Microlite20 : the smallest thing in gaming
- Thread starter greywulf
- Start date
Pilsnerquest
First Post
Thanks for taking a look at the Realms of Renown guidelines.
Could you give me an idea of what caused your concern with the 5 points for for 1 point of effect that gave you most problems. I would like to iron-out any grey areas the magic rules leave, which I am hoping more examples may just possibly help clarify.
If it helps throw out a few game type examples and I will apply the magic rules to them. This may help me to clarify or lengthen the written explanation I have.
Thanks again,
Pilsnerquest
Could you give me an idea of what caused your concern with the 5 points for for 1 point of effect that gave you most problems. I would like to iron-out any grey areas the magic rules leave, which I am hoping more examples may just possibly help clarify.
If it helps throw out a few game type examples and I will apply the magic rules to them. This may help me to clarify or lengthen the written explanation I have.
Thanks again,
Pilsnerquest
Last edited:
greywulf
First Post
Mark, I'm in your hands and ready when you are 
Pilsnerquest, I'm thinking about spells where there's more than one variable. Taking your example of the ball of fire - it's got area of effect, damage, range and possibly duration if you want the magical flames to continue beyond a round.
A wise magic user would need a table of standard spell effects so he can just pick what happens with one point of effect, two, three, etc. otherwise combat is going to grind to a halt while we decides how to juggle the points. Of course, he can cast anything on the fly, but a prepared list would speed things up most of the time.
Also, I'd suggest clarifying what happens to any unstated variable. So if a magic user casts ball of fire and only gets a 6, it'll do damage 1, range touch, area of effect none, duration instant. It he rolls over 10, he could add an extra point of damage, increase the range to 1, make it area effect 1 or duration 1 round.
It's not clear what happens if he rolls under 5 - does the spell fail due to insufficient power?
Thinking about it, this system would also work well if you drop in this rule we've been playing with for M20:
If a d20 rolls a natural twenty, add and roll again. If further natural twenties are rolled, continue adding and rolling.
That way a mage with MIND bonus +3 could roll 3+20+16 = 39 for 7 points of effect. Which is nice.
Hope that helps
Pilsnerquest, I'm thinking about spells where there's more than one variable. Taking your example of the ball of fire - it's got area of effect, damage, range and possibly duration if you want the magical flames to continue beyond a round.
A wise magic user would need a table of standard spell effects so he can just pick what happens with one point of effect, two, three, etc. otherwise combat is going to grind to a halt while we decides how to juggle the points. Of course, he can cast anything on the fly, but a prepared list would speed things up most of the time.
Also, I'd suggest clarifying what happens to any unstated variable. So if a magic user casts ball of fire and only gets a 6, it'll do damage 1, range touch, area of effect none, duration instant. It he rolls over 10, he could add an extra point of damage, increase the range to 1, make it area effect 1 or duration 1 round.
It's not clear what happens if he rolls under 5 - does the spell fail due to insufficient power?
Thinking about it, this system would also work well if you drop in this rule we've been playing with for M20:
If a d20 rolls a natural twenty, add and roll again. If further natural twenties are rolled, continue adding and rolling.
That way a mage with MIND bonus +3 could roll 3+20+16 = 39 for 7 points of effect. Which is nice.
Hope that helps
kensanata
Explorer
@Greywulf: I'll try to make it shorter.
In my proposal I used 1d20 + MIND bonus + level; comparing the two you're basically suggesting "taking 10" – a system that will make magic more calculable. Did you do this on purpose? With my system, it is possible to enchant higher level monsters with a bit of luck, and if the players are on the receiving end, they feel like they're rolling a saving throw. That is, if you propose to roll 1d20 + Magic Attack Bonus vs. DC 10 + MIND Bonus + Level, and the roll succeeds, will you grant the opponent a saving throw (essentially again applying his MIND Bonus and Level)?
Greywulf said:
In my proposal I used 1d20 + MIND bonus + level; comparing the two you're basically suggesting "taking 10" – a system that will make magic more calculable. Did you do this on purpose? With my system, it is possible to enchant higher level monsters with a bit of luck, and if the players are on the receiving end, they feel like they're rolling a saving throw. That is, if you propose to roll 1d20 + Magic Attack Bonus vs. DC 10 + MIND Bonus + Level, and the roll succeeds, will you grant the opponent a saving throw (essentially again applying his MIND Bonus and Level)?
Just popping in. I've followed bits of this from day 1 and left it for a while. Has anyone run this using modern rules? Are there any other conversions necessary? What about running low magic - a la Grim Tales, Conan, real world modern?
I like the basic rules, with added (but completely optional) extended rules. I think once you add all those extended rules pages up it'll be just as big as d20 though.
I like the basic rules, with added (but completely optional) extended rules. I think once you add all those extended rules pages up it'll be just as big as d20 though.
greywulf
First Post
kensanata said:
The only reason I put it at 10, rather than d20, was to make it faster to run in-game. One less dice to roll, that's all. Either works for me though. I bow to your decision
Jezter, I've played the M20 modern rules and love then just as they are. I wouldn't change a single thing.
I must confess that when we play M20 of any kind we play with just the Core Rules and make the rest of the stuff up on the fly. If someone wants to play a winged harpy using a machine gun (it hasn't happened yet. But it could), we'll just make up the rules for flying (probalby just: "ok. You can fly") and machine gun damage, and run with it.
The Macropedia is little more than a toolbox. Pick stuff out that you like, ignore the rest. Just as a carpenter wouldn't try to use every single tool he's got in one go, it's a very bad idea to dump everything into the game. Pick one rule out, two at most, and use them. But no more.
If you tried to put everything in you'll end up needing three entire books just for the rules, and countless supplements too, all of which will add further complexity and contradictions. In other words, one great big unholy mess - which pretty much sums up a lot of D&D games I've seen where people do just that
Microlite20 is about using the minimum rules possible. Every game is different though, so what might be minimum for one group might not suit another. Hence the reasons for collating the House Rules into the Macropedia to give folks inspiration how to play the game.
That's the theory, anyway!
kensanata
Explorer
@Greywulf: I'd suggest the following.
I thought it was important to add that not all spells are automatically opposed. The reason being that in my first few sessions, the magic users tried to cast several spells and often failed to roll the 11 or 12 required. This is frustrating, because failed spells still cost HP. I'd therefore rule that an enchanting dance by a beautiful woman in front of men drinking and wanting to be entertained does not grant these men a saving throw: They want to be enchanted! The only limit will be the number of creatures or HD the witch can enchant.
The same is true for casting sleep on guards late at night. Theses guys want to sleep anyway!
And of course I'm hoping that the verbs "to hit" and "enchant" make it obvious in which situation one or the other will be applied. And I hope that the text doesn't mislead some DMs to apply both tests...
I thought it was important to add that not all spells are automatically opposed. The reason being that in my first few sessions, the magic users tried to cast several spells and often failed to roll the 11 or 12 required. This is frustrating, because failed spells still cost HP. I'd therefore rule that an enchanting dance by a beautiful woman in front of men drinking and wanting to be entertained does not grant these men a saving throw: They want to be enchanted! The only limit will be the number of creatures or HD the witch can enchant.
The same is true for casting sleep on guards late at night. Theses guys want to sleep anyway!
And of course I'm hoping that the verbs "to hit" and "enchant" make it obvious in which situation one or the other will be applied. And I hope that the text doesn't mislead some DMs to apply both tests...
Ry
Explorer
I'm working on expanding the tables for the Rank20 magic system (easily ported to m20). Spells are constructed from a few tables (Range, duration, area of effect, effect).
Optional Rule 5:
PCs can Take 5 on any roll. If a magic user takes 5 they do not need to spend a reserve point to cast their spell. Instead, roll 1d6. On a 1, the caster loses a reserve point. Otherwise the spell is "free".
Optional Rule 5:
PCs can Take 5 on any roll. If a magic user takes 5 they do not need to spend a reserve point to cast their spell. Instead, roll 1d6. On a 1, the caster loses a reserve point. Otherwise the spell is "free".
Pilsnerquest
First Post
Absolutely, thanks for breaking down the areas you found questionable. I can definitely see your points.
I like how this looks, clean and simple explanation on what to do with a higher roll. Are you using the 4x5 magic rules in your games? If you do, or have, how did you work area of effect when dealing with fireballs vs., say, color spray?
That additional d20 roll on a natural 20 rule would be a blast for players.
Thanks,
Pilsnerquest
Last edited:
greywulf
First Post
Kensanata: Works for me
rycanada: Take 5 eh? If I tell my players that, they'll leave the table, grab a coke, go to the bathroom, etc. Intersting idea. I /really/ need to work on an M20 magic system. Half of me likes it's rules-free nature, but the other part of me thinks that it's been zenified too much and there needs to be a few more rules to shore it up.
Pilsnerquest: My pleasure. We've played with the 4x5 magic system (itself shamelessly stolen from FUDGE 4x5) and my players like it, a lot. It wouldn't work in a converted D&D adventure as it's just too different, but it works very well for a Name of the Rose/Ars Magica style setting. Hence the given targets DCs where it's harder to cast magic on stone than it is on leather or a person - the stone doesn't want to change
If I were going to depart from d20, I'd use the 4x5 system as the basis of the system, without a doubt.
EDIT: realized I didn't answer your question!
In 4x5 you can't create anything - there's no "create" action - but you could cast Augeo Navitas (enhance energy) on an existing flame to burst a torch that a goblin is holding, say. The torch would be DC20. If it's succeeded by 5 (or less) points, that poor goblin holding it will take 1d8 damage. 5-10, he takes 2d8 damage and the any close goblins will take 1d8.
Succeed by 11-15 the the goblin holding the torch take 3d8, next closest 2d8, then 1d8 radiating out. Much goblin toast.
Under this system there's no equal to color spray and the like though perhaps tempero navitas (control energy) could be used to create a similar effect to manipulate the light.
Does that help?
rycanada: Take 5 eh? If I tell my players that, they'll leave the table, grab a coke, go to the bathroom, etc.
Intersting idea. I /really/ need to work on an M20 magic system. Half of me likes it's rules-free nature, but the other part of me thinks that it's been zenified too much and there needs to be a few more rules to shore it up.Pilsnerquest: My pleasure. We've played with the 4x5 magic system (itself shamelessly stolen from FUDGE 4x5) and my players like it, a lot. It wouldn't work in a converted D&D adventure as it's just too different, but it works very well for a Name of the Rose/Ars Magica style setting. Hence the given targets DCs where it's harder to cast magic on stone than it is on leather or a person - the stone doesn't want to change
If I were going to depart from d20, I'd use the 4x5 system as the basis of the system, without a doubt.
EDIT: realized I didn't answer your question!
In 4x5 you can't create anything - there's no "create" action - but you could cast Augeo Navitas (enhance energy) on an existing flame to burst a torch that a goblin is holding, say. The torch would be DC20. If it's succeeded by 5 (or less) points, that poor goblin holding it will take 1d8 damage. 5-10, he takes 2d8 damage and the any close goblins will take 1d8.
Succeed by 11-15 the the goblin holding the torch take 3d8, next closest 2d8, then 1d8 radiating out. Much goblin toast.
Under this system there's no equal to color spray and the like though perhaps tempero navitas (control energy) could be used to create a similar effect to manipulate the light.
Does that help?
Last edited:
Similar Threads
