Magic Systems

[fireinthedust]

What do magic systems "say" through their design?

Looking at the different games, I'm wondering what they really say about what magic is supposed to be.

I'm also wondering what the best way to design a magic system would be, based on the idea of "you design it to work like the idea of magic you've got".

1) Vancian/D&D: cast and forget: Magic is ammo. Pack it and fire it, like magic arrows.

2) World of Darkness Mage: you write reality with magic. Mage as author/designer.

3) Vancian/DCC rpg: Magic is a powerful force barely chained by the will of the mage. Pick a spell and hope you can control it; select a bunch of these wild spells every day, and cast them over and over agin until you screw up and one leaves you ("forget" the spell until you rest).

4) 4e: spells/invocations/aegis/whatevers: you can do two types of magic whenever you want, but others you can only do once a fight, and others once a day, or until you take a nap. Spam the sleep spell.

5) Wheel of Time d20: You learn spells (er, weaves), and can cast a bunch, but if you want to cast more powerfully, or when you run out of "free" castings, you can overchannel at the risk of death or burning out/losing your magic. Mage as channel for power.

6) Call of Cthulhu d20 (I haven't seen the Chaosium game, oddly, in 14+ years of gaming): Magic is horrible secrets from the beyond that you can learn, but that corrupt your sanity to know them or cast them. You can know as many as you want (until you go insane) and cast as often as you want (until you're drained, or you go insane). Most spells seem evil by D&D standards.

7) True20: You know a few select powers, and can use them as often as you want. Using them can be fatiguing (skill check to avoid this) but otherwise you're free to keep going.


Any that I've not covered?

 

[AeroDm]

Really interesting topic. I'd say the only other one I can think of is Star Wars with the Force which is sort of the equivalent. The details of Force in Saga are evading me at the moment...

I think the way magic is done can say a lot about it. Wheel of Time feels very different than 4e magic and the system made the world feel like WoT. I disagree, though, with the idea that you have to design the system to support your feel. I think the main consideration in designing the system has to be that it will be sustainably fun. I would rather a system that consistently provided interesting tradeoffs that needed a lot of story explanations than an incredibly evocative system that ground play to a halt.

 

[pming]

Hiya.



One of the best magic system bases I've seen is in an old Avalon Hill RPG called "Powers & Perils" (yes, I'm pimping that one again...). You can find the rules here: Powers and Perils - Index (under Rules --> B aic Rule Books).

The core of it: You have a MEL (Magic Experience Level), which is how experienced you are in arcane and esotric knowledge. This is the base upon which you roll to see if you succeed in casting a spell. In each spell you have, you will have an EL (Expertise Level), which is how good you are at that particular spell. Each spell is has a BMC (Base Mana Cost); this cost is the basis for determining how hard it is to learn, how much it will cost in MP (Mana Points) to cast, how fast you can cast that spell, etc. Combining everything together and you can have a fledgeling wizard who is expert with Fire Darts, and an arch-mage who barely knows how to cast it. The fledgeling wizard will cast it faster and it will be more effective, but he will fail more often than the arch-mage.

Add in how wands, rods and staves work and you have a kick-ass and very interesting magic system, IMHO. Oh, wands, rods, staves and some other magic items (and some natural ones as well) can increase a wizards Casting Ability (meaning he can cast more MP's in any given day), sometimes with augmentations to some particular spell or type of spell (re; fire based, death-powers based, etc.).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Bluenose]

Runequest has several magic systems.

'Common' magic (which has had a lot of different names) is something nearly everyone can cast. Little spells that you may or may not get right, that provide small bonuses to ordinary activities. More powerful effects require more magic points.

Divine magic is close to the D&D style of 'fire-and-forget' magic, in that you sacrifice a portion of your personal power to your favoured god and in exchange gain the ability to cast certain spells that the god grants. Since you're giving up some of your power, that leaves you less magic points for common magic. Depending on the edition you may have to roll to cast the spell successfully or not.

Sorcery in every version I've seen is skill based. You have a skill based chance to cast a spell successfully, and you can also modify those spells at the time at a cost in extra magic points and often with a reduced chance to cast successfully. Powerful and flexible, but very difficult compared to divine magic and it's unlikely you'd have the same flexibility as a D&D wizard.

Shamanism involves bargaining with spirits. Effectively you make a deal with a spirit and in exchange it allows you to use it - once or many times depending on the nature of the deal. Spirits differ a lot in what they can do.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Ars Magica?


Also, there's psionics, binders, incarnum, shadow magic, and others for D&D.


Fun topic.

 

[steeldragons]

To your question, I think, in the OP...I'm not sure how the magic "system" (mechanics) really speak to what magic is "supposed to be" in the gaming world.

That seems to be a matter of narrative, culture, description on the DM's and/or players' part.

I see how different games define magic, and the use thereof, differently...I have various types of magic and various practitioners of various types in my game world...as I imagine just about everyone does. But the mechanic for the working of the magic is fairly consistent throughout the world...

The definition of the system really does nothing, in my game/world, to describe how the cabal of "good" necromancers vs. the priests of the goddess of magic vs. the students of the "School of Enchantment" (or Evocation or whatever) vs. the sinister secrets of the shadowmages differ from each other. That is a "fluff/flavor/color" descriptive cultural thing...regardless of type of system used in the game, imho.

Granted the definitions of "arcane magic" vs. "divine magic", etc...speak a bit to the flavor of the casting (study and research vs. divine invocation/intervention, insanity inducing or life-force sapping or what have you), but the basic system/mechanic is the same and doesn't define the perception of magic, or magic-users (meaning any user of magic, not just wizard/mage types), in the world.

At least for me. So, I say, go with whatever system you like best...whatever works well for you and your group, your play...and then define "magic" and perceptions thereof in the world, in whatever way you would describe any other element of a nation or culture.

--Steel Dragons

 

[Doug McCrae]

What do magic systems "say" through their design?

D&D magic is mage as nerd. Carries his books around with him, probably holds them like a girl. Needs high intelligence. Can't wear armour, unlike the football playing jocks.

 

[Ravilah]

I agree with the OP that the mechanics of the system do have an effect on how magic is perceived in the milieu (the crunch effects the fluff).

The Vancian magic system does make the player think of magic as a safe, reliable, and expendable resource (like ammo or rations). While systems with burn-out or insanity make magic a potent gamble (in the case of Deadlands, literally).

I see most magic systems as falling on a spectrum. One one end is "Magic as Tool" and on the other "Magic as Mystery." When magic is a tool, the wizard (psion, warlock, etc) balances with other characters because his spells are effectively the same as an archer's arrows, a thief's lockpicks, or a noble's diplomatic connection. They are all tools of the trade.

When magic is mystery, the wizard's spells are far superior to the common tools of warriors and rogues. His spells can rewrite the fabric of the universe. The wizard remains balanced with the other players because wielding this power comes with great risk or great cost...the power is strange, unnatural, and dangerous.

"Tool Magic" games tend to be in High Magic worlds where every town has a local mage and cities all have Wizard Guilds and Bardic colleges. "Mystery Magic" games tend to be Low Magic games which make wizards more rare and magic items harder to find.

I speak in tendencies, not hard rules of course. In my DnD game, I try to keep magic mysterious and...well...magical, but it is challenging when magic wands with 30 charges of magic missile are available. In the end, the GM plays the biggest role in how magic "feels," but the system he/she uses certainly bends the feel in a certain direction.

 

[the Jester]

There are a few others I can think of.

There's the 3e binder: You channel beings that no longer quite exist and gain abilities reflective of them.

I never read Magic of Incarnum, but there might be something different in there.

The 2.8e Players Option: Spells & Magic has a ton of variant spellcasting systems in it, including several that don't seem analogous to those you list:

Spell points: You can do so much magic per day. Harder spells use up more of your "reservoir" of magical ability.

Warlocks and witches: Magic is a gift from dark powers and it eventually corrupts you.

Defilers and preserves (and ritual priests): Before you cast a spell you must gather the requisite energy from the environment.

Conditional (priest) magic: Magical power comes from the gods and is more powerful when it is in the providing god's interests.

 

[Jimlock]

I really like how magic works in the Dragon Age 1+2 video games...

Magic = Power = Vanity