Brian Stanfield

When I started buying all the .pdfs of the Hero books, I looked into how to bind them myself and came up with all kinds of interesting ideas. As far as preparing an existing binding, there is s specialty binding tape that re-sets the binding and the first page. Here's an example of how it works: http://www.wikihow.com/Repair-a-Book's-Binding   I have a friend who likes to do book binding repairs, and he says it's not really all that hard. Also, it is possible to simply add more glue to the existing binding: http://www.philobiblon.com/bkrepair/BookRepair.html   The main problem with this idea is that the paper cover liner in the 6e books is not the strongest and tends to tear, making the extra glue irrelevant.

 

​I know I'm going to have to repair my 6e1 soon, and I plan on doing an entire binding replacement with the double-sided and hinged tape. I'd suggest practicing on a junk book first! If you get to it before I do, please post your results!

 

P.S. They make specialized glue for this process which stays flexible with age. That's part of the problem with the original 6e books: bad glue and bad liner paper. All the equipment is available at a reasonable price (compared to the cost of the 6e1 book!!!!!).

The timing on this is crazy. I literally just turned off the tv after binge-watching Ancient Aliens on the History Channel, and this is the first thing I read! I love the idea, although it is awfully dark. But that has some serious benefits. The drama is built right into the backstory.

 

I discovered Zechariah Sitchin years ago when a student of mind recommended The Twelfth Planet, a great alien conspiracy theory that goes off the deep end. It is fun to conjecture about the origins of the Sumerians and their influence on ancient civilization, and to ponder the possibilities of the planet Tiamat returning, etc. etc. (I may have that part wrong . . . it's been a while). Although I love it as a curious exercise in conjecture, it's historical and anthropological junk food. Which makes it PERFECT for a game setting. Sitchin is full of so many interesting ideas. They make for a great fantasy setting for sure, and probably also a Star Hero setting as well. Or both. His ancient technological explanations are fascinating, if nothing else.

 

Have fun with this!

He seems to be referring to 5th edition Ultimate Skills. Excellent book. I'm basing my spell research rules off of ideas in it.

I'm also tweaking heroic stat range a skill breaks based on ideas in it to fix complaints about characters in low power settings.

 

Standard Skill enhancers are usually limited to one type of skill.

"Expert" is one that crosses types but restricted by subject.

I'm thinking of creating one called Student of the Arcane.

 

Ultimate Skill also discusses skill interaction with power frameworks on p. 60.

It discusses putting skills in pools.

Ż

 

Actually, there's a 6e version of the Skills book, but it's only available as a .pdf or through drivethturpg pod. The pagination is identical though.

I'm not familiar with skill enhancers.

 

 

​They are like little powers, or talents, that affect other skills. Things like jack of all trades, linguist, etc., have an affect on the cost of related skills. Check 6e1 96 for a quick rundown. There is a much more detailed discussion with more applications like you've been discussing, including how they may be created, in Hero System Skills, pages 46-52. See especially the "expert" skill enhancer on page 47. It relates to the other discussion you directed me to, I think. There's also an in-depth discussion of skill trees and how they relate and affect each other in chapter 2. Check it out if you haven't.

Okay, as it turns out, I summed up the notes on the idea for a pool based around skills in one post in the rebuilding MA from scratch thread in the Hero Discussion forum. Hopefully, this link works, If not, I'll copy the whole thing.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93329-rebuilding-martial-arts-from-scratch/page-6?do=findComment&comment=2544607

 

I see what you're getting at here. Both the linked thread and a comment you made earlier about spell trees is something I've been wrestling with in my mind for a long time. It sounds like you've been thinking some similar things about pre-requisites, development, etc. I was trying to come up with a natural and integrated way to allow for spell skill growth based on Active Points known, XP used, etc. The formula was getting way out of hand in my head and I had to quit. But it seems like you are thinking along those same lines. 

 

As for the skill thread, would making a "skill enhancer" as discussed in Hero System Skills save some time and effort with your pool problem? Maybe not, but just a thought.

Personally, I think the easiest ways to ensure that spellcasting is tiring are to:

1) Require that all tiring forms of spellcasting cost END, and perhaps even require Increased END Cost (between x2 to x4); especially on Instant Attack Powers. I can see allowing Half-END for Constant (and especially Uncontrolled) Powers.

2) Enforce the standard LTE rules across the board; for ease of book keeping I think you can safely ignore the first three step on the Long-Term Endurance Table (CC 19, FHC 22).

3) Strongly encourage (or require) both warriors and sorcerers not to exceed the Normal Characteristic Maxima on END & REC.

I'm inclined to agree with this, and I just wrote a big long response only to delete it all. Maybe simple is best. Let me work through this. Let's assume a character has NCM of 50 END and 10 REC, and SPD 3. Let's assume also that he's using beginning spells with the x2 END Limitation, resulting in 6 END spells (beginning level stuff):

• Turn 1: 3 spells would result in 18 END, and with other activities we could round it up to 20. After post-segment 12 REC, he'd be at 40.
• After 4 full Turns he'd be at 10 END, and LTE after 4 Turns would only take away 4 END from his total, so he's be down to 46 and ready to go again after a full Turn of Recoveries.

If we use x4 END Limitation, each spell would be 12 END:

• Turn 1: 3 spells would be 36 END. After post-segment 12 REC he'd have 24 END.
• Turn 2: He'd only be able to cast 2 spells for 24 END. After post-segment 12 he'd be at 10 END.
• Turn 3: Take 4 Recoveries to get back up to 50
• Turns 4 & 5: repeat
• Turn 6: 4 recoveries again.

I guess it all depends on when you start applying the LTE penalties. Does it start with Turn 1? That's not how the RAW read, but assuming it's a campaign rule to always apply LTE to spell usage, that would be 4x the REC, resulting in 4 LTE being lost per Turn. After 6 Turns that would be a loss of 24 LTE. Not bad. The example above would work out much differently by Turns 4 & 5 if you apply the LTE as you go, with more recoveries interjected with spell usage because he could never get back up to 50 until after a long rest.

 

Am I getting this right? Thanks again for the suggestions!

 

Here you go.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93703-magic-system-comments-welcome/

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/93884-divine-magic-system/

 

 

Thanks!  Your comment below caught my attention because I'm concerned with the same effects (exhaustion, etc.). What I didn't see (and I may have missed it) is whether using LTE for spells is a Limitation for the spells. 

 

 

This is what I'm considering for my campaign. Let me know how you think this compares. I'd like to combine LTE with an Endurance Reserve in this way:

• All spells casters will have suffer the effects of LTE as per RAW, with a REC every 5 hours.
• All spells casters will have an Endurance Reserve with the following characteristics:
  • 40 END reserve (10 AP)
  • 9 REC (6 AP) (I'm thinking of rounding this up to 10 for cleanliness in bookkeeping)
  • Slow REC: every 5 hours (to match the LTE time scale) (-5 Limitation on REC)
  • Total starting cost of Endurance Reserve is 11 CP.
  • Every spell will take the Double Endurance Cost Limitation (-1/2), so they draw from BOTH personal END and the Endurance Reserve.

It costs 11 points, so it's a bit of a penalty during character creation, but it can be bought up with XP. 

 

Case 1 Let's assume a beginning spell costs 3 END and the character has a base of 30 END, 3 SPD, and 10 REC:

• In the first Turn, the character may cast 3 spells for a total of 9/9 END (personal/reserve). If he moves, or is carrying weight, etc., lets assume 1 END per phase, for a total of 12/9 END spent. That will leave the character, after post-segment 12 REC, with 28/31 (personal/reserve totals).
• Turns 2, same thing, resulting in a total END of 26/22.
• He can continue at this rate for 2 more Turns, ending out with 22/4 END after 4 Turns. After casting 12 basic level spells, he's tapped out magically, but not completely incapacitated for other activities.
• As for the LTE, he's been going at a constant rate for almost a minute, but he loses only 1 point of LTE, which brings him down to 29 LTE.

 

Case 2 I'd like it to be a bit more costly here, but I don't want to do a x2 END Limitation because he'd be wiped out after a very short period. Given the same as above, with a x2 END cost Limitation:

• Turn 1: 3 spells cost 18 END, and other activities add to that. Let's round it to 20 END per Turn for simplicity. With a post-segment 12 REC, he's at 20/22 END (personal/Reserve).
• Turn 2: same arrangement, ending after segment 12 with 10/4. He's done with spells after casting only 6 basic ones, and is teetering on exhaustion. 
• LTE rules have him using 2x his REC per turn, so he loses 2 LTE after his 2 turns, capping him at 28 LTE.

The end result with the LTE in both scenarios is that he can't keep going long enough to lose any significant amount of LTE.

• Is there a way to modify the Double END Cost so that it is variable which END it draws from?
• Perhaps more from the personal and less from the Reserve? 
• Can you double the END cost just on the regular END usage in addition to the Double END Cost Limitation? This would seem to combine these two cases in a more desirable way.

Case 3 Or maybe I can simply draw magic from the LTE itself, as you have suggested. Is that worth a limitation on the spells? Let me redo the 2 examples above, drawing from LTE and see what the result is:

• Turn 1: 3 spells at 9 END and other activities totaling 12 END. LTE is now at 21, with personal END at 18 and the END Reserve at 31. Recovery only affects personal END, so the final totally are 21/28/31 (LTE/Personal/Reserve). However, personal END can't exceed LTE, so it's 21/21/31
• Turn 2: same: END 12/12/22
• Turn 3: same: LTE 3/3/13

Again, after 3 Turns of basic spell usage, this guy is wiped for any kind of activity, spells or otherwise, and will need at least a full day or more of REC just to be able to do normal stuff again.

 

I'm not satisfied with any of these!

 

I'm thinking of connecting the END Reserve to LTE, to be calculated in total after the battle. As per case 1 above, after the battle, personal END would be 22 and the Endurance Reserve would be 4. If I compare the total use of the Endurance Reserve of 36 to his normal REC of 10, it is 4x his REC. He'd lose 4 LTE per Turn, and after 4 Turns this drops his LTE from 30 to 14. This seems to be the effect I'm going for, but it is contrived, and really doesn't follow the LTE rules as written (using total END expenditure rather than averaged over extended usage). The LTE RAW don't accomplish what I'm looking for, although my house rule here does. But in the end, it's just too contrived and too hard to explain to someone new to the system. 

 

I'm leaning towards doubling the END cost just on the personal END, while keeping the Double Endurance Cost on each spell as well. Is this kosher?

 

Going back and looking at your quote above, I'm thinking of going with just an LTE rule like you suggest. Is there a Limitation associated with this? -1/2?

 

Thanks again for your suggestions! Sorry for the ridiculously long post. If you made it through, +3 skill levels to your KS: crazy rules discussions.

Charges remove the END cost, so the cost END adds the END cost back in.

 

Fire Jet Blast 7d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +¼) (44 APs); 4 Charges (-1), Costs Endurance (-½), No Range (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

 

This spell can only be used 4 time per day and it cost END. Oh and this spell uses normal damage and not killing so the 7d6 is not as killing as it could look like.

 

This would make it draining to cost a lot of spells fast and also Limitation total number of spells per day with out LTE tracking.

 

Got it. Thanks for the clarifications!

If it's a Fantasy Hero setting, I like using the HS Grimoire as a base for my spells. Each spell includes cost differences for variations on a spell. It's a way to start someone thinking about varying a spell, but gives them a limited amount of variations. In time as they learn how it works in terms of calculating Active Points, Advantages/Limitations, and Real Cost on the fly, they can begin to play with their own variations later on. 

 

As for actual manipulation of the pool, however, I have a limitation set for the VPP that requires extended time between adventures to make the changes, at least until they become much more experienced. But that all fits into the narrative of my spell system: begin small and shaky and become more competent over time, expanding one's repertoire with XP, and then eventually buying off limitations as well. It eventually leads to a person who is (hopefully) more comfortable with building spells on the fly.

Some thing like this? So each spell costs 4 END to use.  the Dart of Ice spell costs up to 12 END, 4 for each dart.

 

22 points: Spell Pool Multipower, 45-point reserve, (45 APs); all slots Restrainable (-½), Costs Endurance (-½)

1f Fire Jet Blast 7d6, Area Of Effect (8m Cone; +¼) (44 APs); 4 Charges (-1), Costs Endurance (-½), No Range (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

1f Bolt of Fire Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6 (45 APs); 2 Charges (-1 ½), Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

1f Bolt of Lighting Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6 (45 APs); 2 Charges (-1 ½), Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼)

2f Dart of Ice Killing Attack - Ranged 2d6, Autofire (3 shots; +¼) (45 APs); Costs Endurance (-½), Restrainable (-½), Gestures (-¼), Incantations (-¼), 32 Charges (+¼)

 

Forgive my ignorance here, but can you really take a "Costs Endurance" limitation on powers that already should cost END? Or is that a reference to an endurance pool?  

I use a modified LTE system. You can find details in a couple of posts in the forum addressing my magic system for current FH campaign.

 

- E

 

Can you point me to those posts? I'd really appreciate it.

a Limitation that requires half END to Activate a spell (in addition to gestures, incantations, etc.) may make sense ... while keeping mage REC and END characteristics deliberately low.

 

What do you mean by "requires half END?" I can't quite envision what you mean here. I'm interested . . . .

What do the non spell casters look like?  Are the swordsmen bricks with brick trick power pools?

 

Just common fantasy tropes. I want the wizards to start off rather tame and grow in strength over time, whereas the swordsmen will already be adept. The oldest versions of D&D used to be like this: the magic users were fairly weak at first, with a steep learning curve, but they grew into their own after about 10 levels or so. Although I'm not trying to recreate or mimic D&D, I like the way they used to do that. Nowadays, with 5e, D&D has just about everyone slinging spells and it's fairly uninteresting to me.

I like the idea of a wizard being worn out after using magic and needing a rest. My inclination is to use LTE rules for magic, but that seems a bit too costly and limiting. A warrior could swing a sword all day, but a wizard could only cast spells until his LTE is drained, and wouldn't be able to do anything even more mundane to be useful because he'd be too exhausted, with no recovery until much later. It seems too punitive. Is there a way to manipulate the LTE rules so that it returns at a rate faster than REC/5 hours (if I remember the rule correctly)?

 

So I'm thinking an Endurance Reserve with the Double Endurance Limitation. This would draw END from the reserve as well as personal END. The END could be recovered, but the Reserve would only recharge as a slower rate. This way a wizard could cast spells until the Reserve is spent, but still have the END to do other non-magical things. He wouldn't become totally useless to the party. The drawback with this is that it doesn't make using magic costly enough for my taste. Is there a way to allow for END to be used when LTE is spent, but then only recovered at the rate of LTE? 

 

If I do go with the Endurance Reserve, what's a good number for that? Any ideas? I'm thinking spells in the 40 AP range for beginners, with some of them, like defense spells, being constant. It seems the Reserve would have to be big enough for defense to be practical for several Turns while also using attack spells. But what's a good number for the Reserve? I have no idea on this one.

 

Any suggestions are most welcome!

Next topic: how to manage Endurance.

 

I like the idea of a wizard being worn out after using magic and needing a rest. My inclination is to use LTE rules for magic, but that seems a bit too costly and limiting. A warrior could swing a sword all day, but a wizard could only cast spells until his LTE is drained, and wouldn't be able to do anything even more mundane to be useful because he'd be too exhausted. It seems too punitive. Is there a way to manipulate the LTE rules so that it returns at a rate faster than REC/5 hours (if I remember the rule correctly)?

 

So I'm thinking an Endurance Reserve with the Double Endurance Limitation. This would draw END from the reserve as well as personal END. The END could be recovered, but the Reserve would only recharge as a slower rate. This way a wizard could cast spells until the Reserve is spent, but still have the END to do other non-magical things. He wouldn't become totally useless to the party. The drawback with this is that it doesn't make using magic costly enough for my taste. 

 

If I do go with the Endurance Reserve, what's a good number for that? Any ideas? I'm thinking spells in the 40 AP range for beginners, with some of them, like defense spells, being constant. It seems the Reserve would have to be big enough for defense to be practical for several Turns while also using attack spells. But what's a good number for the Reserve? I have no idea on this one. Any suggestions?

Here's another idea: maybe each school of magic requires its own separate Power Skill.  Or, here's an alternative: casters have Magic Skill like you'd expect, but are also required to buy Knowledge Skills representing their various schools.  Preparing (and/or casting) a spell would require succeeding at the Magic Skill Roll using the corresponding school's KS as a Complementary Skill Roll.  

 

You could also relate the maximum number of prepared spells in a school (Delayed Effect slots) to the school's KS in some way; maybe a total of the KS's Skill Roll times 5 in Active Points, or maybe the KS roll divided by 3 in slots, meaning a character has to improve their knowledge in each school in order to advance in it.  For that matter, you could set each school's Active Point cap equal to its KS's Skill Roll times 3 in Active Points.

 

I forgot to include the Power Skills in my description. I initially thought a general "magic talent" to make the person eligible for magic, if even in latent form for later, and then a Power Skill for each school. But I think I'm dumping the talent, since it seems a bit redundant and an unfair waste of points.

 

Thanks for all your suggestions!

I used to know how to figure this stuff in my head as well but I've gotten used to letting Hero Designer do all the heavy lifting.  I would consider the 5e Superman I linked to an example of campaign effectiveness limits (as is, he can get up to a 75 STR via the More powerfull than a locamotive slot) rather than a defined Limitation even if only (-0) since future XP could certainly be put towards slots that used the full Reserve if the GM allowed.

 

I need to get Hero Designer, but then there's one more thing for me to learn! I'm really a luddite at heart.

 

I'm a bit intimidated by your Superman example! Did you basically just impose your own limitations on the Multipower in order to allow for flexibility in how many slots you can use at once?

Okay, I think I see now what you're driving at!

 

It's one thing to say "sure you can have a 60 Active Point spell" and another to say "Whoa, you got 5 spells of 60 Active Points going at once!"

 

Sorry for being a little obtuse.

 

 

I suggest requiring spellcasters to use a Mana Pool i.e. an END Reserve dedicated to spells, and make sure all spells cost mana (END) to cast.

 

 

As for the valid observation some have made that a Variable Power Pool is one of the most complex constructs in a complex system and perhaps not for beginning players, if you put a Limitation on them "Only spells from a pre-written and approved list" and "Only spells the character has acquired for their spell book" that will tend to simplify things. I think it could be manageable.

 

You might still allow some spells to have "Costs END only to Activate" for something you might want a spellcaster to be able to maintain long term, like a light spell.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

An incantation to summon a palindromedary: SATOR AREPO TENET OPERA ROTAS

 

Eureka! I was beginning to think I had lost my mind and/or I totally don't understand the rules. Sorry if I went overboard on the explanation, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to be as explicit as possible. And it made things clear in my mind as well.

 

As for the END, I'm thinking of using Long Term Endurance to limit spell usage. I like the idea of a wizard being physically exhausted after a lot of spell usage.

This is a standard feature of multipowers, or it used to be.  There's no reason you have to buy a multipower slot to the full AP available in the pool--but it's usually stupid not to since you're getting an 80% or 90% discount on the slot.

 

There also used to be a limit to the number of spells a caster could have running at once, typically INT/5.  Again this rarely matters since you rarely need to have more than attack, defense, and movement going at any particular time, and people rarely play stupid spellcasters.

 

As you say, it's stupid not to max out each slot, but if it's a fixed slot then you're stuck with it. It seems like maybe a larger pool with an AP cap for each slot would work. And thanks for the suggestion on the INT/5 rule. As you say, you don't really need too many spells going at once.

"Let's say the pool is larger (the number isn't important) and that a VPP could allow a character to have a number of spells that, say, give him a shield, a movement ability, an attack, invisibility, etc., all active at once if they are constant."

 

Well, the short answer is "Yes, and CAN have all those powers active at once."  But to have all those powers active at the same time they would each have to be so small that they are, in practice, utterly ineffective.

 

Going back to the earlier example of the man-at-arms in a dust-up with Mr. Mega Mage - Like I said before, the man-at-arms has his sword, his STR, his Combat Skill Levels, and his Advantages.  Roll all those together and the well constructed melee specialist should be swinging 3d6 HtH RKA.  That's 45 active points.  So using that as a guide, I allow my mage PCs a pool of 45 active points as well for their magic powers.  

 

If we assume that's a 45 pip VPP, and for sake of simplicity we do Mystic Blast (an attack power), Wings of Mana (a movement power), and Sorcerer's Shield (a defense).  Well, it's likely that your defense spell will offer the same, or less, rPD & rED than the man-at-arms's chain mail hauberk, the Flight you buy will be less than the man-at-arms's base Running plus whatever extra he buys, and your Mystic Blast won't penetrate that chain mail hauberk that the man-at-arms is wearing.

 

"No problem," says the mage.  "I'll reshuffle my VPP on the fly into a the Magical Mega Ka-Boom and drop this chump."  Well, if you bought your VPP with Requires a Skill Roll to Change then that comes with a penalty of -1 for every 10 active points.  That's -4 for a 45 point power.  With an INT of 15 and 3 points in the Magic skill, Mr. Mega Mage would have to roll an 8 or less on 3d6 to pull that particular rabbit out of his, um, hat.  

 

That thing you fear just isn't quite the boogyman you make it out to be.  And the level of complication that VPPs add to an already complicated game...  IIRC you said you were trying to make things easy for new players.  I don't feel like this is it.

 

In all honesty, it sounds like you're describing a Multipower. Maybe you're conflating the Pool and the Control Cost? Are you assuming they're both at 45 points? I can't tell from your example. If this is in fact the case, then you can create a VPP that looks like this (let's assume there are -3 limitations on each spell):

• 3d6 HKA (45 AP): Real Cost 11
• 45 m flight (45 AP): Real Cost 11
• 9d6 blast (45 AP): Real Cost 11
• 15 PD/15 ED resistant protection (45 AP): Real Cost 11

There's even one point left in the pool for whatever. Regardless, these aren't paltry spells, and they can all be used limitless times, and several of them simultaneously.

In 6e the maximum Active Points for any individual slot and the maximum Real Points total active do not have to be equal as they did in previous editions.  It is very easy to set a VPP up in 6e where only 1* slot with 60 Active can be used at any one time. It's also quite easy to to create a VPP where the opposite is true - no single slot can have more than 30 Active but have several slots available at one time. 

 

It's interesting you bring that up. There may be something kicking around in my memory from the old Multipower rules and the relation of AP and RP. I was a wiz at this stuff in the '80s, but I'm plenty rusty now and am trying to relearn things in 6e. Everything seems familiar and different at the same time. Regardless, that distinction actually would make some sense as a house rule in order to limit the number of slots.

 

 

For apple to apples comparison sake, it is also possible to create a Multipower where the Reserve is larger than the maximum Active Points of any single slot.  There is no Limitation on the Reserve for this, it's just a way of constructing the entire framework (5e example).

 

 

I may be misunderstanding you, but are you suggesting another house rule, or perhaps a -0 Limitation, that puts a cap on the AP for any slot in the Multipower?

Either I am somehow still not understanding what it is you are actually saying, which I concede is quite possible, or you have not yet understood that the Variable Power Pool does in fact already have what you call for, a "built in limit on how many spells can be active at any one time."

 

Unless you mean a limit to the absolute number of spells, like "only 5 spells no matter how strong or weak the spells themselves are" but in that case the Multipower also doesn't have such a limit so that doesn't make sense either. It's driving me bonkers trying to figure out what you are trying to say.

 

On further thought, let me step back and re-frame this. Maybe you'll detect where my error is if I break down my concerns. I'm looking for a way to balance magic with "normal" gameplay in a fantasy setting (the Holy Grail of fantasy gaming). I'm trying to find a way to:

1. Limit the power of each spell for a beginner, which can be gradually raised over time with XP
2. Limit the number of spells for a beginner, which can also be gradually raised over time with study, scavenging, collecting, or XP
3. Relate the spells to a limited school of magic, connected to a spell book for each school. A wizard may know several schools, but they cannot be mixed and matched. Each book is discrete.
4. All spells should not be all available all the time. There should be some sort of time constraint on how they are studied and prepared before an adventure that constrains just how many spells are available until the wizard can prepare different spells.
5. None of this should be a Vancian arrangement. I want a more organic system.
6. Do all of these without a lot of extra house rules that appear arbitrary or punitive: in other words, keep the meta-gaming to a minimum.
7. Make it all understandable to beginners who have no idea what the hell any of this means.

So after reading, especially Fantasy Hero 6e, the power frameworks seem like the best way to approach this. Each power framework limits the AP available for spells (#1 above), but each also has a potentially unbalancing approach to the number of spells available (concern #2 above).

 

Multipower limits the AP based on the Reserve.

1. Each Multipower represents the spellbook's collection of spells (slots).
2. Each slot's AP cannot exceed the Reserve, so there's a limit for each spell.
3. Even with variable slots (which I wouldn't initially allow anyway), a number of spells could be active simultaneously only as long as their total AP does not exceed the Reserve. So there's still a limit built into it.
4. The Reserve can be initially set low for a beginner, and the reserve and the number of slots could grow over time with XP, study, collection, etc.
5. So what is potentially unlimited is the number of slots in the Multipower. This is something I'm trying to figure out how to regulate without an arbitrary "you can only have x number of slots based on y rule or characteristic." Potentially, as you pointed out, a Multipower could have 20 slots, but there's still a limit to how many of them can be used at once. If the reserve is 50, then the total AP of all the slots cannot exceed 50, regardless of their Real Cost.
6. Even if several slots were available, their total AP would be 50, and therefore only 5 END would be used for them if they were all active at once, the same as if only 1 slot at 50 AP were used.
7. The rules make it a zero phase action to reallocate the slots. I'd like to make this take time so all the slots are not available from phase to phase (another potentially unbalancing problem from concern #4 above).
8. The other problem is that, without a cap on how many slots are available, how does one control the number of spell slots available in a Multipower without setting an arbitrary limit (concern #6 above)?
9. Conversely, another problem is that a low Reserve could make it so that too few spells are available. You could raise the Reserve to accommodate more spells, but then spell inflation may happen unless there is some outside rule added to cap the AP of each spell (similar to the control cost of the VPP), but this adds the arbitrariness of the house rules (concern #6 again).

Variable Power Pool has two limits: the control cost with limits the AP in each spell, and the pool, which limits how many spells are actually available to use. So far so good.

1. Each VPP represents a spellbook, as above. 
2. The pool and the control cost can each be initially set low for beginners, and potentially be bought up for each school of spells through XP.
3. There is a potentially unbalancing problem with how many spells are available for filling the pool when the pool is reallocated (In other words, what limits are there to what can be created for the pool, which is concern #4 above). The obvious solution is to limit reallocation to only spells that have been collected or possibly created/adjusted by an experienced wizard ahead of time in the spellbook. Problem solved here.
4. The other potential problem (also #4 above) is that a VPP could potentially have a greater number of spells in the pool available to use simultaneously because there is no constraint on their combined AP, only on the total Real Cost of the spells in the pool. So if the pool is 50 and the control cost is 40, the spells could be limited in such a way as each spell could have 40 AP, but a low Real Cost, and therefore make many stronger spells (for a beginner) available to use simultaneously (see my previous post on this). If each spell has, say, a total of -3 limitations, the wizard could have 5 spells of 40 AP, each with a Real Cost of 10 each (filling the 50 point pool), and all 5 could potentially be active at once. The potential total AP of the spells being used simultaneously then could be 200 AP, unlike the Multipower, which is limited at 50 AP total in the analogous example above.
5. There is, however, a built in solution that I was not seeing before: if all 5 spells of 40 AP were simultaneously active, that would be 20 END cost per phase! Problem solved, since this simply can't be maintained. A natural limit has been found (concern #6 above).
6. The spells could be reallocated, but there would be a time limit on how and when this can be done, so no readjustment on the fly to create just the right spell available at just the right time (concern #4 above). Characters would be limited by what's in their book, or potentially what they have created with the Invention Skill later in the campaign as they become more experienced and reach "mastery" (maybe through XP expenditure or something, although this is concern #6 above).

This may just be my paranoia at work here, or it may be because of all the munchkins I've played with in the past, but I want to try to head off the abuse before it begins, and do it within the rules as much as possible without arbitrary limits (concern #6 above). But it also all runs the risk of violating concern #7 above: make it easy to understand!

 

In all of this talking I think I have settled on the VPP again (my original inclination). I was curious about trying out a Multipower system, but it seems to introduce more concerns for me than it solves. So in all reality this is all just an academic exercise.

 

Does this clarify what I was trying to say, Lucius?

 

If you've made it this far, congratulations! All comments are welcome!

Unless you mean a limit to the absolute number of spells, like "only 5 spells no matter how strong or weak the spells themselves are" but in that case the Multipower also doesn't have such a limit so that doesn't make sense either. It's driving me bonkers trying to figure out what you are trying to say.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary can't make heads or heads out of it.

 

I think maybe this is what I'm saying. I'll elaborate, but first, wouldn't your palindomedary be unable to make heads or heads out of it? Just curious.

 

 

If a character has a Variable Power Pool with a Pool cost of, say, 15, and works up 50 different possible spells for it, are you somehow under the impression the character can actually have all those spells active at once? Because that's not the case.

 

If one of the spells works out to a Real Cost of 15 and that spell active, guess how many spells the character can have running? One, and only that one.

 

If the character casts 3 spells that are ongoing and each has a Real Cost of 5, how many more spells can the character cast? ZERO. Until dropping one of those 3 active spells, no further spells will be possible.

 

The character could conceivably have up to 15 spells at a time - if they can all be bought at just 1 pt each, and even if they're that weak there can be no more than 15. You can change the Poll value up or down but wherever you set it, there's your limit. No Variable Power Pool allows potentially unlimited numbers of powers at one time - unless you literally invest infinite points.

 

So I think maybe I haven't clearly expressed myself. Sorry. But to use your example, a 15 point pool will have as many spells as whose Real Cost adds up to 15, right? So, as you say, there is a limit to how many spells one could have (1 15-point spell, 15 1-point spells, etc.). But if someone has 15 1-point spells, they could have them all active at once if they can pay the END, correct? Let's say the pool is larger (the number isn't important) and that a VPP could allow a character to have a number of spells that, say, give him a shield, a movement ability, an attack, invisibility, etc., all active at once if they are constant. The attack is the only one that may be instant, and could vary from phase to phase, but this isn't even always the case. A wizard could hold an opponent, cast a shield, drain the opponent, hit him with lighting, all in the space of 4 phases (as long as the Real Cost fits into the pool). This is what I see as potentially unbalancing if the pool isn't capped.

 

The Multipower could have a limitless number of spells, but only a few of them could be active up to the Reserve of the Multipower, correct?

 

So the Multipower has a restraint on what can be used at any one time (the spells' AP vs. Reserve), while the VPP has a restraint on what is available (the spells' RC vs. pool). The Multipower has no cap on each spell's AP other than the Reserve, while the VPP has the control cost to "cap" each spell.

 

So I'm seeing a potential problem with the VPP allowing too many spells available to "be active at once" versus the Multipower. That may not be the best way to express it, but I can't come up with a better way. The Multipower has the potential problem of allowing too many spells to choose from versus the VPP because there is no limit on the slots of a Multipower.

 

*One thing I may not have said yet is that I imagine the wizard being able to "buy up" the pool or reserve with experience points, which would simulate growing expertise.

 

I'm not sure if this sheds any light on any of this. As I said before, I came to realize there are practical limits in a VPP based on the END used for spells, so even though every spell in the pool could be active at once, it would be very short-lived based on natural END limits.

Skill based systems are a lot of what the talk about a new kind of pool has been in the hero system forum thread on revamping the martial arts system.

 

Magic has often come up as something else that could benefit from such a pool.

 

Other than that, my knowledge on skill-based magic is limited.

Can you direct me to that thread?

I think one of the problems that others have with a VPP is that it allows starting characters a lot of spells.

 

For my part, I feel that if you force narrow subdivisions on what applies as a VPP for a certain type of magic, this mitigates that problem.

 

Yes, yes, a thousand time yes! I think the pool is a way to control this, if paired intelligently with the control cost. My complaint was that the Multipower has a built-in limit on how many spells can be active at any one time, while the VPP does not. I like the idea of a Multipower, but the VPP fits more with what I want: a cap of how many Active Points  a spell can have, and how many spells can be fit into the pool. But the VPP potentially allows for all the spells to be active simultaneously. I think my best bet is to not focus on the spells themselves, but on the Endurance used by the spells. If I make the Endurance more precious, fewer spells can be maintained. I think it all works out in the wash with a VPP.

 

But, does anyone have any experience with a Skill-based magic system?