Mana

[warhorse11h]

I have always played this game that ST is used to provide the strength for magic spells and also regulates damage. If you took yourself to 1 ST by spell casting, you were unconscious (Now it would be 0). If you were injured, and cast spells you could again get to 1 and be unconscious again. You could only die (0) because of fatigue if you were injured while your ST was down from fatigue or if you got hit hard enough to do the job.
Since the development of the staff and the quasi-stat mana, I've been tempted to think about another way of doing things. Going ahead and creating a full blown mana stat and separating spell casting from ST, which would be for damage alone. Except under one circumstance, an emergency, you wouldn't cast spells against your ST. If you did, the ST loss for spell casting would be actual damage that couldn't be healed by any means but bed rest.
Don't prepare the boiling oil just yet or start collecting wood for the bonfire. I haven't done this and am not planning on it, just wondering if anyone else has thought about it and if so, what are your thoughts.

[hcobb]

My big question is what can you cast from and what is only good for recharge?

I've house ruled on the expansive side to enable lone badass wizards to rough up the PCs, but I doubt it's really supported in the text:

http://www.hcobb.com/tft/house_rules.html#Magic

[warhorse11h]

I may have not been clear before. Mana, for this approach to work, has got to be a natural force. Wizards and others have learned how to tap into and focus that force to cast spells.
I think it would work like this. At the time of character generation, using a human as an example, you create a wizard with ST 8, DX 14, IQ 10. His mana stat could be determined a number of ways. It could be equal to his ST or his IQ or perhaps be the result of (ST+IQ)/2= mana. Using the example wizard above, his mana stat would be (8+10)/2= 9 mana.
He could use his mana to cast spells. Mana would recover like fatigue, but resting wouldn't be necessary, only the passage of time.
As the wizard gains experience, he would be able to purchase more mana, exactly as he can for his staff. The expended experience points representing the wizards growing expertise with focusing the mana field surrounding him. He would be limited to having only as much mana as he has IQ, or subject to GM determination, you might set the limit at his IQ times two.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by warhorse11h

Since the development of the staff and the quasi-stat mana, I've been tempted to think about another way of doing things. Going ahead and creating a full blown mana stat and separating spell casting from ST, which would be for damage alone. Except under one circumstance, an emergency, you wouldn't cast spells against your ST. If you did, the ST loss for spell casting would be actual damage that couldn't be healed by any means but bed rest.

I've given some thought to this, and it seems to me that IQ could be used for the Mana stat, just as ST is used for Hit Points and Fatigue. This would make high IQ even more useful to Wizards, of course, and might have some implications for XP expenditures and whatnot that are not immediately self-evident to the casual observer.

Among other things, it might enable you to do away with the concept of "fatigue" entirely. (Assuming you could come up with something more restrictive in terms of encumbrance to allow for the fact that not only is sheer weight and clumsiness of the item being carried an issue, but duration of the time in which it is carried is also -- this could be as simple as restricting the "number" of items carried (besides armor) to a number equal to the character's current ST, though.)

Making IQ equivalent to Mana for Wizards would also enable you to change the way "non-Wizards" do magic in that you could increase the cost to cast spells, rather than the cost in XP to learn them, by either doubling or tripling the cost in Mana points to cast them, or, alternately, saying that a non-Wizard CAN'T use Mana and instead MUST expend ST to cast spells. Of course, if you feel particularly strongly about the dichotomy between Wizards and non-Wizards you could still retain the higher costs to learn Spells as well, but to a large degree that might depend on how common you want magic to be in your campaign.

In short, I think the potential uses for Mana are very great in TFT, and I think you could do it in such a way that it wouldn't layer a ton of extra rules on the game (indeed, might simplify quite a few of them).

[warhorse11h]

Originally Posted by JLV

Among other things, it might enable you to do away with the concept of "fatigue" entirely. (Assuming you could come up with something more restrictive in terms of encumbrance to allow for the fact that not only is sheer weight and clumsiness of the item being carried an issue, but duration of the time in which it is carried is also -- this could be as simple as restricting the "number" of items carried (besides armor) to a number equal to the character's current ST, though.)

Two thoughts along those lines. Substitution of fatigue with mental fatigue, which could be recovered at the same rate, 1 point per 15 minutes. You wouldn't have to be sitting down, but you shouldn't be trying to concentrate on anything hard. Or, having depleted the mana field you can access, you have to give it time to rebuild, again at the accustomed rate of 1 point per 15 minutes.

Oh, the idea of using IQ for the mana stat isn't one I had thought of, but it is as workable as any other.

[Skarg]

One of the main issues with having mana based on IQ, is that it totally removes the original balance of Wizard arena character design. i.e. even in original Wizard, ST was the least compelling stat for most wizards, but it definitely had value. Mainly for the amount of spells that the wizard can cast and maintain in one encounter.

New ITL already somewhat undermines that in for experienced wizards who can get Manastaff and invest in it, and planning for that will also somewhat discourage wizards taking ST. It still costs 200 XP per point, though, so it's still a kind of trade-off choice whether to put XP in mana, or put that XP into DX or IQ or spells, or possibly some alternative use of XP.

Back to the main point, if you house rule that mana is based on IQ, then there will be little/no incentive to raise ST, and less incentive to get staff mana. You're increasing the value of what's already the most important thing for wizards to get, IQ. (Also because a high-IQ wizard can get Aided in mana and in DX by apprentices...)

i.e. It adds weight to the already-heaviest thing for wizards to concentrate in.


As for the option to use either mana or bodily ST that does damage, yes I've played many many games that way, as it's the original way of GURPS Magic. I think it's a fairly interesting trade-off, especially if there are no healing spells (...). Of course if you just do it without adjusting other things (e.g. spell costs), you're essentially giving wizards double or more mana than they used to have.


I think this thread also wants mention that many TFT players over the years have house-ruled that while fatigue and damage add towards unconsciousness, the wizard only dies if the actual damage is enough to kill them by itself.

[hcobb]

If IQ is mana then dulled senses make the wizard not your best slime spotter.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Skarg

One of the main issues with having mana based on IQ, is that it totally removes the original balance of Wizard arena character design. i.e. even in original Wizard, ST was the least compelling stat for most wizards, but it definitely had value. Mainly for the amount of spells that the wizard can cast and maintain in one encounter.

I'm not sure this actually true. Seems to me that Wizards still need ST because they still take damage. In fact, if they've exhausted their Mana, they are likely to be quite vulnerable until they can "re-charge." Plus, if you read Warhorse11's original comment, you would note that ST can still be used to cast in an emergency situation, only now, instead of being mere "fatigue" it would be actual wounds that must be recovered from normally. In short, I think this view is based on reading the idea and not experimenting with it.

Originally Posted by Skarg

New ITL already somewhat undermines that in for experienced wizards who can get Manastaff and invest in it, and planning for that will also somewhat discourage wizards taking ST. It still costs 200 XP per point, though, so it's still a kind of trade-off choice whether to put XP in mana, or put that XP into DX or IQ or spells, or possibly some alternative use of XP.

Plus the already existing Mana rule, if extrapolated as I do above, now becomes a core concept instead of an exception to all the other rules. Which actually makes the game easier to understand.

Originally Posted by Skarg

Back to the main point, if you house rule that mana is based on IQ, then there will be little/no incentive to raise ST, and less incentive to get staff mana. You're increasing the value of what's already the most important thing for wizards to get, IQ. (Also because a high-IQ wizard can get Aided in mana and in DX by apprentices...)

i.e. It adds weight to the already-heaviest thing for wizards to concentrate in.

Which I don't actually see as a problem, but rather a feature. After all, ST has now, under the new XP rules, become the primary attribute that warriors will want, with DX topping out fairly early on, depending on the armor they use. IQ is very much a "secondary" attribute for them now, so I don't see the problem of reversing the issue for Wizards.

Originally Posted by Skarg

As for the option to use either mana or bodily ST that does damage, yes I've played many many games that way, as it's the original way of GURPS Magic. I think it's a fairly interesting trade-off, especially if there are no healing spells (...). Of course if you just do it without adjusting other things (e.g. spell costs), you're essentially giving wizards double or more mana than they used to have.

Though clearly, if you treat ST expended as spell casting energy as wounds, then the issue becomes much more carefully considered than if all ST damage can be healed at 15 minutes per point.

Originally Posted by Skarg

I think this thread also wants mention that many TFT players over the years have house-ruled that while fatigue and damage add towards unconsciousness, the wizard only dies if the actual damage is enough to kill them by itself.

Though, again, if we do away with all the fatigue nonsense, this issue no longer requires extra rules to address.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by hcobb

If IQ is mana then dulled senses make the wizard not your best slime spotter.

Life is all about trade-offs, though... Suddenly that Naturalist talent looks more useful to the non-Wizard than it did before.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by JLV

In short, I think this view is based on reading the idea and not experimenting with it.

I may not have experimented with that specific idea, but I have made hundreds of wizard characters, and recently made dozens of competitive arena wizards, and feel I'm pretty qualified to comment on the way it would impact choices for wizard designs. The original situation in Wizard has a nice trade off between the three attributes for 32-point wizards with no other source of mana but ST. If you switch mana to IQ, then ST is much more of a dump stat that it otherwise would be. A 32-point arena wizard point-buying ST rather than DX or IQ-which-is-also-mana to just get some more ability to suffer damage would be a very ineffective tactic.

Originally Posted by JLV

Which I don't actually see as a problem, but rather a feature. After all, ST has now, under the new XP rules, become the primary attribute that warriors will want, with DX topping out fairly early on, depending on the armor they use. IQ is very much a "secondary" attribute for them now, so I don't see the problem of reversing the issue for Wizards.

One of the main reasons I mention things here is to share what I see that I suspect many others won't unless I mention them.

You and I also frequently see TFT very differently, I've noticed, which is interesting and I hope I don't come across as looking for binary arguments. For example, I am quite interested what you mean about your perspective on ST vs DX for warriors with the new XP rules?