Spellcasting tactics

[Kloster]

Well, to be honest, I'm not particularly convinced time taken doing Disruption _was_ usually useful. It could be good against heavily armored opponents (because it blew by), but at the lower end where you were facing people most likely to care, not have a high power, and not have countermagic up, it was also pretty likely to fail, and at least in some versions of RQ, typically made you more vulnerable to enemy spell attack yourself. And it wasn't like the typical character had a lot of magic points/Power to burn at that range. One the whole, I have to wonder if your time wasn't better spent usually just trying to hit him; you weren't necessarily much less likely to hit, and you at least had a chance of doing more than the net 4 points of damage you were dealing with the Disrupt (since you were stopping a small healing and doing a bit more).

...

Trying to interupt the healing with a disruption does not preclude hitting him in melee. It is a complement.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[badcat]

There is quite a bit of room for tactics with the spells from Magic World. You have Countermagic, Protection, Fire/Frost, Ward, Conjure/Dismiss Elemental... and you can expand on it with many of the older, similar, magic systems like Arcanum. An 'identify spell' skill and magic intiative system could even develop into a nice magic duelling system, I'd think.

[Atgxtg]

Sure, that works, but it has two problems:

1. If the target is in melee with one of your own side, which is often the case with the healing spell, you either have a relatively low chance to hit, fire late, or have a good chance of hitting the wrong person;

We rarely would cast heal on ourselves while in melee. If some is badly injured he would usually pull back or seek help from others. Otherwise he either losses an attack or has a delayed Strike rank and could wind up back where he was before casting.

Firing late is sort of a non-issue, thanks to bows going of at DEX SR.

Speedart and Multimissle both help with the low cancel thing, and also help to ensure that some damage will get through. Speedart was one of the nastiest little spells in the game, and multimissle was worse. If the arrow bounces, firearrow the jerk. Nothing like Shiskaduck after a long day's adventuring. In fact, RQ probably had the nasties archer magic in any RPG.

If fun and games time is over, toss up a few points of Multilmissle and play machinegun.

2. It requires you to either outnumber the opponents or have good control of the battlefield, since archers are, themselves, good targets because they don't have a shield prepped and don't even really have a decent parrying weapon. They can still dodge, but RQ3 Dodge tended to be a specialists art because of how quickly any encumberance at all chewed it up.

So, yes, it did happen, but not enough to really impact the field utility of things like Heal 2.

Nah, I requires a decent missile skill and Multimissle. A high DEX doesn't hurt. Worst slaughter I even saw in RQ involved an Elf PC with Mutimisle a DEX SR 1 and a one use Arrow Trance spell (and some people thing non-resuable Divine Magic isn't worth it!). 15 shots a turn. So what if only three can impale. It was the freaking 18 point criticals that bypassed armor that are the real problem. Increible vicious offense, and his elf bow was down 4 MPs.

All it takes is multimissle and you have the foes outnumber and control of the battlefield. Unless you are up against some real heavy hitters, your new SMG will do the job. Toss in a few points of Mobility (another often ignored gem) and they can't get you.

One thing that helps is the declaration phase. If you know what the other guys are doing you can declare accordingly.

Of course as with any other tactic, the situation makes a difference. One common tactic in RQ was to break the group up into three man teams with two warriors screening an archer.

RuneLords had a ton of creative tactics and uses of magic. Many of those would slaughter people who didn't have their battle magic down.

[Atgxtg]

There is quite a bit of room for tactics with the spells from Magic World. You have Countermagic, Protection, Fire/Frost, Ward, Conjure/Dismiss Elemental... and you can expand on it with many of the older, similar, magic systems like Arcanum. An 'identify spell' skill and magic intiative system could even develop into a nice magic duelling system, I'd think.

Well,it is similar to/based on battle magic, so most of those spells could be adaptated, as could several RQ era tactics.

[RMS]

RuneLords had a ton of creative tactics and uses of magic. Many of those would slaughter people who didn't have their battle magic down.

Either good tactical options or such gross skills/magic/powers that they need almost no options. I had powerful Sword of Humakt floating around that could literally wade into combat with anyone and pretty much ignore all the incoming attacks and could guarantee killing two people per round, regardless of armor, skill, or magic on the other side. Even if he didn't kill, he always knock back so far that they couldn't return the attack and frequently took other people out on their flight through the air.

Then, I have a Wind Lord in my longterm campaign that has some powerful tactical options from spells like "Teleport" and "Guided Teleport" to get in quick powerful strikes on someone that is completely unprepared. Anyone tough gets tossed around by powerful sylphs, which insta-kill pretty much any human. In actual combat, he can wade in and let his Shadow Cat (w/ Pow 32) cast spells from a hidden position and go through every time...if nothing else.

Those characters, along with a few others, have demonstrated beyond all doubt that RQ really does handle high powered characters quite well, despite some claims I've seen.

[badcat]

I've never understood the underpowered thing. My main problem with RQ magic was the Glorantha angle; it never felt like fantasy magic as in some favorite books. No, a full-fledged Rune Priest I wouldn't call 'underpowered' anywhere. Magic World shouldn't be compared to RQ2 directly, though; it has an entirely different feel, especially when logically expanded.

[Atgxtg]

I've never understood the underpowered thing. My main problem with RQ magic was the Glorantha angle

I think the problem was, from the view of the mainstream D&D crowd was that RQ had to area effect spells. No fireballs, no lightning bolts. A spellcaster couldn't take down a half dozen people at once, at least not until RQ3, and then the Magic Point cost pretty much prevented them from doing it again for a couple of days.

But when it came to augmentation magic, RQ was probably unmatched in power, especially RQ3.

[badcat]

Could be, but I seem to remember some really devastating cult spells.

Wierd thing about spell power in general and power levels in particular was that almost everybody I knew said they enjoyed AD&D more at low level than when levels got to 10+, but I couldn't get most of them to try a BRP game. They would moon over those really nasty high level spells above spell level 5 but rarely were any of that power used in play; meanwhile my RQ2, later SB1 group was using the BRP equivalent sometimes right out of the gate...especially in the Stormbringer game. Talk about powerful spells. RQ2 was no slouch when it came to power levels and being a member of the correct cult for that sort of thing, though, for sure.

What you said about the perception of power because of some area effect spells was one of the reasons I so desparately wanted to play a Magic World based game in those days. It is one of the key differences between it and RQ...Magic World could easily 'copy' the D&D feel, using BRP.

[Enpeze]

No, I just like the idea of being able to do something to stop someone from casting a spell. It is part of the genre. Plus I also think that is makes a lot of sense that a guy who is getting feathered with arrows isn't going to be able to get a spell off, unless it is quick.

Of course. But as far as I understood you spoke not from material weapons which interrupts spell casting. You spoke from spells like disruption which do this as additional effect because the rules allows it. Maybe you can explain it ingame why your character has the knowledge how to gain the interruption advantage but this also means somehow that magic is handled in a way like a gadget and finally it de-mystifies it.

Plus, I like the idea of more powerful spells taking longer to work. It can add some drama too, as the other characters have to protect the caster so they can complete the spell.

In SB the magic seem to be very powerful. But there is a serious payoff for the sorcerer, as it is mentioned in many classic sword and sorcery (eg conan) stories too. In SB a spell could easily last many hours. More often than not he has to do his summoning magic in absolute secrecy. And he is almost never sure if it works out or how long it will last to find a good demon servant. There are many ingame events I, as GM can introduce during the time a spell is cast and it makes alot of fun to play the summoned creature.

But thats RQ battle magic. For another setting, I might favor something else. I'm rather fond of Ars Magica for the flavor and feel of magic. At one time I adapted parts of it to replace the RQ3 Sorcery system. O like the idea of learning types of magic and getting better spells in that type as you skill improves.

Ars magica is very nice. It has a Jack Vance flair. (Lyonesse, Green Pearl) But its much too complex for me and I dont like the rest of the AM rule system.

Wish I had a copy of Authentic Thaumaturgy. I'd like to see it. I'm just dying to throw together a more mystical/arcane magic system for BRP. Strombringer's magic system is just too overpowering. Guy with demon beats guy without demon. Not a fun situation to role-play.

I dont agree. Its great for roleplaying, because it matters which efforts and sacrifices the sorcerer has to make to get his demon. Or do you think that I as GM tell the player just to roll his dice after he intends to bind a new demon servant and that was it? Never. Getting a certain demon can be a whole sub-adventure. (with every cruel consquence for the player)

So I think the difference between your games and my games is that in your games "magic knowlegde" is to know how to cast a 1 point spell to interrupt a 2 point spell cast, while in my games "magic knowlegde" is that your powerful demon could acutally eat you if you dont sacrifice every 66 hours a virgin to him.

One thing about me though is that my "style" of play varies depending on what sort of game/setting I'm trying to run.

With this I am with you. But I dont play games anymore where magic is handled with many funny colored effects, 100p pages of crunchy rules etc. This reminds me too much to a game called...you know which one I mean.

[badcat]

Just out of curiosity, did both you guys miss the part in Stormbringer where under the rules you can use the bound demon abilities as though the effect were being cast as a spell? As in throwing a flame bolt via a bound fire elemental, and so forth? You could use each bound entity with such useful powers up to three times an hour without breaking the binding, although some of them would be 'used up' in the process... I don't remember if SB4 and SB5 had that or not.:confused:

The worst part of Stormbringer was trying to keep control of the damn sorcerers, I used to dread seeing Melniboneans and Pan Tangians rolled up.:eek:

[Atgxtg]

Just out of curiosity, did both you guys miss the part in Stormbringer where under the rules you can use the bound demon abilities as though the effect were being cast as a spell? As in throwing a flame bolt via a bound fire elemental, and so forth? You could use each bound entity with such useful powers up to three times an hour without breaking the binding, although some of them would be 'used up' in the process... I don't remember if SB4 and SB5 had that or not.:confused:

The worst part of Stormbringer was trying to keep control of the damn sorcerers, I used to dread seeing Melniboneans and Pan Tangians rolled up.:eek:

No, annd I wish you here. IN fact, that was my point. A srocery overpowers any other character is SB.

[badcat]

I was asking a specific question? There is no doubt that sorcery was overpowered; it was intentional game design, as Melniboneans were supposed to be that way. Human sorcerers were not overpowered. SB1 was not what you would call balanced in many ways. Intentionally. Now, back to my question, did you know about the rule I mentioned?

[Atgxtg]

Of course. But as far as I understood you spoke not from material weapons which interrupts spell casting. You spoke from spells like disruption which do this as additional effect because the rules allows it. Maybe you can explain it ingame why your character has the knowledge how to gain the interruption advantage but this also means somehow that magic is handled in a way like a gadget and finally it de-mystifies it.

Huh? So if you run someone through with a sword and that messes up thier spell it's okay, but if you blast them with magic and it intterpts their spell it isnt't?

I don't get your point. My "ingame" explaination is thag if I either am waiting for someone to cast or see someone casting and then act fast and hurt them and in so doing it stops them from completing the spell. Much the way my "ingame" excuse that decapitating someone stops them from counter attacking, or doing much of anything else.

As for demystifying magic. Well, kif it is a complete mystery then no one can do anything with it. Some demystification will exist the second you create any sort of structured system for it, and some sort of structure is inherent in any RPG.

I also think that anyone who was learned magic would have some "ingame" understanding of that magic, the same way someone who has knowledge of First Aid or World Lore has knowledge of injuries and geography.

In SB the magic seem to be very powerful. But there is a serious payoff for the sorcerer, as it is mentioned in many classic sword and sorcery (eg conan) stories too. In SB a spell could easily last many hours. More often than not he has to do his summoning magic in absolute secrecy. And he is almost never sure if it works out or how long it will last to find a good demon servant. There are many ingame events I, as GM can introduce during the time a spell is cast and it makes alot of fun to play the summoned creature.

None of which changes the fact that if and when a sorcerer is successful in binding a demon, he now has power that completely outclasses non sorcerers. Once one guy gets demonds its starts a demon arms race to stay in the game.

Strombringer probably demystified magic more than RQ did. Virtually every significant NPC in the book and supplements was literally dripping of demons just to keep from being left behind in the tactical arena. Even Elric is given demond armor in the RPG to keep up with the Pang Tangians.

Ars magica is very nice. It has a Jack Vance flair. (Lyonesse, Green Pearl) But its much too complex for me and I dont like the rest of the AM rule system.

Which rule system. One thing that I don't like about AM is that, thanks to changing ownership and authors, the rule system gets changed with every edition. It is now sort of a injoke "tradition" that the combat section will be rewritten from scratch with each edition.

I dont agree. Its great for roleplaying, because it matters which efforts and sacrifices the sorcerer has to make to get his demon. Or do you think that I as GM tell the player just to roll his dice after he intends to bind a new demon servant and that was it? Never. Getting a certain demon can be a whole sub-adventure. (with every cruel consquence for the player)

None of which changes the overpowering nature of SB magic. It completely dominates the game, and if you put so much empasis on the summoning, then all the non-sorceroers are going to be standing around helpless BEFORE the wizard gets his demon, too.

Just what do the rest of your players do while the sorceror is off in secret running a solo adventure to get his demon?

So I think the difference between your games and my games is that in your games "magic knowlegde" is to know how to cast a 1 point spell to interrupt a 2 point spell cast, while in my games "magic knowlegde" is that your powerful demon could acutally eat you if you dont sacrifice every 66 hours a virgin to him.

No, more like you are running one player in a solo while I'm running a group.

Ohm and that demon can't eat you if you waste him with another demon or elemental after 65 hours. Useful to keep in mind when your running low on virgins.

And why do you think someone would go through all that crap and risks to get a demon. Ohm yeah, becuase they let them overpower anyone who doesn't have a demon. So all the other players might as well stay home and "phone it it".

With this I am with you. But I dont play games anymore where magic is handled with many funny colored effects, 100p pages of crunchy rules etc. This reminds me too much to a game called...you know which one I mean.

Everyone has their own favorites, both to like and despise. Just to get a broader picture. What games do you play besides SB?

[Atgxtg]

I was asking a specific question? There is no doubt that sorcery was overpowered; it was intentional game design, as Melniboneans were supposed to be that way. Human sorcerers were not overpowered. SB1 was not what you would call balanced in many ways. Intentionally. Now, back to my question, did you know about the rule I mentioned?

But,from what Enpeze posted I don't think he agrees about the overpowering nature of SB magic. SO the point is in doubt.

The problem was SB, especially SB1 played lousy with magic. Side with magic kills side without isn't good for an RPG no matter what side of the conflict the PCs are on.

And human sorcerer could be unbalancing too. It wasn't the higher ranked abilities that were a problem. Generally summoning Beast Lords, Elemental Lords and Lords of Chaos is not something done too often. It was the demonds and elementals that caused problems. Sick a slamander after a character who lacks magic and they are dead.

But to answer your question...

Yeah, my character used to keep a salamander bound in a ring for just such contingencies. I also recall stuff about binding and releasing demons to call up later. There were some restrictions, too, but I'd have to dig out my book for the fine details.

[Enpeze]

Just out of curiosity, did both you guys miss the part in Stormbringer where under the rules you can use the bound demon abilities as though the effect were being cast as a spell? As in throwing a flame bolt via a bound fire elemental, and so forth? You could use each bound entity with such useful powers up to three times an hour without breaking the binding, although some of them would be 'used up' in the process... I don't remember if SB4 and SB5 had that or not.:confused:

The worst part of Stormbringer was trying to keep control of the damn sorcerers, I used to dread seeing Melniboneans and Pan Tangians rolled up.:eek:

Yes of course I know and use this rule. But PC sorcerers are rare in my games. I like to use them rather as neutral NPCs or enemies. (like their classical role in REHs hyperborea) In my games I am caring for the inherent logic of the setting. So there is no D&D grouping like: here is our thief and here our fighter and over there is our sorcerer. Not my style I think.

[Enpeze]

Huh? So if you run someone through with a sword and that messes up thier spell it's okay, but if you blast them with magic and it intterpts their spell it isnt't?

IMO alone the word "blast" (if you mean the same than me with it) and magic in one sentence is not what I would want to experience acutally in a game. Many ago I used to play such games where it was usual and important that you magically "blast" enemies away and where poeple rolled with the eyes if you didnt use the magic properly. Magic was considered more as a tool to have fun and to solve adventure plots and not as a (sometimes dangerous) mystical path. But this style of play has changed considerably the last 10 years and for me (and my players) its now a slower but and more satisfying experience. Maybe its one the reasons why I prefer to play in a alternative historical setting with rare (but sometimes powerful) magic and dont care for Glorantha where everybody and his dog has his low magic.

As I said before, if you like to play with more number crunching and use magic as a tool then I have no problem and its fine for me if you and your group like it this way. I wanted just point out that there are other playing styles out there which consider magic as something different.

I also think that anyone who was learned magic would have some "ingame" understanding of that magic, the same way someone who has knowledge of First Aid or World Lore has knowledge of injuries and geography.

Could be, but treating magic like any mundane skill is making it even more mechanical.

None of which changes the fact that if and when a sorcerer is successful in binding a demon, he now has power that completely outclasses non sorcerers. Once one guy gets demonds its starts a demon arms race to stay in the game.

Demon arms race to stay in the game? Does this mean that people without demons lack the motivation to play their role after one player has his first demon? A strange view which, if true, I dont understand. It seems that you are very concerned about maintaning a somewhat mystical balance between the personal might of the individual players. I guess you would never like to play a servant of a noble or a beggar with SB1 rules. For me roleplaying is playing a role in an open story and not comparing the correct balance of stats between the players.

Strombringer probably demystified magic more than RQ did. Virtually every significant NPC in the book and supplements was literally dripping of demons just to keep from being left behind in the tactical arena. Even Elric is given demond armor in the RPG to keep up with the Pang Tangians.

Yes you are right, but only if you play in the YK setting which I dont. So the SB5 NPCs are just a nice read for me but nothing more.

Which rule system. One thing that I don't like about AM is that, thanks to changing ownership and authors, the rule system gets changed with every edition. It is now sort of a injoke "tradition" that the combat section will be rewritten from scratch with each edition.

I think I once read through the 2nd ed. rules which where not good.

None of which changes the overpowering nature of SB magic. It completely dominates the game, and if you put so much empasis on the summoning, then all the non-sorceroers are going to be standing around helpless BEFORE the wizard gets his demon, too.

Just what do the rest of your players do while the sorceror is off in secret running a solo adventure to get his demon?

If you consider only the things a sorcerer can DO in a game and the final result of his magic then maybe you are right if you say that a sorcerer in SB is overpowered. But I see also the path he has to walk to get this considerable might. His personal risks are high and he has to put more energy and thoughts to gain his power than maybe a warrior. So in my POV it evens out. Requirements (min POW 16) initial investment and maintaining the personal power level is higher for a sorcerer, but reward is (sometimes) sweeter.

BTW: there is not a mandatory "sorcerer-slot" in my games. They are not classical "party" games where one has to be "the thief" and another "the fighter". Before I begin to play (mostly mini-campaigns) I try to filter out which type of professions could be involved in the setting environment. Eg. I once played a landsknecht-campaign where the players where members of a larger mercenary unit in a kind of thirty years war. Another mini-campaign was about assassins in a medieval urban environment and so on. Sorcerers PCs do sometimes happen but are rather rare.

And why do you think someone would go through all that crap and risks to get a demon. Ohm yeah, becuase they let them overpower anyone who doesn't have a demon.

I guess of the part the reason why my players sometimes want to play it, is that they think it could be a roleplaying challenge and interesting alternative to other professions. i am sure none of them wants to play a sorcerer only because he can theoretically have more power than the other players.

So all the other players might as well stay home and "phone it it".

I try to avoid this and arrange a solo with just one player on a seperate day.

Everyone has their own favorites, both to like and despise. Just to get a broader picture. What games do you play besides SB?

Well as mentioned above I dont play SB, I use just the wonderful rules for a homebrewn setting which resembles an alternative historical world. Other games I play are the old ICE Cyberpunk, Gurps traveller (with BRP rules of course) and CoC. And what do you play beside RQ and D&D?

[Kloster]

We rarely would cast heal on ourselves while in melee. If some is badly injured he would usually pull back or seek help from others. Otherwise he either losses an attack or has a delayed Strike rank and could wind up back where he was before casting.

...

Pulling back can be dangerous (1 free attack, IIRC).

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

...

One thing that helps is the declaration phase. If you know what the other guys are doing you can declare accordingly.

...

This is exactly what I meant when speaking of a higher DEX.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

...

RuneLords had a ton of creative tactics and uses of magic. Many of those would slaughter people who didn't have their battle magic down.

Yes, some are scary.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

IMO alone the word "blast" (if you mean the same than me with it) and magic in one sentence is not what I would want to experience acutally in a game. Many ago I used to play such games where it was usual and important that you magically "blast" enemies away and where poeple rolled with the eyes if you didnt use the magic properly. Magic was considered more as a tool to have fun and to solve adventure plots and not as a (sometimes dangerous) mystical path. But this style of play has changed considerably the last 10 years and for me (and my players) its now a slower but and more satisfying experience. Maybe its one the reasons why I prefer to play in a alternative historical setting with rare (but sometimes powerful) magic and dont care for Glorantha where everybody and his dog has his low magic.

I get your point. One thing that bothered me about that game that you referred to, but didn;t name eariler was that it didn't have sorcerers, wizards, shamen and enchanters, it had magic-users.

As I said before, if you like to play with more number crunching and use magic as a tool then I have no problem and its fine for me if you and your group like it this way. I wanted just point out that there are other playing styles out there which consider magic as something different.

Yes. I am aware that there are different styles of play, and actually use them. But since this thread is about spellcasting tactics,so that is the style we are going with here. Even with a more mystical approach, tactics are used. For instance in SB using one type of elemental to counter another, or frying someone with a bound salamander,

In fact, one of my SB groups used their heads to kill a powerful sorcerer. They got themselves hired, fetched him the sacrifice he needed to conduct the summoning, and then attacked him while he was summoning a demon and was distracted. They kept the dog as a pet.

Personally, I don;t see direct damage offensive magic as being counter to the genre, as such spells have appeared in fiction. One of my personal favorite Magic Systems is the one Kim Eastland worked up for the old Marvel Super Heroes RPG. Despite being written for a Superhero RPG, those rules have a more arcane feeling than the magic system for most RPGs.

Another favorite were the rules in Pendragon, back when magic was the domain of the GM. Even 4th edition Pendragon, with the possibility of PC mages has a more arcane feel to it. than most other magic systems.

Could be, but treating magic like any mundane skill is making it even more mechanical.

THe gent rid of the mundane skill %. I view magic as something arcane, but I feel that as a wizard progressess in skill he also progresses in knowledge. A guy with summoning at 97% has a pretty good idea of what he is doing.

Take a look at Elric. When Elric uses magic, he usualy as a idea of what he is dealing with and the risks involved. That is one reason why re rarely works magic. HE typically does so only as a last resort, or if upset to the point where he doesn't care. But magic isn't much of a mystery in the YK.

Demon arms race to stay in the game? Does this mean that people without demons lack the motivation to play their role after one player has his first demon? A strange view which, if true, I dont understand. It seems that you are very concerned about maintaning a somewhat mystical balance between the personal might of the individual players. I guess you would never like to play a servant of a noble or a beggar with SB1 rules. For me roleplaying is playing a role in an open story and not comparing the correct balance of stats between the players.

No, it means people without demons lack the firepower to resist those whith demons. It is's a player balance thing, it is an adventure balance thing. If the group is fighting an NPC sorcerer, then they arescrewed if he has demons (and elementals) and they don't. The demon rules in SB1 are so Tunnels & Trolls inspired (an RPG that makes magic more of a mundane tool than any. "Take that You Fiend!") to yield T&T results. The side with the higher point value wins.

If there is one PC wit demons, then he will wade through nomal foes.

Note that once you got to the latter edtions of SB, this got toned down, but SB, epeciallSB1 with sorcerors stating off with skill percentages much higher thna other characters.

Yes you are right, but only if you play in the YK setting which I dont. So the SB5 NPCs are just a nice read for me but nothing more.

But that is the core setting for the RPG. If you run a variant setting the i a different matte, but can't expect everyone else to judge the system based upon hat you did in your own campaign.

I consider SB o be a failure. It was supposed to portray the word of Elric, but has to handout magic items in a D&D fashion to to balance out. That isn't how the characters are in the Moorcock stories.

I think I once read through the 2nd ed. rules which where not good.

Funny, I liked AM 2nd edition.

If you consider only the things a sorcerer can DO in a game and the final result of his magic then maybe you are right if you say that a sorcerer in SB is overpowered. But I see also the path he has to walk to get this considerable might. His personal risks are high and he has to put more energy and thoughts to gain his power than maybe a warrior. So in my POV it evens out. Requirements (min POW 16) initial investment and maintaining the personal power level is higher for a sorcerer, but reward is (sometimes) sweeter.

The POW requirement is non issue. It doesn't affect play. It just determines if a player can start off as a sorcerer, or more rarely, learn sorcerer during play. Since POW gain is a product of POW vs POW tests, non sorcerers typically don't change in POW, so the 16 isn't putting any stress on te PC.

His personal risks really are not any higher than that of any other adventuer in the game. He can have his mind warped, his bodty warped, he can die, get eaten,or have his soul devoured. It's not like the demons exclude non-sorcerers from their attention. Summoning is like playing around a hornets nest. Mess up and you get stung, but so will anyone else in the area.

Maintaining a higher POW level is also a non issue. It's not like anyone has anything else to spend POW on. So it's not like sorcerers are missing out of the other uses of POW so they can summon.

BTW: there is not a mandatory "sorcerer-slot" in my games. They are not classical "party" games where one has to be "the thief" and another "the fighter". Before I begin to play (mostly mini-campaigns) I try to filter out which type of professions could be involved in the setting environment. Eg. I once played a landsknecht-campaign where the players where members of a larger mercenary unit in a kind of thirty years war. Another mini-campaign was about assassins in a medieval urban environment and so on. Sorcerers PCs do sometimes happen but are rather rare.

I don't play with many mandatory slots either, although certain campaigns may require them. I bet there were "soldier"-slots in your landsknecth campaign. If I were running a game like Thieves Guild, I'd expect to have at least one thief in the group.

As for you sorcerers being mostly NPC spellcasters, that sort of takes out the whole "the risks balance the rewards" Argument. If he is an NPC he is essentially a game tool for the GM to use to advance the storyline. What I'm saying is, if such a character sends a demon or two after a group, ala Theleb K'aarna, said group is screwed unless they have their own mage.

I guess of the part the reason why my players sometimes want to play it, is that they think it could be a roleplaying challenge and interesting alternative to other professions. i am sure none of them wants to play a sorcerer only because he can theoretically have more power than the other players.

Quite a role-playing challenge, what with thier running off to run solos. Roleplaying is a group experience.

Well as mentioned above I dont play SB, I use just the wonderful rules for a homebrewn setting which resembles an alternative historical world. Other games I play are the old ICE Cyberpunk, Gurps traveller (with BRP rules of course) and CoC. And what do you play beside RQ and D&D?

[badcat]

Many of these are reasons that I went to a combo-SB1/Magic World/Arcanum homebrew. It still works great...

[badcat]

I think you two are RQ snobs.

[Atgxtg]

Many of these are reasons that I went to a combo-SB1/Magic World/Arcanum homebrew. It still works great...

I used to run a lot of low powered RQ, too, with no battle magic. I once ran an Young Kingdoms campaign using RQ, and a slightly modifed RQ sorcery rules, and a touch of CoC for the magic system. IMO it was more like Elric than SB was.

But a lot of that is style. Battle Magic tactics exist because that was the style of RQ2. If it seemed less mystical and more tool like, that was probably because it was written by a technical writer, striving to make a system that was easy to use and understand. Understanding takes away the mystery.

In Pendragon, outside of the occasional magical sword or other artifact, magic is something that NPCs do.

[Atgxtg]

I think you two are RQ snobs.

Stormbringer drone.

You just like girls with wings.

[badcat]

back.

Girls with wings? hmmmm... yum?