Harry Potter-Style Wizards

[trav_laney]

My wife is a huge Harry Potter fan, and she likes to watch the movies over and over again in sequence. Which means, I also watch the movies over and over again in sequence. I'm not saying the movies are bad, but...well, you know.

Anyway. I don't know if anyone else has this problem or not, but everytime I watch a movie (especially fantasy fiction), I start reducing everything down to D20 mechanics. The question on the table is:

If you were to develop a wizard class variant for the D20 system, based on J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" series of books, what changes would you make and why?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Here's my thoughts.


The Wizard's Wand: According to J.K. Rowling, a wizard cannot cast a spell unless he has a wand. This wand is supposed to be attuned to the wizard ("The wand chooses the wizard," the clerk at Flourish and Blots said,) but it is possible to use another wizard's wand in place of your own (example: Gilderoy Lockhart using Ron's damaged wand in "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.") And Hagrid used an umbrella instead of a wand to start a fire and to curse Dudley Dursley with a pig's tail.

D20 Interpretation: all wizard spells have a Focus requirement for casting. This focus is always the wizard's own wand, which is specially attuned to the wizard. It is possible to use another wizard's wand, but requres a Spellcraft check DC 20 to avoid backfire. It is possible to use an improvised wand (with a penalty to the Spellcraft check) from any item vaguely the same size and shape as a wand (such as an umbrella). A new wand costs 100 gp.

Material Components: No wizards in the world of Harry Potter use material components for casting spells...at least, not yet (there is still another boook out there, ya know.) All spells appear to have verbal and somatic components ("Swish, then flick!" / "A-LO-ha-MOR-ah!"), and they all seem to require the afforementioned wand, but nobody mixes bat guano or grasshopper legs into their incantations.

D20 Interpretation: all spells have a focus requirement, plus any V or S components that are listed in the spell description. Arcane spells have no material components whatsoever.

Houses: The wizards from Slytherin are obviously the "bad guys," and the wizards from Gryffindor are obviously the "good guys." Little is known about Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff, except that they seem to have little interest in the affairs of Voldemort. But if you dig deep enough into the books, you will find that Gryffindor favors courage, Ravenclaw favors intellect, Hufflepuff favors hard work and fairness, and Slytherin favors cunning.

D20 Interpretation: wizards are separated into their Houses by alignment:
Good: Gryffindor
Evil, Chaotic: Slytherin
Lawful: Hufflepuff
Neutral: Ravenclaw

A wizard's House doesn't seem to have much of a bearing on the story, except that unless a character is in the Gryffindor or Slytherin houses, he/she will most often be ignored.

Familiars: In "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," Harry is told that students who apply to Hogwart's School of Witchcraft and Wizardry may bring one of the following animals: a cat, a frog, a rat, or an owl. We have yet to see a wizard walking around with a bat, hawk, lizard, raven, snake, or weasel.

D20 Interpretation: all familiars must be cats, frogs, rats, or owls. All of them appear to suck, badly.

Parseltongue: some of the characters in J.K. Rowling's books (notably, Voldemort and Harry Potter) can talk to snakes.

D20 Interpretation: this would be best handled with a feat:

Parseltongue (General)
You are born with the rare gift of being able to talk to snakes.
Effect: you may converse with snakes (only) as if under the effects of a permanent speak with animals spell.


What else? Come on, help me out. It's fun.

 

[Shayuri]

I'll toss in.

It's been noted in the book version that although Hagrid's wand was broken when he was expelled from Hogwart's, he had since covertly repaired it and snuck it into his umbrella. So no, you can't use just ANY old umbrella to work magic...just one that has a wand hidden in it.

I'd also avoid "mechanicizing" aspects of the world that don't have to be. Assigning alignments to Houses, for example. The four school Houses were just emphasizing what traits each of the four Founding Wizards thought was most important. There's no other significance to them in the larger context of the wizarding world.

It's also worth pointing out that potions in the Potterverse are so fast and easy to make that you can almost treat them as a form of spellcasting. It may take just hours or even less to make basic potions, which can have quite a number of effects. More advanced potions (Polyjuice for example) can take significantly longer. Weirdly, that whole, "It'll take months to brew" plot point vanishes by the time a bad guy needs to make it to imitate...

Well. No spoilers.

Also, it's noted later on in the books that a wizard CAN cast spells without the words and motions associated with spellcasting. Doing so is considered essential to proper dueling, in fact, since it prevents the foe from anticipating what you're doing, and speeds up your reaction time.

-- Mechanically, just allow Still and Silent Spell metamagic feats to work as usual, on the fly. Potter wizards -always- cast spontaneously, any spell they know. Applying metamagic doesn't increase casting time. Still and Silent Spell become prerequisites for Quicken Spell.

Additionally, some wizards seem able to work magic -without a wand-. Dumbledore seems to have pulled this one off, at least once. And most wizards it seems manifest random magic by will alone while growing up. In game terms, this is so rare/uncontrollable, it probably doesn't need a rule.

Oh, and on familiars. Although students must bring a "magical animal" to school...in no way to these animals appear to exhibit the properties of a familiar, other than being unusually intelligent (well, the owls and Crookshanks at least), and capable of rudimentary communication of emotions.

Let's see...what else...

Determining how many spells are known...thorny. Potterverse wizards seem, to me at least, more like sorcerors than wizards. Yet, they know a lot of highly specific spells, AND seem able to make relatively low-key magic effects without formal spellcasting (wizards are always moving furniture just by waving their wands around, etc). Perhaps some "spells" are actually feats...sort of like the feats that grant spell like abilities, or even better, the Reserve feats, that let you perform limitless weak magic if you know a related spell.

 

[trav_laney]

It's been noted in the book version that although Hagrid's wand was broken when he was expelled from Hogwart's, he had since covertly repaired it and snuck it into his umbrella. So no, you can't use just ANY old umbrella to work magic...just one that has a wand hidden in it.

Good catch...and I like it. Making wands an absolute necessity for casting spells makes the game strategically interesting. I'm sure that someone would be tempted to create a feat that would allow a wizard to cast spells without a wand (i.e., "Eschew Wand" or something similar), but I think this should be discouraged.

Being able to "disarm" a wizard is a very interesting concept. And sundering a wizard's wand would become every mage-slayer's favorite tactic.

While we are on the subject of spell components....

What about rare/expensive material components? Is making arcane magic subject to disarm/sunder attacks enough of a balancing factor for spells with expensive components? or should an XP component be substituted in place of the material component?

 

[trav_laney]

Perhaps some "spells" are actually feats...sort of like the feats that grant spell like abilities, or even better, the Reserve feats, that let you perform limitless weak magic if you know a related spell.

Or just clever use of the Prestidigitation spell?

 

[Shayuri]

Well...honestly?

You can't just tack Harry Potter onto the D&D spell list. There's stuff on that list that seems to me to be waaaaaay beyond the Potterverse...or just totally against the spirit of Potterian magic in general.

In general, Potterverse magic doesn't seem able to -create- or -destroy- things. Spells incapcitate by paralyzing, or changing the target's nature into something that can't move as freely. I've yet to see a spell that traps someone by wrapping them in chains. Similarly, there's no "disintegrate" in the Potterverse. In fact, if I had to characterize it in D&D terms, I'd say Potterverse magic is almost (if not quite) entirely of the Transmutation school. Adavra Kedevra is clearly Necromancy (as are several other of Voldemort's techniques). There are some Enchantment/Charm spells...most of them having highly specific effects, like making someone laugh, or angry... The more powerful Enchantments are Deadly Curses (Dominate...and I'd consider Cruciatus to be something akin to "power word: pain" and thus also of the Enchantment school).

Noteably, there doesn't appear to be ANY "Evocation" spells, or Summoning spells (summoning in Potterverse means bringing a physical object to the caster, not whisking up some beastie ). Illusions seem very limited, and may well be limited to permanantly enchanted -items- rather than spells.

Oh, and don't forget the Animagus feats!

 

[trav_laney]

I'd also avoid "mechanicizing" aspects of the world that don't have to be. Assigning alignments to Houses, for example. The four school Houses were just emphasizing what traits each of the four Founding Wizards thought was most important. There's no other significance to them in the larger context of the wizarding world.

I didn't intend for this to be a mechanic...it had more to do with the way Hogwart's sorted their students, than anything else. If a student were true neurtal, the Sorting Hat would probably put them in Ravenclaw, for example. It has no real impact on the wizard's spells or abilities, and it certainly isn't intended to be a restriction.

 

[trav_laney]

Noteably, there doesn't appear to be ANY "Evocation" spells, or Summoning spells (summoning in Potterverse means bringing a physical object to the caster, not whisking up some beastie ). Illusions seem very limited, and may well be limited to permanantly enchanted -items- rather than spells.

Draco summons a snake when dueling with Harry in "Chamber of Secrets."

 

[Shayuri]

Arr, well, if that's the case, why not sort by the actual qualities?

Gryffendor is Courage. Slytherin is Ambition. Ravenclaw is Cleverness (intelligence works). Hufflepuff is...a little hazier, but I think it works out to Steadfastness, or Hardworkingness.

 

[Shayuri]

Draco summons a snake when dueiling with Harry in "Chamber of Secrets."

Argh! Touche'.

Very true. That's part of the problem too, of course. In the fiction, wizards do whatever she wants them to. Those of us trying to reduce things into a stable set of rules are thus left with some odd inconsistencies.

...that "slashy" spell Harry learns seems more like evocation than transmutation too, in hindsight...

...and Sirius/Ratboy is said to have anihilated a street full of Muggles in a burst of flame.

lol...

 

[airwalkrr]

But Hogwarts is not the only wizard school. I haven't read all the books, but do all wizard schools have the same four houses? I had thought those four houses were specific to Hogwarts.