Spells: Broken, but how broken?

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Refplace

I'm not saying I like all the spells.
But trying to say Magic is broken because it doesn't fit Powers just doesnt wrk for me.
Magic is like UT so a lot of things exist as part of the background.
Powers lets you build thngs not part of the background.

Lots of people aren't complaining about any of the spells in GURPS Magic existing (I am, but lots of others aren't).

Rather, they are complaining about many of the spells in GURPS Magic being over-powered.

They say that the spells do too much relative to their cost. They say that there are some spells that must have their costs raised, or their power level (the amount that they "do") lowered, or in some cases perhaps even both.

[hal]

The question to me throughout all of this - from the start of GURPS 1st edition right on up to GURPS 4e:

What does the GENRE itself permit, what is expected of the Genre, and can such a Genre be run in conformity to the wishes of the GM him/herself.

First order of business in my opinion as a world builder is this:

What precisely is magic supposed to allow or disallow? What is the purpose of Magic overall in a given environment? Is it secret? Is it commonplace? Is it subtle, is it in your face? What precisely IS magic?

If you create a game system where you arbitrarily decide that pistols do 1d6 damage, rifles do 3d6 damage, and armor piercing 20mm rounds do 3 points of damage with armor non-existant - then that is how the designed universe WORKS.

Now, the real issue that crops up at this point, is the expectations of the players in that game world. If they expect a reasonably realistic game world in which to run, and they identify those things which are unreasonable about the game, the GM/designer either modifies the rules to fit more with reasonable expectations, or - the GM tells the players "TOUGH, it is my world and I'll run it as I please. Either play as is, or get out."

Sadly, books, once printed, are unalterable, and in a game that is RAW, what is written needs to be thought about before it becomes solid print.

Now, suppose you have the ability to print a book right here, right now. Your job as the game designer, is to craft 100 spells for use in the game world. Do you:

A) Build 50 spells that are reasonable and subtle and 50 spells that are over the top?

B) Build 90 spells that are reasonable and subtle, with 10 spells that are over the top?

C) build 100 spells that are reasonable and subtle and zero spells that are over the top

D) Build zero spells that are reasonable and subtle and 100 spells that are over the top?

No matter how you approach the problem, you are dealing with the issue of target audience, and the fact that once written, the product becomes set in stone as far as RAW go.

Frankly? It is far easier to build spells with a high fatigue cost and tell the GM that he can discount the energy costs as he sees fit as a means of encouraging a magic heavy campaign where mages can do just about anything. Likewise, the converse is true where the GM can be told that the spells are designed for a magic heavy campaign, but GMs can increase the cost significantly to make spells less likely to be flung willy nilly.

What causes problems however, is when you mix BOTH spell design philosophies together and tell the GM to sort them out - especially when there are 800+ spells to sort out!

One issue that arises in GURPS MAGIC 2nd edition, is that you get over 1500 gallons of water using the RAIN spell, for 2 energy points of spell casting, that you get with the CREATE WATER version - also costing 2 fatigue. By my calculations, RAIN produces 1.8 gallons of water in the same time period as the spell CREATE WATER does.

If for example, in a given game universe, Resurrection is not only difficult, but requires stealing the soul out of the death realms away from a jealous Diety in charge of keeping the Death Realms separate from the living - then that is a whole different game from one where people routinely are brought back from the dead as simply as one casts the spell "Major Healing".

No matter HOW you decide things during the design phase of the game, you're going to create a structure that most GMs will be unable to avoid if they will run a RAW campaign.

[Crakkerjakk]

I think you're right, that's the core of my problem with the permanent creations spells. I don't really have a problem with the idea of a spell that reverses missiles (though I think it should be less dependable, maybe, or harder to cast) but I like my vaguely medieval western europe fantasy as much as the next gamer, and some of the spells in Magic put holes in that setting fairly quick. Limiting created material to a day without high-energy enchanting solves the problem, really. So all that's left is the spells I don't like for game mechanical reasons.

[Mailanka]

Acid Ball (and similar spells): It does Acid Damage. There's no such thing. Do they mean "burning" damage? Or do they mean "Corrosion" damage? There's a huge difference, and it's kind of important to know which system I should be using. If it's the latter, it's probably overpowered.

I find Magic to be a fine book over all, with the exception of a couple of things that make me grit my teeth. I haven't yet found that it destroys my games when I try to run it, and I feel that many complaints are based more on genre complaints, the sorts of things I often see whenever a GURPS assumption does not match a player's setting assumptions.

However, Magic is certainly a very messy book. Taking all the things in this thread and others (Grease vs Ice Slick, Shocking Touch vs Death Touch, Acid Ball, Cloud Walk vs Walk on Air (a personal peeve of mine)), you start to get a picture of a somewhat ramshackle book that feels less like an upgrade to 4e and more of a transcription of 3e material in one bundled package.

I'd love to see a thorough fixing of Magic, but I can't imagine we'll see one (there are far more profitable, useful things that SJGames can apply its limited time to), and even if they do, I don't think they'll fix it so that Powers matches with Magic (that's just the way skill-based stuff works. Try making Power Blow as a spell. How do you model "double" ST? I have no idea!), but it would be nice to see the spells cleaned up, straightened out, balanced with one another better, and made fully compliant with 4e standards.

[hal]

Now, having said how difficult it is to create a spell system that won't clash with what EVERYONE wants for their game universe, the next option is to create a game structure/universe where most are content to play in, with guidelines on how to change that for your own game world. In light of what GURPS 4e now permits, it is entirely possible that a GM might want their game universe to be such that players must purchase dedicated fatigue for magic use only, and call it "Essence", which powers spells. Mages might be required to purchase Channelling abilities that allow mageborn to process the local mana internally at a rate of say, 3 Essence per turn. Unused essence returns back to the environment (Those who remember Eden Studios WITCHCRAFT or ARMAGEDDON might recognize what I'm getting at here). In other campaigns, Magery might be something that is purchased at the start of character play and can never be improved. In other instances, Magery may be improvable.

These are all "Switches" available to the Gm to customize their game world. What can NOT be customized however, without resorting to houseruling the spells once they've been written up in the books and finalized, is the actual game mechanics of the spell itself.

To that end, my criticism of GURPS GRIMOIRE is that when compared against GURPS MAGIC 2nd edition, the spells were not balanced as far as capabilities (what the spell does game mechanics wise), as far as fatigue cost to get a given result relative to other already published results in previously published spells, and as far as who can cast the spells (ie Magery 0, Magery 1, Magery 2, etc). Heck. Once Magery 3 was allowed to be exceeded, why were there no Magery 4 requisites for spells or Magery 5 etc - much like 7th level spells, 8th level spells, etc in D&D etc?

Last but not least:

A STANDARD genre trope is standard because so many people like writing about it as authors (ie books, movies, plays, etc) and so many people who support the authors enjoy paying to see/experience (by what ever medium is involved).

My suggestion as a consumer is simple:

Create a standard "Core" set of magic spells and magic game mechanics and magic spells, that permit the least version of the Magical Fantasy Genre. Then Add more spells to make for a more magic heavy campaign. Then add more spells that make magic "Fantastical" and over the top. Actually create graduations in spell types such that:

Magery may reduce the cost of spells equal to the value of Magery-3. Or perhaps More Fantastical spells require higher values of Magery.

In every spell description, it could be noted that...

"GM determines what level of magery or Thaumaturgy is required to cast the spell in question."

In short? GURPS could set the bare bones guidelines on the actual game mechanics for spells, as that is a "mechanics" thing, but still pay close attention to the needs of the GMs rather than "it sounds COOL" or "It needs more bang for the buck". GURPS MAGIC 2nd edition had more of the rational/reasonable spells than did GURPS GRIMOIRE - if that helps any.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by hal

In short? GURPS could set the bare bones guidelines on the actual game mechanics for spells, as that is a "mechanics" thing, but still pay close attention to the needs of the GMs rather than "it sounds COOL" or "It needs more bang for the buck". GURPS MAGIC 2nd edition had more of the rational/reasonable spells than did GURPS GRIMOIRE - if that helps any.

The problem with this is that it doesn't actually fix anything, it just acknowledges the depth of the problem and abdicates responsibility.

Most players don't want a DIY book. They want a catalogue. They want to sit down and play the game now. Arguably, GURPS's biggest weakness is that it lacks this mentality in most things. Adding to it even more won't fix anything.

I'd love to see a GURPS Magic-Design system, one that sets out some rules for how magic would generally work, some switches for making it work different ways, and then letting you design whatever you want from the ground up. However, I would bet you dollars to donuts that GURPS Ultra Tech sold better than GURPS Vehicles did, because people would rather reach out and grab readily made things than design an entire set of tech from scratch: It's hard enough designing your own worlds and characters, now you have to design your own guns too? The same applies to Magic.

Really, the GURPS magic system is extremely bland. It doesn't make huge assumptions the way, say, the Exalted Sorcery system or D&D's magic does. It lays out everything based on the effect it does, groups them based on the elements involved, and creates rules for the most common magical effects you see in fiction, and does little more. In fact, most people complain when it walks away from this system and things start to get kinda wonky.

[Refplace]

I agree that the catalog approach is not only the goal of Magic but was probably the most popular way to handle the book sales wise.
And any catalog is going to have stuff you like and stuff that seems a bad sale.
Even worse when your not doing it to a specific world type and trying to add something for everyone.
There are a lot of ideas and styles of Magic that don't fit the Magic system but the addons from it and thaumatology do help.

That said I think the inclusion of a few spells in the book that dont fit a particular world are easily dealt with by excluding them or minor changes.
Think creates are overpowered? Add a removal trigger, increase cost, add needed reagents or just drop them.

[Redcrow]

I wish GURPS: Magic 4e had been a bit of both. A spell design system and a catalog of spells using that system. It might not have as many spells as the current version, but they could always release pdf supplements that increased the catalog of spells.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Redcrow

I wish GURPS: Magic 4e had been a bit of both. A spell design system and a catalog of spells using that system. It might not have as many spells as the current version, but they could always release pdf supplements that increased the catalog of spells.

It actually DOES have a spell-design system. It starts on page 14, and is surprisingly useful. It's just not as useful as it could be.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Redcrow

I wish GURPS: Magic 4e had been a bit of both. A spell design system and a catalog of spells using that system. It might not have as many spells as the current version, but they could always release pdf supplements that increased the catalog of spells.

Well It does have some, but the real toolkit book is Thaumatology.
Adding to the catalog seems to me to be the work of game setting books or in this case a generic magic system used for a couple of game settings designed to use the same magic setup.