I like the magic system in Cinematic Unisystem - you have to roll a skill check to cast a spell. You need so many levels of success or something 'bad' happens. There's fatigue in the form of penalties to future spell rolls - you can get one or two off pretty easily, but more than that and you're going to get tired. Spell slots feel clumbsy but workable, mana points are more 'realistic' but a PITA to keep track of. Fatigue that does hp damage has the unintended side effect of making wizards into bull mooses with huge CON scores. I'll take my wizards frail and scholarly, thank you!
What inspired the D&D magic rules and do you like it?
- Thread starter pdkoning
- Start date
Narfellus
First Post
I am mightily in favor of spell use that does fatigue damage/subdual damage. Green Ronin's Psychic Handbook uses this, and it seems to work pretty well. I've even considered a simple house rule where wizards have much higher access to all the spells in there spellbook, but casting them does 1 point of subdual damage per spell level, plus any metamagic tagged on to that. I haven't tried it in-game yet so i'm not sure of the kinks.
Ars Magica takes this a step further by assuming that wizards are naturally the most powerful member of a group, and therefore have the most responsibility. Their abilities have the potential to backfire and physically, emotionally and even spiritually harm the caster.
Grim Tales uses an interesting Spell Burn system that doesn't really encourage you to use magic much.
For a grittier, more realistic approach to magic, i'm in favor of systems that have a skill roll to check for success, and penalties for failure or wild magic. In basic DnD this would be an aggravant to the adventuring party if there wizard couldn't cast fireball to save their bacon with some amount of reliability. That is the biggest single reason why DnD magic has lost it's uniqueness: it has become as mundane as swinging a sword.
Ars Magica takes this a step further by assuming that wizards are naturally the most powerful member of a group, and therefore have the most responsibility. Their abilities have the potential to backfire and physically, emotionally and even spiritually harm the caster.
Grim Tales uses an interesting Spell Burn system that doesn't really encourage you to use magic much.
For a grittier, more realistic approach to magic, i'm in favor of systems that have a skill roll to check for success, and penalties for failure or wild magic. In basic DnD this would be an aggravant to the adventuring party if there wizard couldn't cast fireball to save their bacon with some amount of reliability. That is the biggest single reason why DnD magic has lost it's uniqueness: it has become as mundane as swinging a sword.
Last edited:
jester47
First Post
There seems to be a movement to a sort of compromise mechanic between spell slots and spell points. Essentially it is sort of a spell space system. That is as a 5th level wizard you have a certain number of spell slots at various levels.
The shift seems to be to say that a 3rd level slot can hold 3 1st level spells, or 1 1st level and 2 second. A few new feats seem to be pusing in that direction.
-my contribution-
I figured that another way of doing this was to have the intelligence level of the character be the limit of spell levels that they could hold. So if you had an intelligence level of 14 you could hold up to 14 slots the largest spell castable by the character is stat -10. So in this case this character could not cast anything more powerful than a 4th level spell.
Wizards get the ability to rearrange the stack. But they fire and forget. Sorcerers get to fire as often as they choose, but they cannot change the spells they have selected. But sorcerers also get access to their most powerful spells at first level. So a sorcerer with cha of 18 could walk around with a couple of 8th level spells. But that is all the sorcerer ever gets (plus 2 1st or a 2nd).
Furthermore a wizard cannot just research a 5th level spell at 1st level and then begin casting it. They have to start of with researching 1st level spells. So once you have researched 2 1st levels, you can then research 1 2nd level. To research a third level you will have had to researched 2 2nd levels. Thus to have one 4th level spell, you will have to have researched 2 3rd, 4 2nd, and 8 1st. This makes finding the third level spell in a dungeon a greater treasure, as it allows a wizard with 1 3rd, 2 2nd, and 4 1st to achieve a 4th sooner.
Aaron.
The shift seems to be to say that a 3rd level slot can hold 3 1st level spells, or 1 1st level and 2 second. A few new feats seem to be pusing in that direction.
-my contribution-
I figured that another way of doing this was to have the intelligence level of the character be the limit of spell levels that they could hold. So if you had an intelligence level of 14 you could hold up to 14 slots the largest spell castable by the character is stat -10. So in this case this character could not cast anything more powerful than a 4th level spell.
Wizards get the ability to rearrange the stack. But they fire and forget. Sorcerers get to fire as often as they choose, but they cannot change the spells they have selected. But sorcerers also get access to their most powerful spells at first level. So a sorcerer with cha of 18 could walk around with a couple of 8th level spells. But that is all the sorcerer ever gets (plus 2 1st or a 2nd).
Furthermore a wizard cannot just research a 5th level spell at 1st level and then begin casting it. They have to start of with researching 1st level spells. So once you have researched 2 1st levels, you can then research 1 2nd level. To research a third level you will have had to researched 2 2nd levels. Thus to have one 4th level spell, you will have to have researched 2 3rd, 4 2nd, and 8 1st. This makes finding the third level spell in a dungeon a greater treasure, as it allows a wizard with 1 3rd, 2 2nd, and 4 1st to achieve a 4th sooner.
Aaron.
lukelightning
First Post
I used to hate the Vancian/memorize system and wanted a spell-point system instead. I've since changed my mind.
I like the idea of a wizards preparing their spells beforehand...so that spells energies/patterns/whatever have all been set and all that remains are the final triggering elements (words, actions, whatever). This, I think, upholds the idea of a wizard's power coming from his/her knowledge. Spell-point and fatigue systems make it too physical, like the wizard is just an energy battery storing a charge.
That being said, I hate the idea of spellbooks. It gives wizards the biggest Achille's heel of any class.
All in all, I think Monte Cook's system in Arcana Unearthed is my favorite; you choose a list of spells that you can cast ("readied") and can cast a certain number of these.
I like the idea of a wizards preparing their spells beforehand...so that spells energies/patterns/whatever have all been set and all that remains are the final triggering elements (words, actions, whatever). This, I think, upholds the idea of a wizard's power coming from his/her knowledge. Spell-point and fatigue systems make it too physical, like the wizard is just an energy battery storing a charge.
That being said, I hate the idea of spellbooks. It gives wizards the biggest Achille's heel of any class.
All in all, I think Monte Cook's system in Arcana Unearthed is my favorite; you choose a list of spells that you can cast ("readied") and can cast a certain number of these.
Narfellus
First Post
In my Midnight campaign, whenever it starts up again, i'm going to introduce several different sets of magic. One reason will be to playtest them, but the other is to introduce the idea that there are different ways to cast magic or psionics, and some methods might work better than others. Perhaps a caster is more proficient than another, and his school of training or natural inclination has served him better. Of course, this could create dispute among players who feel shafted by their "chosen" system of magic.
I really like the idea of shifting slots around and filling them with whatever you want. This way, the wizard is still limited to his "prepared" spells, but can cast them varying amounts of time. I'm generally in favor of the following concept: the more leeway you give with magic casting and the more power early on, the more checks and balances must be built into the system. d20 Cthulhu does this by allowing you to Time Travel millions of years in the past or future at first level, but you do massive permanent ability score damage.
I really like the idea of shifting slots around and filling them with whatever you want. This way, the wizard is still limited to his "prepared" spells, but can cast them varying amounts of time. I'm generally in favor of the following concept: the more leeway you give with magic casting and the more power early on, the more checks and balances must be built into the system. d20 Cthulhu does this by allowing you to Time Travel millions of years in the past or future at first level, but you do massive permanent ability score damage.
pdkoning
First Post
lukelightning said:
Our DM house-ruled that wizards did not need spellbooks any more.
You are right when indicating that 'prepared' spells do not feel as 'physycal' as spell point / fatigue systems. I think however that this is a matter of taste, some people may like backfire or fatigue rules. Some of the quys a I play with likes insanity connected to magic and 'chaos/wild magic'.
azmodean
First Post
A system I've always liked is one where everyone, not just spellcasters, has both HP and energy points (mana, whatever), but different classes use them for different things. Spellcasters get more mana than any other class, but each spell burns a ton of mana. Fighter types get the least mana, they use small amounts of mana to use weapon techniques. Somewhere in the middle you have rogues, who use mana to enhance their skills, monks, who make extensive use of mana to power their physical attacks and defenses, and barbarians, who can burn mana to temporarily increase their physical stats.
Tav_Behemoth
First Post
The great part of Vancian magic is the foreshadowing. In the most Vancian-magic of Vance's stories, "Turjan of Miir," we're told on page 9: "What dangers he might meet he could not know, so he selected three spells of general application: the Excellent Prismatic Spreay, Phandaal's Mantle of Stealth, and the Spell of the Slow Hour". (Other magicians in the Dying Earth books get their powers by commanding extradimensional entities, so not even Vance uses Vancian magic throughout.)
Because this is fiction, in the course of the story each of these spells gets used in an appropriate and inventive fashion. It creates a delicious anticpation in the reader, as you're waiting for each shoe to drop: how will the one remaining spell get him out of the next jam?
The closest approximation is pre-made characters for a one-shot game, where the DM has crafted the spells with the adventure in mind and you can look at the sheet and think "Hmm, wonder why I'll need all these neutralize poisons" or come to a puzzle and have the flash of insight that *this* is why you have the anti-gravity spell prepared.
In regular campaign play, it's more strategic in nature; trying to predict what spells you'll need is like packing your clothes for a trip in uncertain weather. This is, of course, what Turjan does as he prepares for his advanture in the story - but since games are not stories, the actual outcome is different. (I was going to say that it violates the laws of good drama to have a story in which the party encounters a monster, then runs away to rest overnight while their wizard prepares a new assortment of spells, but come to think of it that's something I'd like to see happen more often in fiction.)
I like that strategic aspect, but it creates a different feel than you find in most fantasy universes.
Because this is fiction, in the course of the story each of these spells gets used in an appropriate and inventive fashion. It creates a delicious anticpation in the reader, as you're waiting for each shoe to drop: how will the one remaining spell get him out of the next jam?
The closest approximation is pre-made characters for a one-shot game, where the DM has crafted the spells with the adventure in mind and you can look at the sheet and think "Hmm, wonder why I'll need all these neutralize poisons" or come to a puzzle and have the flash of insight that *this* is why you have the anti-gravity spell prepared.
In regular campaign play, it's more strategic in nature; trying to predict what spells you'll need is like packing your clothes for a trip in uncertain weather. This is, of course, what Turjan does as he prepares for his advanture in the story - but since games are not stories, the actual outcome is different. (I was going to say that it violates the laws of good drama to have a story in which the party encounters a monster, then runs away to rest overnight while their wizard prepares a new assortment of spells, but come to think of it that's something I'd like to see happen more often in fiction.)
I like that strategic aspect, but it creates a different feel than you find in most fantasy universes.
The Horror
First Post
My favourite magic systems are definately Talislanta (for the flexibility), Shadowrun (for the backlash) and Lone Wolf (for the simplicity and the endurance cost).
Similar Threads
