boards.

 

What we haven't talked about is how spellcasters pay points for their spells. If they buy them like powers, it rapidly becomes very expensive and though the kind of limitations we have discussed reduce the price greatly, it still makes mages unattractive to play. I personally like VPPs and multipowers, which let mages add new spells relatively cheaply, but require a significant investment of points up front. If you control what spells they can get, you can avoid this getting out of hand.

 

There's a catch, though. Over the longer-term, if only spellcasters can use VPPs and multipowers, this gives them a significant power boost. So if you permit power-frameworks, I'd permit them for all characters. A rogue can have "stealth powers", a fighter "fighting tricks" etc. These will be more expensive, and can contain a more narrow range of powers, than a spell multipower but they are not typically as limited, and give fighters something more to do that just whack things.

 

While magic can be used to solve many problems' date=' certain things should not be made easy. For example, instantaneous travel (teleport) shouldn’t be possible – it negates the need for too many things: stealth, climbing, horses, etc…If I’m running a “race against the clock” scenario, teleport makes it way too easy.[/quote']

 

If you control access to what spells are available, this is not a problem. On a related note, I prefer not to have a catch-all of "magic", but require power frameworks to have a tight definition. So I tend to use "schools" of magic. A necromancer might be able to learn "Fireball" but he can't cast it using his "Necromancy" power skill and he can't add it to his "Necromantic" power framework. This allows some flexibility without every spellcaster becoming the dreaded swiss-army mage. This also allows spellcasters to be strong in one area - but at the cost of being weak in others.

 

Due to the fact that so few people can wield magic' date=' most people won’t understand it, and will fear or be somewhat in awe of it. When people are afraid of something, they don’t always act rationally. Consequently, at least some magic should be relatively subtle – capable of being used without drawing attention to the fact that it’s being used…which can make it all the more dangerous![/quote']

 

If magic is rare and scary, you should allow it to give a bonus to PRE attacks, which will simulate that effect. A side benefit to the approach to magic laid out here is that with heavily-limited magic, extra time, skill rolls, etc it becomes hard to build a mage who is effective in direct combat: spells that are large enough to do major damage are just too hard to cast. But magic can be highly, highly effective in small doses by doing things other than damage. A spellcaster might not have to raw power to simply explode the hearts out of the chests of some watchful guards ... but a cumulative mind control to send them to sleep will ultimately be just as fatal. But it'll take a little time, which means it will have to have invisible effects ...

 

Smart spellcasters will work this out pretty swiftly. In a fight, a moment of paralysis (Entangle) or blindness (Flash) is often enough to tip the balance. This approach typically relegates spellcasters to a support role (albeit a very powerful one) in combat: but I see that as a feature, not a bug, because they really get to shine out of combat.

 

Instead of magic weapons and armor' date=' particularly for low-powered items (such as the typical +1 in most gaming systems), I’d rather have slightly enhanced items be a reflection of the quality of the craftsmanship used in making the item. Only if the effect of the item cannot be produced by improved quality (materials, craftsmanship, etc), should the item be REQUIRED to be magical. So, while magic items will exist, they will be rare.[/quote']

 

+1 swords. Meh. In one D&D game, we had so many magical swords in storage, they were referred to as "the magical picket fence"

 

I agree with you about the boringness of ubiquitous magical items. In my games I tend to provide magic items rarely. Unlike D&D, having magic items is not a prerequisite for advancement, and I prefer the story to be about the PCs, rather than about their gear. I tend to use one-off items, and they are specifically built to answer specific needs, that mundane equipment cannot. In the last game, the players eventually got magic armour. It gave no plusses, per se, but it was plate harness that didn't rust, didn't encumber, didn't get hot and sweaty, etc. They loved the bejeusus out of that armour, which had been made especially for adventurer-types. But it wasn't overwhelmingly powerful. Likewise, near the end of the campaign, they got a magic spear that could cut ghosts - and also generate a variety of sunlight laser-like effects, making it a fantastic vampire-killing weapon: which is precisely what it was built for. The players quested for it for months (real time) because they knew they needed to go up against some vampires. As an aside, I tend to build magic items with specific powers on charges, so that the PCs can use them when they need it: the Sunspear referred to had 15 charges with a variety of powers (ranged energy killing attack, area effect energy killing attack, big-ass armour piercing attack) that used 1 to 3 charges. It recharged over the course of a day if exposed to strong sunlight. That gave the PCs a very powerful tool, but didn't let them blast everything they came across: they husbanded the charges in the spear until they really needed them, because often they might not be able to readily recharge it.

 

One old computer game that seems to come close to the feel I want is an old Microprose game called “Darklands”. It’s basically set in medieval Germany' date=' and most of the magic was based on alchemy (in fact, I think all of the magic avaialble to the player was alchemical). Some sort of hybrid between this and Robert Jordan’s “The Wheel of Time” (where people had to have an innate gift in order to “channel”, and their maximum potential was quantifiable) would probably come close to what I’m after (though Jordan’s work had far more common occurrences of magic than what I’m looking for).[/quote']

 

Yeah well, hopefully this gives you some ideas. Applying the approach discussed to alchemy would let a PC spellcaster prepare his spells in advance, using the Trigger advantage to put them into potions, and then activate them as needed. This actually would let him get around the problem of having to make spell rolls in combat, but at the cost of having to prepare his spells in advance and putting him at risk of losing them as potion flasks can be lost/stolen broken, etc. He'd also need to be able to access them and drink them, which could be difficult in some cases. I'd probably add on a short extra delay to reflect the thing taking effect once drunk, but I'm mean like that However, that'd be a perfectly viable character.

 

cheers,Mark

[Christopher]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

A suggestion to get the players to take skills and develop a bit of background:

I don't think limiting the way's how to design characters will help.

 

6E1 35 has seven Inspiration Sources. I tend to use a combination of those and they lead at least to some non-comabt skills.

 

I've been reading a thread on this board where everyone is posting "quotes of the week". I started at the beginning of the thread' date=' and I'm somewhere in the neighborhood of post #2175 (out of about 11250 -- I plan to post some of my own great quotes when I get caught up to the current posts), and there's some GREAT stuff in there. One of the things I'm trying to do with my players is give them the opportunity to have THAT kind of gaming experience. I'd love for them to think back to "that gladiator campaign", and vividly remember those characters and some of the things they accomplished and the adventures they had! I look back on the Pathfinder and D&D campaigns / adventures over the past couple of years, and I can remember a couple of the characters that I've created and played, very few of the other characters, and very little of what we did (and I take notes during play to keep track of the NPCs and events so I know what's going on in the story).[/quote']

I do find that intersting as well. But this might simply be something your players do not want as well.

I had to give up playing f2f because me and my group were simply not compatible on that level.

 

My advice: pick up what you have and run run with it. If you can throw situations at your players where they perceive having skills other than combat is useful for them' date=' they will buy those skills [b']of their own free will[/b]. I've converted many D&D players to Hero, and have gone through this "combat skills only" phase many times. As NuSoardGraphite noted, PC's tend to round out over the course of the game ... if there's a reason for it. Right now, it sounds like they don't believe that they have a reason for it.

Perphaps one approach is to allow skills with marginal combat influence to be used.

Tactics, Breakfall and Teamwork are clear combat Skills.

Acrobatics might give you a "Surprise Maneuver" bonus.

All interaction Skills can be used during a Presence attack.

 

Limit how often they can be used in combat, maybe only once per combat.

Once they start using Persuasion or Acrobatics in combat, they have it avalibel out of combat as well.

 

Ahhh. OK, this we can work with!

 

I've been running Fantasy Hero for nigh on 30 years now, and I feel exactly the same. I want spellcasters to have flavour and utility: but not dominate the game*.

I don't quite see the problem. By the default system, without frameworks the followign will happen:

The Mage buys a 12 DC Fireball, and has to apply Skill Roll, OAF (Wizards Staff), Gesutres and Incantations (-2 worth of Limitations) only to get the Character Point cost down too 20.

A warrior buys a sword and get's 6 DC, with no Endurance cost. For 0 Character Points and some money.

Or he buys a 12 DC Bow. No endurance Cost (Charges), Little END cost from STR-Limit and the ammunition is rather abundant.

 

Without any sort of Framework (wich decrease the spell cost; not allowed for heroic games normally) or Equipment pools (to decrase weapon availibility) mages will be rather weak compared the fighters in combat. Everything the mage can do, anotehr character can do with less Character Points, less Limitations and less to no Endurance Cost.

 

A step into the other direction:

Both to allow more diversification and to make Fighters more comparable to mages in versatiltiy, consider allowing people to build "Combat Talents".

Most often the are naked advantages. Things like "Autofire, 3 Shots for HKA" or "Area of Effect, Cone/Area, 4m or HTH-Reach for HKA, No Range". Or they are small powers (Superacrobatics build as flight with limitations). Hero System Martial Arts has some good ones. Afaik fantasy hero also has some.

 

 

 

1. Since I’m trying to go for a gritty low-fantasy feel, I think I’d like magic – and spellcasters in particular – to be fairly rare. I’d like magic to be difficult to learn and wield, but in addition to that, it shouldn’t be something that everyone can learn to do. Someone would have to have an innate “gift” to even begin to be able to use it.
   
2. Since it’s difficult to control, direct attacks should be somewhat difficult and slow – perhaps with the length of time required to cast the spell increasing as the power of the spell increases (not necessarily linearly). Spells should also be interruptable, though the caster should still have at least a chance to get the spell off in spite of attempts to interrupt.
   
3. The simplest spells shouldn’t be exceptionally difficult to cast, but as the spells become more powerful, certain components/reagents (appropriate to the spell) might be required.
   
4. Spellcasters should be able to develop new spells, or learn them from other sources (books, scrolls, other spellcasters).
   
5. While magic can be used to solve many problems, certain things should not be made easy. For example, instantaneous travel (teleport) shouldn’t be possible – it negates the need for too many things: stealth, climbing, horses, etc…If I’m running a “race against the clock” scenario, teleport makes it way too easy.
   
6. Due to the fact that so few people can wield magic, most people won’t understand it, and will fear or be somewhat in awe of it. When people are afraid of something, they don’t always act rationally. Consequently, at least some magic should be relatively subtle – capable of being used without drawing attention to the fact that it’s being used…which can make it all the more dangerous!
   
7. Instead of magic weapons and armor, particularly for low-powered items (such as the typical +1 in most gaming systems), I’d rather have slightly enhanced items be a reflection of the quality of the craftsmanship used in making the item. Only if the effect of the item cannot be produced by improved quality (materials, craftsmanship, etc), should the item be REQUIRED to be magical. So, while magic items will exist, they will be rare.
   
8. One old computer game that seems to come close to the feel I want is an old Microprose game called “Darklands”. It’s basically set in medieval Germany, and most of the magic was based on alchemy (in fact, I think all of the magic avaialble to the player was alchemical). Some sort of hybrid between this and Robert Jordan’s “The Wheel of Time” (where people had to have an innate gift inorder to “channel”, and their maximum potential was quantifiable) would probably come close to what I’m after (though Jordan’s work had far more common occurrences of magic than what I’m looking for).
   

1. With the default approach to magic, they will be so expensive there will be few.

2. Again, the amount of Limitations for the standart appraoch takes care of that. It's simply unfeasible to have a spell without Limitations. Much less a attack spell. And you still need the OCV to actually hit the target. And the enduracne to repeat it as often as the fighter.

3. There are both Charges and Expendable Focus Rules for the more complex ones.

4. Develoment: Simply, there is nothing you or the players can't build. The only questions are: How can you pay the CP for this spell? If you want more complexity, you could craete rules that use the "Inventor" Skill.

5. I would never say "no". It would say it "is rare or very difficulty" - it is very typical for heroes to ignore such hard-and fast rules and do the "impposible" quite regulary. But in the end you can just say "no Teleport magic" and be done with it.

6. You could require them to have a Distinctive Feature. So they have to buy some spells with Invisible Power Effecs (IPE).

7. There is nothing preventing you from throwing in "Masterwork" items, that give a little more OCV modifier or have a DC or two more. Maybe they don't even have real weapon limitation and thus don't suffer from the DC-Doubling Rule.

 

 

Overall I think you want more a "Lord of the Ring", the Movies feel. The few really powefull mages are almost godlike beings - and still can't win wars on thier own.

But things like Heritage (Dundain) can be a real power boost, that works across the entire spectrum of abilities. And weapons like Anduil whose main powers are Origin and maybe special Material are already rare.

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

I don't quite see the problem. By the default system, without frameworks the followign will happen:

The Mage buys a 12 DC Fireball, and has to apply Skill Roll, OAF (Wizards Staff), Gesutres and Incantations (-2 worth of Limitations) only to get the Character Point cost down too 20.

A warrior buys a sword and get's 6 DC, with no Endurance cost. For 0 Character Points and some money.

Or he buys a 12 DC Bow. No endurance Cost (Charges), Little END cost from STR-Limit and the ammunition is rather abundant.

 

Except ... and this is not hypothetical, because I have seen it over and over ... that's not what happens.

 

Oh sure, a cheap fireball to clear away the minions is nice, but a Barrier (excuse me, Shield spell) big enough to defeat longbow arrows and a simple Aoe Accurate TK (or as we mages like to call it, Bigby's Crushing hand) costs the same - and lets you lift the hapless fighter into the air and strangle him at your leisure. There ain't a damn thing he can do about it unless he's got STR 20+. The argument that a 12 DC fireball's no worse than a 6 DC bow not only ignores the beneficent effect of Area of Effect (Fighter: "I just killed another Orc!" Wizard (yawning) "Yeah, good for you. I just killed 20. Let me know if you want some help over there because I'm all outa orcs on this side.") but more importantly ignores the fact that a fighter type is really restricted to a few powers - armour, HKA and HA. And they are limited by physics and the "real weapon" limitation: a fighter normally can't buy a 12 DC bow. Spellcasters are not so limited: invisibility, flight, entangle transform ... and they can exceed the limits of mundane weaponry with ease. Unless the wizards are kept under strict control, the game pretty much inevitably degenerates into The Amazing Rhialto and his muggle sidekicks.

 

If you force them to pay full cost for spells, they buy a smattering of cheap cantrips, and then 2-3 combat spells (big-ass defence, big-ass attack and backup nasty attack, usually) and then spam them. It does nothing solve the problem, but it does add an element of boredom.

 

How many threads have we had on the Fantasy forum, with GM's lamenting that very fact? It might not happen every time - if for example, your players are well-mannered genre fiends who don't care about maximising their character's potential at the expense of the game, or are maybe simply too ineffectual to build dangerous characters. But it happens a lot.

 

cheers, Mark

[gojira]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

I didn't read through everything in your last couple of posts, Markdoc, but for the OP: one way to limit problems like the "12DC Fireball" Mark mentions above is to give the Wizards a pre-approved spell list to choose from. Get the Fantasy Grimoire, tell your players "Weak, Apprentice versions of spells only to start, and here's a list of banned spells/schools" and let them pick lesser, more balanced versions of spells.

 

12DC Fireball? No, it's only 6DC. Hmm, and it's got a -6 penalty to cast, and it uses a lot of Endurance. Only going to be able to cast a few of those. Might want to look at adding some spells that are easier to cast for more flexibility.

 

Don't be afraid to set hard limits too. In Hero System's Urban Fantasy book, there's a mini-setting where mages can't take any kind of defenses spell. Oh, they can protect themselves against other spells: defense vs fire, defense vs dark magic, those are fine. But no defense that stops fists, or knives, or bullets. So any mage can be battered into submission with a good old punch in the nose.

[Christopher]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Oh sure' date=' a cheap fireball to clear away the minions is nice, but a Barrier (excuse me, Shield spell) big enough to defeat longbow arrows and a simple Aoe Accurate TK (or as we mages like to call it, Bigby's Crushing hand) costs the same - and lets you lift the hapless fighter into the air and strangle him at your leisure. There ain't a damn thing he can do about it unless he's got STR 20+.[/quote']

 

The argument that a 12 DC fireball's no worse than a 6 DC bow not only ignores the beneficent effect of Area of Effect (Fighter: "I just killed another Orc!" Wizard (yawning) "Yeah' date=' good for you. I just killed 20. Let me know if you want some help over there because I'm all outa orcs on this side.")[/quote']

I compared ot to a 6 DC Sword, wich will get about the same amount of Damage from STR, CSL or maneuvers and a 12 DC Bow.

And the Fireball would of course loose a lot of raw damage-potentail for hitting multiple foes.

 

Spellcasters are not so limited: invisibility' date=' flight, entangle transform ...[/quote']

If you allow thoe powers at all.

And you don't allow Muggles to buy Supertalents like

"Supersneaking": Invisibiltiy to Sight Group.

 

Then of course you tipped the scale so far in favor of the mages, they can get unbalanced.

 

and they can exceed the limits of mundane weaponry with ease.

Then that sounds like a fault with not aplying the campaign limits to the mages.

I took 12 DC as campaign limit for all Damage types, simply because that is the level I know. When the limit is 6 or 8 DC, then of course spells need to have the same limit. And still cost more CP and END than wielding a sword.

 

If you force them to pay full cost for spells' date=' they buy a smattering of cheap cantrips, and then 2-3 combat spells (big-ass defence, big-ass attack and backup nasty attack, usually) and then spam them. It does nothing solve the problem, but it does add an element of boredom.[/quote']

And with what do they buy the OCV to actually hit? The DCV to not be hit? The SPD, Rec and Endurance they will need? And the Skills?

Wizards have to buy all the Stuff Fighters have to buy. Plus thier spells.

 

Fighter: X+0 = Z

Wizards X+Y = Z

If Y is the cost for Spells, Z is the total points and X is all the stuff other than spells (OCV, DCV, SPD, STUN, END, REC, etc.) how exactly can mages manage to run too far away?

[Tasha]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

I agree that a 2 point level is only for one maneuver' date=' but in my games you could use a 2 pt maneuver for block ... as long as it was [b']only[/b] for Block. Same for disarm or any other single maneuver.

 

cheers, Mark

 

Yeah /agree if you define the 2pt level as being with a specific maneuver with that weapon yes you could use it for Block, Disarm etc. ie 2pt +1 Bastard Sword Block.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

We always set hard limits for how powerful mage spells are. Those are the same limits that Fighters, Rogues, and Archers have. We allow the fighter to buy things like Martial arts with their weapon. Also you can buy talents that increase damage of the bow, as do a ton of 3pt or wider Combat Skill levels. I started to use equipment pools for everyone. All combat equipment is purchased from the pool along with any spells. That way your Wizards have all of those nifty Knowledges they SHOULD have. I also allow them to pay regular points for spells if the Equipment pool isn't large enough for the spells they want. If you keep everyone to the same limits, then everyone can have fun and no one character eclipses another.

 

In most Fantasy Hero Games I have played in Wizards do have a lot of things they can do, but they are usually gimped because they have to pay for spells using regular points. That's why I use Equipment pools for spells. It puts everyone on the same footing.

 

I also allow the purchase of "superskills" which are powers or skill clusters that work like talents. It allows things like the Rogue to take Invisibility that requires a stealth roll. Also for "Backstab" extra damage and ton of other things.

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

I didn't read through everything in your last couple of posts, Markdoc, but for the OP: one way to limit problems like the "12DC Fireball" Mark mentions above is to give the Wizards a pre-approved spell list to choose from. Get the Fantasy Grimoire, tell your players "Weak, Apprentice versions of spells only to start, and here's a list of banned spells/schools" and let them pick lesser, more balanced versions of spells.

 

12DC Fireball? No, it's only 6DC. Hmm, and it's got a -6 penalty to cast, and it uses a lot of Endurance. Only going to be able to cast a few of those. Might want to look at adding some spells that are easier to cast for more flexibility.

 

Don't be afraid to set hard limits too. In Hero System's Urban Fantasy book, there's a mini-setting where mages can't take any kind of defenses spell. Oh, they can protect themselves against other spells: defense vs fire, defense vs dark magic, those are fine. But no defense that stops fists, or knives, or bullets. So any mage can be battered into submission with a good old punch in the nose.

 

Right: we're arguing the same point, I think. There's no "one true way" to build a magic system - what's important is to build to the desired feel. So I emphasised strongly in the earlier posts the importance of the GM designing spells. But that's not going to be enough, just by itself to create a low fantasy feel, unless the spell list is very restrictive.

 

As an example, a while ago, we had a player complaining on the forum that the GM had limited spells to no more than 30 active points (the same as a greatsword) and that his mage couldn't generate big killing spells, and if he was no more effective than a fighter, what was the point and wah, wah, wah. He was missing the point. A mage doesn't need to match straight damage with straight damage to dominate combat (and thus all of the game, since by definition mages can shine outside combat, given the powers they have access to) His mage could still buy and use a greatsword, just like the fighter. However, even within a 30 point active limit, he can also cast Freezing Blood so that when he goes up against an opponent, he can Drain their DEX by 15. Shouldn't be too hard to finish them off as they bumble around ... Or he can use a Freezing blood spell(2d6 Entangle, transparent to physical damage): 1 headshot later, the mage can stalk off in search of more victims.

 

Even at low active points, magic, if freely usable, can be hugely advantageous. Now this is not to say that Hero is bad for low fantasy: I think it's actually the best system I have tried for that purpose.

 

It's just that fantasy - especially low fantasy - that makes setting design a bit more challenging than many other settings.

If you are running Supers, the game system is decently balanced, straight out out of the box, because every character potentially has access to a full suite of powers and skills, and the setting is by default suitable for flying characters who can ignore most mundane weapons

If you are running a gritty spies and detectives game, the game is very balanced, because everyone has access to skills and to GM-provided equipment

Fantasy is a bit different because in many settings you have the fighters/mages archetypes - one of those character conceptions has access to almost no powers and the other has - in theory - access to them all.

 

So that last line has been my focus: how do you make the game fun for people who want to play either of those archetypes? If one archetype is too weak in relationship to the other, many players will feel cheated if they want to play that archetype.

My answer, boiled down to its essentials is handicap the use of powers to the point where they remain useful but can't readily dominate every situation.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Fighter: X+0 = Z

Wizards X+Y = Z

If Y is the cost for Spells, Z is the total points and X is all the stuff other than spells (OCV, DCV, SPD, STUN, END, REC, etc.) how exactly can mages manage to run too far away?

 

Flight. Invisibility. Teleport. Tunnelling. Desolidification. Darkness. etc, etc. There are so, so many ways a mage can outmaneuver a muggle: many of them are not even very expensive to buy.

 

The fighter may boast of his mighty 10 DCV, but it does him Jack **** when his invisible opponent is attacking his ODCV of 3, or using AoE accurate to attack a DCV of 3, using summon to call forth creatures with a statline far superior to his opponents' ... or even simply boosting his own statline to one superior to any ordinary mortal. Or, or, or ...

 

The argument that the game is balanced "because mages have to buy their powers which means that they will have bad statlines" does not, alas, survive contact with reality.

I am curious, now, though: how many fantasy campaigns have you actually run?

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

We always set hard limits for how powerful mage spells are. Those are the same limits that Fighters' date=' Rogues, and Archers have. We allow the fighter to buy things like Martial arts with their weapon. Also you can buy talents that increase damage of the bow, as do a ton of 3pt or wider Combat Skill levels. I started to use equipment pools for everyone. All combat equipment is purchased from the pool along with any spells. That way your Wizards have all of those nifty Knowledges they SHOULD have. I also allow them to pay regular points for spells if the Equipment pool isn't large enough for the spells they want. If you keep everyone to the same limits, then everyone can have fun and no one character eclipses another.[/quote']

 

Equipment pools are OK for one-off or short games, but one of the fantasy tropes is that characters acquire geegaws along the way - over time that adds up. We've tried playing with equipment pools (several times) and as result now hate, hate, hate the idea. It's been discussed many times on the FH boards but when you get situations where a player has to abandon his warhorse, so that he can carry a dagger .... just ... no.

 

I'm not saying it can't work for some groups: obviously your group has had positive experiences (and I must say equipment pools worked OK in our cyberpunk game, though they still generated some weird outcomes) but it most emphatically does not work for us.

 

cheers, Mark

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

[O]r are maybe simply too ineffectual to build dangerous characters.

cheers, Mark

 

Have you been peeking at my charater sheets?

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Personally, I don't understand all the fuss. If it's an innate ability to the character, you pay points. If it's equipment, you pay money, barter, borrow, steal or loot it during an adventure, just like every other RPG on the market. The only way the game can be unbalanced in this way is if the GM goes Monty Haul and give out gobs of over-powered items. And even if he does, where's the problem with that if the challenges scale accordingly?

[Manic Typist]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

It's been discussed many times on the FH boards but when you get situations where a player has to abandon his warhorse, so that he can carry a dagger .... just ... no.

 

 

... how does that happen? Because there doesn't really have to be a limit on what is in the stash, only what the character actively has on him/her. Further, you could build the horse as adding to the character's pool (since he can keep stuff with him, but on the horse). Further- yes, at a certain point it's ridiculous that the character thinks he can keep piling things on.

[gojira]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

... how does that happen?

 

Because if the dagger is 5 character points, and the warhorse as a follower is 5 character points, then something must be taken out of the pool before something else can be put in.

 

Because there doesn't really have to be a limit on what is in the stash

 

I think we are all assuming that this is in fact what a resource pool does: create an artificial limit as to what a character can stash. Is there some other sort of resource pool?

 

Possibly just missed part of the conversation here...

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

... how does that happen? Because there doesn't really have to be a limit on what is in the stash' date=' only what the character actively has on him/her. Further, you could build the horse as adding to the character's pool (since he can keep stuff with him, but on the horse). Further- yes, at a certain point it's ridiculous that the character thinks he can keep piling things on.[/quote']

 

Indeed.

Heroic games can work using Resource Pool rules, but it helps if the GM really massages the system to get the feel he wants. I tend they work better in the kinda games where the loot isn't really the focus, where the characters all have pretty broad access to armories and the like (King's men or Guild work, those sorta games).

 

I generally avoid the "mundane items with high point cost issues by making most Standard/Simple Equipment point free but with Encumbrance cost (Encumbrance rules are important to Low Fantasy) as well as not being free-free (although they might be supplied, made or purchased), just points free.

 

Give enough points so characters can generally use the gear they want, subject to encumbrance, but this is where it actually works reasonably well at helping enforce genre (and oddly enough some reality)... it helps prevent folk from loading out like an old school stereotypical adventurer.

 

It does lend itself to the "everybody has a main weapon and a backup/alternate plus defenses" style of kit, but this is mostly what you need as a base. Better versions of stuff from the free list comes outta this pool too (I like the idea of giving your horses write up additions to the pool. OIF Saddle mayhaps?)

 

Speaking of Horses, most Riding & Draft animals should prolly come from the Vehicles/Bases pool rather than the Followers/Contacts pool. Might even extend that to background NPC's like porters or sailors, only use the Followers?Contacts pool for the more traditional styles of Follower & contact.

 

I don't know if there are fantasy examples for the Improved Availability Perk in 6th anywhere, But I do it as follows:

3pts Artisan (equivalent to Street Level in DC) access lets you buy custom made, Fine, master-crafted and otherwise exceptional versions of normal gear

5pts Mystical allows you access to curiosities. The more commonly available sorts of wonders and charms. Most settings these are things like potions, scrolls, blessings, holy water and the like

10pts Wondrous you're hooked into the most powerful stuff of your setting. Maybe you're an Immortal with a huge stash of storied treasures, or a Prince with a good enchanter as adviser, or you've got a Seven Eyed extra-dimensional being who follows you around and occasionally pitches artifacts at you for inscrutable plot based reasons.

 

I tend to consider these Increased access Perks to also function as a group Contact (suppliers) at a base of 11-, can be bought up like any other contact, and use that as something of a guide to how fast a particular new item can be hunted up

[Tasha]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

Because if the dagger is 5 character points, and the warhorse as a follower is 5 character points, then something must be taken out of the pool before something else can be put in.

 

I think we are all assuming that this is in fact what a resource pool does: create an artificial limit as to what a character can stash. Is there some other sort of resource pool?

 

Possibly just missed part of the conversation here...

 

That assumes that the GM doesn't allocate points to take the house into account. Or that once play starts that you keep worrying about how many points are in the pool. People get so rigid about points. I use equipment pools to define STARTING equipment. After play starts what spells the PC's have access to, Magic items they encounter and what money they get are controlled by ME the GM. So I don't really worry about the equipment pool after the first game. When/if we add someone new I figure out how many points of equipment that a Noob should have so they aren't overshadowed by the PCs.

 

If you allow Players to write up any spell using any power they like and lose the guts to say No it's your fault as GM. I always make it crystal clear that my first OK is provisional and that if during play something turns out to be unbalanced. I will ask that the item/spell be changed to be more balanced.

 

Usually we write up spells that are kind of like abilities seen in D&D. So Invis tends to go away once the person attacks a target. Fireballs allow for Dex rolls for reduced damage. etc. The idea is to have the D&D flavor without the stuff we find annoying. It's not that much different from any genre we play in Hero. We try to come up with guidelines that encompass the feel of the Genre we are playing. Otherwise Hero can feel like Champions Fantasy or Champions SuperAgents. AKA Superheroic powers in another genre. It's actually one weakness the system has. That you have to work a bit to make games not feel like Champions.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: 6E - Low Fantasy Hero - Game Balance Issues - Advice Requested

 

That assumes that the GM doesn't allocate points to take the house into account. Or that once play starts that you keep worrying about how many points are in the pool. People get so rigid about points. I use equipment pools to define STARTING equipment. After play starts what spells the PC's have access to' date=' Magic items they encounter and what money they get are controlled by ME the GM. So I don't really worry about the equipment pool after the first game. When/if we add someone new I figure out how many points of equipment that a Noob should have so they aren't overshadowed by the PCs.[/quote'] This is an excellent point I overlooked. Yeah, micromanaging equipment pools isn't really necessary. Using it as starting equipment is a perfect way to apply the system without letting it cramp your style.

 

If you allow Players to write up any spell using any power they like and lose the guts to say No it's your fault as GM. I always make it crystal clear that my first OK is provisional and that if during play something turns out to be unbalanced. I will ask that the item/spell be changed to be more balanced.

Yeah, learned that right out the gate when we first tried out the playtest edition of FH at Dundracon. It was originally Champions style pay-points-for-everything, and got unwieldy quickly without firm GM hand on the reins.

 

Usually we write up spells that are kind of like abilities seen in D&D. So Invis tends to go away once the person attacks a target. Fireballs allow for Dex rolls for reduced damage. etc. The idea is to have the D&D flavor without the stuff we find annoying. It's not that much different from any genre we play in Hero. We try to come up with guidelines that encompass the feel of the Genre we are playing. Otherwise Hero can feel like Champions Fantasy or Champions SuperAgents. AKA Superheroic powers in another genre. It's actually one weakness the system has. That you have to work a bit to make games not feel like Champions.

Indeed.

To provide a non D&D example, my FH setting has basically 4 types of powers:

(Raw) Magic: Chaos/Entropy/Change Does all the nifty magic stuff everyone thinks of as magic. Only works for people with entropy in their system. If you weren't born strange, you have to become strange to work this magic. It generally kills you, drives you crazy, mutates you, or otherwise makes you pay. Nasty Side Effects. Think Warhammer Magic, Lovecraftian and Moorcockian influences plain to see. Also somewhat inspired by the Magic of Recluse Chaos mages.

 

Order Working: Not really magic. More like mystical anti-magic. Removing all the Chaos/Entropy from a given system and hardening it. Expensive points wise, generally persistent effects more like powers and can include enhanced stats. Come with some drawback limitations/disadvantages/Side Effects. A lot of the kinda Paladin/Monk powers fall under his heading, as do the natural abilities of some of the Elder Races. Very inspired by the Black Mages of Recluse

 

Wild Magic: Nature has a way of balancing out the order and chaos in it's systems. It forms patterns which transform the entropy into energy. Tapping this natural energy is usually very, very, very dumb. And Fatal. But there are a couple of races native to my setting's world (Most of the races are transplants) that can do so, and every once in a while someone with the right stuff will figure out a way to ride the power for a while. Doesn't usually end well.

 

Tamed Wild Magic: This is your land of miracles, rituals, gods, and the like. The Otherworld that overlays our own is far more susceptible to intangibles like belief and faith, and when intelligent minds start believing in things, they form intangible patterns in the otherworld that beginning channeling the raw magic in the world in given directions. besides the obvious Celtic legendary roots, I also draw pretty heavily on the Hero Plane from Glorantha for the way I envision the Otherworld. Generally, crating a link with an Otherworld source for controlling wild Magic requires either aforementioned natural affinity, or deliberately creating a false affinity by introducing Entropy deliberately by ritual. This can range from mostly harmless (A vow of chastity violates your nature, for example, and scars or tattoos can as well) to expedient, powerful, and often vile (insert any of the number of ways one could become Chaos ridden. Lots of ways to break a part of your mind, body or spirit).

 

At one point in the not too distant past, during what passed for my Renaissance/Reformation, a bunch of rather serious philosopher types decided to prove that Gods were just false imaginations of men. They succeeded in creating any number of what were effectively Construct Gods, but discovered that once a God in the Otherworld was made manifest, it was no longer strictly tied to the belief of just it's worshipers, but also the other inhabitants of the Otherworld, and still wielded full access to their given suite of powers. A lack of worshipers, while hampering and greatly reducing their spheres of influence, did not in fact exterminate them. And wiping out a God's followers makes them really cranky, and likely to try and create a new generation of followers by coming and giving a nice personal show for the survivors to talk about for a few generations after raining down molten sulfur from the skies.

Not a lot of the Constructs survived the Apocalyptic war that followed, but a few still lurk in secluded spots, most notably the Spirit Forges, which were sort of like Unbeliever munitions factories. They still are capable of manifesting a number of interesting disposable wondrous weapons, but generally require some kind of sacrifice in return, life force being the preferred coin. (stolen lock, stock, and barrel from Legacy of Kain, because I thought they were awesome). That whole bit of background grew out of the possible ramifications of that last magic style.

 

And so it goes... just thought a quick example without any grit might help spark ideas.