GURPS Magic: The Least of Spells

[maximara]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Widespread martial training wasn't uncommon, the English longbowmen being a good example. Which of these do you think might be mandatory learning for the general population to support the military?

My first thought would be Analgesic and Aide (preferred combat wizard college).

I'm more familiar with GURPS Magic and so know that even Magery 0 wizards would be an asset to the military (primarily in the food college).

Yes, combat spells are the low hanging fruit was it were but there is more to an army then just combat. So what IQ/A spells could be useful that really aren't directly combat related?

[Gumby Bush]

Ack might be required of those expected to receive wizardly communications (officers, I suppose).

Adjuration might be required of all loyal subjects.
Sweet Oblivion if we're concerned about questioning.
Easy Rider if teleportation magic is in frequent use.
Puff, as well as Squirt and the rest of the no-damage innate attack spells might be useful for signalling.

[maximara]

I was reading Mailanka's review of the book and I realized something.

Between Fantasy's Low Magic options (Mysteries of the Trade being the big one here) and allowing Fractional Magery/Limited Non-Mage Ceremonies rules to work on all forms of magery, why does this even exist?

Sure you would be at -5 to cast spells in normal mana areas (-10 if for some insane reason someone want to cast a spell in a low mana area) but Fractional Magery in part assumes Magery can be learned and one you get to Fractional Magery 5 you have Magery 0 with all the benefits.

Don't mistake me. I like the idea but IMHO the issue goes back to the fact that GURPS Magic didn't really get a "proper" update as the spell list is based on Classic where Magery 1 was the lowest one could (officially) go unless one went with how Clerical magic worked in that book.

But Classic Magic Clerical magic, if you took the RAW, only allowed the Clerics to learn and cast spells not requiring Magery ("allow non-mage clerics to use spells of one (or a few) colleges as though they were mages" and no even the 2e of Classic: Magic didn't use Power investiture which would have fixed this.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by maximara

why does this even exist?

Sure you would be at -5 to cast spells in normal mana areas (-10 if for some insane reason someone want to cast a spell in a low mana area) but Fractional Magery in part assumes Magery can be learned

Well, for one reason, maybe one doesn't want to assume Magery can be learned. In many settings, that simply isn't the case.

[Imbicatus]

Use Magic is going to see a lot of use in my DFRPG game, especially as I am letting it fool not just magery items, but also clerical and Druidic items.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Well, for one reason, maybe one doesn't want to assume Magery can be learned.

. . . or that complicated fractional Magery schemes, or really slow not-quite-spell magic, or many other things don't exist . . . or that straight-up spells that work for everyone do exist.

This supplement is just another arrow in the quiver of GMs and world-builders. Nobody has to use it, but it's a fairly simple option. In that sense it's like GURPS Power-Ups 1: Imbuements: You could probably do what it does another way, but you might not want to.

"Here are some skills that cut the Gordian knot and just do the thing. They stomp all over some other things in the process. Use them only if you want."

A game system as sprawling as GURPS has no need of One True Way. Offering lots of back routes and alternatives is the raison d'être of much of the line.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by Kromm

This supplement is just another arrow in the quiver of GMs and world-builders. Nobody has to use it, but it's a fairly simple option. In that sense it's like GURPS Power-Ups 1: Imbuements: You could probably do what it does another way, but you might not want to.

On that note, could the spell list be solid enough to give a setting the feeling of widespread magic that does enough without any other supplements or Magic itself? I haven't gotten a chance yet to buy it, but I feel that will definitely sway how soon I do.

[Gumby Bush]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

On that note, could the spell list be solid enough to give a setting the feeling of widespread magic that does enough without any other supplements or Magic itself? I haven't gotten a chance yet to buy it, but I feel that will definitely sway how soon I do.

The very idea of Least Spells provides the germ of an idea which might be expanded into such a thing. I think the thread of new Least Spells shows that you could produce that feeling without non-Least Spells, but we've been relying pretty heavily on comparisons to Magic spells.

Some of it may depend on how you use it, too. If almost everyone (\in the setting picks up a Least Spell or two, then I think you're likely to wind up feeling like magic is everywhere, even though most spells are unlikely to fundamentally alter the setting.

Several spells are designed for settings where Least Spells complement ordinary spells: Ack, the Enchantments spells, Easy Rider, Reorient, Aide, Disbelieve, and Use Item.

There are also several "poke" Innate Attack spells: they do no real damage, but are obviously magical and could be quite useful, or at least fun. Others are spells I wish I could learn (Keyfinder, for instance).

[Anders]

If I'm using the Sorcery system, would it be reasonable to approximate all the Least Spells as perks?

[Say, it isn't that bad!]

Originally Posted by Anders

If I'm using the Sorcery system, would it be reasonable to approximate all the Least Spells as perks?

Yes; and even using the regular Magic system. Although, I limit characters to a maximum of 5 perks (can't remember if that's in the rules or not).