Spell Prerequisite question

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by Plane

Perhaps we should not read "half of these" as exactly 50% of each of the 1/50+1/100+1/500 but rather half of the collective total?

That does make more sense, yes.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by Plane

*reviews T25*

I'm not getting what you mean, probably need it... spelled out for me.

"This works exactly like the One College Only limitation (p. B67), but allows access to more than one college. Two colleges is -30%; three, -20%; and four (the maximum), -10%."

Magery 0 costs 5 points for all mages, but you may apply one of the limitations below to the 10 points/level for Magery 1+. Limited Magery is sometimes known as “aspected Magery.”

"One College Only: Your Magery only benefits the spells of a single college and the Recover Energy spell (p. 248). You learn other spells as though you were a nonmage, and can only cast them in high-mana areas."

Per Partial Limited Magery and the Limited Magery 0 rules this is no longer true: "Roxana the Sun- Witch buys Magery 0 with no limitations, for 5 points, plus three more levels with the Day- Aspected limitation, -40%, for 18 points. Total cost is 23 points. She can detect and use magic items, and cast spells that don’t have Magery 1+ as a prerequisite, whenever she wants; when the sun is in the sky, though, she casts at +3."

Originally Posted by Plane

"half these people possess Magical Aptitude" sounds like a 1:1 ratio not 1:2

It sounds like on Yrth in High Mana 1 in 100 is a non-mage who knows a spell and 1 in 100 is a mage who knows a spell.

Those change to 1 in 200 for both in Normal and 1 in 1000 for Low.

Here are the guts of The Magery-Spell Paradox

In the GURPS Classic version of Yrth (when Magery was called Magical Aptitude) there was an interesting paradox created.

In the correction note for the first printing of information on Yrth it is stated: "Since Caithness is a low-mana area, the example given for the number of people to know spells is wrong. 1 in 50 might know a spell or two in a high-mana area, 1 in 100 in a normal-mana area, 1 in 500 in a low-mana area. Perhaps half these people possess Magical Aptitude. Of course, some people with Magical Aptitude, especially in low-mana areas, will never learn magic or even become aware of their talent."

Why would anyone in a normal-mana or low-mana without Magery learn a skill that in that area they would never be able to use? The only way that statement makes any sense is if the early form of "Clerical" magic where followers of a deity could cast spells as if they were mages without having Magery existed on Yrth.

In 4e it is expressly stated that Power Investiture is unknown on Yrth but elsewhere it is stated that Ritual Magic does exist on Yrth. While a form of Book Path magic exists where magery isn't required it is at -5 to skill, the way to counter that is to learn “Fractional” Magery 0 which runs into the whole only half the people who know spells have Magery (of any type) issue.

[Anders]

It makes no sense from a character-optimizing stance, but people do all kinds of things that are sub-optimal. I imagine they learn them as part of a ritual before starting work - e.g., a blacksmith who learns Ignite Fire and recites it as a kind of prayer before lighting the forge. It doesn't work for him, but it's part of what his master taught him and it might do something - he doesn't know. And when he teaches it to his son (who was born with Magery 0), it actually lights the fire on its own! So the son teaches his son - who can't get it to work - but the son nevertheless does it...

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Anders

It makes no sense from a character-optimizing stance, but people do all kinds of things that are sub-optimal. I imagine they learn them as part of a ritual before starting work - e.g., a blacksmith who learns Ignite Fire and recites it as a kind of prayer before lighting the forge. It doesn't work for him, but it's part of what his master taught him and it might do something - he doesn't know. And when he teaches it to his son (who was born with Magery 0), it actually lights the fire on its own! So the son teaches his son - who can't get it to work - but the son nevertheless does it...

Or maybe some of the spectators for big ceremonial castings have seen it enough times that they could do it themselves if the universe would cooperate.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by maximara

a

Why would anyone in a normal-mana or low-mana without Magery learn a skill that in that area they would never be able to use? The only way that statement makes any sense is if the early form of "Clerical" magic where followers of a deity could cast spells as if they were mages without having Magery existed on Yrth.

No, it also makes sense if it was talking about all people who know spells put together on a global scale

[Plane]

Originally Posted by maximara

"This works exactly like the One College Only limitation (p. B67), but allows access to more than one college. Two colleges is -30%; three, -20%; and four (the maximum), -10%."

That's Two-College Magery, you had said One-Spell Magery though...

Originally Posted by maximara

Limited Magery (One Spell Magery) is still not in line with Partial Limited Magery/Limited Magery 0

Was that a mistake?

Originally Posted by maximara

Here are the guts of The Magery-Spell Paradox

In the GURPS Classic version of Yrth (when Magery was called Magical Aptitude) there was an interesting paradox created.

In the correction note for the first printing of information on Yrth it is stated: "Since Caithness is a low-mana area, the example given for the number of people to know spells is wrong. 1 in 50 might know a spell or two in a high-mana area, 1 in 100 in a normal-mana area, 1 in 500 in a low-mana area. Perhaps half these people possess Magical Aptitude. Of course, some people with Magical Aptitude, especially in low-mana areas, will never learn magic or even become aware of their talent."

Why would anyone in a normal-mana or low-mana without Magery learn a skill that in that area they would never be able to use?

It's a question made under a false premise, someone without magery who normally lives in No/VeryLow/Low/Normal mana is able to use magic if they take a vacation to a high-mana area.

As Charon concurs, the "half" who lack Magical Aptitude most likely congregate in high-mana areas.

Let's say for example there are 100/5000 people who know spells in high mana. Perhaps 99 of those 100 are non-mages

Mages don't get any benefit from being in High Mana, so I'd imagine they would probably avoid it, and prefer Normal mana where their abilities are more niche.

The 100/10,000 in Normal Mana and 100/50,000 are probably 99/100 mages. Non-mages who bothered to learn spells probably won't spend much time in those places where they can't use their learned abilities.

[pawsplay]

When this first came into print, it seemed there was an assumption that a species capable of casting a Magery spell would have to be a mage. Clearly, that does not hold true for all GURPS campaigns.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by Plane

It's a question made under a false premise, someone without magery who normally lives in No/VeryLow/Low/Normal mana is able to use magic if they take a vacation to a high-mana area.

As Charon concurs, the "half" who lack Magical Aptitude most likely congregate in high-mana areas.

Let's say for example there are 100/5000 people who know spells in high mana. Perhaps 99 of those 100 are non-mages

Mages don't get any benefit from being in High Mana, so I'd imagine they would probably avoid it, and prefer Normal mana where their abilities are more niche.

The 100/10,000 in Normal Mana and 100/50,000 are probably 99/100 mages. Non-mages who bothered to learn spells probably won't spend much time in those places where they can't use their learned abilities.

Take a good hard look at the Mana levels on Ytarria. The only areas of sizable high mana areas are Djinn Lands, the Ring Islands (which have some very high mana areas), and the Nomad Lands.

Remember the "1 in 50 might know a spell or two in a high-mana area, 1 in 100 in a normal-mana area, 1 in 500 in a low-mana area. Perhaps half these people possess Magical Aptitude" is across the entire Ytarria continent. Adjusted for the "2% have Magery" in 4e (up from the 0.5% in 3e) this becomes '2 in 25 might know a spell or two in a high-mana area, 1 in 25 in a normal-mana area, 1 in 125 in a low-mana area'.

Moreover the very concept of a "vacation", as we understand it, is something that didn't appear until the Industrial Revolution ie TL5; the highest Yrth has natively is TL4. Heck, it wasn't until the Champagne Fairs in the 12th and 13th centuries that people commuted and even that was limited to the times their crops were in season and so wasn't a regular thing.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by maximara

Take a good hard look at the Mana levels on Ytarria. The only areas of sizable high mana areas are Djinn Lands, the Ring Islands (which have some very high mana areas), and the Nomad Lands.

I'm positing that mages probably avoid Djinn/Ring/Nomad (they gain no special benefit from being there) so it's non-mage spell-knowers who venture into those parts.

Originally Posted by maximara

Remember the "1 in 50 might know a spell or two in a high-mana area, 1 in 100 in a normal-mana area, 1 in 500 in a low-mana area. Perhaps half these people possess Magical Aptitude" is across the entire Ytarria continent. Adjusted for the "2% have Magery" in 4e (up from the 0.5% in 3e) this becomes '2 in 25 might know a spell or two in a high-mana area, 1 in 25 in a normal-mana area, 1 in 125 in a low-mana area'.

Even though the % of mages has quadrupled I'm not sure if that means adjusting the numbers if they weren't changed between editions.

What I'm positing and what Charon agreed with is perhaps it's not a 50/50 split (1:1 ratio) between mage/non-mage in EACH area, but rather a 50/50 split OVERALL, with different splits/ratios depending on mana levels.

So you could have non-mage casters composing the vast majority of casters in high mana, while mages compose the majority in normal/low. Each type tending to drift towards a region where they can be useful at all (non-mages in high mana) or exclusively useful (mages in normal/low).

Originally Posted by maximara

Moreover the very concept of a "vacation", as we understand it, is something that didn't appear until the Industrial Revolution ie TL5; the highest Yrth has natively is TL4. Heck, it wasn't until the Champagne Fairs in the 12th and 13th centuries that people commuted and even that was limited to the times their crops were in season and so wasn't a regular thing.

Agree, all the more reason to assume that non-mage casters spend the majority of their time in High Mana areas to take advantage of their hard-won skill.

Their presence annoying and driving away mages, who are no longer as special, towards regions where they can remain special.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Plane

Even though the % of mages has quadrupled I'm not sure if that means adjusting the numbers if they weren't changed between editions.

In fact, an argument could be made that the quadrupling reverses the situation. Rather than half of all spellcasters being mages, perhaps only half of all mages ever actually learn any spells.