Legendsmiths

The reason for not including all of the component limitations is that by-and-large it isn't really that informative, especially because the system isn't 100% "by the book". When you look at it, I'm essentially giving "Based on ECV", an advantage, for free. I'm also making the spellcasting roll part of the attack roll, something that isn't done. The mana used is reduced by the amount of success when casting a spell, for which there are no limitations that provide this. On top of that, standard spells are essentially in a power framework similar to an elemental control. So, when all is said and done it would actually be more confusing to provide all the lims than to simply state what they are. There's a lot of handwaving and fudging going on, but it's not all completely off the deep end. I don't want to include all of this in the normal document, because these limitations are effectively captured when I talk about spellcasting. However, here's what I based it on... The basic lims are: ½ Phase Action (-0) Concentration (-1/4) Gestures (-1/4) Incantations (-1/4) Increased ENDx3 (incl. Long Term END) (-1 1/2) Side Effects (Extreme, Affects both character/environment, Only on crit fail) (-3/4) Reduced Range but No Range Penalty (I made this up) (-0) Combined Attack/Casting Roll based on ECV vs ECV/DCV/3 as appropriate (-0) Limited by POWER (-1/4) Personal Focus or Consumable Focus Required (-1/4) Total -3 1/2 For Special Spells, Increased END is worth (-2) because while the multiplier is actually x6, the interaction with Limited by POWER prevents them from being high active point spells so I don't feel the full x6 (which would be -3 with long term) is worth it. Total -4 Now, where's the -7? Why are additional Standard Lims doubled? The answer lies inside power frameworks. Consider the following: Fire Elemental Control: 20 pts EC Slot 1 40 - Fire EC (20) = 20 pts EC Slot 2 40 - Fire EC (20) = 20 pts EC Slot 3 40 - Fire EC (20) = 20 pts Apply the limitations to all of those. 20 / 4.5 = 4. So, for 20 points total, you just got three 40 active point powers. 40 / 4 = 10, meaning that the active point cost for each slot was effectively divided by 10. Multipower: 40 pts MP Slot 1 40 / 5 = 8 MP Slot 2 40 / 5 = 8 MP Slot 3 40 / 5 = 8 Apply the limitations to all of those. 40 / 4.5 = 9. 8 / 4.5 = 2. So, for 15 points total you just got three 40 active point powers. 40 / 2 = 20, which is a huge active point multiplier. Notice what happened to the value of limitations. In each case the limitations value was more than doubled or quintupled. A common restriction on power frameworks is that no "special" powers (defenses and the like) can be put inside them, at least not multipowers, without GM permission. I agree with that, they are cheap enough as is. Now, ECs and MPs have their own quirks associated with them. Additionally, they're very mechanical. That lead me to dream up essentially a new power framework for this spell system, with the restriction that only non-special spells can be placed insided it. I created a POWER stat to reflect the MP reserve or EC base. We've tweaked it a little, but the result is still pretty much the same. It is a limiter on the amount of power you can command. Then, trying to keep things simple, I said to simply double the value of all limitations applied to standard spells. This is very similar to the EC effect, and certainly much more "fair" (IMO) than the cheapness of a MP. Voila. There is a certain amount of fudge-factor here, but all in all I think it is relatively balanced. Like all power frameworks it makes powers cheap, which means that in high-point games they are going to be very effective. The flip side of that is that in low-point games, even normals can have some amount of power. So, with this system, you can actually make a dabbler: POW 2 (2 pts) No increased magic stats Spellcasting (3 pts) Ego 11 (2 pts) Total: 7 pts. No spell can be more than 2 real points so even if you gave him 4 spells he still will only have spent 15 pts total on magic. His spellcasting is 15-, but none of his spells will be more than 2 motes, 3 if it is a special spell. Thus, on a 13- he pays minimum ESS, no long term, and can command about 15 Active points of power. This is good for TK, an RKA, a small entangle, light, basic detects, skills (e.g. lockpicking 15- is a 15 AP special power), leaping, etc. Pretty effective all-in-all (now I want to build this guy). Using traditional FH, he would have to spend 3-4 pts per spell to do the same thing, and he would still have to buy spellcasting and increased stats. I know I used some abbreviations and some short math. Let me know if this doesn't make sense.

Loud and clear. I've updated the document. There was a pretty big typo in Dabbler. I've also included a sample mage. The RTF exporter does not include equipment (I don't know why), so he has 3 pts in his personal focus (a spear w/ mage touch) which isn't on the sheet. Other than that, he is a complete 50 pt Dabbler. I will advance him 25 pts and make him a mage, and then make him 100 pts and an archmage. If something is still unclear, let me know. I really want this to be understandable. Thanks.

I agree with shadowpup. I allow them to spend points on items if they want something "signature", otherwise I actually use the d20 SRD magic items and just translate them.

I feel that 15 points is about equal to a level. That would make a 10th level char about equal to a 200 pt character, assuming that 1st level is 25+25, and that seems about right. As for loot, I would use D&D equipment, and simply halve the weight. That will be close enough for metric relative to heroic strength. Armor and weapons are a bit trickier, but the options are also fewer. I would really suggest that money be the key factor in purchasing equipment, not points, unless you are going to run a Xena/Herc type game where the point is the action, not the quest for wealth and glory. That's how I run my game. Hopefully I'll have EQ lists up soon (based on the d20 SRD lists), but they aren't finished yet.

I think adding Power Defense makes more sense than MD, but it depends on the campaign. I don't require Pow DEF but *highly* recommend it.

I require all "cheap" powers (e.g. defenses, movement, etc.) to have Diff. to Dispel x4 (+1/2). This helps increase the active points a little, plus makes the spell much more diff to dispel (as the advantage would imply in case you missed it )

What is your concern, Fantasy GM? That the players won't like incremental bonuses or that you want them to focus in a particular direction? My experience has been that incremental bonuses work fine, and that players will focus or diversify as they see fit. Really, what's to stop someone from multiclassing in d20 besides an arbitrary XP penalty that can be avoided if played right? I think that's the strength of the system. I would recommend you go with 25+25 points to start small, make sure the bad guys are usually 0+25 or weaker. Award about 3 XP per session, +1-3 for completion of an adventure. However, only give them the XP at the end of the adventure. Example: 3 sessions to rescue the princess = 3 x 3 = 9 plus 1-3 for how well they rescued her. Total: 10-13. Essentially, only award the XP when the characters can take time between adventures to spend it. This will have a "level up" feel, since they are getting points in bursts, but is still very Hero.

It all comes down to what you will allow the wizards to buy. In my magic system, until a cleric passes beyond initiate status in the church (a 4 pt membership perq), they can only buy basic healing with a limitation "Not to heal a single wound greater than 1/2 BODY" (-1/2). That way any impairing or disabling wounds cannot be healed even by low level priests. Wizards can't buy healing at all, and druid types are limited to the minor healing as described above... and can't ever get any better. You just have to establish those guidlines for your magic system.

I had posted this a while ago. Scroll up to the top of the page. http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=7792#post7792

I think your spells will end up costing too little, especially things like movement or defenses.

The only thing I didn't like about END Reserves is that they are so cheap. A 40 pt pool with recovery per hour isn't going to be much more than 5 points. Are you doing something different, Blue?

One of the reasons I built the system the way I did was I wanted to be able to create a 50 pt mage. Using the normal Hero, no power framework system and maybe -2 ot -3 lims, this was very difficult. At the same time I feel Multipowers result in spells that are just too cheap, so I wanted some balance. At 115 points the mage in the group is powerful, but no more so than any of the other characters.

By Atlantean are you referring to my Atlan Wizardry? If so, the adjective for the Atlan is atlan. And they are humans, although there is certainly a hint of Atlantean relationship. Or, is Atlantean from your world. Just curious. I will actually be posting the writeup of the world this goes with. We're still extricating the d20ness from the manuscript which is about 69K words.

I agree with Markdoc. You have to enforce arbitrary limitations to preserve balance. I use real point limits on spells, not active points. That way if you want to build a city shattering spell, you may need bulky, arranged foci, 1 week to cast and so on. Additionally, for "special" (i.e. cheap) powers, I specify fewer limitaitons and require Difficult to Dispel x4 (+ 1/2). This increases the cost of the power, without being totally arbitrary, and makes those spells as difficult as attacks to dispel. A good solution all around.

Seems like everywhere I turn I'm pimping my magic system. Ah well.... I feel your pain, and that is one of the reasons I stopped playing FH a while ago. When 5th came out, I really wanted to give it another shake. Me and my group sat down to figure out what we really wanted in a magic system. We already had an idea of the metaphysics of the world, and just needed to decide how the system(s) would work mechanically. In the end we came up with the following types of power: Divine Channels Psionics Wizardry Druidic Power Innate Power The most common forms of power are Divine Channels and Wizardry. Additionally, we needed to ensure that not only each type was unique, but that they all mechanically were different. For wizardry, this is what we have: http://www.tekhed.com/hero/magic.pdf The other stuff is there as well, but buried. I intend to make the other stuff more accessible, I just haven't gotten around to it yet. Feedback is welcome, here or via email. Otherwise, consume and evacuate as necessary.

My magic system uses LTE and is quite structured. You may find some useful ideas in it. I essentially went with -1/2 for LTE, but there are a bunch of other lims in effect as well. http://www.tekhed.com/hero/magic.pdf

Agreed. Combat Luck can unbalance the game if allowed to the wrong players, at the wrong time. I allow 1 level when characters are 115+ points, and then an additional 1 level every 25-50 points.

As for geing waaaaay off, my party of 5 110-115 pt heroes faced 9 25 pt thugs who spent all their points on combat ability (they were mercs). The fight was interesting, but not terribly difficult. 50-75 pt focused characters can be almost as challenging as 100pt diversified characters. The issue is how many points are spent on combat ability, what are the "x factors" (OCV + Damage Classes), and how relative are they. A 25 pt thug is easily a 7-8 xfactor (3-4 OCV + 3-4 DC). A 50-75 pt character can easily have an xfactor of 10-12 which is more or less a DX 15 (OCV 5) guy wielding a greatsword (DC 7), and that WILL be tough. The GM should always balance the threat, not the points.

Oh, 75 disads is quite a bit, especially if you adhere to category limits. If you want 100pt chars I suggest 50 + 50. That is of course unless you want some severely disadvantaged heroes.

Well, the straight FH Orcs are not 25 pt characters, as much as I remember. At 150 pts you will find yourself in an epic campaign. If you are considering magic systems, I'll offer mine as an option. We continue to develop and clarify it, but it works real well for the feel we want. http://www.tekhed.com/hero/wizardserrand.php I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

I agree with both Derek & Alibear. I build my thugs at 25pts (0 base, 25 disads). This is equiv IMO to a 1st level NPC class in D&D. I'd say a 1st level char is about 50 pts (25 + 25). That's definitely a budding hero. 3xp per session is about right for a 4-5 hour session. I use a card system to reward good roleplaying on the spot, and they can turn cards in for XP if they want (1 for 1). 75 pts (50 + 25) is about a 3rd level char, right on the 10-15 pts per level. 100 pts (75 + 25 or 50 + 50) is about a 5th to 6th level char and are quite powerful. If you are realistic about your thug monsters (orcs, goblins, etc), they will all be about 25 pts and 100pt chars will surely trounce them. My campaign has been running a while and the chars are about 115 pts. I still throw double their number of 25pt thugs at them from time to time and it's still a good fight, although they rarely get hurt. Lower points forces people to focus. The more points you give them, the more likely they are to diversify. Also, experience gets spent differently than base points. Building a 100pt char from the beginning is different from adding 50pts to a 50 pt char over the course of the campaign. I think the latter is far more interesting. Good luck.

You mean Damage Resistance. I like that idea, but would it have to be limited. I mean, if I have 8 PD and put on leather I am now as tough as plate?

I only use Hit Loc on key villains and characters. Mooks/Thugs/Grunts all shots are to the chest unless the character does a called shot. This speeds play, keeps the focus on the key characters, and still requires hit loc to play into the game. Kind of a comprimise. If you wanted to extend this to all characters, that works well too. That's essentially what GURPS does and that works very well. All shots are to the chest unless specified otherwise. I know people can make arguments about the chaos of combat, blah, blah, blah, but it comes down to the feel of the game. No hit loc unless called shots leads to a more "controlled" game. Players will never be taken out by a random shot (if you apply the system to PCs). Food for thought.

Eodin, that's what I do. The one stipulation I make is that you cannot recover while you are "maintaining" a spell. However, you can drop your connection to the spell, so that you can recover, and then at the end of the duration it will end. In order to keep it going you will have to recast it. It works very well for us. http://www.tekhed.com/hero/magic.php

No. There is no power pool at all. Essentially, all spells are either spontaneous or formulaic, those are the only two rolls you would make. In order to cast formulaic spells, you must "know" them (i.e. pay points). Learning spells in this manner costs 1 point per 2 points of Complexity (and complexity is already real cost/5). So, assuming -2 limitations, a 60 active point spell would have a real cost of 20. This gives it a complexity of 4, and it would cost 2 points to learn this spell by rote, allowing you to formulaically cast it. Otherwise you will have to cast it spontaneously, which limits your skill depending on how much END you are willing to pay. This is almost identical to how spellcasting works in Ars Magica. Most mages do not know many spells by rote, relying on their skill to cast spells spontaneously. Obviously, as with any power pool type solution, you would want to have some common spells defined ahead of time, but you will still have the flexibility to cast them on the fly. When I came up with the point costs I tried to balance them as closely as they are balanced in Ars. To be good at any spellcasting you want at least level 6 in one form and one technique (e.g. create and fire). That is already 24 points. Mages in Ars are way more powerful than any other character type, so using this system can easily unbalance a game. The system inherently favors mages. There's a lot of non-hero goofiness here, especially since you are trying to roll high. However, I think the system works. The probabilities for spellcasting in my examples are pretty close to what they would be in Ars. LTE is used because spellcasting, especially formulaic, is all about endurance. Taking fatigue in Ars was a process that could slow you down for the rest of the day, which LTE is good at simulating.