Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip > The Fantasy Trip: House Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-05-2019, 12:15 PM   #31
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

With this new talent in play, can a PC still learn just one spell and cast it at reduced DX?
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 02:25 PM   #32
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikMod View Post
With this new talent in play, can a PC still learn just one spell and cast it at reduced DX?
TFT Legacy removed the -4 DX penalty that was in the old TFT. The only DX reduction now would be from iron/steel weapons and armor.
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 05:46 PM   #33
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikMod View Post
With this new talent in play, can a PC still learn just one spell and cast it at reduced DX?
The Wizardry Talent I proposed, as originally worded, doesn't change any rule like that one or any other.

For the Legacy era it really should have a word or two on this subject added. By the way it alters the memory cost rules for wizards, it should say something clear about the memory cost for non-wizards learning spells as well.

If I were the GM who had to interpret this Wizardry Talent as worded, I'd say it implicitly limits spell learning to characters that take this talent and all of its prerequisites.

Whether that's a desirable effect or not is certainly worth talking about.

As zot points out, the latest edition of ITL seems intent on making spells easier for non-wizards to cast. I'm not at all sure I like that, but acknowledge that's the way the designer is leaning.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 06:16 PM   #34
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck View Post
As zot points out, the latest edition of ITL seems intent on making spells easier for non-wizards to cast. I'm not at all sure I like that, but acknowledge that's the way the designer is leaning.
I think it's a good move, particularly since wizards have several spells that far outclass their corresponding talents (Silent Movement, Lock/Knock, Glamor, Persuasion, Repair, Repair Device, Meal, ... there are probably others). This gives heroes a chance to start out with talents and expand into the corresponding spells. Otherwise, to me, wizards become the superheroes of the game.
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2019, 09:54 PM   #35
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TippetsTX View Post
Skarg beat me to it... I also think that wizardry as a talent that any anyone can learn would create a society with far more wizards than the default assumption for Cidri. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but I prefer the rarity currently implied in the rules.

In fact, I have further expanded on the idea "wizards are born, not made" by establishing that, in my campaign, the ability to perceive and influence the forces responsible for 'magic' is a genetic mutation found sporadically throughout the diverse races inhabiting Cidri. Individuals w/o this marker can never learn how to cast spells, though there is a segment of the population who may, with difficulty, unlock a latent predisposition for magic use (i.e. heroes who pay a higher 'cost' to learn spells).
I've been meaning to return and add to what TippetsTX wrote a few days ago.

The Deryni novels by Katherine Kurtz were an especial favorite of mine, set in a fantasy world with a rare genetic mutation for magical abilities (and not every character that had the Deryni gene knew they did until something triggered it -- great reading). More recently of course we have the Harry Potter universe as an example of magical bloodlines. The premise certainly adds a nice "flavor" to use in a game.

There's no reason that would have to be incompatible with a Wizardy Talent in TFT. A person would still have to be "born a wizard", and that could be as rare as the GM wanted to make it.

But just like in the Potter books, the "born wizard" can hardly utilize their magical ability, may not even be aware they have it, without extensive training or schooling. Here the learning cost of the Wizardry Talent merely represents the time invested in this magical education, and reciprocally the time taken away from practicing and studying anything else.

And anyone who didn't have the wizardry gene would be wasting their time if they studied to take the Wizardry Talent, because it still wouldn't confer any magical abilities to the student. (Sorta like violin lessons can turn out to be a waste of time too for the wrong person.)

GM's can choose to have their world's work as they choose, making wizards as rare as they want for any in-game reason they want.

The Wizardry Talent is still just as useful for regulating memory and limiting other any talents in the characters that are wizards, regardless of what made them wizards in the first place.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 02:17 AM   #36
Steve Plambeck
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zot View Post
I think it's a good move, particularly since wizards have several spells that far outclass their corresponding talents (Silent Movement, Lock/Knock, Glamor, Persuasion, Repair, Repair Device, Meal, ... there are probably others). This gives heroes a chance to start out with talents and expand into the corresponding spells. Otherwise, to me, wizards become the superheroes of the game.
There's a lot to be said for that.

There is a great deal of symmetry in all the TFT rules, and that's part of what makes the system easy to learn and remember.

We have Heroes who use weapons. We have Wizards who use spells. But Wizards can also use weapons, subject to certain limitations. So if Heroes couldn't also use spells, subject to certain limitations, the rules would be asymmetrical.

I'd love to get everything costing the same for all characters to learn, which was the main point of my Wizardry Talent in the first place. And it does that job as far as Talents are concerned. Unfortunately the job isn't finished because we still have different learning costs for spells: 1 point for wizards, 3 points for non-wizards (Legacy ITL-16).

As worded, the Wizardry Talent confers a "memory pool" equal to IQ from which a wizard pays for learning spells. One way of looking at things would be the non-wizard, by not having taken that Talent, doesn't get that separate memory pool. So the non-wizard must still spend talent points to learn spells. That's what keeps non-wizards from going hog-wild memorizing spells, and it retains the RAW exactly if you also retain the cost of 3 learning points. Although in my house, I think I'll just charge 1 so every figure is still paying the same; I don't think that will get ugly, as the non-wizard is drawing on a smaller pool of memory than the person with Wizardry. And because I foresee a new limitation on non-wizards casting spells. As zot reminded us, the -4dx penalty for non-wizards has been dropped from Legacy TFT. But there's something else we not only could do, but kinda have to do if implementing a Wizardry Talent.

What if we make using a memorized spell exactly the same as using a weapon you pick up? Under Unskilled Rolls (Legacy ITL-8) we read "if use of a talent requires a die roll, then unskilled use should either be prohibited entirely or should require extra dice, and failure should have serious consequences."

Using a weapon requires a 3 dice roll if you have the correct weapon talent, and a 4 dice roll if you don't. The logical extrapolation becomes: using a memorized spell requires a 3 dice roll if you have the Wizardry Talent, and a 4 dice roll if you don't. This echoes that symmetry we see in so many of the TFT rules. And face it, if you put a Wizardry Talent in the game, then the RAW on ITL-8 actually require a figure without the corresponding talent (Wizardry) to roll 4 dice to attempt a spell.

And this could be a lot of fun. Again from ITL-8, "If a player tries an unskilled roll and fails by more than one point, the GM should invent an appropriate mishap". In the case of spell mishaps, there's be no limit on hilarious effects. GM: "It seems you badly mispronounced a few words in that spell Alex. You've turned yourself into a newt for 12 turns, but you will get better." "Oh dear Miri, you rolled a 20 on a 3-hex Wall spell. I'm afraid there's now a 3-hex walrus attacking your party." "Merlin, was that a gargoyle you were trying to summon? Seems you've conjured up a garden instead. Oh dear, those plants have teeth..."

GMs could write themselves little tables of possible magical mishaps, and roll dice to see which came up, with the more lethal results being the less frequent.

I like this a lot more than a -4 DX penalty! :)

Anyway, to summarize.... WITH the Wizardry Talent, have spells learned equal to IQ at 1 point each, separate from talents; roll 3d6 to attempt spells. WITHOUT the Wizardry Talent, pay for memorized spells with talent points (3 each being the RAW, or another cost by house rule if desired); roll 4d6 to attempt spells.

There's some extra room here to tweak it all a little too. I might allow the non-wizard who only spent 1 talent point on memorizing a spell has to roll 4 against DX, but the same non-wizard could spend the full 3 talent points to memorize it so well that they only have to roll 3 dice for that particular spell. Which is basically just the RAW. I certainly foresee a Thief studying the Lock/Knock spell wanting to get it right as possible every try.
__________________
"I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I'm right."
Steve Plambeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 08:37 AM   #37
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

With this new approach to unlocking 'different kinds of memory' - do you think we should also have a Linguist talent, which unlocks a traunch of 'language' memory, so you can learn up to your IQ in languages?
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 09:17 AM   #38
TippetsTX
 
TippetsTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikMod View Post
With this new approach to unlocking 'different kinds of memory' - do you think we should also have a Linguist talent, which unlocks a traunch of 'language' memory, so you can learn up to your IQ in languages?
I proposed a rule variant to handle languages outside of the Talent paradigm here...

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=161853
__________________
“No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos
TippetsTX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 09:58 AM   #39
MikMod
 
Join Date: May 2019
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TippetsTX View Post
I proposed a rule variant to handle languages outside of the Talent paradigm here...

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=161853
That's kinda the same idea as this magical-memory, but everyone has a minor version for free (IQ/5), or pays for the 'linguist' talent and gets up to IQ/3 languages?
MikMod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2019, 11:31 AM   #40
TippetsTX
 
TippetsTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: North Texas
Default Re: A Wizardry Talent (unpublished 1982 Interplay article)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikMod View Post
That's kinda the same idea as this magical-memory, but everyone has a minor version for free (IQ/5), or pays for the 'linguist' talent and gets up to IQ/3 languages?
Correct. And while I will concede a conceptual similarity here, there is a HUGE difference between 'free' IQ for spells vs. languages as far as in-game impact goes.
__________________
“No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos
TippetsTX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.