Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 28, 2021, 01:27:18 PM

Quote from: Godsmonkey on October 28, 2021, 01:22:24 PM
I tend to use the Savage Worlds idea of "trappings". Let's use a fireball type effect for example:

A mage would cast a ball of flames, much like a typical fireball spell.

A weird scientist might have a device like a giant roman Candle gun that shoots balls that explode into an area effect.

An alchemist might have a phosphorus or similar grenade.

A Psychic might use the power of his mind to agitate molecules to cause an explosion.

In each case, mechanically, they work the same, but all appear very different in game play.

Yes, it is easier when you're dealing with different classes.

Now think of a Wizard in a pseudo medieval Europe setting, he casts spells in a certain way.

Change the setting/world and he should cast different spells (in trappings and maybe beyond) to keep the world internally consistent.

Imagine a World where you're a Maya character, your wizard shouldn't cast Fireball, even if mechanically it's the same spell. IMHO this helps with immersion on the setting, the buy in if you will.

In Savage Worlds you can bend the Magic System in a number of ways.

You can make the spellcasting purely ritual - and it's a Skill Check associated with your Witchdoctor's "Ritual" Skill. And you simply have to enumerate the number of successes to pull off the Ritual.

You can make ritual have in-game material costs. There are a number of Savage Settings that do things like this. The idea is that the core task resolution is the same, but the mechanics can be tweaked in a huge number of ways.

One of the ways they do this is by the Setting Rules. In this case a Wizard might have the Edge  "Arcane Background: Wizardry" and your Witchdoctor  has the "Arcane Background: Ritual Magic" - and under those specific Edges it will delineate which powers are accessible to each Arcane Background. This is how they make differences between "techno-magic" (Weird Science) where how the PC uses their spells is both mechanical (in the sense their Powers are linked directly to devices) and trappings.

You can scale it up/down as much as you want. Savage Rifts has *crazy* levels of magic where starting characters are near Archmages - and they have robust systems of mega-ritual magic there. Or you can have magic that is low-key and subtle(ish) like Rippers or Deadlands. Low-magic games might only allow "wizards" to have a very limited list of powers to access. Same is true in games where different kinds of casters exist - like Witch Doctors and Wizards. This is a very normal thing in Savage Worlds.

The key here (in any game) is that you as the GM enforce the narrative conceits of the mechanics. Doesn't matter what system you use. But it helps to have a system that is designed for it. This is one of my issues with D&D Vancian magic. SW let's you do anything you want and you can narratively enforce whatever you need for immersion with much less effort.

This is true in the various editions of Talislanta as well - which range (depending on edition) from simply skill-based ritual effects (Tal2e/Savage Lands) to Vancian-like (3e with trappings), to full bore Effects Based (4e/5e). Interestingly they can ALL work in the same game simultaneously because though they mechanically approach the task resolution differently, the actual task resolution is the same.

TL/DR - make sure the Task Resolution is as universal as possible. The Mechanics/Trappings are whatever the system allows you to do to your tolerance level = best choice.

Quote from: tenbones on October 29, 2021, 03:02:17 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 28, 2021, 01:27:18 PM

Quote from: Godsmonkey on October 28, 2021, 01:22:24 PM
I tend to use the Savage Worlds idea of "trappings". Let's use a fireball type effect for example:

A mage would cast a ball of flames, much like a typical fireball spell.

A weird scientist might have a device like a giant roman Candle gun that shoots balls that explode into an area effect.

An alchemist might have a phosphorus or similar grenade.

A Psychic might use the power of his mind to agitate molecules to cause an explosion.

In each case, mechanically, they work the same, but all appear very different in game play.

Yes, it is easier when you're dealing with different classes.

Now think of a Wizard in a pseudo medieval Europe setting, he casts spells in a certain way.

Change the setting/world and he should cast different spells (in trappings and maybe beyond) to keep the world internally consistent.

Imagine a World where you're a Maya character, your wizard shouldn't cast Fireball, even if mechanically it's the same spell. IMHO this helps with immersion on the setting, the buy in if you will.

In Savage Worlds you can bend the Magic System in a number of ways.

You can make the spellcasting purely ritual - and it's a Skill Check associated with your Witchdoctor's "Ritual" Skill. And you simply have to enumerate the number of successes to pull off the Ritual.

You can make ritual have in-game material costs. There are a number of Savage Settings that do things like this. The idea is that the core task resolution is the same, but the mechanics can be tweaked in a huge number of ways.

One of the ways they do this is by the Setting Rules. In this case a Wizard might have the Edge  "Arcane Background: Wizardry" and your Witchdoctor  has the "Arcane Background: Ritual Magic" - and under those specific Edges it will delineate which powers are accessible to each Arcane Background. This is how they make differences between "techno-magic" (Weird Science) where how the PC uses their spells is both mechanical (in the sense their Powers are linked directly to devices) and trappings.

You can scale it up/down as much as you want. Savage Rifts has *crazy* levels of magic where starting characters are near Archmages - and they have robust systems of mega-ritual magic there. Or you can have magic that is low-key and subtle(ish) like Rippers or Deadlands. Low-magic games might only allow "wizards" to have a very limited list of powers to access. Same is true in games where different kinds of casters exist - like Witch Doctors and Wizards. This is a very normal thing in Savage Worlds.

The key here (in any game) is that you as the GM enforce the narrative conceits of the mechanics. Doesn't matter what system you use. But it helps to have a system that is designed for it. This is one of my issues with D&D Vancian magic. SW let's you do anything you want and you can narratively enforce whatever you need for immersion with much less effort.

This is true in the various editions of Talislanta as well - which range (depending on edition) from simply skill-based ritual effects (Tal2e/Savage Lands) to Vancian-like (3e with trappings), to full bore Effects Based (4e/5e). Interestingly they can ALL work in the same game simultaneously because though they mechanically approach the task resolution differently, the actual task resolution is the same.

TL/DR - make sure the Task Resolution is as universal as possible. The Mechanics/Trappings are whatever the system allows you to do to your tolerance level = best choice.

Oh, I'm not doing vancian magic, I'm doing a magic points system, still need to decide if the wizard graduates knowing ALL the spells (whichever I decide they are) or just a basic subset and needs to learn/discover/create new ones.

One thing I'm almost sure off is schools/spheres. As in there will be schools of magic and the wizard graduates on only one school. Some might even be incompatible with others, because I want to do away with the generalist MU.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 29, 2021, 03:12:51 PM

Quote from: tenbones on October 29, 2021, 03:02:17 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 28, 2021, 01:27:18 PM

Quote from: Godsmonkey on October 28, 2021, 01:22:24 PM
I tend to use the Savage Worlds idea of "trappings". Let's use a fireball type effect for example:

A mage would cast a ball of flames, much like a typical fireball spell.

A weird scientist might have a device like a giant roman Candle gun that shoots balls that explode into an area effect.

An alchemist might have a phosphorus or similar grenade.

A Psychic might use the power of his mind to agitate molecules to cause an explosion.

In each case, mechanically, they work the same, but all appear very different in game play.

Yes, it is easier when you're dealing with different classes.

Now think of a Wizard in a pseudo medieval Europe setting, he casts spells in a certain way.

Change the setting/world and he should cast different spells (in trappings and maybe beyond) to keep the world internally consistent.

Imagine a World where you're a Maya character, your wizard shouldn't cast Fireball, even if mechanically it's the same spell. IMHO this helps with immersion on the setting, the buy in if you will.

In Savage Worlds you can bend the Magic System in a number of ways.

You can make the spellcasting purely ritual - and it's a Skill Check associated with your Witchdoctor's "Ritual" Skill. And you simply have to enumerate the number of successes to pull off the Ritual.

You can make ritual have in-game material costs. There are a number of Savage Settings that do things like this. The idea is that the core task resolution is the same, but the mechanics can be tweaked in a huge number of ways.

One of the ways they do this is by the Setting Rules. In this case a Wizard might have the Edge  "Arcane Background: Wizardry" and your Witchdoctor  has the "Arcane Background: Ritual Magic" - and under those specific Edges it will delineate which powers are accessible to each Arcane Background. This is how they make differences between "techno-magic" (Weird Science) where how the PC uses their spells is both mechanical (in the sense their Powers are linked directly to devices) and trappings.

You can scale it up/down as much as you want. Savage Rifts has *crazy* levels of magic where starting characters are near Archmages - and they have robust systems of mega-ritual magic there. Or you can have magic that is low-key and subtle(ish) like Rippers or Deadlands. Low-magic games might only allow "wizards" to have a very limited list of powers to access. Same is true in games where different kinds of casters exist - like Witch Doctors and Wizards. This is a very normal thing in Savage Worlds.

The key here (in any game) is that you as the GM enforce the narrative conceits of the mechanics. Doesn't matter what system you use. But it helps to have a system that is designed for it. This is one of my issues with D&D Vancian magic. SW let's you do anything you want and you can narratively enforce whatever you need for immersion with much less effort.

This is true in the various editions of Talislanta as well - which range (depending on edition) from simply skill-based ritual effects (Tal2e/Savage Lands) to Vancian-like (3e with trappings), to full bore Effects Based (4e/5e). Interestingly they can ALL work in the same game simultaneously because though they mechanically approach the task resolution differently, the actual task resolution is the same.

TL/DR - make sure the Task Resolution is as universal as possible. The Mechanics/Trappings are whatever the system allows you to do to your tolerance level = best choice.

Oh, I'm not doing vancian magic, I'm doing a magic points system, still need to decide if the wizard graduates knowing ALL the spells (whichever I decide they are) or just a basic subset and needs to learn/discover/create new ones.

One thing I'm almost sure off is schools/spheres. As in there will be schools of magic and the wizard graduates on only one school. Some might even be incompatible with others, because I want to do away with the generalist MU.

If doing magic points, it's also important to decide if you want to have big "fuel tanks" of spell points with a slow recharge (ends up working much like D&D's spellcasting pace) or small "fuel tanks" of spell points that refill faster (closer to the Savage Worlds feel). The former allows for big nova effects (which might risk unbalancing some scenarios, particularly when there are likely to be few encounters), but then they're stuck doing non-magic stuff for some time. The latter tends to keep a more consistent level of magical output. Both can work out, but give very different feels (and you might use different versions for different types of spellcasters...but note that it didn't really work out so well in 5e when done with the Warlock vs. other casters).

Quote from: HappyDaze on October 29, 2021, 03:20:46 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 29, 2021, 03:12:51 PM

Quote from: tenbones on October 29, 2021, 03:02:17 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 28, 2021, 01:27:18 PM

Quote from: Godsmonkey on October 28, 2021, 01:22:24 PM
I tend to use the Savage Worlds idea of "trappings". Let's use a fireball type effect for example:

A mage would cast a ball of flames, much like a typical fireball spell.

A weird scientist might have a device like a giant roman Candle gun that shoots balls that explode into an area effect.

An alchemist might have a phosphorus or similar grenade.

A Psychic might use the power of his mind to agitate molecules to cause an explosion.

In each case, mechanically, they work the same, but all appear very different in game play.

Yes, it is easier when you're dealing with different classes.

Now think of a Wizard in a pseudo medieval Europe setting, he casts spells in a certain way.

Change the setting/world and he should cast different spells (in trappings and maybe beyond) to keep the world internally consistent.

Imagine a World where you're a Maya character, your wizard shouldn't cast Fireball, even if mechanically it's the same spell. IMHO this helps with immersion on the setting, the buy in if you will.

In Savage Worlds you can bend the Magic System in a number of ways.

You can make the spellcasting purely ritual - and it's a Skill Check associated with your Witchdoctor's "Ritual" Skill. And you simply have to enumerate the number of successes to pull off the Ritual.

You can make ritual have in-game material costs. There are a number of Savage Settings that do things like this. The idea is that the core task resolution is the same, but the mechanics can be tweaked in a huge number of ways.

One of the ways they do this is by the Setting Rules. In this case a Wizard might have the Edge  "Arcane Background: Wizardry" and your Witchdoctor  has the "Arcane Background: Ritual Magic" - and under those specific Edges it will delineate which powers are accessible to each Arcane Background. This is how they make differences between "techno-magic" (Weird Science) where how the PC uses their spells is both mechanical (in the sense their Powers are linked directly to devices) and trappings.

You can scale it up/down as much as you want. Savage Rifts has *crazy* levels of magic where starting characters are near Archmages - and they have robust systems of mega-ritual magic there. Or you can have magic that is low-key and subtle(ish) like Rippers or Deadlands. Low-magic games might only allow "wizards" to have a very limited list of powers to access. Same is true in games where different kinds of casters exist - like Witch Doctors and Wizards. This is a very normal thing in Savage Worlds.

The key here (in any game) is that you as the GM enforce the narrative conceits of the mechanics. Doesn't matter what system you use. But it helps to have a system that is designed for it. This is one of my issues with D&D Vancian magic. SW let's you do anything you want and you can narratively enforce whatever you need for immersion with much less effort.

This is true in the various editions of Talislanta as well - which range (depending on edition) from simply skill-based ritual effects (Tal2e/Savage Lands) to Vancian-like (3e with trappings), to full bore Effects Based (4e/5e). Interestingly they can ALL work in the same game simultaneously because though they mechanically approach the task resolution differently, the actual task resolution is the same.

TL/DR - make sure the Task Resolution is as universal as possible. The Mechanics/Trappings are whatever the system allows you to do to your tolerance level = best choice.

Oh, I'm not doing vancian magic, I'm doing a magic points system, still need to decide if the wizard graduates knowing ALL the spells (whichever I decide they are) or just a basic subset and needs to learn/discover/create new ones.

One thing I'm almost sure off is schools/spheres. As in there will be schools of magic and the wizard graduates on only one school. Some might even be incompatible with others, because I want to do away with the generalist MU.

If doing magic points, it's also important to decide if you want to have big "fuel tanks" of spell points with a slow recharge (ends up working much like D&D's spellcasting pace) or small "fuel tanks" of spell points that refill faster (closer to the Savage Worlds feel). The former allows for big nova effects (which might risk unbalancing some scenarios, particularly when there are likely to be few encounters), but then they're stuck doing non-magic stuff for some time. The latter tends to keep a more consistent level of magical output. Both can work out, but give very different feels (and you might use different versions for different types of spellcasters...but note that it didn't really work out so well in 5e when done with the Warlock vs. other casters).

So far I'm going for the D&D pace, will need to investigate the SW way.

I agree with Happy here.

If you're going with spellpoints - you need to figure out the rate of accrual and their use. If you're going to have discrete "schools" - you may want to have discrete skills to adjudicate rolls.

This give you one last structure - difficulty of effects. If you're going effects based, then you need to have those parameters fine-tuned to a core task-resolution. So a "Bolt" effect does X as a baseline for Damage, Range for Y-Cost. Then you'll have to figure out what kind of modifiers you want to allow (Can you overclock it with more points? Can you boost range/damage/area of effect?)

Ritual magic might be more "Vancian" in terms of the overall discrete effect. I.e. a Ritual to summon a storm does only that. But the effect is modifiable based on the skill of the caster, the points expended. Narratively you might want larger effects to actually require more points than most casters can muster alone (Happy Fuel Tank idea is important here) - because then you load on optional mechanics to allow for lowering that cost:

- Ritual Assistants: perhaps the more others help in the ritual they can lend their own spellpoints? Mundanes might have a base tiny amount they can offer for just helping?

- Material components: These could be causes for adventures themselves (or at least side-quests) to acquire items that act as spellpoints for specific rituals.

- Sacrifice: you can make a list of spellpoint enhancers for personal sacrifice (or other people!).

- Special locations: Certain locations might enhance spellpoint expenditures of a certain kind. Graveyards for Necromantic rituals. etc. Glades for natural effects.

- Special Seasons: Same as above. Plug this into cultural reality in-game and you got yourself some built in drama and timelines to allow your ritualists to plan for (and your PC's to race against if they're going up against a ritualist).

You get the idea!

I don't mean to beat the SW Horse... I'm just using it as an example. I'm like you - I like having different ways of skinning the magical horse in my games. There is a lot of novelty in PC's learning new ways in-game to experience things like magic, rather than assuming there is only one way.

I *highly* recommend looking at Talislanta 4e (it's free - go to the www.talislanta.com) Basically there are ton of schools, but they all have different modes of casting effects, each school has its penalties and bonuses. Some modes are completely foreign to certain schools. So you have a huge mix of "traditional high-fantasy magic" as well as "low ritual magic" all in the same plane of play.

Quote from: tenbones on October 29, 2021, 04:30:44 PM
I agree with Happy here.

If you're going with spellpoints - you need to figure out the rate of accrual and their use. If you're going to have discrete "schools" - you may want to have discrete skills to adjudicate rolls.

This give you one last structure - difficulty of effects. If you're going effects based, then you need to have those parameters fine-tuned to a core task-resolution. So a "Bolt" effect does X as a baseline for Damage, Range for Y-Cost. Then you'll have to figure out what kind of modifiers you want to allow (Can you overclock it with more points? Can you boost range/damage/area of effect?)

Ritual magic might be more "Vancian" in terms of the overall discrete effect. I.e. a Ritual to summon a storm does only that. But the effect is modifiable based on the skill of the caster, the points expended. Narratively you might want larger effects to actually require more points than most casters can muster alone (Happy Fuel Tank idea is important here) - because then you load on optional mechanics to allow for lowering that cost:

- Ritual Assistants: perhaps the more others help in the ritual they can lend their own spellpoints? Mundanes might have a base tiny amount they can offer for just helping?

- Material components: These could be causes for adventures themselves (or at least side-quests) to acquire items that act as spellpoints for specific rituals.

- Sacrifice: you can make a list of spellpoint enhancers for personal sacrifice (or other people!).

- Special locations: Certain locations might enhance spellpoint expenditures of a certain kind. Graveyards for Necromantic rituals. etc. Glades for natural effects.

- Special Seasons: Same as above. Plug this into cultural reality in-game and you got yourself some built in drama and timelines to allow your ritualists to plan for (and your PC's to race against if they're going up against a ritualist).

You get the idea!

Quick summary of the magic system so far in the image below.

- Ritual assistants: I hadn't thought of allowing non casters to help out but it's an interesting idea.
- Material components: Yes, I had thought of this, part of the neccessary changes even if it was only a cosmetic change need to be the materials. Also provides drama.
- Sacrifice: In the Maya game the "wizard/Cleric" needs blood in all spells, mostly their own, not sure if be exact as to where to draw it to be more potent (The ball sack of the caster  ) willing sacrifice is certainly an interesting idea that would keep the magic white. (The bad guys have no such constraint of course).
- Special locations: For my totally not "Monster Hunter" game I'm developing this already was in it. For the Maya game the temples and maybe certain other locations (The cenotes were believed a door to the other world) could be a good option)
- Special Seasons: YES! Certain spells MUST be done under the full moon and such. Others are just more potent or sure to work if performed in the right place/time.

Quote from: tenbones on October 29, 2021, 04:40:33 PM
I don't mean to beat the SW Horse... I'm just using it as an example. I'm like you - I like having different ways of skinning the magical horse in my games. There is a lot of novelty in PC's learning new ways in-game to experience things like magic, rather than assuming there is only one way.

I *highly* recommend looking at Talislanta 4e (it's free - go to the www.talislanta.com) Basically there are ton of schools, but they all have different modes of casting effects, each school has its penalties and bonuses. Some modes are completely foreign to certain schools. So you have a huge mix of "traditional high-fantasy magic" as well as "low ritual magic" all in the same plane of play.

Dude beat the horse all you want, I'm not shy about stealing ideas getting inspiration from anywhere/anyone.

Will give a good look at Talislantla, thanks.

Well if you want something more directly convertible:

There is the ritual system from 4e, and that was adapted into rituals in PF which are more flavorfull.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on October 29, 2021, 05:19:36 PM
Well if you want something more directly convertible:

There is the ritual system from 4e, and that was adapted into rituals in PF which are more flavorfull.

Will need to do some research, I don't own either. But I bet I can find some nice resume somewhere.

IIRC,  in one version of WFRP, material components were "optional" in that they didn't help you to cast the spell, but they could be consumed by the arcane backlash of a miscast...instead of miscast energy harming the caster. I liked that tradeoff.

Quote from: HappyDaze on October 29, 2021, 05:28:42 PM
IIRC,  in one version of WFRP, material components were "optional" in that they didn't help you to cast the spell, but they could be consumed by the arcane backlash of a miscast...instead of miscast energy harming the caster. I liked that tradeoff.

And/or the ingredients reduce the chance of a miscast...

I'm thinking of a focus, a wand, staff, ring, that the caster can create to help it focus the magic energy. Would need to be something hard to create IMHO.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 29, 2021, 05:07:47 PM
- Ritual assistants: I hadn't thought of allowing non casters to help out but it's an interesting idea.

Someone needs to hold down the victims sacrifices while you're busy shouting blood and souls for my Lord Arioch I mean Tezcatlipoca I mean Ek Chuah.

More seriously, regarding spell points, don't just think of the size of the pool, but the flow of points. Most spell point systems are effectively nova systems, where you have a pool that you can blow out very quickly, and then you have to rest a long time before it replenishes. This tends to encourage the 10 minute adventuring day, where the wizards blast everything in sight, and then the party retreats until they can do it again.

But it's possible to build a more dynamic system, where points ebb and flow over the course of a fight or a scene. The old MSH Karma system could be used a model, where you can gain (or lose) points during the course of an scene based on your actions (defeat enemies, act heroically, save bystanders, sacrifice an eye, kill someone, etc.), and then have to strategically decide whether to use the points now or save them for the climax. Fighting vidya games often have power meters that do up as you make regular attacks, and when you hit a certain threshold you qualify for special moves. Adapted to a magic system, you'd have a cast a certain number of weaker spells before more powerful ones are unlocked. That could be emulated by a tally point system, where you start with 0 points, and each spell you cast adds its cost to the pool. You'd start limited to weak (say 1 point) spells, but as the size of the pool increase, more powerful effects would be available (say at 5 points, you can start casting 2 point spells). These pools would quickly dissipate if not continually added to, and certain powerful effects might reset the meter. Another option is something like the Marvel Saga system, where actions are based on card play, and more heroic/plot protected characters have larger hands. If we replace cards with dice, then spellcaster roll a number of dice at the start of the fight, and then use the results to pay for spell effects. Say 3d6 results in a 1, 5, and 3. In that case, no 6 point effects would be allowed, and 4 point effect would require using the die with a 5 on it. More powerful casters could have more or larger dice. And when a die is used it might be gone for the fight, it might be replaced with a new random roll, or a lot of other variations. The old Swashbuckler game concept of branching options based on what you did last round could be another example, if you're familiar with it.

I'm not suggesting any of these ideas in particular, they're just examples. but I do recommend thinking about the flow.

Quote from: Pat on October 29, 2021, 06:06:37 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on October 29, 2021, 05:07:47 PM
- Ritual assistants: I hadn't thought of allowing non casters to help out but it's an interesting idea.

Someone needs to hold down the victims sacrifices while you're busy shouting blood and souls for my Lord Arioch I mean Tezcatlipoca I mean Ek Chuah.

More seriously, regarding spell points, don't just think of the size of the pool, but the flow of points. Most spell point systems are effectively nova systems, where you have a pool that you can blow out very quickly, and then you have to rest a long time before it replenishes. This tends to encourage the 10 minute adventuring day, where the wizards blast everything in sight, and then the party retreats until they can do it again.

But it's possible to build a more dynamic system, where points ebb and flow over the course of a fight or a scene. The old MSH Karma system could be used a model, where you can gain (or lose) points during the course of an scene based on your actions (defeat enemies, act heroically, save bystanders, sacrifice an eye, kill someone, etc.), and then have to strategically decide whether to use the points now or save them for the climax. Fighting vidya games often have power meters that do up as you make regular attacks, and when you hit a certain threshold you qualify for special moves. Adapted to a magic system, you'd have a cast a certain number of weaker spells before more powerful ones are unlocked. That could be emulated by a tally point system, where you start with 0 points, and each spell you cast adds its cost to the pool. You'd start limited to weak (say 1 point) spells, but as the size of the pool increase, more powerful effects would be available (say at 5 points, you can start casting 2 point spells). These pools would quickly dissipate if not continually added to, and certain powerful effects might reset the meter. Another option is something like the Marvel Saga system, where actions are based on card play, and more heroic/plot protected characters have larger hands. If we replace cards with dice, then spellcaster roll a number of dice at the start of the fight, and then use the results to pay for spell effects. Say 3d6 results in a 1, 5, and 3. In that case, no 6 point effects would be allowed, and 4 point effect would require using the die with a 5 on it. More powerful casters could have more or larger dice. And when a die is used it might be gone for the fight, it might be replaced with a new random roll, or a lot of other variations. The old Swashbuckler game concept of branching options based on what you did last round could be another example, if you're familiar with it.

I'm not suggesting any of these ideas in particular, they're just examples. but I do recommend thinking about the flow.

Oh, I thought the idea was more like the DB Genkidama 

MSH? What's that?

The flow idea sounds perfect for my "totally not a Cleric" for my other game. He accrues divine favor by his actions which he can then spend in miracles...

But I don't want to leave it with zero favor at the start of an encounter... Maybe a mix of base points and the flow idea would work best.

MSH = Marvel Super Heroes, the original one from the 1980s. The karma system rewards heroes who do things like save bystanders, or go on dates (because having a personal life gives the referee an opportunity to throw in complications). It penalizes them for doing things destroying property or killing people. The points can be used adjust rolls or perform stunts. The game works best when the referee is fairly generous handing out points, and when the players use them at dramatically appropriate moments, instead of hoarding them. (One of the design mistakes was the advancement system was based on socking away karma, which encouraged hoarding.)

And I wasn't really suggesting a coherent "flow" system. I was pointing out that there's a flow to how points come and go, and how they're used. And they can be designed to dynamically and ebb and flow over the course of a fight or an encounter, instead of being a simple meter that gets depleted until you're out. The four examples I gave are completely different and not particularly compatible ways to do that. Other examples of different flows that could be adapted to a magic system are 4e's bloodied rules or GURPS' UMana.