PDA

View Full Version : Favorite Magic System



Drolyt
2010-08-20, 12:04 AM
What is your favorite magic system? By magic system I mean a system for handling supernatural effects in a roleplaying game. It doesn't matter if it isn't called magic (for example Force Powers from the Star Wars Roleplaying game count). Systems from video games are welcome too. I'm undecided, I like having the huge selection of individual spells like D&D (as opposed to trying to build spells), but I'm not a fan of Vancian casting. I lean towards Psionics (3rd edition that is), but the number crunching is annoying (that's more a flaw of D&D though).

Crow
2010-08-20, 12:07 AM
I liked the magic system for shadowrun (3rd edition). You can do it all day, if you use moderation, and usually it will just give you a minor headache. But if you push too hard, that headache can become a severe migraine, and if you push even harder, a heart attack.

Voldecanter
2010-08-20, 12:18 AM
I like the Magic System found within Mythus - Dangerous Journey's By Gary Gygax .

Spells have different Casting times depending on what type of Spell one is casting . Also Mages or Priests in Mythus aren't always "True" Mages , a practitioner is either a full practitioner or is not a full practitioner , there are stat requirements to become a full practitioner and even when a character meets the prerequisites , there is a roll that determines if One is actually a Full Caster or is not , and even if you maximize all your Stats there is still about a 22% chance of becoming a Full Mage .

The Benefits for becoming a full practitioner is that a Mage doesn't need to worry about Magical Skills to determine maximum spell levels , and their base Spell Points are x10 whereas Partial Practitioners have to culminate their skills to be as skilled as their counterparts .

Not to mention that there are many different spells and types of Spells and there are also variant mechanics to allow Mages to make a spell up on the spot in times of great peril .

DeltaEmil
2010-08-20, 12:24 AM
Shadowrun magic system 3rd and 4th edition, with 4th edition being slightly ahead, because choosing force does play a bigger role than in third.

Drolyt
2010-08-20, 12:44 AM
Shadowrun magic system 3rd and 4th edition, with 4th edition being slightly ahead, because choosing force does play a bigger role than in third.

What are the differences between 3rd and 4th? I'm currently referencing 4th edition to see how it works.

That said, it appears to be one of those systems where you roll a number of d6 depending on your skill level. I'm not sure I'm fond of that.

Draz74
2010-08-20, 12:49 AM
It's not perfect, but overall I lean towards the 3e D&D Psionics system.

DeltaEmil
2010-08-20, 12:53 AM
In forth edition, the force level you choose to cast a spell determines the maximum number of successes that you can roll (so a spell with only force 3 chosen can only be as effective as if you had rolled three successes, even if you rolled 10 or more).
In third edition, it was a lot more passive, if it played a role at all.

And the shadowrun skill system is a lot more detailed and complex than D&D 3rd and 4th edition, without being too complicated. In my opinion, a lot better than the D20-system. The ony problem I see is that the dice pool combination could be improved (or perhaps should even be nerfed somewhat).

Zeful
2010-08-20, 01:34 AM
Vancian spellcasting.

Zaydos
2010-08-20, 01:45 AM
Vancian spellcasting.

+1. I started with Vancian casting and it's always made sense to me. Although I'm never happy with the amount of spells per day. (AD&D) 2e and earlier you don't have nearly enough spells per day at low levels, 3e and onwards you have too many. Even so Vancian is still my favorite variety.

Drolyt
2010-08-20, 01:49 AM
+1. I started with Vancian casting and it's always made sense to me. Although I'm never happy with the amount of spells per day. (AD&D) 2e and earlier you don't have nearly enough spells per day at low levels, 3e and onwards you have too many. Even so Vancian is still my favorite variety.

Even in 3e you don't have enough spells until higher levels, at least in my opinion. That said, what do you mean "it's always made sense to me"? What reason do you like it other than it is the one you started with?

Thefurmonger
2010-08-20, 02:05 AM
I like the Magic System found within Mythus - Dangerous Journey's By Gary Gygax .

Hell yes!! By far my fav game of all time.

Man I wish I could find a group for it.

Aroka
2010-08-20, 02:06 AM
Artesia: Adventures in the Known World is pretty high up there, for several reasons.

There's depth, but not really a lot of complexity; there's several types of magic, but they all draw from the same pool of basic magic effects and function on the same principles (my roll vs. your roll, cost equals effect). These magic effects are very general, but they're always applied in specific ways - for instance, a Hex spell can affect any type of roll, but when cast it always affects just one type of roll. Magic is very common, to the point that literally all adults know some spells (usually the Offering Ritual and the Invocation for their deity's cult), but the common forms are also the weakest, because most people have very specific magic (instead of knowing the Hex spell, you'll know a Hex to Cause a Warrior to Fumble with his Sword).

The magic is very balanced, too - a magic-user is powerful, obviously, and can do things non-magic-users can't, but everyone can learn magic. Indeed, because the magic skills are stuff like Cult Lore, Folk Lore, Herbal Lore, and Star Lore, you can't learn about the world without learning about the magic, because the world is magical. And really powerful effects have a great cost; my favorite example is causing everyone in a huge castle to suffer a deadly plague, which will cost you most of your magical power permanently. All permanent (rather than instantaneous) effects have a permanent cost.

The enchantment/magic item system is awesome, too - there's lists of basic items that anyone can enchant without permanent cost, because you just need to awaken the inherent potential of the item. (Maximum potential determined by your magical skill, limited by a random die roll.) This includes things like enchanting iron or copper armor to protect better, enchanting a rooster's corpse or some garlic to act as a ward against spirits, enchanting goldenrod leaves to act as a healing poultice... the list goes on.

Then there's alchemy, with your Red and White Elixirs, Philosopher's Stone, and alchemical operations that can transmute base metals, create a basilisk, or extend your life. There's a slight potential for abuse here, because an alchemist can, after an initial investment, turn a profit by transmuting lead into gold or stones into gems to fund "philosophical elixirs" that grant him the system's equivalent of experience points, but that's easy to handle by not giving the PCs time to just sit around chugging elixir.

There's a lot more - the magic system takes up 46 pages in a 350-page book.

It's a great, deep system, relatively simple, and makes for significant magic.

RuneQuest's multiple magic types (especially in Mongoose's second edition) are pretty great, and HeroQuesting is awesome. The way enchanted items - divine relics especially - work in MRQ2 is great.

Conan d20 has a cool system, too; spells are very powerful and deadly, and you've got all the classic evil sorcerer material.

Warhammer Fantary Roleplay 2nd edition has a nice system, too - magic is different and powerful, but you don't want to use it except in the most extreme circumstances. You hack at the skaven with your sword until they're just about to overwhelm you, and then you blast them apart with your magic and hope you don't destroy yourself in a surge of Warp power.

Lord of the Rings has a nice magic system. Nothing stunningly original, but it works well with the setting. It's powerful, but often in subtle ways (an elven archer is probably going to be more effective in combat than a wizard shooting lightning bolts). Using magic tires you out, and the more you use it the harder it is to resist the weariness each time.

Satyr
2010-08-20, 03:17 AM
The cinematic Unisystem magic is basically built around the premise of "build your own spell" every time you need one. That's fun.
It's not even impossible to balance; most powerful spells are slow, and spell research/creation takes quite some time.

tcrudisi
2010-08-20, 03:20 AM
I've not played the new version, but oWoD's Mage: The Ascension had an awesome magic system. Yes, it is the equivalent of having epic spellcasting in 3.5, but it was balanced since everyone had it. You could do anything you wanted if the player has the creativity for it, and I like that.

Aroka
2010-08-20, 07:06 AM
The cinematic Unisystem magic is basically built around the premise of "build your own spell" every time you need one. That's fun.
It's not even impossible to balance; most powerful spells are slow, and spell research/creation takes quite some time.

Dungeons & Zombies has a similar system, doesn't it? There's a few principles, but they need specific applications.

That reminds me of the magic in The Riddle of Steel, which is awesome but fairly complicated. The basic tenet is "Balance? What balance? This is magic! Screw your balance!"

TROS is brutally realistic, with a combat system where permanent injuries and death are inevitable rather than probable, where even the best swordsman can be killed with an arrow into the chest...

And wizards can disintegrate you. And that's just the unimaginative stuff. They can cause your bones to sprout horrible spikes that tear through your flesh, they can turn you into a slave, and countless other things.

However, magic is also brutal to the user. All spells result in aging, measured in months (and you may age dozens of months per spell if it's powerful enough and you roll badly and/or don't have enough dice left to mitigate the aging after casting the spell itself). This aging happens all at once (and includes hair, beard, and nail growth!), and if it exceeds a certain amount, you pass out from the effect. It's also brutally realistic - if you cast a spell to let you fly at Mach 3 and then blast off, you'll black out from the acceleration and die of not being able to breathe at that speed. All flight spells above a certain low speed require magic to protect you from their effects, making them difficult and complex.

The system is based on principles, each with three levels, and multiple types of spells: Spells of One (using one principle, cast in seconds), Spells of Three (using up to three principles, cast in dozens of seconds IIRC), and Spells of Many (involving more than three principles, cast in minutes or more, often as hours-long rituals). The more principles and the higher level effects you use, the longer the casting time and the greater the power required and the price paid. Combat rounds are measured in seconds (I think it's actually 1-2 seconds per exchange), so combat spells need to have casting times of 1-2 seconds. That means low-level Spells of One only. These do still include stuff like quick telekinetic shoves, either to throw enemies or shoot weapons at them, but generally you'll want to have a big guy with a sword protect you while you work proper magic to disintegrate every enemy in sight. Of course, all spells are resisted, either by nature or by your target, so success is never guaranteed.

There's a bunch of example spells, but generally you have to build your own, which is half or more of the fun. The system even works in a way where pre-building your spells gives you a concrete advantage - when you've created and formalized a spell that uses the principles in a specific way, it's easier to mitigate the aging it causes.

I just love magic systems where magic has a cost associated. Consequences for actions FTW.

Tyrrell
2010-08-20, 07:18 AM
the magic of Hermetic magi from Ars Magica 5 in addition to having perhaps the most options and detail of any RPG magic system ever has, for me, the perfect feel for the magic that I want for my characters.

While the system lets the characters craft their own spells on the fly the characters powers tend to be specialized to the extent that they aren't preposterously powerful, they're just a little bit useful for darn near anything and somewhat competent within their own specialization.

The rules for formal magic duels, creation of enchanted items, binding familiars, using arcane and sympathetic connections to pierce the magic resistance of foes, magic resistance for that matter, the rules for undergoing initiation into secret magical practices, the way that magic has specific limits that it can't easily overcome, the way that each character's magic has flaws and strengths, the way that magical materials can be used for study, or crafting, or augmenting spells, or performing powerful rituals, the different ways to study, the ways that magical laboratories can be altered to fit the personality and interests of the mage, the nature of talismans, the way that familiars are handled, and so on and so on

For me it is just right, it's so close to exactly what I'd want if I were just dreaming it up that it's scary.

For me the only downside to the system is the learning curve for new players.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 07:19 AM
Sometimes you just don't want to overthink things. And that's when 3.5 invocations step in.

Psyx
2010-08-20, 07:23 AM
WFRP2. Brilliant system that well-represented the way magic works in the game-world (ie: twisting the forces of chaos).


Every spell has a difficulty number. Roll a number of d10 up to your maximum, dictated by your skill at using magic. Add a small bonus from material components, should you use them.

Make difficulty: Spell works
Fail to make difficulty: It doesn't
Roll more 1's than anything else: Make a check or gain an insanity point
Roll doubles, triples or quadruples: Go to the backlash tables and suck down anything from curdling milk in the area (on the doubles table) through to 'you are dead' on the quadruples table.

You can cast all day, but the more you cast, the crazier and deader you're going to end up.

Aroka
2010-08-20, 07:26 AM
WFRP2. Brilliant system that well-represented the way magic works in the game-world (ie: twisting the forces of chaos).


Every spell has a difficulty number. Roll a number of d10 up to your maximum, dictated by your skill at using magic. Add a small bonus from material components, should you use them.

Make difficulty: Spell works
Fail to make difficulty: It doesn't
Roll more 1's than anything else: Make a check or gain an insanity point
Roll doubles, triples or quadruples: Go to the backlash tables and suck down anything from curdling milk in the area (on the doubles table) through to 'you are dead' on the quadruples table.

You can cast all day, but the more you cast, the crazier and deader you're going to end up.

I love the Wind-specific tables in the magic sourcebook, where you can (IIRC) inadverdently turn parts of yourself into gold using Gold Magic (couldn't you actually turn internal organs into gold, killing you?).

Snake-Aes
2010-08-20, 07:37 AM
Casting from two primary sources: Mana and Rituals. Casting from mana is intuitive(think diablo or dragon quest VII). Rituals are effects based on your skill with magic (spellcraft in d&d), with long cast times and a different subset of applications. Many spells and rituals are interchangeable.

Now, I don't know any official system that does that, but my Long group plays around with that for almost 5 years now.

balistafreak
2010-08-20, 09:15 AM
Something different: the Mass Effect 2 powers system.

Admittedly it's far better suited for a real-time game than a turn-based one, but the idea of interacting with two systems at once appeals to me.

Explanation: there are two major parts to Mass Effect 2 combat, your powers and the 3rd person shooter. When you shoot off a power, it happens (near) instantly - however, ALL of your powers are locked out for a short interval (measured in seconds) depending on the complexity/effect of the power used. During that time, you are free to concentrate on the second part, taking cover and shooting down enemies.

Sure, you can just use the powers or guns, but combining the two and using one to supplement the other makes for an "optimal" experience. The game doesn't really reward focusing on either extreme - even Adepts (power focused) have to learn a lot of gunplay, especially at higher difficulty levels, and the Soldier (gun focused) can't be played effectively without liberal and well-timed applications of its signature time-slowing power. Every class needs to master the "power dance" to have a hope of completely the game. (On Insanity mode, that is. You can do whatever the heck you want on Casual.) :smalltongue:

This might explain my burgeoning obsession with the Crusader maneuver system. :smallbiggrin:

Tyndmyr
2010-08-20, 09:26 AM
Even in 3e you don't have enough spells until higher levels, at least in my opinion. That said, what do you mean "it's always made sense to me"? What reason do you like it other than it is the one you started with?

It feels right. Other systems invariably either involve a spell point/mana point system that feels too granular and RPGish, or don't really show progression the way that vancian does. I've played under a great many magic systems, and that one, despite the downsides such as spell preparation bookkeeping, always felt the best.

darkpuppy
2010-08-20, 09:31 AM
Personally, I like my magic dangerous as hell, so several systems have appealed to me. First, there's Ron Edwards' Sorceror, which had a system wherein magic is a distinctly nasty force that can screw you over... C. J. Carella's Witchcraft also had an interesting system... but even in DnD, there were variants that I quite enjoyed. For example, the taint system, used in WoW and Ravenloft, was quite fun to use, while the Defiler/Preserver system led to some incredibly interesting "discussions" IC about which was less risky... WFRP's system also had its good points, but, for me, the risks involved with the more animistic system in Werewolf (old or new) win hands down. Yes, you can get that shiny level 5 gift... but are you willing to pay the price? because you can guarantee it's going to be steep.

Morty
2010-08-20, 09:34 AM
Vancian Spellcasting. The execution in 3rd edition D&D isn't ideal, but I still like the basic assumptions it makes. It makes spells feel like something serious - casting them takes a long time so you do it all beforehand and only finish it when you need it.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-20, 09:35 AM
[...]Other systems invariably either involve a spell point/mana point system that feels too granular and RPGish[...]

Golden....

Khatoblepas
2010-08-20, 10:10 AM
I always liked RuneQuest/BRP/Classic Fantasy's approach to magic. Skill based, so that spells aren't always successful or completely mitigated by sanity/spell failures etc. It's just like swinging a sword or picking a lock: The more you do it, the better you get at it. But only that spell. So you're gonna want to get a mage who knows the spell better than you to teach you that spell, or research better ways of casting that spell rather than scribe and go.

I like to add the Ceremony rules from Advanced Runequest too in order to make casting these spells more tempting just before combat. Cast the spell for X more rounds, gain +Xd6% to your casting skill, up to your Ceremony skill. Of course, when I'm playing Classic Fantasy, I sub Perform (Rituals) instead to streamline it.

It also gives us the idea that spells are easier to cast the more pomp and hand waving you put into it.

Satyr
2010-08-20, 10:14 AM
Dungeons & Zombies has a similar system, doesn't it? There's a few principles, but they need specific applications.


Sort of. Only much more free-form (no invocations, one standardized skill) and a more formulaic spread sheet for creating spells (or actually rituals) but it works very well as it both includes vast freedoms for players and sensible mechanisms to control abuse.
I like magic systems which allows many options; however if magic makes any other options obsolete, it is not a good system.


Other systems invariably either involve a spell point/mana point system that feels too granular and RPGish,

How can an RPG be too RPGish? Isn't that like a too round wheel?

Aroka
2010-08-20, 10:28 AM
How can an RPG be too RPGish? Isn't that like a too round wheel?

I suppose he meant too video-game-RPGish? Which is a bit silly, considering we measure health the exact same way - in hit points.

Except, of course, in realistic RPGs like TROS, where you just measure wounds rather than some nonsense abstract pool of "health."

But if hit points are "a mechanical representation of how much damage you can sustain", how is mana any different? "A mechanical representation of how much magic you can use."

Artesia:AKW has five stats in each of three areas (Body, Mind, and Spirit), which are added up for a Body, Mind, and Spirit point total; Body is your hit points, and Mind and Spirit are mostly used for magical stuff (different magics requiring different points). It doesn't strike me as very video-gamish at all. I also love that sacred or special places have their own pools of points (which can function as either) - actually a whole lot like in Witchcraft. You want to cast a great big spell, or a lot of smaller spells, you hit up that hilltop or a battlefield or graveyard. (Of course, a battlefield will also be massively Polluted, making any ritual to tap the power or use it much harder unless you Purify it first.)


Edit: Okay, granted in TROS bleeding does specifically reduce your Health attribute, but that just goes to show that ultimately, you need to track number somewhere. And that's the only part of combat that reduces HT, and bleeding isn't the most common way to die.

Melayl
2010-08-20, 10:33 AM
I prefer mana and skill-based casting systems myself. It just seems to fit my idea of fantasy better. Skill-based systems also (IMO) allow for risk in spellcasting, which is important to me.

Glimbur
2010-08-20, 10:37 AM
I'm fond of Dark Heresy's system. You start out as an easily deniable asset with little skill. An example power is one that heals 1d5 wounds, in a system where the average starting character has somewhere between about 8 and 15 wounds. Another option is a power that lets you reroll one die you roll before the end of this turn. That sounds great, until you realize you roll two dice to hit and that it takes a half-action every turn to use. Using it every turn leads to...

Backlash. I did not find it as scary as some people do, but every time you use your powers you have a non-zero chance of killing yourself. More likely, things just get a little weird, or glass breaks within 1d5 km of you, or it rains blood in a 3d30 m radius, or whatever. Clearly supernatural.

On the plus side, you can keep trying your "spells" as much as you want.

Xefas
2010-08-20, 11:15 AM
Well, depends on the mood and the setting. For something high-fantasy, I think Exalted's system of Sorcery works perfectly well, in that it uses the exact same mechanics as everything else. You take an action, you spend motes (the resource you use for everything from heroically punching someone, to heroically inspiring a nation, to heroically walking as casually as possible), and stuff happens. Stronger sorcery does, admittedly, take a few more actions than normal.

This prevents you from having to learn and work under an entirely new system than everything else. Not to mention it gives the feel of such epic power being perfectly natural for your characters. Heroically punching someone uses the same mechanic as grabbing a few deities and using your own badassery as a forge to warp their divine essence into physical metal which you then build a giant mecha out of and rampage across the countryside inside (in the span of about 10 seconds).

For something a bit more gritty, Burning Wheel does a nice job. It's skill based (there's a separate 'Sorcery' skill from everything else), and if you succeed on the skill check, you can allocate extra successes between 'Area' and 'Effect' to either increase the size or potency of the spell. If you fail, you get to roll a d6. 3-6, nothing bad happens. On a 2, you just messed up the incantation and instead of your spell, you cast an entirely different and random spell. On a 1, 'Unwanted Summoning'. You dun effed up. There are a couple of gruesome options if you get this effect - all of which are decidedly gruesome.

Whether you succeed or fail, you're still Taxed, which can effect you with The Sickness - both sort of self explanatory. Although, if you want to be more careful, you can increase the casting time by a few times over to lower the chances of horrible mishap and possibly increase its power.

That's just the Human-specific stuff too. Elves have Spell-Songs, Orcs have Rituals, and Dwarfs have their own weird stuff.

And then there's the Magic Burner, a separate book about magic. Which I don't have :smallannoyed:

Kobold-Bard
2010-08-20, 11:36 AM
The D&D Erudite is my fave. I make all prepared casters in my games work like that now usnig a modified version of Spell Points (none of that paying extra to blast effectively crap) and spontaneous casters are similar to Psions etc. Absolutely love me some Erudite :smallbiggrin:

Drolyt
2010-08-20, 11:38 AM
Hmm, a lot of you seem to like magic with lots of risks. Why? Personally I don't see the fun in your powers having a chance of killing you if you use them.

darkpuppy
2010-08-20, 11:46 AM
That's cool, Drolyt, it's not for everyone. But then, I've never had any fun with systems where there's no backlash for messing with reality.

Aroka
2010-08-20, 11:47 AM
Hmm, a lot of you seem to like magic with lots of risks. Why? Personally I don't see the fun in your powers having a chance of killing you if you use them.

Risk is fun. It adds an element of excitement. I love WFRP - it's a world where magic is dangerous, and the system makes you feel it. At the very least, there'll be that niggling worry ("Oh, please no doubles, no doubles"). It restricts magic in a smooth and sensible way, and makes magic special and dramatic - the Bright Wizard will smash enemies with sword and staff until the PCs are nearly overwhelmed, then summons his power for a mighty blast of fire that scorches the enemy! (The dwarf glares at him, "Why didn't you do that right away?" The wizard just give him a mysterious look and shakes his head at the naivete.)

It doesn't always have to be risk, though. Just having a cost is good, too. It, again, limits magic realistically. Magic is available, it can be very powerful, but you won't use it to solve all problems because it has a cost. This, again, makes magic special and dramatic. You'll always be making a conscious decision to use magic, and that makes it feel cooler to me.

Magic doesn't have to have a cost all the time - as I've said, in A:AKW, the cost of magic is related to its duration. If you want to cast a permanent Curse on someone that may even be passed down to his descendants (indefinitely, in theory), you'll have to expend your power permanently. If you want to just put a Hex on them, you only have to expend your power for as long as you want to maintain the Hex. If you want to cast a simple, instananeous effect, like a Sending, you just use some temporary power that you'll start recovering right away.

I don't like cheap magic, like you see in D&D. Even spells with expensive material components are really cheap in D&D.


A lot of us, I suppose, prefer an "older" sense of magic, before D&D - in the style of Tolkien or Moorcock or Howard, where each spell is a surprising display and a significant action.


Risk or cost isn't the only way to balance things out, though. The other good way is basically "equal opportunity for equal power." I described MRQ2's magic system, which is IMO the highest evolution of the magic systems of the RQ games. Magic has no permanent cost as such (except that you do need to devote time and experience to learning the associated skills), but it's also available to everyone in the same way, the power is completely relative to your ability, and it's not over-powered - you can't sweep away a battlefield full of enemies with one spell. (Not the ones the rules give you, anyway; the setting of Glorantha absolutely has magic that can do that, but only the very greatest heroes can do that sort of thing by themselves, and even they prefer to have support for it.)

Draz74
2010-08-20, 11:50 AM
Hmm, a lot of you seem to like magic with lots of risks. Why? Personally I don't see the fun in your powers having a chance of killing you if you use them.

I think my goal is to make magic playable, but a little underwhelming (like an unoptimized D&D 3e Warlock) "out of the box," but pretty risk-free; then, offer some feats that make magic significantly more powerful, but also introduce risks to its use.

Depending what kind of feats you select, you can take on different types of risks. (Some casters risk their spells not working round-to-round; others risk getting tired quickly, so that they can't do more magic that day; some risk roleplaying restrictions, like a Binder with a bad pact; and some risk actual harm to themselves.)

Drolyt
2010-08-20, 11:51 AM
That's cool, Drolyt, it's not for everyone. But then, I've never had any fun with systems where there's no backlash for messing with reality.
I don't see your point? I'm fine with everyone having their own opinions, I was just wondering why some people prefer the high risk magic.

Caliphbubba
2010-08-20, 11:54 AM
+1 for the oWoD Magick system. good times, good fun. Epic effects are possible at low power levels, but unlikely. and it rewared creativity.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-20, 11:55 AM
I don't see your point? I'm fine with everyone having their own opinions, I was just wondering why some people prefer the high risk magic.

Because it's fun, mostly. It's not my top preference as I like my spellcasting reliable, but there are great many stunts to be pulled when magic is trickier. Storyteller's Mage is a good example of how you don't want to tell reality to shut up and sit down (rather, you gently but firmly hold her shoulders, stare at her back, whisper how good she looks and kick her knees)

Mordar
2010-08-20, 11:55 AM
Hi all -

Although many may mock me (alliteration alert!), my favorites are RoleMaster and Shadowrun. SR nicely presents the idea of risk/reward and models the physical/mental drain of spellcasting quite nicely.

RM gives you great flexability, allows you to do foolish things to yourself in an effort to cast that big spell, and works to keep casters in check while giving them the aforemention flexability. The combination of power points and multiple spell lists (with the ability to "over cast") gives even a fledgling several options, and while you can deplete your battery so to speak, it can recharge quickly enough to continue the adventure without 8 hours of downtime.

- M

darkpuppy
2010-08-20, 11:55 AM
Like I said, I don't have any fun with systems where magic has little to no cost. Bending reality should bend you right back, imho. But, as you note, to each their own.

Xefas
2010-08-20, 11:57 AM
Hmm, a lot of you seem to like magic with lots of risks. Why? Personally I don't see the fun in your powers having a chance of killing you if you use them.

Because it forces a meaningful decision. You have to decide "Is it worth it to my character to achieve X, something he would not otherwise be able to achieve given mortal constraints, if it means risking his life?". It creates drama for the characters and interesting situations for the players.

If you play RPGs like a board-game, and only consider the optimal decision, then of course it's not going to be fun. If you play RPGs to play out engaging emotional interactions between fictional personalities, then the choice between "Do I fireball the Duke's guards in order to save my daughter, risking being torn apart by eldritch abominations, but otherwise assuring my safety? Or do I pull my sword and risk life and limb without meddling with dangerous magics? Or do I simply walk away because I've decided my daughter isn't worth risking my life?" is gold. That could be a major turning point for that character. He's either a hero, a coward, or a cautionary tale about foolhardy wizards meddling with powers they were not meant to know. All of those could be components to a good story.

On the other hand, you have "I fireball him. Lets keep going." and that's it. Not a lot of wonder and majesty for something called "magic". Not that you can't have a good story without risky magic, but risk is the essence of an engaging story, so risky magic adds to it.

And again, your character always has the choice never to learn/use magic. If he doesn't have the balls, or doesn't care enough about something for the tiny chance of horrible death, then he doesn't have to learn it. It's a choice.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-20, 11:57 AM
That said, all systems tend to have their perks, both mechanical and narrative. Shinken can probably confirm this point: It's highly amusing to play a wizard who keeps preparing spells duplicated and is deathly afraid of casting them because he effectively forgets the spell until he can prepare again. Can be played for drama or laughs equally.

Aroka
2010-08-20, 12:03 PM
RM gives you great flexability, allows you to do foolish things to yourself in an effort to cast that big spell, and works to keep casters in check while giving them the aforemention flexability. The combination of power points and multiple spell lists (with the ability to "over cast") gives even a fledgling several options, and while you can deplete your battery so to speak, it can recharge quickly enough to continue the adventure without 8 hours of downtime.

For all the hundreds of spell lists (gah!), I did like Rolemaster magic more than the combat. At the levels we played (1-12 or so), the spells kept a very Middle-Earth appropriate feel; the elf ranger was just preternaturally woodwise and stealthy, the paladin just had that Dúnadan knack for healing and championing, and only the magician/wizard actually did flashy magic, throwing bolts of fire when his sword and bow didn't suffice. To me, Middle-Earth magic is supposed to be subtle, except when it's a proper wizard doing it.


stuff

All of this so much.

Aran Banks
2010-08-20, 12:14 PM
World of Warcraft casting, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Arbane
2010-08-20, 12:25 PM
I don't see your point? I'm fine with everyone having their own opinions, I was just wondering why some people prefer the high risk magic.

I'm personally not the hugest fan of it (because dice hate me and want me to suffer), but I can understand the appeal - it makes magic a risky, poorly-understood last resort, rather than Standard Operating Procedure. As some wiseguy pointed out, in D&D the ultimate miraculous feat, raising the dead, has "all the grandeur and wonder of ordering a McDonald's Extra Value Meal".

My favorite magic system? I'm partial to Exalted's Charms: Combine magic power and mundane skills to do incredible things.

I also like Weapons of the Gods' "Secret Arts", which covers things like Taoist curses, medical effects, and social influence - you can't actually _force_ people to take action the way you'd like, but you can give them a cookie if they go along with you.

Psyx
2010-08-20, 12:25 PM
Hmm, a lot of you seem to like magic with lots of risks. Why? Personally I don't see the fun in your powers having a chance of killing you if you use them.


Several answers:

Magic in WFRP is very specifically about twisting the raw power of chaos. It's *supposed* to be dangerous. Wizards are a bit mad, and generally not keen to use magic for everything. Mages are seldom trusted and witches are burned at the stake because uncontrolled magic is dangerous. Risky magic that can make weird stuff happen is perfectly in keeping with the game setting.

Vancian and spell-point systems limit a caster on spells per day. You invariably get the casters announcing that they are out of juice, and suddenly the party is bedding down for a good night's sleep by lunchtime; refusing to take another step until they have their spells back on line. It's a bit dull. With a 'pick up them bones' approach to casting, the caster can toss around as many spells per day as they like... in theory.

Risky casting means casters must pick and choose when to use their spells. It's fun; knowing that every spell you cast could do something strange and unpredictable. It takes some of the surety out of the caster's hands. Rolling those dice for miscasts is fun.

Casters stand at the back and don't take their fair share of kickings in the press of battle. So why shouldn't they share the risks, the same way as fighters do every combat? Otherwise there can be a level of resentment from those who have to put their life on the line every combat, while the skirt-wearers stand at the back, take no real risks, and steal all the glory.

Magic is powerful. It often out-shines melee types. If it was just like throwing arrows, then why not use a bow? For magic to be powerful, there must be a cost. That's game balance. D&D has got it wrong, and we all know it: The cost is not enough. In D&D magic is just an arrow in your quiver, that you use without a second thought. We're talking magic here: reality warping MAGIC: It should be more than a munition.




RM gives you great flexability,

There are a few too many lists, but it's not too bad a system. Although one of my character's last words were 'overcasting is easy'...

Glimbur
2010-08-20, 12:28 PM
World of Warcraft casting, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

What exactly do you like about it? If I remember correctly, it is mana-bar based, with different abilities having different cooldowns. Also everyone has something to spend mana on. Am I correct?

DanReiv
2010-08-20, 12:30 PM
Deadland's Huckster system.

Just do it with a double pair.

Aran Banks
2010-08-20, 12:36 PM
What exactly do you like about it? If I remember correctly, it is mana-bar based, with different abilities having different cooldowns. Also everyone has something to spend mana on. Am I correct?

It's a real-time RPG. Therefore real-time casting.

You need to know a lot about your abilities to do well (of course... for some classes this turns into hotkeying the entire keyboard and then smashing it against your face).

You can fire off many many spells, with the only time restriction being how long it takes to cast the spell just before.

Tinydwarfman
2010-08-20, 12:42 PM
My own burgeoning re-make and combination of the GURPS Threshhold Magic System, combined with smaller fatigue costs and a more in-depth re-write of the Syntactic word/noun skill casting! But that's not even close to being done.

Honestly, I really do like GURPS's basic system. Fatigue Points make your character seem human, give a resource to manage, and have real costs for overusing your power.

Silly Wizard
2010-08-20, 12:47 PM
I prefer the spellcasting in Mage: the Ascension, although I am pretty keen on that of Arcana Evolved (I never liked separation of arcane and divine) and 3.5 psionics.

Morty
2010-08-20, 12:48 PM
Vancian and spell-point systems limit a caster on spells per day. You invariably get the casters announcing that they are out of juice, and suddenly the party is bedding down for a good night's sleep by lunchtime; refusing to take another step until they have their spells back on line. It's a bit dull. With a 'pick up them bones' approach to casting, the caster can toss around as many spells per day as they like... in theory.


I wouldn't be so quick to call Vancian and SP spellcasting as cost-free. Yes, D&D doesn't add any constraints to either of those systems aside from spell slots or spell points limit, but it doesn't mean it can't be done. WFRP 1st edition for instance, had both Spell Points and consequences for spellcasting.

Renchard
2010-08-20, 12:48 PM
Mage: the Awakening. I like magic systems that don't focus on discrete effects, but rather on providing building blocks to let the mage create their own spells. I prefer Awakening a bit over Ascension because I prefer Fate and Death to Entropy. Ars Magica has a great building block system, and I liked the Elements of Magic system as well (a third party product for 3e).

Wardog
2010-08-20, 12:59 PM
For a CRPG example, I liked the system in used in an old game called Magic and Mayhem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_and_Mayhem

It combined a slot-based "prepare the spells you think you'll need in advance" system with mana-based on-the-fly casting.


Between game levels, you prepared your spells by combining various reagents and talismans.

Talismans were sort-of-like spell slots, that you purchased as you levelled up, and came in three types: Law, Neutral, and Chaos. Reagents were various material components that you found in the course of your adventures.

Putting different reagents in different talismans produced different spells (e.g. IIRC brimstone in a neutral talisman gave you a fireball spell, while brimstone in a chaos talisman gave you a particular summoning spell).

Once you started a level, you were stuck with the particular spells you had chosen/created until you completed the level, after which you could rearrange them shoud you wish.

While playing the level itself, you could cast your chosen spells at will, using mana. Mana was replenished by standing (or telling a summoned monster to stand) on a mana source.


As the game was a RPG/RTS where you used your summoned monsters as an army, and chose your spell selection between maps, it would need some tweeks to adapt it for PnP roleplaying (e.g. by using a D&D-style "you need a good night's rest" to change your spell selection, and an alternative way of replenishing your mana), but I'm sure it could be made workable with a bit of thought, and I thought it was an interesting and enjoyable system in the original game.

Aux-Ash
2010-08-20, 01:03 PM
My favourite magic system comes from the swedish roleplaying game Eon.

The basic principle is that you channel units of power, called filaments, from various powersources and then weave them into effects. For instance, if you want to weave the effect fire then you need to channel filaments from fire (which could be from an actual fire, or from yourself but causing some damage to yourself).

However, if these filaments are left unused for more than a round, then they return to their element (and if you don't control it it can hurt you a lot, fire-filaments could put you on fire if uncontrolled when they disperse). This mean that one cannot channel from more than one powersource at a time (except during rituals, but those takes hours) so if you want more than one type of effects you need to transform filaments into another form of filaments.

The last step is then to weave the effects, which forms the spell.

As an example: If I want to make a fireball that flies against the target and explodes, I need to first channel fire-filaments. Then transform some of them to chaos-filaments. Then weave one fire effect from fire, one movement-effect from chaos and one explosion-effect from chaos.

The more filaments, the more powerful the spell. Of course, the more filaments the more dice is added (and in skill-checks you want to roll low) and a point of exhaustion for each effect (and when they mount up you cna gain additional dices to skillchecks).

Potentionally you could do anything.... at your own peril.

Tinydwarfman
2010-08-20, 01:58 PM
The cinematic Unisystem magic is basically built around the premise of "build your own spell" every time you need one. That's fun.
It's not even impossible to balance; most powerful spells are slow, and spell research/creation takes quite some time.

Where, prey tell, could I find the rules for Unisystem magic? I've been looking, but I can't find a core book.

The Rose Dragon
2010-08-20, 02:20 PM
There is no core rulebook. However, its best magic system is in, I believe, Witchcraft (http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=692&it=1).

The best example of the cinematic example is Ghosts of Albion (http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=56971).

Greenish
2010-08-20, 02:25 PM
To me, Middle-Earth magic is supposed to be subtle, except when it's a proper wizard doing it.Of course, in Middle Earth, "wizard" is a race, not a class. (Or rather, the divide doesn't exist.)

Aroka
2010-08-20, 02:33 PM
My favorite magic system? I'm partial to Exalted's Charms: Combine magic power and mundane skills to do incredible things.

If we get into concepts, I really love this style of magic. Glorantha, the setting of RuneQuest and HeroQuest, has it - HQ does a better job of representing it mechanically, IMO, but it's present in both. You don't really "cast spells", it's just that you know the way to throw a spear so that it turns into a lightning bolt, or you know how to blow out the breath in your lungs to carry you through the air at great speed, or how to run over tree-tops or water. In Glorantha, magic is life, and life is magic, and the line between "mundane feats" and "magical feats" is so blurry you can't really tell where it goes. It's considered perfectly normal procedure for great heroes who haven't been killed by something particularly vicious (of which there's plenty) to get up within a week of their death, so bodies are laid out for viewing at the home of the deceased for a week in case it happens.

In RuneQuest, though, this is not represented well, mechanically, and the mechanics actually make it hard to feel like this is what you're doing.


WFRP 1st edition for instance, had both Spell Points and consequences for spellcasting.

Did it? I don't remember any mishap table. I remember the spell points. Then again, nobody ever played a spellcaster at my table.


Of course, in Middle Earth, "wizard" is a race, not a class. (Or rather, the divide doesn't exist.)

Every Middle-Earth RPG I know (MERP/RM, LOTR) basically takes the stance that the Istari train human apprentices (I suppose "wizard" is a specific title, but in the LOTR RPG there are non-Istari wizards too), and maybe even elves who want a more impressive grasp of their natural abilities.

Tyrrell
2010-08-20, 03:03 PM
Originally Posted by Tyndmyr
Other systems invariably either involve a spell point/mana point system that feels too granular and RPGishGolden....

That's just flat out false.

Ars Magica which I was singing the virtues of and the WoD mage games which other people are extolling (although I'm myself not at all fond of assencion and I've not yet read the new one), shadowrun, Deadlands hucksters, Werewolf, and I'd wager cinematic unisystem and Ron Edwards sorcerer (although I haven't read them) have all been mentioned as well as a bunch of others. In fact, the only things on this thread that I recognize as spell point/ mana are WoW and Rolemaster.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-20, 03:14 PM
Did you really spend so much effort in writing a reply to something that was just a snide remark about a logical contradiction?

Morty
2010-08-20, 03:17 PM
Did it? I don't remember any mishap table. I remember the spell points. Then again, nobody ever played a spellcaster at my table.


I may be wrong. It's been a while since I read the rulebook. But I'd be surprised if there weren't, since 1st edition is just as, if not more, grim 'n' gritty than 2nd. And the lack of mishap table doesn't mean there are no consequences, especially given 1st edition's... haphazardness.

TheThan
2010-08-20, 03:41 PM
For D20 system I love the 3.5 psionics system. It simple, easy to use, elegant and much more balanced than standard magic. The problem I have with the “spell points” variant (IE mana), is that the variant opens up the casters to be able to cast more spells at any given time. When you combine it with the standard spell list (which has spells that are already a bit broken), you end up widening the gap between casters and everyone else. That’s not to say I don’t like the concept, but the execution is a little poor.
My only real issue with psionics is that it cannot fully replace the Vancian casting system because it doesn’t have easy access to healing. Magical healing is very important in the D20 system, as it is the only real effective way to restore lost hit points. Granted, that is a problem with most sub systems in D20, none of them are fully integrated into the system. So you kind of have to make your chosen sub-system fit.


I like Tri-stat’s approach to just about anything. Its very much “build your own” so making magic spells is very customizable, and with a little know how you can create just about any effect you can think of. You can even utilize a spell point system (BESM calls it energy, but whatever) to give your spells costs, so they aren’t infinitely spam-able.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 04:08 PM
Every Middle-Earth RPG I know (MERP/RM, LOTR) basically takes the stance that the Istari train human apprentices (I suppose "wizard" is a specific title, but in the LOTR RPG there are non-Istari wizards too), and maybe even elves who want a more impressive grasp of their natural abilities.Well, the magic in LotR isn't really something you could train (as far as I can discern from the books) and seems to be the domain of Maiar and noldor (or whatever the elves who went to west and came back were called). Of course, LotR doesn't work that well as a class based system, since in the books the abilities were tied to your race (and breed, dúnedain being "more noble" than the men with continental ancestry, with healing and stuff), the elves who visited west being strong in magic (of sorts) and the "lesser" elves being just expert woodsmen.

But hey, if you want hobbit wizards, whatever rocks your boat.

[Edit]:

My only real issue with psionics is that it cannot fully replace the Vatican casting systemDefinitely my favourite common typo.

Kobold-Bard
2010-08-20, 04:29 PM
... Vatican casting ...

Lightning Bolt
http://www.google.co.uk/m/search?site=images&source=mog&hl=en&gl=uk&client=safari&q=pope%20lightning#i=4

Summon Nature's Ally
http://www.google.co.uk/m/search?site=images&source=mog&hl=en&gl=uk&client=safari&q=pope%20lightning#i=6

Ba-dum-bum-chsh! :smalltongue:

Tetsubo 57
2010-08-20, 05:21 PM
I like the 3.5 Psionics system. I also like the Everstone system. It is also a point buy mechanic.

BobVosh
2010-08-20, 05:29 PM
I liked changeling's magic.

Well, changeling the dreaming. Still haven't played the newest one.

I'm not sure about the entire balance of it, but it was fun to combine the magic types, think of a simple magic act to set it off, and creative enough that magic didn't require reading 200 pages of fairly ridged spells.

dsmiles
2010-08-20, 06:57 PM
Personally, I like my magic dangerous as hell, so several systems have appealed to me. First, there's Ron Edwards' Sorceror, which had a system wherein magic is a distinctly nasty force that can screw you over... C. J. Carella's Witchcraft also had an interesting system... but even in DnD, there were variants that I quite enjoyed. For example, the taint system, used in WoW and Ravenloft, was quite fun to use, while the Defiler/Preserver system led to some incredibly interesting "discussions" IC about which was less risky... WFRP's system also had its good points, but, for me, the risks involved with the more animistic system in Werewolf (old or new) win hands down. Yes, you can get that shiny level 5 gift... but are you willing to pay the price? because you can guarantee it's going to be steep.

I'm quite surprised you didn't like the magic system from The Slayers d20. Now, there's some dangerous as hell magic. I loved it. My friends and I converted all of the appropriate 3.5e spells to it and used it exclusively. Aaahhh...good times. But we play 4e now, and the powers system is what it is.

darkpuppy
2010-08-20, 06:58 PM
@dsmiles

I shall have to look that one up. Sure a friend's got a copy somewhere, but it may well be an interesting choice. I'll definitely give it a whirl next time I find a local group (in Pembrokeshire, exceedingly unlikely... reading, let alone roleplaying, does not appear to be a popular past-time in west wales... *sigh*)

dsmiles
2010-08-20, 07:01 PM
I'd offer you a spot at my table, but I live in Virginia. I can haz players nao, plz?

EDIT: And unfortunately, when my hard drive crashed, I lost all of that campaign setting. :smallfrown:

Galdor
2010-08-20, 07:01 PM
I'm also a fan of 3.5 psionics, for reasons that have already been stated.
I've recently gotten into the Star Wars Saga force system, and I like that as well. Making the powers per encounter was a great way to do it.

TheThan
2010-08-20, 07:10 PM
.

[Edit]:Definitely my favourite common typo.

doh. I'll fix that.

darkpuppy
2010-08-20, 07:18 PM
I'd offer you a spot at my table, but I live in Virginia. I can haz players nao, plz?

EDIT: And unfortunately, when my hard drive crashed, I lost all of that campaign setting. :smallfrown:

*smiles* if I'm ever in the area, I'll PM ya... unfortunately, not gonna happen for at least 6 months. However, if you know any roleplayers who you'd like to see crushed, suggest citizenship in the UK, specifically Pembs, and then give me a PM. I do player ego-crushing as a free service. :smallcool:

Drolyt
2010-08-20, 08:05 PM
Just to clear up confusion on LotR magic: it was never explained. It is pretty clear that anyone can do it though, they just need to learn and to increase their natural potential. The ring wraiths were human sorcerers, and it is implied that the Numenorians had magic. There was also that shapeshifter from The Hobbit. It was very heavily implied that Frodo was beginning to develop some limited mental powers, and Galadriel outright stated that it was at least possible for him to learn magic and command the One Ring. So yeah, magic was equal opportunity in Middle-Earth the same way technology is in the real world: anyone can use it, but most people don't have access to it.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 08:13 PM
Just to clear up confusion on LotR magic: it was never explained. It is pretty clear that anyone can do it though, they just need to learn and to increase their natural potential. The ring wraiths were human sorcerers, and it is implied that the Numenorians had magic. There was also that shapeshifter from The Hobbit. It was very heavily implied that Frodo was beginning to develop some limited mental powers, and Galadriel outright stated that it was at least possible for him to learn magic and command the One Ring. So yeah, magic was equal opportunity in Middle-Earth the same way technology is in the real world: anyone can use it, but most people don't have access to it.What, everybody? No way. Numemorians (and thus their offshoots in Angmar) got upgraded to human+ for settling and living so long closer to the Valar, "the shapeshifter" in Hobbit (Beorn) wasn't a human but a skin-changer (a race of werebear-like thingies) and Frodo had no powers other than those that leaked from the ring.

Now, it's true the magic was never explained, but all I can see indicates that it's innate power (and usually a direct result from interaction with the Valar).

Drolyt
2010-08-20, 08:34 PM
What, everybody? No way. Numemorians (and thus their offshoots in Angmar) got upgraded to human+ for settling and living so long closer to the Valar, "the shapeshifter" in Hobbit (Beorn) wasn't a human but a skin-changer (a race of werebear-like thingies) and Frodo had no powers other than those that leaked from the ring.

Now, it's true the magic was never explained, but all I can see indicates that it's innate power (and usually a direct result from interaction with the Valar).

The Nazgul were all sorcerers before they obtained the rings, and of them only the Witch King of Angmar was of Numenorian descent. Also are you certain Beorn wasn't a human? Doesn't matter I suppose. Also whether or not Frodo's powers were caused by the ring is irrelevant, Galadriel confirmed that he could learn magic if he wanted to. Sure the Elves learned from the Valar and the Numenorians learned from the Elves, but Dwarves seemed to have magic of their own that they developed completely on their own. At any rate regardless of where you got it it seemed all beings in Middle Earth were capable of using magic, to one degree or another.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 08:44 PM
The Nazgul were all sorcerers before they obtained the rings, and of them only the Witch King of Angmar was of Numenorian descent.Are you sure? I thought his subjects were other fallen numemorians and the continental people they subjugated.
Also are you certain Beorn wasn't a human? Doesn't matter I suppose.He and his people had the power to take the form of a bear, which was inherited.
Also whether or not Frodo's powers were caused by the ring is irrelevant, Galadriel confirmed that he could learn magic if he wanted to.What, where?
Sure the Elves learned from the Valar and the Numenorians learned from the ElvesYou keep using "learned" but "received" would be a better term.
, but Dwarves seemed to have magic of their own that they developed completely on their own.Where? They were great smiths, miners and warriors, sure, but what magic did they have?
At any rate regardless of where you got it it seemed all beings in Middle Earth were capable of using magic, to one degree or another.[Citation needed]. The only men to use magic at all were numemorians, and even theirs was rather limited. No dwarf nor hobbit magic is depicted in LotR, Hobbit nor Silmarillion.

Aroka
2010-08-20, 09:36 PM
But hey, if you want hobbit wizards, whatever rocks your boat.


Every Middle-Earth RPG I know (MERP/RM, LOTR) basically takes the stance that the Istari train human apprentices (I suppose "wizard" is a specific title, but in the LOTR RPG there are non-Istari wizards too), and maybe even elves who want a more impressive grasp of their natural abilities.

Foomph. Straw men are so flammable.

A RPG in a setting with magic in which no PC can use magic is silly. (Not to mention all my campaigns are set 1600 years before the War of the Ring, in one of the standard MERP setting times, and that period is so completely shrouded in mystery by the 3000s that it's pretty impossible to make definite claims about it based on the books. Funnily, even the First Age and the ages before the suns are detailed more by Tolkien.)


Are you sure? I thought his subjects were other fallen numemorians and the continental people they subjugated.

Indeterminate. Khamul the Easterling is the only one named besides the Witch King, but Easterling does have a pretty specific meaning the - peoples of Rhûn. AFAIK there's no indication the dúnadan ever ruled in that region, while the Easterlings have been allies, servants, or slaves of the Enemy for millenia.


Also, púkel-men.

Mordar
2010-08-20, 09:59 PM
I'm quite surprised you didn't like the magic system from The Slayers d20. Now, there's some dangerous as hell magic. I loved it. My friends and I converted all of the appropriate 3.5e spells to it and used it exclusively. Aaahhh...good times. But we play 4e now, and the powers system is what it is.

Hijack! I really loved the idea of Social Damage from the Slayers! game...don't remember a whole lot about it, but I know I liked it!

- M

malloyd
2010-08-20, 11:20 PM
A RPG in a setting with magic in which no PC can use magic is silly.

Nah, you just need the right kind of setting. It worked well for early versions of Pendragon. I've never thought adding a PC magicians to that was a good idea.

Lord Raziere
2010-08-20, 11:30 PM
4E magic system. I like how all the stronger spells are dailies and encounters while the weaker ones are at-wills, meaning it makes a certain amount of sense: the dailies and encounters take more time to recharge because they use more energy and the at-wills are weak because they take so little energy to use, they literally recharge every six seconds.

Drolyt
2010-08-21, 01:29 AM
Are you sure? I thought his subjects were other fallen numemorians and the continental people they subjugated.He and his people had the power to take the form of a bear, which was inherited.What, where?You keep using "learned" but "received" would be a better term.Where? They were great smiths, miners and warriors, sure, but what magic did they have?[Citation needed]. The only men to use magic at all were numemorians, and even theirs was rather limited. No dwarf nor hobbit magic is depicted in LotR, Hobbit nor Silmarillion.

Hmm, the quote button is causing everything you posted to mush together. Oh well. I guess I would have to look it up to prove it too you, but I'm tired right now so I'll just tell you what I remember and you can look it up if you want. If my memory is wrong, well bad Drolyt. I could swear that it was specifically mentioned that only the Witch King was of Numenorian descent. Yes Beorn's powers were inherited, but by all accounts he was of the race of men. When Frodo asks Galadriel why he cannot see into the minds of those who wield the the other rings or command the Nazgul she says he would have to become much stronger. Become much stronger, not be much stronger, which implies he could be. Received vs learned, what does it matter? The dwarves make magical toys in the Hobbit. Their song also said that they made "magic spells" and had "words of power upon the door". Admittedly no hobbit ever shows magic, except for the brief instance where Frodo begins to perceive Galadriel's thoughts.

Dr Gunsforhands
2010-08-21, 02:30 AM
I have always had a soft spot for Talislanta.

Rather than having a straight up list of spells, you were given some examples and then encouraged to invent your own magic. Magic is treated like a skill in Talislanta, you can theoretically cast as many spells as you want so long as you roll well, but each time you don't roll an exceptional success, you start taking penalties to your roll. Keep this up, and you increase the chance to cast a critical failure. If you do, you have a chance to instantly die from too much magic use. A spellcaster could literally sap his energy until he died. I always liked the idea rather than a wizard who ran out of spells and became powerless.

I also liked how different the schools of magic felt. There was a huge difference between calm still healing mysticsm and bombastic world bending wizardry.

Drolyt
2010-08-21, 02:52 AM
Lots of good replies everyone, thanks for the input. Only problem is now I feel compelled to actually go and look at all these systems.

Kobold-Bard
2010-08-21, 02:58 AM
Lots of good replies everyone, thanks for the input. Only problem is now I feel compelled to actually go and look at all these systems.

I believe banks now offer a very impressive mortgage for buying rpg books en masse :smallwink:

Balain
2010-08-21, 05:26 AM
WoD Mage was cool, very close to Ars Magica ( i only played 4th edition I believe) Both are my favorite. I think the designers were the same if i recall right, or some of them were.

Witchcraft is also cool. There is a core book. The creators decided to make it free to download at some point THink it still is. I downloaded at and printed off copies for my friends. Glad work wasn't too picky about us using the colour laser printer LOL

Aroka
2010-08-21, 06:44 AM
Nah, you just need the right kind of setting. It worked well for early versions of Pendragon. I've never thought adding a PC magicians to that was a good idea.

Well, okay, that's an exception, but Pendragon doesn't even work if you play non-knights, IMO. You'd be missing out on about half of the game.

IcarusWings
2010-08-21, 07:52 AM
In Lord of The Rings I'm pretty sure the Ringwraiths were kings and then made into sorcerers by Sauron, and I think about three of them were of Numenorean descent.
The dwarves didn't have magic but they did have runes, which may or may not have been magical, Tolkien hints that they're not magical but the dwarves believe them to be.
The elves did have magic but only ones who had been to Valinor and manifested them through proximity to the valar.
The Pukel-Men were never outright stated to have any form of magic, there were legends and tales of their statues coming to life but Tolkien even said that nobody knew if they were true or just fanciful stories.

When Frodo asks Galadriel why he cannot see into the minds of those who wield the the other rings or command the Nazgul she says he would have to become much stronger.
This doesn't necessarily mean he could become stronger, just that he would have had to.

On to magic systems, if ToB counts then I'd say that. And I've also always liked Incarnum, I've never seen it being as complex as people make out, and It seems elegant to me.

Thrawn4
2010-08-21, 08:47 AM
Lots of good replies everyone, thanks for the input. Only problem is now I feel compelled to actually go and look at all these systems.

Same with me. Luckily I found out that Ars Magica 4th is free :smallbiggrin:
http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=AG0204

Drolyt
2010-08-21, 09:02 AM
Same with me. Luckily I found out that Ars Magica 4th is free :smallbiggrin:
http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=AG0204
Sweet, thanks for the link.

Tyrrell
2010-08-21, 02:17 PM
Just don't judge fifth edition too harshly based on fourth. The system is much changed in many ways, most of which were, naturally, the result of issues with fourth edition.

Tinydwarfman
2010-08-21, 03:14 PM
I'm about to try GURPS Realm based magic, I hear it's a lot like Ars Magica's Sphere system. Anybody used it before?

Tyrrell
2010-08-21, 03:48 PM
I'm about to try GURPS Realm based magic, I hear it's a lot like Ars Magica's Sphere system. Anybody used it before?

Ars Magica doesn't have spheres, that's Mage the ascension. Despite both systems allowing characters to craft new spells on the fly, they've got very little in common.
(and sadly, I'm not familiar with GURPS realm based magic)

Tinydwarfman
2010-08-21, 04:03 PM
Bah, right, I always get those 2 mixed up.