Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 12:54:08 -0400 From: thorsten.heimann@castrop-rauxel.netsurf.de (Thorsten Heimann) To: Multiple recipients of listSubject: A 'new' magic system
As my subscription to this list is only a few days old, I don't know if and how often this theme has been discussed before - so, if you get this '...oh no, we had this a 1000 times before...' feeling, just ignore this mail (sorry :-( )
BTW - I know nothing about the 'new system' which has been discussed here for a while. The following explanations are about 'normal' Spell Law and the 'normal' spell lists in the companions.
Rolemaster is (IMO) the best FRPG around - it's depth and realism really is unmatched. But having played RM for several years now, I've developed a real antipathy agains the normal Spell Law system; ok, there are MANY extensions now (more spell lists, single spell development etc.), but IMO the system has some fundamental drawbacks:
(a) while high level mages are REALLY powerful, the average Lvl 1 or 2 pure spell user has (almost) no chance of survival; in my player group are one or two players who would really like to play a mage. However, unless you've a campaign with almost _no_ fights and almost _no_ traps, it cannot be done (hey, I'm no hack'n'slay GM, but I use my combat system once in a while...). One solution would be to play such terrible characters like the Warrior Mage, which is (IMO) really boring.
(b) The Spell Law system is much too technical (or mechanical) - there is absolutely no mystery, no _magic_ in the game, when your mage murmurs something like '... ok, let's see. This guy is probably Lvl 3 or 4, so I just need that Lvl 1 Sleep V spell from Spirit Mastery for 1 PP...' Magic (!!) is thus reduced to some slots on spell lists with no room for imagination.
(c) I'm missing a certain element of 'chance' in the magic system - ok, you have your base attack rolls and whatever, but that's not what I mean. The problem is, that spells (i.e. spell lists) are developed just like any other, 'normal' skill. If the BAR indicates a success, the mage can _always_ be absolutely sure of the result of the spell. There are situations, where you (i.e. the GM) would like to 'modify' the success a little bit, just to remember the spell user that he/she is just that: A user of the essence, not a master.
To overcome these drawbacks, I'm currently developing a magic system, which
unites the features of Spell Law and Ars Magica, and I would like to have
your comments, remarks, hints, whatever... BTW - did I say "I'm developing"?
Eh - I mean I'm 'borrowing' :) some good ideas from I.C.E. and the producers
of Ars Magica (what was their name again? Here comes a first abstract of the system. The rules are (as you will
notice) under *heavy* construction :-)
Instead of developing spell lists or single spells, the pure spell users
develop skills in certain 'techniques' and 'forms':
Believe it or not: EVERY SINGLE SPELL in Spell Law and all the companions
can be simulated by a combination of these techniques and forms. A fire ball
would need a CREO IGNEM spell, while sorcerers would love the PERDO
CORPOREM and PERDO MENTEM spells. Flying would be REGO CORPOREM
AURAM while a teleport spell might need REGO CORPOREM VIM (kind of
booster...).
Currently, all of these techniques and forms are developed at costs 1/1/3 ,
which means that your pure spell user can specialize himself / herself in
certain techniques and forms while omitting other areas (though I'm planning
to review those costs - our 'fire mage' is getting too strong with his shock
bolts...). Furthermore there has to be (for every profession) a table, where
allowed and n/a technique-form combinations are summarized: E.G. a mage will
certainly be allowed to use the CREO IGNEM, CREO AQUAM, ...,
combinations, while he/she may not be allowed to use any PERDO whatever
combinations (these are for sorcerers :).
Spell resolution procedure:
1. The player specifies the desired effect of his/her spell. IMPORTANT: The
specification has to be concrete yet universal. E.G. "... ring of flames
with a radius of 10'..." would be bad, "...magic fire, which surrounds
'object'..." would be much better. This gives the GM the scope to handle
every situation.
2. Player states 'technique' 'form' ... 'form' and number of PP to be used
for the spell.
3. The GM tries to find a spell on the spell lists, which effects correspond
to the desired effects. [Yes, this is the hard part. You gotta know your
roleplaying system... In most situations, this is surprisingly easy.] The
spell on the spell lists yields the level for the current spell. Effect,
range and duration of the Spell Law spell are modified by the actual number
of PP. The level of the spell (for RRs) is the number of PP used by the
character.
4. ESF roll (IMPORTANT: Disregard overcasting!).
6. Success / failure of the spell is determined by looking at the Base
Attack Spell table: (a) Normal success with a % modification to the RR or
the elemental attack roll. (b) normal failure (spell failure table)
(c) critical failure (negative result on the BAR table) - under
construction :) Will include (in extreme cases) modifications to the
number of PP involved in the spell or even the effects of the spell.
IMPORTANT: The result for elemental attack rolls cannot exceed +20%.
Modifications to this roll (1D100):
As I said before, the system is under construction and has been displayed
rather sketchy. My experiences with this system have been hitherto very
good... it adds exactly the amount of flavour and _magic_ to my magic system
that I wanted all the time.
I would be very interested in comments, hints and criticism referring to
this system.
Thorsten
techniques:
CREO - I create
INTELLEGO - I perceive
MUTO - I transform
PERDO - I destroy
REGO - I control
forms:
ANIMAL - animals
AQUAM - water
AURAM - air, weather, flying
CORPOREM - humanoid body (also healing)
HERBAM - plant life, trees, herbs
IGNEM - fire ;-)
IMAGONEM - illusions, pictures
MENTEM - thoughts, feelings, spirits
TERRAM - earth, stone, solid bodies
VIM - magic itself, energy, demons
- normal mods for BAR roll (disregard level bonus!)
- average of
Back to the
House of Rules.