Harry Potter-Style Wizards

[Andor]

OTOH Harry passes out right after he casts the Patronus the first time. I seem to recall other instances of spells running out although I can't site one right now.

Perhaps a wizard can 'push' their level by taking stat damage? So Harry could have learned the patronus by spending time and making a spellcraft check, but he can't cast it till he pushes his level and take a whopping load of stat (chr? wis?) damage and passes out. Or maybe it's a heroic feat that allows him to do so, and is part of what makes Harry heroic.

 

[trav_laney]

Here's some more:

Wandless Magic: in rare instances of the book, magic is done without the benefit of a wand (when Harry makes the glass disappear in the snake terrarium, or when Professor Quirrell surrounds the room with fire). And according to J.K. Rowling herself, "You can do unfocused and uncontrolled magic without a wand (for instance when Harry blows up Aunt Marge) but to do really good spells, yes, you need a wand."

D20 Interpretation: There are many ways to handle this, but I think the easiest would be to use a feat:

Wandless Spellcaster (General)
You can cast spells without a wand.
Benefit: you can cast arcane magic without a wand. Such a spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than normal, and requires a full-round action.


Animagi: Some wizards in the Potter universe have the ability to change shape into a particular animal. Rita Skeeter can turn into a beetle, and Professor McGonagall can turn into a cat, for example. This ability seems to be a choice rather than an inborn ability: when their friend Lupin contracted lycanthropy, Peter Pettigrew, James Potter, and Sirius Black decided to become animagi so that they could take animal forms as well. Peter chose the form of a rat, James chose a stag, and Sirius chose a dog.

D20 Interpretation: This would probably be best handled with a feat.

Animagi (General)
You excel in the arts of Transfiguration, and have learned how to change your form into that of an animal.
Prerequisites: wizard level 5
Benefit: choose one animal of Small or Medium size. You gain the ability to wild shape into the form of this animal, once per day, as a 5th level druid.

To answer the "why can some wizards change into smaller animals?" question, I suggest the following:

Improved Animagi (General)
You are among the most skilled animagi in the wizarding world.
Prerequisites: Animagi, wizard level 11
Benefit: choose one animal of Tiny or Large size. You gain the ability to wild shape into the form of this animal, once per day, as an 11th level druid. This ability replaces (does not overlap) the Animagi feat.


Lycanthropy: Professor Lupin is afflicted with an incurable magical illness that forces him to become a werewolf. Even with centuries of magical research, the wizarding world has failed to find a cure for this painful and debilitating illness, and those who are afflicted with it become social outcasts.

D20 Interpretation: unless the illness is diagnosed and treated before the first full moon after exposure, lycanthropy is permanent. Spells and magical effects that cure magical diseases are only able to suppress the illness for one hour per caster level. Mortal magic cannot cure lycanthropy.


Raising the Dead: Dumbledore insists that no magic can raise the dead, and has mentioned this on more than one occasion. We don't know if this is because it is simply impossible (as with modern science), or if it is impossible because of what would happen to the persons casting and receiving the spells...but for whatever reason, it cannot be done.

D20 Interpretation: I think the entire family of raise dead spells (raise dead, resurrection, true resurrection, reincarnate, etc.) should be scrapped.

 

[SteelDraco]

Gandalf never complained about getting tired or running out of magical energy either...no wizard does, in fact. I think this is because of the separation of roleplaying elements from game mechanics...a group of fighters in the pub wouldn't sit around discussing who has the highest Strength score or the best enhancement bonuses on their bastard swords; they would talk about great battles they fought and brave deeds they accomplished. The same for wizards; they wouldn't mention their spell slots, their save DC bonuses, and the like in a roleplaying setting.

Well, it's possible to make that kind of thing clear, without in-character rules discussion. Lots of fantasy books make it obvious that the spellcasters have a finite amount of energy available to them, and need time to recharge it. Heck, I think Gandalf does mention running out at one point - in The Hobbit, where he's throwing explosive pine cones at the goblins just after the Misty Mountains.

Modeling the HP wizards after the warlock would work well, particularly if you increased the number of invocations gained, and decreased their general power.

 

[trav_laney]

Potions seem to vary quite a bit, though they all take some time to make, measured in minutes at least. I'd probably say a minimum of ten minutes to do any potion. It's not clear why you'd use a potion for lots of things, though. Couldn't someone who was good at Transfiguration replicate a Polyjuice potion? Maybe you can't affect yourself with magic, other than potions? I can't think of any instances of someone using magic on themselves that wasn't a potion. You can certainly alter others, but perhaps not yourself?

You know, now that you mention it, I can't find a single example of when a wizard in the Potterverse actually targets himself with a spell. Perhaps you are right...spells with a target of "personal" or "caster only" must be done with a potion, requiring a casting time of at least one hour while the potion simmers in a pewter cauldron...

 

[Shayuri]

The only examples I can think of where a wizard affects himself with a spell from his wand are:

1) The "loudspeaker" spell, cast during Quidditch matches by a wizard, on himself, to make his voice reeeeeeeally loud so he can narrate the game.

2) Apparating and Disapparating. The wizard casts these on himself...we've never really seen it done, but I assume it's done with a wand.

3) Spells that bounced by mistake from Ron's broken wand.

 

[Sigurd]

I think you have to impose certain design decisions on the Harry Potter world pretty quick.

Remember:

1. You have only seen one public school for witchcraft and wizardry founded by 4 really powerful wizards long ago. At least 3 other schools exist and they were presented as exotic but of relatively the same power level.

2. There is no comparing the power level of professors to students. We simply have no points of comparison except for Lupen and he's a coward.

3. There seems a distaste but definite respect for areas like Nocturn Alley and extra 'finishing school' magic. Voldemort did not become what he did at Hogwarts but after he left. Clearly there are great magics outside of the finishing school.

4. Rowling's world is suffused with a sort of British code of conduct. Wizards are artificially content to not expose themselves, abuse muggles, or otherwise crush us poor magic deprived blighters.

5. There is a quaint contentment among the wizardly poor. Neither do they try to abuse the muggles.

6. I think you have to assume that there are large tracts of extra-dimensional conservation areas. I don't think muggles can see hogwarts, or the train leaving London on tracks that emerge from an invisible platform. Taking the wizard bus as an example Rowlings world is pretty good at bending physics, light, and memory such that it doesn't really have to consider the muggles much.

7. A great deal of magic has no perceived cost or component(s). I think that contributes to a wizarding economy that is almost universally self sufficient. Seemingly the rich have neat items of great power they don't use very much. The poor are not visible to judge except perhaps in the movie sequence in Nocturn Alley. The Alley sequence in inconclusive because its unclear if these are poor people or evil people.

8. I think the prevalent alignment is "Lawful British".


Any disagreement, any comment.

 

[I'm A Banana]

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.

I've always been struck that the four houses resemble the Four Pillars of the Adventuring Party: Gryffindor = Courage = Fighter; Slytherin = Ambition (read: greed) = Rogue; Ravenclaw = Cleverness = Wizard; Hufflepuff = "Protestant Ethic" = Cleric.

I mean, it kind of wonks with the idea of these all being wizards, but I like it when those archetypes resonate that deeply.

 

[Sigurd]

Wands = Rods

Wands = Rods

I think in D20 terms the 'wand' is a rod of focus. Sort of like the Harry Dresden books. Imagine it increasing your casting level by 3. Some wizards would be so powerful that they could cast without the wand, at reduced power, but most would either be too weak or too lazy\careful to ever try without it.

Innate Power

In many ways the Hogwarts wizards seem more like sorcerers.

Also I think you have to put some stock by harry being told he is a "powerful" wizard. Clearly all wizards are not created equal. There is a level of refinement that makes most magic enabled people able to do a body of spells, say up to 2nd level, but some magicians are more powerful than others.

Harry's Patronus is not just a clever trick it is something that most wizards need years to learn to cast, if ever.

An interesting question on this topic is Madame Hooch. In the movie and the books (as I recall) she doesn't cast much magic. I don't think she does much more than fly and fly some more. Unless this is a subconscious swipe at gym teachers, she may be very specialized in her magic.


Sigurd

 

[Jack Simth]

Actually, they seem more like warlocks or artificers than anything else; they've got a handful of things they can do without anything other than their wand, which they tend to use basically at whim, and a bazillion different effects they can manage by enchanting items for it.

 

[bairdec]

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.

In one of the stories (when they were at the World Quidditch Cup) Voldemort's Death cult guys were throwing fireballs around. Made me wonder why, with all the other wizards around, no one could fight back. Also, they had the snake sigil thing in the sky at the time, so that should be Illusion. Necromancy, in the form of raising dead, seems to be difficult, but possible. Although I know Voldemort was sort of only mostly dead, instead of truly dead.