Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What Should Magic Be Able To Do, From a Gameplay Design Standpoint?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9610328" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>In brief?</p><p></p><p><strong><em>Dramatically less than what it can currently do</em></strong>, at least in the hands of any <em>single</em> caster.</p><p></p><p>Having magic that can do lots of powerful things is fine. Having magic that lets <em>any single character</em> do lots of powerful things is less fine.</p><p></p><p>Dreamscarred Press's <em>Spheres of Power</em> rules (for PF1e, I haven't used the 5e ones) are a beautiful example of how to preserve most of the interesting utility and diversity of magic, while very thoroughly rebalancing things so casters DO NOT rule the roost. </p><p></p><p>TL;DR: The titular Spheres are sort of like Priest "spheres of influence" from 2nd edition. You must know the base sphere before you gain access to more powerful things with it. Further, you must invest Talents into those spheres in order to actually learn those more powerful things, and using the more advanced abilities costs Spell Points. Both talents and SP are limited resources, so most spellcasters need to <em>specialize</em> in order to be truly effective. However, zillions of specializations are possible and any single character might finish their 1-20 run with several distinct specialties, perhaps 5-7 (assuming a full-caster class with lots of talents, like Wizard or its pure-sphere equivalent, the Incanter).</p><p></p><p>As a great example, the Light sphere is a surprisingly diverse and strong option, with a great variety of offense, buff, and debuff effects, and plenty of non-combat utility. Alteration (the equivalent of transformation spells in 3.x/PF1) is a powerful but <em>expensive</em> school in terms of both talents and SP, you get what you pay for. However, if you choose to play as the Shifter class, you naturally get Alteration sphere stuff (and ways to make it better/easier/cheaper), and you can take an archetype that gives you Light sphere powers as well, meaning you can specialize in just those two spheres and actually be a quite effective character, or you can start with a solid foundation of those spheres, and grow into new ones as you gain levels and thus more talents.</p><p></p><p>Magic has plenty of flaws in the 3e/PF1e/5e structure. But its greatest flaw is being able to do <em>so many</em> powerful things all with a single character, and often all during a single day, or at least with 24 hours' notice.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9610328, member: 6790260"] In brief? [B][I]Dramatically less than what it can currently do[/I][/B], at least in the hands of any [I]single[/I] caster. Having magic that can do lots of powerful things is fine. Having magic that lets [I]any single character[/I] do lots of powerful things is less fine. Dreamscarred Press's [I]Spheres of Power[/I] rules (for PF1e, I haven't used the 5e ones) are a beautiful example of how to preserve most of the interesting utility and diversity of magic, while very thoroughly rebalancing things so casters DO NOT rule the roost. TL;DR: The titular Spheres are sort of like Priest "spheres of influence" from 2nd edition. You must know the base sphere before you gain access to more powerful things with it. Further, you must invest Talents into those spheres in order to actually learn those more powerful things, and using the more advanced abilities costs Spell Points. Both talents and SP are limited resources, so most spellcasters need to [I]specialize[/I] in order to be truly effective. However, zillions of specializations are possible and any single character might finish their 1-20 run with several distinct specialties, perhaps 5-7 (assuming a full-caster class with lots of talents, like Wizard or its pure-sphere equivalent, the Incanter). As a great example, the Light sphere is a surprisingly diverse and strong option, with a great variety of offense, buff, and debuff effects, and plenty of non-combat utility. Alteration (the equivalent of transformation spells in 3.x/PF1) is a powerful but [I]expensive[/I] school in terms of both talents and SP, you get what you pay for. However, if you choose to play as the Shifter class, you naturally get Alteration sphere stuff (and ways to make it better/easier/cheaper), and you can take an archetype that gives you Light sphere powers as well, meaning you can specialize in just those two spheres and actually be a quite effective character, or you can start with a solid foundation of those spheres, and grow into new ones as you gain levels and thus more talents. Magic has plenty of flaws in the 3e/PF1e/5e structure. But its greatest flaw is being able to do [I]so many[/I] powerful things all with a single character, and often all during a single day, or at least with 24 hours' notice. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What Should Magic Be Able To Do, From a Gameplay Design Standpoint?
Top