Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Haltherrion" data-source="post: 5470419" data-attributes="member: 18253">Nice discussion. For me there are two conflicting pulls on magic regarding how it is handled in a system. On the one hand, I like a lower magic system and the chance of misfires. On the other hand, in a game, it needs to be handled in a way where everyone has fun. If a PC must be focused on magic in order to use it (as in nearly all D&D versions and classes) than making it weak or infrequent can really make the magic users not-fun compared to the non-magic users. But make it balanced with the respect to the warriors and maybe you strip out all the mystery and vagaries. But there are other approaches. Some examples might be systems where everyone can try to use magic, it layers over base abilities. So making it fail a lot isn't catastrophic- you can always decide whether to favor magic or more mundane approaches. To your particular questions:  I like this in concept but wonder how it can be effectively handled in a game. It seems like the D&D approach where certain classes depend on magic wouldn't work because such classes would have no choice but to use magic and therefore the negative effects ("playing with one's soul") can't really be much of a bother because if they were, the magic user would be quickly dead or nerfed into uselessness. In a system designed from the ground up to allow people to dabble in magic as much as they risked but let them be useful without magic, it could be another matter but even then, you'd need to be prepared to kill the character if they pushed it too far and this can be difficult. It reminds of the post apocalyptic games that models radiation as irreversible damage. Yes this may be realistic but what does this mean as a game? If I push my character for legitimate in-character reasons do I make him unplayable at some point? Where does that leave me with respect to other players who might be a little more weaselly about skirting the edge? I die, they get my gear and I get to start over with a level 1 character? That seems like a stiff penalty for playing my character "well".  I like the concept in principle but balancing for a game is tough. Take your typical combat system where I, the player, get to do something every 10 to 20 minutes as we cycle through combat. Me, mage: I try to cast a spell, oops it failed. I wait another 20 minutes well the non-casters get to do their stuff before seeing if I fail again. Darn, the dice aren't with me and I fail 4 times in a row... gee, golly, 90 min to 2 hours have gone by and I've done diddly. This isn't really a lot of fun... Hmm this reminds me of my last talisman game were I could roll much more than a 2...  Well, again interesting in concept but can be dull for the magic caster. Mage: "I need a rest to be useful again." Warrior: "Naw, I'm good, let's push on... hey another batter, cool!" Mage: "I guess I'll read a book while you guys spend an hour resolving the next battle cuz I can't do anything but toss darts and darts don't do a lot."   Very cool concept but seems hard to balance. I'm sure I sound more negative than I mean to but it's hard to capture the design items you mention while delivering a system that is fun for all players. Interesting discussion topic though.</blockquote>

Verification