Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:31 AM	Have you noticed the way magic has lost any magic about it? In most literature, magic is an art, in D&D a science. It is too controlled, too predictable, and too reliable. The sense of magic and mystery has been lost, it has degraded to casters simply casting spells, without fail as if it were some powerful mundane thing. Magic shouldn't be tossed around frivolously, it should be a dangerous force, wielded only by the masters and saved for when things get desperate. This thread is for those who want the magic system to change, to bring the magic back into magic, so to speak. It is currently being developed by NorthWind, LostMage, and me. Help is appreciated, and we may end up having to make several drafts(threads) that will develop the system. Holy Beholder, NorthWind and LostMage's Rewrite of the magic system/ Potential Reflavoring of the Same. NorthWind came up with that title(and Ars Arcanum, but the other one is funnier).
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:38 AM	Table of Contents 1. Restoring the Magic to Magic. 2. Possibilities for Using Magic. 3. Possibility 1, will be changed later. 4. Possibility 2, will be changed later. 5. Possibility 3, will be changed later. 6. Problems With the Change, and Possible Solutions. As a side note, this thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=850891) deals with the major problem of magic items. Please read the notes.
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:39 AM	Chapter 1. Restoring Magic to Magic Reserved
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:40 AM	Chapter 2. Possibilities for Using Magic Reserved
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:40 AM	Chapter 3. The First Possibility A chance of destruction. Magic is not as controllable as it would seem, especially battle magic. Spells have their ranges changed, and are now thrown weapons, with the standard 5 increments, that change as you increase in level. Short range spells are 5 ft+5 feet per five level increments, medium range spells are 20 feet+4 feet per level(round down to nearest 5) increments, and long range spells are 80 feet+20 feet per level. You have to make an attack roll against AC 5 to hit the square, modified by distance. If you fail, it goes half a range increment off(minimum 5 feet). If you roll a natural one, you must make a will save against your spell DC, or it blows up on you. If you succeed, it fizzles. To balance this, casters now use a d6 hit die. This only applies to arcane casters that use spells.
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:41 AM	Chapter 4. The second Possibility Reserved. Name will be changed.
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:42 AM	Chapter 5. The Third Possibility. Reserved. Title will be changed.
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:42 AM	Chapter 6. Potiential Problems and How to Solve Them. Reserved.
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 12:43 AM	Chapter 7. Notes Reserved. NorthWind, LostMage, lets get started.
Vaelan 07-10-07, 03:20 AM	Remember second edition Wild Mages? Remember when your group decided that Wild Mages just don't work and discontinued use of them? I do! I'm not saying your efforts are doomed to failure (I'm thinking it awfully hard, though!), but you should really consider the previous attempts at making magic behave similarly and how they failed so spectacularly. I am somewhat interested to see if you can get it to work, hitting that perfect point between game-breakingly "mysterious" (read: random) and superficial.
Rhialto 07-10-07, 03:27 AM	The approach I'm using is to have a mana pool, and spells cost a random amount of mana to cast.
Bobson 07-10-07, 04:05 AM	Have you noticed the way magic has lost any magic about it? In most literature, magic is an art, in D&D a science. It is too controlled, too predictable, and too reliable. The sense of magic and mystery has been lost, it has degraded to casters simply casting spells, without fail as if it were some powerful mundane thing.Yes, Agreed, Agreed, and Agreed. :) Magic shouldn't be tossed around frivolously, it should be a dangerous force, wielded only by the masters and saved for when things get desperate.Agreed, agreed, and I'm not quite so sure. If you want to make magic dangerous to the point where it can be just as bad to use it as to not use it, then you're not playing D&D any more. I think the best target would be "well-understood art" - wizards and others know what they're doing, they can usually cast spells the way they want, but their understanding is never perfect, and there's still room for unexpectedly good or bad results. Iron Heroes has an arcanist class (the only magical one) which needs the caster to not roll a 1 on spellcraft checks in order to avoid hazardous mishaps. If that was how magic in standard D&D worked, it would lead to a much less magical setting...
IceFractal 07-10-07, 04:21 AM	I think what may be lacking is mystery. In standard D&D, the player, and usually the character, knows pretty much exactly how their spells will work, and why they work that way. Unknown (to the players, not just the characters) factors, even if their effects are simple, will add some mystery to magic, and provide some interesting things to discover. The ultimate example of this would be where the players don't even know the magic system, only what they find out in-game. However, this isn't practical for most games - DMs may rotate, and players do like to be able to pick the type of character they want to play. For instance, while a Sorcerer's powers are an unpredictable expression of his bloodline, if the player wants to play a stealth/control type, they'll want those type of spells specifically, not random ones. So a compromise that could work pretty well is to have the base magic system known, but have a certain amount of factors, which vary from campaign to campaign and character to character, and are only known initially by the DM, although characters may be able to theorize what they are by their experiences. I'll detail this in its own post.
IceFractal 07-10-07, 04:22 AM	As promised, the "unknown factors" idea: Factors have three components: Scope, Conditions, and Effect. Scope is what the factor applies to. For instance, magic in general could have a certain number of factors, Evocation in particular could have some more, and each individual mage could have some personal ones. Universal factors would mostly be known, if in somewhat incomplete form, although rarer ones could be thought of as myths. This also depends on the settings - if magic is underground and mistrusted, knowledge will be more limited than if several mage's guilds exist. Conditions are what they sound like - when the factor applies. Some example conditions, ranging in rarity: * Only during Daytime / Nighttime * When touching unworked earth or stone * While a certain constellation is ascendant * When the casters is touching / not touching metal * On the first day of spring, an hour after dusk, while standing near a river and holding silver. Effect, obviously, is the effects on spells cast under the conditions, which can be positive or negative. Generally, rarer conditions would have stronger effects. Some example effects: * +/- 2 caster levels * Automatically maximized and widened. * Effects caster instead of target, or random person nearby instead of caster * A swarm of almost-dissipated spirits remains for as long as the spell is in effect. * Cast for free, spell slot not expended.a * A bell tolls seven times, and the spell is repeated each time, but at diminishing strength. Conditions and Effects could be custom designed, or you could use a table as a starting point. When applying the effects in play, don't reveal exactly what happened, just mention what's visible - a spell being unusually effective or weak, or a change in how it functions. And don't mention why it happened - half the challenge is knowing which conditions caused it. So, for use in a particular campaign, you might have some laws of magic (Condition/Effect pairs, applying to all magic), of which most are known. Then each school of magic may have one or two quirks, known only to specialists. Finally, each spellcaster has a few factors, perhaps 3, initially unknown, although they may learn or guess what they are through experience. Example: Jim Tinstaff, the Wizard, has three quirks to his magic. The first, is that his spells gain +2 caster level when he's touching a body of water. The second is that any spell he casts at night under a new moon will repeat itself 12 and 24 hours later. The third is that if he casts an ice or cold spell while cutting himself with a crystal dagger, the target of that spell will keep losing heat until they freeze solid. Of these, the only one he knows is the first. He's witnessed the second effect, but erroneously believes it was because of an astrological conjunction.
Werral 07-10-07, 06:03 AM	You really should check out the Indie RPG site, the Forge. THere's one idewa on there where every spell creates it's opposite action somewhere - so a heal spell actually results in harm to someone else somewhere to balance it. Basically any positive effect must be balanced either by) A A) A negative effect of equal power on an ally or loved one B) A positive effect of equal power on a dire enemy. Attack spells would be balanced in another way. It's a cool idea IMHO (and not my idea), my only question is whether D&D as written is the right game for such systems? D&D is pretty Gamist, these kind of systems are more narrativist.
NorthWind 07-10-07, 10:21 AM	Whoa! Holy Beholders, you're fast! I just read the first few posts, this is NorthWind, one of the posters responsible for spurring this on, as mentioned above. The discussion is on the thread From the Cloudlands to the Core: A Campaign Setting (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=848535) - the last handful of posts are the planning stage for this thread, and can be found on The Campaign Workshop. The inspiration that sort of got me going was this essay. (http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html) Anyways, here we are, all neatly lined up an' all that. Cool beans. So, the point of this thread I think can be split - does it have to be a rewrite of the magic system? Yes and no. I think we should do so, for those who want it. And we should also try to work on small but consequential changes to the Vancian system for ease of integration for those DMs who would rather not have to re-teach their players the magic system, but add some of the ideas we produce. One last thing - some posters have already produced input for magic systems, flavor, etc. Excellent! To be plain, I don't see this as a project of re-making the system, that's just a part of it. It is also a place to work out how to make for your own setting an interesting type of magic, whether our system, your own, or the core rules. A place to work out how we can make magic more magic, as Holy Beholder said, no matter how you do it. Holy Beholder, NorthWind and LostMage's Rewrite of the magic system/ Potential Reflavoring of the Same. NorthWind came up with that title.Well, that and Ars Arcanum for the thread itself (sorry, had to grab some credit here :P)
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 01:45 PM	As promised, the "unknown factors" idea: Factors have three components: Scope, Conditions, and Effect. Alright: You roll for 1d4 conditions on a table, then for the same amount of effects. This will need more development before it gets put in 1 of the systems. Conditions d20 1.During the day 2.During the night 3.While touching water 4.In a high wind 5.After Fasting for a day 6.Just after eating 7.While over 50% HP 8.While under 50% HP 9.When protecting an ally 10.When attacking your own race. 11.When attacking undead. 12.While Holding a Staff. 13.Under the full moon 14.During an eclipse 15.While drunk 16.When isolated 17.When working with another mage. 18.While holding your spell book. 19.While Casting Evocations 20.While Casting Illusions. Effects D20 1. +2 caster level 2. -2 caster level 3. Area of effect increases by 1d4x5 feet 4. You glow green and heal HP equal to 1/2 your HD. 5. One of your allies glows green and heals HP equal to 1/2 your HD. 6. You glow red and take damage equal to 1/2 your HD. 7. One of your allies glows red and takes damage equal to 1/2 your HD. 8. Range increases by 1d20x5 feet. 9. Your weapon starts to glow blue. 10. Your weapon starts to glow yellow. 11. Your clothes turn into a rainbow pattern. 12. Your clothes turn invisible, but you don't notice. You are also called emperor by people. 13. Any vegetables you have turn into an alcoholic beverage. 14. Any fruit you have turns into juice. 15. You grow tiny useless wings for 1d4 hours. 16. Your skin turns into a random unnatural color for 1d4 hours. 17. The spell has a 50% chance of not using a slot. 18. You gain natural armor +3 for 1d6 days. 19. Any copper pieces you carry have a 10% chance of turning to gold. 20. Any gold pieces you carry have a 10% chance of turning to copper.
NorthWind 07-10-07, 02:00 PM	Another (time consuming) way to apply this idea is that spells all have these conditions instead of their casters. The most common spells would have simple conditions, such as the need for a focus or material component, whereas more obscure or rare pieces of magic would have something like "Can only be cast when the full moon is obscure by clouds". This adds another research element to spell casting - when the party has some down time, the PC wizard might search for the details of a condition for a spell he needs to use. Also, I think some of the effects there are a tad harsh, Holy Beholder - clothes turning invisible can be very problematic, depending on the circumstances, numbers 16 through 20 I think we might consider working on, depending on how harsh or dangerous the DM wants to portray magic as - I'll try and come up with a list in addition to the ones above sometime soon.
Rustmonster 07-10-07, 02:50 PM	For all those who like the current magic system, we will be preparing an alternate thread, called "Why magic is good as it is, and everyone who disagrees is an annoying upstart" Please restrict trolling, spamming, and other such activities to that thread. I really hope you are not serious about this part. I personaly like the "magic is like a science" feel that D&D has (although I don't like alot of the spells in the game, I still like the concept). But just because I like magic as a science, doesn't mean I'm a flaming, trolling, spamming, immature individual. I beleive that you yourself said that I am a reasonable individual. I have no problem with anyone who beleives that magic is too controlled, because I know that it is quite highly so, and that can't be everyones idea of magic. My personal veiw is that any force so widely used as magic, that has been studied by the greatest minds for tens of thousands of years, would have been understood to a point where those who know how to use it can control it quite well. It has become like a science, and to some, science is an art. Note how I said "those who know how to use it". Not just anyone can use magic effectivly. You have to train, like a wizard, or have inborn talent, like a sorcerer. Then again, it is just as good an argument to say that magic is a force that can never be quite completly controled. It is wild, free, and unrestrainable. Some may learn how to use it, but can never quite control it. It has grave consequenses to use magic if something goes wrong, but also wonderful rewards if the Fates are in your favour. It is feared and often misunderstood, but to those who practice it's use, it is an art form like no other. I am looking forward to seeing what ideas you have for a more wild magic system. I'll give input once you start writing, and I promise none of it will be "trolling, spamming, and other such activities."
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 04:42 PM	Yeah, I was being somewhat sarcastic about that part. That other thread I mentioned doesn't exist. And yes, I have said you are a reasonable individual. Its just that a lot of people react violently to stuff they oppose, and this thread really doesn't need a bunch of "your all retards, the idea is stupid" posts. Which is why I am waiting for NorthWind or LostMage to start the other thread(just kidding here, that thread is unnecessary).
NorthWind 07-10-07, 05:00 PM	Which is why I am waiting for NorthWind or LostMage to start the other thread. I hope you're sarcastic 'bout that, too...that's not a thread I think we should start. If there's a problem with your taste, fine. Bring it up with us if you want, but if it's flaming or trolling, don't expect it to be acknowledged. Besides, I think that with a few house rules, the original system can get the same feel that we're looking for. Anyways, thanks for your interest, Rustmonster, hope to hear from you again in the future!
LostMage 07-10-07, 05:07 PM	Well, it's good to see my thread spawned this nifty little thing goin' here, kudos to NorthWind for the initiative on the other thread, since you can't really see it here, and thanks to Holy Beholder for jumping on board! I can't say I'll be able to contribute too much in the way of rules, but I'll do what I can! Also, I'm seeing a diversion of visions between Holy Beholder and NorthWind - careful, guys. I have to say I'm with both of you. It ought to be a new system, but also important is the need for simple fixes and ideas to be easily integrated to a campaign that's already in motion, like NorthWind said. All in all, good job to both of you, you really took initiative on this one!
NorthWind 07-10-07, 06:26 PM	Thanks, LostMage, hope to hear from you, too. I like the d20 listing, like I said, it adds a nice hidden variable. Also, it's a modular change - if you want to just slap it onto your own game, it woudn't cause too much fuss, and I think we should make what we do available in modular forms (that is to say, a modular adaption of what ever it is) so that things can be mixed and matched. It'd work especially well if we had multiple lists to chose from, or racial or regional lists for the campaign world (i.e. a region whose style of magic is necromancy may have several conditions that have to do with working magic when in contact with a corpse, in a graveyard, etc.) Anyways, here's another d20 list of conditions: Effects d20 Spell is cast while... 1. In the presence of a divine icon or realted item 2. While standing in running water 3. In the rain 4. It is snowing 5. Standing in colored light 6. Underground 7. In a forest 8. Next to a mirror 9. Flying 10. In a temple 11. In contact with cold iron 12. Upside-down 13. Under the new moon 14. In a duel 15. In a library 16. In a magic circle 17. In a tree 18. Wounded by lead 19. While chained 20. Other of DM's creation Also, an alternative to this could be to apply conditions to spells, but this is a little harder - for individual characters, this can be easily applied, to spells, if you roll a 12 on the above table for fireball, or a 19 on Holy Beholder's table for something like Sleep there's a problem. I'll admit, on this account, I'm stumped, at least for now, so any ideas there would be cool. Also to do with making magic more magic, where do spells come from? why does magic work? and what about divine magic? These questions have to do largely with flavor, however, and not mechanics. One idea I like for the first question would be that all the magic in circulation today is derived from the simple, powerful magic of a supernatural race (i.e. faeries, dragons, angels, what have you) and magicians have written their own variations of it so that it can be more readily cast. Why magic works is hugely dependent on your setting - perhaps there is no reason why it works, it just does. Maybe it's the idea of opposite actions such as Werral suggested. Or it's the changing of the ethereal plane. Really, the thing here, is that all of this is focused on arcane. I usually have a problem dealing with divine magic in campaign worlds, but will divine magic run on the same system?
Holy_Beholder 07-10-07, 06:42 PM	I'm thinking that there should be some effects that always happen that depend on the character and how magic effects them during certain conditions, then there should just be that element of randomness on all spells. Maybe you roll a d20 for spells for something else there too. For instance, whenever Tom Jerry casts an evocation spell, his caster level is treated as 2 higher. However all evocation spells also have a chance of randomly working wierdly. Say he casts fireball. It will usually just radiate heat, however there is the off chance that it will explode and send debris flying, which could hit someone. Edit: Also, northwind, nice list. Maybe we could get it to be 100 effects and 100 conditions. If you have another idea, I'll copy it into one of the possibility chapters. I left open 3 possible chapters like I said, and I think that at least one of them should be something that can be added on to the current system with a minimal amount of fuss. Edit: This is a really simple idea, but maybe instead of having a set caster level, you make a caster level check, and get a bonus. For instance, a 10th level caster would just roll. If they roll a 16, then their spell is going to be much more deadly.
NorthWind 07-10-07, 08:53 PM	Maybe we should have modular random and constant conditions. For example, the lists we have would be rolled on at character creation by the DM, and stick with that character for the rest of their life. As for spell conditions, I was thinking along the lines of just more interesting components, I suppose. This could be an alternative variant with conditions specific to spells. Sometime later I'll add more conditions to the list, but here's number 41 (assuming we're merging the lists to develop a d100 list) for now: Effects d% (I like the sound of that!) Spell is cast while... 41. The magician is in love Also, I'm thinking of something of a greater division between wizardry and sorcerery - something like you'd find in the books of Ursula K. LeGuin or Dianna Wynne Jones. It doesn't have to be huge, maybe more like a difference in execution of magic and some minor variation in spell lists. For example, in Mrs. Jones' work, sorcerers' magic requires the use of objects on their person. If you were a sorcerer, perhaps your spells would require focuses and verbal components, to the exclusion of somatic and material components.
Roog 07-10-07, 09:38 PM	Have you noticed the way magic has lost any magic about it? In most literature, magic is an art, in D&D a science. It is too controlled, too predictable, and too reliable. The sense of magic and mystery has been lost, it has degraded to casters simply casting spells, without fail as if it were some powerful mundane thing. Magic shouldn't be tossed around frivolously, it should be a dangerous force, wielded only by the masters and saved for when things get desperate. Sounds interesting. I'm currently considering two magic variants to enhance the feeling of "a dangerous force, wielded only by the masters and saved for when things get desperate", without totally changing the game. 1: An overcasting variant, where casters have reduced numbers of slots, but can risk spontaneous casting without slots. This involves increasing levels of physical risk and loss of control of the spell. 2: A variant that separates "petty" and "true" magic. "Petty" magic is quick reliable small scale magic (probably refreshing by the encounter or similar), while "True" magic is large scale, powerful, unpredictable, and subject to GM fiat on it's exact effects. "True" magic can involve long (days/weeks/more) rituals, truly strange material requirements, and at the top end areas of effect on the order of kingdoms, etc. What the magic user loses is power projection density, and what the magic user gains is power projection scale. Obviously this requires more work than the first variant.
Shan_TheBabau_Burke 07-10-07, 09:39 PM	I love the idea of spicing up magic, but in a game where you have a wizard by the name of Fled Raziw, with a ferret familiar, who charges around shouting, "It's Fled Raziw and Wizzle too!", magic doesn't need to get any more "wild". (That's my dad's character btw) In his case, magic is mysterious enough that even he doesn't know what he's going to do next. However, he hasn't played with us in quite awhile :( and no one else wants to play a mage. I pinpointed the problem as the exact one you describe. It's too humdrum. I've tried several different approaches, but none seem to work. In the campaign I just began, we play all together for the first time Saturday, I've made all the wizards and sorcerers a part of a secret organization. They are going to catch glimpses of them now and again and hopefully one will want to join up. I'm praying for a monkey see, monkey do. This is a good thread and I'm hoping to see ideas that are way better than mine posted here. Good job guys! :cheer:
NorthWind 07-10-07, 10:41 PM	Sounds interesting. 2: A variant that separates "petty" and "true" magic. "Petty" magic is quick reliable small scale magic (probably refreshing by the encounter or similar), while "True" magic is large scale, powerful, unpredictable, and subject to GM fiat on it's exact effects. "True" magic can involve long (days/weeks/more) rituals, truly strange material requirements, and at the top end areas of effect on the order of kingdoms, etc. What the magic user loses is power projection density, and what the magic user gains is power projection scale. Obviously this requires more work than the first variant. This is a great idea, we ought to develop it more. Would you be interested in helping out? I'm thinking something like this: The normal range of spells, levels zero through nine, with maybe a few exceptions (the Planar Binding series, Wish) would qualify as minor, or trivial magic. Major spells, "true" magic would probably have a few set spells that other mages have worked out already. The rest of them would probably be user-specific, similar to Eberron's eldritch machines, but with different flavor and criteria. But that's just me. Needs more work.
Roog 07-10-07, 11:34 PM	I'm thinking something like this: The normal range of spells, levels zero through nine, with maybe a few exceptions (the Planar Binding series, Wish) would qualify as minor, or trivial magic. Major spells, "true" magic would probably have a few set spells that other mages have worked out already. The rest of them would probably be user-specific, similar to Eberron's eldritch machines, but with different flavor and criteria. But that's just me. Needs more work. Things I see as potential petty magic: - Most level 0-9 spells - Most spell like abilities - except: spells that are considered true magic - except: some other spells (eg some save-or-die) that could be removed to reduce the magic users immediate power. Things I see as potential true magic: - Anything with extended casting times could be considered. - Spells that raise/resurrect/etc - contingency or similar - Spells that involve significant GM fiat (e.g. Atonement) - wish - Permanency and significant magic items - versions of regular spells available at lower levels with serious restrictions (e.g. Gate) - any spell that messes with people's minds over the long term - Spells that change the large scale nature of the world
keyunp 07-11-07, 12:08 AM	Here's an idea I started working on once to make spells a bit more unpredictable, but never finished. Take a look at a spell. You keep every from the name, range , etc down to spell resistance. For the description you only use the one line at the begining of the spell section. The DM can read the origional description for ideas, but the only "rules" for the spell is that one line. What actually happens is totaly up to the DM. And it dosen't have to come out the same every time. Your tabel of conditions and effects look interesting, but don't use d100 table, keep d20 tabels with different tables for regions, races, specialist, etc.
NorthWind 07-11-07, 08:07 AM	Things I see as potential petty magic... Yep, that list is about what I was going for. I like this - easy enough to implement, but is a nice addition. Now, when you say "versions of regular spells available at lower levels with serious restrictions (e.g. Gate)" you mean to say a version of Gate available at lower levels, but with greater restrictions, right? Also, how do you plan to implement this? I remember reading an article somewhere, on 4th edition magic - the write thought that wizards and other casters should have abilities that aren't so much spells as things that they've learned to do with magic. This is more or less in the same vein. keyunp: that's another easy-to-use idea, which I think I might use a little more often in my games. It requires no mechanical changes, really - just some imagination.
Roog 07-11-07, 08:23 AM	Also, how do you plan to implement this? I remember reading an article somewhere, on 4th edition magic - the write thought that wizards and other casters should have abilities that aren't so much spells as things that they've learned to do with magic. This is more or less in the same vein. Say - only when the stars are right for the destination ... at certain places of power ... with powerful and dangerous rituals ... the spell can be cast. Basically turning the spell into a mini adventure with research, travel, timetables, resources, and a major spell that hopefully sends you where you want to go.
NorthWind 07-11-07, 09:38 AM	Alright, so the way I'm interpreting this is that, for example, a level ten sorcerer needs to cast Time Stop, so he does some research and finds that, with his knowledge of magic, he needs to use it from the peak of a recently formed mountain during the winter solstice (or something along those lines, right?) I like the dimension this adds to spellcasting, as a sort of fairy-tale magic. As for lists - keyunp, a series of d20 tables would be easier to apply to races, classes, etc. I think we'll stick with that. Here are some tables we can start thinking about - d20 conditions tables: 1. a table for wizards 2. a table for sorcerers 3. a table for specialists (evoker, enchanter, etc.) 4. a table by region 5. a table by race The first two tables, depending on what a sorcerer is in your game, could be one in the same. Naturally, table four would be based on your campaign world, and it's history of magic. The only issue I see here is selecting which table to use for, say, and elf evoker, so for simplicity's sake, one or two table may suffice. What do you guys think? Edit: A random thought just occurred to me, that DnD magic is either combat oriented or socially oriented, so that the players can "win" so to speak. Flavor spells, that won't need any detail outside of "A spell for the propelling of ships" available to PCs for utility or practicality. They would be minor or simple magic that can be easily recorded and learned (that is to say, the party wizard can access them for free) and for accomplishing tasks like cooking, dowsing, etc. Not exciting or flashy, but an extra to add some 'reality' - wouldn't low-level magicians be employed to do these sort of chores?
keyunp 07-11-07, 10:21 AM	If a character is getting 3 conditions, with only 1 known by the players, then if there are multiple table (say elf evoker), then let the player choose for the 1 known. Let prestidigitation be cast with a 24 hour duration, but you only get to use 1 specific option. "A spell for the propelling of ships" I'd say don't let it be done for "free", but let it be done with the right conditions. Say you stand on the bow of the ship, arms out streched, and every minute say "I'm top of the world!", to keep the ship moving.
Holy_Beholder 07-11-07, 11:50 AM	Alright, it seems like we will have to divide spells into petty and true. I'm thinking that there should probably be a table for conditions that let you use a true spell. All 3 have to be met. Place 1. On the peak of the tallest mountain. 2. At the bottom of the deepest ocean. 3. In the center of the largest temple. 4. Inside a circle of silver etched on a field. 5. At the top of the tallest tower. 6. On an island on the center of a crystal clear lake. 7. In a circle of giant crystals jutting out. 8. In a circle of fire, made with rare ingredients that make it glow purple. 9. At the heart of the darkest bog. 10. Inside the biggest tree in the darkest forest. Time 1. During a full moon 2. During an eclipse 3. During a sunset. 4. During a sunrise. 5. During winter solstice. 6. During summer solstice. 7. During spring equinox 8. During autumn equinox 9. During New Years Eve. 10. During the anniversary of the death of the first dragon. Object 1. A cockatrices feather 2. The blood of a virgin. 3. The horn of a minotaur. 4. A dragon's horn. 5. A kraken's tooth. 6. A basilisk's eye. 7. The life of a goblin child born on the spring equinox 8 years ago. 8. A wind in a bottle(if your in northwinds new campaign, replace this) 9. An adamantine talisman 10. A preserved stirge in an amber sphere. I tried to think of 20 for each, but need help. Heres 10 though.
NorthWind 07-11-07, 05:39 PM	I'd say don't let it be done for "free", but let it be done with the right conditions. Say you stand on the bow of the ship, arms out streched, and every minute say "I'm top of the world!", to keep the ship moving. Sorry, I worded that wrong. I meant that it wouldn't cost much at all to add or learn it, so that you wouldn't have to pay to have a spell that brings good fortune for gardens when you add it to your spellbook. As for lists, good idea. I was only worried that the idea would be bogged down by a series of lists to choose from, but I had forgotten that we were including multiple conditions. Holy Beholder: We could go for random generation and also specific conditions that are for each spell, it could go either way. (I especially like Object number nine, by the way :D ) However it's accomplished, though, I'm seeing research as a big part of true magic, resulting in interesting plot hooks for adventures.
Holy_Beholder 07-12-07, 01:07 PM	I think research is good too. It would be nice to get LostMage's opinion though. On other matters does anyone have any ideas for the list? And I'm thinking that there would be a few great libraries, of which there is a scroll for each spell, that magically appears when it is written, and shows what is needed for casting. Of course, you have to find the right library, get to it, research it, get the magic items, and cast the spell when and where you need too. In the case of combat spells, I think you should only have to do this once, then you get to add it to your spell book or whatever you store them in. Say for flesh to stone you have to go to the third library, get a basilisks eye, then cast the spell from the peak of the tallest mountain during a sunrise. The spell would then summon a string of floating glowing runes, that would go onto a page of your spell book, or on a band on your staff or on the side of your talisman or something.
SilvercatMoonpaw 07-12-07, 04:00 PM	Preface: I'm not trolling, spamming, flaming, or anything of that sort. At least, I'm not trying to. I would like to ask a question: How is it that magic as a non-dangerous, non-mysterious force isn't as much of a wonderment to you? I mean, it's magic. You flip fireballs and call forth demons. Magic is about the power, about looking cool. The current "no worries" system allows you to be cool without any headaches. If magic is dangerous or hard to use who would use it to look cool? It'd be foolish to do that, and that makes it so that the power-mad become really unsatisfying because they're just being stupid rather than being insane. I mean they're pretty much comical, kinda like the villain who carries around a pocket nuke strapped to his back. Plus if magic is easy to do it becomes impressive when people decide not to do it. Mysterious presents a different sort of problem: it becomes stale after the first couple of times. Plus it gets boring because it looks easy. Snap your fingers. Say a bit of mumbo-jumbo. Even if you can't do it just by watching someone else there's still less magic to something you can't explain then to something which you know is hard. Seriously, which is more impressive? It puts the magic back in the rabbit-in-the-hat trick when you know how it's done and that it's hard. Or am I the only one who feels this way? I apologize if I have trolled, spammed, or flammed. It can be very difficult to know what's what.
NorthWind 07-12-07, 05:17 PM	No, you're not trolling, flaming or spamming. Don't worry about it. Here's how I look at it: magic as non-dangerous I'm okay with. Magic as non-mysterious? Well, then it isn't really magic - or at least, in my opinion, it's not. Now, mysterious, I don't see where you're coming from here. The way the system is, it's more that everything is already very cut and dry, whereas I think it could use some more ambiguity. Gets stale? This, again, I don't see. Magic as-is has already become stale - to us, at least. But, the way it is, you already snap your fingers and say some mumbo-jumbo. Making it mysterious doesn't mean making it easier. Maybe my problem is that the PHB presents magic as so cut and dry as a matter of necessity. Perhaps all magic needs is a DM to use it right, and it will be just different enough to be exciting. Anyways, this probably isn't much of an answer, but that's me. I suppose it's really a matter of taste. Thank you for bringing this up, it's something we should work out first, before creating lists and tables and variants. We should spend time discussing why we're changing this.
SilvercatMoonpaw 07-12-07, 06:51 PM	Here's how I look at it: magic as non-dangerous I'm okay with. Magic as non-mysterious? Well, then it isn't really magic - or at least, in my opinion, it's not. One way we may differ is that I can see "magic" as a term applying to a type of reality manipulation, whereas you see it as a descriptor for something inexplicable and wonderous. Now, mysterious, I don't see where you're coming from here. The way the system is, it's more that everything is already very cut and dry, whereas I think it could use some more ambiguity. Gets stale? This, again, I don't see. Magic as-is has already become stale - to us, at least. But, the way it is, you already snap your fingers and say some mumbo-jumbo. Making it mysterious doesn't mean making it easier. To understand my position you have to stand in the shoes of someone who would immediately try to figure out how magic gets from intention to results. If you don't know how it's done then it seems to have few steps and thus lulls one into a false sense that it must be easy. Your attempt to create rituals with obscure components however, is a way to make magic seem more complex without revealing exactly how it works. Maybe my problem is that the PHB presents magic as so cut and dry as a matter of necessity. Perhaps all magic needs is a DM to use it right, and it will be just different enough to be exciting. I would think so. One problem with the PHB is that it presents magic as descrete packets. 1st-level Magic Missile. Without metamagic there really isn't much variance within a spell. You can't make the missiles into a force club, for instance. That may be why you feel it's dry (and I do too, to a lesser extent). Anyways, this probably isn't much of an answer, but that's me. I suppose it's really a matter of taste. Thank you for bringing this up, it's something we should work out first, before creating lists and tables and variants. We should spend time discussing why we're changing this. One ironic problem with designing magic the way you seem to want to go about it is that you generally have to think of it scientifically. You don't have to tell the players, but unless you want magic to make no logical sense you have to build it in a logical framework which you understand. "Magic causes lethal damage." It's your start, but you have further questions to answer: How does this show in the game world (wounds?)? Are there additional options to be explored (can another creature's life-force be substituted?)? If you don't do these things then magic remains pretty much metagame.
Holy_Beholder 07-12-07, 07:30 PM	The basic idea is if it is random enough, or the players don't know how it works, it gets the mystery back. With current magic, after a while, it is just sort of there, it isn't really a big deal any more. "To understand my position you have to stand in the shoes of someone who would immediately try to figure out how magic gets from intention to results. If you don't know how it's done then it seems to have few steps and thus lulls one into a false sense that it must be easy." The problem here is that for the players it is easy, they can just cast spells without worrying about it. Magic loses the mystery about it if you can easily figure out how it goes from intention to results(sleep, pick spells, cast) Also, you weren't trolling or spamming, it was helpful.
SilvercatMoonpaw 07-13-07, 09:27 AM	The basic idea is if it is random enough, or the players don't know how it works, it gets the mystery back. With current magic, after a while, it is just sort of there, it isn't really a big deal any more. Just seems like throwing something random at the problem and hope everything just works out. You can't just say "magic is random" without at least a modicum of logical reasoning to that effect. The problem here is that for the players it is easy, they can just cast spells without worrying about it. Magic loses the mystery about it if you can easily figure out how it goes from intention to results(sleep, pick spells, cast) This is a mechanics vs. flavor issue. I always support having mechanics to back up flavor, but what you seem to be doing here is simply saying that there's no flavor issue, only a mechanical one.
Holy_Beholder 07-13-07, 12:43 PM	Its not throwing random stuff, you still cast the spells, but there can be unexpected side effects, and if you really mess up, instead of shooting a fireball at your enemies, the bead blows up in your hand in a tiny explosion. Its not as much "magic is random" as magic is hard to use, and a little mistake will change things, as well as it interacting with people differently. Eventually, people will figure out that casting daylight during an eclipse will blind people, or casting lightning bolt on top of a mountain triples the range, and it will then be reliable. Also the flavor issue is that magic is way too controlled. On other topics, I came up with another idea. Basically magic is drawn from a source, the further away from the source you are, the harder it is to cast. Mages often make towers, fill them with magical stuff(dragon blood, pixie dust, basilisks eyes, etc.) and draw from that source. Travelers can draw on other sources, for instance necromancy magic would be powerful in a graveyard. In addition, you can attune sources to yourself, so your tower only supplies you with magic. Here's the mechanics: Within 10 feet of source-80% chance spells cast take no spell slot. Within 50 feet of source-40% chance spells cast take no spell slot Within 100 feet of source-20% chance spells cast take no spell slot. Within 1 mile of source-10% chance spells cast take no spell slot. Within 5 miles of source-Normal magic Within 20 miles of source-10% chance spells cast take 2 spell slots Within 50 miles of source-20% chance spells cast take 2 spell slots Within 100 miles of source-40% chance spells cast take 2 spell slots Within 500 miles of source-80% chance spells cast take 2 spell slots Further away-Spells cast take 2 spell slots, 40% chance they take 3. This assumes that the power source is in a gargantuan object. Every object size down halves the distance for all of the ranges. Here are the object sizes Fine-A horse shoe Diminutive-A filled jar Tiny-A filled sack Small-A cart Medium-A wagon Large-A two room house Huge- A large graveyard Gargantuan- A wizards massive tower Colossal-A gigantic flying castle with a village surrounding it. This also adds a strategic element, since beating a wizard traveling is much easier than assaulting ones tower. Smart players can come up with subtle objects(like the horseshoe, nobody will ever see that coming. On the other hand, if you go very far away from the horse, you lose the magic), and if an object is destroyed, you have to use a different source. Also, if the spell takes no spell slot, the wizard can decide to use a spell slot to do double damage, double the range, or double the area. What do you all(especially NorthWind) think?
SilvercatMoonpaw 07-13-07, 01:08 PM	I meant throwing random stuff at the problem of magic flavor you don't like. I think the source idea is great. It's like the feats from Sandstorm and Frostburn where you have to carry around a bunch of stuff from the area to get the benefit. It also explains why creatures may congregate around specific places, or what magic items (real magic items, they kind that are hard to get/make) are made out of. The one thing I'd say is that there should be more variety then just spell slot use, such as spontaneous metamagic (maybe even unintended) of a certain kind.
LostMage 07-13-07, 07:45 PM	"Various RPG systems try different mechanics in an effort to make their magic feel more "magical". However, I feel that most of these simply alter the mechanics almost at random. The problem is in how magic is conceived of in the first place, not in the stats and die rolls used to implement it." This is what inspired me, Silvercat. It's not the mechanics...it's the execution. What I view the above tables as are good ideas to add to Vancian casting, to spice it up. It adds some interest - without much strain on the DM. However, the DM could (and should) also work to make magic interesting, with or without alterations or variations to the rules. Magic should be considered not as something added to the natural laws of the world, but as part of their laws, just as science isn't something apart from nature, but woven into it. There is an irony to this project - magic will still have rules, as a matter of necessity. It can't be like in the storybooks mechanics-wise. But it can be flavor-wise. By the way, Holy Beholder, opinions. a.) For the research post: nicely done. It would make for nice side-quests, but you'd have to be careful, depending on who's playing. Some groups would want to keep research quietly in the background. But the idea is good. b.) For the distance from source idea: the idea of a concrete source I like. In fact, I toyed with the idea of making light be necessary for using magic, and the color of the light would have various effects on spellcasting (that would be my "hidden variable". The distance idea is nice, and the mechanics are quite well thought out. But you'd want to be careful with this, since a wizard in his tower is nigh invincible with only a slim chance of expending spells. This is what you're aiming for, but you still need to be careful - a sorcerer's flying castle swoops down to wreak havoc - a PC wizard slays the sorcerer and takes his flying tower...problem. That one-ups any artifact you could give to another player. I would change the effect of the source.
Holy_Beholder 07-14-07, 12:37 AM	The sorcerers flying castle only works for that particular sorcerer, so you can't use it. I think i phrased the attunment of objects badly. Basically, you can't take a source that a mage has managed to claim for themselves, however there are a lot of public sources. In addition, that also means the source can be the target(say your in a harry potter campaign, their wand is fine sized, and has a range of 1/128 normal, so you have to be within about 10 inches for maximum effectiveness, at roughly 4 feet, you have a 40% chance of not taking a spell slot). With the horse shoe example, you have a 40% chance of not using a spell, however once your horse is killed you either need to take it off or stay near your horse, and an immobile mage is a dead mage unless they have some good protection. In addition, I was thinking about talismans or something that you could use as a ranged touch attack against the object, so if a wizard is riding on a magic carpet with all sorts of magical stuff in a sack on the back of the carpet, that looks like a seat, you can hurl a talisman at him, cut off his source, then shoot him full of arrows. The light concept is also really good, torches could burn different colors, and in certain places they mix, in each color spells have a different effect. The whole light concept could be further developed, do you have any more ideas on that concept? Also, do we have the go to work with it?
Dex 07-14-07, 06:23 AM	I also like the "distance from source" idea - it reminds me of the magic in the (Well of Echoes?) series by Ian Irvine, where you have a whole lot of magical nodes scattered all over the world. The further from a node you are, the less powerful your magic is, the longer the spell takes to cast, and the greater the chance of failure, as well as powering magic items. Also, each node is of a different strength, which would be what the highest level spell a caster can use is (0-9) and how far they can use it from. I almost used this kind of system in a campaign but decided against it, since I would have to either map out every node in the world, and spellcaster players would stick to the high-magic areas, or I would have to roll field strength randomly, which might annoy players by limiting magic use ("What do you mean, my potion of cure light wounds doesn't work?").
LostMage 07-14-07, 09:02 AM	Dex: Nice. But yeah, you'd want to have a map in a system like that, random generation would put your PC spellcasters at odds. Holy Beholder: Ah, I see. It's a cool system, nicely thought out. As for light, I'll give you what I have, you can work from there, if you like. 1. To cast a spell, a wizard or sorcerer (note: I hadn't figured this for divine magic) must be in or have access to (by holding or being within sight of) a natural source of light (torches, sun, moon and starlight, etc.) 2. The color of the light can confer a small bonus to spellcasting, although most PCs would be unaware of this the light bonuses I worked out are as follows (I pictured most of them coming from stained glass or torches burning salts for color): Purple light will give a spellcaster a +1 luck bonus to a variable aspect of the spell (damage, SR checks, etc.) Blue light will add 1 to the difficulty class of an enchantment Red light will add 1 to the difficulty class of an evocation Green light will increase the caster level of a spell of the summoning subschool by 1 (thus, a summoned creature lasts a round longer) Moon light will increase the dificulty class of a spell with the shadow subschool by one. Torchlight without coloration confers no bonus. Magical light can be used as a source, but it confers no bonus, and as soon as the spell is cast, whether or not it works, the duration of the magical light will end.
Dex 07-14-07, 11:51 PM	What about a sort of combination-color approach to light-casting? So for each of the basic colors (Red, Blue, Yellow) there is a certain bonus, depending on what type of light there is. And when there isn't a light color available, the opposite happens Just off the top of my head, they might be: Red might be +1 CL Blue might be +2 to DCs Yellow might double the duration. So in an otherwise lightless dungeon, being in the radius of a torch could give +1 CL and double duration (DM rules that fire light is a mix of red and yellow), but all save DCs are -2 (since there is no blue light available). Standing in shadowy illumination might give you no benefit, but no penalty either. Suddenly mages are fearsome under broad daylight, less feared at nighttime, and magic items that give off light (like the 30% chance of a +1 sword to glow when you get one) become so much more important!
Roog 07-14-07, 11:58 PM	What about a sort of combination-color approach to light-casting? So for each of the basic colors (Red, Blue, Yellow) there is a certain bonus, depending on what type of light there is. And when there isn't a light color available, the opposite happens Just off the top of my head, they might be: Red might be +1 CL Blue might be +2 to DCs Yellow might double the duration. So in an otherwise lightless dungeon, being in the radius of a torch could give +1 CL and double duration (DM rules that fire light is a mix of red and yellow), but all save DCs are -2 (since there is no blue light available). Standing in shadowy illumination might give you no benefit, but no penalty either. Suddenly mages are fearsome under broad daylight, less feared at nighttime, and magic items that give off light (like the 30% chance of a +1 sword to glow when you get one) become so much more important! If feel that these ideas on light don't particularly add a "magical" feel to magic. They would be relatively easy to study, easy to understand, and easy to manipulate, both by characters and players. This may even give a more "technological" feel to magic.
Holy_Beholder 07-15-07, 12:24 AM	Alright, working on light. Light has two factors, strength and color. It affects certain spells in certain ways. Strength 1. None-Pitch black, color doesn't matter. 2. Faint-Starlight, a torch very far away 3. Dim-Moon light, a torch pretty far away 4. Weak-Torchlight up close 5. Average-Holding a torch 6. Strong-Sunlight 7. Brilliant-Sunlight, while you are in a room full of mirrors. 8. Blinding-Remember that time you held a high strength flashlight or several laser pointers on both eyes and turned them on when it was pitch black? Remember how bright that was? Like that. Color 1.White 2. Yellow 3. Orange 4. Red 5. Purple 6. Blue 7. Brown 8. Green Spells are affected in a certain way when above a certain light, or below a certain light level in one color. For instance, necromancy is stronger when there is dim or less purple light, and weaker above dim in yellow light. In any other color or dim purple or yellow there is no effect.
Holy_Beholder 07-18-07, 06:45 PM	Bump. Also, the spells for light have these categories, which are affected by light in these ways. They have a barrier line, and are either stronger below a certain amount and weaker above or vice versa. I will show the color, whether they are stronger above or below, and the light level Necromancy-Below Dim Purple Abjuration-Above Average Blue Evocation-Depends on element. If there is no element, above Weak Green. More later.
SilvercatMoonpaw 08-15-07, 06:53 PM	BUMP. This is the thread that should not die.
Holy_Beholder 08-20-07, 06:15 PM	Alright, I'm thinking for Conjuration Above Medium Blue, and For Conjuration(Healing) Above Dim Green.
NorthWind 08-25-07, 08:34 AM	All right, sorry I haven't been posting here too much... Since this is sort of re-appearing, let's list what we've got and to which system it will belong. I've looked through the first page, and we already have several ideas: a.) random tables, b.) true v. petty magic and c.) the effect of light on magic. Also, these aren't different systems, per se, they're variant rules. Will we be working on those, or on building a different set of mechanics?
Dex 08-27-07, 04:28 AM	It depends on how player- and creator-friendly you want it. ATM all spells are extremely well defined. For any given spell and any given wizard you know exactly what will happen, even if it's just "one of the eight prismatic colours will hit them". You know how far it goes, and for how long. But if you make it too random, the players won't use it as much, because it's a lot of rolling that might make no sense to them. The thing with random effects is that the players would see no reason why casting magic missile makes something change colors or whatever: most people playing dnd have been brought up playing Diablo 2 or Warcraft, where when a spell is cast, an effect happens, same after same after same. Players don't really want to master a spell, only to find out that they really can't control what happens. Requirements, like having to be in a certain place at a certain time, are better because the players still know what will happen, they just need to plan things in advance.
NorthWind 08-28-07, 05:40 PM	This is a good point...make it too random or obscure, and players will loose interest in playing spellcasters. Now, I've never played a MMORPG, but I see your point. What you've chosen for your character's abilities should function reliably, or else it seems arbitrary. That being said, maybe we need to redefine our purpose here on Ars Arcanum. To make magic more magic is the thing here, but so far, it's been by variant rules. And of course, magic depends very much on the campaign setting, where the DM decides how it's used commonly, it's purpose and source, etc. I think the big problem here was that casting is too cut and dried. Everything works without fail, and all of magic is mechanics. For me, it's in the execution: spell slots seem very regimented. Spell points would also seem very restricted. Hmm...well then, should this continue? I'm finding myself at a loss as to where to go next.
EpicEvokerElf 08-30-07, 07:08 PM	I myself am rather in love with the magick systems in the Wheel of Time and Strange & Norrell as well. Being Wiccan, I like the tables here but I'd say you have too many. You may want a set of, say, 6 or 20 results for each spell or school. These are dependent on the effect. This would apply to Petty (or Simple) Magick. True Magick would require a ritual, with a time and date correspondence, possibly colors, maybe a lunar element, or even multiple magi. Components also need more use. You shouldn't be able to say, "I have a component pouch, I've got everything." This may be nearer to the root of the problem.
EpicEvokerElf 08-30-07, 07:48 PM	Here's my take on this, tentatively. 0 LEVEL SORCERER/WIZARD SPELLS (CANTRIPS) Abjuration Resistance (Petty): Prepared incense of frankincese, myrrh, or rosemary Conjuration Acid splash (Petty): A few drops of vinegar Divination Detect Poison (Petty): An amethyst Detect Magic (Petty): A quartz crystal Read Magic (Petty): A clear quartz crystal Enchantment Daze (Petty): A lead ball Evocation Dancing Lights (Petty): A tiny pale blue candle Flare (Petty): A bit of sulpur Light (Petty): A quartz crystal and a white candle Ray of Frost (Petty): A runestone inscribed with the rune Isa Illusion Ghost Sound (Petty): A chime Necromancy Disrupt Undead (Petty): A silver needle Touch of Fatigue (Petty): A paste of valerian root Transmutation Mage Hand (Petty): A glove Mending (Petty): A piece of thread or a nail Message (Petty): A slip of parchment Open/Close (Petty): A skeleton key Universal Arcane Mark (Petty): A stylus Prestidigitation (Petty): Anything So, here are some alternate components/foci. The difference is rather obvious. A candle or incense is expended, a glove or stylus is not. How is this? Rather time-consuming, but... You only need this for the spells you use.
EpicEvokerElf 08-30-07, 08:10 PM	I'd like to point out that not all of this should be random (it seems). For example, True Magick should have one defined ritual that you must discover. Some aspects may be variable, but no the whole thing.
NorthWind 08-30-07, 08:29 PM	Hmm...looks good. A random idea I had was trying to make a "magic meter", so to speak. I've only thought of this in a vague sorta way, but the general idea is similar to spell points - however, it's slightly blurred. You're never quite sure how much magic you have yet, it'd be more like "half my power" or "nearly expended". I have no idea how to execute this, or if it's a viable concept at all. But I'd like to use it in a game. 'course, there are problems: a.) how would one keep track of this? The point is that it's not as specific as points, it'd work best in, say, percents. But that's next to impossible to manage without numbers. b.) some players would probably be averse to never knowing exactly what their character can still pull off. So, although your spells would still be reliable, you'd never be certain what you could accomplish. c.) how would spell's costs be assessed?
EpicEvokerElf 08-30-07, 10:47 PM	Abjuration Alarm: A silver bell Endure Elements: A small tuft of fur or a candle Hold Portal: A small knotted rope Protection from Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: An ointment of any protective herb (if you want a list of a few, ask) Shield: A bay leaf Conjuration Grease: A few drops of olive oil Mage Armor: A curl of birchbark Mount: A tuft of horsehair Obscuring Mist: A drop of water and a few broom petals Summon Monster I : A magick circle, scribed with a wand of yew or wormwood Unseen Servant: Same as Summon Monster I Divination Comprehend Languages: A few drops of hot wax on or in your ear Detect Secret Doors: A dowsing rod Detect Undead: A dowsing rod made of yew twigs Identify: As written True Strike: A few drops of cinnamon oil to anoint the weapon Ench Charm Person: An apple Hypnotism: A shiny pendant Sleep: Powdered valerian Evoc Burning Hands: A pinch of club moss Floating Disk: As written Magic Missile: A quartz crystal Shocking Grasp: A gauntlet Illusion Color Spray: A prism and a white candle Disguise Self: A mask Magic Aura: Olive oil, used to anoint the object Silent Image: A mandrake or briony root Ventriloquism: A hand puppet made of serpent skin Necromancy Cause Fear: A yew wand Chill Touch: A pinch of salt Ray of Enfeeblement: A dead bay leaf Transmutation Animate Rope: A bit of thistle Enlarge Person: A bay leaf Erase: A sheet of blotting paper Expeditious Retreat: A clover blossom Feather Fall: A feather Jump: A whippy twig Magic Weapon: A drop of cinnamon oil Reduce Person: A candle stub Whew!
Keenath 08-31-07, 11:45 AM	On one hand, I agree totally with your points -- Magic *IS* too much like technology. I would love to play a character like Schemndrick the Magician from last unicorn, who sometimes is reduced to shouting, "Magic, do as you will!" and praying it does something useful. But I can't honestly say that works in a game, for more than a few reasons. 1: This may be the most easily solved problem, but magic should only be unpredictable in dramatic situations. We don't see Gandalf cursing under his breath because he failed when casting a Light spell, and we don't see Merlin have to try three times to turn young Arthur into a squirrel. 2: Flipside of the same coin, it's hugely frustrating to a player and the party when he can't use his magic to save the day when he really needs to. Depending on the nature of this 'art' of magic, a caster becomes an unreliable ally ("Dammit, I said *FIREBALL!*") or a downright hazard to his friends ("Mage Armor! ACK! I didn't say DISINTEGRATE!"). This is the problem the 2nd edition Wild Mage suffered from; you couldn't trust him to drop spells when and where they were needed, or in any sort of expected or repeatable form -- and that's when he wasn't turning your skin blue or polymorphing you into a llama by accident. "Sorry" just doesn't cover things like that. Those points stated, there may be ways to get around that. My first suggestion is that magic be reliable unless the user stresses himself. Essentially, unless you "overchannel" to use your highest-level (or possibly two-highest-level) spells, you don't have a failure chance. That way we won't see Elminster rolling a 1 and flubbing a simple fireball, or some such thing. Second, and this works best if you use action points, allow the caster to forego the randomness if he spends an action point or similar cost. There may be a backlash after doing so, such as fatigue or sickness after the fact, but it's worth having to allow that a wizard who really needs a teleport can pull it off safely, but the cost of an action point insures that this is used only when it's truly dramatic to do so. Third, if the caster DOES screw up, the result needs to be either an unexpected additional element to the spell or simple failure -- don't punish the party for the wizard's screwup. In other words, a Bull's Strength never transforms into a Fireball by accident, but it might make the target grow horns for the duration, or make his muscles bulge hugely, reducing his dexterity by an amount equal to the strength bonus. But even so... I'm not sure D&D is the right place to do this. D&D is a very gamist system, very concerned with concepts of 'balance' and 'strategy'. A wild-magic system seems more appropriate to a more narrative system like, say, 7th Sea or Octane -- where a spell going wild is more a story element than marking a spell slot off your page.
EpicEvokerElf 08-31-07, 01:33 PM	In the Wheel of Time, magick is made up of Weaves of the Five Powers, Earth, Air, Fire, Water, and Spirit. You select one Affinity at 1st level, which must be an element correspondent with your sex. (Earth and Fire for men, Air/Water for women.) Weaves (spells) have one or more elements associated with them. If you have none of the required affinities, the weave takes up a slot 1 level higher. If you have all, it's one level lower. If you have some, same level. You get more through the Extra Affinity feat. You can also overchannel. By making a concentration check, you can do a few things. You can cast a 0, 1st, or 2nd level weave without using a slot, or you can cast a weave 1-3 levels lower. The DCs vary, but if you fail you must make a fort save (DC = 5 + DC for your previous check) or suffer a consequence (dependent on the degree of faliure). If this makes sense, I can post more and we can twist this to fit D&D. Like it?
EpicEvokerElf 08-31-07, 01:35 PM	Another idea is like spell points (is that like PP?), but a variable number; say, at level 1, 1d6 or 2d4. The DM rolls them secretly every day. You only know that you're Full, Mostly Full, Half-Empty, Mostly Empty, or Drained. How's that?
Holy_Beholder 08-31-07, 09:14 PM	Not a bad idea. About the random effects, the spell would still work, it just might do something a bit wierd, like be a bit stronger or weaker than usual. Variable magic points work too, and are kind of like recharge magic. Maybe if you are at 50% or less HP, the tables start to work. Or it could be up to 4 tables. For instance: 50-75% HP. Damage can go up or down 1 die, or die size if there is only 1 die. 25-50% HP. Damage can go up and down 2 dice, or die size if there are 2 or less dice. less than 25% HP. Damage can go up and down 3 dice, or die size if there are 3 or less dice. This could also have to do with the center of an effect, for instance a fireball might be a bit misplaced. However if magic is in a conductive situation, such as with colored light, you can count as higher and have more control. With the opposite color, you get less.
EpicEvokerElf 08-31-07, 11:00 PM	I like the variable spell points concept, but mabe in tandem with a variable cost for spells (randomly 1-25% -1 point, 26-75% same as written, 76-00% +1 point).
NorthWind 09-01-07, 12:34 AM	Well, to be honest, I'm not going for random, just more mysterious. If spellcasting functioned reliably, yet included a hidden variable, well, that's where I'm working towards. I must confess, though, that my most recent gaming session proved your point, Keenath. In the last fight, the party wizard started pulling out his Magic Missiles, and for ease of play, I just said "Grab your d4!" In the middle of combat, the other players wouldn't want to hear any mystical flavorings to casting a spell. So it goes from wondrous to gimmicky. Many spells are written as such - for ease of use. But they become very much like fancy bullets, or party tricks. In narrative magic, magicians are wonder-workers. They speak with the wind, turn into animals, call on angels, and so on, and the author has the luxury of setting the scene, with descriptions of what it's like when magic is happening. In DnD, they caramelize orcs, and players are mostly concerned about damage. Which is fair, but rather dull. Just saying, is all.
EpicEvokerElf 09-01-07, 11:54 AM	I agree. That's why the Weaves system won't work. too complex, and too much conversion. The variable SP, though... That seems to fit the bill nicely.
EpicEvokerElf 09-09-07, 11:25 AM	From Garth Nix's official site:The necromancer's bells are an inspired creation, using sound instead of wands to command the dead. Yet along with Mogget, the young characters are playing with dangerous and often hard-to-control forces in their battles against evil. Was this a conscious decision, symbolic of anything? It was a conscious decision, though I don't know whether it's symbolic of anything. I just personally hated (and still hate) books where the magic might as well be technology. You know that it will work in exactly the same way every time, just like a light switch, without danger. I think magic is much more interesting and certainly much more suspenseful if it's at least partially unknown and potentially dangerous.
NorthWind 09-10-07, 08:03 PM	A random note: if magic didn't work randomly, but on intangibles (i.e. pureness of heart, etc.) it'd be a lot more magic than "caster level: fourth" So your latest Baator character is...a necromancer?
EpicEvokerElf 09-10-07, 10:26 PM	Indeed. A Free Magic adept. And something... more. :devil: And the intangibles don't work as well, because we need to end with a real, working mechanical system.
EpicEvokerElf 09-11-07, 09:34 PM	Ars Magica Detectum: Your character has a number of spell points equal to the appropriate number on the table here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/spellPoints.htm) divided by 2.5, d4's. So a 1st level cleric has 1d4 spell points, while his 20th-level cousin has 93d4. Spells cost a number of points equal to twice their level minus 1. When casting, you roll 1d4. On a 1, the spell costs 1 less point to cast. On a 4, the spell costs 1 more point. On a roll of 2 or 3, the cost is unchanged. You do not know how many spell points you have or how many a spell costs, both numbers are rolled secretly by the DM. You know at any time whether you are Full, Mostly Full, Half-Empty, Mostly Drained, or Drained, as determined by what fraction (1, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4, 0) of your points remain (rounded up). Bit complex...
ArchmageOmega 09-15-07, 03:59 PM	There's two specific things I think should be addressed to make D&D magic more magical. (Not that these two are the only things, but I think they might be the easiest short of rewriting the entire magic system.) First is the discrete, finite spells. There are a lot of spells that could probably be rolled into something slightly more general. This would, obviously, be a whole lot of work. The second is the idea that magic is something completely seperate from the natural world. Things like a blacksmith making a sword from rocks (iron ore) or plants growing were, at one time, considered magical. This may be easier to implement. The biggest change would be the anti-magic and meta-magic spells, like dispel magic and detect magic. Dispel magic should probably have side-effects. Detect magic should probably make everything glow slightly. Disjunction should do something really drastic. Another part of the second idea is to do away with the idea that it takes a mage to make something magic. Any blacksmith, with the right skills, equipment and materials, should be able to make a +1 flaming longsword. (For one thing, it'd go a long way towards explaining why there are so many of them.) This would apply to all magic item creation and would probably have to replace the old system completely. Still, it's less work than rewriting the entire list of spells.
Dex 09-16-07, 02:05 AM	I've just had a game and one thing we tried worked fairly well. We thought "how come a sorcerer can aim a fireball at pinpoint precision at 450ft+, while the ranger takes penalties for an arrow?" so our DM agreed to change the ranging rules for the session to see how it worked. Instead of the player picking where the spell hits and it happens (for areas and targets, like Fireball), we changed the ranges into "thrown" range increments, and if we missed the attack roll we rolled for grenade-like weapon scatter. We used: Close: becomes Thrown with a range increment of 10ft. (max 50ft) Medium: Becomes Thrown with a range increment of 30ft (max 150ft) Long: becomes Thrown with a range increment of 75ft (max 375ft) We also halved the scatter distance (so a Fireball that misses lands 35ft away). We didn't get too much use at further ranges so I'm not sure how it evens out, and we're going back to normal because there were some things we didn't have time to sort out (like how to change Charm Monster, or whether to change Magic Missile or not). Opinions?
Holy_Beholder 09-16-07, 12:15 PM	Well that will definitely stop people from trying to precision attack near allies. Maybe on a natural one the spell blows up in mid air(half way through). That would work pretty well.
EpicEvokerElf 09-16-07, 09:44 PM	Nice one Dex, I really do like it. Only on a nat 1 it should detonate on the caster.
Holy_Beholder 09-17-07, 07:16 PM	Alright, that is going to go in as an edit to one of the earlier posts.
Dex 09-20-07, 04:15 AM	Basically, it worked because if the attack roll hit, all was good, and it was just one roll. I've noticed that when spells missed in other adventures, they just sort of "disappeared" without consequence. Now when they miss, they still do something, just in a different place from where you planned. It's actually kind of fun to find out that the missed scorching rays hit something flammable nearby. :D Oh, and the precision fireballing was beyond a joke. There have been some encounters where up to four party members were all just outside the fireball's radius. On a side note, I've found that while DMing describing secondary spell effects makes the players a little more interested in using magic, for example, craters and collapsing walls that happen when big spells go off, or things like electrocuting a bunch of lizard folk when the sorcerer aims a lightning bolt into the swamp. I dislike the "Fireball doesn't set people on fire" thing, because, hey, it's a FIREBALL. If it doesn't set things on fire, what does? As a side note, ArchmageOmega, There's two specific things I think should be addressed to make D&D magic more magical. (Not that these two are the only things, but I think they might be the easiest short of rewriting the entire magic system.)...First is the discrete, finite spells. There are a lot of spells that could probably be rolled into something slightly more general. This would, obviously, be a whole lot of work. I have been working on scalable spells inspired by the Wheel of Time's spell system (some good spell ideas, bad place to RP in). It's not what we're trying to do on this thread, but since you brought it up I have so far written: Attack spells Fire Cold Electricity Other A Shield/Mage Armour/Stoneskin type spell And am planning: a mage hand/telekinesis Charm Healing ...because these effects all have spells that do pretty much the same thing, just slightly differently or powerfully at different spell levels. It's like linking them all together.
ArchmageOmega 09-20-07, 12:26 PM	I don't know if it'd work or not (it'd be something to try), but I think it'd be cool to rebalance and extend (in the lower power direction) the epic spellcasting system. Then you could take the existing spells and rewrite them in the new system, which should involve (hopefully) few mechanical changes. The problem here is how to get spell levels out of the spellcraft DC. Of course, if you want to do away with spell levels too, you might could say something simple like "it costs spell points equal to the DC". (BTW, I do like the Wheel of Time series and I like how magic works there, but it would be pretty hard to roleplay.)
EpicEvokerElf 09-20-07, 07:42 PM	If you notice, I actually posted WoT's weaves system up here. It's cool. Oh, and Rober Jordan died yesterday. The last book shall never come. If you want to PEACH something that will hopefully fulfill these req's, check out my Old Kingdom classes (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=924918), from Garth Nix's incredible series by the same name.