You tossed out the enchantment system

[hcobb]

So what did you replace it with?

I see the two obvious replacements in the game as Alchemy and spirit binding.

What have you used?

[Shostak]

PCs not allowed to enchant. GM makes whatever magic items desired beholden to no system whatsoever.

[larsdangly]

I find the enchantment system a little baroque in its formulas for numbers of wizards and apprentices, but otherwise good enough to leave as is. And my attitude is that PC's are completely free to make enchantments - but they have to actually do it themselves rather than pay someone the cut rate prices in the book. I've found the 'you can do it if YOU can do it' rule of enchantment is very effective at discouraging munchkinism. I don't know many (maybe any) players who will really stick to a plan to make and grow a character who is capable of these things.

[Skarg]

* Assumption that there are very few magic items or enchanters available for public purchase, and those that are have a much higher market price, and tend to be in demand by the most powerful and wealthy people, who have advantages in the market due to their power (e.g. the seller would rather sell to local powerful people even if you can match their price), and those powerful buyers may become interested in anyone who is competing with them to buy magic items.

* Developed magic item breakdown house rules, where using magic items involves a chance of them not working smoothly, based on a "breakdown number" which declines temporarily or sometimes permanently the more you use it. So occasional uses when needed is generally not a problem, but heavy use can wear them down and eventually mess them up and have interesting side effects.

* Also have used the GURPS Magic rules, and some other house rules in various GURPS campaigns.

[JimmyPlenty]

Enchanting remind me of computer coders sitting around to make a video game. Does seem weird having people punch a clock whose only job is to give ST.

I think this is why trying to explain everything can be bad.

In many of my favorite sword and sorcery movies, there is no real explanation for these things...they simply are. That way, you get away from making a system...which keep others from trying to break it.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

I think you can run the system as is. But I have modified the market value of magic items and job pay for enchanters according to the new XP rules (attribute bloat is a thing of the past).

It is very unlikely that a character will ever reach Greater Enchanment levels, with a DX that makes it worthwhile. Even minor enchantments is usually out of reach, so you either need a very large population base (cities in the 1 million range), with university level guild facilities and enough law and order that support that, or you go with lower DX enchanters and that means a lot of failures, and that in turn drives up the prices.

I would go with a x2 cost on all things that can go wrong, weapon enchantments, potions, scrolls, etc. And x10 for lesser magic items. And greater magic items would be such an important and rare business that it would be regulated by the powers that be.

I would also inflate the comparative cost of 1 silver to be 10 modern dollars, not one. The prices are pretty spot on even if you take that into account. A loaf of bread should not be compared to a cheap super market loaf, but a loaf from a baker that makes each one by hand, with locally produced grain and made with love and all that. And a plate armor at 500 silver would be closer to 5000$ today if it was hand crafted with medieval tools. Hell you would probably have to pay 5000$ for a hand crafted one that was crafted with modern tools today.

So this would mean that magic items is a game for the very rich, and most of them are paid for with swaths of land, titles or deeds to castle and manors or rights to tax a village in perpetuity. Well out of most adventurers hands, at least low experienced ones. And all because of inflation and an anti attribute bloat xp system. :-)

On top of that, most magic items should cost ST to use, or you should have to pay the x10 premium of lowering that cost.

[Steve Plambeck]

One possible solution to the problems posed by self-powered magic items (play balance, economics) or at least for those which aren’t clearly labeled as self-powered or not, is to treat them all as semi-self-powered. This only applies or helps for those items enchanted with spells that normally have a continuing cost (Thrown and Creation spells), but that’s probably the vast majority.

We can do this by limiting the base enchantment on such an item to only doing three things: casting the spell without having to know or have the IQ for it, casting the spell without a to-hit roll (except where desired), and not having to pay the initial spell cost for just that first turn.

For every turn thereafter, the user has to pay the normal ST cost for maintaining that spell. For example, summon a bear, become invisible or activate Iron Flesh for free on the first turn, but then pay the usual 1 ST per turn to maintain these spells. This is still a big ST saver for the caster (3 or 4 points) while still costing them the ST needed for the duration of the spell.

These base enchantment semi-powered items could be made for the price in the tables. The next tier up could be the exact same item, but enchanted to run on 1 ST per hour instead of per turn. These would cost 10 times the price in the tables. And lastly the top tier could be otherwise identical items that run on 1 ST per day, for a cost of 100 times the base price.

To avoid a bookkeeping nightmare, the items that cost some ST per hour or per day could be treated as non-regenerating fatigue cumulative with the time the item is used or worn. If the invisibility ring costs 1 ST per hour, the user tallies 1 hit of fatigue per hour. Then it’s a second cumulative hit to do a second hour, a fifth hit to do a fifth hour, etc. After 5 hours the figure has and adjST of -5. The item shuts off automatically should the wearer become unconscious. From the point it’s shut off, voluntarily or involuntarily, fatigue begins to wear off at the normal rate.

Note that this system has the side-effect of making items more useable by some figures than by others. Conan might use a base-cost semi-powered item for 18 turns before fainting, but a halfling as little as 4. Of course the same thing could be said of two wizards casting the spell conventionally if they had significantly different ST to begin with.

For my part, in the past we never let PCs make or buy enchanted items. In my next campaign world I probably won't either, but if I did they'd all have to be the semi-powered variety that costs ST per turn.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

I think one of the problems are the magic items that affect others negatively. Who should pay that cost? I would solve it by forcing those items to be self-powered or only last for a set amount of time or by the one shooting an arrow of slowness for example. In general, I kind of hate cursed items, especially if the curse isn't really big. Who on earth would make such items? They are just as expensive to make and then it is like a bad, very expensive, practical joke that isn't even that funny?!?

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

I think one of the problems are the magic items that affect others negatively. Who should pay that cost? I would solve it by forcing those items to be self-powered or only last for a set amount of time or by the one shooting an arrow of slowness for example. In general, I kind of hate cursed items, especially if the curse isn't really big. Who on earth would make such items? They are just as expensive to make and then it is like a bad, very expensive, practical joke that isn't even that funny?!?

One thing that occurs to me is that it seems likely that conjuring an effect to mess people up, would probably tend to be easier than making an effect that improves someone's ability to do things. It's generally easier to harm, damage, or mess up a working system than it is to enhance a complex working system like a human, let alone improve the abilities of a very capable person. This seems like a natural quality/principle of most situations about how most things work in nature and in engineering.

In general, I think you are right that most people would not bother to make trap/curse type enchantments, but they can sometimes be useful as weapons, traps, security devices, restraints, prisoner retainers, capture aids,and so on.

[Steve Plambeck]

As long as we're talking about what we'd like to change if we tossed out the official enchantment system, I'll vent over another part of it I've actively disliked since Advanced Wizard first appeared.

It is the part of the process that calls for a small army of apprentices to march into the lab every day and spend that day casting Aid spells. Call me a romantic, but my idea of magic is, well, something magical. Turning wizards into factory workers repetitively casting the same dull Aid spell over and over to meet the shift's ST quota just strikes me as abhorent. It's taking all the magic out of magic.

The in-game rationale for the system, that this is how new wizards learn their spells and magical skills while paying for their education, doesn't add up. How does it help an apprentice to learn about illusions and summoning, defensive spells, reading and writing scrolls, managing demons, and all those thousands of other colorfully detailed and complex things, if he or she is sitting in a lab casting the Aid spell over and over, hour after hour, day in and day out, week after week? If I were one of those apprentices I think I'd rather slash my wrists than work another day for Master Enchanter. It never made sense.

In my romantic vision of how enchantment, the process of magic item creation should work, an expert mage works alone. He or she is an eccentric recluse; and if they weren't that way to begin with, being pent up in their towers and labs years at a time on a single project turns them into that. There would be no ST cost per day, at least not more than one advanced wizard could pay. The enchantments would take vastly long periods of time, and often require rare, expensive, and almost unobtainable ingredients.

There could be one or two companions in the enchanter's household, just to do the cooking, cleaning, and general care-taking. But the enchanter would be adverse to having any more people around than necessary -- social interactions would always be an unwelcome distraction from the great work in progress. And other wizards might be especially unwelcome! They might be out to steal the enchanter's research!

Apprentices would not be learning the craft from enchanters. Much as in our own university system, academicians often come in two varieties: those who prefer to work with young people and teach, and those who prefer the solitary work of the researcher. Some like to alternate doing both, and many institutions require faculty to do some of each (and that can often be a point of contention). University politics is really a big deal. I can only imagine how much more colorful that would get in an Institute of Magic -- oh how the lightening bolts would fly.

Be that as it may, new wizards might learn in universities, or they could pick up their trade skills serving as apprentices to a wizards' guild. It just wouldn't, or shouldn't, be an enchanters' guild. Enslaving apprentices to be ST batteries is plain distasteful, unrealistic, and really takes the magic out of the whole profession.