What is wrong with GURPS Magic?

[Randover]

I dislike GURPS Magic for two Major issues

For a quick pick system they lack worked examples of succesful mage builds and/or templates. Making it hard for me as GM to introduce a newbie player as mage.

Secondly a generalist wizard is extremely difficult to build even for advance players. Players experience is like being out of touch with setting and magic society. Maily because its pretty hard to create elementary/advanced/top brass spell list with so many spells and collages.


As for flexibility issue it and flavor it was remedied by Thaumatology and Magical Styles.

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by Randover

I dislike GURPS Magic for two Major issues

For a quick pick system they lack worked examples of succesful mage builds and/or templates. Making it hard for me as GM to introduce a newbie player as mage.

Secondly a generalist wizard is extremely difficult to build even for advance players. Players experience is like being out of touch with setting and magic society. Maily because its pretty hard to create elementary/advanced/top brass spell list with so many spells and collages.


As for flexibility issue it and flavor it was remedied by Thaumatology and Magical Styles.

Hmm...actually Fantasy (1986) did have a couple of sample mages (2 IIRC)..guess that is one thing that got DROPPED over the years.

If you want sample mage builds (and I know 'buy something' is annoying) but the Wizards (3E?) Book is kind of cool...plus IIRC one of Kromm's PC's is hiding in there.

Building a Generalist in Core Magic is actually the easiest thing I found to do...even in a more restricited system (ie using Styles to limit available spells...before the Styles supp was published-by about 20ish years) I always found myself able to do plenty of this and that.

Usually the complaint is more from folks looking for the old DnD mage with the 'use 2x per day Fireball (Tac Nuke)' saying the GURPS mage needs more Dakka...personally I have never found that.

[Anthony]

The GURPS Magic system is functional, but that's about all you can say about it; it isn't very interesting, it doesn't have much of a mythic feel, and it's got a whole lot of badly balanced stuff (both excessively good, and not good enough).

[Fred Brackin]

What's wrong with Gurps Magic in actual play? Very little.

Almost all the usual objections (and I have heard them ad nauseum) are phrased in theoretical terms with the verb "could" and other hypotheticals being used to the point of abuse.

Some of the things that are wrong in the current version are the result of the rushed update to 4e that it did get. The pricing of Regular Spells by SM is just one. This is the source of most of the really cheap ways to destroy a planet. You couldn't do that in 3e.

I have used the default Magic system in two very long and high-powered Gurps games. One in 3e and one in 4e and the rules didn't cause me any real problems.

[Flyndaran]

With Thaumatology it can be made to work. Without it, it is far too rigidly specific for my tastes.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Almost all the usual objections (and I have heard them ad nauseum) are phrased in theoretical terms with the verb "could" and other hypotheticals being used to the point of abuse.

"I hate the spell prerequisites idea"*
"All these trivial cantrips are really kind of uncool"**
"Nearly every PC mage has a combined Magery + IQ -2 of 15+"
"Most of the missile spells are a game mechanical trap for players"
"It's heavily incentivized to max out your Magery level to whatever campaign camp, and then increase IQ, instead of putting more than one point in an individual spell skill"
"Mages end up with so much IQ they're good at everything IQ based"
"There are too many spells that just duplicate what a regular skill does, but better."
"The save-or-die effects are so 1980s."

* I like it, but a LOT of people don't and you can't handwave them.
** I think they're adorable, but I agree they're contributing to the spell-list bloat problem as presented.

[Bruno]

BTW: It's not that mages need "moar dakka" in that they need more top-end lethality - they need more intermediate steps between "ignite fire", "fireball", and "entomb".

And Fireball needs work, but seriously - those "spend 6 to 8 FP, remove foe entirely from combat" spells are evil. Tickle? Eeeeeeevil.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Bruno

"I hate the spell prerequisites idea"*
"
* I like it, but a LOT of people don't and you can't handwave them.
.

Well, I can wave bye-bye to them as I move past them.

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by digoraccoon

1. There aren't a lot of options for a GM to create "rewarding" treasures for spellcasters.

In a supers game? An item that absorbs damage to FP? X-Ray vision goggles so you can see through walls to eliminate the -5 unseen subject penalty? Super-memory boosting potions that let you learn spells in a few minutes of study? A latent mutation that produces Compartmentalized Mind so you can cast multiple spells at once? Special rituals that invest you with powers-as-magic that complement your spell magic? Forcefield ring? Genies in bottles with custom binding spells? Someone's just not thinking very hard.

[Bruno]

Magic item that...
* acts as an energy battery.
* gives a skill bonus with one, some, or all spells.
* reduces casting time with one, some, or all spells.
* you can attach to someone to reduce or eliminate range penalties when spellcasting.