jibba's post here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23932&page=18) have me thinking about the "small" details of designing my game. This post in particular:
Quote from: jibbaIts more than that though.
The spells in 1e are there for in game reasons. An invisible bulter than can fetch your slippers make tea, iron your newspaper is just the sort of thing a wizard ought to have.
So the spells are not plot spells because of the games organic growth. What you have is a pot of spells that have evolved because the game evolved and was not formed whole cloth.
This is the reason for stuff like Tenser's floating disc, and its hte reason why 4e for example removed the 'piontless stuff'.
If you go back to the inspiration for the spells, Dying Earth, you will find numerous spells that make the Wizard's life easier. They are translated into the game because the game tries to create a world.
So the spell comprehend languages exists because its a spell that a wizard would create and use a lot not becuase it fulfils a useful gap ion a wizards arsenal. Yes in play its going to be useless because a plot is never designed such that if you don't find the scroll in room 3 or you are not able to read it then you have no idea what to do or where to go next. That is possibly 'realistic' but its also poor design. You can eliviate the poorness of it or play in a sandbox with lots of similar hooks that can be followed or not.
So when I design a new spell I try to work out where and why it first developed and then try to find an interesting use for it. The Unseen servant for example happens to be a magical invisible creature who can follow quite complex instructions and carry 30lbs of weight. because he can not be damaged expect by magic he is perfect for removing mundane traps. He wasn't designed to be the ideal minesweeper but he is great at it.
So Alberlard my high level mage created Albelard's Maddening Massage. A spell that causes a number of disembodied hands to come into being that act as a distraction they basically poke, twist, nudge and annoy the target, they tie shoelaces together, empty pockets, pour out the contents of potion bottles and undo straps and remove clothing. Now in D&D terms this effect is devastating. It prevents spell casting, destroys or loses magic items, reduces amour class etc etc
Now it emerged from Albelard's Erotic Massage which was itself developed because Wizard academies are notoriously male dominated places ....
So spells in D&D were never diesigned to complement the system. They weren't designed to enabel play or to complement the Pillars of exploration, roleplay and Combat. They were simply things that felt like the sort of things that Wizards would have or create spells to be able to do.
Perhaps a lot of Wizards end up with Sleep, Charm, Fly, Invisibility, FireBall but these are really the boring spells.
has been following me all day.
I still hold that the abilities he's describing are mostly "background" things but I admit that I like them. I also realize that "Albelard's Erotic Massage" should not prevent or make it harder to get "Fireball". My developing system doesn't use "prepared spells" or "spell books" and I can easily set abilities like this up as a "give away" kind of thing (a no cost ritual perhaps). In either case this thread is aimed particularly at jibba but I'm open to other people's input.
TL: DR: Question is what "domestic powers" or relatively minor abilities/spells do/have/would you like to see developed in a game? Do you have any particular examples or fun little concepts? If so feel free to share'em.
As far as favourite "domestic" spells go, this isn't an RPG but a fiction example but Galger's Jar Opener (from the novel With A Single Spell) "opens any container a man can hold in one hand"...by summoning a huge demonic thing that will however only open jars.
For stupid cantrips, Stick is fun (causes a object up to 5 pounds to attach to something). The original 1st Ed. AD&D cantrips were also not bad e.g. there are spells that grow hair on objects, make illusions that are only two-dimensional, kill bugs, or create salt (which it notes can be handy against giant slugs).
The cantrips list from the 1E Unearthed Arcana is nothing but this.
Quote from: daniel_ream;579606The cantrips list from the 1E Unearthed Arcana is nothing but this.
Not familiar with it. Might you share some of the ones you remember/like most?
Quote from: MGuy;579607Not familiar with it. Might you share some of the ones you remember/like most?
http://www.mjyoung.net/dungeon/char/spell001.html
In my homebrew all spells can be learnt by anyone able to learn spells. However each spell has a difficulty and the efficasy depends on the level of the caster.
So a Fireball is quite hard (difficulty 4 on a scale of 1 -10 ) and a low level caster will produce a baseball sized ball of flame whereas an experienced caster might produce one 3 feet across...
So these domestic type spells tend to be easy to cast but the sacle of them can become quite relevant.
Poligars Professional Polishing for example will polish one object to a mirrored shine. At higher levels it can polish more objects or can polish something to a fantastic degree a sheet of coppoer polished to an extreme layer can reflect a Prismatic spray for example.
Here's another link for the 1st Ed. cantrips, with fuller descriptions. Doesn't include the 'minor illusion' cantrips though.
http://www.frontiernet.net/~jamesstarlight/CantripsOrisons.html
EDIT: unrelated to that, Advanced Fighting Fantasy had a list of Minor Magic spells too. I found the list (originally in the Blacksand! sourcebook) reproduced here.
http://advancedfightingfantasy.co.uk/rules_spells_minor_magic.html
A lot of items/spells that duplicate modern technology are a must.
A device or spell to heat water (for bathing) would be probably the first thing that I research if I were a wizard in D&D land.
Spells that keep things cool to ice-cold would be handy, for sure.
Mending is already a cantrip that would be pretty useful - no reason to be wearing ratty robes. Better yet is if you have a chest that casts the spell on anything put inside.
Of course, prestidigiation deserves mentioning. It can turn plain grits into a taste sensation. The fact that the wizard survives on only gruel doesn't have to be a bad thing. Putting that spell on a wooden spoon (for cooking) could let you flavor your boiled skunk into something much more appetizing.
I've created magic items that are for domestic use (or for comfort when you're not at home). Rolemaster also has a lot of them.
Popinjay's Garment
This is a mutable garment that during the hours of darkness cleans itself and changes into a new form. Thus insuring that you are always dressed well!
Each night, roll d12 (choose colour and fashion at your whim)
1. Silk Shirt.
2. Wollen Jumper.
3. Velvet Hat.
4 Leather Trousers.
5. Mittens/Gloves.
6. Silk Scarf/Cravat
7. Waxed Coat.
8. Fur Coat.
9. Thermal Vest.
10. Patterned Waist-coat.
11. Blazer.
12. Leather Boots.
Slobs Box of Refreshments
This box is full of small compartments. Overnight each one fills with small amounts of foodstuff. The compartments contain things ranging from a ripe tomato, to a handful of sweets, a hunk of cheese, a spoonful or two of porridge with jam in it, to a hard-boiled egg, a chicory stick and a rasher of bacon.
Home Comforts
This is a range of items meant to give you the comfort of home when travelling.
Handkerchief Tent
A small kerchief that tranforms into a 2-man tent.
Folding Chair
A small wooden cube that unfolds into a leather upholstered armchair.
Bathing Cup
A copper cup that transforms into a copper bath. As an added bonus it heats water placed into it to a comfortable bathing temperature.
Be mindful that removing all the non-combat spells and "balancing" the fighter (despite any good intentions), lead to 4e.
Quote from: One Horse Town;579742I've created magic items that are for domestic use (or for comfort when you're not at home). Rolemaster also has a lot of them.
Popinjay's Garment
This is a mutable garment that during the hours of darkness cleans itself and changes into a new form. Thus insuring that you are always dressed well!
Each night, roll d12 (choose colour and fashion at your whim)
1. Silk Shirt.
2. Wollen Jumper.
3. Velvet Hat.
4 Leather Trousers.
5. Mittens/Gloves.
6. Silk Scarf/Cravat
7. Waxed Coat.
8. Fur Coat.
9. Thermal Vest.
10. Patterned Waist-coat.
11. Blazer.
12. Leather Boots.
Slobs Box of Refreshments
This box is full of small compartments. Overnight each one fills with small amounts of foodstuff. The compartments contain things ranging from a ripe tomato, to a handful of sweets, a hunk of cheese, a spoonful or two of porridge with jam in it, to a hard-boiled egg, a chicory stick and a rasher of bacon.
Home Comforts
This is a range of items meant to give you the comfort of home when travelling.
Handkerchief Tent
A small kerchief that tranforms into a 2-man tent.
Folding Chair
A small wooden cube that unfolds into a leather upholstered armchair.
Bathing Cup
A copper cup that transforms into a copper bath. As an added bonus it heats water placed into it to a comfortable bathing temperature.
Those are great
I have this book which is a variation on the portable hole type deal.
It has a number of double page pop-up illustrations. You open up the illustration of the carpenters tool kit and you can reach in and pull out carpenters tools, you turn to the page with the roast dinner there is a roast dinner, you turn to the page with bowl of warm water and a razor and shaving soap , etc etc
There is a list of random rolls when you open each page. Then they are set and you can go back to them at a whim.
I have always personally disliked the 'domestic' spells, excluding a few. The things that Cantrips can accomplish even tend towards being relatively elaborate compared to how simple many higher level spells are.
There is the 'manipulating the primal forces of the Earth' Wizard which exists in the same skin as the 'I pull rabbits out of hats' Wizard, and it doesn't work for me. If I can do some of the things I can with 'domestic' spells then I really need them to translate thematically across the entire list of spells.
If I can summon an invisible butler at low levels to bring me my slippers, then I don't see any particular reason I can't summon an invisible assassin to do my bidding at the same level or only slightly higher ones, but I can't for the most part. Not without shenanigans.
Why can't I summon an army of invisible stock brokers to handle my portfolio that generates income independent of my adventuring career since I can imbue magical energy with the knowledge of how to maintain a mansion, but no other skill set at all. Or similarly how I can transmute anything into anything, except the heavily restricted ability to transmute things into other things that have a monetary value.
The things you can and can't do with magic need to be consistent, and in D&D they are generally not. Gary Gygax had an absolutely terrible sense of humor (go read the spell components; Scrying required you to construct a television and I'm not kidding) and that translated into a lot of 'rabbits from hats' type spells that don't mesh with the general theme of magic beyond them. I'm sure the issue of too many people with too many ideas of what 'magic' should be working on things from there, and only really having two spellcasting classes to fit all possible ideas into didn't help either.
If you can summon Unseen Servant as a 1st level spell, then I want to know why I can't summon Unseen Sweatshop Worker, and Unseen Mildly Skilled Craftsmen as well. For that matter I don't think the expression is 'Comfort is the mother of invention', so 'domesticity' is going to be far down the list compared to money, social power and sex.
To put it more succinctly I don't think the general thrust would be to have spells that mimic the lifestyle of the wealthy, as much as they would simply generate wealth, which doesn't happen in D&D until high levels for entirely gamist reasons.
The easy solution for me is to avoid the Hat Tricks model of magic altogether when homebrewing.
Quote from: Wolf, Richard;580267I have always personally disliked the 'domestic' spells, excluding a few. The things that Cantrips can accomplish even tend towards being relatively elaborate compared to how simple many higher level spells are.
There is the 'manipulating the primal forces of the Earth' Wizard which exists in the same skin as the 'I pull rabbits out of hats' Wizard, and it doesn't work for me. If I can do some of the things I can with 'domestic' spells then I really need them to translate thematically across the entire list of spells.
If I can summon an invisible butler at low levels to bring me my slippers, then I don't see any particular reason I can't summon an invisible assassin to do my bidding at the same level or only slightly higher ones, but I can't for the most part. Not without shenanigans.
Why can't I summon an army of invisible stock brokers to handle my portfolio that generates income independent of my adventuring career since I can imbue magical energy with the knowledge of how to maintain a mansion, but no other skill set at all. Or similarly how I can transmute anything into anything, except the heavily restricted ability to transmute things into other things that have a monetary value.
The things you can and can't do with magic need to be consistent, and in D&D they are generally not. Gary Gygax had an absolutely terrible sense of humor (go read the spell components; Scrying required you to construct a television and I'm not kidding) and that translated into a lot of 'rabbits from hats' type spells that don't mesh with the general theme of magic beyond them. I'm sure the issue of too many people with too many ideas of what 'magic' should be working on things from there, and only really having two spellcasting classes to fit all possible ideas into didn't help either.
If you can summon Unseen Servant as a 1st level spell, then I want to know why I can't summon Unseen Sweatshop Worker, and Unseen Mildly Skilled Craftsmen as well. For that matter I don't think the expression is 'Comfort is the mother of invention', so 'domesticity' is going to be far down the list compared to money, social power and sex.
To put it more succinctly I don't think the general thrust would be to have spells that mimic the lifestyle of the wealthy, as much as they would simply generate wealth, which doesn't happen in D&D until high levels for entirely gamist reasons.
The easy solution for me is to avoid the Hat Tricks model of magic altogether when homebrewing.
I totally agree with your premise but not with your outcome.
I totally agree with the if I can summon and invisible bulter then why can't he poison my enemy or carry a blade or whatever, so I allow it.
You do get this of course in D&D to a degree. Invisible Stalker, or to yout other points Bibgy's Dextorous digits, Bigby's Construction Crew etc etc but its limited by level becuase spells in D&D are limited by the effect they can have.
Alberesh's Maddening Massage ended up as a 5th or 6th level spell because of its effect in play. It can destroy potions, it can disrupt spell casting, it can disarm your oponent drop wands down gratings etc etc so its a very powerful spell in a game world constructed so heavily on 'stuff'. In "magic" terms its no more complex that Bigby's Dextrous digits a 2nd level spell that creates a pair of hands used for stuff like magical experimentation
So in my homebrew game where anyone can learn any spell and spells have no levels they have diffculty and effect based on level the Unseen Servant spell (Secican's Surreptitious Servant) can be used by a high level caster to do much more so a 10th level caster could use it to lift an object weighing 300lbs for each mana spent per round, so you could use it to lift a 200lb Wizard and carry him about for a mana per round. Or you can use it to do things further from the wizard without their oversight, so with a high enough level and enough mana spent the Unseen servant effectively becomes an invisible assasin. (Actually a summoner would do that better as they could summon an invisible demon and geas it to perfom that act which is more mana efficient and better as the demon is smart and not an automoton but I digeress...).
Quote from: Wolf, Richard;580267I have always personally disliked the 'domestic' spells, excluding a few. The things that Cantrips can accomplish even tend towards being relatively elaborate compared to how simple many higher level spells are.
There is the 'manipulating the primal forces of the Earth' Wizard which exists in the same skin as the 'I pull rabbits out of hats' Wizard, and it doesn't work for me. If I can do some of the things I can with 'domestic' spells then I really need them to translate thematically across the entire list of spells.
If I can summon an invisible butler at low levels to bring me my slippers, then I don't see any particular reason I can't summon an invisible assassin to do my bidding at the same level or only slightly higher ones, but I can't for the most part. Not without shenanigans.
Why can't I summon an army of invisible stock brokers to handle my portfolio that generates income independent of my adventuring career since I can imbue magical energy with the knowledge of how to maintain a mansion, but no other skill set at all. Or similarly how I can transmute anything into anything, except the heavily restricted ability to transmute things into other things that have a monetary value.
The things you can and can't do with magic need to be consistent, and in D&D they are generally not. Gary Gygax had an absolutely terrible sense of humor (go read the spell components; Scrying required you to construct a television and I'm not kidding) and that translated into a lot of 'rabbits from hats' type spells that don't mesh with the general theme of magic beyond them. I'm sure the issue of too many people with too many ideas of what 'magic' should be working on things from there, and only really having two spellcasting classes to fit all possible ideas into didn't help either.
If you can summon Unseen Servant as a 1st level spell, then I want to know why I can't summon Unseen Sweatshop Worker, and Unseen Mildly Skilled Craftsmen as well. For that matter I don't think the expression is 'Comfort is the mother of invention', so 'domesticity' is going to be far down the list compared to money, social power and sex.
To put it more succinctly I don't think the general thrust would be to have spells that mimic the lifestyle of the wealthy, as much as they would simply generate wealth, which doesn't happen in D&D until high levels for entirely gamist reasons.
The easy solution for me is to avoid the Hat Tricks model of magic altogether when homebrewing.
Interesting points, that need thinking about when constructing a magic system. There do tend to be a lot of metagame limitations built into magic systems. Trying to use real physics TM as a starting point would be interesting but tricky. The same book that had Galger's Jar Opener above also had a 0-level spell which created permanent massive dead magic zones - which was however uncommon knowledge because the Wizards' Guild had vigorously repressed it. Various other spells had various loopholes that could be exploited by a clever wizard to do nasty things as well, but with the main limitation being that most wizards had no idea of the exact drawbacks. Which worked fairly reasonably in the setting (IMHO) but which would be hard to do in an RPG just because you'd need to keep most of the information on how spells worked away from the players.
On monetary systems, of course a monetary system needs to be built on something thats' scarcity so if gold could be created with magic, it wouldn't be used as a currency. You could imagine a world where gold is everywhere and they have to use something else as a currency, of course.
Quote from: Wolf, Richard;580267If you can summon Unseen Servant as a 1st level spell, then I want to know why I can't summon Unseen Sweatshop Worker, and Unseen Mildly Skilled Craftsmen as well.
One obvious explanation for this (and one used in some other games) is that the Unseen Servant can't do anything that you yourself don't know how to do, less a significant amount of finesse and/or speed because you're essentially programming a set of invisible magical waldoes.
Anyone can open a door, carry a teacup, or sweep a floor with minimal physical skill. Sewing a garment or forging a nail is a different matter, and I can see a cogent argument for the wizard casting the spell needing to have those skills, not just the wizard creating the spell, which would explain why Unseen Blacksmith isn't a commonly known spell.
Really, the problem here is that D&D magic is largely effect-based. It's "I want a spell that does X, so that should be about level Y" rather than "the laws of magic work like this, therefore the possible things one can do with magic flow from those laws, with the difficulty and efficacy of specific spells following on appropriately".[1]
[1] "Emulation" and "Immersion", my ass.
I agreee with everying on this page of the thread. Everything I was gonna say got said already, primarily in jibba's and daniel's posts.
Related fantasy economy thread (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=51296&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)
Quote from: MGuy;580363I agreee with everying on this page of the thread. Everything I was gonna say got said already, primarily in jibba's and daniel's posts.
Related fantasy economy thread (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=51296&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)
Interesting thread. takes some time reading through it but really interesting ideas
So...how would one go about building a "non-metagamey" RPG magic system?...
Quote from: MGuy;580363I agreee with everying on this page of the thread. Everything I was gonna say got said already, primarily in jibba's and daniel's posts.
Related fantasy economy thread (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=51296&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)
Odd. He's basing his argument upon the abstraction of gold pieces being assumed to be a literal thing, as in actual pieces of unstamped gold being exchanged in a barter-like fashion.
Which is bizarre because AD&D 2e PHB & DMG (and AD&D 1e DMG) do go to great lengths talking about how gp is just an abstraction, not an actual gold disc devoid of stamped meaning (and which may be counted out in any currency manner your setting likes, too). And further it talks how money is a function of the viable economies in the setting world, being backed by accepted gov't and market standards. Also, if you are outside of a currency's range, or even a gov't (and it's corresponding market) reach, the game talks about barter and favor exchanges in extreme hinterland societies.
It's like a weird one-man argument with a strawman. Either that or 3e has done some additional fucked-up things to currency that I never knew about.
Considering TSR went into detail about the economy of hiring hirelings, and the level of disruption it could lead in a feudal labor economy -- and the issue of garnering permission of such feudal "property" -- I find it rather stunning Frank missed the equally involved discussion about the nature of money in this game. I mean TSR AD&D talked about various additional taxes -- in several additional sourcebooks as well! -- so it's not like its notion of economy was a simplistic one of bartering blank precious metal discs.
But perhaps WotC fucked up hardcore...
Oh well, this is just a tangent. Ignore and carry on.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;580549So...how would one go about building a "non-metagamey" RPG magic system?...
It has to be meta gamey to a degree.
I am trying to do it with a mana source and using level as the limiter of effect
So take fireball iconic D&D spell
D&D its a 3rd level spell with a level based effect. Later the effect is limited to 10d6
In my system anyone that learns how to cast spells can learn it (the learning bit is a bit archaic) For each 3 mana you put into the spell it does 1d6 damage. If you exceed your level x3 (this is a standard mechanism in fact it's mana x base spell effect here =3) then the spell has a chance to go wrong based on its difficulty and the ammount you exceed this by.
A first level wizard has d10 + bonus (1-5) mana so a 1st level wizard could deliver a 3hd fireball.
The idea is that the physics of the spell is set in the spell but the effect of the spell, its damage, force, duration etc is set by in game logic rather than meta game logic. So spending more mana does more damage grants better Defense, grants longer duration or adds bells and whistles to an effect being more experienced means you can safely channel more power.
Some people won't like it because its magic as pseudo science and they want magic to be well more magical. However, whilst this works in novels where magic is limited in effect by the plot I think in a game its a good rule. Magic behaves like this so you can do this with it.
I could see a Bounteous Blessing spell that at the lowest level of effect could give someone a temporary bonus but at eh top level could become a permanent stat increase.
Quote from: Opaopajr;580685Odd. He's basing his argument upon the abstraction of gold pieces being assumed to be a literal thing, as in actual pieces of unstamped gold being exchanged in a barter-like fashion.
What? You can literally substitute gold in that conversation for anything. Trade, barter, goods, fiat money, credit. It doesn't really matter because the conversation would still be the same.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;580549So...how would one go about building a "non-metagamey" RPG magic system?...
[nitpick]As long as it is rules we're talking about it is the metagame we're talking about. [/nitpick]
Anyways as jibba put it just have things scale. Let's say Unseen Servant. The higher level you get the stronger, smarter, more Unseen Servants you can make in one casting until by level 10 you can get unseen servants with about the power of and usefulness of a second level commoner and have them run all day. Let's take "Cleaning" spells. You get to the point at higher levels where you can clean entire houses by making the area that the spell cleans larger and larger. It'd take a bit of effort to do this for every spell but it wouldn't be too hard.
This is where I hate how busy life has become, becaus this is very near and dear to my heart. Because I could spend all day on this one thread. I've been building on my basic spell system when I 'graduated' from d20 back in 83.
Matching system to setting and game style I always advocate for, and magic is one of those places that a GM has the most leeway to really do some setting specific stuff as well as a place they can really hang themselves.
Frequency distribution of caster vs power level, speed of growth, how many areas of magic and how are they represented, rate of power recovery, importance of reagents, cost of learning magic...all of these and more are major considerations. Basic thoughts on it are Here (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14955496/Discussion%20of%20Magic).
More later. I don't have unseen servants, but Artificers do control constructs (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956361/Stick%20Golem) and Necromancers have more servants (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956012/Raise%20Skeletal%20Servant) than any other type of caster.
Quote from: LordVreeg;580724This is where I hate how busy life has become, becaus this is very near and dear to my heart. Because I could spend all day on this one thread. I've been building on my basic spell system when I 'graduated' from d20 back in 83.
Matching system to setting and game style I always advocate for, and magic is one of those places that a GM has the most leeway to really do some setting specific stuff as well as a place they can really hang themselves.
Frequency distribution of caster vs power level, speed of growth, how many areas of magic and how are they represented, rate of power recovery, importance of reagents, cost of learning magic...all of these and more are major considerations. Basic thoughts on it are Here (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14955496/Discussion%20of%20Magic).
More later. I don't have unseen servants, but Artificers do control constructs (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956361/Stick%20Golem) and Necromancers have more servants (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956012/Raise%20Skeletal%20Servant) than any other type of caster.
Very nice. I need to look into this more when I have more time.
Quote from: jibbajibba;580689snip spell system
Good stuff... I do like these sort of more freeform spell systems. It cuts down on some of the arbitraryness of the scaling.
A bit off topic, in systems like that I'm pondering whether there should actually be two factors that scale separately - the power rating of the spell, and the complexity of the spell.
Some effects may be just a matter of raw energy (the same spell moves the paperweight as the mountain, but the mountain takes more energy to do) and the complexity of the spell (creating a house is more complicated that creating the same mass as an amorphous blob).
Quote from: MGuy;580715[nitpick]As long as it is rules we're talking about it is the metagame we're talking about. [/nitpick]
'Metagame' is perhaps not the correct word. 'Gamey' would probably do, actually; basically I mean these are rules which don't follow internal logic beyond what's good for the game - as in, maintaining challenge ratings and game balance.
One example of something that comes to mind - Arduin had the first spell fumbles tables. There's an example of a wizard fumbling a
Create Water spell, and getting a 'reverse effect', which naturally kills them and probably TPKs the party as an equal volume of water evaporates out of the caster and anyone nearby, leaving them as dessicated mummies. Perfectly logical extrapolation from how magic would work, although in D&D
Create Water is 0-level and the reverse (2E
Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting/3E
Horrid Wilting) is 8th.
Conversely you have limitations like
Implosion only working on living creatures - I ways thought I should be able to Implode anything really, I assume this is to stop people Imploding their way through dungeons or imploding ships or the like.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;580867'Metagame' is perhaps not the correct word. 'Gamey' would probably do, actually; basically I mean these are rules which don't follow internal logic beyond what's good for the game - as in, maintaining challenge ratings and game balance.
One example of something that comes to mind - Arduin had the first spell fumbles tables. There's an example of a wizard fumbling a Create Water spell, and getting a 'reverse effect', which naturally kills them and probably TPKs the party as an equal volume of water evaporates out of the caster and anyone nearby, leaving them as dessicated mummies. Perfectly logical extrapolation from how magic would work, although in D&D Create Water is 0-level and the reverse (2E Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting/3E Horrid Wilting) is 8th.
Conversely you have limitations like Implosion only working on living creatures - I ways thought I should be able to Implode anything really, I assume this is to stop people Imploding their way through dungeons or imploding ships or the like.
yes, systems that actually reflect the setting always aid in immersion and in making the players aplin old enjoy the experience more.
And I have used spell success rolls, including the same fumble and critical success numbers, as I use in combat.
I just got to throw out there that I do not like spell fumbling. The prospect of randomly dying because a simple spell backfired is anathema to me. On that note I do think that there should be a strong connection between setting and rules. Whenever I get done with my rules I'm going to engineer a setting (the best I can) based on how the rules play out. Hopefully I get something close to what I want. If I find anything amiss I'll be changing the rule to make it fit better. I believe in my ruleset you pointed out how the Dark Elves' "save a roll" ability would make them often times do certain things over and over again everyday until they get it "perfect" in setting. I had figured that would be the case after writing it up and having a racial OCD quirk seems "ok" for me. That's the kind of strong connection I'm hoping for.
Prior to the discussion that led to this one I had thought briefly about cantrips but didn't give them a second glance. This discussion has actually will help a lot when I redo the spells and write up the Rituals and Rites for my game.
Quote from: MGuy;580713What? You can literally substitute gold in that conversation for anything. Trade, barter, goods, fiat money, credit. It doesn't really matter because the conversation would still be the same.
No. He really is talking about how the economy works as a neutral universal barter system. Then he notes how adventurers form a sort of brain drain and later resource drain upon regions. The pile of assumptions on how a D&D setting is formulated is dizzying, but all a castle of sand.
Like I said, considering TSR assumed our fantasy worlds to have different governments and corresponding currencies, this argument is specious. Especially since TSR AD&D also went to great lengths stating that adventurers were in general not looked upon favorably. (And further there's no "magic shop" or people willing to trade out their best local stuff to newcomers just because of a pile of specie.)
Here, let me offer a useful new book looking at this notion and blowing away our current assumptions of barter's elaborate past. Basically the concept of debt, credit, power projection (military) as debt/credit foundation, service, taxation, jubilee, etc. all derive a hell of a lot earlier than modernly assumed. These concepts are extremely old, and if you have agrarian societies with the needed military to defend the non-mobile crop resource you're going to have a complex economic structure of debt/credit by default.
"Debt: the First 5000 Years" at Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/Debt-The-First-000-Years/dp/1933633867)
Normally I wouldn't care to respond with this tangent, but it's a rare opportunity to share a pretty neat book.
It does relate in the sense that economy (debit/credit) is grounded in power projection, and that the easiest way to correlate magic's effect upon a society would be its immediate military advantage. But magic is such a screwball factor, with oft embedded setting assumptions of "lost knowledge," that you could structure it with a strong strain of domestic trivialities. And as a poster already noted trying to follow the logic thread of magic's "actual effect upon society" is more of an exercise towards madness. So I cannot speak to the fruitfulness of such a goal.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;580864Good stuff... I do like these sort of more freeform spell systems. It cuts down on some of the arbitraryness of the scaling.
A bit off topic, in systems like that I'm pondering whether there should actually be two factors that scale separately - the power rating of the spell, and the complexity of the spell.
Some effects may be just a matter of raw energy (the same spell moves the paperweight as the mountain, but the mountain takes more energy to do) and the complexity of the spell (creating a house is more complicated that creating the same mass as an amorphous blob).
Each spell also has a difficulty rating which is your chance to learn it based on intelligence (well its a roll + int Mod + level versus a target number) so I added a complexity ruling. some spells also add bells and whistles based on additional mana spend.
Quote from: MGuy;580923I just got to throw out there that I do not like spell fumbling. The prospect of randomly dying because a simple spell backfired is anathema to me. On that note I do think that there should be a strong connection between setting and rules. Whenever I get done with my rules I'm going to engineer a setting (the best I can) based on how the rules play out. Hopefully I get something close to what I want. If I find anything amiss I'll be changing the rule to make it fit better. I believe in my ruleset you pointed out how the Dark Elves' "save a roll" ability would make them often times do certain things over and over again everyday until they get it "perfect" in setting. I had figured that would be the case after writing it up and having a racial OCD quirk seems "ok" for me. That's the kind of strong connection I'm hoping for.
Prior to the discussion that led to this one I had thought briefly about cantrips but didn't give them a second glance. This discussion has actually will help a lot when I redo the spells and write up the Rituals and Rites for my game.
In my system spells only fail if you pump more energy into them than you have experience to cope with. It is my metagamey bit if you like but I still try to tie back to some in game thing. So 1st level can generate a 1HD fireball with no issues but trying to generate a 3hd fireball carries risks .
Quote from: MGuy;580923I just got to throw out there that I do not like spell fumbling. The prospect of randomly dying because a simple spell backfired is anathema to me. On that note I do think that there should be a strong connection between setting and rules. Whenever I get done with my rules I'm going to engineer a setting (the best I can) based on how the rules play out. Hopefully I get something close to what I want. If I find anything amiss I'll be changing the rule to make it fit better. I believe in my ruleset you pointed out how the Dark Elves' "save a roll" ability would make them often times do certain things over and over again everyday until they get it "perfect" in setting. I had figured that would be the case after writing it up and having a racial OCD quirk seems "ok" for me. That's the kind of strong connection I'm hoping for.
Prior to the discussion that led to this one I had thought briefly about cantrips but didn't give them a second glance. This discussion has actually will help a lot when I redo the spells and write up the Rituals and Rites for my game.
Oh, everyone has different preferences when it comes to fumbles. I love say wild mages in D&D but I can see why people might prefer magic to be reliable. This exact fumble is a bit hardcore for me - I prefer not to have PCs explode due to someone else's bad roll - but what it did make me think about what how much magic systems are built around what's balanced, rather than being an extrapolation from some set of arcane principles. More or less what daniel_ream said I guess.
Thinking about it, D&D has a lot of very gamey limitations on many spells, for instance e.g.
*you can conjure celestial orcas, but not in the air above people
*invisibility that turns off when you attack
*very firmly defined effects e.g. a horizontal plane of force (tenser's floating disk) is a completely different spell to a vertical plane of force (shield)
*magic missile not working on inanimate objects (e.g. no dropping chandeliers on people or the like).
Quote from: MGuy;580923I just got to throw out there that I do not like spell fumbling. The prospect of randomly dying because a simple spell backfired is anathema to me. On that note I do think that there should be a strong connection between setting and rules. Whenever I get done with my rules I'm going to engineer a setting (the best I can) based on how the rules play out. Hopefully I get something close to what I want. If I find anything amiss I'll be changing the rule to make it fit better. I believe in my ruleset you pointed out how the Dark Elves' "save a roll" ability would make them often times do certain things over and over again everyday until they get it "perfect" in setting. I had figured that would be the case after writing it up and having a racial OCD quirk seems "ok" for me. That's the kind of strong connection I'm hoping for.
Prior to the discussion that led to this one I had thought briefly about cantrips but didn't give them a second glance. This discussion has actually will help a lot when I redo the spells and write up the Rituals and Rites for my game.
I have a large set of optional rules I use that have taken shape due to play. This is a good thing, especially when these rules are expressions of the setting and style. Ritual magic (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956030/Ritual%20Magic) is a good example, in that it explains a lot of how lower power casters get things done in my setting. But again, in Celtricia, 95% of casting is not done in combat, and even for PCs, 70% is not done in combat.
Cantrips and spells cast by lesser casters are a large part of a game, and should be based on the % of the population who can use magic. Our system is built to have a lot of casters, but with very few even medium power casters, so catrips make sense. This also creates a social set where social class is partially derived from the ability to 'touch the void'.
But the possible failure of spells changes the dynamic quickly, especially if you set up the system so that taking their time, the increase of reagents, focusing objects, and pouring more ability into a spell all can aid the spell success. That 'mage vs other' imbalance (a very crude and wide-ranging term) is changed pretty dramatically when spells can fail.