Another balancing Magic thread

[duo31]

So I've been toying with the idea of trying to run a D&D style Fantasy Heartbreaker using the SR4 skills Mechanic, and the Alt.War damage system. Basically I want a fantasy game that encourages planning and tactics, and less stupid. Also, I want scaling HPs to die. Getting stabbed by a peasant with a pitchfork should still hurt and PCs should still be afraid of being shot in the back by a thug with a crossbow. Also, levels can die. Having better skills or more stuff should be the measure of power, not i killed a bunch of stuff so now i can jump off of cliffs with impunity.

However, I'm wondering how to balance Magic in the setting. In Shadowrun, Magic is balanced against Sufficiently Advanced Technology and there is no decisive one is better than the other.

Do we make the PCs play a different game than NPCs, ie make being a magic user NPC only, or does Magic need to be ubiquitous, such that there is common magic, which acts like advanced tech, and then you have
specialist magic users, who study very limited fields, such as summoning spirits, or mind control, or illusions and mana balling things?

The 1st idea is very 1st/2nd Ed thing to do. Fuck the PCs, they are just schlubs who decided that they were willing to accept a higher risk for a greater reward (murder hoboing) than the time honored tradition
of crap farming.

The 2nd idea is very 3.x/4E in that you are special little snowflake super murder hobos, and you do shit cuz you are awesome and everyone else is a shitbag waiting to die.

Which do you think tells better stories, or is more fun?


Also, anyone have a good chase mechanic? Running away should be a viable option.

[Juton]

Most people seem to prefer being super special murder hobos.

Getting back to your main question, there are mainly two ways to balance magic. The first is to give every class or archetype something fantastic, and for those fantastic things to be roughly equally useful. Which works if you can get your group to agree that a Warblade is a fine replacement for a Fighter. Which is surprisingly difficult to do a lot of the time. That's why fighters still suck in all the ways they where sucking 40 years ago, plus a few extra.

The second is to give magic real limitations and real disadvantages. There are a few problems with this. First is players with a low degree of system mastery or common sense will die a lot playing a mage, and they will bitch incessantly about it. You have to very rigorously police power creep, because it will happen. Lastly it's hard to make disadvantages meaningful and not a complete pain in the ass.

So no matter which route you choose you'll make someone unhappy. The benefit of being a game designer is you get to be the person who decides who is unhappy.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

The 1st idea is very 1st/2nd Ed thing to do. Fuck the PCs, they are just schlubs who decided that they were willing to accept a higher risk for a greater reward (murder hoboing) than the time honored tradition
of crap farming.

That's not a very 1e/2e mentality. In AD&D, one of the core power conceits is that only a very few people even get to level 1 at all. PCs were inherently better than your average crap-farmer because if a crap farmer decided to go fight orcs, he wouldn't gain levels, he would die.

[sabs]

FASA when they made their fantasy heartbreaker based on shadowrun, made everyone who mattered use Magic.

Warrior Adepts
Archer Adepts.. etc

[Red_Rob]

So I've been toying with the idea of trying to run a D&D style Fantasy Heartbreaker... Also, I want scaling HPs to die... Also, levels can die.

At this point I'd stop referring to it as "D&D Style", it's just going to confuse people. It's a low fantasy game where one person is never going to be able to ignore a bunch of mooks with swords, which is a fine game concept and models a lot of source material better than D&D does, but it's not really in the same genre as D&D despite having similar trappings.

Regarding magic/not magic, balancing it vs. mundane is a lot easier if you don't do the D&D "scale to infinity" thing. Casters and noncasters are fairly balanced up to level 10ish in D&D, so if you never go beyond the magical power level of movie-Gandalf you don't have so much to worry about.

[ishy]

Also, anyone have a good chase mechanic? Running away should be a viable option.

It seems you want a more 'realistic' type of game.
If you want running away to be a viable option, the people who run need to be just as good or better at moving and/or hiding than their opponents.
In typical D&D you meet enemies who have high movement speed, high fly speed, teleportation at will, scent, tremor sense etc etc.
Any realistic chase / escape mechanic is doomed to fail.

Though since your heartbreaker is not D&D, it depends on what your system actually does.

[duo31]

The 1st idea is very 1st/2nd Ed thing to do. Fuck the PCs, they are just schlubs who decided that they were willing to accept a higher risk for a greater reward (murder hoboing) than the time honored tradition
of crap farming.

That's not a very 1e/2e mentality. In AD&D, one of the core power conceits is that only a very few people even get to level 1 at all. PCs were inherently better than your average crap-farmer because if a crap farmer decided to go fight orcs, he wouldn't gain levels, he would die.

roll 3d6 straight, usually creates PCs that are lucky to have one stat that is above average for a human, thus PCs that are Steve the Adventurer, former Crap farmer. Most players ended up as Warriors or Thieves, Priests and Mages tended to be hosed by having low primary stats.

So I've been toying with the idea of trying to run a D&D style Fantasy Heartbreaker... Also, I want scaling HPs to die... Also, levels can die.

At this point I'd stop referring to it as "D&D Style", it's just going to confuse people. It's a low fantasy game where one person is never going to be able to ignore a bunch of mooks with swords, which is a fine game concept and models a lot of source material better than D&D does, but it's not really in the same genre as D&D despite having similar trappings.

Regarding magic/not magic, balancing it vs. mundane is a lot easier if you don't do the D&D "scale to infinity" thing. Casters and noncasters are fairly balanced up to level 10ish in D&D, so if you never go beyond the magical power level of movie-Gandalf you don't have so much to worry about.

Good Point. How about Dungeonrun or ED4
Since I don't want level based abilities or leveling really D&D is right out.
Basically I'm thinking Low-Tech Shadowrun. But in Shadowrun your team might include Angel Summoner, Puppet master (or if you are Frank the same person) , Hatchetman, and Fast-Jack. If you go Low tech, Hatchetman becomes the BMX Bandit and Fast-Jack becomes Autolycus.
The street sam really gets boned.

I suppose you could make magic grafts and symbionts to replace cyber/bio.

[Saxony]

Which do you think tells better stories, or is more fun?

Depends entirely on who you are gaming with.

Or, equivalently, who you want to play your game, who your market is, et cetera.

I'm going to guess you are mostly making this game so you can play it with other people. Thus, the important question is "What do the people I want to play with want to play?"

Meaning we can't really know the answer to the question, nor is there really a "wrong" answer aside from avoiding obivous pitfalls that break up groups.

This also means you should figure out the answer yourself.

So I answer your question.... with another question . What will the players of your game want? Once you know that, then you can start asking other people questions like "How do I implement this design choice?".