Anyone picked up True Sorcery?

[JohnSnow]

Thanks Rob. Anything I can do to help!

By the way, I crossposted your reply to the True Sorcery thread over on the Iron Heroes boards. Figured you'd want the guys to know. Especially since I'd raised some of the issues I saw there with the guys. I was just after input, but I felt I should correct my impression with your reply.

I'll type that email up and drop you a note.

Cheers!

 

[Baumi]

How does it compare to Elements of Magic?

 

[Nebulous]

How does it compare to Elements of Magic?

Hmm. You know, i bought EoM but never fully used the system, so my reply probably won't mean a whole lot. Initially, i think i like True Sorcery better. Once some of the errata is fixed that is, and once i can more fully look it over. For some reason the EOM system never fully "clicked" for me.

One question i have is this: how does the increased casting times (up to 5 rounds i think in the example above, right?) fit into the standard D&D scenario? A mage casting a spell for five rounds is otherwise 4 additional rounds of not casting subsequent spells. How does that impact their usefulness on the battlefield?

 

[Henry]

Robert,

Thanks for the dedication to bringing this out. Based on all the times it was sent back for revision, I was beginning to worry.


I'll have to keep checking back to see when that new PDF is released, because I want a copy, but I don't see any reason to buy until the revised PDF is released. I've been looking forward to this product for a long time - about a year and a half, truthfully.

 

[rjs]

Very very soon. It could very well be updated today.

Rob

 

[Henry]

One question i have is this: how does the increased casting times (up to 5 rounds i think in the example above, right?) fit into the standard D&D scenario? A mage casting a spell for five rounds is otherwise 4 additional rounds of not casting subsequent spells. How does that impact their usefulness on the battlefield?

In this magic system, you can prepare a limited number of spells ahead of time. If you're familiar with Zelazny's Amber series, it works vaguely like that. That 4 actions of casting time means from start to finish; you can "hang" the spell so that it can be cast at 1 standard action at a later time (assuming you don't take damage, blow a concentration check, and lose it). There's no limit of "spells prepared" or such -- you take a certain amount of drain (drain is different depending on game system used, like D&D or True20) for casting it, and could literally cast yourself into unconsciousness.

So a mage would hang his most important spells, and then in combat cast much smaller, quicker spells when his big ones were spent. You don't have to cast that 10 damage dice, DC 40 monster; you could cast a smaller, quicker spell that does less, but also is less draining.

Also, your casting time decreases with skill; a high-level spellcaster could toss off something as a swift action, something that would take an amateur several rounds to cast!

 

[Henry]

Very very soon. It could very well be updated today.

Rob

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out.

One thing: I'm hoping the examples and the options on spells will be much better explained than in the BCCS. In BCCS, it could be very unclear sometimes what path to take, for instance, to turn a single-target spell into a big, bad area-effect planet-buster spell. I and a number of fellow entusiasts have come up with the same results in a spell before, with very different casting DCs, because of some things I thought needed to be included, but others did not.

Also, I really had some reservations on the "taking extra time" rules, because there were a few loopholes someone revealed to me that created some spells abnormally powerful, in proportion to the level of the wizard casting them. One gamer in another group related an invisible, multiple-round, nonlethally damaging "force cloud" that his 3rd level wizard created to handle multiple foes; he didn't mind "blowing his brains out" for such a spell as long as the party could use it to take down multiple enemies much stronger than they. I'm hoping that clearer examples of what can and can't be done will help this.

 

[2WS-Steve]

In this magic system, you can prepare a limited number of spells ahead of time. If you're familiar with Zelazny's Amber series, it works vaguely like that. That 4 actions of casting time means from start to finish; you can "hang" the spell so that it can be cast at 1 standard action at a later time (assuming you don't take damage, blow a concentration check, and lose it). There's no limit of "spells prepared" or such -- you take a certain amount of drain (drain is different depending on game system used, like D&D or True20) for casting it, and could literally cast yourself into unconsciousness.

So a mage would hang his most important spells, and then in combat cast much smaller, quicker spells when his big ones were spent. You don't have to cast that 10 damage dice, DC 40 monster; you could cast a smaller, quicker spell that does less, but also is less draining.

Also, your casting time decreases with skill; a high-level spellcaster could toss off something as a swift action, something that would take an amateur several rounds to cast!

You just sold me this book!

 

[ValhallaGH]

There's no limit of "spells prepared" or such

Technically, you are limited to preparing no more than a number of spells equal to your Intelligence bonus at any one time. You can prepare a million spells in any given day, but no more than your intelligence bonus may be prepared at any one time. So if you don't have an Intelligence bonus, or have and Int penalty, then you can't prepare spells at all.

 

[igavskoga]

While I can't comment specifically on what appears in True Sorcery, I don't have it yet, I have done extensive study of the BCCS system.

What I can say that is true about both, since they come from the same foundation, is that this magic system requires a COMPLETE change in perspective coming from your standard fire & forget mobile artillery that is the Vancian system.

If you try to play a wizard in this system as if they were a caster in d20 -- you will be disappointed, there is no doubt about that. This system is far more modular, subtle, and flexible.

A good way to start becoming familiar with the system is to create a wizard and just dive in and start making spells. You will find, often, that spell strategy will shift dependant on level far more than it does in D&D since there are more resources to manage. There is far more utility to be had at any level, especially the lower ones, beyond "I cast my 3rd out of 4 magic missiles."

Another big thing I noticed was, in trying to recreate some of the hallmark D&D spells, such as fireball with a 5th level caster, is twofold:

1) It was typically far more effecient AND interesting to do other things than Lightning_Bolt_052.
2) If I toned down the spell effect somewhat, so I was gunning for a shorter range, radius, and/or damage I could cast the spell more often than the 2 or 3 times a 5th level D&D caster could throw fireballs -- this to me was a more than welcome change, how often do you really throw a fireball at anywhere near the max range?

This was the biggest thing I have taken away from studying the BCCS system. I am posative it will hold true for what's in True Sorcery. Expect to look at traditional fantasy magic mechanics a bit differently or expect to be disappointed. The formula now is subtlety before power whereas in core D&D it is power before subtlety.


----------
One gamer in another group related an invisible, multiple-round, nonlethally damaging "force cloud" that his 3rd level wizard created to handle multiple foes; he didn't mind "blowing his brains out" for such a spell as long as the party could use it to take down multiple enemies much stronger than they.
----------

If this is similar to the post on the Green Ronin Mythic Vistas forum, I am almost 100% posative that the guy was doing the math significantly wrong. To duplicate the effects he was talking about would've required hitting a DC that was barely castable at best or completely out of reach at worst. Not to mention that a duration was completely impossible since it would've required blending with a second talent which would've skyrocketted the DC well out of the reach of a 3rd level caster.

I've noticed, at least with BCCS, that if you've created a spell effect and it looks vastly too powerful for the DC you've come up with, then 9 times out of 10 you've missed a calculation somewhere along the line. Granted, this can be easy to do because, as you've said, what to include and what not to include isn't immediately clear. There are some instances where this can be done, like using Force to hit a single target with massive amounts of nonlethal, but the actual loopholes like that aren't as many as you think and are easily house-ruled away.