Jump to content

  

463 members have voted

  1. 1. Magic System

    • Vancian (Memorization)
      190
    • Mana Pool
      143
    • Other
      130
  2. 2. Spell Progression

    • Individual Spells (MM->Acid Arrow->Fire Ball ->Skull Trap)
      292
    • Spells get upgraded (MM LVL 1-> MM LVL 2)
      94
    • Other
      77
  3. 3. Should there be separate Arcane & Divine sides to magic?

    • Yes (D&D)
      268
    • No (DA:O)
      102
    • Other
      93


Recommended Posts

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

One method of controlling magic in a mana system that doesn't require rest would be to have mana pools regenerate after combat but during combat you only get what you started with and the mana pools themselves are quite limited in size, to avoid spamming of spells, instead limiting them to a few each combat, depending on how effective and powerful the spells in the system are. If the spells are designed so that the careful choice of which spell to use during combat for the current situation and/or enemy, with magic only being powerful if used right, then even better. All my own taste of course.

  • Like 1

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think mixed system could be way to go. For example, mages have limited capacity how many spells they can memorize, but they also have mana, which they can use to change memorized spell to other and mana cost could be determined how change spell needs. Like if spell is from the same school then mana cost for change could be small and cost would rise father we go from orginal school and to change spell to oppositing school would be most tasking. This costing system assume that there is typical circle of the magic schools, where there is opposing schools. And this system could reward those players who have prepared better or were just lucky by so that mage can spend his or her mana to restore spells back to his or her memory without resting. In this system mana regeneration time should be some what high or at least there should be no mana reg in combat, to prevent too much resorting on it.

 

This system is somewhat similar with that system which Josh metioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with a amge havig all spells avilable at all times is that that turns him into a uber-class.

A mages spell selection in D&D is HUGE. Imagine how D&D would go if mage had acess to all of them and can cast them whenever he wants?

 

Why bring a thief? A mage cna cast True Seeing, Knock, Fly, Leviatate, Dimension Door, etc...

Why bring an archer? A mager can fireball, lighting blot, cloudkill or nuke na opponent from range in many ways.

Why bring a fighter? A mage can cast bulls strength, tensers transformation, mage armor, fire/ice shield, blur, shadow form and butcher in melee (do a sunburst or two).

 

 

The mage is so attractive becase he is so flexible. But he can't do it all at once. Without a limitation, the mage becomes an uber class that can do everything.

And also makes all other clases look boring by comparison...you havea 100 spell selection list while a fighter has 2-3 swings.

 

Depends on what spells are available and what restrictions the mage has. Any system can be horribly abused if not set up right.

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's possible to still make prep meaningful by allowing the player to switch between pre-built (by the player) suites of spells at a frequency that is less than "per rest". I.e. if the player can only use a subset of spells at any given time, but can switch between those subsets with a time penalty (or only outside of combat), that still makes the choices important without the system strictly being Vancian.

What about the system in Knights of the Chalice and the first Wizardry games where you could learn all the spells, but had a limited number of spell points for each level of spells. So you might have 5 points for level 1 spells and 4 spell points for level 2 spells. Once you ran out of spell points you would have to rest. This gives you the ability to adapt on the fly by having the spells in your spell book, while also limiting you from wasting and overusing magic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

In the end, I too will be happy with any system they use ....UNLESS they settle for an action/DPS system that makes mages feel like nothing more than archers with colorful arrows. because nothing can be more dull and unimaginitive than that.

Edited by Stun
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

In the end, I too will be happy with any system they use ....UNLESS they settle for an action/DPS system that makes mages feel like nothing more than archers with colorful arrows. because nothing can be more stupid than that.

 

Agreed.

 

As I said before - spells should NOT be like ammunition for guns or bows (got my fireblast / incendiary rounds / flame arrow; my magic missile / armor piercing rounds / razor arrow; etc.)

 

Magic should be fantastic and do things that no mundane things can.

 

All the blasts and buffing kind of take the magic out of magic for me, really.

Edited by Merin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the system in Knights of the Chalice and the first Wizardry games where you could learn all the spells, but had a limited number of spell points for each level of spells. So you might have 5 points for level 1 spells and 4 spell points for level 2 spells. Once you ran out of spell points you would have to rest. This gives you the ability to adapt on the fly by having the spells in your spell book, while also limiting you from wasting and overusing magic.

 

KotC used the d&d sorcerer rules for casting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the system in Knights of the Chalice and the first Wizardry games where you could learn all the spells, but had a limited number of spell points for each level of spells. So you might have 5 points for level 1 spells and 4 spell points for level 2 spells. Once you ran out of spell points you would have to rest. This gives you the ability to adapt on the fly by having the spells in your spell book, while also limiting you from wasting and overusing magic.

 

KotC used the d&d sorcerer rules for casting.

 

For the record if there has to be a compromise I see having spell charges ala Sorcerers as far more appealing then a mana pool mechanic.

Edited by diablo169
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate having to rest to use spells or recharge. All that does is force you to spam resting which is stupid. I am for cooldowns or a quick way to recharge without forcing resting. This might be one they need to set up optional choices in options for the players to decide what they prefer.

 

I'm not a fan of cooldowns, they're too arcadey. Memorization at least has a rationale explanation for it, and reflects a Character's engergy level. Cooldowns are the equivalent of...

 

Party: It's still moving! Quick, cast Fireball again!

Wizard: I can't. Not for another 47 seconds. That spell can only be cast once every 60 seconds!

 

IMO "Rest spamming" is a player trying to keep a full complement of spells rather than using them judiciously.

 

Exactly this. A lot of people are posting how much they hate being limited by memorization yet this is a very efficient way of keeping combat tactical, as already said, if you are smart and think about battle prep then you would save spells for later obviously.

 

Imo cooldowns are a very lame way of keeping casters in check, I like the D&D method, simple spells can be cast quickly and somewhat efficiently whilst amazingly powerful spells take time to cast but can turn the tide of battle in your favour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that a straight cool down system is arcadey, but the ability for casters to slowly recover memorized spells outside combat. 5 minutes of ingame time per spell level, lower level spells recovered first with combat interrupting the timer would work to me. So example:

 

Your epic wizard goes into a battle and casts 3 spells, a level 1, a level 4 and a level 9 spell.

 

After 5 minutes outside of combat, the level 1 spell is recovered. Unfortunately, before another 20 minutes of in game time occur so he can get his 4th level spell back, he is ambushed resetting the timer. He casts a level 3 spell during that fight. After 15 minutes pass outside the fight, he gets that level 3 spell back. Another 20 minutes pass and he gets his 4th level spell back. Before he can finally recover his 9th level spell, another massive battle occurs, and he expends all his spells.

 

The rest of the party is fatigued now as well, so everyone sleeps and he gets all his spells back in the morning.

 

So this allows mages to get their default spells back more easily, but it's not like you can easily fire off the same high level spells every battle.

Edited by Hypevosa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of casting times, that way you can then be interrupted from casting a spell, and I always liked that 'spellcasting' animation in the IE games.

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make mana pool extremely short and let it refill after every combat, but not doing one. It will save you from mages making encounters a joke by spamming dozens of spells at bosses and being useless after using-up their spells. Problem solved.

 

Regenerating mana pools is the major part of the problem. Essentially, if you always have all resources at disposal, you're still spamming magic. Not only magic may be nerfed for the game's good (to be in line with those who don't rely on it), but the strategic concerns (saving spells, etcetera) are no more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model. Something that takes into account the difference of playing on a PC as opposed to around a table.

  • Like 1

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model.

 

With regards to setting-building, you're preaching to the choir - though I'd like to point out its not hard at all to fit a magic system in a world's workings. As for the part of ditching the Vancian system, I disagree wholeheartedly.

Edited by Delterius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

Edited by BasaltineBadger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure, not necessarily during the entirety of a encounter but you're spellcasting during every encounter. If Magic is limited for a entire day, then you won't just 'carefully' choose who to buff with each given spell (which ends up being a obvious choice, regardless), but rather when to buff - if at all.

Edited by Delterius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure.

 

Well there's nothing wrong with mages actually doing something all of the time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make mana pool extremely short and let it refill after every combat, but not doing one. It will save you from mages making encounters a joke by spamming dozens of spells at bosses and being useless after using-up their spells. Problem solved.

 

Regenerating mana pools is the major part of the problem. Essentially, if you always have all resources at disposal, you're still spamming magic. Not only magic may be nerfed for the game's good (to be in line with those who don't rely on it), but the strategic concerns (saving spells, etcetera) are no more.

He says for it not to regenerate during combat. It restoring after battle is no different to how people would just rest their parties after every battle and as long as the mana pools are kept to a reasonable size and no mana potions it will have the same effect.

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model.

 

With regards to setting-building, you're preaching to the choir - though I'd like to point out its not hard at all to fit a magic system in a world's workings. As for the part of ditching the Vancian system, I disagree wholeheartedly.

 

To me, the rules should be built around the lore, I find that not all magic systems work well in all settings and I tend to pick up on the dissonance when a magic system has been blagged into a setting. I don't see why you wouldn't want to see a new system, the Vancian system is not perfect and trying out alternate systems would be good.

Edited by FlintlockJazz
  • Like 1

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't spam magic because it's very limited in the first place. If your mana pool only allows you to cast 2 fireballs through the whole combat you'll obviously carefully chose your targets. If you can cast only 5 buffs max. you won't just spam all of your buffs on every party member, but chose the buffs that would give you the greatest benefit considering the current situation.

 

You're spamming over the course of the adventure.

 

Well there's nothing wrong with mages actually doing something all of the time.

 

That would make Mages and non-Mages (ideally) equally useful in every encounter. As opposed to the IE games, where well placed spellcasting (in mid-lower game, since in higher levels things are different) could and would save your party almost single-handely. I highly doubt that in your system, you'll have something like Sleep, that triggers instant kills out of most everything for its level.

 

 

rest their parties after every battle

 

Try not doing that. Unfortunately, the games were shy of really punishing you for being obtuse, but they were still designed around rational resting - and they gain actual quality if you don't exploit the weak ambushes.

Edited by Delterius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end of the day whatever system they go with I'll be happy with as long as it fits the lore. No shoving something in because everyone loves it if it doesn't fit the setting.

 

Its weird how common this concern is voiced. Not only is the setting new, but its being developed especially for a CRPG series.

 

The believability of a setting depends on it's internal consistency. If something doesn't fit with the way the rest of the setting has been set out then it will stick out like a sore thumb to me. It's precisely because they are building it from scratch that I would like to see them take the opportunity to build the best world they can, and as it's being built especially for cRPG I see that as more reason for them to try something new rather than go with the Vancian model.

 

With regards to setting-building, you're preaching to the choir - though I'd like to point out its not hard at all to fit a magic system in a world's workings. As for the part of ditching the Vancian system, I disagree wholeheartedly.

 

To me, the rules should be built around the lore, I find that not all magic systems work well in all settings and I tend to pick up on the dissonance when a magic system has been blagged into a setting. I don't see why you wouldn't want to see a new system, the Vancian system is not perfect and trying out alternate systems would be good.

 

To me, new rules should be built around the lore. But when neither rules or lore have been estabilished, then you make good rules first and build the lore around it. Though it seems Obsidian has a older vision for the lore than it did for the rules, it is still time to adjust both to each other.

 

Regardless, magic systems are amongst the most easily justifiable things. Discussions about the internal consistency of settings generally revolve around other things.

 

And why I'd prefer the Vancian system? Well, its both strategic and tactical as opposed to pretty much everything else. All they need to do is implement a decent rest system (that keeps you from resting in every encounter) and voilá.

Edited by Delterius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try not doing that. Unfortunately, the games were shy of really punishing you for being obtuse, but they were still designed around rational resting - and they gain actual quality if you don't exploit the weak ambushes.

 

I tried not to use the rest feature but that was something me as a player did to restrict myself, not something the rules did, and so for the purposes of comparing systems I would not take it into account. The rules allowed me to do so and in fact forced me to do so in order to get the right spells when I realised I didn't have the right selection for a specific battle. A restricted mana pool would probably have done a better job as it could be set to a size that seriously limits the number of spells cast per battle. If someone resorts to using fireball in every battle then they would probably have just memorised a whole bunch of fireballs in a Vancian system and done the same anyway, in that case I'd say it's more an issue with the spells and their effectiveness.

Edited by FlintlockJazz

"That rabbit's dynamite!" - King Arthur, Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail

"Space is big, really big." - Douglas Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try not doing that. Unfortunately, the games were shy of really punishing you for being obtuse, but they were still designed around rational resting - and they gain actual quality if you don't exploit the weak ambushes.

 

I tried not to use the rest feature but that was something me as a player did to restrict myself, not something the rules did, and so for the purposes of comparing systems I would not take it into account.

 

From personal experience (I only recently played the IE games and refused to spam-rest from the start, no problems there) and taking into consideration that A) The Rules tried to limit resting (but were too shy about it) and B) The actual Vancian system (as in PnP) doesn't need to explicitly limit resting (the GM's going to make you suffer if he wants to), I'd say that's unwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...