So, pick a system, and tell me why it would suck ass to be a magic-user in that system, where its set up in such a way that a Magic User will never be a good career choice, and why you think so.
People can also try to defend said systems against the original accusers.
RPGPundit
Exalted 1st Edition (I'm not familiar with 2nd edition).
I don't mean using charms, obviously. I mean using Magic Circles, Sorcery...
To build a character that uses Sorcery well and efficiently, one must plan to play second fiddle for a long time... Unfortunately the GMs that ran games of Exalted in which I played never got to the point where you could make a 'proper' magic-user.
Nihilistic Mind: I think you don't understand Exalted Magic... considering you can destroy entire armies with one terrestrial spell (like Obsidian Butterflies), I don't understand the second fiddle status. It is hard to make a D&D style MU though.
I've never really liked Gurps 3e magic system. I haven't played with 4e's, but I hear it's better. I never liked the Mental/hard skill for each individual spell (+Magery). More or less it was just too many things to put points into when you want to be a mage.
In Advanced Fighting Fantasy wizards are ludicrously better than warriors.
I could not get anywhere as a Magic-User with Traveller. That has to be the most poorly documented magic system ever written.
Sure, Krakajak, I agree... But the system is simply not flexible.
I've found that to compensate the lack of Charms in favor of Sorcery is only suitable if the GM changes play to accommodate that in particular. The second fiddle comment doesn't come from the lack of exploits the Exalted Sorcerer can accomplish but rather the fact that the Sorcerer is only really useful in some situations... It is easy to suit one's campaign to a group of Solars that do not focus on Sorcery.
If the campaign is meant to build up on the Epic but starts small, the Sorcerer's hidden powers are likely to stay hidden for quite some time...
Nihilistic Mind: Awww, it sucks your campaigns went that way. In the few games of Exalted I played/ran, whenever Sorcery got involved, it more or less became the centerpiece. Most spells tend to drive the story in a certain direction. Sorcery is one of the reasons Exalted is hell on me as a GM. So I totally understand why you don't like it, but "second fiddle" it isn't :D
Riddle of Steel springs to mind. Every time you cast a spell you age, as I recall.
Not as bad was Seventh Sea, where being a 'mage' meant spending half your character's ability to have one 'neat trick', some were better than others.
Lessee: poorly defined tarot card reading.
Reaching into holes in space to pull stuff from elsewhere (nice but not worth the sacrifice)
Um... taking on limited benefits of being a mythic character, along with the weaknesses
Shapechanging
and... um... something with runes.
Half of your character. Being a master fencer (well, the schools of fencing, being good with a sword was cheaper by far) was half of that, and came up in probably every game.
So.. you could be a cool swashbuckler and reasonably competent in a wide arena (in a swashbuckly game) or you could be a crap ass one trick pony who was competent enough to feed himself on a regular basis but would get his ass kicked by just about anyone else.
Um...yeah.
Quote from: KrakaJak;281121Nihilistic Mind: I think you don't understand Exalted Magic... considering you can destroy entire armies with one terrestrial spell (like Obsidian Butterflies), I don't understand the second fiddle status. It is hard to make a D&D style MU though.
If only. In mass combat, the unit is considered to be nothing more than a series of buffs to the commander's stats. You use his stats for everything, including defense against Sorcery. If that boss is an Essence user, nevermind Exalted or divine, your spell just got gimped or nulled into worthlessness. They did not fix this in second edition either.
Basic D&D. You get one spell, once per day, if it's a combat spell (because you probably only know one) it doesn't do much more than a sword.
Advanced D&D. You can still only cast one spell at the start, but you know around four of them. But, which ones you know is based on a randomly rolled table in the DMG. Know Floating Disc, Light, Analyse and Burning Hands? Sucks to be you mage boy, you're as useful as a hireling porter.
WFRP 1e sucked in its magic system. You couldn't really do anything as a wizard until you were onto a third career or so, by which time any of the warrior classes (especially dwarves) were damn-near freaking invulnerable.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;281189WFRP 1e sucked in its magic system. You couldn't really do anything as a wizard until you were onto a third career or so, by which time any of the warrior classes (especially dwarves) were damn-near freaking invulnerable.
RPGPundit
Christ yes, and the spells were dull.
Quote from: Spike;281143Riddle of Steel springs to mind. Every time you cast a spell you age, as I recall.
In theory yes - in practice no. The problem with that game is that you have a gritty combat system married to a ridiculously powerful/broken magic system.
If a player knows how to work the rules.... aging is not a problem. There are enough modifiers to keep ageing so low that it never becomes a factor even in prolonged campaigns. Also magic is so versitile that a sorcerer built right quickly becomes the swiss army knfe of the group.
Magic in TRoS sucks becuse it is broken, not because casters age.
Now that you've said all that, I am slowly starting to recall some of those same opinions from when I first read it.
Vaguely.
Still, the concept, as written, is pretty fucktastic. Hey, I'm a mighty wizard! Fear me or I'll stick a knife in yer gullet because, well, my knees are pretty bad and my hair is going grey and I REALLY don't feel like shaving another day or two of my already short life just to fuck up your day.
I can't remember the details but Stormbringer (BRP) felt like its magic system was broken. It was to the point where players felt cheated if they didn't play a magic user (precisely if they weren't Menilbonean). Personally I'm more annoyed by a system that makes one PC archetype the uber-k3wl-p0w3r-wielder while the rest of the archetypes suck than by a game where magic is sub-optimal.
Quote from: KrakaJak;281121I've never really liked Gurps 3e magic system. I haven't played with 4e's, but I hear it's better. I never liked the Mental/hard skill for each individual spell (+Magery). More or less it was just too many things to put points into when you want to be a mage.
I can appreciate that learning GURPS Magic can be tough. However it is definitely a viable choice. 4th edition corrects some of the issues that cause the most abuse.
Quote from: Balbinus;281157Basic D&D. You get one spell, once per day, if it's a combat spell (because you probably only know one) it doesn't do much more than a sword.
Advanced D&D. You can still only cast one spell at the start, but you know around four of them. But, which ones you know is based on a randomly rolled table in the DMG. Know Floating Disc, Light, Analyse and Burning Hands? Sucks to be you mage boy, you're as useful as a hireling porter.
I think bolting on a version of 4e ritual system for the non-combat spells would make Wizards (and Clerics) a much better class without unbalancing the game. The resource management aspect will still be in play as you can only afford a finite amount of components.
Quote from: Balbinus;281157Basic D&D. You get one spell, once per day, if it's a combat spell (because you probably only know one) it doesn't do much more than a sword.
A sword with which the odds of landing a solid hit are less than stellar.
QuoteAdvanced D&D. You can still only cast one spell at the start, but you know around four of them. But, which ones you know is based on a randomly rolled table in the DMG. Know Floating Disc, Light, Analyse and Burning Hands? Sucks to be you mage boy, you're as useful as a hireling porter.
Everyone is about as useful as a hireling porter at first level. I know people like to make hay about the Fighter getting to swing every round or some such, but the overall success rate of that wasn't much better.
Does no one run from encounters that are clearly beyond them anymore? Is every combat intended to turn out in the player's favour?
Quote from: Age of Fable;281122In Advanced Fighting Fantasy wizards are ludicrously better than warriors.
Having spells' limiter be that they cost Stamina to cast, and including a heal spell that restores more Stamina than it costs to cast, will indeed do that. :)
Quote from: boulet;281233I can't remember the details but Stormbringer (BRP) felt like its magic system was broken. It was to the point where players felt cheated if they didn't play a magic user (precisely if they weren't Menilbonean). Personally I'm more annoyed by a system that makes one PC archetype the uber-k3wl-p0w3r-wielder while the rest of the archetypes suck than by a game where magic is sub-optimal.
Yup. In earlier editions, there's no way you could really have non-sorcerers along with sorcerer PCs.
Quote from: One Horse Town;281627Yup. In earlier editions, there's no way you could really have non-sorcerers along with sorcerer PCs.
"Can you carry my stuff? My Size is so low I can't pull the giant bronze sacrificial alter along, and it's handy for the summonings."
I dunno about playablity, as my group were never particularly interested in it, but the rules for magic in Marvel FASERIP were abominable. They really should have just instructed people to use the keyword "magic" with the normal listing of powers. Magic in a supers game isn't bad, but having a separate system for it is a bad plan.
McWoD's magic system was, given the circumstance, actually pretty good.
It was broken as ALL hell though. Especially anything having to do with restoration...
In High Valor, the magic asks you to use poetry to make magic easier! That is you the player must create a dramatic rhyming "spell", in order to make the setback ALL magic causes less hideous. It never makes the CASTING easier, magic is a wonderful, powerful tool, but its gotta be HARD or it runs rampant. Shame the writer thought POETRY* was a way to make it easier.
*or dramatic prose, or taking extra time, or gathering rare materials and such. Why do we have to RHYME! *cries*