This is brainstorming, so expect things to develop as the posts continue.  

I've spent some time pondering and tweaking metaphysical systems for games, but I've never really sat down to start from scratch.  Seeing a recent thread asking for help with divine magic put me on the path to this brainstorm, rather than ambush the other thread.

I'll start with some basic assumptions that are necessary to have a framework to build upon. First, I'll use my own deeper metaphysical concepts from Haven, that is that Reality is surrounded by a dangerous and potentially hostile "Chaos" of some sort, and that all magic is fundamentally drawing on this external source to fuel it.

The second and more critical assumption is that D&D style breakdowns between arcane and divine magic do exist.  However, this is caveated in the next assumption.

Our third assumption is, essentially, that magic should reflect how it is viewed in the grander pop-cultural milieu, rather than purely through the lens of D&D-isms. Note that I've mostly rune Haven (assumption 1) in Runequest. THis isn't terribly relevants, as during the breakdown of this design process I will be breaking both D&D and Runequest rules entirely.

Our final assumption is that all discussion will be on desired game/RP effects first and that all rules will be done after the fact with an emphasis on meeting the goals set in the discussion.  

We may begin by creating two broad categories, divine and arcane, for our magic. This is not terribly creative, but it is highly functional and requires little extra explanation.   As I expect to create numerous divisions of the 'arcane' category, I can also presume that there will be additional divisions of the 'divine' category.

Fundamentally:

Arcane magic is magic which works on mortal conception of the laws of metaphysical reality and their manipulation.

Divine magic is magic which is granted to the magician by higher powers directly, externally.


Thus the amount of magic an arcane caster can draw upon is directly related to how much knowledge he has gained, while the amount of magic available to the divine caster is directly related to how much magic their source is willing/able to grant.  Arcane magic is directly a result of how experienced the caster is (levels/skill totals), but Divine magic does not require such a limitation, per se. In fact, it may be directly relatable to external considerations from the character... to whit, whom they draw upon.

In considering various divisions I feel it is fundamentally important that there be distinct characteristics that define them. I speak not of spell lists, for I do feel that D&D failed spectacularly to ensure its various divisions of magic 'worked' as separate categories.


In that spirit allow me to propose several functional sub-divisions and their relative, simplified, strengths and weaknesses in short list format.

Arcane Magic:

Wizardry: The default form. Studies the rules of reality and develops 'hacks', spells if you will, that allows him to do magic.  Pros: May perform spells at will, cons: Number of spells known limited by knowledge (small spell lists)

Alchemy: Refining reality down to raw components.  Pros: May have a much larger pool of 'spells' and more readily recreate older known spells than the wizard, Cons: Must 'cast' all spells in advance, potentially weaker overall abilities, dangerous lab accidents

Old Sorcery: Direct channelling and manipulation of Chaos without all those silly 'rules'.  Pros: Incredibly powerful and direct, Cons: Not capable of subtlety, highly risky,  social condemnation

Elementalism: Direct manipulation of the four(?) elements of reality to create crude alterations.  Pros: Wizardry light, requires less study with a bigger spell list and more direct effects, Cons: Shallower range of spells

Divine Magic:

Miraculous Magic: Service to the Gods results in the Gods occasionally allowing direct, miraculous results.  Pros: Incredibly powerful effects available from the start, socially approved.  Cons: No control over effects, payment in service/faith.  Potential loss of favored status means loss of power

Spiritualism:  Making deals with spirits (and totem spirits?) in exchange for direct spells from said spirits.   Pros: With a variety of spirits to deal with, and more interaction directly with the spirits, spells are more flexible than divine magic and more accessable. Cons: Spirits are like 'gods lite', and thus Spirit magic is less powerful overall.  Servicing spirit contracts likely to become a chore as the number of deals/spell list grows.  

Diabolism: Dealing with Demons for powers.  Pros: Powerful compared to spiritualism, potentially as powerful as miracles. Cons: Sacrifice. Demons demand a lot.  Social Backlash.  Less 'spells' than 'powers'. Casters eventually lose their fundamental humanity.


Obviously both categories can be grown, this being a mere starter sampling.

Looking at my intention it seems obvious that one fundamental method of creating a mechanical difference that influences play is 'limiter mechanics' a la D&D's spells per day.

Rather than focus on Spells per Day, I'd rather look at RQ's Power Points. Fundamentally, a Divine Caster would never tap their PP, say, to cast a spell. The power comes from elsewhere.  In D&D terms, the divine caster isn't limited  by spells per day at all. Obviously there have to be limits of some sort.   One might suggest that complex rituals need to be performed to draw on Divine magic, rituals that are time consuming, difficult to do correctly, and utterly divorced from the desired effect (thus are not susceptable to being manipulated, a la wizardry, to produce alterations), being purely supplications to the Gods for a desired miracle.   For Spiritualism, a 'time' mechanic could be implemented, that is the spiritualist must spend X amount of time either placating the various spirits (or alternatively, binding them against their will) in order to access their powers, and once 'cast' the spirits must either be re-placated or rebound.   For Diabolism, a risky, time consuming ritual, with an expensive/dangerous sacrifice to the proper demons in return for a measure of their power, that must be renewed at appropriate times (yearly?), and may include taking on permanent demonic traits through a corruption mechanic. THe more corrupted the caster, the less often, or perhaps less dangerous, their pacts would be.


For arcane magic the investment of personal energy permits the spell to function.  For illustration we will continue to use PP and will make up a 'technoarcanist', who casts spells via bizzare clockwork devices, sort of a cross between a wizard an engineer and an alchemist.  The technoarcanist spends time in a workshop, devising devices that let him fundamentally ignore laws of reality in ways that suits his need. He builds 'gadgets' he brings with him, adventuring (or what have you), but they remain inert, dead things. When he needs to do X, he grabs the appropriate device and channels his personal magic into it (power points or x number of spell levels, whatever) to 'fire it up'. Once charged, the device does what it was designed to do until the duration runs out.  In theory, anyone with magic could charge and use such a device, but only the specialize studies of a technoarcanist allow them to be built in the first place.  

We could then contrast this with an Alchemist, who channels his magic (PP) into his potions during the brewing process, meaning that in theory he could spend all of his magic between adventures creating vast numbers of potions, but he is also limited by his ability to carry potions around. Now an alchemist who also studied, say, wizardry, would have little PP to use for his wizarding studies, but would have a few alchemical surprises to back up his spells during an adventure.

By this means, every 'branch' of magic may have a distinct mechanistic playstyle that reinforces the powers and limits of the style while all the while drawing on a distinct metaphysical framework, a grand unified theory of magic.

Quote from: Spike;638529This is brainstorming, so expect things to develop as the posts continue.  

I've spent some time pondering and tweaking metaphysical systems for games, but I've never really sat down to start from scratch.  Seeing a recent thread asking for help with divine magic put me on the path to this brainstorm, rather than ambush the other thread.

I'll start with some basic assumptions that are necessary to have a framework to build upon. First, I'll use my own deeper metaphysical concepts from Haven, that is that Reality is surrounded by a dangerous and potentially hostile "Chaos" of some sort, and that all magic is fundamentally drawing on this external source to fuel it.

The second and more critical assumption is that D&D style breakdowns between arcane and divine magic do exist.  However, this is caveated in the next assumption.

Our third assumption is, essentially, that magic should reflect how it is viewed in the grander pop-cultural milieu, rather than purely through the lens of D&D-isms. Note that I've mostly rune Haven (assumption 1) in Runequest. THis isn't terribly relevants, as during the breakdown of this design process I will be breaking both D&D and Runequest rules entirely.

Our final assumption is that all discussion will be on desired game/RP effects first and that all rules will be done after the fact with an emphasis on meeting the goals set in the discussion.  

We may begin by creating two broad categories, divine and arcane, for our magic. This is not terribly creative, but it is highly functional and requires little extra explanation.   As I expect to create numerous divisions of the 'arcane' category, I can also presume that there will be additional divisions of the 'divine' category.

Fundamentally:

Arcane magic is magic which works on mortal conception of the laws of metaphysical reality and their manipulation.

Divine magic is magic which is granted to the magician by higher powers directly, externally.


Thus the amount of magic an arcane caster can draw upon is directly related to how much knowledge he has gained, while the amount of magic available to the divine caster is directly related to how much magic their source is willing/able to grant.  Arcane magic is directly a result of how experienced the caster is (levels/skill totals), but Divine magic does not require such a limitation, per se. In fact, it may be directly relatable to external considerations from the character... to whit, whom they draw upon.

In considering various divisions I feel it is fundamentally important that there be distinct characteristics that define them. I speak not of spell lists, for I do feel that D&D failed spectacularly to ensure its various divisions of magic 'worked' as separate categories.


In that spirit allow me to propose several functional sub-divisions and their relative, simplified, strengths and weaknesses in short list format.

Arcane Magic:

Wizardry: The default form. Studies the rules of reality and develops 'hacks', spells if you will, that allows him to do magic.  Pros: May perform spells at will, cons: Number of spells known limited by knowledge (small spell lists)

Alchemy: Refining reality down to raw components.  Pros: May have a much larger pool of 'spells' and more readily recreate older known spells than the wizard, Cons: Must 'cast' all spells in advance, potentially weaker overall abilities, dangerous lab accidents

Old Sorcery: Direct channelling and manipulation of Chaos without all those silly 'rules'.  Pros: Incredibly powerful and direct, Cons: Not capable of subtlety, highly risky,  social condemnation

Elementalism: Direct manipulation of the four(?) elements of reality to create crude alterations.  Pros: Wizardry light, requires less study with a bigger spell list and more direct effects, Cons: Shallower range of spells

Divine Magic:

Miraculous Magic: Service to the Gods results in the Gods occasionally allowing direct, miraculous results.  Pros: Incredibly powerful effects available from the start, socially approved.  Cons: No control over effects, payment in service/faith.  Potential loss of favored status means loss of power

Spiritualism:  Making deals with spirits (and totem spirits?) in exchange for direct spells from said spirits.   Pros: With a variety of spirits to deal with, and more interaction directly with the spirits, spells are more flexible than divine magic and more accessable. Cons: Spirits are like 'gods lite', and thus Spirit magic is less powerful overall.  Servicing spirit contracts likely to become a chore as the number of deals/spell list grows.  

Diabolism: Dealing with Demons for powers.  Pros: Powerful compared to spiritualism, potentially as powerful as miracles. Cons: Sacrifice. Demons demand a lot.  Social Backlash.  Less 'spells' than 'powers'. Casters eventually lose their fundamental humanity.


Obviously both categories can be grown, this being a mere starter sampling.

Looking at my intention it seems obvious that one fundamental method of creating a mechanical difference that influences play is 'limiter mechanics' a la D&D's spells per day.

Rather than focus on Spells per Day, I'd rather look at RQ's Power Points. Fundamentally, a Divine Caster would never tap their PP, say, to cast a spell. The power comes from elsewhere.  In D&D terms, the divine caster isn't limited  by spells per day at all. Obviously there have to be limits of some sort.   One might suggest that complex rituals need to be performed to draw on Divine magic, rituals that are time consuming, difficult to do correctly, and utterly divorced from the desired effect (thus are not susceptable to being manipulated, a la wizardry, to produce alterations), being purely supplications to the Gods for a desired miracle.   For Spiritualism, a 'time' mechanic could be implemented, that is the spiritualist must spend X amount of time either placating the various spirits (or alternatively, binding them against their will) in order to access their powers, and once 'cast' the spirits must either be re-placated or rebound.   For Diabolism, a risky, time consuming ritual, with an expensive/dangerous sacrifice to the proper demons in return for a measure of their power, that must be renewed at appropriate times (yearly?), and may include taking on permanent demonic traits through a corruption mechanic. THe more corrupted the caster, the less often, or perhaps less dangerous, their pacts would be.


For arcane magic the investment of personal energy permits the spell to function.  For illustration we will continue to use PP and will make up a 'technoarcanist', who casts spells via bizzare clockwork devices, sort of a cross between a wizard an engineer and an alchemist.  The technoarcanist spends time in a workshop, devising devices that let him fundamentally ignore laws of reality in ways that suits his need. He builds 'gadgets' he brings with him, adventuring (or what have you), but they remain inert, dead things. When he needs to do X, he grabs the appropriate device and channels his personal magic into it (power points or x number of spell levels, whatever) to 'fire it up'. Once charged, the device does what it was designed to do until the duration runs out.  In theory, anyone with magic could charge and use such a device, but only the specialize studies of a technoarcanist allow them to be built in the first place.  

We could then contrast this with an Alchemist, who channels his magic (PP) into his potions during the brewing process, meaning that in theory he could spend all of his magic between adventures creating vast numbers of potions, but he is also limited by his ability to carry potions around. Now an alchemist who also studied, say, wizardry, would have little PP to use for his wizarding studies, but would have a few alchemical surprises to back up his spells during an adventure.

By this means, every 'branch' of magic may have a distinct mechanistic playstyle that reinforces the powers and limits of the style while all the while drawing on a distinct metaphysical framework, a grand unified theory of magic.

have a look at my thread on divine magic lots of cross over.

There's probably lots of ways to build up multiple styles of magic. A question might be whether you want to build a system with several types of magic - or building a meta-system that lets players/GMs design their own styles?

In the broader milieu of fantasy fiction I can think of a couple of interesting series that had multiple forms of magic for instance there's the Master of the Five Magics (Lyndon Hardy) which used I think the magic styles from A Bard's Tale computer game. So there were:
Alchemy - creating potions
Enchantment - creating magic items
Thaumaturgy - voodoo or telekinesis type stuff, normally an 'engineering' magic
Demonology - summoning stuff
Sorcery - mind control
(Plus the 'Sixth Magic' of 'meta-magic' which let the user rewrite magical laws, thus stuffing up the universe).


Or another series I quite liked (The Misenchanted Sword, and other books in that universe) had flavours of magic set up as:

Theurgy (clerical magic); primarily divination since the gods are nearly all knowing, but refuse to directly intervene in mortal affairs.
Demonology: summoning demons.
Wizardry: uses complex rituals to draw on the chaos underlying reality. Ability inborn to some extent, needs extensive supplies and reagents. Occasionally malfunctions if a spell is cast incorrectly, and requires years of study.
Witchcraft: psionics - witches can fly, move objects, read minds (and consequently learn languages quickly) - it is not as versatile as wizardry, however. Witchcraft uses the witches' own energy, physically tiring them, and casting a too-powerful spell can be fatal.
Warlockry: mostly seems telekinetic. Appeared recently. Warlocks are attuned to a 'Source', which apparently fell from the sky in the Night of Madness; they grow more attuned to the source and hence more powerful - but eventually are drawn to it and are never seen again.
Sorcery: technological/science based, though assumed to be just another branch of magic but commoners and the other traditions.

Quote from: jibbajibba;638543have a look at my thread on divine magic lots of cross over.

Actually I did.  I didn't want to thread crap there, since you started from a vastly different point than I had already been thinking, thematically...

I'm giving this a 'sleep on it' before I start delving into the deeper stuff.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;638556There's probably lots of ways to build up multiple styles of magic. A question might be whether you want to build a system with several types of magic - or building a meta-system that lets players/GMs design their own styles?

I think its simpler than that. I think you either chose to have an underpinning theory of magic or you don't bother and just write whatever magic you like as inspiration hits.

Its tempting to assign a value judgement to that sort of breakdown, but I think that falls into a trap of assigning value deprived of context. Within the context of a game system and the presentation of a more or less complete world I believe the systemic approach is better, and could argue for pages over why... but what ultimately matters is the end result, not the process.

QuoteAlchemy - creating potions
Enchantment - creating magic items
Thaumaturgy - voodoo or telekinesis type stuff, normally an 'engineering' magic
Demonology - summoning stuff
Sorcery - mind control
(Plus the 'Sixth Magic' of 'meta-magic' which let the user rewrite magical laws, thus stuffing up the universe).

That is not a system of magic, but merely a descriptive difference between various types of magic. Nothing wrong with it, but it is no more complete or interesting than, say, D&D's having clerics cast healing magic and Magic Users cast fireballs.

Then again, one of the most wildly recognized divisions of Magic is the whole Red Mage, Black Mage etc from Final Fantasy, which is pretty arbitrary yet successful, so make what you will of it.

QuoteOr another series I quite liked (The Misenchanted Sword, and other books in that universe) had flavours of magic set up as:

Theurgy (clerical magic); primarily divination since the gods are nearly all knowing, but refuse to directly intervene in mortal affairs.
Demonology: summoning demons.
Wizardry: uses complex rituals to draw on the chaos underlying reality. Ability inborn to some extent, needs extensive supplies and reagents. Occasionally malfunctions if a spell is cast incorrectly, and requires years of study.
Witchcraft: psionics - witches can fly, move objects, read minds (and consequently learn languages quickly) - it is not as versatile as wizardry, however. Witchcraft uses the witches' own energy, physically tiring them, and casting a too-powerful spell can be fatal.
Warlockry: mostly seems telekinetic. Appeared recently. Warlocks are attuned to a 'Source', which apparently fell from the sky in the Night of Madness; they grow more attuned to the source and hence more powerful - but eventually are drawn to it and are never seen again.
Sorcery: technological/science based, though assumed to be just another branch of magic but commoners and the other traditions.

See my above comment, with the addition of pointing out just how arbitrary it seems to me. What connects Wizards to Witches... and why is there a difference between witchcraft and warlockery?

In the end state my little brainstorming project might result in an equally diverse list, but the underpinning framework would, presumptively, allow me to connect the dots within the rule set. An empiricist wizards studying the fundamental laws of magic would be able to, say, disrupt the Spiritualist's bound spells purely on account of knowing more about how they worked, while the Spiritualist has literally know idea of what the wizard is doing, but might be able to find a Spirit who could disrupt any given Working of the wizard.  i.e: the wizard's magic lock spell might be virtually impregnible, except to a Spirit of Opening Ways, which could be 'bound' by tricking it into viewing the locked door as an insult.  Whatever.

THat is just off the top of the head interactions based on trying to have a serious underpinning rather than ad hoc 'it seemed cool at the time' ideas.

Again, my bias is towards a systemic approach.

I totally understand your position.

Mine was somewhat different.

I wanted a small number of classes. Just three, Warriors, Rogues and Casters (who I called Magi as a generic).

I wanted to divide the design space into Combat, skills and magic to mirror the classes.

I wanted hybrids to be possible but to work out significantly lower powered than core classes of the same level.

I wanted to encourage GMs to construct their own settings and to select and build archetypes (a bit like 2e D&D kits) that fitted their setting as opposed to having hundreds of disparate classes or subclasses that were all considered 'core' but that were impossible to reconcile into a single setting.

As far as magic went I wanted to have a core magic theme that was accessed in several different ways and for each expression of magic to be actually different in play. Not just different spell lists but a whole different paradigm.

So I do have a core theory of magic.
i) magic is powered by Mana - all flavours of magic use the same engine and it is the magi's personal ability to tap into the mana in the wider universe that powers their magic
ii) Mana gathers in sacred places, and some artefacts store it. It can be stolen, recharged and manipulated
iii) Each magical paradigm has a set of rules through which it works. The underlying concept is one of magic as pseudo science. Mana is some sort of force in the universe that can be tapped to alter the existing laws of reality in some way.

However, my driving force was to have playable magic rules that work at the table and to open up tactical and roleplay options and challenges to magi as a result

Quote from: Spike;638577In the end state my little brainstorming project might result in an equally diverse list, but the underpinning framework would, presumptively, allow me to connect the dots within the rule set. An empiricist wizards studying the fundamental laws of magic would be able to, say, disrupt the Spiritualist's bound spells purely on account of knowing more about how they worked, while the Spiritualist has literally know idea of what the wizard is doing, but might be able to find a Spirit who could disrupt any given Working of the wizard.  i.e: the wizard's magic lock spell might be virtually impregnible, except to a Spirit of Opening Ways, which could be 'bound' by tricking it into viewing the locked door as an insult.  Whatever.

I like it, especially the technoarcanist mentioned above. This kind of reminds me of the old Warhammer colour magic system. How would you represent it in a game system?

Well in retrospect the other model I threw out there won't be useful if you want an overarching framework - its based on the idea that each type of magic uses a wholly different energy source which therefore has different rules.

Difficult I think to build such an overarching framework since with no realistic frame of reference for magic, nearly anything is plausible. A noble goal though.
I can mention that I hate 'thematic' spell lists - like how the 3E D&D assassin gets a small list of every spell that might possibly be of use to an assassin, which completely disregards school/components/casting time or any other objective view of how spells' function - having spell lists derived from underlying principles does at least avoid that.

Quote from: Spike;638577That is not a system of magic, but merely a descriptive difference between various types of magic. Nothing wrong with it, but it is no more complete or interesting than, say, D&D's having clerics cast healing magic and Magic Users cast fireballs.

I think you're both misunderstanding MotFM.  Each of the five magics has its own specific rules that don't work in any of the other systems, so they are completely different magical systems; also they weren't taken form Bard's Tale.  Each of the five magics is a proto-science - Alchemy for chemistry, Sorcery for psychiatry/hypnosis, Thaumaturgy for engineering, etc., etc.

Quote from: daniel_ream;638630I think you're both misunderstanding MotFM.  Each of the five magics has its own specific rules that don't work in any of the other systems, so they are completely different magical systems; also they weren't taken form Bard's Tale.  Each of the five magics is a proto-science - Alchemy for chemistry, Sorcery for psychiatry/hypnosis, Thaumaturgy for engineering, etc., etc.

I know the rules but looking back at my first post I guess I haven't managed to convey why its of interest.
More details http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_the_Five_Magics
BTW - what science would "wizardry" (the demonology thing in MotFM) equate to ?

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;638704BTW - what science would "wizardry" (the demonology thing in MotFM) equate to ?

I want to say thermodynamics, but it's been a really long time since I've read the books so I could be misremembering.



All that aside, when creating a new magic system my standard method was always to start with the assumption that magic is basically about drawing power from somewhere to do something with.  There are four qualities that need to be defined:

Source - where does the power come from? (self, deity, other dimension, mana flows)
Force - how powerful is the magic in raw terms? (can move small pebbles, can throw fireballs, can reshape continents)
Form - what does the magic look like? (subtle and invisible, elemental evocations, streamers of multicoloured light)
Function - what sorts of things can the magic do? (evoke elements, affect minds/souls, only destroy, only heal, etc)

This isn't comprehensive, of course, but it's a good first cut, and the answers to these will lead sensibly to other aspects of the magic system.  For instance, if the source of magic is mana bound into natural objects, what a wizard does to tap that mana will be different from a wizard tapping a source of magic defined as jealous gods who demand worship.

In my OP I discussed two primary catagories of magic and how they differed within a single framework of metaphysical principles.  In that same post, and the brief discussion that followed, I attempted to express some of how that might play out at the table.  

Now I'd like to expand at least one portion of that discussion, and turn my attention to the Miraculous.  

Now, first of all, I'm not terribly fond of that term... which I know is my own damn fault for using it, but there you have it.

Unfortunately, we have to back away from the topic of magic to provide some framework.  I've used a world of many gods, literally thousands of gods, with some variances of power and purview, but at no point are we talking a few jumped up wizards with an ego problem, but truly divine beings responsible for nothing less than the orderly running of all of reality.  If the Gods are grouped into pantheons, this is a purely mortal expression of certain favored Gods, or those with some noted connection to the region, rather than an actual division within the ranks of the divine.  They are real, they are powerful, and while they can walk among mortals, they prefer to act at a remove, by granting mortals tokens of power for their own reasons.

In Haven, for example, this is due to the fact that every bit of Chaos that is given form and purpose by mortal will adds to the stability of Reality itself, counteracting the constant erosion of Reality by the Infinite Possibilities.

But the essential point is, the Gods are not chumps, and neither is their magic, even if it draws on the same principles (channeling chaos into order) as all other magic.

At the table, wether in rules or simple imaginations, Divine Magic should feel unmatched in terms of power.

I'll caveat that now by suggesting that at least two other forms of magic might approach it in terms of raw power, but with greater drawbacks, at least within my own setting: Old Sorcery and Diabolism. In the case of Old Sorcery one is essentially attempting to mimic the power of Divinity without actually going through a divine source, more power simply means drawing greater amounts of dangerously unpredictably Chaos into Reality. The Gods do this all the time, but for mortals they serve as limiters and filters, removing the risk to Reality by virtue of their divine abilities.  In the case of Diabolism, in my cosmology Demons are godlike in power and abilities, essentially latecomers to the reality party, and are dangerous more because they have no connection to the Mortals that occupy reality.  Thus they have similar levels of power, but an alien and hostile perspective.  More: Demons already have their own 'system' for channelling Chaos into reality... the creation of vast numbers of lesser demons, thus the granting of "miracles" is, in and of itself, of no interest to them.

So, Divine Magic is simply 'More Powerful' than any other form.  By itself it offers very few drawbacks, the single biggest being that a God has to deign to power it... it is not actually under the control of the Caster.

That isn't much to go on, so we'll look deeper.

The Purpose behind the Gods granting magic is to keep the Mortal realm in concordance with the Divine.  Spells granted by the Gods are thus less likely to be all about 'smite this one dude before he stabs me in the face' and more... group oriented.  They serve to hound mortals into following the Gods, into obeying Divine Laws, and to create a sort of dependence upon the Gods. Manipulative? Perhaps.

I feel that Divine Spells work on a larger scale than most other magic, which is one way to point out their power. I also think they can be reasonably divided into  Blessings, Banes and Wards.

Blessings, of course, are various 'buffs' that affect groups of worshippers for the better.  Typically this would take place in non-adventuring contexts, such as ensuring a bountiful harvest for a region (and possibly increasing pregnancy rates as well...), or granting an entire army some minor, but noticable, advantage in the field.  

Banes are, of course, the inverse. One might suggest that while few, if any, blessings are done on an individual basis, that some Banes might be applied at the personal level to castigate blasphemers and the like.

Wards are, of course, protections. Specifically, however, they are protections from things that fall outside of Divine Law. You can't ward a town against your typical army, except under extremely unusual circumstances (such as the town being literally the last place on earth where a particular god is worshipped...), but can somewhat easily ward against those things that fall outside of divine law, such as the Undead, Demons and so forth (and even Demons have some loopholes...).

As I type I am struck by a few ideas. One, of course, is the extremely ritualistic method by which Divine Spells are cast, traditionally. THe second is that their extreme 'group focus' means that they are very easily undone by a single person. This encourages mortals to police their own for sinful beliefs, and to avoid frivolously drawing upon divine power to protect the unworthy.

Now, I do suggest that, for game play reasons, that it is not unreasonably hard to scale down a regional or army wide blessing to protect a smallish group of, say, adventurers... it does suggest that such spells actually be very much understood to work on the wider scale more efficiently.  Example: Say that 'Blessing of the Unbroken Skin', designed to be cast on an army of hundreds, or thousands, of men is perfectly usable at the party level. Presume it has a number of ritual components that are consumed in casting, at a fixed cost of 5000 Gp.  (ballparked cost), and it affects anywhere from 5 to 5000 'believers'.  Now, in a party of five players, they're paying 1000 Gp per character for the blessing, while an Army of 5000 is paying 1 Gp per blessing.  That is entirely notional at the moment, of course.

Now, secondary to the scalar element is the 'display of faith' element, the ritual nature of divine casting.  For a blessing there might be an object (a holy flame, for example) which must be protected or the spell ends.  Perhaps  the priest performing the blessing must be protected while they chant the entire time, whatever.

In the case of blessings and banes there is something of a sense of exclusivity.  Thor isn't going to bless both armies, he's gonna pick a side. (note: The Gods are not, however, to both blessing a people and cursing them at the same time...), so two opposed sides may be competing in displays of piety if they each claim the same divine patrons, and the 'winner' gets the blessing.  Of course, it isn't forbidden to turn to other gods rather than partaking in such a bidding war, but that has its own issues.

Banes may largely work similarly. Its just as easy to curse the entire scythian peoples as it is to curse that beggar that spit in the street before the temple, at least for the mortals requesting such curses.  On the other hand, as such curses are meant as object lessons, those who labor under them may easily discover a means of negating the curse (though it doesn't have to be easy to actually undo it!). So too, depending on the reasons for the cursing, it may actually be easy to find a god who will undo the curse on the face of it, at least for the pious.  The Bane is likely to be embodied into a singlural, unique ritual object, which would then be protected by the caster.

Obviously, however, one would not cast Banes, normally, against singular enemies that you intend to slaughter mercilessly.  However, in army v army senarios, there would be more utilitarian banes designed to affect a single battle, which again could be offset with sufficient piety and prayers to patron dieties.  Holy Wars would see a large number of gods on both sides working furiously to support their chosen mortal champions by both assisting them, and protecting them from the 'enemy' gods.

Wards, of course, protect mostly places. Buildings and so forth, and would tend to be somewhat generalized.  A warded building is impassible to ALL undead, Demons and other Anathema for as long as the ward lasts. One might ward against followers of a rival faith, but that gets into tricky theological ground.  However, it must be noted that all wards have a signular weakness: Any warded individual (that is protected by the ward) may undo the entire ward with a simple act, with each Ward having its own easily undestood condition.


Special Note: Smiting: While a reasonable handful of Gods undoubtedly provide Smiting services for their followers (seriously: If you're the god of LIghtning, how else are you really gonna prove your priests are protected other than a judicial blasting once in a while?), there must be some caveats.

Smiting spells are not just point and shoot magics, they are a very (very) specific and powerful form of Bane.  The target has to have earned his smiting (no smiting smitty the smith for not touching his forelock...), and he has to have been warned in advance against a specific defiling act.  Naturally, Anathema (Necromancers and Undead, Demons in violation of their Divine Treaty, known blasphemers) are much easier to get smited on demand. As a protective measure Smiting tends to be a bit bittersweet... a Priest may declare, for example, that burning the temple is a smiting offense, but the smiting won't prevent the temple from being burnt, it will only punish the guy after the fact. This is especially true of the 'sanctity' of the priest's life/body. Ironically, it is easier to get a preventative smiting for the sake of the temple than it is for the person of the priest (as buildings aren't prone to hubris...).


So that is sort of an overview of what sort of spells might be found in Divine Magic. Sort of unfinished, I feel, and not necessarily good for the dungeon crawling adventurer.

Now lets talk about the actual processes of casting a bit.

In order to cast divine magic one must either meet TWO conditions OR be particularly favored by a/the Gods.

The two conditions are first that the caster be granted divine privilege, that is be an ordained priest.  The process by which this status is granted may vary wildly... old and established churches prefer to handle all the training and ordination of priests personally (and so long as the Gods keep granting divine spells they must be right to do so....right?), while less organized faiths allow each individual to determine for themselves if they wish to serve the gods.  Usually the Gods do demand some form of direct service, regardless. Tending a shrine, ministering to the faithful and generally tending to one or more Gods personal whims are all required to one extent or another.  The truest test of one's divine status is, of course, the ability to channel divine magic, period.  If a truly devout priest is 'excommunicated' for political reasons and can still cast magic obviously the Gods are on his side. Note, of course, that any significant act of Blasphemy is ground for immediate loss of status (specifically, for my purposes, studying Necromancy, aiding a demon in violating the Divine Treaty, guiding someone away from the Gods, or even just the Gods you claim fealty too, or violating in any way Divine Law (which, it should be noted, is actually beyond mortal understanding, so don't worry about that one so much...).

The second Condition is knowledge of appropriate rituals.  Any given faith, any given god, will have dozens, if not hundreds of rituals.  Common, everyday rituals that are well known are less pleasing than an ancient, long forgotten ritual developed by a favored saint based on prophetic dreams....

No divine spell should be terribly simple to cast. Long chants in obscure languages, ritual motions, vestments and implements... all sorts of obstacles.  Participating in a ritual, even receiving a simple blessing, should feel like an act of sacrement to all participants.  A few muttered words of blessing might actually do more good than nothing at all, but if you can't be bothered to actually do it right, why should the gods be bothered to actually cast the blessing?


The exception are, for lack of a better word, Saints.  In theory, one holy enough and blessed enough, is personally watched by the Gods (or even just one God), who makes nearly their every utterance a miraculous act.  Obviously, such individuals are chosen for the piety and embodiment of divine ideals, but in essence they serve as a means for the Gods to directly influence mortal affairs without actually getting their hands dirty.  They also serve to create new Rituals for use by lesser lights.

In meta-terms, that is to say Game Play, I see no reason why a PC couldn't BE one of those Saints, though the actual process of encoding it may be a bit much.

I have debated wether to continue on the already identified branches of Divine Magic or to use something of a compare and contrast method by alternating with various Arcane styles of magic.

I have chosen, for the moment, to go with the later.

So then let us look at the Wizard.

In my breif for this brainstorming I have used a generalized conception of the Wizard as sort of a scientist, a scholar of magic.   Rather than develop an entire science around how magic interacts with the living world (thus why a Wizard would care more about Ash wood over Maple, say...), we can generally leave that in abstract.

So we have sort of a starting point: Wizards accomplish magic because they know shit.  

Arguably the very keystone of their knowledge is how to draw upon magical energies in the first place, this being the singular skill that makes a wizard a 'wizard'.  In a class based system it is the defining class skill, while in a more open skill based system (RQ) it is the key skill necessary to unlock all spells and other magical skills.  Runequest, in several iterations, already has a functional wizard template with their sorcery, but if I merely wished to use existing Templates, I wouldn't bother brainstorming much.

The Wizarding skill serves not only to access a wizard's spells, but also as a defining limiter on how powerful his spell casting can be, as an expression of how much power he can safely draw upon.

Since I don't want to step back too far from my scientist theme, a wizard's casting requires implements. Wands, crystals, staves... all manner of devices. In my own setting I've thrown out that Chaos is channelled through the implements rather than through the body, thus they are twisted and corrupted over time as the wizard uses them as a proxy, as a filter to protect himself.  This, however, is largely unnecessary. Simply stated: No wizard can cast magic spells without properly prepared implements.

As a theory let us suggest that we have a number of implement forms, possibly taken from the suits of the Tarot (for flavor), and also a number of materials.  A spell involving doing harm may require an implement emblematic of the suit of swords (a knife, or for extra flavor, an Athame), which also must be the proper material based on the nature of the target.... say a defensive spell might require an 'athame' of Iron (for its grounding and its hardness), while an offensive spell may require Copper (for... um... because), and so forth.

Since Wizards are scientists they can make their own spells from components, which works well here as instead of coding a bunch of spells (and making the wizard player carry all that crap around...) they can select spell elements based on their purpose and what materials the wizard needs.

Now, since a wizard is personally hauling magic into reality and shaping it, spells tend to be a lot more limited in power than Divine magic, working mostly on a personal level. In order to have a wider range of effect, the wizard requires time.

Mechanically: A wizard spell has a default power level (based on the wizarding ability of the caster... see above), and any attempt to exceed that base power either increases risk of catastrophic failure (magic backlash, as they've exceeded their ability) or expanded elements of time.

Now: What can a wizard's spells do?

The easiest thing for a wizard to accomplish is to create Energy, such as lighting a fire or summoning a lightning bolt.  Energy is transitory, very close to the raw chaos he is drawing upon. After that comes the creation of unstable matter (gasses and liquids), then more stable and permanent matter.

Changing existing things is the hardest, or rather the riskiest.  

Recall that he is merely drawing upon chaos, not actually brining raw chaos into reality.  By giving the chaos form he allows it to exist safely.

So wizards can make things, all sorts of amazing things, with just magic. But since it was very recently just possibility, it is also temporary. Magical creations tend to rather easily 'fall apart' under the right circumstance, and magically created energies (attacks, say), may be disrupted by a knowledgeable wizard much more easily than a natural attack of the same type would be.

Lastly: Wizards power may be limited by their ability to draw upon chaos safely, but their unique stature as scholars of magical energies means that given time and even a little bit of study, any wizard can disrupt or work around any other type of casting. While certainly anti and counter magic spells may be available to any caster, a Wizard doesn't actually need them unless he's in a hurry. Even relative power levels don't matter much as the wizard isn't opposing the spell directly but actually unweaving it in whole or in part.  Slightly more difficult, the Wizard may alter an already cast spell from any other branch of magic as if it were one of his own, though there might be caveats (trying to keep a divine spell running longer than it should would be hard without a source of power equal to a God, for example).


Now: Back to casting techniques.

As noted the Wizard requires implements, period. This provides some interesting ideas: Presume a wizard is stripped of his implements and cast into a dungeon. He is fed in a wooden bowl, with a wooden spoon. Now, with a little effort he might be able to use his spoon as a wand (Staves) and his bowl as either Cups or Coins... and while he may not know any useful spells requiring wooden implements, he may then use those two/three implements he has to sort of improv cast spells that require wood as a material and wands or cups for implements. WHile properly consecrated implements made of higher quality materials would serve better, and actually knowing full spells would be best, a clever wizard should never be enterly unarmed.

That said the Wizard doesn't just need to own the implements. He has to have his hands free to move them about. Chanting in an obscure tongue is useful (as a meditative technique to focus the mind and shape the raw energies before releasing them. The exact language and words become secondary) and careful patterns, either engraved into things (like his implements), or formed in the air are also important parts of his technique.

For longer castings, the Wizard would actually begin shaping his environment to his purpose. The actual moves would be obscure and seem pointless to a non-wizard (moving a chair two feet to the left, turning that rock over there onto its side...), but to the Wizard they are very important acts to channel the energies and trap them, metaphysically, where he needs them.  One assumes a wizard's tower is already 'pre-shaped' for a number of common powerful spells, but the requisite energy still needs to be summoned.

Importantly, while wizards undoubtedly have books full of magical knowledge, their books aren't generally 'Spell' books, and normally spells can not simply be shared between wizards casually. Research and deep secrets of the arcane? Yes, certainly.  On the other hand, as magic may be 'stored' in patterns, magic scrolls are certainly within the Wizard's purview.  They remain useful only to skilled casters, as the magic trapped within the ink on the scroll must still be unlocked and directed, so they aren't perfect replacements for actually being a bad ass wizard, but they do work. Certainly, one does not need the wizarding skill of the original caster to unlock a scroll's full potential (thus a twentieth level scroll might be unlocked to a first level wizard. He can't recreate it, but he could use it.  My assumption is that at least one power point or spell level would need to be expended to 'tap' a scroll.)


I think that pretty much covers how wizarding should work in this system under development.

Quote from: Spike;638848In my OP I discussed two primary catagories of magic and how they differed within a single framework of metaphysical principles.  In that same post, and the brief discussion that followed, I attempted to express some of how that might play out at the table.  

Now I'd like to expand at least one portion of that discussion, and turn my attention to the Miraculous.  

Now, first of all, I'm not terribly fond of that term... which I know is my own damn fault for using it, but there you have it.

Unfortunately, we have to back away from the topic of magic to provide some framework.  I've used a world of many gods, literally thousands of gods, with some variances of power and purview, but at no point are we talking a few jumped up wizards with an ego problem, but truly divine beings responsible for nothing less than the orderly running of all of reality.  If the Gods are grouped into pantheons, this is a purely mortal expression of certain favored Gods, or those with some noted connection to the region, rather than an actual division within the ranks of the divine.  They are real, they are powerful, and while they can walk among mortals, they prefer to act at a remove, by granting mortals tokens of power for their own reasons.



The exception are, for lack of a better word, Saints.  In theory, one holy enough and blessed enough, is personally watched by the Gods (or even just one God), who makes nearly their every utterance a miraculous act.  Obviously, such individuals are chosen for the piety and embodiment of divine ideals, but in essence they serve as a means for the Gods to directly influence mortal affairs without actually getting their hands dirty.  They also serve to create new Rituals for use by lesser lights.

In meta-terms, that is to say Game Play, I see no reason why a PC couldn't BE one of those Saints, though the actual process of encoding it may be a bit much.

Definitely some nickable stuff in there for my divine casters thanks Spike.

Saint was one of my prefered Divine Archetypes already and i think a set of Banes, Blessings, etc is goign to be how I approach the divine.

I think I will keep "miracles" as a Divine Hail mary and code that in as well.

Yeah... I pretty much just tossed 'Miracles' out there as a catch-all term for 'spells powered by the gods'. You're welcome to use it however you like.

I am to be 'nickable'.