Spellcasting Styles - Formulaic v. Channelling.

[jkeown]

What I'm trying to model is Caleon's divergent spellcasters. They are of two flavors:

Formulaic Wizards whose spells involve much chanting, gesticulation, and focuses (staffs, wands, orbs, amulets, etc) to manipulate ambient magic fields. The magic is already here, they are simply reforging it. They are most like DnD Wizards, really. In HERO, I'd just layer on Limitations. It seems as though BRP's "default" Magic system most resembles this style of spellcaster.

Channellers can draw upon the power of gods (the Ilzar), from well-springs of magic that occur naturally, or the deep magic of raw Chaos and Void channels. Their spells are direct, energetic and unsubtle. Channels are more damaging or effective than Formulaic spells, but the latter is more versatile. Additionally, you often can't tell a channeller is at work except for the look on his or her face. Failure at channelling results in personal injury, the spell's energy loosed upon one's person in a moment of pain, a bloody nose or torn ligament. In HERO, I added healthy amounts of Concentration, Side Effects and Requires a Skill Roll limitations. If there is a DnD paradigm for Channellers, I'd have to go with Clerics, whose spells stem from an external source.

Would a common Fumble-Failure-Success-Special-Critical (Skill Result) layout be acceptable? Formulaic casters simply getting the spell wrong and losing PP, while Channellers loose PP and suffer for their blown rolls? Spells of either flavor would be bought as Skills.

Socially, they tend not to mingle, Formulaic Wizards have their own schools, colleges and guild rank structure, while Channellers form loose organizations around a common Source (those being the natural springs or self-aware beings like Chaos Lords and Ilzar). The exception being the Zaratyn Church of Volshann, whose priesthood is as often Formulaic as Channeller, or very often not even a spellcaster, but a scholar or warrior dedicating his life and works to the cult.

Would you as a player be drawn to one or the other? I see benefits in both, but players might not like to have their hands blown off by a bad spell roll or see a healing formula sicken a patient (for example...)

Thanks in advance for any opinions this post warrants!

[soltakss]

What I'm trying to model is Caleon's divergent spellcasters. They are of two flavors:

Formulaic Wizards whose spells involve much chanting, gesticulation, and focuses (staffs, wands, orbs, amulets, etc) to manipulate ambient magic fields. The magic is already here, they are simply reforging it. They are most like DnD Wizards, really. In HERO, I'd just layer on Limitations. It seems as though BRP's "default" Magic system most resembles this style of spellcaster.

Would they learn specific spells that are taught by their School/Guild? Presumably you can get magical items to support them (Spellbooks, Matrices, PP Stores).

Channellers can draw upon the power of gods (the Ilzar), from well-springs of magic that occur naturally, or the deep magic of raw Chaos and Void channels. Their spells are direct, energetic and unsubtle. Channels are more damaging or effective than Formulaic spells, but the latter is more versatile. Additionally, you often can't tell a channeller is at work except for the look on his or her face. Failure at channelling results in personal injury, the spell's energy loosed upon one's person in a moment of pain, a bloody nose or torn ligament. In HERO, I added healthy amounts of Concentration, Side Effects and Requires a Skill Roll limitations. If there is a DnD paradigm for Channellers, I'd have to go with Clerics, whose spells stem from an external source.

I'd go with Fumbles causing damage as the energy is channelled through the body whereas Failures simply mean you don't get hold of the energy properly and can't use it.

Would you have a single Channelling skill, a single skill per deity or s skill for each spell? Having a single skill to represent the ability to channel energy might be easier and might allow them to become proficient quickly. Having a skill per deity slows progression down but means that someone who is good at casting one deity's spells is going to be fairly powerful.

Presumably you have a spell list for each deity. Do they learn the spells or can they call on the power of the deity and manifest that power as any one of a number of spells?

Would a common Fumble-Failure-Success-Special-Critical (Skill Result) layout be acceptable? Formulaic casters simply getting the spell wrong and losing PP, while Channellers loose PP and suffer for their blown rolls? Spells of either flavor would be bought as Skills.

I'd go with Fumble = Damage/Bad Effect, Failure = Lose full PP but spell doesn't work, Success = Normal spell effect, Special = Extra Spell Effect, Critical = 1 PP cost and Extra Spell Effect.

Formulaic casters can still fumble - you say the formula wrong and target someone else, or you have a strange effect.

Socially, they tend not to mingle, Formulaic Wizards have their own schools, colleges and guild rank structure, while Channellers form loose organizations around a common Source (those being the natural springs or self-aware beings like Chaos Lords and Ilzar). The exception being the Zaratyn Church of Volshann, whose priesthood is as often Formulaic as Channeller, or very often not even a spellcaster, but a scholar or warrior dedicating his life and works to the cult.

That sounds reasonable, although I wouldn't put any rules restrictions on either being a Channeller or Formulaic Wizard - it is always better to have cultural reasons rather than rule reasons.

Would you as a player be drawn to one or the other? I see benefits in both, but players might not like to have their hands blown off by a bad spell roll or see a healing formula sicken a patient (for example...)

I'd be drawn to a Channeller, but the Formulaic Wizards look interesting.