Multiple One College Only Magery?

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

I think that's one of the reasons why GURPS Magic's magic system is crap.

GURPS Fantasy tries to kludge around the issue by modifying the One-College Magery Limitation, depending on how many colleges there are, from 2 colleges and up to various numbers, possibly not going over the 24 (IIRC) colleges there are in the default GURPS Magic magic system.

But the fact is, Magery is a crappily advantage, in that it does 2 different things simultaneously, and I've never seen anyone propose a fix for it.

Then you haven't been listening. For that matter Magery 0 is a patch that tries to fix it. I think the reason it doesn't work is Magery actually does at least three things, and the one that should be taking the limitations is the one that *hasn't* been separated.

It adds its level to your spell skills. This is a Talent, and almost no limitations ought to apply. You can't use *any* talents in situations you can't use the skills it covers, so limiting it because of restrictions on when you can use a spell isn't valid. And at 10 per level it really shouldn't be reduced in cost for One College if your college has more than 6 (or 10 for the variant pricing) spells in it.

It allows you to sometimes sense enchantments and mana levels. This is the piece Magery 0 attempts to separate. It shouldn't take most Magery limitations (which it originally didn't, until Thaumatology had to "correct" that because of the failure to separate the next part), but One College might actually be OK, if you can't sense items using different colleges, or mana levels that aren't aspected. At 5 points this is an oddly cheap form of Detect

It allows you to cast spells in the first place. This is the bit that *ought* to take most of the limitations, and isn't separated out. I suppose you could say it's officially worth 0 points, since all humans are given Can Cast Spells (only in high mana) for free. Of course if you do that, then any kind of limitation that only restricts when or how you can cast spells (e.g. Dance, Dark Aspected, Solitary, Song) is worth 0 too - i.e. pretty much all the official limitations on Magery should cost exactly the same thing as the unlimited version. That's clearly nonsense, and it's the failure to separate out this piece so you can modify it and not the other parts that makes Magery limitations such a mess.

[reddir]

Originally Posted by malloyd

...I think the reason it doesn't work is Magery actually does at least three things, and the one that should be taking the limitations is the one that *hasn't* been separated.

It adds its level to your spell skills. This is a Talent, and almost no limitations ought to apply. You can't use *any* talents in situations you can't use the skills it covers, so limiting it because of restrictions on when you can use a spell isn't valid. And at 10 per level it really shouldn't be reduced in cost for One College if your college has more than 6 (or 10 for the variant pricing) spells in it.

It allows you to sometimes sense enchantments and mana levels. This is the piece Magery 0 attempts to separate. It shouldn't take most Magery limitations (which it originally didn't, until Thaumatology had to "correct" that because of the failure to separate the next part), but One College might actually be OK, if you can't sense items using different colleges, or mana levels that aren't aspected. At 5 points this is an oddly cheap form of Detect

It allows you to cast spells in the first place. This is the bit that *ought* to take most of the limitations, and isn't separated out. I suppose you could say it's officially worth 0 points, since all humans are given Can Cast Spells (only in high mana) for free. Of course if you do that, then any kind of limitation that only restricts when or how you can cast spells (e.g. Dance, Dark Aspected, Solitary, Song) is worth 0 too - i.e. pretty much all the official limitations on Magery should cost exactly the same thing as the unlimited version. That's clearly nonsense, and it's the failure to separate out this piece so you can modify it and not the other parts that makes Magery limitations such a mess.

Thank you for explaining this. I'm finding it much easier to think about Magery, and how it might sensibly be tweeked for different flavors, after reading this.

[simply Nathan]

I think I might just ignore Magery 0 if I run a campaign and rebuild the leveled magery with existing Talent rules (I'm going to have maybe 50-100 spells in my setting total, chosen for rules simplicity and adventure utility); 15 for unrestricted Magery, 10 for themes like "Elemental/Nuke wizard" or "Clerical/Healing wizard", and occasionally throw a spell or two into an otherwise mundane talent as appropriate "Artificers get bonuses to Armoury, Masonry, Carpentry...and Enchant".

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by malloyd

It allows you to cast spells in the first place. This is the bit that *ought* to take most of the limitations, and isn't separated out. I suppose you could say it's officially worth 0 points, since all humans are given Can Cast Spells (only in high mana) for free.

Actually it's officially worth 0 points, because "serving as a prerequisite" is worth 0 points.

Personally I'd use the Style system to handle magicians who can only cast spells by clog dancing. They belong to the Clog Dancing Style and the Clog Dancing Style only teaches spells cast via clog dancing and requires its members in good standing to clog dance while casting spells

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Actually it's officially worth 0 points, because "serving as a prerequisite" is worth 0 points.

So do you let non-mage characters claim a 0 point feature to be able to cast any spells they want to learn in normal and low mana? If the answer is no, then there is something else involved there.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by malloyd

So do you let non-mage characters claim a 0 point feature to be able to cast any spells they want to learn in normal and low mana? If the answer is no, then there is something else involved there.

But there isn't. The decision to make spell casting dependent on being able to "feel" mana is a world building decision entirely. I have come up with worlds where you would need an Unusual Origin to be a male spell caster (because it's a sex-linked trait) and where to be a spell caster you have to either have be a "halfling" (be part fae) or have a fae familiar. I charged no points to be a woman or a halfling who can't cast spells (although a halfling who can't cast spells likely has some other supernatural advantage). There's nothing involved except my desire to have my world work the way I want it to.

[Sunrunners_Fire]

Originally Posted by malloyd

So do you let non-mage characters claim a 0 point feature to be able to cast any spells they want to learn in normal and low mana? If the answer is no, then there is something else involved there.

Setting Features are not Character Features; neither cost character points.

The ability to cast known spells in High Mana (or higher) is a Setting Feature, as is the inability to cast known spells in Normal Mana (or lower). Magery includes a Character Feature of "I Can Cast Known Spells In Low Mana (Or Higher)" that overrides the general Setting Feature by virtue of its' specificity. This doesn't cost anything extra.

"Requires Prerequisite" is a feature. It costs nothing, gives nothing. If the trait isn't balanced on its' own merits, it won't be balanced with or without a prerequisite.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Sunrunners_Fire

The ability to cast known spells in High Mana (or higher) is a Setting Feature, as is the inability to cast known spells in Normal Mana (or lower). Magery includes a Character Feature of "I Can Cast Known Spells In Low Mana (Or Higher)" that overrides the general Setting Feature by virtue of its' specificity. This doesn't cost anything extra.

I don't think we are talking about the same issue. Imagine two characters in the *same* setting. They are absolutely identical in all respects - same spells, same skill levels, same (lack of) ability to sense magic. One of them can only cast his spells in high mana, of which there may only be a few spots on the planet, the other can cast them in the normal mana that is present nearly everywhere. Are these two characters worth the same number of points?

I think it's pretty obvious one of them has a real advantage over the other, is it worth 0 points?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by malloyd

I don't think we are talking about the same issue. Imagine two characters in the *same* setting. They are absolutely identical in all respects - same spells, same skill levels, same (lack of) ability to sense magic. One of them can only cast his spells in high mana, of which there may only be a few spots on the planet, the other can cast them in the normal mana that is present nearly everywhere. Are these two characters worth the same number of points?

I think it's pretty obvious one of them has a real advantage over the other, is it worth 0 points?

It's perfectly possible to set things up so that people who are not gingers can only cast on top of mountains but the obvious intent behind such a set up is that if you are a PC magician, then you have red hair and there that are also some grumpy blonde or brunette NPC magicians who live on top of mountains. So yes, it's worth 0 points.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

It's perfectly possible to set things up so that people who are not gingers can only cast on top of mountains but the obvious intent behind such a set up is that if you are a PC magician, then you have red hair and there that are also some grumpy brunette NPC magicians who live on top of mountains. So yes, it's worth 0 points.

Not very Generic and Universal though.

This "solves" the problem for any disadvantage whatsoever, but not in a very satisfactory way. The obvious intent is that you not play a character with [insert any problem here], and if you want to anyway, too bad, the rules don't support playing that way.