While I like Wizards a lot especially the Thoth-Amon kind (I personally prefer the term Sorcerers). I've always been bugged about Wizards being rather limited (at the early levels).
But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
The second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
1) I was thinking of adding some kind of 'Magic Points' secondary attribute. Tied to Wisdom. I'm not saying that magic points are the best but it would eliminate some of my bugbears.
2) Or just let the players cast any spell they want as their level suggests. So, in essence, they could cast sleep twice a day, etc.
3) Give them an extra spell as their intelligence bonus suggests (I've seen this in a couple of OSR games already).
4) I think it's in Crypts and Things - There's a 'luck attribute' and you can roll on it to see if you can remember the spell you've just cast.
Last option: Or do I just tell myself to STFU and play as god intended. :)
Any advice or thoughts welcome!
Ta'!
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
Feel the same way about it sticking out? Yes. The decision to go with a pseudo-Vancian spellcasting system is definitely a defining choice early in the game, and one upon which tons of ink (real and digital) has been spilled. Are you asking whether we like it/dislike it? I think it is a perfectly valid and playable, if arbitrary, choice.
QuoteThe second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
What are we remedying?
Quote1) I was thinking of adding some kind of 'Magic Points' secondary attribute. Tied to Wisdom. I'm not saying that magic points are the best but it would eliminate some of my bugbears.
2) Or just let the players cast any spell they want as their level suggests. So, in essence, they could cast sleep twice a day, etc.
3) Give them an extra spell as their intelligence bonus suggests (I've seen this in a couple of OSR games already).
4) I think it's in Crypts and Things - There's a 'luck attribute' and you can roll on it to see if you can remember the spell you've just cast.
Spellpoint systems work fine, The ability not to have to choose which spells you think you will need at the beginning of the day will certainly effect the game balance. Fatigue points (or encounter-recharging abilities) are another option. The 'any spell, any time, but consequences' (such as done by Mage: the Ascension) is another option. My questions to you are:
1) What exact problem are you trying to fix? I've poked a little fun about this but I'm serious. You did not lay out what the problem was before asking for advice on fixing it.
2) What games other than OSR (by which I assume we are talking D&D and D&D-alikes) have you played?
3) How far afield are you willing to go? Are we sticking to a class-and-level based system? If yes, are the wizardly/Cleric spell divisions sacrosanct? And a wizard has access to the whole gamut of wizards spells (in general, they still have to find them and put them in their book, but all wizards can cast both divination and necromancy spells, for example)?
1. Look at it differently. You're not really "memorizing and forgetting". It's more like casting a ritual where the preparation is the first part and the actual casting is the second part. Think of it as "holding and unleashing", where the amount of magic you can keep prepared gains as you gain in skill and power. This makes a lot more sense when you use the AD&D "10(?) minutes per spell level" to memorize.
2. Freeball it. Once they learn a spell, they have it. Let them cast that many slots. Or simply total the levels and use it as spell points. They get in a big fight and the magic user wants to take his 3, 3, 2, 1 spell slots and dump into 9 Magic Missiles, do it.
3. Stay with #1 but let Magic-Users sacrifice HPs to cast if they don't have a spell prepared. 1d4 per level of spell.
Doing 1, 3 with Magic-Users and 2 with Clerics differentiates between the two and kind of makes it clear the power of the Magic-User comes from them and their spells, while the Clerics more flexible power is due to flowing from their faith and their god.
As our Durulz friend has pointed out, it would help if you narrowed down what bugs you the most and what your rough end goal is. If you don't have one, and are just brainstorming, that's good too.
Apologies... If I wasn't clear. I thought the title was kind of self-explanatory in what I'd like to fix (or tighten up), no?
The problem for me is that I don't particularly like the idea of spells being forgotten (a la the Vancian magic system). In the same way, I don't like thieves only having 17% to do 'X' for their first few levels. But that another story...
My end goal is to tighten up my OSR game and fashion it in an away that suits me and the group.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;973260My questions to you are:
1) What exact problem are you trying to fix? I've poked a little fun about this but I'm serious. You did not lay out what the problem was before asking for advice on fixing it.
2) What games other than OSR (by which I assume we are talking D&D and D&D-alikes) have you played?
3) How far afield are you willing to go? Are we sticking to a class-and-level based system? If yes, are the wizardly/Cleric spell divisions sacrosanct? And a wizard has access to the whole gamut of wizards spells (in general, they still have to find them and put them in their book, but all wizards can cast both divination and necromancy spells, for example)?
1) Hopefully, I've answered that now, in my second post.
2) Way too many to list.
3) Not very... I'd still like to retain the old school vibe without some of its more cumbersome trappings if you will (cumbersome, in my opinion). So, I'm happy to stick to classes per se. Dividing or considering dividing cleric/wizard spells is somewhat beyond the scope of what I'm asking.
Spell slots are about resource management, which is a big part of what makes good rpg's good as games. So, we should all love them. But it's true that having to pre-select each at the start of the day is an irritating and unnecessary detail. Every D&D game I've played addressed this sort of 'sub-rule' by ignoring it. I.e., you can use your 3 2nd level spells on whatever 2nd level spells you have access to - the only thing you can't do is cast 4 of them.
Quote from: CRKrueger;9732631. Look at it differently. You're not really "memorizing and forgetting". It's more like casting a ritual where the preparation is the first part and the actual casting is the second part. Think of it as "holding and unleashing", where the amount of magic you can keep prepared gains as you gain in skill and power. This makes a lot more sense when you use the AD&D "10(?) minutes per spell level" to memorize.
2. Freeball it. Once they learn a spell, they have it. Let them cast that many slots. Or simply total the levels and use it as spell points. They get in a big fight and the magic user wants to take his 3, 3, 2, 1 spell slots and dump into 9 Magic Missiles, do it.
3. Stay with #1 but let Magic-Users sacrifice HPs to cast if they don't have a spell prepared. 1d4 per level of spell.
Doing 1, 3 with Magic-Users and 2 with Clerics differentiates between the two and kind of makes it clear the power of the Magic-User comes from them and their spells, while the Clerics more flexible power is due to flowing from their faith and their god.
As our Durulz friend has pointed out, it would help if you narrowed down what bugs you the most and what your rough end goal is. If you don't have one and are just brainstorming, that's good too.
Thanks, mate. That's great.
I'm doing a bit of both really... Brainstorming and a bit of fixing (or tightening up really). And just looking to see what other people can add. :)
1) Yeah, this makes sense now. Even just 'reframing' the concept helps settle my nerves. :)
2) That's one of the ways I was thinking about it too - Use the slots that you have. It would make them a bit more powerful at the beginning as well. And more versatile.
3) I think that's a great idea! Fatigue in the way of hit point cost. That would stop people using ridiculously high spells all the time. This could be introduced at level three or something.
Ta'!
Quote from: Larsdangly;973269Spell slots are about resource management, which is a big part of what makes good rpg's good as games. So, we should all love them. But it's true that having to pre-select each at the start of the day is an irritating and unnecessary detail. Every D&D game I've played addressed this sort of 'sub-rule' by ignoring it. I.e., you can use your 3 2nd level spells on whatever 2nd level spells you have access to - the only thing you can't do is cast 4 of them.
I really like the spell slots idea as an abstraction of a Sorcerers limits.
So, I've no real issue with that per se. However, having to choose the spells for that day is a right pain. So, yes, that totally needs to go IMO... How did you generally house rule it?
Off the top of my head, I'd pretty much allow access to spells that you have in your grimoire. But of course, you'd have those limited slots.
Krueger's idea of hit point fatigue is great and would stop players taking the piss at higher levels.
Ta'.
In Microlite-20, it costs HP's to cast spells, but you start with more HP's.
Quote from: cranebump;973274In Microlite-20, it costs HP's to cast spells, but you start with more HP's.
That's true... That's what got me thinking of adding any HP penalty after third level or something like that (I'd have to test it a bit). At least the wizard would have a few at that stage. It would be gnarly at first level! Could you imagine...? ;)
In my Majestic Wilderlands supplements I use a variant of the 4e ritual system. A magic user and cast any spell in his spell book as a ten minute ritual with a cost in components equal 10 times spell level squared. They are limited to casting rituals for spell level equal to HALF of the highest spell level they can cast rounded down. Cost can be gold or silver which I use.
I use this mechanic to flesh out a series of ritual only spell caster like the Runecaster, Artificer, and Theurgist. I use a variant of the 3.X sorercor system for another class called Wizards. They can cast less spells but are more flexible with the ones they do know.
Finally I explain that memorization is mental discipline that constructs a series of magical forms in ones mind. When a spell is cast mana is channeled into the form which creates the spell and destroys the form. Part of the meditation is using the spell book. The form is a magical construct in one's mind created by following the ritual inscribed in the spell book. The inscribing spell books in of itself is a magic ritual and the spell book is a minor magic item and a critical part of the memorization ritual.
Wizards opt for a more generalized system where forms are not attuned to specific spells but only to a spell's power level. Through training a Wizard affixes in his mind the partial forms of a number of spells based on his experience. These partial forms are permanent. The power forms are designed to be created from a memorized ritual that doesn't need a spell book.
Hope this helps.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973272Off the top of my head, I'd pretty much allow access to spells that you have in your grimoire. But of course, you'd have those limited slots.
This has its own consequences (in particular, massive incentive to search out new spells, murder/rob every wizard you run across, etc.) because each new spell you have in your book is one more option you have up at all times. This is not inherently a bad thing, but it might effect the shape of your game. 5e did a thing where you still have to pick a number of spells each morning that you were memorizing, but you were limited in casting based on your slots, not once per time you memorized the spell. I think it works fairly well, is similar to a lot of the fixes we tried for BECMI when we were dissatisfied with the default memorization scheme, and might be another option.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256Any advice or thoughts welcome!
Ta'!
Our houserule since time out of mind has been that spellcasters can choose their spell to cast at the time of casting. So the slot system works a bit like a mana point system.
For my 2nd edition games, I have recently houseruled that wizards get extra spells similarly to cleric bonus spells. (Apparently that's how 3rd and Pathfinder have it as well.)
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256Anyone else feel the same on this?
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/ade55849168fba6a2b4e87b91fb5ac7f/tumblr_mir0puPMG81rjvyh0o1_r1_250.gif)
And so it goes, like a corpse flower bloom, the impulse to trash game-balance is born anew.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256Or do I just tell myself to STFU and play as god intended. :)
Satori.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;973296(https://68.media.tumblr.com/ade55849168fba6a2b4e87b91fb5ac7f/tumblr_mir0puPMG81rjvyh0o1_r1_250.gif)
And so it goes, like a corpse flower bloom, the impulse to trash game-balance is born anew.
Satori.
Maaatt Daaamon.
Silly human... That's why there would be hp loss, or some form of countermeasure, etc. Did you net read the posts.:rolleyes:
Plus, your game balance would not be the same as my game balance.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;973290Our houserule since time out of mind has been that spellcasters can choose their spell to cast at the time of casting. So the slot system works a bit like a mana point system.
For my 2nd edition games, I have recently houseruled that wizards get extra spells similarly to cleric bonus spells. (Apparently that's how 3rd and Pathfinder have it as well.)
That sounds reasonable as well... ta'.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;973289This has its own consequences (in particular, massive incentive to search out new spells, murder/rob every wizard you run across, etc.) because each new spell you have in your book is one more option you have up at all times. This is not inherently a bad thing, but it might effect the shape of your game. 5e did a thing where you still have to pick a number of spells each morning that you were memorizing, but you were limited in casting based on your slots, not once per time you memorized the spell. I think it works fairly well, is similar to a lot of the fixes we tried for BECMI when we were dissatisfied with the default memorization scheme, and might be another option.
That something that could work as well...
Regarding the shape of the campaign. For a start, it's a homebrew setting (Sword & Sorcery with a fuckton of horror). So, any form of magic is going to be very rare (including Sorcerers). That said, if one of my players wanted to play one, then rob, beat or maim the bejesus out of another, in order to aquire his spell book, then that would be highly encouraged on my part as the GM.
That said, there are consequences to every action... So they can also expect reprocussions of some kind.
Quote from: estar;973288In my Majestic Wilderlands supplements I use a variant of the 4e ritual system. A magic user and cast any spell in his spell book as a ten minute ritual with a cost in components equal 10 times spell level squared. They are limited to casting rituals for spell level equal to HALF of the highest spell level they can cast rounded down. Cost can be gold or silver which I use.
I use this mechanic to flesh out a series of ritual only spell caster like the Runecaster, Artificer, and Theurgist. I use a variant of the 3.X sorercor system for another class called Wizards. They can cast less spells but are more flexible with the ones they do know.
Finally I explain that memorization is mental discipline that constructs a series of magical forms in ones mind. When a spell is cast mana is channeled into the form which creates the spell and destroys the form. Part of the meditation is using the spell book. The form is a magical construct in one's mind created by following the ritual inscribed in the spell book. The inscribing spell books in of itself is a magic ritual and the spell book is a minor magic item and a critical part of the memorization ritual.
Wizards opt for a more generalized system where forms are not attuned to specific spells but only to a spell's power level. Through training a Wizard affixes in his mind the partial forms of a number of spells based on his experience. These partial forms are permanent. The power forms are designed to be created from a memorized ritual that doesn't need a spell book.
Hope this helps.
Thanks mate... I really like the idea of components in order to facilitate spell use. The use of a ritual menchanic is cool also.
The momorization explanation seems sound when you put it that way - especially, regarding the spell book use (Krueger helped me there too!). :)
Quote from: The Exploited.;973305Maaatt Daaamon.
Silly human... That's why there would be hp loss, or some form of countermeasure, etc. Did you net read the posts.:rolleyes:
Plus, your game balance would not be the same as my game balance.
People still prattle on about "game balance"? :eek: I thought we had moved past that nonsense.
Quote from: Dumarest;973317People still prattle on about "game balance"? :eek: I thought we had moved past that nonsense.
Hah... Alas, there's always one that feels the need to stick their beak in. ;)
Especially, since he's so obviously 'in tune' with my own personal homebrew setting's balance.
No group I have ever played with felt memorization was 'bad' per se. A little goofy that it's literally fire and forget, but we've always explained that memorization was mere prep time. My personal feeling on the matter is that allowing Wizards to determine spells at time of casting makes them far too versatile and takes off one of the reins Wizards have in OSR.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973305That's why there would be hp loss, or some form of countermeasure, etc. Did you net read the posts.:rolleyes:
Yes, and countless others just like them for more than a dozen years, plus whole editions all of whaich managed to fuck this pooch straight into the ground.
My personal feeling is you're better off playing a completely different fantasy roleplaying game, built to allow spells to be cast the way you want them to be cast.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973305Plus, your game balance would not be the same as my game balance.
Please share whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973272I really like the spell slots idea as an abstraction of a Sorcerers limits.
So, I've no real issue with that per se. However, having to choose the spells for that day is a right pain. So, yes, that totally needs to go IMO... How did you generally house rule it?
Off the top of my head, I'd pretty much allow access to spells that you have in your grimoire. But of course, you'd have those limited slots.
Krueger's idea of hit point fatigue is great and would stop players taking the piss at higher levels.
Ta'.
I'ave always house-ruled this by simply letting magicians cast whatever spells they know, in whatever order and combinations they like, provided they don't exceed their spell slot limits for a day. This comes pretty naturally to most people, I think; it's been decades since my group even discussed the issue!
And this is one of the 5th Ed changes I liked.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;973326Yes, and countless others just like them for more than a dozen years, plus whole editions all of whaich managed to fuck this pooch straight into the ground.
My personal feeling is you're better off playing a completely different fantasy roleplaying game, built to allow spells to be cast the way you want them to be cast.
Yeah, but I couldn't give a cup of blue piss about your personal opinion.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;973326Please share whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.
Haw haw haw.... If you can't grasp that 'overwhelming' concept, from what I've already said then you're as dumb a stump.
Quote from: Larsdangly;973330I'ave always house-ruled this by simply letting magicians cast whatever spells they know, in whatever order and combinations they like, provided they don't exceed their spell slot limits for a day. This comes pretty naturally to most people, I think; it's been decades since my group even discussed the issue!
Thanks for that mate... Yeah, I like the sound of that as well.
Playing a wizard for the first couple of levels, at any rate, is a bit of a pain, as they can only cast that one certain spell. So, if they need it again in the same session then they are out of luck.
Interesting to see that quite a few people are thinking along the same lines.
Quote from: Harlock;973320No group I have ever played with felt memorization was 'bad' per se. A little goofy that it's literally fire and forget, but we've always explained that memorization was mere prep time. My personal feeling on the matter is that allowing Wizards to determine spells at time of casting makes them far too versatile and takes off one of the reins Wizards have in OSR.
I think the forgetfulness has been dealt with... Which is cool. Or at least it makes sense to me now.
As was said in earlier posts, there could be some restrictions put on it. Through fatigue, HP loss, or magic points (or some such). A bit of playtesting would determine the exact nature of any restriction (or not). Of course, the GM is the key to a balanced game and would adapt to anything that might be going awry. Ta'.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973341. . . I couldn't give a cup of blue piss about your personal opinion.
Okay.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973341. . . you're as dumb a stump.
Not always, but that's definitely the safe way to bet.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973344Of course, the GM is the key to a balanced game and would adapt to anything that might be going awry. Ta'.
I was actually going to make that comment on a later post, that GM fiat can fix any imbalance. Sometimes I forget which boards are stirred into an uproar with the words GM and fiat next to one another. Obviously old school gamers are a bit more used to that than the "everything must be balanced at every stage if every level in all situations" crowd.
I swear, my brother-in-law still thinks OSR means the GM and players have an adversarial relationship and that the GM's job is to kill players, not referee the game.
Quote from: Harlock;973355I was actually going to make that comment on a later post, that GM fiat can fix any imbalance. Sometimes I forget which boards are stirred into an uproar with the words GM and fiat next to one another. Obviously old school gamers are a bit more used to that than the "everything must be balanced at every stage if every level in all situations" crowd.
I swear, my brother-in-law still thinks OSR means the GM and players have an adversarial relationship and that the GM's job is to kill players, not referee the game.
Balance, as a concept, should be malleable and flow with the story IMO. That's where any decent GM is worth their salt.
Man, I remember those days though... The Player Vs DM syndrome. Luckily, I think, most people move away from that over time... However, I recently played in a Symbaroum game online that resulted in a TPK. The GM was using our lack of game knowledge against us (I hadn't GM'd or even owned the game at that stage). Congratuaitons god you managed to polish us all off. I'd have prefered if he'd have simply stated, ' I turn all your brains to stone...'.
He's probably still wondering why we all suddenly disappeared from his Skype contacts. :)
In LFG the magic user only learns a limited number of spells but can cast them as many times as they have spell slots available. More like the sorcerer from 5e than the Wizard (or cleric for that matter). Works perfectly well.
I dont think this approach would work well for a magic user who can learn an unlimited number of spells, however. Too much flexibility.
Quote from: Psikerlord;973383In LFG the magic user only learns a limited number of spells but can cast them as many times as they have spell slots available. More like the sorcerer from 5e than the Wizard (or cleric for that matter). Works perfectly well.
I dont think this approach would work well for a magic user who can learn an unlimited number of spells, however. Too much flexibility.
LFG, your sig, right? I'll have a look at that. Cheers!
I'm not all that au fait with the 5e rules to be honest. But I agree with you 100%. The ability to learn an unlimited number of spells would be way over the top.
Ta'.
The 'forgetting' never sat well with me but I liked LotFP's fluff that each spell cast is a unique work of art... that each casting is a solitary creation that is lost as it completes its purpose. Just a different bit of flavor text but I prefer it.
In general I prefer systems with 'spell points' of some sort. The Last Gasp blog (http://www.lastgaspgrimoire.com/do-not-take-me-for-some-turner-of-cheap-tricks/) has a system of casting using spell points, and then desperate casting without them, that I liked a lot and worked well in our Lamentations games before I moved everything over to Renaissance.
The 5e system works well although I'm sure there is some theorycrafting that will tell you why it doesn't. Otherwise there's spellpoints as in RQ or hit points as in White Hack and many other OSR games.
Quote from: Simlasa;973394In general I prefer systems with 'spell points' of some sort. The Last Gasp blog (http://www.lastgaspgrimoire.com/do-not-take-me-for-some-turner-of-cheap-tricks/) has a system of casting using spell points, and then desperate casting without them, that I liked a lot and worked well in our Lamentations games before I moved everything over to Renaissance.
That was an awesome blog. He put one nice little horror adventure too. Too bad he discontinued it.
Quote from: Voros;973415That was an awesome blog. He put one nice little horror adventure too. Too bad he discontinued it.
I love Last Gasp's style.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973363Balance, as a concept, should be malleable and flow with the story IMO. That's where any decent GM is worth their salt.
Man, I remember those days though... The Player Vs DM syndrome. Luckily, I think, most people move away from that over time... However, I recently played in a Symbaroum game online that resulted in a TPK. The GM was using our lack of game knowledge against us (I hadn't GM'd or even owned the game at that stage). Congratuaitons god you managed to polish us all off. I'd have prefered if he'd have simply stated, ' I turn all your brains to stone...'.
He's probably still wondering why we all suddenly disappeared from his Skype contacts. :)
I should probably clarify that a bit. My brother-in-law is younger than me and barely got his teeth into D&D2e before 3rd came out. He's not a killer DM. Quite the opposite: he refuses to play OSR because he thinks it's the GM's job to kill his character. He's an odd duck, but a great guy and good to my wife's sister, so I forgive him.
I said it before fuck balance. The rules should reflect how the setting works. And of all the different parts of a Fantasy RPG, magic is one aspect that is nothing but made up shit. The only issue to consider is whether it fits with the setting you want to use for your campaign. Finally most fantasy RPGs including most editions of D&D are flexible in the types of fantasy they can handle. Tweak it one way it can be used for a low fantasy campaign, tweak it another and everybody is a demigod and so forth.
Adding to my previous reply. Don't worry about the rules, just describe how magic works in plain english. Then figure out the rules to make it happen. If you want to use D&D (any edition) it possible to create an arbitrary magic system. The biggest problem you will run into is unintended side effects that at first glance "trashes" your setting. The thing you need to do about those is not to start with tinkering with the rules. First think about the mages place in society, how one becomes a mage in plain English.
Having whacked out magic in a low fantasy setting where the PC mage is just 1 in a 100,000 is different if you consider the number of mages equal to the number of literate priests in the setting. The former is a case of "Hey shit happens in a fantasy world." The latter is going to have some plausibility issues. Also consider whether other players will have fun with the 1 in a 100,000 whacked out magic mage. It may be plausible but perhaps not fun for the other players to deal with.
To say that you like spell point is insufficient to offer meaningful advice on. You need to spell out in a minimal amount of details in plain english how you like magic to be in your setting, and what set of rules you want to start with.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973363Balance, as a concept, should be malleable and flow with the story IMO. That's where any decent GM is worth their salt.
All dick-waving aside, I really would like to hear more about this - can you give an example?
Quote from: estar;973437I said it before fuck balance.
(http://data.whicdn.com/images/55788631/large.gif)
I agree. After 4th editions Balance At Any Cost, I'm ready to chuck the idea out the window and just wing it.
Don't like memorizations and fire-once spells?
Don't use them.
Okay, we're done here. Somebody get me a beer.
Personally, choosing my loadout of spells ahead of time is the best part of playing a magic user.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973363Balance, as a concept, should be malleable and flow with the story IMO. That's where any decent GM is worth their salt.
The only "story" is "what happened." "Balanced characters" means "it's fun to play any character type." It does not need to be the same sort of fun.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973449Personally, choosing my loadout of spells ahead of time is the best part of playing a magic user.
It certainly required a combo of planning, tactics and expertise to do well.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973341Yeah, but I couldn't give a cup of blue piss about your personal opinion.
Then the rest of us have the right to think your opinion is worth even less than that. Don't spew shit out of your mouth and expect it to be taken as truth.
Thank you for finally convincing me you are no longer worth listening to. The express lane from your tongue to my asshole has been installed.
Quote from: estar;973437To say that you like spell point is insufficient to offer meaningful advice on. You need to spell out in a minimal amount of details in plain english how you like magic to be in your setting, and what set of rules you want to start with.
Sure. In my case it a preference that stems from a set of fantasy metaphysics from other sources... picking and choosing my flavor of make-believe. Original D&D's metaphysics were never my cup of tea. They seemed more based on game concerns than anything else I knew of.
Some later systems, like Earthdawn, tried to build palatable fluff around them and that helped ease my friction with them. But I still go back to a number of other ways of doing it, including DCC's trick of having spells be reusable until you botch it somehow.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973449Don't like memorizations and fire-once spells?
Don't use them.
Okay, we're done here. Somebody get me a beer.
Personally, choosing my loadout of spells ahead of time is the best part of playing a magic user.
I'd like to buy you a beer.
Quote from: Simlasa;973466But I still go back to a number of other ways of doing it, including DCC's trick of having spells be reusable until you botch it somehow.
Which I think first came from Dragon Warrior's mystic class - make a roll each time you cast. When you fail the roll, no more spells until the next day. Something like that.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973272So, I've no real issue with that per se. However, having to choose the spells for that day is a right pain. So, yes, that totally needs to go IMO... How did you generally house rule it?
er... its supposed to be a pain. It forced the caster classes to prep loadouts and work with what they have. Also unless you get lucky you tend to not have much more than you can cast in your book anyhow for a while, possibly the whole campaign if spells other than your own research are few and far far between. And there will be spells you possibly just cant ever learn anyhow.
As for house ruling it. We never did. It works fine as is.
If I want something else then theres 5e D&D. No more fire and forget. And slots are now more like pseudo spell points.
Think of the spells as specialized shells in a rifle. Each day the casters load up what they hope will be useful and go. That might mean they selected badly and either have to make do or get creative.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973450The only "story" is "what happened." "Balanced characters" means "it's fun to play any character type." It does not need to be the same sort of fun.
Nope... What's 'happening'.
Okay, we're done here, someone get me a Jameson.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973449Don't like memorizations and fire-once spells?
Don't use them.
A tad late there... Wasn't that established a few pages ago?
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973449Personally, choosing my loadout of spells ahead of time is the best part of playing a magic user.
Oh... That's nice.
Okay, we're done here, someone get me a Jameson.
Quote from: Omega;973490er... its supposed to be a pain. It forced the caster classes to prep loadouts and work with what they have. Also unless you get lucky you tend to not have much more than you can cast in your book anyhow for a while, possibly the whole campaign if spells other than your own research are few and far far between. And there will be spells you possibly just cant ever learn anyhow.
As for house ruling it. We never did. It works fine as is.
If I want something else then theres 5e D&D. No more fire and forget. And slots are now more like pseudo spell points.
Think of the spells as specialized shells in a rifle. Each day the casters load up what they hope will be useful and go. That might mean they selected badly and either have to make do or get creative.
Sure, that's true of course... However, We've already discussed the 'whys' of restricting magic users.
I'm really interested in the 'hows'. By that I mean, moving away from the traditional 'you must pick 'x' spells today'. But there are other restrictions to be imposed (when decided on), such as fatigue, HP cost, etc.
I probably should have stated, that the idea of this homebrew, is a low fantasy setting. Therefore, no one would EVER go beyond level 10. Gaining experience will be a very slow affair and with virtually no magic items. Now, this might sound a bit boring to the traditional D&D player, and I totally get that. But our group likes low fantasy games. Yet, we still want to go the OSR route instead of WFRP (1st & 2nd editions) which we love but have played them to death.
So, the magic user would be quite underpowered for quite a while. So, I'd like to at least give him a few spell choices. The setting's tone is heavily based off 'Beyond the Wall OSR RPG'. That is to say, that a Level 5 fighter is considered one of the best in the And at Level 10 your character is probably some kind of King (and is already looking at character retirement).
Quote from: Psikerlord;973470Which I think first came from Dragon Warrior's mystic class - make a roll each time you cast. When you fail the roll, no more spells until the next day. Something like that.
I remember the Mystics from Dragon Warriors. :) Great little game that...
I do like some kind of 'spell burn out' system. In WFRP (2e) if you botch your roll you could be in some god awful trouble. Personally, I like magic to always come at a price (a la the S&S genre). This is handled very well in Symbaroum. A caster will get temporarily corruption every time a spell is cast. Should he go beyond his threshold (without waiting to recover), then he can gain mutations, etc. Even worse then that though, he could turn into an abomination and the character is lost forever as a midless killing machine. So, you've got to be exceedingly carful when using any type of magic.
Of course, that is applicable to Symbaroum given the origin of magic within the game, so it may not be suitable for every other setting. But I like it in the context and suits the game's dark tone. :)
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973452Then the rest of us have the right to think your opinion is worth even less than that. Don't spew shit out of your mouth and expect it to be taken as truth.
Thank you for finally convincing me you are no longer worth listening to. The express lane from your tongue to my asshole has been installed.
Well, if I've convinced you that I'm not worth listening to, then I've done my job. :) Happy days! I'll truly miss your insightful comments. Bye bye...
Oh, but before you toddle off, I should point out that my comments to Black Vulmea were in response to his snarky comments at the beginning of the thread - So, just to put it in a bit of context and all.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973452Don't spew shit out of your mouth and expect it to be taken as truth.
Haw haw... I don't expect anything from anyone. And anything I say should be approached with skepticism, just like everyone else.
Quote from: Simlasa;973394The 'forgetting' never sat well with me but I liked LotFP's fluff that each spell cast is a unique work of art... that each casting is a solitary creation that is lost as it completes its purpose. Just a different bit of flavor text but I prefer it.
In general I prefer systems with 'spell points' of some sort. The Last Gasp blog (http://www.lastgaspgrimoire.com/do-not-take-me-for-some-turner-of-cheap-tricks/) has a system of casting using spell points, and then desperate casting without them, that I liked a lot and worked well in our Lamentations games before I moved everything over to Renaissance.
Cheers for the link! I'll take a gander.
I like spell points as well. It's a good simple way of managing spells as a resource, and you know exactly what you limitations are. I like in RQ the way you can store magic points in Staffs, etc. Always give a wizard an excuse to carry a staff! And add to that some kind of botch system and you got some good gaming fun there. :)
Funny, I've read quite a lot of the supplements for LoTFP but not the actual core book. But I quite like the idea of how they handle spells from what you've described.
I've just finished reading Death Frost Doom... A rather cheery sort of adventure! :) Great atmosphere in that supplement though.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973503I like spell points as well. It's a good simple way of managing spells as a resource, and you know exactly what you limitations are.
Another thing I like about Last Gasp's spell point system is that spell points are rolled randomly for the day and the PC Magic User doesn't necessarily know how many points they get for the day. Adding to the vagueries of magic.
Spells generally go off as intended, until you're out of points and pushing it.
Quote from: Simlasa;973518Another thing I like about Last Gasp's spell point system is that spell points are rolled randomly for the day and the PC Magic User doesn't necessarily know how many points they get for the day. Adding to the vagueries of magic.
Spells generally go off as intended, until you're out of points and pushing it.
That sounds very interesting, by varying the spell points. I wouldn't have thought of that, to be honest. As you say, it takes into account the ephemeral nature of magic and the ebb and flow of its nature. It could be interesting too, if they varied again, in different locations as well. For places that were more or less 'in-tune' with magic. So, I could see a lot of dark rituals be practiced at specific locations, and then the heroes being drawn to them in order to stop such nefarious shenanigans.
I think pushing magic should have consequences as well. I mean, who couldn't do with an extra tentacle or eyeball? Muhah! ;)
While not entirely appropriate for a low-magic fantasy game, I also have to recommend the Earthdawn spell-system. It is very tied into the metaphysics of the game-world (& the nasty lovecraftian Horrors that showed up when the mana spike happened). Here's a decent old thread with a good, very basic, summary: https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?121399-Earthdawn-Splain-the-magic-system!
QuoteIn Earthdawn, some people can cast spells by manipulating magical energy. However, manipulating magical energy directly is dangerous for a number of reasons; the raw power can injure you and it can attract the attention of Horrors, who are a bit like Tribe 8's Z'bri, without being quite as cool.
In any event, you'd like to shield yourself from damage, so instead of manipulating the magic directly, you put it in a "matrix", which holds it for you in a way that lets you manipulate it safely. However, you can only have one spell in a given matrix at a time, and changing the spell that you have in a matrix is a difficult and time-consuming process.
If you want to be able to use a spell in a fight, it's much easier if you put it in a matrix beforehand. It's a bit like memorizing spells from AD&D. Unlike AD&D, once you have a spell in a matrix, you can cast it as many times as you like. This is balanced in Earthdawn by the fact that spells almost always have "to hit" rolls, and that it takes multiple rounds to cast more powerful spells.
The matrices themselves are "Talents", or magically enhanced skills, and if you have a high rank in a spell matrix, you can store more powerful spells. Eventually, as your character advances, he'll get access to more matrices.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256While I like Wizards a lot especially the Thoth-Amon kind (I personally prefer the term Sorcerers). I've always been bugged about Wizards being rather limited (at the early levels).
But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
The second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
What I have done:
A) Mana Points = Level x Intelligence / 4. Spell cost = Level of spell.
Result: Increased versatility, more low level spells, fewer high level spells. Controlling spells known is
very important, other wise you'll wish for LFQW.
B) Spells as standard, but knowledge not tied to spell slots, and lower level spells castable with higher level slots.
Result: Same number of spells as before, but versatility increases. A 7th level wizard can still drop two
fireballs and four
magic missiles, but the players will actually seek out utilitarian spells, and be able to use them. Sometimes, the tears of a magician sacrificing a 4th level slot for
feather fall are tasty.
Also, this effectively turns memorization into "spell points" with a minimum amount of work. The total number of spells doesn't change, it's just that the magician has the skill to use a fraction of his mana more efficiently to cast spells of greater complexity.
Furthermore, at first level I have magicians know their INT bonus in additional first level spells. A useful boost at levels 1-3, but doesn't overshadow the martial types later.
C) Magicians can cast a number of spells per day equal to Level + INT mod. Of these, magicians can only cast 1+ INT mod of their highest level spells.
Result: Just trying this out now. Simplest, with one caveat to stem fireballorrhea.
With all schemes, spell knowledge is restricted to research, barter, or salvage. Magicians don't get automatic spells in their spell book each level.
(Because I'm answering as I read)
Quote from: The Exploited.;973496Sure, that's true of course... However, We've already discussed the 'whys' of restricting magic users.
I'm really interested in the 'hows'. By that I mean, moving away from the traditional 'you must pick 'x' spells today'. But there are other restrictions to be imposed (when decided on), such as fatigue, HP cost, etc.
If it was me, I would let the
players decide if picking their spells for the day was tedious or not.
That said, you can just say that learning spell formulae are like learning specialized skills. You don't simply forget how to do an appendectomy. However, if your planning on transitioning from general surgery to something more specialized, you can spend some considerable time an effort performing a fellowship into a different area. You make there be a significant cost to change the spells in the spell book. An extra spells that the character has access to may not be castable, but perhaps they can write scrolls or create items with them.
ACKS is a good example of this.
Saying old D&D's Jack Vance inspired magic is "the wizard forgets spells" is like saying that an archer running out of arrows means he forgets how to use a bow.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;973638Saying old D&D's Jack Vance inspired magic is "the wizard forgets spells" is like saying that an archer running out of arrows means he forgets how to use a bow.
True, but I've found it's not really worth arguing about.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;973642True, but I've found it's not really worth arguing about.
But that's why we have the Internet.
Quote from: Telarus;973537While not entirely appropriate for a low-magic fantasy game, I also have to recommend the Earthdawn spell-system. It is very tied into the metaphysics of the game-world (& the nasty lovecraftian Horrors that showed up when the mana spike happened). Here's a decent old thread with a good, very basic, summary: https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?121399-Earthdawn-Splain-the-magic-system!
Thanks for that link mate... A lot of people seem to rate the magic system in Earthdawn. The matrix idea seems interesting. For the Mana spikes (or botches, if they are similar) I like the idea of nasty Lovecraftian abominations showing up (the odd time). Keeps the players getting too cocky! :)
Quote from: Baron Opal;973571What I have done:
A) Mana Points = Level x Intelligence / 4. Spell cost = Level of spell.
Result: Increased versatility, more low level spells, fewer high level spells. Controlling spells known is very important, other wise you'll wish for LFQW.
B) Spells as standard, but knowledge not tied to spell slots, and lower level spells castable with higher level slots.
Result: Same number of spells as before, but versatility increases. A 7th level wizard can still drop two fireballs and four magic missiles, but the players will actually seek out utilitarian spells, and be able to use them. Sometimes, the tears of a magician sacrificing a 4th level slot for feather fall are tasty.
Also, this effectively turns memorization into "spell points" with a minimum amount of work. The total number of spells doesn't change, it's just that the magician has the skill to use a fraction of his mana more efficiently to cast spells of greater complexity.
Furthermore, at first level I have magicians know their INT bonus in additional first level spells. A useful boost at levels 1-3, but doesn't overshadow the martial types later.
C) Magicians can cast a number of spells per day equal to Level + INT mod. Of these, magicians can only cast 1+ INT mod of their highest level spells.
Result: Just trying this out now. Simplest, with one caveat to stem fireballorrhea.
With all schemes, spell knowledge is restricted to research, barter, or salvage. Magicians don't get automatic spells in their spell book each level.
(Because I'm answering as I read)
If it was me, I would let the players decide if picking their spells for the day was tedious or not.
That said, you can just say that learning spell formulae are like learning specialized skills. You don't simply forget how to do an appendectomy. However, if your planning on transitioning from general surgery to something more specialized, you can spend some considerable time an effort performing a fellowship into a different area. You make there be a significant cost to change the spells in the spell book. An extra spells that the character has access to may not be castable, but perhaps they can write scrolls or create items with them.
ACKS is a good example of this.
Thanks for that! :) The Mana point sytem, in the way that you described it, seems pretty solid to me. Plus, I really like the Magic user having to sacrifice their higher spells as the game dictates (as in your feather fall example). And I get what you are sayng about limiting spell knowlege. Again, I totally agree and I'd implement limatations in my own game.
I'd be the same... No free spells just becase you've reached a new level. I'd really like to encourage the 'groundwork' in order for them to get any new spells, etc. It's have the fun!
Regarding the point you made about players picking their spells at the start of the day. On reflection, I'd say you're right about that too. It should be the players choice and if they want to go that route and I'd be happy to facilitate them.
I've heard of ACKS alright, but I don't know much about it, but I'll have a look out for it.
Thanks!
Quote from: The Exploited.;973678Thanks for that! :)
You're welcome!
QuoteThe Mana point sytem, in the way that you described it, seems pretty solid to me. Plus, I really like the Magic user having to sacrifice their higher spells as the game dictates (as in your feather fall example). And I get what you are sayng about limiting spell knowlege. Again, I totally agree and I'd implement limatations in my own game.
I hope you're referencing method B. For grins I messed around with a spreadsheet, and the resulting numbers for A) only vaguely match my memories. As I remember, most of the group were spell casters or multiclassed. And there was a lot of spells thrown about defensively before adventures. The math is a bit out of whack, and I'm probably forgetting something important about it.
B has worked well, and isn't that much different than btb.
C is going alright at the moment, but I'm waiting to see if it is simpler, but too simple.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
Yeah, I have thought it seemed silly since the first time I heard about it in 1980. I don't think it's as silly as I used to, but I still almost never choose such a magic system. If I do want a spell to be limited in casting frequency, I tend to prefer other mechanics/reasons/explanations why/how it isn't spammable. Such limits can be interesting and add something to play, or it can just be the spell simply doesn't work more than once per day per caster (or whatever), but the caster forgetting and need to re-memorize rarely feels right to me.
QuoteThe second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
1) I was thinking of adding some kind of 'Magic Points' secondary attribute. Tied to Wisdom. I'm not saying that magic points are the best but it would eliminate some of my bugbears.
Yep. My solution, as for all the other things I didn't like about D&D, was to play TFT & GURPS instead. (Literally no bugbears, either. ;) ) Their magic systems tend to have spells cost fatigue points that are based on strength and/or health. Can also be IQ, wisdom, will, or its own stat (mana), but by having a limit that recharges over time and/or with rest, you get a more natural-seeming mechanic that also interacts with other game mechanics. More powerful spells can require more energy, some spells can take variable power levels for more or less effect, you can have techniques for lowering cost, apprentices casting spells to lend their power to you, etc. It's not an easy thing to just hand-wave onto a spell list not designed for it and hope it's balanced, though. It works best when smart game developers have meticulously balanced and playtested it, etc.
Quote2) Or just let the players cast any spell they want as their level suggests. So, in essence, they could cast sleep twice a day, etc.
3) Give them an extra spell as their intelligence bonus suggests (I've seen this in a couple of OSR games already).
4) I think it's in Crypts and Things - There's a 'luck attribute' and you can roll on it to see if you can remember the spell you've just cast.
There are of course many ways you can do it. I don't particularly like your 2 3 or 4.
Others I like to use sometimes (usually combined with the mana points approach):
* Ingredient requirements. Spells consume ingredients which you need to find, get, store, carry, not get destroyed, use up.
* Tools. Different spells might also require different equipment which you need to find, get, carry, ready to use, etc, but don't get used up.
* Penalties to re-cast a spell if you don't wait a certain period, either per caster or per subject. Combined with risks of accident which apply the worse the modified roll result is, means it can be safe to cast a spell periodically, but have problems of some sort if you try to cast it very frequently.
* Using up environmental magic resources. Depending on the theory of what does the magic, that may get strained by frequent use of powerful or specific spells. Maybe the spells work via elementals or djinn or spirits or something, and there are only so many around and they get tired or go away after being bent to someone's will. Or maybe there is only so much ambient mana and it gets used up and slowly replenishes, or maybe some mix.
* Some spells may be limited as to when they can be cast. Noon, midnight, moonrise, sunset, when lightning strikes, when someone dies, as you fall asleep or wake, as you pull a hair out of the subject, etc.
Quote from: Skarg;973823Others I like to use sometimes (usually combined with the mana points approach):
* Ingredient requirements. Spells consume ingredients which you need to find, get, store, carry, not get destroyed, use up.
* Tools. Different spells might also require different equipment which you need to find, get, carry, ready to use, etc, but don't get used up.
* Penalties to re-cast a spell if you don't wait a certain period, either per caster or per subject. Combined with risks of accident which apply the worse the modified roll result is, means it can be safe to cast a spell periodically, but have problems of some sort if you try to cast it very frequently.
* Using up environmental magic resources. Depending on the theory of what does the magic, that may get strained by frequent use of powerful or specific spells. Maybe the spells work via elementals or djinn or spirits or something, and there are only so many around and they get tired or go away after being bent to someone's will. Or maybe there is only so much ambient mana and it gets used up and slowly replenishes, or maybe some mix.
* Some spells may be limited as to when they can be cast. Noon, midnight, moonrise, sunset, when lightning strikes, when someone dies, as you fall asleep or wake, as you pull a hair out of the subject, etc.
This is it mate... Forgetting spells, after some really good explanations here, feel alright to me now. So, it's not a issue for me anymore. I'm happy enough with some sort of spell limitations as well. So, if I did go the rout of spells dissolving from the mind after use, that makes sense for only that spell a day.
I guess it's just down to personal game preference. So, I'll probably go the magic points/mana route now. As you pointed out it feels pretty natural. So, the character recover MPs after a given space of time (and proper rest!). I see dealing with forces that we humans were not meant to meddle should be pretty strenuous as well dangerous. :) And the more powerful spells are going to cost you dearly.
Thanks for those suggestions mate. I really didn't like the 'luck thing' in Crypts and Things. It's just far too nebulous and I don't see a decent vector to actually make it work.
The idea of a cumulative fumble is cool too when a player decides to 'push' his or her spell use.
Limiting spells to different times is cool as well - Given the ebb and flow of magical energies (makes them feel a bit like rituals, which I like). So, that's a nice touch to have them performed at certain periods of the day (or Lunar phases, etc.).
I'm still thinking about the cosmology at the moment, so I'm not 100% sure of the origin of magic yet. Some of it will definitely be Lovecraftian in nature (derived from comic entities). I was also thinking that magic is something a kin to a 'science' (Mcguffin!) given the planets nature.
I would like some shamanistic magic too, similar to the science bit, but has been tapped into by more primitive cultures without the academic study that Wizards have to do. They are just manipulating it in a different way.
One other cool thing about going the MP route is that a caster can decide to spend more MPs to customize the spell's effect. So, if it was just a levitate spell they could pay more points to maybe slowly float forward as well, etc.
Thanks!
I'm glad to have been able to offer something helpful. It sounds like you've got what you want.
The tricky parts for me are predicting what will work the way I'd like for purposes of balance and exploits players may come up with.
I like cumulative modifiers because it gives the option of caution or pushing despite danger. There can also be modifiers for things like how long you take to cast a spell, missing/substitute ingredients, how good the conditions are, etc. And it means that as a character gets better, they naturally can do things more frequently or faster or whatever... but the whatever also leaves a lot of room for potential unforeseen/untested tricks players may figure out. I find though that having only the safe end of the failure result tables known, and "mysterious GM tables of fun failures" when they push it, keeps most players mostly not trying to exploit that side of it, at least. When players know all the rules then they tend to push the limits, but when there's a safe way and an unknown possibly dangerous way, many players will err on the side of caution more often. (Except when they don't... :-D )
Quote from: Skarg;973946I'm glad to have been able to offer something helpful. It sounds like you've got what you want.
The tricky parts for me are predicting what will work the way I'd like for purposes of balance and exploits players may come up with.
I like cumulative modifiers because it gives the option of caution or pushing despite danger. There can also be modifiers for things like how long you take to cast a spell, missing/substitute ingredients, how good the conditions are, etc. And it means that as a character gets better, they naturally can do things more frequently or faster or whatever... but the whatever also leaves a lot of room for potential unforeseen/untested tricks players may figure out. I find though that having only the safe end of the failure result tables known, and "mysterious GM tables of fun failures" when they push it, keeps most players mostly not trying to exploit that side of it, at least. When players know all the rules then they tend to push the limits, but when there's a safe way and an unknown possibly dangerous way, many players will err on the side of caution more often. (Except when they don't... :-D )
That's true... I think it will need a few playtests to get the right balance. Hopefully, it will be a long(ish) running campaign so that would give me time to smooth over the kinks.
Exactly what you said there mate! Cumulative penaties give that sense of drama where the players are gambling to push themselves but are unsure at the same time. I love it. :) Failures as long as they are handled correctly are usually the most fun for me as a player anyway. Those type of mechanics can really enhance a game overall! Cheers again.
This thread has been a real gem for me so far...
I really appreciate everyone taking the time to help me out!
Many thanks! :)
Rob.
How many people arguing about "Vancian" magic in RPGs have actually read the Jack Vance stories in question?
Wizards don't "forget" spells after they cast them. The "Memorization" is a process of enchanting material components (yes, they are magic up ahead of time), and impressing magic energies upon the mind. When a spell is cast these magical energies are released. Each spell has a different energy pattern, so each spell use needs to be preselected and "programed" individually.
It makes sense in teh stories, and in the initial contaext of D&D magic users as battlefield artillery. A limited number of preselected artillery rounds available for the day is part of the game.
For a D&D game that allows wizards to cast any spell they know, subject to a limitation on how many spells they know, or cast minor cantrips as long as they make a succesful skill roll, or cast longer, more powerful rituals check out Beyond the Wall.
D&D Vancian magic models Vancian wizards, well one sort of them, very well. It does a very poor job of modeling Merlin or the wizards of Earthsea.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256While I like Wizards a lot especially the Thoth-Amon kind (I personally prefer the term Sorcerers). I've always been bugged about Wizards being rather limited (at the early levels).
But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
The second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
1) I was thinking of adding some kind of 'Magic Points' secondary attribute. Tied to Wisdom. I'm not saying that magic points are the best but it would eliminate some of my bugbears.
2) Or just let the players cast any spell they want as their level suggests. So, in essence, they could cast sleep twice a day, etc.
3) Give them an extra spell as their intelligence bonus suggests (I've seen this in a couple of OSR games already).
4) I think it's in Crypts and Things - There's a 'luck attribute' and you can roll on it to see if you can remember the spell you've just cast.
Last option: Or do I just tell myself to STFU and play as god intended. :)
Any advice or thoughts welcome!
Ta'!
5e solves your issue quite nicely. Prepared spells equal level plus Int modifer use how you will until your spell slots are out with cantrips worth a damn at will. 1st-2nd level wizard? She has 3-4 at will tricks and likely 5-6 1st level spells prepared spells to use 3-4 times. Useful but not a game changer in the least.
Quote from: DavetheLost;973983How many people arguing about "Vancian" magic in RPGs have actually read the Jack Vance stories in question?
Wizards don't "forget" spells after they cast them. The "Memorization" is a process of enchanting material components (yes, they are magic up ahead of time), and impressing magic energies upon the mind. When a spell is cast these magical energies are released. Each spell has a different energy pattern, so each spell use needs to be preselected and "programed" individually.
This is true, but I don't see how it changes anything. It's not like EGG could have put in his books, "this spell selection scheme is exactly like the magic in the Jack Vance novels of..." He wrote out rules. The whole 'memorization' and 'forgetting' bit is a cultural shorthand for those rules which isn't exactly accurate, but not in themselves a horrible interpretation.
Quote from: Marleycat;9740425e solves your issue quite nicely. Prepared spells equal level plus Int modifer use how you will until your spell slots are out with cantrips worth a damn at will. 1st-2nd level wizard? She has 3-4 at will tricks and likely 5-6 1st level spells prepared spells to use 3-4 times. Useful but not a game changer in the least.
True enough, sounds pretty close alright. :)
Quote from: Willie the Duck;974297This is true, but I don't see how it changes anything. It's not like EGG could have put in his books, "this spell selection scheme is exactly like the magic in the Jack Vance novels of..." He wrote out rules. The whole 'memorization' and 'forgetting' bit is a cultural shorthand for those rules which isn't exactly accurate, but not in themselves a horrible interpretation.
While Gygax was inspired by Jack Vance's description of magic the point was to have wizards in his Greyhawk campaign not to run a Dying Earth campaign. What people forget that Gygax designed an initial version version of the magic system and then altered and tweaked throughout the campaign until he settled on the version that appeared in OD&D.
The magic system of OD&D is not a depiction of anything other than what worked in Gary's campaign. If a referee, like the OP, doesn't like how it work then he needs to do that process himself to come up with something that person feel works right for him.
For myself, I took the OD&D magic system added a ritual system where caster can cast spell as a 10 minute ritual in addition use a type of treasure called viz which is magic in physical form to allow him to cast spells but have it remained "memorized". I played a number of campaigns where I altered and tweaked my ideas, like the costs, and then wrote it.
Since "magic" is completely arbitrary a referee has a lot of leeway to come up with something that fits his mind's eye view of what it means.
Quote from: estar;974327While Gygax was inspired by Jack Vance's description of magic the point was to have wizards in his Greyhawk campaign not to run a Dying Earth campaign. What people forget that Gygax designed an initial version version of the magic system and then altered and tweaked throughout the campaign until he settled on the version that appeared in OD&D.
The magic system of OD&D is not a depiction of anything other than what worked in Gary's campaign. If a referee, like the OP, doesn't like how it work then he needs to do that process himself to come up with something that person feel works right for him.
If what I said contradicts that, then I misspoke.
My comment on Vance was meant as a "this is why it works the way it works" not as a "this is the only way it should work". There are a lot of stories of magic out there that D&D does not model well at all.
I think variant magic systems have probably been one of the most common house rules for D&D. And many other games take very different approaches, suggesting that the D&D Vancian fire-and-forget approach is far from one size fits all. It certainly is not my favorite approach to RPG magic.
Quote from: DavetheLost;974352My comment on Vance was meant as a "this is why it works the way it works" not as a "this is the only way it should work". There are a lot of stories of magic out there that D&D does not model well at all.
I got that but what important not Gygax using Vance as a starting point but the process he used to get to the published game. If a referee wants a decent magic system for their campaign then the sure way of doing that is to use Gygax's process. Start out with something based on whatever inspires you, and then play over and over again altering and tweaking things until it works like you want it too.
Quote from: Skarg;973823* Penalties to re-cast a spell if you don't wait a certain period, either per caster or per subject. Combined with risks of accident which apply the worse the modified roll result is, means it can be safe to cast a spell periodically, but have problems of some sort if you try to cast it very frequently.
Interesting. I'd like this for any system* where there is a tendency for an MU to cast the same spell repeatedly. If for no other reason than to get some variety in what the MU does.
* However, I'm not sure what system that would be.
Quote from: DavetheLost;973983How many people arguing about "Vancian" magic in RPGs have actually read the Jack Vance stories in question?
No clue. I read Vance's Dying Earth stuff way back in the day and reading it didn't change my preference for spell point systems. I highly doubt there is any correlation between reading Dying Earth and preferring one system over another though. Fire and forget seems a reasonably accurate high level summation of what Vance described as to how the mages of the Dying Earth impressed spells on their minds, etc. etc. etc.
Quote from: estar;974358I got that but what important not Gygax using Vance as a starting point but the process he used to get to the published game.
Important in what sense? Is there any evidence that designers today are unaware that trial, error, and correction is one aspect of a design process?
Quote from: Bren;974597Important in what sense? Is there any evidence that designers today are unaware that trial, error, and correction is one aspect of a design process?
I am sure most are aware of it but doing it to extent that Gygax did not so much. The situation is understandable as most publishers have deadlines and limited time to devote to individual project and can't take a year or two to put a supplement or game through the wringer multiple times.
Having done both, my conclusion that extended playtesting with multiple groups of players is the best process to use for development. Provided you can spare the time and generate the opportunities to do the testing.
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256While I like Wizards a lot especially the Thoth-Amon kind (I personally prefer the term Sorcerers). I've always been bugged about Wizards being rather limited (at the early levels).
But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
The second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
1) I was thinking of adding some kind of 'Magic Points' secondary attribute. Tied to Wisdom. I'm not saying that magic points are the best but it would eliminate some of my bugbears.
2) Or just let the players cast any spell they want as their level suggests. So, in essence, they could cast sleep twice a day, etc.
3) Give them an extra spell as their intelligence bonus suggests (I've seen this in a couple of OSR games already).
4) I think it's in Crypts and Things - There's a 'luck attribute' and you can roll on it to see if you can remember the spell you've just cast.
Last option: Or do I just tell myself to STFU and play as god intended. :)
Any advice or thoughts welcome!
Ta'!
I suppose you've not played DCC? In DCC, characters have less spells total than in standard OSR games, but they cast by making rolls of D20+INT+Level versus a DC of 12+spell level.
If they make the check, the spell functions (and is more powerful the higher the roll was). If they fail the check they can't cast it again for the rest of the day. But as long as they succeed, they can keep casting.
Quote from: RPGPundit;975408I suppose you've not played DCC? In DCC, characters have less spells total than in standard OSR games, but they cast by making rolls of D20+INT+Level versus a DC of 12+spell level.
If they make the check, the spell functions (and is more powerful the higher the roll was). If they fail the check they can't cast it again for the rest of the day. But as long as they succeed, they can keep casting.
Hey mate, I've not played it yet, but I bought it last week (and Hubris!). I've only scanned it because I've been mad busy with work. I love the character's flavour. At first, I thought the 'funky dice' would be a bit of hard work, but it works really well. There's an online die roller for guys who don't want to buy the app (so that's really handy).
I'm loving it so far, and I've also bought the app. The magic, from what you've said seems very cool too (an easy formula to use). So you can cast away until you screw up! :) That works well into the narrative I wanted. Sure, you can cast magic but it's unpredictable and dangerous. The way it should be! :)
Cheers!
Quote from: The Exploited.;973256While I like Wizards a lot especially the Thoth-Amon kind (I personally prefer the term Sorcerers). I've always been bugged about Wizards being rather limited (at the early levels).
But the one thing that really sticks out, for me at any rate, is that whole 'forgetting' the spell after it's cast. So, effectively you can only cast it once per day. Anyone else feel the same on this?
The second part of this thread is asking for advice. Have you got any ideas/suggestions on how to remedy this?
1) I was thinking of adding some kind of 'Magic Points' secondary attribute. Tied to Wisdom. I'm not saying that magic points are the best but it would eliminate some of my bugbears.
2) Or just let the players cast any spell they want as their level suggests. So, in essence, they could cast sleep twice a day, etc.
3) Give them an extra spell as their intelligence bonus suggests (I've seen this in a couple of OSR games already).
4) I think it's in Crypts and Things - There's a 'luck attribute' and you can roll on it to see if you can remember the spell you've just cast.
Last option: Or do I just tell myself to STFU and play as god intended. :)
Any advice or thoughts welcome!
Ta'!
Spell slots in 5e basically are magic points. It works just fine and does change the feel from "I cast Magic Missile, so I forgot how" to "I'm all out of magic power for the day because I cast so many spells." Not having to occupy valuable slots with niche spells you may never use is quite nice.
Quote from: fearsomepirate;975472Spell slots in 5e basically are magic points. It works just fine and does change the feel from "I cast Magic Missile, so I forgot how" to "I'm all out of magic power for the day because I cast so many spells." Not having to occupy valuable slots with niche spells you may never use is quite nice.
They are mostly magic points that manage to mostly avoid the typical pitfalls of magic point systems in games with a wide range of effects and power levels:
1. The "conversion rate" problem, where the system makes it preferable to turn a few powerful spells into multiple weaker spells (or vice versa, depending upon the exact implementation) is avoided by still using slots with flexibility, coupled with 5E's change so that spells do not inherently scale by the level of the caster. That means if you upgrade a 1st level spell to a 3rd level slot (where allowed) you mostly get what you pay for, often with a slight cost in efficiency that is probably worth it for getting that one spell off now. Likewise, downgrading slots is a net loss, and thus still requires a little operational planning by the player. Though not so much as to cause analysis paralysis or extreme manipulation by the caster savant player.
2. The number of spells prepared and the number of slots available is kept small enough that your average casual player can make informed decisions about what to do, but not so limited that they either blow things too quickly or go the opposite route and conserve too much. There is a little bit of a hump in the learning curve for a new player compared to simpler magic point system, but once over that I find the player gets to a functioning state much quicker. That is, the exact mechanic has an upfront cost that quickly pays for itself in operational understanding.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;975473spells do not inherently scale by the level of the caster.
I didn't really appreciate how much this helped address the LFQW problem until someone else pointed it out. Used to be that your low-power spells got more powerful in a linear fashion, while your got these upper-class spells that were quadratically more powerful. Now it's more like your biggest spells are always big hitters relative to your level, while your older spells gradually get demoted from "nuke" to "nice to have." Magic Missile now starts at 3d4+3. It is a very potent spell at level 1, capable of ending some encounters before they really get going. At high levels, that's more like a single, unaugmented weapon hit.
Question: when you talk about not liking the memorization of spells, is the mechanics you don't like, or the explanation?
The reason I ask is because I recently created a magic system for my own fantasy heartbreaker, and for the sorcerer class, the mechanics are fairly similar to the Vancian D&D approach, but the explanation is quite different. In my game, sorcery spells take a long time to cast. The higher the spell level and the lower the caster level, the longer it takes; in theory, anyone can learn and cast any spell, but in practice, it will take a couple YEARS for a first level sorcerer to cast a fifth level spell. For a high level caster performing a first level spell, however, it only takes a few minutes.
Anyway, to keep things fun, sorcerers are able to construct foci, which are magical objects (wands, amulets, etc.), keyed to their creator, that store spells to be activated later. Each foci holds a certain number of spell levels, and a sorcerer can utilize a total number of focus levels equal to three times his experience level.
The effect is similar to Vancian D&D, because time must be spent casting spells to be held in one's foci. However, the big differences are that you can keep spamming a spell if you have the time, and it's pretty reasonable for high-level sorcerers to recharge their foci with low-level spells mid-adventure. It also gives some flavorful reasons why mages are festooned with rune-covered bits and bobs, and some tactical considerations to their gear. It doesn't get away from the need to pre-select your spells, Vancian style, but it does change how low level spells are used to a small extent. A sorcerer will start an adventure loaded for bear, but as he casts his powerful spells, he may replace them with a bunch of first-level spells.
I also have another magic class called the mystic. That one has spontaneous casting that causes fatigue and possibly worse and each learned spell induces a 'mark' (like corruption from DCC). It's meant to model all the non-academic mages, from clerics to psychics. But that's a whole nother thing.