DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

In a different forum, the issue of DF artillery mages came up again, and I was induced to actually type out some musings I've had wrt Artillery Mages. Basically, I have been tempted from time to time to work up a missile spell equivalent to Heroic Archer or Weapon Master that makes missile spell specialization pew pew or boom boom wizards into a viable niche.

Something along the lines of:
This should allow DF level wizards to pew pew effectively every turn for 30-40 extra points. However, it may not be balanced and worse it steps on the scouts' toes. OTTH, it doesn't outright negate the scout, is expensive, and recreates a traditional dungeon niche.

Since I'm not running DF right now, it remains a temptation.

Thoughts?

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Hmm . . . Quick, accurate fire is almost the opposite of the classic artillery mage. In old-timey dungeon fantasy, such a mage's job was to sling long-casting-time area-effect spells that blasted everything indiscriminately. For instance, the old AD&D Fireball ("Fire Ball," if you look back far enough!) took three segments to cast to Magic Missile's one segment, and lobbed one explosive missile, not a machine-gun-like spray of projectiles. It was slow enough that interruption was a concern, so the mage needed the now-traditional screen of fighters to protect him while casting. Thanks to the way early tactical combat worked, the projectile could be lobbed over intervening friendlies who were doing this job.

In light of that, I might go for effects more like these:

Artillery Mage

1 point/level

You can enhance Missile spells (and only those spells) with certain ranged-combat enhancements from the GURPS Basic Set. Each level of Artillery Mage lets you apply +1% in the form of any of the following modifiers, at no extra energy cost or penalty to cast:

• Area Effect* (+50%/level).
• Delay (+10% or +20%).
• Explosion* (+50%/level). Treat Missile spells that are already explosive as having the first level of this enhancement.
• Guided† (+50%).
• Homing, Ordinary Vision† (+50%).
• Incendiary (+10%). On a tight-beam burning Missile spell, this removes the 1/10 damage divisor used with Making Things Burn (p. B433). On a regular burning Missile spell, this shifts the flammability class up one step.
• Increased Range (+10%/level).
• Overhead (+30%).

* Area Effect and Explosion are mutually exclusive.
† Guided and Homing are mutually exclusive.

Optionally, the GM may also allow Ricochet (+10%) from GURPS Powers.

You must choose your enhancements when you start casting the spell. If you change your mind, you must start over. If you've already created a Missile spell with a set of enhancements, they're "locked in" from that point on!

Otherwise, the modified spell works as usual. There's no effect on casting time, damage dice, energy cost, etc. Defensive spells affect it normally.

The cost may need adjustment . . . playtesting would be good for something like this. Maybe that should be +2% per level, or even +5%.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

+1% is too expensive - I wouldn't want to pay 50 points to have Explosive Fireball instead of just buying the spell. +5% is probably better - 10 points seems fair, if you have to choose which enhancement you're good at.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

To be clear: This affects all your Missile spells, and you choose the enhancements you're using each time you cast, not when you buy the ability. But yeah . . . maybe 1 point per +1% is too steep. At +5%, somebody with Heroic Archer-level points could get +100% in enhancements, which might be too good. I'm not sure.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Couldn't it be possible to get Compartmentalized Mind (with whatever -% for missile spells only) so that they could cast and lob fireballs on the same turn.

That's the route I would take.

*I don't have my books on me so I can't look up point cost, but if i remember correctly it would be similar in point total to Heroic Archer + Weapon Master Bow.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Okay, in that case, +1% seems fair - 50 points for "I can do all sorts of wackiness with my missile spells and choose as I need them, for no extra cost" is a bargain in DF.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I can see some appeal in better replicating the big game changer spells, but IME DF already does that fairly well. A three turn maxxed missile spell from a Magery 6 mage does that nicely, as well as a lot of the area spells.

The thing that I have personally experienced, and have seen several complaints about, it the deficit of actions for arty mages. Existing missile spells are more or less built to force ROF 1/2 or lower, and IME that deters their use a lot. Players like to take a significant action every round. Non boss fights tend to be short. Old school delvers in Other Games tended to have the option of one spell per round, and at higher levels as emulated in DF, often just did that. GURPS missile mages don't.

Realistic bows have the same problem but we have Heroic Archer to make a valid archer delver. Scouts don't make other delvers obsolete with their rapid bowfire though, so I don't think rapid "fire"fire would be intrinsically worse if it had a fair CP cost to damage return.

So I guess I'm just saying that I'd like to be able to make throwing a missile spell every turn a reasonable niche for a Wizard. Not overpowered, not niche stealing, but reasonable. It might not be what everyone wants, but I don't think I'm alone either. Not that you need to stop talking about "big arty" here - go ahead. It's just not what I'm interested in.

All that said, "artillery" might be exactly the wrong word here. "Riflemage" is wrong too though. "Warmage?" "Blaster Mage?" "Missileer?" "Missilseer?"

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

OK, I lied, I am a little interested in this, and I have an issue: the way that is designed gives big piles of options that can be chosen anew every time a spell is cast. Requires a lot of player and GM discipline to keep the game running fast.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

"Until further notice, every missile I cast is [insert modifier here]" saves a good bit of time, and works for most situations. Just remember to say you're NOT doing explosive when you try to snipe the gnoll in your archer's face.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I see your point, but then I'm reminded that warriors have tons of options: Swing or thrust with my weapon, shove or slam using my shield, or maybe toss in a kick or a grapple just for fun? Use Attack, Move and Attack, or one of four flavors of All-Out Attack . . . or even bug the GM to let me try Committed Attack or Defensive Attack? Make the blow a Deceptive Attack? Aim for a hit location or try to disarm? Risk a Dual-Weapon Attack or a Rapid Strike? Invoke one of my combat power-ups?

This trait gives wizards a little more choice in combat. Yes, they already get to choose spells, but in practice they fall back on a few of those. I imagine that they would do the same with this advantage: settle on favorite enhancement bundles. However, spells crossed with enhancements could at least make combat less boring for mages. I personally think that "toss a blast of energy every turn" is terribly boring, which is why I'm not in love with an approach that goes in that direction.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Yep, there's an array of options, and to some extent those options layer and multiply.

In your proposal the wizard is choosing a spell (+a number of rounds to build the spell, and possibly hit location, determined attack, etc.) and dividing some discrete but quite possibly large number of points between 8 different leveled options that cost a different number of points each on the fly. I'm not saying it's impossible, but even a cut down version of the advantage enhancement system is a bit much to juggle in combat.

I'd actually lean towards strongly encouraging them, for the reasons mentioned above. Maybe you pay X points for each Y% worth of enhancement, and then allow a perk for a "combo bonus" for predefined allocations that doubles the total allowed Y for that combo.

IME, scouts lurve "shoot an arrow every turn" in combat, so I'm not sure that swapping the fancy bow and quiver of trick arrows for a bandoleer of wands and bevy of missile spells will make it boring.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

One option would be to buy the Magical Bolt powerup from DF11 page 37.

It's an out-and-out canonical 'shoot a thing every turn' option. And I do mean 'shoot a thing', as it ~never misses the target.

If you want other forms of every turn shot, you could just mix up variants of that.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I was just about to post something about Magical Bolt. It is reliable and has RoF 1, and does fairly minor damage. It is perfect for fights with mooks, and fills a niche that the big missile spells don't. You trade power for speed.

My only beef with Magical Bolt is that it isn't on the main template. It seems designed for low-power enemies, so it is a reasonable thing for a more novice Mage to have, as opposed to being something to "level-up" to get.

The advantage proposals at the beginning of the thread are pretty cool, too. I'd split the difference on Kromm's version, and offer it at 2% per level, since the flexibility is likely to be something that gets used less often with more experience. I like the idea of offering some sort of "Fast-Draw" for missile spells, but I feel like the penalty to skill ought to be steeper so that it isn't a go to in every fight. The guy with the rocket launcher just shouldn't be whipping it out so quickly every single time, and a 6d lightning attack feels a lot like a rocket launcher to me.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

The -3 is the same penalty that WMs pay for rapid strikes or HAs pay for quick shots, and I like the consistency there. Yet you do have a point - a M6 type cold throw 6d missiles with full Acc every turn until they ran out of energy using the ability I posted.

How about limiting the missiles to Magery/2, round down? Goes with the whole "rushed" theme, and keeps the damage in the same range Scouts of similar point total.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

That might be better, and it brings damage down to the sort of lower level I'd hope for with spells dashed off quickly. The way I like to see it framed is that Wizards either do devastating damage or they plink more rapidly, and halving Magery goes toward that.

Consistency with WM and HA is a laudable goal, too. If everyone is facing a -3, maybe that is the way to go. Since range penalties are also likely to be a factor, maybe it is enough.

I think there is a place for both versions of this advantage. Kromm's version offers an array of customization that is cool, while the martini version offers a way to avoid the issue of Wizards getting a spell ready about a second too late to join the fight. The frantic pace of most minor fights is where I see the real problem, and I am not sure I have seen a solution that I feel especially drawn to use.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

My solution is and has always been to have everybody start out equally in need of prep. Warriors have to draw weapons, ready shields, and close the gap; that takes a turn or two. In the same turn or two, wizards are casting and chucking their Missile spells. The problem arises when you let warriors run around with ready weapons all the time and/or have all fights start at step distance. In my former fantasy campaign, things like a magic sword dropped in the fires of Hell because the PC blew an Acrobatics roll to go from A to B, and major reaction penalties when the PCs weren't sure if the next encounter would be friend or foe, put a stop to carrying weapons in hand. And I've always started combats at 15 yards or so except in surprise situations.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

It ignores DR and, at shorter ranges, can always hit the brain. Despite low damage the injury can be serious.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

What I see is the difference between AD&D Wizards and GURPS Wizards is the balance of power between them and fighters. In GURPS fighters can inflict huge damage every turn while in AD&D fighters did damage by weapon type plus some bonuses thus they did not get to be insta kill PCs like they are in GURPS. Plus monsters had high hit points if they were powerful so fighters in AD&D needed to hack away to kill powerful monsters which in GURPS they can kill them in one shot. The Wizard in AD&D had limited spells but if the Wizard was high level he could nuke a powerful monster while an AD&D fighter would have to steadily hack away if he wanted to kill the same monster. In GURPS this is reversed because fighters can kill powerful monsters easily due to hit locations, ST bonuses and other modifiers. A GURPS Wizard can cast a lot of little spells endlessly helping to undermine the dungeon setting but in combat they aren't able be the gamechanger because it takes a long time to cast powerful spells and because monsters in DF have low Hit Points fighters can take down powerful monsters quickly enough that they do not have wait for a wizard to blast the powerful monster with a missile spell. So the Wizard is reduced to non combat and to casting Information spells endlessly because they can cast them with little energy and thus become a pain in the a $$ for the Dungeon Master trying to keep the dungeon mysterious and exciting.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

This is good advice, but most fighter type characters in our game have Fast-Draw. Wizards don't have as easy and obvious a way to shorten the interval between attacks. Further, though warriors may need to draw and close, Wizards need to cast and attack and cast and attack again. The prep a Wizard does will have to be repeated. Archers face this, too, but there are obvious mechanisms in DF to overcome the delay faced by an archer.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Especially if you slap a Gadget Limitation onto it.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Pre-calculate. It's a GURPS tradition.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Yep.
I like Kromms idea and can see it as a style perk.
I can see the plinking niche too though and also something like Heroic Archer and Zen Archery for spells.
Mix it all together on enough points and you have some versatile and powerful artillery mages.

For plinking how about this.
Aetheric Dart Missile Spell
Cost 1 Acc 3 Damage 1d-2
This spell creates a small missile that does impaling damage.
The energy responds particularly well to Will and the attack roll is based off IQ rather then DX. It can be held and charged up like other missile spells but instead of increasing the power the accuracy is increased by 3 per turn to a max of ACC = Magery *3. Cost increases 1 per turn charged just like other missile spells.
The spell can be cast as a Blocking spell for 1 extra energy cost.

The Blocking part may be overpowered but we already have spells that can be an attack set up as Blocking spells so the precedent is there.
This gives a mage a good 0 cost plink spell at skill 15 and a nice Fast Draw type when needed but you need skill 20 to use it that way for free.
And give it some time and you have a very accurate long range attack.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

If you want to spend points on a "pew pew" mage...

Compartmentalized Mind (Magic PM, -10%; No Mental Separation, -20%; Missile Spells only, -30%) [20]

You can then throw a 1(M) point missile every turn, or a 3(M) point missile every other turn.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Remember what an old-school artillery mage actually does. If he does his job right, he chucks his big area spell, mostly kills the enemy, and goes off to have a healing potion while his pals mop up. The goal he's designed to meet isn't "do something each turn in combat" but "contribute meaningfully to combat." If he has enough of the advantage I described, he can unload something with Area Effect 3 and do full damage to every bad guy in an area wider than the warriors' Move.

That said, thinking about this last night, I believe the fairest cost might be 2 points per +5% allowed. So being able to add Explosion 1 to everything is 20 points, and the Area Effect 3 I mentioned would show up at 60 points.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Maybe it would be better to do this as techniques? That would cut down on the massively multiple choice mage.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Experience has shown me that the added complication of techniques and techniques lists in DF causes far more hesitancy and headache than open-ended traits. Players tend to respond more negatively to busy character sheets than to one "do stuff" ability that requires them to think about what they do. Most players are pretty good at that, actually . . . "I want to blow everything up!" "Fine, add Explosion."

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

And it's good to remember that a DF Wizard can contribute to a fight by non-magical means. A non-casting wizard is about the weakest PC you can get but they can still put up a respectable melee fight against lesser enemies, or throw or sling projectiles. Regrettably Thrown Weapon (dart) is set as an alternative to Innate Attack, which the artillery wizard needs more.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

What about some sort of fast casting power that would allow a wizard to cast spells rapidly at the cost of using a lot of magical energy? Combat in DF is so quick that waiting to cast a spell puts the wizard at a disadvantage.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

They already get reduction becasue of high skill.
ATR is another way to build that too.
But fast casting removes a major imitation on thier power so should be limited to specific spells or very expesive IMHO

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Ultimately, the GM must solve the problem that his group actually has.

For instance, I've been GMing GURPS since 1986, and in those 27 years, I've run mostly fantasy (three long-running fantasy campaigns account for 17 years of that time). I've had the player of a wizard PC complain just once that magic was too slow, she felt left out, she had nothing to do on her turn, etc. Over the same time period, I've had all but one player of a wizard complain about being unable to blast the entire enemy force with a big, old-school spell like AD&D's Meteor Swarm. This is probably a direct result of gaming with people born in the late 1960s who started gaming in the 1970s . . . they expect wizards to do one big thing, not the constant bolt-chucking of computer-game magic-users. For my players, then, my proposed advantage would be ideal.

However, a group of people who want constant bolt-chucking wouldn't like that. For them, I'd recommend the other solution offered here, or just using Magical Bolt from Dungeon Fantasy 11. If Magical Bolt seems too weak, change damage from nd(∞) to 2.5nd; it'll cost the same. If the GM doesn't mind a steady stream of zero-FP-cost 4d bolts that can't miss the target, then that's a fair use of 40 points.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I think the problem I have with GURPS Wizards inDF I that I think that there are two types of PCs; the routine PCs and the extraordinary PC. The fighters are routine PCs in that can attack often and do the routine stuff in a dungeon. The thief is also routine as he checks for traps and scouts ahead for danger etc. The cleric tends to be routine in curing wounds and removing curses etc. But the wizard is extraordinary, he has godlike powers and can do almost anything. To balance this his magic powers are not routine and they can be used endlessly he needs to wait until the big battle to unleash his power so he relies on his routine PC fellow delvers to help him explore the dungeon and defend him until the big battle. The wizard in my mind does not use magic for trifle purposes so he won't use magic to detect traps or open locks unless absolutely necessary. He will instead rely on the party thief to do routine tasks. The wizard in my mind is like the one in the movie Dragonslayer or even like Gandalf who uses routine hobbits and dwarves to help him destroy the ring.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I've also considered just allowing mages to buy pure innate attacks that mimic the form and damage type of their existing missile spells. Maybe limit it to the number of points you have in the parent spell and buy it as an alternate ability, so to have a really awesome innate fireball you also have to be pretty good at the core spell. (Less for balance than for flava.)

I went with the Heroic Archer mimicking route instead more out of an personal distrust of the innate attack build system than anything else.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I run a dungeon-based DF game; everyone always has weapons out already. Even the wizards, who know not to rely on distance and "I"ll have time to cast" for their own survival. ;)

That said, what would be a fair cost for the Artillery Mage enhancements if it was one spell, one specific enhancement? In other words, if you had to choose, say, Explosion (+50%) and only on a specific spell?

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Without any of the extra costs/skill penalties involved in Adjustable Spell: Enhanced Spell, I would set the cost at 1 point/+10%. That way the regular Explosive version is still cheaper to learn, but uses up more energy. That won't work for any spell/enhancement combination, but it's probably not over-powered. Heck, 1 point/+20% might still be fair in some campaigns.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

My assumption would be that many Wizard players would want a bit of both worlds:

1. The ability to launch powerful damage-causing spells, single-target and area-of-effect, for use in climax battles, but it's okay if these are severely limited (costing FP, or subject to something similar to Limited Use x/Day). The Costs FP Limitation is far from ideal, for this, however, because you don't actually get much of a discount for it, and Limited Use as written is completely ridiculous.

2. The ability to contribute something magical during run-of-the-mill combat encounters. This has to be sustainable throughout an entire dungeoncrawl, so having to pay FP is bad, except if some mechanic can be devised in which the first 3 or 4 uses per fight cost zerp FP and subsequent uses have a low but non-zero FP cost, e.g. by having a very specialized ER that recharges so quickly that it's essentially always full again every time a new fight starts (so we're talking a few minutes).

Magical Bolt looks fairly good, but its ability to automagically hit increases it CP cost, and I imagine that many DF players would prefer a cheaper version (more damage-per-CP) even if they have to roll to hit.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I'd love to see what sort of solutions you'd come up with for mages in a Ultra-tech world where distance isn't really a factor and it's the mages who suffer when things like 80DR armors and stuff come into play. That 1 FP = 1d damage becomes hell on a mage when someone else can shoot a gun.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Draw Power. Provide them with ultra-tech fuel sources, or magitech spell batteries.

However, at that tech level more battle mages are probably doing something along the lines of illusions, mind control, or tech control for opponents' equipment, not hurling damage spells.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

. . . and probably use guns themselves. If everyone is firing x-ray lasers and you want to compete by shooting fireballs, you would need to up fireballs to a ridiculous extreme to keep up. A GM could do that, but equally could just say, "it's 1d for 1 FP if you do it yourself, but you can use an x-ray laser like everyone else."

At an ultra-tech level of play, where ST plays no role in determine how much a given ranged weapon does for damage, it's going to be hard to compete with personally-generated attack spells. Save them and do other things, IMO, and stop worrying about killing people with your magical powers when you've got a more serious weapon on your hip.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Even those wizards supplemented their awesome powers with X-Wings and light sabers.

Just sayin'.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Oh, yeah, I know. Jedi might be a little snotty about modern conveniences, but I was just struck by how much your post sounded like a particular unimpressed smuggler.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Yeah, it did to me while I was writing it, too. But really, don't fight blasters by out-blasting them. The usual "spells instead of swords" thing is that it's hard to do both. It's trivial to do both when you have UT weaponry.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Besides, throwing fireballs and lightning bolts in a world where the best ranged weapons are bows makes you unique. It's not so special when the guy beside you can buy a plasma thrower from a crook on a street corner.

If I were creating an ultra-tech world where mages still had something of awe and mystery about them, they shouldn't just be able to do as well as someone with tools. They should be able to do impossible things. It should be about raising the dead. Telling the future. Summoning spirits. Controlling people's minds (and computers) with a word and a gesture. Getting lucky. And if that mage knows a Word of Power, the effects are going to scale with the world, because you can't out-tech reality.

Also, I would have mages be... well... slightly crazy. Tech worlds are big on science. Magic's not science. It's not even rational. They have a DWIM algorithm for the universe, and DWIM algorithms shouldn't exist. If you want to have them match tech for big flashy effects, let them contact spirits with huge energy pools and high-point powers, and convince the spirits to do the work for them, tearing up cities or searching sectors in an eyeblink. But the spirits are not entirely safe to speak to, and only remotely safe if you're a virgin, or a seventh son of a seventh son, or haven't had any salt for 24 hours, or speak to them in Latin, or some other condition that makes no sense to humans.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I don't think there's anything wrong with a setting where wizards hurl missile spells that are competitive with (or even better than) the technological weapons they are competing with. There's not a lot of settings that work that way, of course, but if a GURPS GM wanted to do it and still use GURPS Magic mostly RAW, I'd probably advise spell TLs (to prevent TL 3 wizards from having ~TL8 weapons) tied to damage divisors and range modifiers.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

That's possible, of course, but not always the case. Wizardly destructive spells don't have to be moderate. In some settings, rather than approximating hand grenades and maybe pistol fire, wizardly wrath bears more resemblance to high-UT personal weapons, artillery strikes, or even heavy starship weapon batteries.

Evocation being an obsolescent art at higher tech levels mostly follows from fitting wizards for balance at TL ~3 and then transposing them forward without advancement. If the setting isn't really concerned with TL3 balance (either because not-TL3 or not-balance), it can go quite different places with that.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Okay, so make it possible - but it should cost more. A lot more. If your fireball is a heavy starship battery in strength, it shouldn't cost 1 point to learn and 35 for Magery 3.

The problem I have, really, is the "GURPS Magic should natively do all of this at all levels of scaling, and magic should be inexpensive, fast, powerful, and versatile" approach. I don't think it needs to do that. GURPS has other ways to do this, so why not use them?

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Yeah. Keeping it skill-based is a legitimate option, but if 'disintegrate' is a basic spell, the entry fee needs to be higher.
What other ways to actually do that? I don't think GURPS has any ways to do that except buying yourself an ultratech armory. Which would be deliberately missing the point.

And even if you're willing to write off 'inexpensive', there are things GURPS magic does that GURPS alternatives are iffy on. Skill-and-personal-energy driven. Missile spell mechanics. Of course, if you just write your own GURPS Magic for the setting you actually want to play, that can all work out.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Wizardry in ultra-tech settings is a lot more interesting when this is a noun phrase.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Even mundane wrath bears spice up a setting.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Innate Attack is pretty kaboomy...

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Not simultaneously inexpensive, powerful, and versatile...

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I really think this is a good place to use TL. By default GURPS magic doesn't use TLs, but adding it isn't gonna break things, and might make TL(Not 2 or 3) magic more adaptable.

IMO a missile spell should be comparable to a
A sidearm of the same TL for 1 energy
A military grade personal weapon of the same TL for 2-4 energy
A support weapon of the same TL around 4-9 energy
A heavy/siege weapon at 10+ energy

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

There's no particular reason this should be the case unless you want it to be. There are all sorts of other considerations, like recharge and security issues, that change the calculus on what role wizards can play in an ultra-tech setting. For instance, wizards at TL3 are usually perceived as smart; a wizard at TL10 who is basically a cannon with infinite ammo is not necessarily going to be treated as any brighter than your comms specialist.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I'm definitely in favor of this route, or something similar. If folks really can't justify changing the rules of magic in their game, have it be done through technology instead - a technomagic amplifier, that boosts the damage of missile spells by x3 or more (other effects TBD).

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

You could even balance that approach by paying for TL or using the Campaign default. So a TL 3 mage who can cast TL 6 spells buys TL +3 as an extra cost for his superior firepower. Also should allow the accessory perk to cover more things.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Hmn, this is an interesting train of thought.


Instead of Dice of damage, make base damage equal to TL, and use converting adds to dice. So At TL 4, it's 1d per energy point, at TL 7, it's 2d... TL 11 is 3 etc.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

That wont satisfy the Magic must be equal or superior to tech crowd though.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

It also implies that TL0 casters can't inflict any damage with their spells. Still, it's a start, and an easy rule to remember.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I prefer armor divisors and range mods to damage mods. Armor divisors because a 3d(10) weapon is more interesting than a 6dx5 weapon in play for lots of reasons and with magic we don't have to worry about reality checks. Range mods because high TL stuff way out-ranges most spells.

I don't suggest flat Acc bonuses because invisible sniper weapons are a bit iffy for game balance, but part of me thinks a "sniper staff" with a magitek phantaso-scope that adds (TL-4) to Acc, + possible scope and precision aiming bonuses would be kinda cool.

Going back to the beginning of the thread, you might just use Kromm's advantage proposal and give every TL some fixed number of points to spread around. That way you get short range AP "fireball plasma lance" stuff and long range "sunlazor" plinking stuff that the Powered Infantry can laugh off, plus grenades, mortars, etc.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

As a further Noodling opportunity, I think we need to clarify some terminology here.

"Artillery Mage" is already kinda blurry, and seems to mean any mage that specializes in damaging attacks spells like missile spells.

One sub-grouping of AMs seems to specialize in large devastating attacks, like big fireballs etc. "Artillery Mage" would be an ideal designation for this but it is already taken. I'm gonna suggest "Boomer Mage" because they like spells that go boom and because they like to nuke things.

One sub-grouping of AMs seems to specialize in routine attacks that they can use frequently. Maybe "Spellslinger?"

Anyway, thoughts on names and categories?

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I think you actually got the names right in your very first post: the two categories are definitely "boom boom" and "pew pew". :)

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Right, and just add the limitation that it only works where there is mana, and if you hate it being free make it cost some FP if you like. It's not a trivial build but X for free, 2X for some extra time or FP or both, 3X for more, etc. is buildable with GURPS Basic Set.

Is that the goal? You should be able to out-fight technology at any given TL and have it be inexpensive, powerful, and versatile?

I can't get behind that at all, so I'll just step aside and let you guys figure out what you want. For me, the kind of thing being talked about should cost a lot of energy to use, or a lot of points. To me, a mage who can fire fireballs that out-do modern weapons is a superhero, and should be built on superheroic point levels.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Uh, did you follow the thread there? You wrote:
I questioned the assertion that GURPS has other ways to do what you said it did. What you quoted is one response in from that.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

As you can probably tell from my suggestion of IAs upthread I definitely didn't get the impression Peter was suggesting that a replacement should have all those features.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Oooh, I think I had a pronoun (the 'this' in the last sentence I quoted) mapped to the wrong thing. That makes sense then!

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

That's absolutely not the goal. We'd just like magic at higher TLs to not be an inherently losing proposition. There's a big difference between scaling to keep a rough parity with technology, and completely outclassing technology.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

It's not. Magic is powerful at high TLs in roughly the same way it's powerful at low -- plot-destroying information spells, mind control, buffs, and utility effects. If you make artillery spells useful, you really have to deal with the overpowered stuff in magic.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say - not saying GURPS would allow all of that to happen at once. At least not inexpensively in terms of points, even if it was a "I can blow up a planet for 0 FP every second!" type of power. Lots of points even if it's cheap in actual play.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Fine, but I'm still bowing out because:

- I don't think GURPS Magic needs to scale on damage. GURPS Magic mages have a whole lot more much better stuff they can do than inflict damage, and I think that's the real upside to mages with that system. Giving them "keep up with the tech in terms of damage" is something I think is a mistake, based on how powerfully effective I find them with non-damaging powers (which they then augment with slow but IME effective damaging attacks). IMO straight-up non-attack magic in GURPS Magic gets dramatically more effective coupled with high technology and Draw Power, not less effective. I'd rather be the mage with Great Haste and an x-ray laser than just a guy with an x-ray laser.

- I don't think you need to do this with GURPS Magic, because you can do it other ways, in a manner that is much more fair in terms of cost to buy the level of effect. GURPS Magic spells are cheap for what they do, and since as I said above I feel what they do is better when combined with tech, I think the way to go is with Innate Attack and Affliction, not scaling the spells.

Obviously folks disagree, so I don't see me putting anything productive into the discussion.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Although - if you're adverse to Innate Attack, RPM has a pretty darn high damage output built into it. Not surprising, as it's baselined against "Action Hero" TL8 weapons.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I think the healing abilities out of Magic are better than what you will get at any tech, ever. In theory it's even possible to cast the Resurrection spell if you can manage to get 300 thaums of energy together at once.

Not to mention legit summoning of the spirits of the dead to communicate with them and other stuff I don't think technology is ever going to touch.

I think for DF artillery mages are good enough as they are. For other genres artillery mages don't make as much sense and there's loads of better things you can do with magic.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

And this is the important part!

GURPS Magic's baseline is 1d~ as it presumes a Low-Tech setting where most attacks are 1d~ (ST 10~ with a -2 ~ +2 weapon). If your setting isn't using that as its' baseline attack, then you should adjust the spell's damage values accordingly; if your setting's baseline attack is 9d(10), then replace the '1d' in the spell description with '9d(10)'.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

The average damage output of characters at the point level of mages is upwards of 2d cutting. I'd normalize it at 3 fatigue for the equivalent of a TL-appropriate rifle (including range, accuracy, and rate of fire).

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

If non damaging magic is really good, I don't see how having damaging magic suck is going to balance things.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

You're not running DF, but you're playing in one, and speaking as the Cleric who has to fire off a Sunbolt at the beast when you're missing from game, I hope you get this sorted soon. Theltemes died in the line of duty last night while you were off 'moving into a new home' whatever that means. :)

-P

PS: Theltemes deserved it, using a druid with a spear to poke an ogre only made it *angry*. I used a *lot* of healing to prop our barbarian up and my medical knowledge was insufficient to bringing Theltemes back from the brink.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

I hadn't realized that Martinl was looking at how to do this. He and I are in the same gaming group. I've used Innate attack to simulate a single bread and butter combat spell that does low damage instantly on need (Anyone who has seen "Sorcerer's Apprentice" with Nicholas Cage: Plasma Bolt!)

Then, I go and buy all the other spells from the standard spell table so that I can drop higher powered spells at longer intervals as needed.

-P

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

It means that you can't be really good in two separate categories at once for a trivial cost. If you limit mages to one school or a really small number of spells, sure, make the damaging spells better.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Guns/TL8 (Rifles) is an Easy skill. The current suggestion for a modern or ultra-tech mage who wants competitive ranged damage output is to take that skill. Easy skills are trivial point investments; any alternative should be of comparable cost.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Guns/TL8 (Rifles) is worth diddly squat unless you have a gun. Which costs money, is subject to law and social control, and can be dropped.

That's how equipment works in GURPS. You're comparing to a small segment of the cost, and complaining that that small segment is cheap. The problem is that the "cost" of equipment is payed in various different currencies, of which points is only one.

Re: DF Artillery Mages Noodling
 

Either I've lost the subthread I'm responding to or you have. Reconstructing ...

Done. And, so, thereby: Erm? (I'm not trying to be an ass. Really, I'm not. You appear to be coming at it from an angle that doesn't make any sense to me and so I'm confused.)

My argument, such as it is, is that if the GM wishes missile-mages to be competitive with other ranged damage dealers, then the GM should scale the missile-spell's damage to the setting's baseline damage and that the GM shouldn't charge the mage more points to be competitive than the GM would charge any other ranged damage dealer to be competitive.

Saying, "But you can do all these other things!" isn't especially relevant; you get what you pay for. Each and every single one of those other currencies also cost points. [Everything in GURPS costs points, directly or indirectly.] The factor of it being a mage doing it vs it being a sniper doing it is essentially a Feature. A rifle-equivalent missile spell costs fatigue, is subject to legal/social controls and can't be dropped. A rifle costs G$, is subject to legal/social controls and can be dropped. The difference washes out in terms of costs and benefits.

I'd still prefer the rifle over the missile spell because the rifle doesn't cost fatigue [fatigue is worth more to me than the G$ spent on bullets; gear comes and goes, fatigue loss gets you dead and there are so many other things a mage can be spending that fatigue on] and because the rifle can be gotten rid of [walking around with the world knowing that you are armed with a dangerous weapon they can't take away from you is an excellent way to become an "unfortunate accident" if you ever run afoul of the law].