Magic as a skill instead of a list of spells?

[sladethesniper]

Instead of having "spells" which have definite and measurable effects achieved with regularity and specific ingredients...

What if there was just various flavors of magic as a skill and it was up to the GM and player to literally make it up as they go.

It could work the exact way every other skill works. So in the same what that a character uses "physics" or "chemistry" to do things, they would also use "dream magic" to do things. The limits of it are thus "fuzzy" and the methods are suitably "made up" just like with every other skill. It feels weird to have a list of spells, but not a list of airplanes that can be piloted with the "pilot" skill or a list of cars that can be driven with the "drive" skill, or a list of chemicals that can be made with the "Chemistry" skill.

I don't know if I am making sense, but I really don't like having "magic" being used in the exact same manner as a technological item when I think it should be a skill that can be used imaginatively instead of as a tool that always works.

I would say that there could be various types of "magic" such as found in Mythras, and the various abilities, tricks, spells given would be examples of what could be done with them.

-STS

 

[Peter Fitz]

That's fine in principle, but it does mean a lot of work for both player and GM. Especially for the GM, who has to maintain consistency in the level of effect from session to session without any clear guidelines.

The advantage of mechanistic magic systems is that it removes a great deal of ambiguity.

[rsanford]

12 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

Instead of having "spells" which have definite and measurable effects achieved with regularity and specific ingredients...

What if there was just various flavors of magic as a skill and it was up to the GM and player to literally make it up as they go.

It could work the exact way every other skill works. So in the same what that a character uses "physics" or "chemistry" to do things, they would also use "dream magic" to do things. The limits of it are thus "fuzzy" and the methods are suitably "made up" just like with every other skill. It feels weird to have a list of spells, but not a list of airplanes that can be piloted with the "pilot" skill or a list of cars that can be driven with the "drive" skill, or a list of chemicals that can be made with the "Chemistry" skill.

I don't know if I am making sense, but I really don't like having "magic" being used in the exact same manner as a technological item when I think it should be a skill that can be used imaginatively instead of as a tool that always works.

I would say that there could be various types of "magic" such as found in Mythras, and the various abilities, tricks, spells given would be examples of what could be done with them.

-STS

 

Outside the skill roll, how loosey-goosey do you want the system? For example, would the casters you envision be able to cast spells as often as they like or would you want some limits? Do you want spells that effect large areas to be more taxing than effecting small areas? What about short range versus long range spells?  Or perhaps you are thinking of spells that have a fixed range and area of effect? There is a file in the download section titled The Second Way that includes rules for an Ars Magica / Deep Magic -like freeform system but I warn you it’s kinda fiddly as casters have to specify and calculate spell cost based on things like area of effect and range. It does leverage skill rolls for spells but it also makes for very powerful spellcasters and until you have run a few freeform games you will never imagine how magic can mess up a GM’s carefully wrought plans. Find it here - 

 

Edited April 30 by rsanford

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, sladethesniper said:

Instead of having "spells" which have definite and measurable effects achieved with regularity and specific ingredients...

What if there was just various flavors of magic as a skill and it was up to the GM and player to literally make it up as they go.

It could work the exact way every other skill works. So in the same what that a character uses "physics" or "chemistry" to do things, they would also use "dream magic" to do things. The limits of it are thus "fuzzy" and the methods are suitably "made up" just like with every other skill. It feels weird to have a list of spells, but not a list of airplanes that can be piloted with the "pilot" skill or a list of cars that can be driven with the "drive" skill, or a list of chemicals that can be made with the "Chemistry" skill.

I don't know if I am making sense, but I really don't like having "magic" being used in the exact same manner as a technological item when I think it should be a skill that can be used imaginatively instead of as a tool that always works.

I would say that there could be various types of "magic" such as found in Mythras, and the various abilities, tricks, spells given would be examples of what could be done with them.

-STS

 

As this risk of repeating my post from another thread this sounds similar to what they do in Ars Magica, only a bit less structured, and thus a bit harder to game.

In that RPG magic is studied as a group of techniques (create, destroy, control, etc.) and forms (fir, water, air, plant, animal, etc.) and all spells are a combination of a technique and form. To cast your roll the appropriate technique+ form against a difficulty, but in BRP that would probably translate to rolling against both skills per the Wizardry rules, with a doifficulty modfier based on the power (or the magic point cost) of  the effect.

 

Arms MAgica had two main types of spellcasting. Formulaic magic aka spells, were tried and true abilities that were written down and studied, were (mostly) reliable and consisten in thier effects. But Ars Magic also had Spontaneous Magic where the  caster just stated what they wanted to do and the GM would determine the appropriate techniue and form to match, very much like what your suggesting. In Ars Magica Spontaneous Magic was a bit harder, less predicable, more fatiguing, and more likely to result in some strange results, especially if the caster botched the casting roll. In the game it was used mostly when a caster didn't know the right spell for a task, and tried to wing it. How successful it was depending on the just what the caster was trying to pull off and the skill of the caster. A powerful mage who was a master in creation and fire magic could easily use spontaneous magic to light a candle, torch, or  campfire pretty easily and probably wouldn't need to bother to learn any sort of "Ignite" spell, although considering their masteries, they probably already did lean such a spell long ago. In fact they probably made up and improved version of upon such a spell. The same mage might not find it so easy to spontaneously mend a broken bone.

 

Now that could port over to BRP and use one skill for magic, but I think breaking down into subcategories of some sort helps, both in keeping mages from being all powerful, and in helping to categorize effects and allow for magical specializations.  Using your skill analogy, the sciences are broken up into different skills (chemestry, biology, physics) and different vehicles and weapons tend to require different skills, so differentiating between, say fire magic and plant magic, would seem to make some sense. 

 

Anyway, just throwing that out there.

 

 

 

[sladethesniper]

39 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Now that could port over to BRP and use one skill for magic, but I think breaking down into subcategories of some sort helps, both in keeping mages from being all powerful, and in helping to categorize effects and allow for magical specializations.  Using your skill analogy, the sciences are broken up into different skills (chemestry, biology, physics) and different vehicles and weapons tend to require different skills, so differentiating between, say fire magic and plant magic, would seem to make some sense. 

I definitely agree with having various types of magic such as moon magic, dream magic, flower magic, fairy magic, tree magic, animal magic, food magic, air magic, fire magic, etc. I should have made that more clear.

I agree that having a long list of spells makes gaming easier, but seems to be so antithetical to the concept of "magic" as something wonderous, special, unexplained, etc.

While it does make some sense that there should be guidelines for magic, why are the same issues not brought up with regards to technology using gunpowder (Calcium nitrate mixed with other high potassium materials to create potassium nitrate, or saltpetre mix that with 15% charcoal and 10% sulfur) and now you have jumpstarted weapons tech massively so that now wizards aren't the only ones with good ranged damage. I mean chemistry 50% (or alchemy 50%) should be able to get you gunpowder, mix that with engineering 30% and now you can use mills and water sluices to make the process more automated.

Same thing for making a blast furnace. Metallurgy 50% should be able to understand and create a blast furnace and now you are able to create face hardened steel which provides protection unrivalled until the late 18th century at least.

If the GM says "no" for some magic, figure out what it takes to make that a yes and go from there. You can say "no" to players without being a confrontational GM, in the same way that a GM should never be told what will happen in a game because X spell on Y page said so. It often feels like magic becomes a way for players to try and control the narrative. Skills become a way to make something maybe happen, magic becomes the way something will happen.

I don't know... this is something that I think I'll try the next time I GM something.

Spoiler

Each type of “magic” is a different skill such as Water, Shadows, Fire, Air, Divination, Electricity, etc. Cost is 1 POW = 1 Rank of Damage or Protection, Mass, Time, Distance, Volume or skill bonus (+5%) from the Universal Measures Chart on page 10.

 Add it up and that equals the COST in MP and the number of rounds that it will take to cast the spell. That COST is then subtracted from the skill. This is to simulate that bigger spells (more MP) are harder to cast (take more time and the penalty to the skill roll = to the MP cost). Roll the dice and check for success or failure. If you fail, the MP are lost regardless.

 Bonuses for the skill roll are gained for the use of magic items, ingredients, fasting, ritual, time of day, geography, hand, verbal components, religious components, etc.

Magic item, for each type of magic: +5%, -1 MP

Religious items for attempting magic that follows the tenets of that religion: +5%, -1 MP

Ingredients that will be consumed: +5%, -1 MP

Fasting, depends on the length of the fast: 12 hours +5%, 24 hours, +10%, 3 day fast +15%, 7 day fast +20%, 10 day fast +25%, 14 day fast +30%, 21 day fast +35%, 40 day fast +40%, -1 to -8 MP

Ritual length, depends on the length of the ritual: 1 minute +1%, 5 minutes +5%, 30 minutes +10%, 1 hour +15%, 1 day +20%, -1 to -4 MP

Hand gestures: +5%, -1 MP

Verbal components: +5%, -1 MP

Important times, dates and geographic locations each provide a +5% bonus so that a necromantic ritual performed at midnight on the anniversary of a horrifically deadly battle on the graveyard where the dead from that battle are buried would get a +15% bonus (5% for midnight, 5% for anniversary and 5% for graveyard).  For events that happen only once a decade, the bonus is larger (+10%) and for once a generation (+15%), once every hundred years (+20%) or once every thousand years (+25%) or -1 to -5 MP.

 You cannot raise the skill roll higher than your base skill, so a skill of 43% casting a 20 POW spell, would reduce the skill to 23%. Using Hand Gestures, Verbal Components, Ingredients and a Magic Item can give a bonus of +20% to bring the skill check back up to 43%. Regardless of how many other bonuses are used, the skill cannot be raised above the base skill of 43%. By the same token, you cannot reduce the MP cost to less than 1. A magic spell will always cost at least 1 MP, and never be cast at higher than the base skill.

 A magic scroll is a one-shot item, and the scroll is destroyed when it is “used.” A magic scroll can be used to learn a spell (which is a specific effect that has been created and codified). The benefit of spells is that they do not take the POW penalty to skill.  For example, a freeform spell that has a POW cost of 12 will cost the mage 12 POW points and have a penalty of -12% to the mage’s skill to make the scroll. To cast the premade scroll, it takes nothing if the reader can follow the instructions. This is why scrolls are often in secret languages…only those who can read and speak the language can cast the spell.

 Magic items require a roll at the lowest skill being used.  To create a magic sword, the skill used would be lowest between “blacksmith” and the relevant magical effect(s) being added to the object.  The creator would also have to expend the POW to cast the spell.

 PCs have a certain amount of MP based on POW. At 0 they pass out. At -1/2 POW they die. If the victim is sacrificed ritually, then double the POW can be extracted.  Thus, a dying person will release their current POW, but if they are sacrificed, they will release double their POW. A magic user can use extra power than they have, but will immediately go unconscious, or die (if they hit their hard limit of POW x -1.5).

 Large, powerful spells can also be created by using more than one person’s MP by having multiple people give their MP to the leader of the spell.  The other participants can only give their MP, the leader of the spell is the one who makes the roll to determine if the spell occurs or not. The range for this giving of MP is only five feet. This also counts for sacrificing, in that the MP of the sacrifice is doubled for the purposes of the spell.

 As an example, the perennial favorite fireball would be a “Fire magic” spell.  To shoot a fireball 30 feet (rank 6 Distance = 30’) and have it cause 3d10 damage (Rank 5 Damage = 32 damage = 3d10) in a 10-foot radius (Rank 5 Distance = 10’ foot) requires 6+5+5 = 16 Magic Points. For a character with a “Fire magic” skill of 71% they would be casting that spell with at (71 skill -16 magic points =55) 55%.  If the character rolled a 63%, they would fail to cast the spell correctly, and will still have spent the 16 MP.

 Because of this, there are some magical effects that have become almost standard as they have a set effect with set costs. These spells are treated the exact same, such as the fireball above.

 To have spells ready for use and not having to wait to make them, you spend the MP before you need them (during the PCs down time). When you decide to fire them off, then you make the skill roll to see if you did it right, but this way you have the spell already available.

-STS

[Mugen]

I like having some freedom in magic, like in Ars Magica or the 2 Mage games, especially Mage:the Awakening.

But I also think having no clear boundaries on what magic can do is a source of imbalance between players. Playing a mage or a non-mage is a completely different experience in the games I mentionned.

That's also the reason why a game like Star Wars D6 started with only 3 Force skills and eventually gave Force users a list of powers they could use in 2nd edition, because once they had a certain skill level they were too powerful.

And even in Mage, Magic comes with different skills that clearly define what the Mage can do. Spirit, Magic, Life, etc. Though even with this limitation, there's still hundreds of ways to achieve your goal with magic...

[soltakss]

5 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

What if there was just various flavors of magic as a skill and it was up to the GM and player to literally make it up as they go.

That's how QuestWorlds approaches things. So, each Magic School/Realm/Whatever has a skill and you have spells under that skill.

You could approach this narratively (I use my Death Magic to cast a spell doing 5D3 damage, costing 5 Magic Points) or using defined hard and fast rules.

6 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

It could work the exact way every other skill works. So in the same what that a character uses "physics" or "chemistry" to do things, they would also use "dream magic" to do things. The limits of it are thus "fuzzy" and the methods are suitably "made up" just like with every other skill. It feels weird to have a list of spells, but not a list of airplanes that can be piloted with the "pilot" skill or a list of cars that can be driven with the "drive" skill, or a list of chemicals that can be made with the "Chemistry" skill.

Yes, that would work.

The trick is not to have too many magic skills, otherwise they become unmanageable.

 

[NickMiddleton]

6 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

...

I agree that having a long list of spells makes gaming easier, but seems to be so antithetical to the concept of "magic" as something wonderous, special, unexplained, etc...

-STS

 

3 hours ago, Mugen said:

I like having some freedom in magic, like in Ars Magica or the 2 Mage games, especially Mage:the Awakening.

But I also think having no clear boundaries on what magic can do is a source of imbalance between players. Playing a mage or a non-mage is a completely different experience in the games I mentioned.

That's also the reason why a game like Star Wars D6 started with only 3 Force skills and eventually gave Force users a list of powers they could use in 2nd edition, because once they had a certain skill level they were too powerful...

Any system has to balance ease of use, for all players at the table, with the atmosphere and texture of play the mechanic's evoke. My experience with "improvisational" magic, from 2e Ars Magica "spontaneous casting" onwards is that managing it generally takes a  lot of GM and player bandwidth - if everyone at the table is comfortable with it, then great; if not, it can be a problem.

And avoiding magic being formulaic / excessively predictable is a laudable goal, but again requires finesse and judgement or it can become a burden to the game. For some settings, magic being "science like"  is appropriate, and for some tables, magic being easily quantified and consistent is to the benefit of everyone's enjoyment...

Completely off the cuff: I think a limited set of skills, or even a single skill with a list of specialisms / sub-domains, and then a set of spell lists as a set of guidelines is a good starting point. Ars Magica's distinction between formulaic spells and spontaneous spells. A set of lists of specific formulae in specific disciplines / categories to get people started (and provide a baselines for adjudication) and then skill rolls to allow variation. Sticking to the formula of a "known" spell is easy; push the formulae modestly (+/- 3 points in effect from a baseline) is routine ;  radically pushing the formulae (+/- 4 points in effect or mroe ), or coming up with an entirely novel spell is hard...

 

[Mugen]

56 minutes ago, NickMiddleton said:

Completely off the cuff: I think a limited set of skills, or even a single skill with a list of specialisms / sub-domains, and then a set of spell lists as a set of guidelines is a good starting point. Ars Magica's distinction between formulaic spells and spontaneous spells. A set of lists of specific formulae in specific disciplines / categories to get people started (and provide a baselines for adjudication) and then skill rolls to allow variation. Sticking to the formula of a "known" spell is easy; push the formulae modestly (+/- 3 points in effect from a baseline) is routine ;  radically pushing the formulae (+/- 4 points in effect or mroe ), or coming up with an entirely novel spell is hard...

That's why I favor Mage the Awakening over AM and Mage the Ascension.

It has improvised magic and learned spells and a fixed list of 10 magic skills named Arcana (Life, Space, Forces, Matter, Mind, etc.) 

Contrarily to AM, you don't have a list of verbs to add to your Arcana. Instead, your Arcana level tells which kind of effects you can do. At 1 dot (out of 5(, you essentially have access to informations relative to the Arcana, at 2 dots you have limited control over it, and at 5 dots you can literrally Make or Unmake anything within the Arcana's realm.

There are 13 different "practices", 2 or 3 of those per dot. It would be possible to map these on a Magic skill %.

[Atgxtg]

Okay I'm replying before coffee so everyone brace yourselves. This can get a little wierd.

10 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

I definitely agree with having various types of magic such as moon magic, dream magic, flower magic, fairy magic, tree magic, animal magic, food magic, air magic, fire magic, etc. I should have made that more clear.

Oh, that's fine. I was mostly pointing out the similarities to your idea and Ars Magica, and that the latter might be useful in showing how to set something like that up. .The various Techniques and Forms help to subdivide the magical abilities such that you can't have a one trick pony. If someone is going to be a fatasic healer, fire mage, etc. they have to master the techniques   (Create, Destroy, Control, Change, Perceive, although in Latin) as well as the various forms (air, fire water, plant, animal, mind body, etc). 

 

 

10 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

I agree that having a long list of spells makes gaming easier, but seems to be so antithetical to the concept of "magic" as something wonderous, special, unexplained, etc.

So, to some extent does a long list of skills. It tens to make magic seem like a science and magicians engineers. The problem is the better we define magic the more it will seem like a science, and thus less magical. Sadly game mechanics by their nature define magic in play, making it more like a science. It tricky to do in gaming as you sort of need the game mechanics to make things work.

Arms Magica's Spontaneous magic mightbe what you re looking for. Other have mentioned Mage. Mage is similar in some ways, as it was written by the same folk who created Ars Magica, but magi are much more powerful there. Someone with Mastery of Life magic can literately tear a life form apart. That might be too powerful for someone with a 90-100% skill in BRP. So you'd probably need to adjust the skill required for a dot. But even so they will define magic more.

 

I was working on a freeform magic system for Prince Valiant.I was toying with  the idea of wizards basically having their own version of the Storyteller Certificate (A special award that players can get that lets them make things happen in game) which included Magical Special Effects, but that they needed to make a cast roll roll and maybe spend a gold star to be able to play them. The gold star cost was there to keep this from being too overpowered, if it turned out to be so without them. 

The idea was to try and keep magic, magical by keeping the game mechanics so reduced that it would still feel more like magic and less like a science.

 

The hard part was the more I'd want to clarify the effects/difficulties for easy of play (like say a parlor trick should be easier than running across England in an hour) the less magical it became. 

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

While it does make some sense that there should be guidelines for magic, why are the same issues not brought up with regards to technology using gunpowder (Calcium nitrate mixed with other high potassium materials to create potassium nitrate, or saltpetre mix that with 15% charcoal and 10% sulfur) and now you have jumpstarted weapons tech massively so that now wizards aren't the only ones with good ranged damage. I mean chemistry 50% (or alchemy 50%) should be able to get you gunpowder, mix that with engineering 30% and now you can use mills and water sluices to make the process more automated.

Well the same issues are brought up for two main reasons:

 

First off we have some idea of how chemistry, physics, mathematics and such work in real life and can fall back on that for game mechanics. We don't have the same understanding of magic. If we did, it wouldn't be magical anymore.

Secondly, it all still has to work with the same game units. 

10 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

Same thing for making a blast furnace. Metallurgy 50% should be able to understand and create a blast furnace and now you are able to create face hardened steel which provides protection unrivalled until the late 18th century at least.

Except it's more than just knolwedge of mettalury at work here. For instance it probably only takes about 20% in Capatry and Animal Hubadry to figure out how a horse collar works, but no one managed to figure that out until the middle ages. 

 

A lot of discover is less to do about an indiviual skill rating are more the ability to see connections that other don't. 

10 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

If the GM says "no" for some magic, figure out what it takes to make that a yes and go from there. You can say "no" to players without being a confrontational GM, in the same way that a GM should never be told what will happen in a game because X spell on Y page said so. It often feels like magic becomes a way for players to try and control the narrative. Skills become a way to make something maybe happen, magic becomes the way something will happen.

Yes. The major troubles with freeform magics are getting the spellcasters on the same page as the GM, and applying those effects in game with non-spellcasting PCs. I mean if a caster can turn an ogre into a frog with just a cast roll then warrriors will be somewhat redundant. One reason why BRP game have POW/Magic Points it to limit the spellcasters. 

10 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

I don't know... this is something that I think I'll try the next time I GM something.

  Reveal hidden contents

Each type of “magic” is a different skill such as Water, Shadows, Fire, Air, Divination, Electricity, etc. Cost is 1 POW = 1 Rank of Damage or Protection, Mass, Time, Distance, Volume or skill bonus (+5%) from the Universal Measures Chart on page 10.

 Add it up and that equals the COST in MP and the number of rounds that it will take to cast the spell. That COST is then subtracted from the skill. This is to simulate that bigger spells (more MP) are harder to cast (take more time and the penalty to the skill roll = to the MP cost). Roll the dice and check for success or failure. If you fail, the MP are lost regardless.

 Bonuses for the skill roll are gained for the use of magic items, ingredients, fasting, ritual, time of day, geography, hand, verbal components, religious components, etc.

Magic item, for each type of magic: +5%, -1 MP

Religious items for attempting magic that follows the tenets of that religion: +5%, -1 MP

Ingredients that will be consumed: +5%, -1 MP

Fasting, depends on the length of the fast: 12 hours +5%, 24 hours, +10%, 3 day fast +15%, 7 day fast +20%, 10 day fast +25%, 14 day fast +30%, 21 day fast +35%, 40 day fast +40%, -1 to -8 MP

Ritual length, depends on the length of the ritual: 1 minute +1%, 5 minutes +5%, 30 minutes +10%, 1 hour +15%, 1 day +20%, -1 to -4 MP

Hand gestures: +5%, -1 MP

Verbal components: +5%, -1 MP

Important times, dates and geographic locations each provide a +5% bonus so that a necromantic ritual performed at midnight on the anniversary of a horrifically deadly battle on the graveyard where the dead from that battle are buried would get a +15% bonus (5% for midnight, 5% for anniversary and 5% for graveyard).  For events that happen only once a decade, the bonus is larger (+10%) and for once a generation (+15%), once every hundred years (+20%) or once every thousand years (+25%) or -1 to -5 MP.

 You cannot raise the skill roll higher than your base skill, so a skill of 43% casting a 20 POW spell, would reduce the skill to 23%. Using Hand Gestures, Verbal Components, Ingredients and a Magic Item can give a bonus of +20% to bring the skill check back up to 43%. Regardless of how many other bonuses are used, the skill cannot be raised above the base skill of 43%. By the same token, you cannot reduce the MP cost to less than 1. A magic spell will always cost at least 1 MP, and never be cast at higher than the base skill.

 A magic scroll is a one-shot item, and the scroll is destroyed when it is “used.” A magic scroll can be used to learn a spell (which is a specific effect that has been created and codified). The benefit of spells is that they do not take the POW penalty to skill.  For example, a freeform spell that has a POW cost of 12 will cost the mage 12 POW points and have a penalty of -12% to the mage’s skill to make the scroll. To cast the premade scroll, it takes nothing if the reader can follow the instructions. This is why scrolls are often in secret languages…only those who can read and speak the language can cast the spell.

 Magic items require a roll at the lowest skill being used.  To create a magic sword, the skill used would be lowest between “blacksmith” and the relevant magical effect(s) being added to the object.  The creator would also have to expend the POW to cast the spell.

 PCs have a certain amount of MP based on POW. At 0 they pass out. At -1/2 POW they die. If the victim is sacrificed ritually, then double the POW can be extracted.  Thus, a dying person will release their current POW, but if they are sacrificed, they will release double their POW. A magic user can use extra power than they have, but will immediately go unconscious, or die (if they hit their hard limit of POW x -1.5).

 Large, powerful spells can also be created by using more than one person’s MP by having multiple people give their MP to the leader of the spell.  The other participants can only give their MP, the leader of the spell is the one who makes the roll to determine if the spell occurs or not. The range for this giving of MP is only five feet. This also counts for sacrificing, in that the MP of the sacrifice is doubled for the purposes of the spell.

 As an example, the perennial favorite fireball would be a “Fire magic” spell.  To shoot a fireball 30 feet (rank 6 Distance = 30’) and have it cause 3d10 damage (Rank 5 Damage = 32 damage = 3d10) in a 10-foot radius (Rank 5 Distance = 10’ foot) requires 6+5+5 = 16 Magic Points. For a character with a “Fire magic” skill of 71% they would be casting that spell with at (71 skill -16 magic points =55) 55%.  If the character rolled a 63%, they would fail to cast the spell correctly, and will still have spent the 16 MP.

 Because of this, there are some magical effects that have become almost standard as they have a set effect with set costs. These spells are treated the exact same, such as the fireball above.

 To have spells ready for use and not having to wait to make them, you spend the MP before you need them (during the PCs down time). When you decide to fire them off, then you make the skill roll to see if you did it right, but this way you have the spell already available.

-STS

It's a good idea. It's just that there are some good reasons why it isn't often done, and even when it is you usual just replace one framework for another. 

 

Ars MAgica and Mage are probably the best examples to look at for inspiration, if you can.

[sladethesniper]

People mentioning AM and Mage... which is funny since I've played both for decades.

They were actually my starting point. While I love the "feel" of them, especially Mage, IN GAME they are so clunky and take up so much time (in my experience) that it slows down the game even more than the big list of D&D spells. As a player with magic, it is great... but as a GM waiting around for the player to decide something, or being another player at the table waiting for the wizard to do something, it really sucks.

The thing is, I don't dislike "vancian magic" (even tho D&D doesn't really emulate Vancian magic... more like loading magical bullets) and spell lists. Nor do I dislike Mage and their spheres. I dislike the amount of time that is spent fiddling around with it during the game while everyone else is sort of left waiting for something to do. That is the problem I am wanting to "solve."

While I think that spell cards (similar to how 4E D&D did it) is actually a great idea, it doesn't feel "magical." It feels the same as tossing a grenade. Cool, it goes boom, now you have 6 grenades left, and a smoke grenade and a thermite grenade. Magic spells just become ammo, which is what D&D mechanically is, a resource management game.

BRP is a much better game system, but I think there is a space somewhere between Mage Spheres (faster) and D&D Spells (more flexibility). That led me to the Psychic Powers in Delta Green Countdown, and thinking something could be done using that model of skills as powers.

-STS 

[Questbird]

This is a perennial topic. My favourite freeform magical system is taken from Maelstrom. It is based on adjusting probabilities, so it is very situational and improvisational. It does make for a fun interaction between the mage and GM and it's not so powerful that it would eclipse any other player's fun. However it's very hard to make the 'impossible' happen unless you are in the right environment (eg. fireballs on the lip of a volcano).

 

[sladethesniper]

How did I not see that thread before??

-STS

[rsanford]

You scooped me @Questbird...

When I was looking at tweaking the Deep Magic noun / verb rules found in Chaosium’s Advanced Sorcery book, I considered six things:

1. How flexible is the system? What kind of things can the system be used to accomplish? For example, can the system be used to create a fire ball? Can it be used to engulf a city in flames? Can it be used to put out an enemies’ torches? Can it be used to teleport an unwilling enemy 10 feet deep in earth? Can it be used to create a tower? What about a watch? Can a wizard cast a spell that puts a defensive shield around the group while simultaneously raining fire down on an enemy?
2. How granular is the system? Is the difficulty or expense the same to cast a spell that effects 20 feet and 100 feet? Is the difficulty or expense the same to cast a spell with a range of 300 feet and 1 mile?

3. How much adjudication of player spells is the GM prepared to accept? For example, if using a noun / verb system and the character has the noun flesh and the verb creation, is that what’s needed to cast a spell that can triple the size and strength of the player group’s primary warrior?

4. How many dice rolls are acceptable to the player group when casting a spell? For example, imagine a character in a modern setting that wants to be able to place a call over the telephone network using only his mind as the cell phone? Assume he has the nouns (skills) energy and mind as well as the verbs create and perceive. Will the player have to roll 4 different skills to see if their spell is successful?
5. How complicated, time-consuming or fiddly is the system? It’s my experience that verb / noun systems that offer clear-cut adjudication, and a rational method of creating most effects, also end-up having multiple tables for modifiers such as spell range, area of effect, and duration; which can become tiresome.
6. How many skills is the GM willing to add to a player’s character sheet? The Second Way which leverages the Ars Magica noun / verb system (with some tweaks), supports up to 12 nouns (one is optional) and 8 verbs. That’s a lot of skills to put on a character sheet if you list them all.

One approach that might be worthwhile is to marry a noun system with a skill system, where the skills represent the verbs (which might be less numerous than nouns). If you are concerned that there might be too many verbs to add to a character sheet, you could have skills representing a verb and its antonym. For example, you might have four skills representing: 1. Control/Relinquish, 2. Create/Destroy, 3. Transform/Reinforce, 4. Perceive/Obscure…

If you want a simplier system, consider merging probability rules, such as those found in Maelstrom, with a skills that represent nouns. Perhaps something like this:

1. The following nouns/skills are provided: Energy, Water, Flora, Fire, Earth, Soul, Body, Heart, Air, Mind, and Fauna.

2. Character describes what he wants to accomplish with the spell.

3. GM rates the grade of difficulty of the spell from 1 (very likely to happen) to 5 (impossible).

4. Player rolls the appropriate skill (or the lowest skill if there is more than one being used) - the spell’s grade of difficulty * 10 to see if they can construct the spells.

5. If the player’s roll is successful, they then must make a successful POW roll * (6-difficulty).

6. The character then rolls 1D2 per difficulty level of the spell to determine the magic point costs.

7. If any of the rolls fail or if the magic point total is higher than the number of magic points the character has the spell fails.

8. The distance and area of affect of the spell can be anything within POW*POW feet for POW*POW seconds of duration.

 

Spell Difficulty Table
Difficulty	Probability
1	These things happen all the time. Someone trips, something falls over, a stray breeze of wind  extinguishes a lantern, someone finds a coin.
2	These things included things that could happen but which are unlikely. A statue topples over when someone leans on it, a roof collapses under a person’s weight, a door jams, it rains in a small area.
3	These things can happen but are highly unlikely. Someone finds a purse of gold coins, a bow-string breaks, someone walks over a river on a tightrope, it hails
4	Its wildly improbable that these things would happen. Finding a sword at just the right moment, suspending by one hand from a cliff for thirty minutes, it snows during the Summer, someone spontaneously combust.
5	These things are impossible and contravene the laws of nature.

 

 

Sample Spell Table
Difficulty	Spell Description
1	It’s Unlocked. An object (chest, door, etc.) was left unlocked.
1	I See Now. A trap becomes obvious.
1	Just a Little to the Left! A missile weapon will unerringly strike it’s target.
2	It Doesn’t Work. An object (Bow, gun, trap) fails to operate.
2	My it’s Dry Outside. Caster can cause rain, wind or lightning during the Summer or Hail, Rain or Snow during the Winter.
2	Sober Up. The target had a full meal and resist being drunk.
3	Didn’t See You There. Something or someone goes unnoticed.
3	Having a Heart Attack. The target has a heart attack.
3	Direct Fire. Cause a fire to flare up in a desired direction.
3	You Can’t Hit Nothing! Deflect a volley of arrows.
4	Don’t Catch on Fire. Target catches on fire.
4	Like a Lightning Rod. Target is struck by lightning. Difficulty 3 if during a thunder storm.
5	Fireball.

 

[Mugen]

@sladethesnipernote I mentionned Mage:the Awakening and not Mage:the Ascension as my favorite. Awakening is a mix between Ascension and Ars Magica. It has 10 Arcana (Entropy was split into Fate and Death) and no Verb+Noun, but makes a mechanical distinction between "rotes" spells that a Mage learned and improvisational magic, whereas in Ascension rotes were just examples of how Spheres can be used.

Improvisational magic is still possible, but it costs Mana and requires a Gnosis (=Arete) roll, whereas spells require a standard Attribute+Skill roll.

I also mentioned the 13 practices, which are not very different from the difficulty chart from @rsanford's post above.

 

https://philgamer.wordpress.com/2009/12/23/mage-the-awakening-101-arcana-basics-the-13-practices/

 

Spoiler

1 Dot: Initiate

• Gain knowledge and understanding of phenomena. (Practice of Knowing)
• Elementary manipulation of phenomena, enough to activate and/or impart direction. (Practice of Compelling)
• Gain sensory perception of phenomena (Practice of Unveiling)

2 Dots: Apprentice

• Exert elementary command and control over phenomena (Practice of Ruling)
• Conceal, camouflage or hide phenomena from scrutiny (Practice of Veiling)
• Protect a target against attacks by providing points of Armor. (Practice of Shielding)

3 Dots: Disciple

• Alter the capabilities or functions of phenomena (Practice of Weaving)
• Injure a target (Practice of Fraying)
• Fortify, bolster or improve phenomena (Practice of Perfecting)

4 Dots: Adept

• Transform phenomena into a related phenomena or shapes, or replace capabilities or functions with different ones. (Practice of Patterning)
• Significantly injure a target (Practice of Unraveling)

5 Dots: Master

• Create Phenomena (Practice of Making)
• Destroy or mutilate a target (Practice of Unmaking)

•  

Edited May 1 by Mugen

[Questbird]

5 hours ago, sladethesniper said:

How did I not see that thread before??

 

There are a few gems like that buried around these forums; but nothing is ever truly lost.

[sladethesniper]

10 hours ago, Mugen said:

@sladethesnipernote I mentionned Mage:the Awakening and not Mage:the Ascension as my favorite. Awakening is a mix between Ascension and Ars Magica. It has 10 Arcana (Entropy was split into Fate and Death) and no Verb+Noun, but makes a mechanical distinction between "rotes" spells that a Mage learned and improvisational magic, whereas in Ascension rotes were just examples of how Spheres can be used.

Improvisational magic is still possible, but it costs Mana and requires a Gnosis (=Arete) roll, whereas spells require a standard Attribute+Skill roll.

I also mentioned the 13 practices, which are not very different from the difficulty chart from @rsanford's post above.

 

https://philgamer.wordpress.com/2009/12/23/mage-the-awakening-101-arcana-basics-the-13-practices/

 

I have both MtA and the other MtA (LOL). I prefer the OG MtA lore, but the second MtA mechanics. I should have been more specific in which MtA I was refering to.

-STS