Druid-like magic system

[Jhaierr]

Tonight I decided to sit down and work on my druid-like magic users (called the Daeic) in my (and a friend's) original fantasy world. I am curious what you guys think! See the PDF attached here. (I'm using 6th Edition.)

 

A few notes to get the general gist of magic and other things in this world:

• I am strongly considering using most of the superheroic rules in play (i.e., everyone pays points for everything, no hit locations, no impairing wounds, but probably no Knockback) and starting everyone with a Standard Heroic character at 175.
• Unless I hit a snag somewhere, I think I will have magic-users pay full points for their spells, but they can have multipowers (as seen here).
• Magical healing is pretty much exclusively done by a separate profession of healers, so you won't see any healing magic here.
• This is just one "path" that a Daeic can take; the others are very similar in progression and nature.
• Magic is not typically unpredictable (e.g., there are usually no magic rolls tied to merely casting a spell, although you might use a Magic roll to slightly alter a spell in casting), and I don't use a ton of limitations on spells. However, almost all spells will have either Incantations, Gestures, or Concentration as a limitation, and sometimes they take Extra Time to cast (especially non-combat spells).
• In the document, I have the cost for "upgrading" the Multipower/spells when you advance to each level instead of the full cost. I'm considering having each character that advances toward the next rank buy each top-level upgrade in individual chunks (e.g., each detection spell, all the Multipower upgrade costs, and finally the Fringe Benefit), so there wouldn't be a situation where they have one spell in the Multipower that's upgraded and others that are not (too complicated).
• You'll see I have several standard-effect options there. I like to keep the more variable effects when it comes to damage as opposed to other types of effects. Plus there will be less dice rolling in play and a simple way of remembering what will happen (e.g., "this spell will always give me +6 STR") and it's less up to "luck" when it comes to effects like that. Damage would be variable and rolled, but this type of Daeic doesn't deal damage directly with his/her spells.
• The way I look at the ranks is that a Daeic needs to buy, say, all the upgrades in the Journeyman rank in order to be called a Journeyman.
• The Adept rank probably should have more spells, but I am also thinking of what is necessary for someone to be called an "Adept." Adepts have other abilities like item creation, spell customization/creation, and other spirit-plane-related spells that they have access to. That's why Adept is cheaper than Master.
• I have other types of magic-users in the world (e.g., elemental, illusionists, mental, bardic, healers), and of course they have completely different progressions and structures to their magic.

Sorry for the length. Any thoughts on what I have here? What do you think of the power level of the spells? Do you think 175 is too low for a starting character given the Template? Should I bother having everyone else pay for all their weapons with points? (Magic items would require points regardless, I think.)

Daeic spells.pdf

[bluesguy]

• I am strongly considering using most of the superheroic rules in play (i.e., everyone pays points for everything, no hit locations, no impairing wounds, but probably no Knockback) and starting everyone with a Standard Heroic character at 175.

Sorry for the length. Any thoughts on what I have here? What do you think of the power level of the spells? Do you think 175 is too low for a starting character given the Template? Should I bother having everyone else pay for all their weapons with points? (Magic items would require points regardless, I think.)

 

Why use the super heroic rules vs. standard heroic rules?  What is the flavor you are trying to achieve?

 

So when I added up the point cost of the Template and the Initiate Spell cost I came up with 149 points already spent.  That means the player only has 26 points to spend on characteristics and other skills.  IMO:  Not enough.

 

If it were me I would add some additional limitations on the Initiate spells so they require components and a potential for a backfire based on making their EGO (since the template has them buying up their EGO by +5).  This would represent the fact that things can go wrong when you first start out but as you become more skilled you don't need components and you don't need to make the EGO roll because the spell casting has become automatic.  I would apply it to the perception based spells as well.

 

Also having players pay points for their weapons and armor is going to be kind of interesting.  What happens when a PC kills someone with a really nice set of armor - can the PC wear it?  If not why not?  In a Fantasy game the normal expectation is that you could wear someone else's armor after it was adjusted to fit you.  Or a really nice sword...

[Jhaierr]

Why use the super heroic rules vs. standard heroic rules?  What is the flavor you are trying to achieve?

 

<snip>

 

Also having players pay points for their weapons and armor is going to be kind of interesting.  What happens when a PC kills someone with a really nice set of armor - can the PC wear it?  If not why not?  In a Fantasy game the normal expectation is that you could wear someone else's armor after it was adjusted to fit you.  Or a really nice sword...

 

I don't want a particularly deadly/gruesome campaign as far as the PCs are concerned (and I'd prefer not to have to fudge rolls a lot to make that happen). Not using the hit locations and impairing rules will help out with that.

 

The reason I'm considering having everyone pay points is because the magic users don't get a cost break (aside from frameworks). Using a sword and a dagger would be 13+8=21 points. That's not bad at all. Alternatively, I could allow everyone to just pick up whatever and use it, but what if they somehow were able to kill a powerful warrior and get his magic sword that is worth 100 points? A PC warrior would get that for free while the PC mage would be stuck paying for all of his abilities. I could have everyone freely use normal items, but magical ones you must pay for... That's one option offered in Fantasy Hero. I don't want to end up playing a Monty Hall campaign. haha

 

I'm really curious what your thoughts are on that. One can easily just say "you need to pay points for it," just like the would in superhero campaigns. Has anyone ever played in a fantasy campaign that required you pay points for items?

 

 

 

So when I added up the point cost of the Template and the Initiate Spell cost I came up with 149 points already spent.  That means the player only has 26 points to spend on characteristics and other skills.  IMO:  Not enough.

 

The Template package already contains the Initiate Spells, so it's more on the order of 83 points left over.

[Markdoc]

I'm really curious what your thoughts are on that. One can easily just say "you need to pay points for it," just like the would in superhero campaigns. Has anyone ever played in a fantasy campaign that required you pay points for items?

 

I have a fair amount of experience with this: coming to hero system from Champions, it was how we initially ran all our games. Alas, I have to say it didn’t work very well and despite multiple experiments to try and make it work, we all abandoned the idea after a while.

 

I should say up front, that it can work for certain styles of game, though it gives a very different feeling and playstyle to a “standard” fantasy game. It works fine for one-off games, where you can build the characters to fit with each other. It can also work where everyone is the same kind of character. If you are playing a game without magic, it works OK – everyone has access to the same mundane equipment and what they choose to use helps define their character. Cost is not so much an issue, because it affects everyone in the same way. Likewise, if everyone is a magic-user, it also works fine: then the game plays more like fantasy champions and the cost of mundane equipment doesn’t really matter, because almost no-one will use it.

 

As a side benefit, if you choose to go this route, all your PCs will be magic-users. In our circle of gamers we had 5 GMs all with different play styles and different game worlds. In every case, players who had originally chosen a fighter or rogue-type character dropped it after a few adventures and made a magic-using character. You outline why in your post above: “Using a sword and a dagger would be 13+8=21 points”. That gives that character one – count’em, one – power: HKA. It’s also 3 points less than the initiate pays for his framework of cool powers. If the mundane chooses to add a bow, to give him a tiny bit of flexibility, he’s now paying as much as the initiate – but he’s much less use. The initiate can do a bunch of useful stuff out of combat and in combat can probably kick the mundane’s ass, with careful use of summoned animals, strangling him with handy plants, etc. You can reduce this problem by giving characters a pool to which they can add equipment: that gives them some flexibility, but it’s only a stopgap. Magic can do all kinds of stuff that mundane characters simply cannot replicate (gear or not), and there’s little or nothing that mundanes can do that magic can’t do as well or better. Having a longsword and a greatsword is really not worth much extra points: it’s still an HKA. In contrast, even with the relatively limited powers you have put in the framework, these druids have a wide range of abilities (Summons, for example, is very, very flexible).

 

Using a “pay for everything” approach also adds some peculiar logic kinks to standard fantasy tropes. Treasure-finding is a standard part of most games, and even if it is not in focus (it usually is not, in my games) there’s often magic mcGuffins in play. In a pay as you go game, characters – even using a pool – will often behave in bizarre and illogical ways, driven by the limitation of their pool size. I find the easiest way to avoid a monty-haul campaign is to simply avoid giving away a host of magical gee-gaws: as GM, I get to control what’s fed into the game.

 

On the other side, I have yet to see what advantages a pay-for-everything approach offers to most fantasy games.

 

cheers, Mark

[Christopher]

There is a middle way beside "all equipment is free" and "equipment is bought with points".

Resource Pionts (specifically the Equipment Points), from APG I 192.

For many intents Resource Points works like a VPP's Pool: You can carry around X Real Points worth of equipment.* You can use "5-point-doubling-rule" here.

Everyone get's 60 points (or GM choosing) for free and extra points can be bought (1 CP per 5 Equipment Points).

There are sugestion to allow Multipliers (from x0.5 too x1.5), for Situations wich require "Concealed carrying of light equipment" vs. "going in armed to the teeth", with the average adventure laying at the default (x1)

There are two sugested ways of Limiting AP/Power of Weapons: AP not higher then twice what you can carry in total Real Points. Or based on Perqs.

It also has rules similar to the 5E "Independant" Limitation, if you were a fan of it.

 

This rule does not restrict "one off" uses, like taking up the Flamig Vorpal Ax +10 from teh deafeated enemy, just regular use.

 

*You may have an Army Companies supplies back home, but you can only take so much along (while it still is easily accessible and wearable).

 

The default Pools are:

60 Equipment

10 Vehicle/Base

5 Follower/Contact

0 Miscelanous (wich can work as any of the above)

 

Advantages:

Everyone has some gear, but the warrior might have to buy more to have full weapon + armor (maybe with multiple weapon options).

The Mage might get some amplifier Artifacts with his totally free "allowance", like this one.

You can (and some others did) add a "Magic" "Psionics" and similar Pools, to give thier Mages a cost discount too. But it does require fudging the fluff so that there is a limit to "how much magic one can have in his mind at one time".

 

Some rules that can help inrease the expense/need for varried weapons:

The Rules about relative Weapon Lenght and "Weapon lengths and enclosed spaces" from 6E2 202.

The fact that many cities had laws against everyone having every type of weapons*. Short Swords and Daggers in particular were re-designed and re-invented many times to circumvent weapons laws.

 

*Medieval times were not the Wild West. And even wild west might have

[NuSoardGraphite]

I have always allowed weapons/armor/equipment for "free" (costs money of course. starting general wealth level must be purchased) and i only charge characters points for things that are inherent to their character (characteristics, skills, talents, powers and perks)

 

Wizards have to buy their spells. (I use frameworks...usually multipower) fighters and rogue types have access to a large repetoire of talents and abilities that will enhance their own performance within the purview of their respective professions. fighters can buy deadly blow and missile deflection, theives can buy super-stealth (invisibility w/fringe) and backstab (deadly blow RSR-stealth) so it all tends to even out in the end.

 

And they all get to collect those magic items i put into the game for free. the fighter gets to have that +2DC Bastard sword of armor piercing, the rogue gets the cloak of storage (EDM to a small pocket dimension that is a large room that can hold a lot of loot!) and the mage gets that staff of power (+3 to magic skill roll, +4d6 aid to spell pool and 100 endurance reserve). and if the magic item is lost or destroyed, there is no loss or need to restructure points since the items are independant of the weilders.

[Markdoc]

We experimented (a lot) with equipment pools, since long before the idea of equipment pools was published, but depending on how we handled them, they either marginally mitigated the problem of balancing mundane or magical characters, or made it much, much worse.

 

If you allow only mundane items into the pool, then it helps the non-magic-users a bit. It makes less difference to mages since they rely less on mundane equipment. I'd recommend that any GM wanting to use equipment pools in fantasy games to do this. It doesn’t solve the problem, but it does help a teeny bit. I should note here that pools play a much different role in modern or scifi games, where we use them a lot: it’s not that I hate pools. The difference is that in those settings, there is a ton of useful stuff that you can add to them. In a fantasy game, mundane equipment is pretty much limited to tools, weapons and armour (read: small skill bonuses, KA, HA and armour), so mundane characters get much less out of them.

 

 

On the other hand, if you allow magic geegaws to go into the equipment pool, it tends to exacerbate the mage/fighter imbalance (especially if players can make their own items), precisely because of the appeal of things like the enhancer staff that was linked to. Magic users have such a wide range of available powers, that they can generally make the best use of such things. If general magic stuff can go into the pool, and magic is generally available, then this difference disappears – but of course you again end up with a game where everyone is a magic-user: no fighter in his right mind is going to use his equipment allowance on a horse, which has limited usability, when he could use the same points on a belt of flying, or teleport, which he can get good use out of in practically any situation.

 

 

Again, I’m stressing that this is not BADWRONGFUN – just that when charging points for equipment (whether you use VPP or not), your choices are between a game where everyone is a magic-user, or games where everyone uses magic. If you want that, it’s cool: but it’s a specific style of play, and GM’s need to know that going in. Mundane characters always have difficulties remaining relevant when magic is in play, and charging points for equipment just makes it even harder for mundane characters to keep up.

 

 

Added to that, it’s hard for me to see what problem charging points for equipment is intended to address. Again, in modern or scifi games, the problem is obvious: there’s so much attractive equipment, that it’s nice to have some way to balance up a bit what PCs cart around with them – particularly if they have access to a van, or a plane where they can shift hundreds of kilos or even tonnes of gear, so encumbrance becomes a non-issue. In fantasy, there’s really no such issue. Given the problems that charging points for equipment causes, I can’t see what the reason for doing it actually is.

 

 

I'd be interested to hear from people who have done it, why they've done it and what the outcome was.

 

cheers, Mark

[Shadowsoul]

I'd say don't make people pay cp for equipment.  You can limit the amount of equipment they start with and you can decide what treasure to dole out as the adventure progresses so you don't need to take cp away from them to spend on loot.  If you're power level is only going to increase based on completing sessions or adventures and gaining xp it demotivates you and makes you less likely to act like a 'real' adventurer would.  No Dwarf Explorer is going to walk away from a sweet repeating crossbow because he somehow knows that he won't be able to buy up his Strength if he keeps it.

 

(With regard to that magic sword, you can balance it out by sending a mage with a Staff of Power after them next. Or you can make villains that don't rely on powerful artefacts - a Strength 20 barbarian with a club that gives him +5 STR is just as dangerous as a Strength 13 barbarian with a club that gives him +12 STR.  And you can always use villains with artefacts MADE OF PURE EVILtm which will inflict horrific consequences on any hero foolish enough to use them).

 

Opening up a treasure chest and gloating over the gleaming contents is one of the most fun parts of fantasy roleplaying and I think that having the GM peering over your shoulder saying 'So you like the Magical Axe of Headsplosions do you?  Well you can use it once but then you'll have to drop your bow or pay to increase your equipment pool, otherwise it's gone!' would ruin the mood.

 

I agree with NuSoardGraphite that it is easy enough to provide loot, particularly magical items, which mages will find useful, power boosters, rings of protection, end reserves, new spells. Druids can gain animal followers if other magic items aren't so useful to them.  'So you're friends all have cool magical swords. Ok, here's a tiger, that one's just for you'. 

 

Magic users do have access to abilities like flying or summoning that others don't, which tends to negate the advantage of having to pay for cp for abilities as others have already pointed out.  Though rogues and the like can often do all sorts of things like pick locks or hunt game which pure spell users can't so at lower levels they are not left behind so much in that respect.  On the other hand a sword is not a guided missile, your fighter still has to pay cp to know how to use it, pay cp to increase it's damage, pay cp to increase their chance to hit with it and pay gold to replace it if it get's bitten in half by some shrieking abomination from the very pits of hell.

 

Also remember that not totalling up people's equipment pools should make the game simpler.

[NuSoardGraphite]

The key to balancing out Magic Users with other non-magic using types is to allow the non-magic using types to purchase their own special abilities, and to make spell-casting not such an instantaneous affair.  My recommendation is at the very minimum, it should take at least a Full Phase to cast a magic spell, with more powerful/complex magics taking even longer.  Some powerful rituals could take hours to cast.

 

I allow for Mages to lower the time they can cast a spell by 1-step on the time chart, but that generates an additional penalty of -3 to the spell-casting roll, in addition to the Active Point penalty.  Of course, conversely, they are allowed to take more time, which generates a +1 per additional step on the time chart they spend preparing the spell. (a normal spell that takes a full-phase to cast, when the mage takes a full minute to prepare the spell, gets a +2 bonus to cast)

 

These things actually can go a long way toward making spell-casting feel like spell casting, as the Mage has to spend time to prepare the spell, so the groups warriors keep the enemy busy for a few phases until the mage is ready, then BOOM.  Everybody gets to do something and the Mage isn't all-powerful because in many circumstances, he or she could be easily interrupted.

[Christopher]

And they all get to collect those magic items i put into the game for free. the fighter gets to have that +2DC Bastard sword of armor piercing, the rogue gets the cloak of storage (EDM to a small pocket dimension that is a large room that can hold a lot of loot!) and the mage gets that staff of power (+3 to magic skill roll, +4d6 aid to spell pool and 100 endurance reserve). and if the magic item is lost or destroyed, there is no loss or need to restructure points since the items are independant of the weilders.

 

Opening up a treasure chest and gloating over the gleaming contents is one of the most fun parts of fantasy roleplaying and I think that having the GM peering over your shoulder saying 'So you like the Magical Axe of Headsplosions do you?  Well you can use it once but then you'll have to drop your bow or pay to increase your equipment pool, otherwise it's gone!' would ruin the mood.

Thanks for these examples of problems that were totally avoided with Equipment Points in the APG I.

Please read a rule or at least asume the writer was as smart as you (and had time to think it through), to avoid making up problems that do not even remotely exist.

 

Stuff you cannot use right now goes into the Armory. And it stays there till destroyed or stolen the usual way. Loosing an item does not reduce your Kit (what you can take along) - it means you lost that item, period. You can pick up an replacement from your Armory. And the armory can (as I already told) be a whole Army companies worth of weapons. Magic Items included. It just will not start that way (suggested starting worth of Armory is 1.5 Times your Kit, plus whatever you find and loot).

While you can make items that work like Indenpend from 5E (inlcuding loosing equipment points till you remake it), the Game Police is not going to force you too under treath of 5 Years only playing AD&D.

 

 

Markdoc raises a good point that maybe Equipment Points* would be under-utilised in Fantasy games. And this might lead to games "where everyone wields magic or uses magic". But I ask a counerquestion: Is that actually something bad?

One of the core advantages of HERO is it's lack of "Artificial Limitations". Stuff like "Arcane caster cannot wear armor" (D&D), "unarmored fighting only works with certain very limited classes and prestige classes"(again D&D) and "Cyberware does not coexist with Magic and Technomancy" (Shadowrn, esp. 4E). It does not exists in HERO, because HERO does not need it to maintain balance.

So D&D does need a prestige class (only included in a certain supplement) to make a Armored Battle Mage** or a Rogue/Wizard** that sneak attacks with Attack Spells? Lucky that HERO does not!

Shadowrun has given you rules to make a Free Spirit Character, except they are so clunky and unwieldy (inlcuding stuff you just do not need) that they are effectively unuseable? Lucky HERO does not has those flaws!

 

*I think one reason they avoided the word "pool" was to differentiate it from several houserules wich had all the Problems.

 

**Examples taken from actuall D&D 3.0 and 3.5 books.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Considering that shadowsoul and myself were simply stating how many hero players have done things since at least the 90's (if not the 80's) with zero problems whatsoever, i think our opinions are still quite relevant to the discussion at hand as a viable option (i.e. do it the same way every other rpg in existence does it and dont worry about the small stuff)

[Jhaierr]

Really interesting thoughts. After reading your different opinions, I am leaning toward not paying CPs for any items and equipment. I also like the idea of having spells usually take a full phase (or an extra phase) at minimum. I could progressively reduce that as you advance through journeyman, master, and adept as well.

 

I'm curious what you guys think of the spells themselves? Would you want to play a character in this path? Any other spells you think should be added given the information provided? (again, healing is in a separate profession) 

[Markdoc]

Stuff you cannot use right now goes into the Armory. And it stays there till destroyed or stolen the usual way. Loosing an item does not reduce your Kit (what you can take along) - it means you lost that item, period. You can pick up an replacement from your Armory. And the armory can (as I already told) be a whole Army companies worth of weapons. Magic Items included. It just will not start that way (suggested starting worth of Armory is 1.5 Times your Kit, plus whatever you find and loot).

While you can make items that work like Indenpend from 5E (inlcuding loosing equipment points till you remake it), the Game Police is not going to force you too under treath of 5 Years only playing AD&D.

 

I alluded to one of the problems with the armoury approach in fantasy games but I didn't make it explicit: in modern games, the PCs usually have either a base or a way to schlep a lot of stuff around. In SciFi games, they almost always have at least a way to schlep a lot of stuff around. In fantasy games that is not the default - in fact, it's not even that common, based on my own experience: very often the PCs will come across stuff that they want and logically could carry, but they have neither the possibility to use it without throwing away valuable gear, nor any way to "stash" it somewhere for later use.

 

If the armoury is "whole Army companies worth of weapons" where, exactly is the character carrying it when they're on a two month trek across the wilderness? If you allow them a bag of holding or similar magic answer, then they effectively have all their stuff with them and can swap gear to their heart's content ... but of course you're not really using pools any more, at that point, which begs the question of why you'd bother to simulate a kind of pool that doesn't really mean anything.

 

Note: I'm not dumping on equipment pools as such: there are times when they can work very well. Just sayin' that most fantasy games are not those times.

 

As to the counter question "are games where everyone uses magic bad?" The answer is, obviously, no, of course not. I've had great fun (under both original RQ rules and Hero system) in Glorantha where everyone, pretty much is a magic-user, not just all the PCs. I ran a short, but successful fantasy campaign, where everyone started as a legendary, magic-using immortal. But those are not typical fantasy games. So what I am saying is not "Don't do this". It's more "This is what you will get, if you do this".

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Really interesting thoughts. After reading your different opinions, I am leaning toward not paying CPs for any items and equipment. I also like the idea of having spells usually take a full phase (or an extra phase) at minimum. I could progressively reduce that as you advance through journeyman, master, and adept as well.

 

I'm curious what you guys think of the spells themselves? Would you want to play a character in this path? Any other spells you think should be added given the information provided? (again, healing is in a separate profession) 

 

Yeah, I think it looks very promising: it's good enough to make a playable character, but not so good that it would dominate every aspect of the game. One of the keys to making a successful long-lived campaign (IMO) is making magic-users that are useful and powerful and fun to play, but not so powerful that they always have an answer to every problem. You already have the key to the approach, in the way that you set this up - the druid would make a great wilderness companion, but he would not be totally useless in a city. At the same time, a fire mage could bring something to the table that he couldn't, and a biomancer could offer things (like healing) that neither of them do.

 

The other thing I like is to give mundanes something to do: the easiest way to do this is make on-the-fly magic harder to pull off.

I use a standard base set of rules in my game which underlie all forms of human magic. There's all kinds of different styles and schools of magic, but they are all subject to these rules (quick copy/paste from my material).

 

• "Magic Requires Effort" - all spells must cost END. While it is possible to have spells that have the reduced END advantage, or even persistent spells, they must at least have the limitation "Costs END to cast (-1/4)" in which the END cost is only paid when the spell is cast
• "Magic Requires Concentration" - all spells must take the "Concentration" limitation to at least the 1/2 DCV (-1/4) level. Manipulation of primal forces is not something to be attempted while you are hopping about.
• "Magic Requires Time" - all spells must take the "Extra time" - at least a full phase (-1/2). Again: a spell is not something you casually toss off in passing.
• "Magic Requires Skill" - all spells require the limitation "Requires a skill roll". This is normally INT based, but some schools of magic teach a style that instead is based on EGO. This is particularly true of mages who specialise in illusion or subverting their target's minds.
• "Magic requires power" - all spells must take the limitation "Requires Mana" (-1/4). The short version is that Mana is equivalent to LTE, so spellcasting can (and often will) exhaust the caster. Once a caster runs out of END, they can use STUN (on a 1:1 basis) to power their magic, and if they run out of STUN, they can use BOD, again on a 1:1 basis - so pushing things to the limit can knock a mage unconscious or even injure them. This severely restricts the number of spells a mage can cast in a short period of time and means that most spells are going to be cast only as a matter of necessity and generally in a careful, deliberate fashion (just like magic in fantasy novels!)

The last thing is basic fairness: if mages get to use power frameworks, so do mundanes. A fighter can use a framework to simulate martial arts power, a spy to build talents related to stealth and information gathering.

 

This approach means that mundane characters still have a niche: they may not get as many cool powers, but they don't knock themselves out trying to open a door either

 

This works pretty well and has been tested in multiple campaigns over the last 25 years or so.

 

cheers, Mark

[Jhaierr]

Great points, and thank you!

 

In our fantasy world, magic requires one of the following: Incantations, Gestures, or Concentration, and it may require Extra Time as well. Usually they are the standard sort of gestures and incantations, but sometimes the gestures are actually drawing runes in the air and sometimes the incantations are singing a song throughout. Over time, the spells may not take as much time because you just get better and faster at it as you improve at magic. I've never required a roll for the magic. I suppose I might require an EGO roll if there is a particularly stressful and distracting situation where you must focus much more than usual (e.g., you are injured badly, bees are attacking you, you are very disoriented). Most magic costs END normally, although sometimes extra END, and as you get more advanced the END cost could decrease as you get better at channeling it. A magic-user can often be disabled by gagging him or tying his hands. However, some schools of magic-users are not hindered in that way (e.g., shapeshifters, mental magic users).

 

I will have to work on and post the elemental mage at some point in the future.

[Christopher]

I alluded to one of the problems with the armoury approach in fantasy games but I didn't make it explicit: in modern games, the PCs usually have either a base or a way to schlep a lot of stuff around. In SciFi games, they almost always have at least a way to schlep a lot of stuff around. In fantasy games that is not the default - in fact, it's not even that common, based on my own experience: very often the PCs will come across stuff that they want and logically could carry, but they have neither the possibility to use it without throwing away valuable gear, nor any way to "stash" it somewhere for later use.

 

If the armoury is "whole Army companies worth of weapons" where, exactly is the character carrying it when they're on a two month trek across the wilderness? If you allow them a bag of holding or similar magic answer, then they effectively have all their stuff with them and can swap gear to their heart's content ... but of course you're not really using pools any more, at that point, which begs the question of why you'd bother to simulate a kind of pool that doesn't really mean anything.

 

Note: I'm not dumping on equipment pools as such: there are times when they can work very well. Just sayin' that most fantasy games are not those times.

You asume there is no Armory during Travel.

In the real world unsued weapons and armor had to be stashed away beyond the point of "easy to pull out" regulary*. You cannot have your whole equipment spread in your base camp and also be able to run away with all of it on a moments notice. So you better leave it packed until you know you need something specific (and pack away the stuff you do not need).

And nobody said anything about this bag of holding being "insta find what you want". If the GM isn't just totally avoiding to create that box of pandora for his/her game.

 

And that Car with a Trunk full of AK-47's and Heavy Duty Body Armor might raise a few questions during random trafic inspections, so I heavily doubt the mobility of the armory for modern games you described. ("I told you we should not have taken that HMG along, now we have to run from the Police isntead of just using a minor bribe or hoping for them not fidning all our concealed light weaponry").

Thier Kit is all they can carry (on person, or in the car during Transit) without creating extra problems.

 

 

If you make a adventure far away from home, let the Player have a "travel Armory" that they put in some kind of base camp.

Fantasy is similar to modern, except the timescales are up (where it takes hours to travel betwen scenes in modern settings, it takes days in fantasy).

 

 

*It could take several hours and help to get into a Knights Armor. And they had to transport spare lances (and swords) someplace other that thier side.

[Markdoc]

You asume there is no Armory during Travel.

In the real world unsued weapons and armor had to be stashed away beyond the point of "easy to pull out" regulary*. You cannot have your whole equipment spread in your base camp and also be able to run away with all of it on a moments notice. So you better leave it packed until you know you need something specific (and pack away the stuff you do not need).

And nobody said anything about this bag of holding being "insta find what you want". If the GM isn't just totally avoiding to create that box of pandora for his/her game.

 

And that Car with a Trunk full of AK-47's and Heavy Duty Body Armor might raise a few questions during random trafic inspections, so I heavily doubt the mobility of the armory for modern games you described. ("I told you we should not have taken that HMG along, now we have to run from the Police isntead of just using a minor bribe or hoping for them not fidning all our concealed light weaponry").

Thier Kit is all they can carry (on person, or in the car during Transit) without creating extra problems.

 

 

If you make a adventure far away from home, let the Player have a "travel Armory" that they put in some kind of base camp.

Fantasy is similar to modern, except the timescales are up (where it takes hours to travel betwen scenes in modern settings, it takes days in fantasy).

 

 

*It could take several hours and help to get into a Knights Armor. And they had to transport spare lances (and swords) someplace other that thier side.

 

 

Well, assuming that there is no armoury during travel is pretty reasonable given that long period of travel is the default for very many fantasy games. In my last two campaigns, the PCs spent months at a time away from anything that resembled a base, often in hostile, or at least unknown territory, and operated with what they could carry on their back or a light pack animal. Assuming that they somehow have a base where they can stash things that they acquired hundreds of leagues away is .... odd.

 

In one of the two fantasy games I am playing in, the PCs are often away from anything that resembles a base, and not only do we operate with what we can carry on our back, but the GM enforces encumbrance so that we usually travel and fight light. We gave up on pack animals: we just went through those guys like popcorn. In the other game, the PCs are on the move constantly: we've never returned back along our track, and have never had anything that resembled a base.

 

I realise that this is not always the case, but there's no doubt that it's a very common occurrence. The idea that you can just "give" the players a camp where they can stash their stuff ... what happens when they move on again? What happens when they have to run away or walk through a portal and have no opportunity to return to their "base"? How do they shift their mountain of stuff from one "base camp" to another, anyway? I think your suggestions are a perfect example of what I was talking about before: you can force the armoury concept into a game if you want to really work at it, but it almost always generates in-game weirdness and logical (or in this case, logistical) problems. I might be OK with the weirdness, if I could see a reason for it, but so far, nobody has suggested a reason for me to want to do that.

 

Free equipment - acquired, carried and lost/broken/discarded as time goes on seems like a much easier way to handle things.

 

The arguments that in modern games characters can't more easily shift or stash their stuff .... pfft. If characters are going to be heavily armed - and let's face it, that's one of the defining features of PCs - then the argument that having some AK's in the trunk of your car is somehow more awkward than having it slung over your shoulder, is not something that we can take seriously. It is true that the armoury system doesn't always work well in modern games: for example, if the characters have to travel by conventional airline to and from their destination, then they are going to be without their armoury and have no realistic way of adding items to it. But really, pointing out that you can also have problems with the concept in  a modern setting doesn't really make it any more desirable.

 

As for the idea that it takes hours to get into a plate harness: I'm not sure what that has to do with the topic, but no, not in real life (or fantasy, for that matter). Having seen it done many times myself, I can assure you it takes around 15-25 minutes, depending on the style of the armour and the skill of the squire.

 

cheers, Mark