|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 12:50AM
#1
|
|
|
So I was thinking that magic should be something that can be manipulated at will, as opposed to something like Vancian magic or spell abilities. Why shouldn't magic work like Prestidigitation except on a grander scale?
I began thinking of magic as more of a skill check against a DC determined by the DM for whether or not the effect goes off, and the caster can basically try to do whatever the heck they want to. The catch would be that magic is volitile stuff, and when you try to manipulate magic, it hurts you. So if you try something relatively simply, it might only deal a point of damage to you. But if you want to throw a massive fireball at a group of enemies, that'll cost you even more. So let's say, for example, you're a caster and you're out in the woods and a wolf attacks you. You notice the wolf is standing near some tree roots and say to the DM, "Hey, I want to use magic to make those roots entangle the wolf and immobilize him." The DM says, "Sure, go for it." You make your roll against a DC (possibly the wolf's AC as a baseline) set by the DM and succeed. The spell goes off and the DM states that this drained 1 HP from you.
Do you think this could work as a balanced idea, so long as it carried the caveat that magic is a more subtle art of manipulation of the elements and environment around you as opposed to god-like spells that rain doom upon your foes?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 7:10AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
Magic systems like this usually have the game system built around them, because it is ridiculously hard to balance.
One-half of the tabletop gaming news podcast Going LastCo-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 9:58AM
#3
|
|
|
Do you know of any specific game systems that use a magic system like that? I've seen some systems that come close, but they're still rather restrictive and use other mechanics.
I'd figure that the DM should know best as to what he or she is going to allow a caster to do in the game. The DM could always say no, that's beyond the scope of your powers, or just set an absurd DC and when the caster fails miserably and has half their life sucked away for trying, they'd learn to keep things simple.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 10:04AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 26, 2009
|
Do you know of any specific game systems that use a magic system like that? I've seen some systems that come close, but they're still rather restrictive and use other mechanics.
I'd figure that the DM should know best as to what he or she is going to allow a caster to do in the game. The DM could always say no, that's beyond the scope of your powers, or just set an absurd DC and when the caster fails miserably and has half their life sucked away for trying, they'd learn to keep things simple.
White Wolf's various Mage games are along this idea. Spend enough resources, wrack your brain for something, and pray you roll well enough (NWoD) or have enough stuff to lower the DC (OWoD).
The problem I've seen with this though is you get a Mage trying to cast some sort of weird Faraday(spelling?) Cage or completely rendering a creature/encounter useless by doing something with their magic. Which then runs into the problem of the Fighter, Paladin, and Rogue looking at the Mage in question and saying "We'll be at the Tavern, give us a Sending when you're done here."
Spiteful Wizard and Voice of Reason of the House of Trolls
The Silent God of the House of Trolls
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 10:27AM
#5
|
|
|
The problem I've seen with this though is you get a Mage trying to cast some sort of weird Faraday(spelling?) Cage or completely rendering a creature/encounter useless by doing something with their magic. Which then runs into the problem of the Fighter, Paladin, and Rogue looking at the Mage in question and saying "We'll be at the Tavern, give us a Sending when you're done here."
This is one of the concerns my gaming group brought up with this. One person said, "Well, I'll just surround the monster in a magic wall, then I'll fill it with water and drown them," or some such nonsense.
I was a little puzzled by this. First he assumed that the cage would last forever once it was cast. I explained that it would last until the start of his next turn, and if he wanted to, he could continue trying to keep the magic going with the same roll (and damage he took) to create it. And the more powerful the creature he's trying to contain, the higher the DC would be as well as his loss of life to keep it going. That's nothing to say of the water and combat lasting only 6 seconds per round. He'd kill himself trying to maintain the wall long enough.
But again, the magic being used wouldn't be so drastic. If I were to write something up, it'd explain that magic is far more subtle and just manipulative of the environment around you. Is the monster standing next to a lit brazier? You could have the fire errupt out of it and damage the monster. Is the monster standing in hindering terrain made of roots and brambles? You could have the roots tighten around its feet and immobilize them until the start of your next turn.
So what I'm looking for is something that is open ended and dependant more upon creativity and roleplaying as opposed to creating Genie of the Lamp-style casters with semi-phenomenal, nearly cosmic powers.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 11:03AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
I don't think you'll get that with D&D. The system is too codified, structured, and well balanced to function in the way you're looking for.
One-half of the tabletop gaming news podcast Going LastCo-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 05, 2012 - 1:33PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
One thing to watch out for with free form casters is teleporting/levitating rocks into people's lungs.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 06, 2012 - 4:59AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Dec 19, 2008
|
You should always, with open ended systems, have baselines like line of sight and line of effect. One thing you might want to do is make a system where wizards can, at each level where they would get a power, have a skill challenge where they create the power they would get, reigned in by skills and your DM ability. Like, if the player says that they want their 5th level daily to be an area burst 5 stun save ends, set an appropriate DC for it (Let's say, 50), and allow them a roll. If they get under that, say they aren't powerful enough, and make that aspect of the power appropriately powerful (like area burst 3 immobilized save ends) If you're going to make a power like this, the questions you should ask should be something like this: What damage type would you like your power to be? (arcana)
What range and/or size do you want it to be?
How much damage do you want it to do?
What effects do you want it to have?
And after you have the results of the questions and the rolls (and the level the player is, for reference), build him the power closest to what he wants that's appropriately powerful for the level.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 06, 2012 - 7:31AM
#9
|
|
|
I don't think you'll get that with D&D. The system is too codified, structured, and well balanced to function in the way you're looking for.
Actually, D&D does allow it to some degree (well, at least with 4E, if you allow Arcana or an ability check associated with your class' primary ability modifier [like INT for wizards, CHA for sorcerers).
However, this is best played as a series of checks, depending on the level of the task. Let's take the "make a cage, drown enemy in water" scenario.
1. He casts the spell. 2. At the start of his next turn, he must make an Arcana check as a minor action (Hard DC) to sustain the effect of the spell. 3. He casts the fill-the-cage-with-water spell as a standard action. 4. Follow the rules on drowning (DMG p.159, or RC p.180).
The rules effectively state that the creature he's attempting to drown would have three minutes before suffocation. That means that before the target creature actually drowns, he needs to sustain the Cage spell for 30 rounds before the target creature starts making Endurance checks, DC = 20 + 5 for each succeeding round, and failing the Endurance check results in first a loss of healing surges, then damage equal to the creature's level.
Let's assume we adjust the per-round from 6 seconds to 1 minute (pre-3E setting). That's still 3 rounds before suffocation. And even if the target's Endurance is so low, because a monster has 1 healing surge/tier -- something people often forget -- that's at least 4 rounds before the target takes damage. Assuming the creature is a level 1 artillery with 4 CON, that's still a total of 14 rounds before it dies. 34 rounds if we use official rules instead.
That's a lot of effort for very little mechanical benefit, really... but whatever floats his boat *shrugs*
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 06, 2012 - 8:07AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2008
|
Unless the drowning enemy takes damage while it is drowning, in which case its life span is measured in rounds not minutes).
One-half of the tabletop gaming news podcast Going LastCo-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.
|
|
|