To what extent does RPM encourage/facilitate/prevent generalist casters?

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Refplace

However in a game specilits do help make the charecters look different which is IMHO a good thing and not just for niche protection.

That is exactly my point. RPGs are interesting in part because it's about simulating how characters are different from each other, individualized by not all having the same capabilities. It's therefore better if spellcasters are different from each other, in terms of their core concept ability (that they can cast spells), than if they are not. Both from an in-party point if there are multiple casters, and from a larger and wider world point.

I don't think RPM is as bad at it as GURPS Magic, though. But as I said earlier, I'm not sure how much less bad it is.

One interesting question is whether a caster with 1 CP in eight of the Paths and 16 CPs in the 9th is a generalist or a specialist, or if we need some new term for that kind of caster, or more generally for that kind of character type. Dabblist, a combination (portmanteau) of dabbler-specialist?

And how much it matters. It's my impression that higher Path skills are very worthwhile in RPM, unlike in GURPS Magic where once you hit skill 15 you basically stop wanting to put CP into that spell, unless it's one you use really often.



Part of what interests me is the presence of player-chooseable inborn skewed aptitudes in the character creation system, e.g. One-College Magery in vanilla GURPS (in worlds where Magery can't be learned), or the many Virtues and Flaws in Ars Magica that makes the magi character more or less apt at using particular kinds of magic.

Those serve to build in permanent flavour in the character, influencing his future development, usually not in an absolute way (few Ars Magica magi have Flaws that completely prevent them from using any one Verb or Noun) but rather as a matter of degree, encouraging or discouraging the character from pursuing certain career paths, but not always so strongly that sufficient in-character motivation (or in-world developments, e.g. if the party's Covenant needs someone to become a necromancer) can never counter-act it. And of course combinable in a multitide of permutations, unlike the rigidity of few-class systems such as D&D or AD&D.

[Lamech]

RPM's power level increases quadratically more or less when it comes to energy gathering. You get more rolls before you start picking up excessive quirks AND you get more energy per roll. Focusing on one path (magery-40% only two required skills) cuts the cost in half, which means you can get much huger spells. Not only that spells can increase more than linearly when tied to energy cost. A spell that adds 100 points of whatever, is more than twice as good as one with 50 energy points.

[Refplace]

To me there are a lot of options but one of them is to simply have more Paths in a campaign if you want to encourage variety.
For my Campaign I have

Ritual Path Magery (Kayan) tht is based off the Chinese elemental system and has an extra Memory Path. It does not have an energy or matter path, noe an Undead one.

RPM (Hike) has I think 9 Paths and is loosely based off Egyptian mythology and is focused more on Spirit.

RPM (Preta) is my variation on Vampires and Hungry Ghosts and has 3 Paths.
Undead (which they an use for Body and Mind on themselves so its very powerful, Feeding (Magic variation with some Mind), and Void which is a negation and destruction type of Path.
Still working on that one, redoing my Vampires who used to use that system is a work in progress with a lot of changes to make.

RPM (Lanterns) still is a work in progress and was an Effect Based system but I finally decided to port it over for balance.

RPM (Dwarven) is another one that works with Symbol Drawing.

And I am looking at a Chi based one a well.

Now each of these are limited compared to bog standard RPM but I hink there very useful and offer interesting mixes. RPM Magery will add to most of them so you can have people learn more then one system with just a skill point investment.

[lexington]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

That is exactly my point. RPGs are interesting in part because it's about simulating how characters are different from each other, individualized by not all having the same capabilities. It's therefore better if spellcasters are different from each other, in terms of their core concept ability (that they can cast spells), than if they are not. Both from an in-party point if there are multiple casters, and from a larger and wider world point.

Wow, you're just unbelievably self-centered aren't you? It's kind of adorable.

[Gnome]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

I don't think RPM is as bad at it as GURPS Magic, though. But as I said earlier, I'm not sure how much less bad it is.

GURPS Magic mages are far more specialized than RPM mages. They can only cast from their limited spell list, and they can only learn spells they have the prerequisites for. If you want to force mages to specialize even further, you can give each college a prerequisite mundane skill as an "entry cost" (i.e. Animal Handling for Animal, Physiology for Body Control, etc.).

It's my impression that higher Path skills are very worthwhile in RPM, unlike in GURPS Magic where once you hit skill 15 you basically stop wanting to put CP into that spell, unless it's one you use really often.

I've played a large number of campaigns with GURPS Magic, and I can tell you there's huge incentive to raise spells to 16 and above; I've seen many players happy to do it. Between range penalties, penalties for spells on, and further bonuses at 20 and above, there's always a use for higher skill.