sdavies2720

As a starting point for discussion: What is a Spell? A spell is the application of magical energy, through the will of the mage, to make a change in the world. A spell consists of three parts: Spell Definition: A description of the magical effect, along with all the things that are needed to create the magical effect. Spell Casting: This is the execution of the spell, essentially the spell in action. These are all of the actions, thoughts, and preparations that must be correctly completed in order to create the spell effect. Spell Effect: This is the final outcome of the spell, the change that occurs in the world as the result of a correct (or incorrect) spell casting. Spell Formulation For a player to create a spell for his character, he goes through the following steps: Determine the desired outcome: What are the Effects, Strengths, Ranges, and Duration of the spell Effect? Source the Mana: Identify where the energy for the spell will come from. Mana comes in different flavors, so this step may also include application of magical Talents or Skills to change the mana from the source type and amount to what is needed. Improve Casting Chances: Identify any magical Laws or ceremonies needed to increase the chance of a successful casting. Record the Spell: Write down the basics of the spell so we don’t forget.

I started this thread to begin posting parts of a ritual magic system that I’ve been working on for my campaign. I think there are several people working on similar concepts, but unsurprisingly we’re all approaching things a little differently one from another. My intent is to tap into the collective wisdom, then put the draft system in the downloads section of this forum. I’ve drafted all the sections of the system, but I’m working/struggling with a number of issues that your feedback could help with. As a starting point, my design goals were: Provide a flexible system under which almost any effect could be created. Allow a quick system for GMs needing to generate NPCs and for players who don’t want to spend a long time detailing their characters. Starting mages should be weak, but not ineffective. Experienced mages should have access to great power that can only be acquired slowly with each learned spell. Magic must remain risky to exercise even for the most powerful adept. Magic is flexible, but most effects should be easier to accomplish through non-magical means. The magic system should drive Mages to learn more about the world and its powers. The game tie should be strong enough to drive story arcs, aid world development, and suggest character plots. Work within the RQ (now BRP) rule set, or at least avoid wantonly breaking it. As of now, the system does pretty well on #1 and #3-#7, but fails pretty horribly on #2. I’m hoping a quick generation system can be bolted on after the fact. When I’m done, I want a system that frames the magical underpinnings of the world. It should be an interesting hobby or life work for characters, but several other types of immediate magic are available (e.g. battle magic) that satisfy requirements of adventuring. One caveat, this is a fiddle-y system, with lots of stuff to tweak. I’ve tried to move most of that to the preparation part of games, but the fiddles remain. I actually want richness to the magic system, so I can explain the back story, e.g. why does that necromancer want middle fingers from 100 corpses? So leaned toward that end of the system. And I really wanted to build in the reason why the original system was called “RuneQuest.” But this will not be everyone's cup of tea. I am interested in ways to streamline it; I typically gravitate to the complex (rather than playable) end of design. I have one player whose character is hot to try the system. He's an admitted minimaxer, and will likely try to break the system. But he's willing to endure stuff being reworked from game to game, so he should make a good playtester.

Thanks for the thoughts everyone. Next Friday, I'm converting long-standing RQ characters to BRP, and we have one intelligent sword in the bunch that I've never been happy how I handled -- this is a good chance to do something different. I've used an EGO/POW contest in the past to determine who wins when choosing direction to go (Sword loves fighting trolls). So I like the concept of using that to determine who controls the combat (and gets the experience check). I need to think through the longer implication. A good intelligent sword when the characters are new potentially becomes a liability later. But, I still want the player to stay center of attention. Perhaps I'll stay with the weapon adding a fraction of its skill to its wielder's ability, and the player gets to decide who gets the skill check at the end of the battle. Steve

One of the other threads triggered a thought for me (they come so infrequently that I have to capture them when I can). Does anyone have a good system or houserule for handling advancement, or increasing skill, for intelligent weapons? I'm thinking something like any time it makes a crtical hit, there is a chance for advancement, say roll under it's to-hit bonus to add +1%. But it might be interesting to have the wielding character 'donate' an advancement check to the weapon. This gives the weapon an incentive to be wielded by someone competent, for whom the skill checks mean less. Anyone played with this? Steve

You can get them at www.pigames.net I bought the Magick (hate that spelling) and Grimoire books. I've only skimmed them, but already can tell that a lot of effort has gone into them. Organization also looks pretty good, but more of a review than that will have to wait until I have more time -- probably my next life. Steve

It's not going to be published. You're welcome, you now have fractured hopes. Steve

Nope. Thus the nudge.

We're still interested, whenever you get time.

Is that really true? I've never looked it up, but I thought what constituted fair use was pretty limited, and I definitely didn't think it included making a copy for someone else, even in private. Steve

Sounds great. When you're ready to start sharing, start a separate thread for this so isn't buried deep in another topic. Steve

* Sigh * I suppose it's inevitable that this ends up in a skirmish. There's a difference in degree, if not in kind, in sending a copy to an individual versus posting copyright material on the internet. My sense (based on observation not hard data) is that the chance of enforcement goes up when the distribution goes up. So, they're taking a practical approach to what they've decided to do. Note that I'm not saying a legal approach, nor saying moral approach, just practical. FWIW, I don't think that being rude is likely to get the stuff posted. Steve

I use most of these (Only differences being: MP=POW, and Hero Point=soak of 1 point of damage, 3 hero points per session +/- roleplaying). If you go this route, especially using the hero points, be aware that there are some multiplying effects. For instance, whenever a player misses an advancement roll for a lower skill that they don't use much, they always reroll -- statistically it makes sense, but it means that no one has any really low skills any more. And the hero point soak coupled with higher hit points means they can wade into a lot of places they should really not be (that's somewhat the point of 'heroic', but as a GM it has thrown me more than once). As GM it's worth keeping rough track of total hero points available -- I've found it's a good indicator of player risky behavior. On the other hand, characters don't drop like flies, which has made the campaign popular and long-running, which was what I really wanted. And I've been soaking up the hero points as we run up to a climax. Steve

Maybe I'm missing something, but if the character is not lying nor is he concealing something, why is an Insight role even necessary? GM: "You meet someone, he's hard to read, you can't tell what he's thinking." Player: "I do an Insight check." roll: Succeeds or fails, doesn't matter GM: "As far as you can tell he isn't thinking anything..." Steve

This is one of the things I like about BRP. As I think about classic mythology, there are lots of examples of people (usually lovers) being turned into cows, trees, swans, etc. There are not that many examples of people being blast to smithereens. Also, that cow can run away, get detransmogrified, and come back as a great enemy ("Bart, originally I just wanted to rob those uppity adventurers. But spending 3 months as a cow gave me some other ideas.") To me, it's not just about neutralizing opponents in a combat. It's about where magic fits with everything else in the world. Steve

Wow, I've been looking for something like this for a while. Thanks for the link. Now I just need a couple of weeks of free time... Steve

I'm hoping we don't start another of those interminable copyright discussions, but the copyright is on the expression. So if you and I paint pictures of the same still life, you have a copyright on your expression (painting), I have a copyright on my expression (painting). Steve

Copyright issues?

Whenever there is a calculation, I round in the player's favor. After all, they're the stars. This doesn't apply if we have a table -- the table rules. But for half-skill things and such it works. Steve

I'm always cautious about allowing 'normal' skills and crafts to add a lot of bonuses. I think that in a fantasy setting, adding a lot of extras requires magic. And, a normal craftsman can add up to three (on a critical) anyway. Overall, I like the mechanics. It also gives a mechanic & opportunity for roleplaying, "I'm looking for a sword. Do you have anything special?" "Well, yes, but I intended to give it to my daughter. She's a strapping girl who's always..." I may adopt this and take a middle ground on the additional virtues: THey are only possible if the item is made of special materials (e.g. meteor metal, or mithril, etc). If you really want to beef it up, special materials require a Special success to create anything worthwhile, but the item automatically gets a virtue that is specific to that material. On a critical, the item gets a second Virtue. And, items made with special materials could then have additional virtues added to them. This way there is some magic involved (eminating from the material) coupled with master craftsmanship. And there are built-in plot hooks, which I always like. Steve

I'm having trouble engaging / answering this question. If it's a new GM, they should try to have around 3 players -- enough for player and character interaction and capability without getting too bogged down. If the GM has run before, they should know roughly how many they can handle and how many players they like to handle. If the question is about BRP versus other systems, that's more a more specific question (and more interesting). Steve

Actually, that was my point...I like the attack/parry mechanic and think it's part of what make BRP combat 'feel' real. But, you can get that yukky D&D feel if you want. I hate the fact that in D&D as a player your character can be in combat and you can think, "Well, the opponent is only doing about 8 points per round, so I should be able to handle him for another 6 rounds." But I was responding mostly to the comment that "players don't like hitting and then finding out that they didn't hit because they were parried." Steve

You could explicitly do what D&D did implicitly: Divide everyone's hit points by their chance of missing a parry (or dodge), and eliminate parry and dodge rolls. So, your 50% thugs would double their hit points. The 100% characters (assuming they always miss on a 96-00) multiple hit points by 20. Under this, you get the same "whittle the opponent down" approach that you have in D&D, and are working with averages rather than the variability that comes with BRP (miss that 50% parry a couple of times in a row and you may be in trouble). Me, I like the parry/dodge roll . Usually it's when my players get frustrated that they can't drop a opponent quickly that they begin to get creative in the combat. Steve

I've run some one-off horror and I've found that it's really hard for me to GM straight-up horror. The stage-setting, reading of the players, and creep factor are (mostly) beyond me on a Friday night. So, I've taken the low road and gone for the "Ewwww" factor rather then shivers. The last one-off I did led up to the players discovering what was being put in the center of the Twinkies coming out of a new factory in town (that never hired any workers, whose trucks left at odd hours). I had a box of twinkies in the middle of the table for player treats and when the players realized that the filling was coming from ...pleasuring... a male cthulhu-spawn, there was a definite "Ewww" moment around the table. I was disappointed that I didn't get anyone to cough out a Twinkie though. Steve

The cube root of 8 is 1.99? Do you want to do extra math with a calculator?:ohwell: Steve

Yeah, I too told my players that I'd use the RAW. It's just really hard to stay away from tweaking the rules... Of course, there is a middle way: Use the CONx5% roll, but modify it by 5% per damage point. That way, you're using the CONx5% from the RAW, but taking into effect the damage done...the fact that it's mathematically the same as a resistance role will just be our little secret. Steve