[RPM] Misc Questions

[Angle]

I have a number of random ideas about RPM I want to ask about.

• Do you think it would break anything if the ban on spells increasing spellcasting ability was lifted, and instead any such spell simply costed 10x as much?
• Do you think it would benefit or hurt balance if any spell with a duration took up one of a players "Conditional Spell" Slots?
• Do you think it would be balanced if players were allowed to buy additional Conditional Spell Slots for 1 or 2 CP apeice? Should they cost more, or would it be unbalancing to allow it at all?
• Do you think it would negatively affect balance if players were allowed to make permanent changes, such as lead to gold or flesh to stone, with some spell effects? Would an additional energy cost based on the increase in value be sufficient to balance it? If not, is there anything that could balance such a thing?
• Would it be sensible to allow players to make Spell Focuses as magical tools that give them bonuses to casting specific things using the "2 CP per +1 to skill" found under racial skill bonuses? Should this be allowed to circumvent the path skill cap?
• Suppose I wanted all of my mages to have an "Axis" that all their magic was oreinted around. This might be something simple, like "Fire", or something more complex, like "Duty". When casting magic that directly affected or manipulated their focus, they had no penalty, but when casting magic that affected unrelated things, they worked at -5, and when working on things directly opposed, they worked under a -10. How wouls you advise that I price this? The guidelines under limited are rather vague, and while the categories listed for create and control look more accurate, they don't cover everything and I'm not quite sure how to convert them to Limitations. Each "Axis" Would need to be very throughly defined, obviously- You can't just say fire, you'd need to specify "The creation and manipulation of fire". That'd mean you'd have no penalty to start and manipulate fire, a -5 penalty to do anything else, and a -10 penalty to put out fire or manipulate anything that's likely to put out fires.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Angle

• Do you think it would break anything if the ban on spells increasing spellcasting ability was lifted, and instead any such spell simply costed 10x as much?

Yes. It would. If you *must* do it, add a flat+30 energy bonus and all associated effects are automatically considered Greater effects.

Originally Posted by Angle

• Do you think it would benefit or hurt balance if any spell with a duration took up one of a players "Conditional Spell" Slots?

Explain further please.

Originally Posted by Angle

• Do you think it would be balanced if players were allowed to buy additional Conditional Spell Slots for 1 or 2 CP apeice? Should they cost more, or would it be unbalancing to allow it at all?

Depends on the setting, but 1 slot for for 1 point is fair. Also, see here.

Originally Posted by Angle

• Do you think it would negatively affect balance if players were allowed to make permanent changes, such as lead to gold or flesh to stone, with some spell effects? Would an additional energy cost based on the increase in value be sufficient to balance it? If not, is there anything that could balance such a thing?

RPM doesn't do permanent stuff, as you know, if you must have it a Duration of "Permanent till dispelled" is worth about 18 energy. See Variant Durations in Thuamatology (p. 242) and Conditional Termination (Thuamatology: Ritual Path Magic, p. 18)

Originally Posted by Angle

• Would it be sensible to allow players to make Spell Focuses as magical tools that give them bonuses to casting specific things using the "2 CP per +1 to skill" found under racial skill bonuses? Should this be allowed to circumvent the path skill cap?

That's a interesting thought. It really is. I'm working on "Path focusers" right now that do something similar to this. Right off, I don't see any issues.

Originally Posted by Angle

• Suppose I wanted all of my mages to have an "Axis" that all their magic was oreinted around. This might be something simple, like "Fire", or something more complex, like "Duty". When casting magic that directly affected or manipulated their focus, they had no penalty, but when casting magic that affected unrelated things, they worked at -5, and when working on things directly opposed, they worked under a -10. How wouls you advise that I price this? The guidelines under limited are rather vague, and while the categories listed for create and control look more accurate, they don't cover everything and I'm not quite sure how to convert them to Limitations. Each "Axis" Would need to be very throughly defined, obviously- You can't just say fire, you'd need to specify "The creation and manipulation of fire". That'd mean you'd have no penalty to start and manipulate fire, a -5 penalty to do anything else, and a -10 penalty to put out fire or manipulate anything that's likely to put out fires.

That's probably a quirk, yes, it's hefty penalties, but you can avoid them for your choosen style. Maybe consider using the rules from Wizardly Weaknesses (Thuamatology, p. 22)

[Angle]

Having all ongoing effects take up a spell slot keeps mages from going and buffing their entire party up the wazoo. That's not necessarily a problem, but I've seen people complaining about it before, and from my analysis of RPM it's certainly possible if players choose to do so.

As for duration, well, it doesn't have permanent effects as written, but I feel that for some settings it would be appropriate to allow such in certain situations.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Angle

Having all ongoing effects take up a spell slot keeps mages from going and buffing their entire party up the wazoo. That's not necessarily a problem, but I've seen people complaining about it before, and from my analysis of RPM it's certainly possible if players choose to do so.

This feels very optional rule-y to me. So that's how I'd present it.

Originally Posted by Angle

As for duration, well, it doesn't have permanent effects as written, but I feel that for some settings it would be appropriate to allow such in certain situations.

Ditto

[PK]

Originally Posted by Angle

Do you think it would break anything if the ban on spells increasing spellcasting ability was lifted, and instead any such spell simply costed 10x as much?

Yes.

Sorry for the short answer, but it's possible to "bootstrap" your way into some absolutely ridiculous situations if you allow this. Just by alternating relatively low-energy Lesser Strengthen Magic and Greater Strengthen Magic spells, even a non-adept would take less than a day to become infinitely powerful. Adapting GD's suggestion that all such spells are expensive and automatically Greater effects will prevent the most obvious and broken abuses, but still leaves room for many subtle ones.

Allow this at your own peril. :)

Do you think it would benefit or hurt balance if any spell with a duration took up one of a players "Conditional Spell" Slots?

Ouch. Thing is, any spell that isn't instant has a duration, so that's going to hurt casters significantly. Maybe if you counterbalance this by significantly bumping up conditional spell slots -- to make it fair, I'd give casters slots = (Thaumatology * 2) + (Magery * 4) . . . though that raises the issue of "now they can have soooo many conditionals hanging."

Do you think it would be balanced if players were allowed to buy additional Conditional Spell Slots for 1 or 2 CP apeice? Should they cost more, or would it be unbalancing to allow it at all?

Naw, that's fine. In fact, it should never be too expensive; the conditional spell limit is the easiest and safest thing to mess with when it comes to RPM values. I recommend a leveled perk:

Extra Conditionals

If the caster has Magery 2+, each level of this perk adds his Magery to the number of conditional spells he can have on at once. That is, his limit becomes Thaumatology + Magery + (Magery * Extra Conditionals).

Otherwise, add the perk level to the number of conditional spells he can have on. That is, his limit becomes Thaumatology + Magery + Extra Conditionals.

The GM must decide how many levels of this perk are available. In most campaigns, three levels is reasonable.

Do you think it would negatively affect balance if players were allowed to make permanent changes, such as lead to gold or flesh to stone, with some spell effects? Would an additional energy cost based on the increase in value be sufficient to balance it? If not, is there anything that could balance such a thing?

Realistically, that has the potential to seriously unbalance your game world. I'd use the rules for the Create advantage: The player has to pay 1 character point for every $(campaign starting wealth)/10 worth of stuff created. On top of that, the Duration modifier for the spell should be at least +80 (roughly 30 million minutes, which should make sense to anyone with PU4: Enhancements).

Would it be sensible to allow players to make Spell Focuses as magical tools that give them bonuses to casting specific things using the "2 CP per +1 to skill" found under racial skill bonuses? Should this be allowed to circumvent the path skill cap?

No and no.

If you allow enchanted items that directly raise Path skills, they should cost whatever they cost -- for example, if the caster has Path of Chance [8]-13, then raising it further would cost the normal 4 points/level.

Circumventing the skill caps shouldn't be free. I have an article in the queue about this, so suffice to say that if you treat it as a leveled perk for each Path (that is, it costs 1 point for every +1 above the normal skill cap per Path) you'll be okay.

Suppose I wanted all of my mages to have an "Axis" that all their magic was oreinted around. This might be something simple, like "Fire", or something more complex, like "Duty". When casting magic that directly affected or manipulated their focus, they had no penalty, but when casting magic that affected unrelated things, they worked at -5, and when working on things directly opposed, they worked under a -10. How wouls you advise that I price this? The guidelines under limited are rather vague, and while the categories listed for create and control look more accurate, they don't cover everything and I'm not quite sure how to convert them to Limitations. Each "Axis" Would need to be very throughly defined, obviously- You can't just say fire, you'd need to specify "The creation and manipulation of fire". That'd mean you'd have no penalty to start and manipulate fire, a -5 penalty to do anything else, and a -10 penalty to put out fire or manipulate anything that's likely to put out fires.

So, like an anti-Higher Purpose (Tradition)? Interesting. This is a pretty significant drawback. I think the simplest way to model it is with a Vow (Cast Traditionally) [-10], with the caveat that you have to have at least 20 points invested in magical traits to take it.

[ajardoor]

Hey, does anyone know what a ritual for Resurrection would be under the RPM system?

What Paths, modifiers, energy costs, etc. are involved?

Thanks.

[Christopher R. Rice]

See Prehistory for a RAW raise dead spell.

[Christopher R. Rice]

You can see this post as well for examples of what were eventually published.

[Nereidalbel]

Hmm, but what about a Mass Resurrection effect? What would need to be added for that?

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

Hmm, but what about a Mass Resurrection effect? What would need to be added for that?

Probably just the Area of Effect to cover it.