[RPM] a collection of questions

[JP42]

Originally Posted by Refplace

I am thinking use the optional duration modifiers in combination with Symbol Casting or just let those types of items be rechrged even if they expire.

From a strictly flavor perspective, there's something nice about the idea that an item, once enchanted, always holds onto a hint of it, and you can always recharge that particular ritual - with the caveat that you also have to pay for the arrears. And if the item has been in a dragon's hoard for a couple hundred years, you might be paying a hefty price indeed.

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by Refplace

I am thinking use the optional duration modifiers in combination with Symbol Casting or just let those types of items be rechrged even if they expire.

Oh, I like that option. Have "lasting" enchantments involve physically etching symbols into the item (requiring an extra skill roll and plenty of time) and/or encrusting it with precious stones (adding a hefty material cost). That "locks in" the ritual, meaning that even once the duration expires, all a skilled caster needs to do is refresh the duration; the magic doesn't truly vanish unless the item is disfigured or destroyed. Of course, once a ritual is locked in via runes you can't easily add more enchantments to it, or even alter the existing magic.

[ULFGARD]

Thinking of continuing to integrate RPM into my current fantasy game. To be consistent, I'd have to have Magery 0 work for ANY type of magic, be learn-able, and also be graduated into 1 point levels to remove a general -5 to perform magic. (That is, ANYONE can cast spells that don't require magery at -5 just as anyone can perform rituals at -5.)

Anyone see an inherent problem with the "entry" level of Magery working across the board? The talent beyond that is specific to type. (RPM, spell, effect-shaping, runic, etc.) This does a great job of fitting in with the magical prowess of my High Elves, many of whom would be ritual adepts...

[Kuroshima]

Originally Posted by ULFGARD

Thinking of continuing to integrate RPM into my current fantasy game. To be consistent, I'd have to have Magery 0 work for ANY type of magic, be learn-able, and also be graduated into 1 point levels to remove a general -5 to perform magic. (That is, ANYONE can cast spells that don't require magery at -5 just as anyone can perform rituals at -5.)

Anyone see an inherent problem with the "entry" level of Magery working across the board? The talent beyond that is specific to type. (RPM, spell, effect-shaping, runic, etc.) This does a great job of fitting in with the magical prowess of my High Elves, many of whom would be ritual adepts...

I personally think they should be separate. I would not mind one being an alternate ability of the other though.

[PK]

Originally Posted by ULFGARD

Thinking of continuing to integrate RPM into my current fantasy game. To be consistent, I'd have to have Magery 0 work for ANY type of magic, be learn-able, and also be graduated into 1 point levels to remove a general -5 to perform magic. (That is, ANYONE can cast spells that don't require magery at -5 just as anyone can perform rituals at -5.)

Anyone see an inherent problem with the "entry" level of Magery working across the board? The talent beyond that is specific to type. (RPM, spell, effect-shaping, runic, etc.) This does a great job of fitting in with the magical prowess of my High Elves, many of whom would be ritual adepts...

Personally, while I wouldn't make Magery 0 "universal" in my own games, I don't think doing so will break anything. On the other hand, I'm glad you're not doing it to further levels of Magery, since that's where the math starts to work very differently between the two types of magic. I think making Magery 1+ universal would cause some actual problems.

[ULFGARD]

Originally Posted by PK

Actually, you don't have to "plunder" that concept, as it's already in RPM. See Conditional Termination on p. 18.

As an interesting alternative, the GM could always allow the extended duration rules (from the same page) to apply in his campaign, but only when bound to items. Then you could just rule that (say) once you hit a duration of 1,000 years, adding an extra Greater Create Magic effect means the item is effectively permanent. I haven't playtested that, so if you try it, please let me know how it works out for you.

Once you have an item that's set to last for 1000 years, the enchantment is probably going to outlast the item! Of course, that said, I'd allow an "enchantment by deeds" system for anything of substantial duration (LONG for the item) that could effectively extend the duration of the spell to the lifetime of the item.

Then again, usual enchantment by deeds/name/etc. is way cool on its own. Maybe worthy of a "permanent" effect -- Rite of Naming -- used in the creation of an item or just after receiving it -- that essentially gives the 1 point "Named Item" Perk. And that falls right back onto your already extant system of enchantment (requiring personal point investment).

[ULFGARD]

Originally Posted by PK

Personally, while I wouldn't make Magery 0 "universal" in my own games, I don't think doing so will break anything. On the other hand, I'm glad you're not doing it to further levels of Magery, since that's where the math starts to work very differently between the two types of magic. I think making Magery 1+ universal would cause some actual problems.

That was my thought upon a quick reading of RPM (a skim -- haven't read through all the details). But it will allow for an established spell mage to dip into the deep pool of RPM, and an RPM Adept to learn a few small spells. Going far, though, is really point intensive.

Doing this also covers the definition of "Mage" in my game, which is Magery 0. I might try this in an upcoming MH game I'm thinking of running where there may be some "spell" magic (though probably not), but where there will CERTAINLY be Ritual/Path magic of the effect shaping variety as well as some Runic magic. Many of the items will require Magery 0 to function, and knowing runes at all will allow a Mage to use a previously created spell-scroll or item. Likewise for some fetishes created by effect shaping Path/Book magic.

Originally Posted by Kuroshima

I personally think they should be separate. I would not mind one being an alternate ability of the other though.

That will be the case for +1 and beyond in both campaigns -- i.e., they can be purchased as an alternate ability.

[PK]

Originally Posted by Kuroshima

I personally think they should be separate. I would not mind one being an alternate ability of the other though.

Originally Posted by ULFGARD

That will be the case for +1 and beyond in both campaigns -- i.e., they can be purchased as an alternate ability.

While I agree with Kuroshima, it's worth noting that the difference is only 1 point:

Magery 0 (Ritual Path) [5]
Magery 0 [1*]

* Alternative Ability, 1/5 cost.

vs.

Magery 0 (Universal) [5]

It's 6 points vs. 5 points, so in the long run, eh, whatevs. It's less the value and more the effect in play that I'm keeping an eye out for, and that doesn't start to potentially break until you go past Magery 0.

[ULFGARD]

Originally Posted by PK

While I agree with Kuroshima, it's worth noting that the difference is only 1 point:

Magery 0 (Ritual Path) [5]
Magery 0 [1*]

* Alternative Ability, 1/5 cost.

vs.

Magery 0 (Universal) [5]

It's 6 points vs. 5 points, so in the long run, eh, whatevs. It's less the value and more the effect in play that I'm keeping an eye out for, and that doesn't start to potentially break until you go past Magery 0.

I get that, and I might work it precisely that way in my MH game. I'm just concerned that it would break assumptions I had made in campaign design for want of a single point regarding what it means to be a mage and how items work for all mages. I've also given a flat free 10 extra fatigue (only to power supernatural abilities/items) to every character in the campaign. This makes magic more powerful, which I wanted. That's not especially popular on the GURPS forum, but it *IS* popular in my game.

All in all, it sounds like this level passes the "smell test" and it is after all only 1 point per "new magic type". In the case of my world, this is at least 4 types of magic...

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

How much would you be able to tell from a Lesser Effect? Just a person's parentage?

The ability to determine fatherhood with certainty would have an immense impact on a medieval world. It's one of my huge no-go's for world magic system design.