D&D "Magus & Grogs" Parties

[rounser]

Discussion of Ars Magica on another recent thread reminded me of an idea from some time ago:

If you're familiar with Ars Magica, you'll know how the party dynamic is such that there is a magus being aided by multiple covenant henchmen ("grogs") and miscellaneous allies such as knights and merchants. The magus is significantly more powerful than any of his or her companions (perhaps comparable to Gandalf amongst the Fellowship of the Ring), but usually quite eccentric (e.g. academic, away with the fairies, or obsessed with fire) and therefore reliant on them in all manner of "real world" situations.

If the lopsided power level of an Ars Magica party were to be translated into D&D terms, how much higher level than their allies could a magus be in order for the EL/CR system to remain workable, and for the party not to solve every problem by means of their most powerful member?

 

[Herobizkit]

It has been my experience that high-level characters are quite like superheroes in both capability and mechanics, and no class moreso fits this comparison than the wizard.

The wizard is the ultimate problem-solver. Their range and scope of abilities far exceeds that of a more 'normal' character. In D&D, this translates to "a spellcaster is more capable and useful (ie can accomplish a wider variety of tasks) than a non-spellcaster".

EL/CR becomes unworkable if the characters are too far apart in levels, as the EL assumes the characters are of equal level. Couple that with the sheer range of powers that a wizard can produce, and you have, to quote Magneto, "a god among insects". IF that's what you want, and IF your PC's don't mind, then make the wizard whatever level you want... but your PCs will invariably get the wizard to do everything, because he can.

D&D is a team game. The only decent way to accompish what you propse in such a setting is to have the wizard be an NPC and a wandering patron to the PCs... and have those PCs create non-spellcasters. You'll see an immediate difference.

 

[Aus_Snow]

The only decent way to accompish what you propse in such a setting is to have the wizard be an NPC and a wandering patron to the PCs... and have those PCs create non-spellcasters. You'll see an immediate difference.

This might or might not be true usually, except for the fact that, using the Ars Magica model, *each* player controls more than one type of character (i.e., one magus, their 'companion', some 'grogs').

Actually, there's more to the absolutely fundamental differences than that, but suffice to say, 'balance' in the (typical) 3e D&D sense doesn't translate across so well to the Ars Magica style/system.

I think the 4th edition can still be downloaded for free, if anybody wants to find out more about the game.


I'm not sure, rounser, if the Wizard would be the appropriate class to represent Magi. But that's open to interpretation, for sure. I'd be tempted to say. . . Adept? No. . . hm, actually I can't think of any class that'd fit, offhand. Perhaps a d20 fantasy variant (as opposed to simply D&D) might suit better?

As for comparative levels, the spellcaster would need to be. . . I don't know. . . maybe 1.5x the average level of the others? Double?

I'll have to come back to this one after some thought on it. At the moment, it seems a problematic proposition.



update --- This is where Ars Magica (4th ed.) is available as a free download, by the way.

I have no idea what I was thinking of with Adepts. It's been a while, I guess. Still thinking about ways to get Ars Magica-style D&D happening.

 

[Yair]

Well, a beginning magus cannot usually do that much combatwise than a militant companion, but can throw out fireballs and stuff. I'd say for a level 1 grog party, the magus needs to be of about level 6. I'd make the Companion also level 6, BTW, allowing more main roles.
Of course, elder magi can be of any level.

I'm not at all sure if ArM's troupe style play will work in D&D. Certainly it will not be possible to play regular adventures, as the disparity in levels will mean the grogs will need to hide and cower or be decimated, and DCs may be problematic too.

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

I think one problem is that levels do not have the same kind of power scaling that a skill based system has. In DnD, a higher level PC is better at everything than a lower level one - whereas a skill based game allows you to excel in one area but not others:

e.g. In ars magica, your 150 year old magus is incredibly powerful, but without their magic, the average grog soldier could beat the average mage to death in no time? In DnD a high level wizard is going to have a high BAB and a lot of hit points... easily capable of slaying low level fighters.

Although that isn't always going to be true in AM... one mage in our last campaign was a master swordsman and wore full chain armour most of the time. Not exactly a pushover.

I think it's very hard to recreate that kind of feeling in a level based game.


Some changes that might get it a little closer to the AM feel:

Consider advancing character level and caster level separately... 3rd level mage, 7th caster level - probably feels about right for a starting mage?

Perhaps keep the levels equal, but only allowing wizards to make saving throws vs magic. Or apply a very sizable penalty for non magicians to save.

Perhaps allow a range of base class choices for the mages character levels, to reflect different career focuses.


Another problem is comparing the DnD magic system to the AM one. Both are powerful in different ways and using them makes for different types of gaming. DnD definitely having more in the way of information gathering/plot solving stuff. Might be best to trim the DnD list and then add some more AM themed spells instead. IIRC, Arcana Unearthed had a magic system a little closer in feel to the AM one.

Anyway, this focuses on trying to recreate AM with DnD. Which I think is difficult. However, nothing to stop you lifting the bits that work easily and just use them. Without trying to recreate the whole game.

I've been thinking lifting troupe play into DnD for a mind flayer 'mages' and thrall 'grogs' mini campaign. (An idea lifted straight off these boards. ) Just trying to work out how to handle the non adventuring PCs.

 

[Shadowdancer]

I've never played Ars Magica, but from the descriptions on this thread, it sounds like you might be able to accomplish the same "feel" by using the Leadership feat with its cohorts and followers. Each player could have a mid- to high-level wizard or sorcerer to run, along with a cohort of nearly the same level and several low-level followers. During combat, each player would just roll for their cohort and followers as well as their PC.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Have wizards use the Gestalt rules from Unearthed Arcana, have companion PCs use regular D&D rules, and have grogs use the NPC classes.

 

[orangefruitbat]

Each player gets a wizard, say level 5, representing a newly graduated journeyman wizard. I recommend that every wizard is a specialist, preferably using the rules out of UA for extra differentiation.

Each player also gets a level 3 companion. This can be a fighter, ranger, rogue, expert, etc, and is a companion who is a skilled and valued companion. No primary spellcasters. Each player also gets 1-3 grogs. These are all fighters/warriors 1. (I prefer fighters, since they get the extra feat customization, but ymmv). Incidentally, if grogs get killed, they start at level 1 again.

Give the wizards a home base (tower, castle, dungeon). Alternatively, their first adventure is to claim a home base. Now, they have a place to keep their stuff, and needs maintenance, upkeep, etc.

Change the XP system. For every season (3 months) the wizard stays home and does research/item crafting, make an INT check (DC 10+1/2 your current level). If you succeed, gain 500 XP, if you fail, get 250 XP. Companions and grogs gain XP normally, but are capped so they can't be higher than (wizard level-2) or (wizard level-4, max lv 4).

This XP change makes it unattractive for wizards to go on adventures (hence, they have companions and grogs), but inevitably, at least one wizard needs to go to supervise. Generally, a player will play either a wizard, a companion, or a group of grogs. The on-duty wizard rotates from adventure to adventure. If more than one wizard goes, it's because the haul is worth the XP hit (a collection of rare spells, magic items, etc).

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I like orangefruitbat's idea.

The idea I had was fairly similar -- have everyone make up a wizard and a cohort. Most adventures consist of one player running their wizard, the rest running their cohorts.

If you want to dodge the leveling issue entirely, it might be worth checking out Sweet20 (http://www.anvilwerks.com/src/sweet20/experience.html), which makes experience gain a function of story and character development, and in fact puts a lot of the control over it into players' hands. I think it'd be a good matchup.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Neat.

I'll probably steal that (and tinker as always). Oh and yeah, I think the UA variants could indeed be good starting points, at the least.

Might even try running something along these lines.


edit --- As my post actually came in after SweeneyTodd's for some reason (and I didn't see it there at the time), I'll just reinforce that I was referring to orangefruitbat's post.