What is the best Magic system to use in a DF campaign?

[Gnomasz]

Originally Posted by Set

As a side note: maybe it is just an impression, but it seems to me many of you guys are assuming "aggressive stances" on the discussion. Or at least, passive/aggressive.

It's because it has become very unclear what do you mean by "boss" and how do you view magic in your game world. As I read it, you don't want a boss to be equipped against magic because mages aren't as common as swordsmen and thus countermeasures aren't as common -- the latter is a valid point, but bosses, I think, shouldn't be equipped just like a random garrison, but like veterans of many encounters. It might not be what you meant, but that's how it looks like.


As to finding a solution to save-or-dies, I've had satisfying results with modified Buying Success, p. B347, which was hinted in the thread earlier. Add to the options:

• For two points, you can turn an enemy's critical hit into normal one (so the attacked can attempt an active defense).
• 1 point to increase your margin of success by 5 (this one I made up on the spot, I've only faced issues with critical hits in my games).

Each boss should have a pool of points to spend. I think it's the most "GURPS-y" way of reflecting the Legendary Defense.

[Tinman]

My group has been using Sorcery for 2 years now. I think it works really well.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Set

I've also read around 5~10 threads about Magic, and the consensus seems to be that it, indeed, isn't balanced.

Among those complaining. GURPS players who post to this forum are a minority of GURPS players, and posters of these forum who post to threads complaining about GURPS Magic are a minority of posters. Using these threads as proof of any consensus is a stretch.

[Set]

Originally Posted by Gnome

As others have also implied, I think you ought to try playing a campaign with the magic system more or less as written. It certainly does well with tweaks and spell rewrites, but you may find that the save-or-die spells don't cause the kind of anticlimaxes you're afraid of. I have played many campaigns using Magic, and I believe resisted affliction type spells actually do a great job of adding suspense.

PCs tend to buy up high resistance (since no one wants to be mind controlled, turned to stone, etc.) and Luck, and NPCs will vary depending on what the GM thinks will be fun.
For players, it can be quite satisfying to cast Entombment successfully, for example, and it doesn't feel like an "easy win" since it costs a lot of energy and often the enemies will successfully resist. On the defending side, having to use Luck, Bless and other resources (such as defensive magic) to defend against save-or-die spells can add complexity to tactical thinking and resource management. It's very rarely the all-or-nothing situation you seem to be so afraid of!

Important enemies will have Luck (and possibly Bless), supernatural immunities, their own casters that can negate bad spell effects with Dispel Magic, Ward, Stone to Flesh, Remove Curse, etc.

And if you don't want the PCs to have Panic cast on them, don't have the enemies cast it! Spells like Daze or Stun can be a great hindrance without instantly removing a character from the fight.

My own tweaks to Magic might help you a little, since I've made magical countermeasures easier and weakened some problems spells (including Panic) a bit. Feel free to take a look: https://www.dropbox.com/s/b0ulwtzujq...%20DF.pdf?dl=0

Liked many of your tweaks! Probably will apply many of them on my own campaign.

As for the save-or-die protections you mentioned: Only two of them are true protections: Luck and Bless. The others still leave a chance of going down in a single bad roll. I don't want Luck to be mandatory, you know? One of the reasons being: it is not available to every template, and I don't want to change that. Bless may be a solution, but again, I don't want it to feel mandatory.

Originally Posted by Gnaskar

There's a point that hasn't been raised yet: the difference between mooks and bosses. Out of game, bosses are meant to be a tough fight, mooks are not. In game, bosses are capable of being a serious threat; either through skill and preparation, luck and aptitude, divine (profane?) blessing, or by cheating.

Mooks, like the theoretical garrison of troops who just barely lose to a party of four heroes, probably aren't going to have much in the way of anti-magic preparations. A few of them may have innate Magic Resistance, and some of the officers may have bought up a bit of Will, but otherwise not that much.

The Boss, on the other hand, will likely prepare specifically to deal with mages as well as mundane foes. Perhaps he keeps golems or undead around to counter mind affecting spells, has gotten himself blessed, is unusually Lucky, or has been gifted with a cursed moly amulet by his dark gods (got to love the Legion of the Damned perk).

Most likely, he's had time to realize that delvers are on their way, and perhaps even had time to study their methods. After all, if the delvers are fond of the Panic spell, that's a lot of survivors who've seen them in action and fled. And if and when the delvers stop to rest to recover all that spent FP, they can get a bit of a head start for planning or reporting back.

If the Boss doesn't think he can counter the delvers' tactics, he's not going to stick around to lose to them. He's gonna run, find some way to beat them, and then face them on his own terms. A boss who's a pushover against the players isn't a Boss; he's a Mook with a backstory.

Some examples from my own campaign:

• A Swashbuckler boss challenged the player swashbuckler to a duel, exploiting her code of honor to prevent the party casters from interfering too much. Other than an Armor spell from the cleric, and a lightning weapon from the elementalist, the duel took place without magic.
• An evil cleric used Terror against the players, which took out the barbarian for a turn. After which the tavernkeeper put a bolt in his eye, and the swashbuckler hacked him up fairly quickly. Everyone else made their save. I suspect the party will invest in a Moly Amulet for the barbarian, despite the consequences for allied casting.
• The big bad, a Mind Warper Bioengineer, has thus far never actually faced the players directly, staying safely behind an ancient and evil network of portals. From his first engagement with the players, he learnt that they have a maddening ability to use the power of friendship (and gold) to recruit his goblin minions. So he's developed a psychic collar creature to keep the goblins in line (which will likely last until the players start targeting the collars; at which point the next generation will poison the goblin when it dies). Basically, the boss discovered that his minions were pushovers, and did something about it.
• The players did manage to blindside a Master Vampire at one point, by showing up to his houseparty and sneaking in with concealed weapons. Which involved a lot of social manipulation and double talk, and a fairly subtle spell duel, until they finally shoot him repeatedly in the heart with a flaming crossbow, before he turned to mist and fled the scene (almost getting killed a second time by a Destroy Air spell in the process; proving that any spell can be deadly). His body-double in a sarcophagus trick almost worked. Every step of the way, the players used cleverness and subtlety to gain an advantage over their foe; so they never had to deal with him in his DR 17 war loadout, and damn well earned the easier fight that ensued.

Good examples. Your campaign looks interesting.

On the point: not all bosses are like that - enemies that the delvers know previously or that he knows of them previously. I'm not talking about the BBEG of the whole campaign, I'm talking about "regular bosses", you know?

Originally Posted by Culture20

And that's because fiction with high fantasy has those. And they're usually not "save or die", but instead just "die". The games are being nice by allowing a margin of success.

Indeed they have those. But again, we're talking about games and in my opinion, save-or-die spells suck.

Many of the people who have replied here also seem to think the same (as does my players)

Originally Posted by A Ladder

Parting comment: If you hate save or die spells, instead of ditching the base magic system, remove save or die spells. Simple, elegant, and removes the thing you really don't like.

Yes, my example was pretty bad. But in any case, imagine the Knight has something epic about him that isn't another being - the Apprentice will have a good chance of one-shotting him. (Good catch on the evil god Set haha)

Once, in a D&D adventure I was GMing, the BBEG was an ancient dryad who was evil because her tree was corrupted secretly by the local lord (who happened to actually be a Rakshasa) so that he could send people to solve the problem and thus be a "hero". The fight against the dryad happened in the area around the tree. When they got close she summoned a sea of vines and called to the animals of the forest. The party's cleric thought about using a protection spell I can't remember to enable them to get through the vines. They went on, fighting against the panthers that would pounce on them.
The dryad started to appear and disappear between the vines. The wizard managed to hit her with a chromatic orb, and so did the fighter with a javelin throw.
When they emerged from the other side of the vines, the dryad tried to mind control the barbarian, but he was immune to it thanks to the dark sword some evil cultists had merged with his body (he didn't have one of the arms - it was the dark sword that would appear during battle).
Then, she charmed the Wizard, who in turn attacked the cleric - he went down because he was weakened. The fighter hit the Wizard and he managed to escape the charm. The dryad delivered the last hit to the Wizard (didn't kill him, but left him unconscious - he managed to save on the death throws). The Barbarian then decided to ignore everything else and go for the tree. He got the wand from the Wizard's body (it was a Fireball wand given to them by the counselor of the town) and ran directly to the tree. Dryad got crazy and tried to stop him but he either dodged or ignored her hits.
Then, when he was in range, he realized he didn't know how to actually activate the wand. So he broke it, trying to do it. Following the rule of cool, I said that the wand exploded in the energy release - throwing the fireball but also hitting him as well. With that, he went down, but the tree was burning and the dryad died with it.
The Fighter, the only one standing, gave first aid to the Cleric and the Barbarian (the Wizard was already safe from death).
That was a pretty cool Boss battle - everyone enjoyed it.

Now, if the Wizard had hit the Dryad with a save-or-die spell (those don't really exist in D&D Next) instead of chromatic orb, the fight wouldn't be nearly as epic.

About magic being as common as swords - between adventurers, they are, but for the rest of the world in general, they're usually not.


Aaaaanyways: I don't really want to get rid of those spells - they have their flavor. I just don't want them to be instant combat solvers.

And I have a suggestion on how to do it, on the OP. I'd like to hear everyone's opinion on that. And also get some help on tweaking the values.

[Set]

Originally Posted by Kromm

It's important to look not at how common magic-workers and magic are, but at how common those things are in crucial engagements, how much influence they have when they're brought to bear, and how these things affect the world in which they exist. To compare to modern-day warfare again:

Few infantry units smaller than battalions have organic artillery. You certainly don't encounter artillery bigger than a small mortar in the hands of units comparable in headcount to fantasy adventuring parties. By comparison to infantry units, artillery units are few in number; by comparison to rifles, artillery weapons are incredibly few in number.

However, nobody with the resources to send infantry battalions into battle wants to do so without artillery support. Most of the casualties in modern warfare are attributable to artillery. Consequently, facing artillery is the preoccupation of troops of all kinds.

A lot of hours of training for infantry involve learning how to "dig in," largely as a countermeasure against artillery; a lot of hours in the field are spent digging. For a long time (and arguably still), the main purpose of body armor was to limit the deadliness of fragments from explosions, not to stop bullets. In short, huge amounts of training and time and resources for the riflemen who are the backbone of the fighting force are expended on being capable of standing up to the artillery that menaces them.

In fantasy, wizards are the artillery. Not always actual artillery in the sense that they can destroy huge numbers of enemies, but they tick off all the other boxes: Small units won't have wizards, who will be few in number by comparison to swords and bows, but nobody with the resources to support troops in the field will willingly go without wizards. Wizards are necessary to win battles and wars, and facing wizards is likely to be the focus of huge amounts of training and time and resources.

I think this tends to be overlooked in fantasy gaming. If "special ops" units laden with magic-workers (read: "adventuring parties") exist and can menace high-value targets (boss monsters), successfully raid fortified positions (dungeons), and take on many times their number in ordinary troops (orcs, zombies, whatever), then anybody who wants to be taken seriously – barons, evil overlords, lich-kings, etc. – will plan for these units. Preparing for the PCs isn't a ham-fisted attempt to balance them; it's a logical world-building step in a setting where roving bands of super-well-trained mercenaries with inordinate amounts of magic and first-rate gear make sense. It's actually harder on willing suspension of disbelief if the entire military and security situation of the world looks like medieval Earth.

I see your point, and it makes sense. Do you think, then, that everyone who is trained should have Magic Resistance like they have Armor? Was the system designed with this approach in mind? (This is a legitimate question, I'm not sure what kind of resistance those spells are supposed to have.)

But, in any case, I don't think that all those spells need resistance at the same proportion, mostly because the rule of fun - whereas flinging fireballs, and having lightning bolts shot at you look really cool and are both interesting situations, dying to a single bad roll is not. Thus my grudge specifically with save-or-die spells. I'd really like to know your opinion on the tweaks I'd like to use in my game.

Originally Posted by Gnomasz

It's because it has become very unclear what do you mean by "boss" and how do you view magic in your game world. As I read it, you don't want a boss to be equipped against magic because mages aren't as common as swordsmen and thus countermeasures aren't as common -- the latter is a valid point, but bosses, I think, shouldn't be equipped just like a random garrison, but like veterans of many encounters. It might not be what you meant, but that's how it looks like.


As to finding a solution to save-or-dies, I've had satisfying results with modified Buying Success, p. B347, which was hinted in the thread earlier. Add to the options:

• For two points, you can turn an enemy's critical hit into normal one (so the attacked can attempt an active defense).
• 1 point to increase your margin of success by 5 (this one I made up on the spot, I've only faced issues with critical hits in my games).

Each boss should have a pool of points to spend. I think it's the most "GURPS-y" way of reflecting the Legendary Defense.

True, I should've been more specific about what I meant by boss. I've clarified in a recent reply, I think, but what I mean is: not the campaign-ender, world-eater BBEG from the depths of the chaotic spiral of death plane, but the boss faced at the end of each adventure - not campaign.
I don't want to feel forced to make them all have Magic Resistance - because that would also counter normal spells, not only the ones I consider bad.

Originally Posted by Tinman

My group has been using Sorcery for 2 years now. I think it works really well.

I'll probably use many different systems of Magic. Still, I have to "solve" this problem I'm discussing first. But thanks for the suggestion, Sorcery indeed looks balanced.

Originally Posted by Rasputin

Among those complaining. GURPS players who post to this forum are a minority of GURPS players, and posters of these forum who post to threads complaining about GURPS Magic are a minority of posters. Using these threads as proof of any consensus is a stretch.

Fair enough. Forums are indeed a vocal minority in pretty much everything and I know that - even though it did sound like I don't.

By consensus I wanted to say: the consensus on the threads talking about Magic around here.

Even if it isn't really the consensus, the important part of this is: I'm not the only one with this idea. So "playing as is" isn't something I'd like to do, because I have the option of trying to tweak it beforehand. If I was the only one with this impression, probably I would be wrong since I haven't played for a long time using the system as is. But there is a considerable amount of people who have played and have the same opinion.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Set

Exactly. And this is exactly why save-or-die spells can be so anti-climatic in the hands of the players.

That's because you want a long drawn out tableau battle where the Characters wear down the Villian whittling away at his massive pile of HP.

That's not GURPS, and most people who really like GURPS will be very frustrated by that. The point of GURPS (aside from the toolbox mentality of the rules) is that fights are grim and dirty and unbloody fair. So when the Players get a lucky break and one-shot the BBEG, they all collectively sigh and then get down to dealing with the mooks*.

And when it goes sideways against them (despite every hardened defense**) the Players quail and the Characters begin panicking and everything begins going according to my plan... [INSERT EVIL LAUGHTER]


* Or as is in my experience the mooks are one-shotted (or the Lieutenants or Captains) in a "defeat in detail" tactic leaving the BBEG surrounded without allies and looking at a quick and thorough smack-down.

** Players loooooooooooove shoring up defenses. So much so they end up Juggernauts with limp-noodle attacks. Granted, you also get the Glass Canon types, so it can balance out.

Personally I always make my characters with a fairly strong weakness, something to be overcome or worried about in every fight. But then I'm a weirdo like that.

Both as a player and as a GM I prefer when the battle against the BBEG is an epic one with much give and take, and running around the field with columns dropping everywhere and things exploding, lightning-bolt-hurling-swords awild and two or three of the party almost die, when finally the two still standing manage to deliver that final hit.

Then you need to shore up the Evil Knights Willpower. That's how you give him staying power. But even still, lucky-shots can happen.

So either remove "Save-or-Die" spells and vitals hits and everything else but "big pile of HP whittling" abilities, or just be prepared to have your tableau battles occasionally anti-climaxed.

Thanks.
I've seen the debate going around on some older threads.
What do you think of my suggestions on page 3? Could work with some adjustments?

Honestly I think Gnomasz suggestion below (and my additions to it) might be perfect for you.

Originally Posted by Kromm

It's important to look not at how common magic-workers and magic are, but at how common those things are in crucial engagements, how much influence they have when they're brought to bear, and how these things affect the world in which they exist. To compare to modern-day warfare again:

Exactly!

Originally Posted by Gnomasz

As to finding a solution to save-or-dies, I've had satisfying results with modified Buying Success, p. B347, which was hinted in the thread earlier. Add to the options:

• For two points, you can turn an enemy's critical hit into normal one (so the attacked can attempt an active defense).
• 1 point to increase your margin of success by 5 (this one I made up on the spot, I've only faced issues with critical hits in my games).

Each boss should have a pool of points to spend. I think it's the most "GURPS-y" way of reflecting the Legendary Defense.

Right, so give the BBEG a "Destiny Pool", or "Villainy Pool" or whatever... it could even be the Destiny advantage as reworked in Impulse Buys.

Bascially in my games (which are almost all Action style) I give all the PCs an Impulse Pool. This is a pool of points they can spend on Impulse Buys (GURPS Power-Ups 5: Impulse Buys), however they wish, each session (this vastly improves Character survivability in 'High Cinematic Games That Still Have Realism' which I prefer).

These points can be used to turn a crit into a non-crit (and vice versus), a success into a failure, can buy 'used' equipment (in ye olde "Hey, this guy's closest has a pile of gear in it, lucky us!" fashion), immediate and momentary use of Advantages not on the Character sheet, reduce damage from a single hit to only 1 point, etc.

So just give a suitably impressive BBEG a pool (no more than half of the total pool of the Players, probably less if it isn't the Final Boss Battle). Even use some evil looking counters (I use black stones, the PCs get white stones). And every time "Fate" or "Destiny" or "The Evil Powers What Be" save his bacon, spend those stones. You can even use them on Captains or Lieutenants occasionally (like if the BBEG does something to bolster them) The Players will see the expenditures, know what is saving the villains, and stimulate their hatred for them even more.

And in long fights, as it's getting tense and they see that pile is still sitting there untouched and their piles are severely dwindled? They start to worry. They start to fret. "Is that pile going to be used to defeat us?" they ask themselves. "Is this where we TPK?"

[INSERT EVIL LAUGHTER]

[JMason]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

That's because you want a long drawn out tableau battle where the Characters wear down the Villian whittling away at his massive pile of HP.

That's not GURPS, and most people who really like GURPS will be very frustrated by that.

QFT! GURPS (Spell based) Magic appeals to folks that want to feel clever. Figuring out that you can do something that ends a fight before anyone on your side get's hurt is one of the ways it does that. Any turn of combat could be a deadly one, so ending combat quickly and efficiently is best.

[Gnomasz]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

The Players will see the expenditures, know what is saving the villains, and stimulate their hatred for them even more.

And in long fights, as it's getting tense and they see that pile is still sitting there untouched and their piles are severely dwindled? They start to worry. They start to fret. "Is that pile going to be used to defeat us?" they ask themselves. "Is this where we TPK?"

This is also where the mage starts using weaker, cheaper spells like Stun to wind down the enemy before taking out the big guns, and I love it.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Set

I'm not talking about the BBEG of the whole campaign, I'm talking about "regular bosses", you know?

Captains or Lieutenants should be 'beefer' than mooks in this area as well. Not like Magic/Mind Control Immune, just beefer. Like having a Will/Resistance of 12-14 instead of 15+ like a BBEG.


Note: I use this reference point when talking about 'villain' levels:

Mooks - Canon-fodder. Should drop in a few hits or just run away if glared at really hard by a Big Damn Hero. DF 62 point Henchmen at best*.
Sergeant - Mook leader. Probably wont run away if glared at, can take at least two hits, there to keep Mooks in line. In DF these guys are 125 Henchies.
Lieutenant - Almost an equal for an individual PC. May be better in a single focused area, but then will be worse everywhere else. In DF between 125 and 250 points.
Captain - Easily an equal for any one PC. Maybe a bit more. 250-300 points in DF.
Marshall/General/BBEG - Outclasses any given PC, probably outclasses starting groups of PCs.


* I.. I don't actually use points to stat out NPCs unless they are Allies or Enemies (I mean named foes get NPC character sheets, I just rarely bother to balance their points. but then I've been running GURPS for 30 years, so it's all very old hat for me). So it's closer to this:

Level - Average Stat/Skill Line (with fluxuations, but eh, it averages out)
Mook - 10
Sergeant - 12
Lieutenant - 14
Captain - 16
Marshall/General/BBEG - 18

Then BAD** gets slapped down onto top of it and Everything Gets Worse.

** Basic Abstract Difficulty from GURPS Action 2: Exploits, the best GURPS book after the core Basic Set books.

Indeed they have those. But again, we're talking about games and in my opinion, save-or-die spells suck.

Many of the people who have replied here also seem to think the same (as does my players)

Well, if you and your Players hate save-or-die, then you definitely need to change them.

..imagine the Knight has something epic about him that isn't another being - the Apprentice will have a good chance of one-shotting him.

But that isn't actually true. The Apprentice doesn't have a good chance.

A Wizard does (yes I know, this just shifts a few decimal points, it doesn't actually change your position).

Originally Posted by Set

I see your point, and it makes sense. Do you think, then, that everyone who is trained should have Magic Resistance like they have Armor? Was the system designed with this approach in mind? (This is a legitimate question, I'm not sure what kind of resistance those spells are supposed to have.)

Not the 'mooks'. What happens is the mook guardsmen see a guy wearing a dress and mumbling to himself and like soldiers in WWII who hear incoming artillery fire, they all collectively crap themselves and dive for cover.

Captains and Lieutenants clench up, strive forward, and hope their defenses are properly in place.

The BBEG smirks arrogantly. Probably even laughs malevolently. Sometimes twirls a mustache in the PC Wizard's general direction.

I'll probably use many different systems of Magic. Still, I have to "solve" this problem I'm discussing first. But thanks for the suggestion, Sorcery indeed looks balanced.

Sorcery balances because the GM controls the effects that get built. A PC won't have a save-or-die spell, because you won't allow it. You'll have built save-or-suck spells instead.



My suggestion:

Get DFRPG. Play it straight out the box in a West Marches (sandbox hexcrawl*) or Felltower (sandbox megadungeon*) style game for about 20-50 sessions. The Players don't get invested in their paper mans, you don't get invested in your tableau battles or BBEGs. This gives you time to discover if this is really actually a problem at the table or just a white board issue (most of us are trying to tell you that, in our experiences, this is not an actual problem at the table, just on the infinite plane of theorycrafting).

Meanwhile pick up some of the other magic systems, like DF 19: Incantation Magic, Powers: Divine Favor, Thaumatology: Sorcery, or Thaumatology: Ritual Path Magic and see if any of these magic systems work better for you.

They probably will** as they inherently do not have save-or-die unless you the GM allow those spells to be built.



* Why one is called a "hexcrawl" and the other a "megadungeon" is lost on me, they're the same style game just one is 'outdoors' and the other 'indoors'.

** Or not, as these systems inherently require more work for the GM. I'm personally really partial to RPM and Divine Favor... but Incantations/Effect Shaping is gathering some love from me recently.

[martinl]

Originally Posted by Set

But, you see, my grudge lies specifically with save-or-die spells.

In GURPS, it's not just the spells, its the whole system.

I don't like save or suck in DnD, since the combat system is attrition based. DnD5 has been pretty good and smoothing those out.

I'm much more ok with this approach in GURPS, since there's a lot of stuff that takes you out if you blow your defense. The archer shooting you in the eye, the rogue backstabbing you, or the barbarian smacking you for 4d+2 cutting to your neck - whatever - it's all "save or suck."

Luck is basically mandatory for my PCs because of this.

Isn't there an impulse buy to blow a CP to win a contest like this? If you want epic resistance in GURPS that would work fine too.