The Gaming Den

I've been playing runequest and reading The Obsidian Trilogy, and I've started to wonder, would it possible to break magic away from classes and allow people to learn spellcasting in addition to what they usually do?

I'm talking d20 here, specifically.

So a feat based magic system?

Hasn't something like that been done already? Or am I just pulling shit out of my ass again.

Definitely a feat based magic system could work and would provide the fighting characters with some better options than their in-built abilities.

The magic feat system would have to be limited as not to overshadow the Mage classes.

Of course, this also means that mages get extra spells or extra effects.

Wait, isn't the sphere system something similar?

If we're doing a feat-based magic system, I'd say there are two ways to do the mage/wizard/whatchamahoozie class:

1) Scrap it. Replace it with the "Loremaster" for smart people, or just kill it. "Wizard" now means "class who has taken a bunch of magic feats."

2) Give it a number of magic feats as class features. Thus, everyone can learn magic if they want to spend the resources, but no one can be as flexible at it as a dedicated mage. 3.x's wizard bonus feats are the general idea.

---

Off the top of my head, I'd say the first feat would grant access to, say, one school of magic and bard-level spellcasting. Additional feats could upgrade the casting to wizard/cleric, add more schools, etc.

The Zelda d20 has something similar. Spells are broken up into groupings based on the 6 sages from Ocarina of Time, and to advance your casting, you have to spend feats.

Despite all the Saga edition hate going around--I'm sure that PL has enough for everyone, heh--a skill-based system magic system could work. You take a feat, you get X number of spells you can use per encounter. Whenever you use those spells, you make a Spellcraft check (or whatever), which determines your awesomeness.

The True20 system uses a "take a spell instead of a feat" system, and gives you a feat every level. I like the way it's set up.

EDIT:

Psychic Robot wrote:Despite all the Saga edition hate going around--I'm sure that PL has enough for everyone, heh--a skill-based system magic system could work. You take a feat, you get X number of spells you can use per encounter. Whenever you use those spells, you make a Spellcraft check (or whatever), which determines your awesomeness.

The system also makes use of skill checks to determine effectiveness. Also fatigue. Which is interesting.

Talisman wrote:Off the top of my head, I'd say the first feat would grant access to, say, one school of magic and bard-level spellcasting. Additional feats could upgrade the casting to wizard/cleric, add more schools, etc.

At that point you might as well just give everyone full spellcasting for free.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:

Talisman wrote:Off the top of my head, I'd say the first feat would grant access to, say, one school of magic and bard-level spellcasting. Additional feats could upgrade the casting to wizard/cleric, add more schools, etc.

At that point you might as well just give everyone full spellcasting for free.

Nonesense. I'm assuming, in this hypothetical system, that feats are worth taking and not taking a spellcasting feat doesn't mean you suck...it means you're a badass mofo in some other respect.

Question: Does anyone have any experience with either Green Ronin's psychic class/system, and their True Sorcery optional system? Both are, essentially, skill-based magic systems.

The concept of Saga's magic system was interesting, I'll give you that. It will prohibit the existence of magic that boosts skills, otherwise things go into crazy town.

Another source of ideas, assuming you fix some of the numbers and benchmarks (even the author mentioned his attempt at veering away from the focus subsystem), can be found HERE.

Talisman wrote:

CatharzGodfoot wrote:

Talisman wrote:Off the top of my head, I'd say the first feat would grant access to, say, one school of magic and bard-level spellcasting. Additional feats could upgrade the casting to wizard/cleric, add more schools, etc.

At that point you might as well just give everyone full spellcasting for free.

Nonesense. I'm assuming, in this hypothetical system, that feats are worth taking and not taking a spellcasting feat doesn't mean you suck...it means you're a badass mofo in some other respect.

Then you're really talking about revising the non-magic feat system, because even in a Races of War game a fighter would be best off ditching two feats for full wizard casting.

Midnight D20 has a feat based magic system.


http://darknessfalls.leaderdesslok.com/magic_main.htm

CatharzGodfoot wrote:Then you're really talking about revising the non-magic feat system, because even in a Races of War game a fighter would be best off ditching two feats for full wizard casting.

So what do you recommend?

One feat per spell is obviously retarded.

One feat for 1/2-level casting seems worthless by itself.

One feat per spell level? You'd have to give out feats like candy to make it workable.

Obviously, spellcasting feats have to scale to some extent...some middle ground between "everyone's a wizard" and blowing a feat on some spells that are worthless in two levels.

Psychic Robot: If you're going to do it like SAGA though, the "skill" is entirely unnecessary. Just let a feat give you X spells that come with defined parameters.

Prak: You do realize that the Obsidian trilogy obviously and *explicitly* uses character classes?

Zelda d20? Gimme gimme gimme gimme! *fanboy squeal*

Dungeon Crawl.

ZER0 wrote:Zelda d20? Gimme gimme gimme gimme! *fanboy squeal*

here...

http://z12.invisionfree.com/Zelda_RPG/i ... act=SC&c=6

Psychic Robot wrote:Despite all the Saga edition hate going around--I'm sure that PL has enough for everyone, heh--a skill-based system magic system could work. You take a feat, you get X number of spells you can use per encounter. Whenever you use those spells, you make a Spellcraft check (or whatever), which determines your awesomeness.

For all your adoption of this community for its shared hate of 4th edition you really don't get on well with numbers and facts do you?

Skill based d20 magic systems suck, the numbers are just stupid and skill ranks in Profession will never equal skill ranks in "Save or die bitch!"

Feat based d20 magic systems suck, magic is just better than feats, and even if it were equal you can't do the OP's thing of "doing what you do AND learning magic" because you need the stupid feats to do what you do in the first place.

And Saga's brilliant plan of giving you an unknown amount of an unknown selection of unbalanced spells that were considered balanced by a resource limit that refreshed on an unknown and variable timetable was, oddly, a steaming load of shit.

A combination of all of that (which Saga did) is utter lunacy.

All those things should be pretty self evident and most of them have been discussed exhaustively enough around if not directly then certainly as they pertain to certain late 3rd edition tack on magic system and tack on fighter powers splat books.

So if you want magic to NOT be classed based you either need to create a new level based resource everyone just gets to spend on magic and/or new previously unimagined stuff as good as magic...

Or something. Really though tacking a whole new magic system on d20? Almost certainly not an especially great idea...

Talisman wrote:

CatharzGodfoot wrote:Then you're really talking about revising the non-magic feat system, because even in a Races of War game a fighter would be best off ditching two feats for full wizard casting.

So what do you recommend?

One feat per spell is obviously retarded.

One feat for 1/2-level casting seems worthless by itself.

One feat per spell level? You'd have to give out feats like candy to make it workable.

Obviously, spellcasting feats have to scale to some extent...some middle ground between "everyone's a wizard" and blowing a feat on some spells that are worthless in two levels.

One thing worth considering is 4e's Ritual system. The implementation in that game is poor, but (like many things in the system) the idea is good.

What the character gets should depend on the type of spellcasting. If wizard-type casting is desired, the mechanics should probably be somewhat different from sorcerer casting.

An orthogonal possibility is to build wizard casting off of sorcerer casting. That is, sorcerer casting represents raw magical ability and the wizard learns to methodically control it.

Your first feat could grant a single floating spell slot of level/2 (possibly rounded up), and one spell known of each spell level. Take the feat again, and you get one slot per spell level known. That's equivalent to a sphere, except you can use higher slots to cast lower spells. Other feats could give more spell slots and/or spells known.

The Prepared Casting feat would let you prepare spells from spellbooks or scrolls in your normal slots. I'm not sure whether you'd want to allow 'spontaneous conversion'.

DCs would probably be based on character level.

PL wrote:Skill based d20 magic systems suck, the numbers are just stupid and skill ranks in Profession will never equal skill ranks in "Save or die bitch!"

Feat based d20 magic systems suck, magic is just better than feats, and even if it were equal you can't do the OP's thing of "doing what you do AND learning magic" because you need the stupid feats to do what you do in the first place.

Skills
Your first complaint is that the d20 is wildly divergent in terms of number generation.

Solution: I suppose that there isn't one, short of not using a d20, which would go against the purposes of this thread.

Your second complaint is that magic gets to be more powerful than completely useless background skills.

Solution: None needed.

Feats
Your first complaint is that magic is more powerful than feats.

Solution(s): Accept that Magic Is Better, or weaken the magic, or strengthen the feats, or do more than one of those.

Your second complaint is that a feat-based system doesn't work because it has opportunity cost.

Solution: None needed.

So, in a d20 system, one possible solution would be a feat-based system that appropriately balances feats with magic powers.

Psychic Robot wrote: So, in a d20 system, one possible solution would be a feat-based system that appropriately balances feats with magic powers.

And so here we are back again to Tome...

It's ironic that youcome to such a logical conclusion for that (Solution) because I had reached the same back in SKR forum years ago.
At the time I was bitchmoaned at for making 'overpowered crap'.
Oh, irony.

If everyone's overpowered, who cares?

(On a side note, I'm actually okay with players writing up their own classes. If one guy wants to masturbate feverishly to his full BAB, full wizard/cleric casting, all good saves, powergaming douchebag, I don't really care.)

Divergent == "the modifiers scale at different rates between characters", not "a d20's too big a RNG". It's of course possible to have d20 without divergence, though even 4E (which supposedly had the objective) already failed.

Also, not only you fail to understand that "overpoweredness" is definitionally never shared by everyone, but you also seem to have no respect for your own players (hardly surprising in hindsight, actually).

Also, not only you fail to understand that "overpoweredness" is definitionally never shared by everyone

You seem to have missed the point. I can repeat it more slowly, if you would like.

you also seem to have no respect for your own players (hardly surprising in hindsight, actually).

I have no respect for retards who play out power fantasies with their characters.

Psychic Robot wrote:Your first complaint is that the d20 is wildly divergent in terms of number generation.

No. No it isn't. The problem is that THE d20 system (not a system using d20s) has a totally unbalanced off the RNG bullshit skill system.

I have no idea what weird innumerate fantasy about d20s in general you are waffling on about.

Psychic Robot wrote:Your second complaint is that magic gets to be more powerful than completely useless background skills.

Solution: None needed.

Well you lose, you fail and nothing more you can say on the topic, or much of game design in general, matters then I guess?

After all there is NO way that sort of attitude is going to provide anything short of the most incredibly retarded "solution". Hmm let me try?

"Hey OP, you should do it by allowing some fighter characters to take Proffession (Basketweaver) Ranks and other fighter characters to get full wizard spell casting instead!"

Yeah that is FUCKING STUPID actually isn't it?

Psychic Robot wrote: Your first complaint is that magic is more powerful than feats.

Solution(s): Accept that Magic Is Better, or weaken the magic, or strengthen the feats, or do more than one of those.

Entirely rewriting one or more likely BOTH of the magic and feat systems is ricockulously stupid in complexity as a mere d20 system patch.

Psychic Robot wrote:Your second complaint is that a feat-based system doesn't work because it has opportunity cost.

Solution: None needed.

Sure, just completely ignore the basic premise of the OP.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:An orthogonal possibility is to build wizard casting off of sorcerer casting. That is, sorcerer casting represents raw magical ability and the wizard learns to methodically control it.

I like this conceptually. It fits well with the way magic is described in many novels.

Perhaps a "sorcerer" might also risk feedback/brainburn whenever casting a spell (damage minimal, but not something you want happening in the middle of a fight), and taking the "wizard" feat negates this as you learn to channel your magic correctly.

Your first feat could grant a single floating spell slot of level/2 (possibly rounded up), and one spell known of each spell level. Take the feat again, and you get one slot per spell level known. That's equivalent to a sphere, except you can use higher slots to cast lower spells. Other feats could give more spell slots and/or spells known.

Leaving aside for the moment how many schools/whatever are available, how many feats should it take to ger full, cleric/wizard, levels-0-through-9 spellcasting? Not just one spell per spell level (or a sphere), but "I am a wizard"?

The Prepared Casting feat would let you prepare spells from spellbooks or scrolls in your normal slots. I'm not sure whether you'd want to allow 'spontaneous conversion'.

It could be done like Arcana Unearthed: you can cast X number of spells per day and have Y number "readied." You can change your spells readied with rest and study. It's a cross between sorcerer and wizard casting.

A "sorcerer" in this system would just have the spells he knows and he can cast those. A "wizard" would be able to learn new spells from scrolls, spellbooks, demonic imps, whatever, and ready different ones each day (from his spellbook, natch).