I tend to dislike the core system, not irrecoverably, and I tend to use it if I have players who don't like to get into alternate rules, but I often prefer to use the Dreamscarred press' psionics systems.
I've occassionally thought of using the mythic earth free form system from over on Enworld, but those campaigns never got off the ground.
I'm thinking of using Sphere's of power in my next campaign for a rather different system, though if that campaign is delayed past July I might give the occult handbook a look.
But what types of alternate magic systems do you enjoy? Which ones have you tried and decided weren't worth it?
Dreamscarred's Psionics system is WOTC's Psionics system, just fixed.
That being said, I've always had a bit of a soft spot for Mana/Magic Points as presented in Unearthed Arcana, just modified a bit.
But PP work because players often don't have very many Powers, especially compared to Casters. Psionics are even more spam-tastic than Sorcerers, but since they have only a handful of powers, it's really easy to just spend PP and use a go-to Power.
Casters, especially Prepared Spellcasters, have a LOT of options available, and allocating Mana Points to prepared spells takes a long, long time.
Magic Points work much better for Spontaneous Spellcasters like the Sorcerer, but again - you have to choose your spells, then spend initial mana points to cast a spell plus any extra mana in order to pump that spell... It's unfortunately a bit of a bookkeeping nightmware.
---
Ultimately, I LIKE Mana/Magic Points, but there's a reason Vancian magic is the standard, and why even WOTC went back to it in 5th Edition: it just WORKS. It's not flavorfully as cool as things like mana or other systems, but it's simpler than alternatives while still allowing access to a lot of options - casting in combat already bogs down time significantly, and adding mana points into the equation doesn't help the situation.
My favorite system was Green Ronin's True Sorcery. Extremely flexible system that depending on Skill rolls. The more powerful the spell the Higher the DC and the longer it took. You could do nearly anything within the Lores you had learned but you needed the rest of your group to keep the enemy back while you did it.
Unfortunately you really had to work out your spells before game cause trying to come up with something more complex than the Basic use of a Lore, would bog the game down. Kind of had to write up an actual spellbook of my more interesting spells so that I could reference it during the game.
That said Spheres of Power is a really good looking system and I am looking forward to giving it a shot.
And then there is Elements of Magic that is kind of a middle ground between True Sorcery and more traditional D&D magic.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
I'm fond of the noun/verb type systems such as the one used in Ars Magica. However the system is so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions in Pathfinder, that it simply can not be dropped in and swapped with Pathfinder's Vancian casting, as the severe failure of Words of Power has demonstrated.
LazarX wrote: I'm fond of the noun/verb type systems such as the one used in Ars Magica. However the system is so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions in Pathfinder, that it simply can not be dropped in and swapped with Pathfinder's Vancian casting, as the severe failure of Words of Power has demonstrated. Which is really a shame, because I would love to have an Arcane-Bloodline Sorcerer who's a teenage girl firing blasts from her wand while screaming "SUGAR RAINBOW BOMB EXPLODE!!!"
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
chbgraphicarts wrote: LazarX wrote: I'm fond of the noun/verb type systems such as the one used in Ars Magica. However the system is so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions in Pathfinder, that it simply can not be dropped in and swapped with Pathfinder's Vancian casting, as the severe failure of Words of Power has demonstrated. Which is really a shame, because I would love to have an Arcane-Bloodline Sorcerer who's a teenage girl firing blasts from her wand while screaming "SUGAR RAINBOW BOMB EXPLODE!!!" I don't see your problem. There's absolutely nothing about the present Vancian system which disallows that.
Running a game using Spheres of Power, and it's really a great system. Caster level varies between classes like BAB, and is used to calculate the scaling DCs of your spells so that early stuff stays useful later. You can easily make some nice, thematic builds that are effective, lots of customization and the Spell Points give a boost when you need it without requiring a new, HP sized pool to track.
If you don't like the (ick) Vancian casting, I would avoid the Occult book. It's stil Vancian because Piazo didn't think people would learn a new system.
I'll throw in another vote for Spheres of Power. It's fun, versatile, and incredibly easy to learn. Plus, since most spheres have a scaling at-will Base Ability, casters always have something magickey to do at low levels. Plus, you can make an elemental bender that's flavorful, effective, and doesn't require tons of system knowledge. Destruction + Nature = done. :-)
LazarX wrote: I'm fond of the noun/verb type systems such as the one used in Ars Magica. However the system is so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions in Pathfinder, that it simply can not be dropped in and swapped with Pathfinder's Vancian casting, as the severe failure of Words of Power has demonstrated. If you don't mind, could you explain what about WoP you consider a 'severe failure'?
A really common complaint about words of power I've heard is that the rules are poorly edited and poorly explained, and hence hard to understand. I personally agree with that line of criticism. Deep Magic contains a big expansion to WoP...but a lot of the 'expansion' is reexplaining the original words of power rules from UM in a comprehensible way, and giving them something resembling professional editing.
The only other criticism I have heard of words of power is from the few people who haven't tried it but just say "anything that isn't Vancian MUST be terrible!!1!".
Other than those two, I don't think I've ever heard substantive criticism of the words of power system. Unless I've thoroughly misunderstood your post, you sound like you have some, though: you said the system is 'so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions', which indicates you think the underlying idea is doomed to failure no matter what, and you don't just object to the implementation.
So, you've sparked my curiousity. Aside from the horrendous editing, what is it you dislike about words of power?
137ben wrote: LazarX wrote: I'm fond of the noun/verb type systems such as the one used in Ars Magica. However the system is so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions in Pathfinder, that it simply can not be dropped in and swapped with Pathfinder's Vancian casting, as the severe failure of Words of Power has demonstrated. If you don't mind, could you explain what about WoP you consider a 'severe failure'?
A really common complaint about words of power I've heard is that the rules are poorly edited and poorly explained, and hence hard to understand. I personally agree with that line of criticism. Deep Magic contains a big expansion to WoP...but a lot of the 'expansion' is reexplaining the original words of power rules from UM in a comprehensible way, and giving them something resembling professional editing.
The only other criticism I have heard of words of power is from the few people who haven't tried it but just say "anything that isn't Vancian MUST be terrible!!1!".
Other than those two, I don't think I've ever heard substantive criticism of the words of power system. Unless I've thoroughly misunderstood your post, you sound like you have some, though: you said the system is 'so antithetical to the rest of the core assumptions', which indicates you think the underlying idea is doomed to failure no matter what, and you don't just object to the implementation.
So, you've sparked my curiousity. Aside from the horrendous editing, what is it you dislike about words of power?
Personally, my only issue with Words of Power: there simply aren't enough Words. That is it. My whole complaint with Words of Power as a system.
As for systems I personally like, I like how Dreamscarred Press implemented Psionics. If I were feeling really ambitious, I'd try to convert it, complete with a "casting" focus for the Spontaneous Casters and see if the DM would let me give it a go.
Sadly, I don't think the method used for Psionics by Dreamscarred Press would work with Prepared Casters without a massive overall. The reason is simple: you've given the advantage of Spontaneous Casters to Prepared Casters.
To more directly answer the topic of the thread:
Having a variety of subsystems is my favorite part of the game. I love that you can have each PC using wildly different rules and still have them all work seamlessly together. It's pretty rare for me to dislike a well-written 'alternate' magic system: even those that don't interest me enough to build a campaign around can still be used occasionally alongside every other magic system in the game.
There are a couple I don't like: Shadow Magic from 3.5 is the main example. I can't really say why, but nothing about it grabbed my interest.
But this thread is about what magic systems we like, not those we don't like. One of my absolute favorite magic systems is Pathfinder's Composition Magic. I really like the rules of the Petition/talisman system, although I'm not wild about the default flavor attached to it (but that can be changed).
I really like Pact Magic in each of its incarnations, as well as herb magic and Ethermagic.
While not a magic system as written, the ToB/PoW maneuver system could be refluffed as an alternate magic system. I and one of my players did just that a few years back.
I haven't tried Spheres of Power yet, but given how much y'all keep mentioning it I may have to move it up on my list.
I still like the classics, psionics and Vancian, too, though.
I have spheres of power. I think it is a great system, but it isn't what I hoped it would be. I hoped it would be like Mage: The Awakenings magic system: that is, where you can do ANYTHING you want within your spheres of magic, based on what power level you have attained. Having been watching The Magicians, it would be nice to see that sort of magic!
Skaeren wrote: I have spheres of power. I think it is a great system, but it isn't what I hoped it would be. I hoped it would be like Mage: The Awakenings magic system: that is, where you can do ANYTHING you want within your spheres of magic, based on what power level you have attained. Having been watching The Magicians, it would be nice to see that sort of magic! That's.... basically impossible to balance.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Milo v3 wrote: That's.... basically impossible to balance. In my experience, it can also lead to a good bit of analysis paralysis at the table. Probably the best thing about Vancian casting is that you have a very countable number of things you can do. Granted, at high levels, you can still have upwards of 20 spells to consider casting on a given round, but that's still way better than "how many things can you imagine doing?"
Milo v3 wrote: Skaeren wrote: I have spheres of power. I think it is a great system, but it isn't what I hoped it would be. I hoped it would be like Mage: The Awakenings magic system: that is, where you can do ANYTHING you want within your spheres of magic, based on what power level you have attained. Having been watching The Magicians, it would be nice to see that sort of magic! That's.... basically impossible to balance. I believe it can be balanced--if there can be a comprehensive imagining and ruling of the circumstances. As a side-project, I came up with such as system I called Macreus (manipulate, create, summon, absorb, and transform).
Something like the following: Spheres of magic affect either physical objects (earth [stone/meta/minerals], wind, water), creatures (living or unliving), elements (fire, electricity) or magical forces (thought, perception, gravity, force).
Depending on your 'sphere level', you create within the sphere of your magic (amount depending increases with level), manipulate (dealing damage, moving quantities of it, etc. with speed/damage/range/capacity increasing with level), summon creatures from that sphere, absorb and deflect damage from that sphere, and transform yourself into an elemental of that type, or gaining its power as an aspect.
For example: Access to the heat sphere allowed you to Create an amount of fire, Manipulate existing flames to deal damage or set things on fire, Absorb fire damage, Summon a Fire Elemental, or Transform yourself into a Fire Elemental, or gain fire aspects (such as fire-breath/fire-sight/fire-resistance).
If all damage is reliant on level, it is automatically balanced.
But with that being said--my answer to the thread is that I heavily utilize the Blackfang Mana System. I believe I posted it in the forums somewhere around 2014.
DM Shade wrote: If all damage is reliant on level, it is automatically balanced. Damage isn't the issue... It's the ridiculous levels of versatility plus interacting with far too many things that lack rules. It works in nWoD and CofD because lack of rules is the default.... But Pathfinder is a very different form of system.
Milo v3 wrote: DM Shade wrote: If all damage is reliant on level, it is automatically balanced. Damage isn't the issue... It's the ridiculous levels of versatility plus interacting with far too many things that lack rules. It works in nWoD and CofD because lack of rules is the default.... But Pathfinder is a very different form of system. You are absolutely correct: Pathfinder is a different system--that is why if anyone wants to try such a system and adapt it to Pathfinder, they must be able to integrate it with the existing framework.
However, if you say it is impossible to balance, you aren't thinking of this all the way through.
Quote: Damage isn't the issue... It's the ridiculous levels of versatility plus interacting with far too many things that lack rules. Hence is why you need the system to follow its own rules that sync with how Pathfinder runs things. You need rules for capacity, and the ability to break down the world into pieces that can be managed by the system.
Should this idea be adapted to Pathfinder, the rules must say not only 'you can move rocks when you have access to the Earth sphere', it should also specify how much in rock-capacity you can move, how fast it moves already, whether or not this is a standing effect that requires you to stand still, how far you can move (or throw them), and how much they would hurt if they impacted something.
To do that, you must also be able to quantify how much of a material is a resource (such as 5-foot cube equaling one Element).
That is what the scaling quality is for. At level 1, you can Create one Elements worth of material; Manipulate one Element's worth of damage/range/speed/force; Absorb one Element's worth of damage; Summon one Element's worth of a creature (a creature that can fit a 5-foot cube); or Transform a certain percentage worth of your body into an element.
Does it work with Pathfinder well enough? Since PF is based on a 2D square grid, it does sync to a certain extent. Does it require a new game? Hardly.
I really like power point/spell point systems. It works in video games, it works really well in savage worlds. Admittedly, the latter has a different rate of recharge than the vancian system's 1/day after resting 8 hours schtick.
Power points also work great in RuneQuest where it's tied to an ability score and the different types of magic use them differently along with it being a generic "mental/spiritual health" measure. Of course, RuneQuest also is flexible enough to tell you what sacrificing a cow to your deity would give in power points for settings where they don't recover naturally.
As far as vancian systems go I have been doing something dangerous that's been a lot of fun for everyone:
I don't like Spheres of Magic, but I can't really explain why... but I have grown to like psionics even though I hated them at first. Maybe the same will happen with SoP, though I doubt it.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
My personal top three are Akashic Mysteries (Dreamscarred Press), Pact Magic (Radiance House), and Spheres of Power (Drop Dead Studios). Interjection Games gets honorable mention for a reasonable array of various systems, though many of them are for a single class, though Strange Magic helped expand some of their systems around a bit more.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Words of Power using the vitalizing variant OGL Spell Points.
IMO, what many of the complaints about Words of Power are really about are that it makes spells (overall) noticeably less powerful; many "benchmark" spells either cannot be duplicated using Words of Power (i.e., true strike) or will end up at a higher spell level. On the other hand, it does work very well for making magic a little less omnipresent in all aspects of the game (simply because of the limited selection of effects); whether that's a benefit or a detriment will depend on a group's tastes and what the campaign/setting is trying to portray.
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
