Magic & Sorcery in 1 Setting, Sensible?

[Harshax]

I was thinking how I could mix different powers in the same fantasy campaign, and would like some discussion on the topic. I'm a RQ3 veteran, so that's my focus.

Magic is the closest to RQ Sorcery, specifically with spells being skills, and being able to increase the intensity of spells. It isn't nearly as detailed (intensity, duration, range, etc), but it is kind of close.

Sorcery is closest to RQ Divine Magic. Spells always work, and there are spot rules for contacting higher powers, but none regarding POW sacrifice or other suggestions to mix these two systems in the same setting.

There is an obvious overlap in powers between the two system, with few being unique to one or the other.

Asserting that I don't want to mirror RQ3 design exactly, I have concluded; however foolishly; that the most significant different between the systems is Skill Rolls vs. Always Works. While Sorcery doesn't not have the upper limit of being able to pump spells up to 1/2 INT, it is no stretch of the imagination to extend the system beyond its 1 - 3 levels Stormbringer roots.

Assuming I have not missed a vulgar difference between the two systems, would it be appealing to play with the one Magic System, but offer an option that characters could sacrifice permanent POW to an Arch Magi or God and gain the sorcerous ability to cast the spell with 100% success?

[Shaira]

My campaign currently uses all the power systems *except* the Magic System, so bearing that in mind...

I'd personally keep Magic and Sorcery as completely separate systems, even if you do use them both in the same game / campaign. The wizardly magic vs divine magic is a perfect example of how to do this.

If I understand you correctly, your option would be to allow magic users to sacrifice 1 POW to cast a (magic) spell at 100%? Or would the spell be from a corpus combining both magic and sorcery spells? I'd be a bit wary of doing this: given the limited number of Magic spells and their extremely broad coverage, you will end up with Magic users getting 100% in a limited range of spell skills with very wide effects quite quickly. Sorcery spells are very much more limited in effect, to the extent that a single sorcery spell, albeit with a 100% certain casting chance, is less powerful than a single magic spell, at pretty much whatever chance (check out Healing for example).

Just IMHO. I think your idea in principle is right, though - you can use Magic and Sorcery as different purpose systems in a single game.

Cheers,

Sarah

[Al.]

I was thinking more in terms of Sorcery as 'Power Words' simple cantrips, easy to use but very limited and inflexible and Magic as a more indepth study of Magic.

That being said no reason why the Sorcery Power Words could not be Holy Words taught by a cult.

Somewhere on this forum was the suggestion of learning Sorcery having an Allegience threshold rather than Pow threshold, that would fit with the Sorcery as Divine Magic model.

If you really wanted to tweak then:

Range could be (Allegience) in meters rather than Pow.

Duration could be (Allegience) in rounds rather than Pow.

Chance to cast could be (Allegience)% in meters rather than automatic.

and so on

Or just leave as written and not bother

Divine Magic/Rune Magic from RQ (sorry I'm doing what I despise in others and refering back to oop works) can easily be ported to Sorcery. (Double the Pow cost to give you Power Point cost) and I might even do that myself and post it (don't hold your breath though)

Al

[RosenMcStern]

Divine Magic exists also in the in-print version of RuneQuest, so you are not referencing an OOP game. Plus you are always free to take my opinions and use them to wrap up your garbage if you feel like it

If you are interested in the porting of RQ magic to BRP (and not only), this discussion group could greatly benefit from your contribution. The spell list is taken directly from MRQ but is compatible with BRP.

d100glorantha : Glorantha (Third Age) with D100

[TRose]

I view magic as much as an art as a science. So i feel the more types of magic the better amd have no trouble using the various type of magic systems in the D100 system. I do tweek some to bring them in line with the bacis Rq magic system( such as the Elric magic system in my Rq world) for play balance.

[Al.]

Divine Magic exists also in the in-print version of RuneQuest,

How close is MRQ Divine Magic to RQI/II/III? See I'm doing it again But seriously if I told someone coming new to BRP to buy 10 Mongoose volumes and just double Pow cost to get PP cost would I be sending them down a blind alley. Coz what I don't want to do is the old 'you should buy X on eBay and do Y with it trap' if instead there is something in print (and available) what will do the same like.

so you are not referencing an OOP game. Plus you are always free to take my opinions and use them to wrap up your garbage if you feel like it

How's about I hope that I wasn't actually being offensive but apologise anyway in case I was. Sorry if I was.

If you are interested in the porting of RQ magic to BRP (and not only), this discussion group could greatly benefit from your contribution. The spell list is taken directly from MRQ but is compatible with BRP.

d100glorantha : Glorantha (Third Age) with D100

Ah ha

Good news sounds like some of the work has been done already

Bad news what if I disagree with the decisions made already?

Al

[RosenMcStern]

How close is MRQ Divine Magic to RQI/II/III?

Some spells are broken (Spirit Block and 5-6 sorcery spells) and the average explanation is more ambiguous than RQ2/3, since the Mongoose writers tend to favour brilliant writing over "dry but effective" game jargon. But the average Mongoose spell is nice and usable. There are more mistakes in both Cult of Glorantha books (written by a Glorantha veteran, Jeff K, and ravaged by the editor) and the Spellbook (not Gloranthan, but useful), but if you check the spells for possible inconsistencies before allowing them you will be able to use 95% of them, and they are nice - really nice.

The Divine Magic system is interesting, but the concept of Dedicated POW is too restrictive. Most old schoolers simply do not use it. It works fine in low magic settings like Stupor Mundi, though: my last battle in the playtest saw beginning player characters casting a lot of Divine Magic.

How's about I hope that I wasn't actually being offensive but apologise anyway in case I was.

I put a smiley to assure you that you were not.

Good news sounds like some of the work has been done already

Bad news what if I disagree with the decisions made already?

Some polls are still open. The ones I have already closed were so clearly decided that they could not be influenced by your vote alone. In general, I will give options for almost everything, hoping that everyone likes at least one of the options. So join, vote and contribute!

[kustenjaeger]

Greetings

This looks very valuable - I've applied to join the yahoo group. I'd like to have a better fit of the MRQ spells to Third Age as I may well go back to using some of the old RQ supplements with a BRP engine (I'm using a house ruled MRQ for an occasional non Glorantha campaign).

Regards

Edward

[mrk]

Spells and divine magic have worked in untold games hand-and-hand for many years. It just depends on how you( aka, the GM) views magic working in your world. It can be the kind were anyone can use it like Glorantha, or only a select and powerful few as in Middle Earth. If you think about it, magic is very much like languages/ or dialects; Just as there's many ways of saying either "hello" or "goodbye", a wizard or priest will have their own unique ways of casting a fireball or raising the dead.

[mrk]

There was a pretty good book written years ago on how "real" magic applies to FRPG's. Can't rememeber the name of it but I think the authors name was Bonewitz and Chaosium printed it at one time.

[Turloigh]

There was a pretty good book written years ago on how "real" magic applies to FRPG's. Can't rememeber the name of it but I think the authors name was Bonewitz and Chaosium printed it at one time.

That would be "Authentic Thaumaturgy" by Isaac Bonewits. IMHO, one of the most useless books I ever wasted money on. YMMV.

I was pondering the same question as the OP, since I'm afraid that one magic system might be overpowered by the other.

Other than that, I got nuffin'.

[mrk]

That would be "Authentic Thaumaturgy" by Isaac Bonewits. IMHO, one of the most useless books I ever wasted money on

I thought it really broke down and expalned how "magic" works in the real world quite well. I know a lot of Game Designers embraced the book and both Chaosium and Steve Jackson Games have published it over the years. What didn't you like about it?

[Turloigh]

I thought it really broke down and expalned how "magic" works in the real world quite well. I know a lot of Game Designers embraced the book and both Chaosium and Steve Jackson Games have published it over the years. What didn't you like about it?

Well, it's been a couple of years, and the book is packed away at the moment, so I may be talking completely out of my ass. I remember disliking the author's "know-it-all" style (I think he criticized how "most roleplaying games" handle the use of magic, when his criticism really only applied to D&D).

I don't, OTOH, remember getting anything useful out of it. Like, at all. (But then, I'm not a game designer.) As I said, YMMV.

(Snarky side comment: to explain how magic works in the real world is a really tall order when magic, well, doesn't work in the real world. Sorry, I'll shut up now. :innocent:)

[mrk]

Yeah, I think your right as there's a slight bit of snottiness within the book, but then the guy does have some authority on the subject and at the time he wrote it magic wasn't very well rationalized in many of the FRPG's back in the 70's. None the less, I still think its' a good read and really gives you an understand of what exactly magic is ( or could be) from a realistic point of view and--even more important-- a foundation as how you want it to function in your own fantasy world.

Well, it's been a couple of years, and the book is packed away at the moment, so I may be talking completely out of my ass. I remember disliking the author's "know-it-all" style (I think he criticized how "most roleplaying games" handle the use of magic, when his criticism really only applied to D&D).

I don't, OTOH, remember getting anything useful out of it. Like, at all. (But then, I'm not a game designer.) As I said, YMMV.

(Snarky side comment: to explain how magic works in the real world is a really tall order when magic, well, doesn't work in the real world. Sorry, I'll shut up now. :innocent:)

[sdavies2720]

Yeah, I think your right as there's a slight bit of snottiness within the book, but then the guy does have some authority on the subject and at the time he wrote it magic wasn't very well rationalized in many of the FRPG's back in the 70's. None the less, I still think its' a good read and really gives you an understand of what exactly magic is ( or could be) from a realistic point of view and--even more important-- a foundation as how you want it to function in your own fantasy world.

Ah, did you ever actually try to use it, either as written or modified as a basis of a magic system? It really is unworkable for a game system. Just go look at some of the spell work-ups, look at how much math is there, and turn on your radar for "I-pulled-it-out-of-the-air" estimates. It's a freeform system with a lot of math to mask it (math that, IMO, make it even less useable).

But, the laws of magic are cool and useful, and there are several good "imagination starter" ideas. It's just a long way from being playable. A long way. I tried.

The snottiness on top of that foundation doesn't help either.

Steve

[mrk]

I don't need to use Bonewitz' magic system because quite frankly I'm quite content with the one I already use. So long as your happy with the game mechanics, there's no reason to change. Like I previously mentioned, what I found interesting was the ideas he presented and the theory behind them and how it could all make sense in the real world. I own MANY game related books and hardly any of them I use (especially the rules ) but that doesen't mean I can't get something out of them. I haven't played D&D in over ten years but there's some D&D modules that I really enjoyed, inspired me and made me a better Player and GM. I'm open and embrace many ideas( so long as I like them).

Ah, did you ever actually try to use it, either as written or modified as a basis of a magic system? It really is unworkable for a game system. Just go look at some of the spell work-ups, look at how much math is there, and turn on your radar for "I-pulled-it-out-of-the-air" estimates. It's a freeform system with a lot of math to mask it (math that, IMO, make it even less useable).

But, the laws of magic are cool and useful, and there are several good "imagination starter" ideas. It's just a long way from being playable. A long way. I tried.

The snottiness on top of that foundation doesn't help either.

Steve