Low magic vs. magic as a plot device

[resistor]

I looked at the GURPS unlimited mana rules, and whipped up my own d20 version. Thoughts/comments? I tried to design it to interfere as little as possible with the existing mechanics. It does actually make casters slightly stronger, but it also offers them the kind of temptation/hint of ultimate power that people seem to want. Also, the possibility of a villain whipping out the same thing should keep them on their toes!

Crunchy Bits

A caster still has the same number of spell slots and spells known as before. Now, however, they can also cast unslotted spells by doing what I shall call "overburning."

Whenever a caster overburns, she adds the spell level of the overburned spell to her running total of "overburned levels." She must then roll a d% and add her total overburned levels (including the levels from the spell she just cast). The result of this roll determines outcome of the spell:

0-25 - spell functions normally
26-50 - spell functions with minor side effects (DM's discretion, high rolls should be more side effects)
51-75 - spell fizzles
76-90 - spell fizzles with negative side effects
91+ spell fails catastrophically, with effects scaling at the DMs discretion based on how far over 90 the roll is

Overburned levels build up continuously, but a caster can restore a number of them equal to one half her casting attribute modifier each day. Any effects that modify the caster's casting attribute must be in effect for all 8 hours of the caster's rest to increase the overburned levels restored.

Flavor

As a mage learns his art, he slows learns to control the rampant energies around him. Slowly, he builds a tolerance to them and becomes able to bend them to his will. The more powerful he becomes, the more energy he can force to do his bidding.

However, some daring mages realize that the supply of energy out there is nearly infinite. By reaching beyond and taking control of more energy than they could normally safely subdue, they can power more spells than other mages of their level!

But this boldness comes at a price: these mages are manipulating more energy than they really know how to control, and with each successive "overburning," they risk catastrophe...

Other Thoughts

I think this could also be extended into an alternate epic magic system: create a feat that allows sorcerers to add 10+ level spells to their spells known, and another that allows wizards to prepare 10+ level spells. But since they don't have any slots of the appropriate levels, they must cast these spells by overburning!

Also, a world using this would probably feature some magic items like this one:

Circlet of High Magery - For the purposes of determining overburning outcomes, the wearer of this circlet is considered to have five less overburned levels than normal (but not less than zero).

 

[barsoomcore]

The original point being: "Magic in D&D doesn't feel anything like magic in the fantasy novels we know and love."

I'll accept that you don't feel this way about the novels you know and love. Have you asked JD what novels he's specifically referring to?

 

[Brother MacLaren]

You had made the case that XP drains where fun and I was attempting to point out how unfun that would be if extended to other classes.

Er, no. I made the point that spending or investing XP could be an interesting option, and that an XP cost is not a "penalty" or "punishment" or a "drain." It's an investment. Spend some XP to overcome the challenge and thereby earn more XP than if you had failed to overcome the challenge. And, if when playing another class I had the spellcaster's astounding ability to trade GP and XP for significant increases in power (that is, create magic items), I would certainly do it. Maybe you wouldn't. Now, if a fighter-type had to spend XP to use a charged or limited-use magic item, more or less equivalent to the Scribe Scroll XP cost, I think many players would still find that worth doing as the situation demanded. Remember, spending XP can't ever drop you down a level, so this never actually makes you weaker (as opposed to level drains, which you seem to have confused XP investment with).
Or, to look at other types of damage, I rather like the idea of having some magic items with drawbacks. Viscious weapons that deal damage to the user; a cloak of protection that can give an extra boost on saves at the expense of Dex. Items where players have to make a tactical decision to use them rather than it being the automatic best choice in every case.

I also disagree that magic overpowers swords at high levels. At least in the games I've played in and GM'd the wizards never overpower the fighters at high levels. Most of the high level monsters have incredible magic resistance, really high save numbers and tons of hit points. However, almost nothing withstands a couple rounds of a high level fighter that has closed to base to base contact. There is no save vs taking damage from a sword, but almost every damage spell is greatly reduced by making a save.

Two things. First, a high-level fighter in a D&D game is only matched with the wizard because of his magic items. The game assumes the fighter will have magic items and access to magical healing. So saying "Magic is better than mundane options" doesn't mean "wizards are better than fighters."
Second, the PC environment is not the same as the world at large. Most NPCs don't actively seek out tough challenges. NPC wizards can bail on a tough encounter, whereas PCs are very reluctant to bail because a) their fellows may not be able to escape as easily and b) that's the adventure the DM has planned. PCs don't rely on hired help much because the players like being the ones who do stuff. Most NPCs don't face multiple encounters in one day, and they spend more time in their own strongholds than do PCs.
In the world at large - the courts and the kingdoms - magic is superior. A tribe of goblins led by a 7th-level cleric will destroy the tribe led by a 7th-level rogue. A garrison of 1st-level wizards can defend a keep better than 1st-level fighters (True Strike and heavy crossbow, or Magic Missile). Wizards can scry-buff-teleport or fly-ImpInv-fireball. Against either of these, non-casters without magical resources are helpless. Magic can slaughter the mightiest of warriors with no chance for them to fight back. (I was once in a game where the PCs used magic to slaughter a mundane marauding army... it was sickening, and I almost defected to the bad guys' side)
D&D adventures are specifically designed to reduce the power of spells in certain circumstances (foes with SR, multiple encounters per day), but they do not reflect the experience of most of those in the game world.

 

[Desdichado]

You ask me to come back! And I wasn't trying to pick a fight. Brother MacLearn had ask about other systems of balancing magic and we were looking at a couple systems and commenting on them. I though saying what I objected to furthered the discussion.

Actually, I was referring to your claim that despite what we said what we really meant was that we didn't like magic. Also, your claims that nerfing magic is automatically bad for it's own sake. Some of your other points were quite interesting, but those were beside the point and accomplished very little other than to stir up the pot, so to speak.

Don't get me wrong; I'm glad you're here making posts, as they do have some insight, but those kinds of comments were not the insightful ones.

 

[Desdichado]

The original point being: "Magic in D&D doesn't feel anything like magic in the fantasy novels we know and love."

I'll accept that you don't feel this way about the novels you know and love. Have you asked JD what novels he's specifically referring to?

Well, that's just the thing, isn't it? Fantasy novels have all kinds of magic. In most of them, in keeping with the "magic as a plot device" kind of atmosphere, who knows what kind of RPG system would really replicate that?

I do know, however, that D&D magic doesn't feel much like anything I've read in any novel (granted; I've never read Dying Earth...) except for D&D novels, like the vast seas of books printed up for Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, etc. So I'm talking a bit more generically -- D&D magic feels like a system apart that has little resemblance to novels in general, but that doesn't mean that the same couldn't be said of many other magic systems. I guess magic with a kind of Robert E. Howard feel would be the closest thing to what I'm looking for.

 

[Desdichado]

The original point being: "Magic in D&D doesn't feel anything like magic in the fantasy novels we know and love."

I'll accept that you don't feel this way about the novels you know and love. Have you asked JD what novels he's specifically referring to?

Well, that's just the thing, isn't it? Fantasy novels have all kinds of magic. In most of them, in keeping with the "magic as a plot device" kind of atmosphere, who knows what kind of RPG system would really replicate that?

I do know, however, that D&D magic doesn't feel much like anything I've read in any novel (granted; I've never read Dying Earth...) except for D&D novels, like the vast seas of books printed up for Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, etc. So I'm talking a bit more generically -- D&D magic feels like a system apart that has little resemblance to novels in general, but that doesn't mean that the same couldn't be said of many other magic systems. I guess magic with a kind of Robert E. Howard feel would be the closest thing to what I'm looking for.

 

[Siamang]

D&D magic is completely different from the Dying Earth flavour, if not the explicit system (or one of them; it varied between story cycles). "Vancian" magic derives from the original short stories, where even archwizards only got about 4 spells a day and risked death actually casting most of them - though in a kind of D&D way since the risk wasn't inherent in the spells but a consequence of the fact that they tended to work by summoning demons. In the later The Eyes of the Overworld a rogue steals some magical tomes and starts casting almost immediately, unfortunately for him.
I agree that D&D models no literary magic whatsoever; I would extend the statement to fantasy in general (not that that's a bad thing, that makes it just as original as the best literature). If you're looking for Howard-style magic, there's always the Conan rulebook itself, which I believe has a good reputation among the fanbase.

 

[mafisto]

What's lame to one is awesomely cool to another. I LOVE Barsoom's magic system because it costs spellcaster's CONSTITUTION. It literally eats people alive. In the final game of the previous season, battling the Tyrant's Shade beneath the streets of Kish, one PC incinerated himself trying to cast a 9th-level spell. Took something like 23 points of Con damage. Foop. Little pile of dust where a PC once stood.

What's this Barsoom you speak of?

 

[Psion]

I like magic as a PC tool. It is, AFAICT, one of the inherent draws of the game.

I also like it as a plot device.

The problem lies in the fact if you ground it in the rules, you make it available to the PCs. When it acts as a plot device, it usually acts in such a capacity because it does something powerful and scary.

Powerful and scary magic accessible to PCs is, well, scary. (I won't use the "u" word. )

This is one of the reasons that, to this day, I consider Relics & Rituals to be a seminal magical product. The ritual rules. It creates a mechanism for plot device style magic, but expresses it in a way that usually isn't directly accessible to the PCs by requiring excessive costs, collusion, or both.

 

[barsoomcore]

What's this Barsoom you speak of?

My campaign setting. Here's a link to the website. Here's a link to the Magic rules.

Warning: Has little to nothing to do with the Barsoom of Edgar Rice Burroughs (of which I'm a HUGE fan, never fear, but wasn't what I wanted to do. Why'd I use the name, then? Because, like the Crazy 88's, I thought it sounded cool).

I've gotten some very angry emails over the years from ERB purists who hate the fact that, for a while, my campaign website was Google's #1-returned site for "barsoom". It's still #8 on the list, which amuses me to no end. So if you happen to be an ERB purist, please keep angry thoughts to yourself.

If you've never read the Barsoom novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs, allow me to suggest that you do. They are excellent goofy swashbuckling fun.