Again, thanks to everyone for the open discussion on these topics. It's greatly appreciated to hear everyone's thoughts and points of view. Feel free to continue the previous discussions.
Today, I wanted to talk about spells... yes, those wonderful things that let characters do what the players can't.
When it comes to spells the ICE systems are either -
Spell Lists - where you develop skill in the list and gain related spells as your abilities in that list grow
Spell Scaling - where you learn spells independently but the power of those spells can be boosted by scaling them up
I'll freely admit that I like spell scaling and the freedom it gives the caster.
I'll also admit that I much prefer RM's lists over the widespread options in HARP.
I'll also say that I want to see a mix of the concepts, and also go over the top with spellcasting....
Here's the concept, so feel free to blast away at it.
* All spells are assigned into Lists (same spell can be in multiple lists)
* Each spellcasting profession has a group of lists that they can access (in some case they have options - pick 1 of these 3 kind of thing) - this part of the profession's abilities (Ability to cast spells - channeling, essence, mentalism) and then Access to X number of lists
* Spells are learned individually from accessible lists (HARP style)
*No such thing as Universal Spells, if you want to cast spells without being a spellcaster buy a spellcasting ability and then buy access to the spell list
* No Rank Requirement on Scaling. If you have at least 1 rank in the spell you can try to scale it to the max (this is going over the top). Every PP spent on the spell has a spellcasting penalty of -5.
ex: A 5PP spell is always cast at -25, regardless of your number of ranks in it. Your casting roll adds in your skill bonus, so if you want to be good at casting the spell you are best to develop it otherwise expect a lot of failures.
* A failure in casting a spell always has a potential of negative results. (Fumbles are even worse)
In the end, the concept is to better focus the spellcaster onto specific lists of spells. The concept is also to allow players to decide their risk/reward without limitation if they have some degree of knowledge regarding the spell.
If my apprentice magician was taught how to create a small fire intended to light candles or campfires, and the tower is being assaulted by an army of soldiers wanting to kill him for using magic, if he wants to try to scale that up and make a giant bonfire manifest itself in front of the door as he looks out one of the windows, then let him try it. Magic is a dangerous thing though, and if he doesn't get a really lucky roll he could end up burning the tower door, or starting a fire in his own chambers, or simply spontaneously combust himself (worst case scenario).... But if he has incredibly high stats perhaps his natural affinity is good enough, along with fate helping his roll, and he may be successful.
Current rules just say that he doesn't yet have that knowledge (not enough ranks) and therefore he can't do it.
Thoughts???
(Not just on the "over the top" part, but the whole spell list, scaling, etc. concept)
Thanks!