Skipper

The second issue is one that I haven't seen in any games. Standard magic/sorcery systems should reward character skill with greater control over the magics they release. A lesser success should still achieve most of what the character wants, but either not exactly or not at the exact cost they expected. Failures may well give the character exactly what they want, but at a terrible cost, or fail utterly while still costing the character dearly. (I hate the concept of failed spells only resulting in a singe power point lost.)

Here's a first take using the Magic rules as written. The player determines the spell and nominal power point cost per the BRP rules. Then they roll against their skill applying the following results:

Critical Success: the spell costs 1d3 PP less than expected.

Special Success: the exact spell with the exact costs goes off.

Success: the spell goes off but at 1 levels more or less than expected and the character pays the price of the final spell.

Failure: the spell goes off at 1d3 levels more or less than expected and the character pays the price of the final spell.

Fumble: the spell goes off at 1d6 levels more or less than expected and the character pays the full price of the final spell.

Note: if the cost of a spell exceeds the character's current PP, then the character trades general HP 2-for-1 for PP. Yes, a fumble (or failure) can kill a character that releases too much power.

The idea is that magic is tough to control, so the skill represents how much control over magical forces the character has not how much of the force they can throw around. Indirectly, a higher skilled character can do more because they have far less chance of killing themselves messing with magic than someone else. Anyhow, it's a first take at what I'm thinking about. Thoughts, ideas, opinions are all welcome.

OOOO! This is nasty......I like it.

I have always also wanted a variable cost/power type system. My idea would in a nut shell allow small minor spells to be used as a skill that could be mastered quickly with no modification, yet more powerful or manipoulated spells to be more uncertain and costly. This allows practiced spells to be routine but unvariable, but ritualistic or sorcerous power to be much more difficult to control.

Skipper

I downloaded Ashes to Ashes today and can hardly put the thing down. I only had paper for the first 100 pages, and I'm craving the rest.

Setting: Very original.... A cross between "Aftermath", Dantes Inferno, and traditional Fantasy. It has a real low magic, down to earth gritty feel.

Appeal: I can see this as a setting that apeals to some of us a lot (My D&D 4E setting is very similar), but others will find it difficult to run. It will take a lot of social interaction and true role playing to get the most out of the setting, but man it sets my mind a soaring.

Length of the Campaign: I can see this as a godd years worth of play time, moreif you really work it. The framework is really well set up.

Feel: The author is trying to get the players to face morally ambiguous choices and face their inner demons. Now this sounds a little odd, but the psychology in the setting will keep the players guessing (make sure they dont read the book).

Skipper

P.S. We need to get the Website geared up and some excitement into it. Its hard to find, so I'll try and post a link here.

ashesttoashes : Ashes to Ashes