Official ICE Forums
Systems & Settings => Rolemaster => Topic started by: jdale on November 02, 2014, 03:12:36 PM
-
In case you don't normally make it to the deep end of the forum, let me first note that I have put out 9 Arcane spell lists which are in three articles in the Guild Companion, and that is what I am trying to start some discussion about:
Part 1: http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2014/sep/redefiningarcanemagic.html (http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2014/sep/redefiningarcanemagic.html)
Part 2: http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2014/oct/redefiningarcanemagic02.html (http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2014/oct/redefiningarcanemagic02.html)
Part 3: http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2014/nov/redefiningarcanemagic03.html (http://www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2014/nov/redefiningarcanemagic03.html)
There are, generally speaking, two outlooks about the Realms of Magic in Rolemaster. Some people feel the difference between the Realms is largely one of technique, and there should be relatively little difference in the outcome. Others feel there should be significant differences in what the Realms are capable of. (There are intermediate positions but first simplicity, that's the black and white version.) I am in the latter camp. With regard to Arcane magic, especially, I think the idea of a blending of the Realms is really only interesting if there are some meaningful differences to bridge. If it's just about technique, meh, so what?
Part of what I am proposing is to find those differences and reach across those divisions. That started a little bit with the first six lists incorporating a little healing and a little summoning into elemental lists. But now that the third installment is out and there are lists for using temples, graveyards, and libraries as special types of magical Nodes, we are really getting into the cross-Realm effects.
The other major theme is making Arcane unstable. Not from anything as prosaic as an increased chance of spell failure, but from unpredictability built into many of the spell effects themselves.
So... with the first nine lists out, I'm interested in feedback. Are these good directions to take Arcane? If they are, are they good implementations of those ideas? What would you adopt, what would you change? What would you like to see? What is missing? How do you use Arcane in your games, does it fit for what you want it to be?
I debated where to put this. It could go in the Guild Companion forum but I didn't think there was enough traffic there. It could go in the RMU Spell Law forum, but it's not necessarily RMU-only, and it's not about RMU Spell Law per se. The Rolemaster forum seemed the most general area to get perspectives from all types of games.
-
I had started a thread about your articles in the RMU section but then I deleted it after noting being able to finish it because I got tied up with something else.
On the recient spell lists about Temples, Libraries and Graveyards I would have liked to see either a spell, ritual or better explanation on just how to form said "loci" instead of just being any location in which such activities occur. For example how long does it take for a temple with worshipers to become treated as such? The same goes for the other two locations. I would also like to see some limits on the area of each, which could be expanded upon be spells or rituals. I think there was a consecration spell in the RMSS/FRP Channeling Comp that had some guidelines on such things but an arcane version would be most helpful.
MDC
-
I agree strongly with your most basic point: the three realms of magic should be significantly different. Arcane magic can bridge the gap (but should also have some spells that neither of the other realms can duplicate).
-
I agree strongly with your most basic point: the three realms of magic should be significantly different.
As far as I understand his articles, it's not completely jdale's basic point, though. He thinks they should be significantly different in their effects. For instance, I'm on the other side, thinking they should be significantly different as sources of power. In other words, how you harness magical energies and how it affects the results, in contrast with what it does and what you can do with it. That being said, it seems that I'm one of the rare (if not the only one) more interested in the "how" than in the "what", so... ;)
-
I agree strongly with your most basic point: the three realms of magic should be significantly different.
As far as I understand his articles, it's not completely jdale's basic point, though. He thinks they should be significantly different in their effects. For instance, I'm on the other side, thinking they should be significantly different as sources of power. In other words, how you harness magical energies and how it affects the results, in contrast with what it does and what you can do with it. That being said, it seems that I'm one of the rare (if not the only one) more interested in the "how" than in the "what", so... ;)
I actually based the origins of magic in my campaign setting using the 'how' side of things, so you're not alone. Arcane in my setting is magic as it existed before the magically-induced Cataclysm...after that the new gods split magic into three parts to better limit its power.
-
As far as I understand his articles, it's not completely jdale's basic point, though. He thinks they should be significantly different in their effects. For instance, I'm on the other side, thinking they should be significantly different as sources of power. In other words, how you harness magical energies and how it affects the results, in contrast with what it does and what you can do with it. That being said, it seems that I'm one of the rare (if not the only one) more interested in the "how" than in the "what", so... ;)
I know, from reading the forums, that you're not the only one with that opinion. I can't think of any function for Arcane magic if you start from that premise, though.
-
I know, from reading the forums, that you're not the only one with that opinion. I can't think of any function for Arcane magic if you start from that premise, though.
Not sure I agree with that, actually. If you go on the premise that Arcane predates a three-Realm system, you can combine some effects into single spells that might come from different realms in a "newer" system. You can also factor in some specific areas (contacting other planes, perhaps) that were removed or blocked by the gods. This, of course, presupposes a fairly active deity structure, but it does give Arcane a place and function (and could lead to some interesting situations if a character happens to stumble across an Old God or three while dabbling with Arcane...).
-
So there would be a difference in scope of effects not between the different realms, but between the realms collectively and Arcane? Interesting, sounds pretty setting-specific though.
Perhaps this is a bit of a tangent though. I'm still looking primarily for feedback on what I have put forward... aside from the realms debate, so far markc's post is the only one with direct feedback. Is everything else perfect? ;) I'm sure it's not. Would you use it? Would you tweak it?
-
I enjoyed the installments of the arcane lists and might be tempted to use them for my current campaign since I have been hinting at the existence of cross realm lists.
They are fairly balanced and I also think the elemental concept split up is a good idea since an Elemental Ways would be way over the top.
Such lists would be pretty expensive (being the arcane/ restricted costs) and need to represent a bit more power than regular open and closed lists and that has been achieved.
Such power should not come from spells placed at lower level, but by combining the effects of several lists in one, based on concept, so a summoning/ teleport/ locate list would be fine, but the gate spell should be 10th lvl and the teleport I 15th, for example.
Especially joining spells from cross realms: such as mental control (Essence/ Mentalism), Barrier creation (Essence/ Channeling) and protective spells (Ess/Cha/Men) are good ways of dealing with the Arcane and trying to match spell effects, so teleport and summoning might be joined, but also shields and walls or mental manipulations (suggestions), seemings and holds.
Simply assume that specialization (the 3 realms) leads to spells with higher power on lower level (so teleport I and Lightning bolt I at lvl 10 are baselines and should never be placed even lower) and diversification (Arcane) leads to more types of spells on the same list, but at higher level.
Instability of spell effects is a lot harder to tackle. One way that keeps popping in my mind is that instead of spells you get effects on a list and that something like water walking could be water expellation that could be used to walk on water, get dry, save drowning victims, dry out beef jerky and attack people by draining their moisture. The instability could come from randomizing the effects based on a roll, where a low roll would cause water to disappear from your clothes and a high roll could make it disappear from skin and muscles. So if you choose to dry clothes you only need a low roll and if you want to attack someone you need a high roll. I'm just brainstorming here...
Would I tweak it? I find that such minor rule changes really confuse things for my players so either I used it as is or I toss it. As long as there is no real power creep, such as the RM2 companions, I would consider the material. In my former gaming days we used to play with almost every rule from every companion, which led to very interesting adventures, but also to some explosive rules discussions.
-
So, here's my theory on Arcane.
Arcane is what the races tried to use as "Magic" in the beginning. It was raw, unfiltered, throw a wide net and gather up all the power I can style. They were learning, and not tapping into the source(s) well... kinda like how we've, slowly, over time learned to make solar power more efficient. As things progressed they were trying to use brute force to do what needed finesse. After some major mishaps they found they were using a giant hammer on an anvil to pound things roughly into place rather than a jewelers small crescent hammer to finesse out a precise result. Time, research and experimentation resulted in finding three primary sources for power and learning to tap into them individually. Mental energy (Mentalism), Elemental Power (Essence - which was often distilled down into the various elements) and what I'll call "Faith" or "Belief" (Channeling). Separating the threads of power made them more controllable, they allowed the finesse needed to not blow yourself to smithereens one day by tapping into too much energy. Each was better at doing certain things, resulting in different focuses to some extent between the sources of power.
Gods, other than the original 'creator' (which may or may not be manifested in a manner mortal beings can understand), were the result of magic, not the other way around. Gods are beings that learned to tap into other beings living energy (Mentalism) and channel that power to them when those beings shared a common belief or goal with them (Channeling). So, Channeling is just the combined power of mass, focused, Mentalism. Gods were elevated into godhood as the result of other peoples believe in them, turning Mentalism (individual power) into Channeling (mass/transferred power). The older the god, the farther back they go into this history (but not always the more powerful for it).
So, I look at it from both the "how" and the "what". How Arcane and the three realms compare in not only source, but also in function.
In "my little world" it is not widely understood that a sizable portion of the population is capable of, or even using without realizing it, magic. The local healer woman that just 'has that special touch' or the witch that makes charms, etc. These are self taught magic users and most don't even know that's what they are doing. They generally only utilize lower level, simple spells (although on rare occasions - lets say the healer woman's son is mortally wounded - they might 'overcast' in a desperate attempt of some kind). Often times I use Arcane magic lists for these people, because they are operating on sub-conscious levels like the very first magic users did. Sometimes these individuals either figure out there's more to their 'gift' or someone in the know spots them for what they really are. From there on out they usually fall into a realm of learning - because they learn, or are taught, the dangers of the raw power of Arcane. Often they might just have enough talent or will to learn one to a few open/closed lists. But some, a fairly small percentage, with training, become Semi-Spell Users. Again, a rare few of those become Pure Spell Users. And once more, a rare few of those become Hybrid Spell Users. A master, of which there would only be a handful in the world, would have progressed far enough that they can, mostly, control Arcane magic to the point of, fairly, reliable use.
So... I'm with jdale. It should be somewhat unstable, even in the hands of someone well trained. They might cast the spell just fine (i.e. it doesn't blow up in their face) but the end result might be slightly unpredictable. Say, you want to enlarge something. There's a range of possible results. I'm almost tempted to say there should be a combined fumble/critical table that is rolled on EVERY time you cast an Arcane spell, somewhat controllable by your skill level (i.e. move up or down the chart by X amount). On the lower end it wouldn't go wrong, but it wouldn't really do what you wanted power wise. On the lower end maybe the power just bled off and fed the PP's of those around you, making your target an inch taller. On the higher end you might enlarge that Guard so much that he now can't stand up in the amount of room given and has to resort to fighting from a sitting position.
-
FYI, I was very late with the next submission so it will presumably be in next month's issue of the Guild Companion (not December). There will be a fifth installment (so, now, probably the February issue) as well and that may complete the set.
-
My thoughts on the subject (but first a quick aside about many of the 50th level spells):
50th Level Spells: I feel that most of them are cop-outs. While it is kind of neat, and maybe appropriate, for some of them to work as they do (allowing the use of the lower level spells on the list without cost for the duration), I would rather a cooler epic-level type spell. For example: Fire Mastery (50th level, Fire Law), the caster is able to use any of the lower-level spells on this list and is master of all fires within (set specific range, like a few miles). This allows them to control (move, grow, shrink/douse, etc...) the fires limited only by their imagination, and those imposed by the GM. The exact effects are up to the GM. This is only a very quick example just put together in a few minutes, so could/would use some refinement, but I hope it illustrates my meaning. It costs a lot to get to a 50th level spell, most of that cost in empty spell slots, so the spell should be really, really cool and strategic* as opposed to tactical in scale.
*What I mean by this, is that most magic in RPGS is geared for adventurers. I get it, it is who the games are focused around, but I have come to prefer a whole-world approach to how things are done. Meaning, you make the world and then fit the PCs and what they can and cannot do into that. So strategic means, in this instance, to effect more than on a personal/small scale; to affect a much larger scale such as city-wide, large battlefield-wide, etc... not just a few individuals or a few dozen square yards of area, which is tactical.
Channeling, Essence, Mentalism, & Arcane: Arcane is the term used to refer to the strongest concentrations of essaence; the ley-lines, nodes and stuff. What bleeds off of those inot the world around is the base essence that magicians and other use, including mentalism (though the way they go about using it differs greatly from magicians and other "essence-users." Channelers are granted the ability (to a much lesser degree) to use the essence by their respective dieties who are currently the some of very few, generally incredibly powerful beings that can tap the raw arcane (where they get their power) with much less/little/no difficulty - hence why they are the gods and we are mere mortals. Those mortals who do gain access to the arcane forces (which can be in a number of ways including level/experience, quirk of birth, location, what have you) do so at risk, for the sheer power of tapping the arcane forces is like trying to swim against a rip current: very difficult and probably a bit stupid. It is much safer (but still not perfectly so) to just use the regular waves like everyone else; they are more steady and you can better predict how they are going to flow. (Damn, I can't believe that waves/surfing are such a good analogy for magic. Now to create Bodie, the totally-gnarly surfing sorcerer.) Now, does that have a huge mechanical effect on things? Probably not, it is more of a flavor thing. Though it could be used to explain why "regular" spells come in lists, but you could have arcane magic "spells" as seperate entities, like spells in HARP are handled - only with much higher costs and greater effects. Arcane magic is so raw and powerful that only the gods and some other powerful beings and very, very few mortals tap into it, so no formalized training/lists. (Though I have to admit I like the Arcanist, Wizard and others from the Arcane Companion... dilemas, dilemas.)
-
I like the idea of 50th level spells being more powerful but how would you handle it if 2 casters cast the same 50th rank fire spell above and both tried to do the same thing with fires in there range?
MDC
-
The next three don't have "Mastery" type spells at 50th level so you are in luck. Actually, of the nine lists so far, only Fires, Water, and Temple have the traditional "Mastery" type 50th level spell, so one third of them.
The Wind spell sort of gets at what you are suggesting, but with more specific parameters:
50. Wind Control – When concentrating, caster may alter the speed of any wind in the radius down to a full stop or up to twice normal, and alter the direction of any wind to any degree. Any spell causing air movement in the radius may be canceled (if an RR is not made) or have its duration doubled. Whirlwind, Whirlwind Toss, Whirlwind Transport, and Stun Cloud True within the radius may be fully controlled by concentrating on this spell (they do not require separate concentration while Wind Control is active). If they were cast by someone other than the caster of this spell, they receive an RR to resist being controlled.
It's still on a tactical scale (500' R) rather than on a strategic scale (which might be 1 mile radius?) although there is an argument for changing it to the latter. What do you think?
I do like the idea of gaining control of fires in the area, although personally I would define that with more specific parameters. The hard part, I think, is to define some kind of a scale, i.e. if you say the fire can be made one size larger or one size smaller per round, then you have to define those sizes. 5' larger or smaller radius per round?
-
I like the idea of 50th level spells being more powerful but how would you handle it if 2 casters cast the same 50th rank fire spell above and both tried to do the same thing with fires in there range?
MDC
Well, then you have a Mage(ry) Off! There are several different ways to do this, the easiest would be a type of Will Contest sort of like the one done for intelligent items, or you could have a spellcasting test with all the normal mods going into it and whoever does best wins - at least for that round. But really, I don't see this happening enough to need much more than the GM just deciding who gets control for story purposes. I mean, there are so few individuals who reach high enough level to even get 50th level spells and you couple that with the specific list, you get an event that is extremely rare.
I do like the idea of gaining control of fires in the area, although personally I would define that with more specific parameters. The hard part, I think, is to define some kind of a scale, i.e. if you say the fire can be made one size larger or one size smaller per round, then you have to define those sizes. 5' larger or smaller radius per round?
Nah, that's not hard, just remember to think strategically, think "big picture" and not "adventurer-scale." But, five feet per round? No way. More like 100 or 200, or more. Strategic. Miles long tsunamis, major earthquakes (8 to 9 on the Richter Scale) that cover hundreds, perhaps thousands of square miles, fires that destroy entire forests of hundreds of square miles, etc... that is what I am talking about.
Most characters who want to just be adventurers shouldn't bother with the spells past 20-25th level, because past that should be the strategic ones which really don't help on an adventure. (Except for the few that can be cast prior to the adventure which will hopefully cover them for the entire time, like a major protection from undead to give you some DB & RR bonuses before you go into the crypts.) Especially because I think, no matter the character level vs spell level thing, these strategic spells should almost always be handled like rituals; they should take a minimum of several minutes to cast, more commonly several hours to even days. That is also why I prefer their durations to be more than 1 round/level or 1 minute/level. More like 2-6 hours/level or even days per level depending. Again, I am not talking about the spell you cast to deal with a small horde of screaming orcs, but the one you use to bring down the mountain they are living in. (So, I guess in that situation, the duration would be how ever long it takes for the mountain to come down - several hours I would think.)
-
I agree it could be extremely rare, but IMHO there should be rules for such an occurrence as it sets a precedence.
In fact it opens up a whole new area of magic, gaining control of other casters spells and or effects. I think there is an rule like this in the spell reigns list but it has been quite a while since I looked at it.
I can for see some groups starting at 40th + level and going from there, in that case it would occur more often.
Also what about Shadow World where there are a few high level people, creatures and items around that would need such a rule in place.
Again I love the idea of more powerful/effect-y 50th and 50+ level spells.
MDC
-
I guess this is where I digress from the majority of RM players and GMs, I just don't need a rule to cover everything. A good foundational rules system - which RM has - is all that is needed, imo. The rest can be done at the table. (See second part of my sig... ;D )
-
I guess my preference is the Arcane is more powerful, god (light) type magic than just a merging of the 3 realms and access to all spells at various ranks. Or maybe I should have both in a game with PC's being able to achieve, start or somehow acquire this new type of magic.
I guess that also brings into being a new question that I think I have asked before, what other types of magic are out there that differ from the norm in RM or an RM world/universe/dimension.
IMHO Deamon, Devil, Angelic magic would be different in my main world then the standard magic players can use right off the start (unless the story provides for that)
MDC
-
I see where you're going with this, but vastly expanding the power level of the 50th level spells is beyond the scope of what I am trying to do. If I do that, then these lists will be grievously unbalanced against other lists, at least at that level. That doesn't serve my purpose, which is just about how arcane fits in with the existing system. I think if you want to make a case for that, a better approach would be to redo the 50th level spells for a large number of lists to show how it would change the system across the board. You could also revise the 40th level spells (might want to move some existing spells down to that level) and add some 60th or higher level spells (I know one of the old RM2 companions had a bunch of those). Might be a good topic for an article of its own.
-
Although the particular spells of the lists capture some "Arcane Flair", their random parameters are problematic.
One particular example would be "Arcane Fires" list, "12 -- Great Wall of Arcane Fire" (6d10'x10'x6') vs "30 -- Immense Wall of Arcane Fire" (2d100'x10'x6').
(As an archmage) i personally would never cast the 30 level variant, because of its uncertainty -- rather using 3 times the lower level variant if need be.
Learning the lists is already costly and than putting 30 'mana' into a spell with that much variation ... oh come on.
Please correct me if my mind fails me, but looking back at RM2/RMSS/SW "Arcane" spell lists, i cant remember XdY parameters.
If you want uncertainty use another spell system, spell-failure or a base spell roll for modifiers (or fix the typo to mean 2d10*10).
As far for the Flair ..., it was already mentioned that this depends very much on the definition of game world itself.
I refer you to some of the old RMCs (RMC1, SUC) for a good read on how this is supposed to work -- also taking a look at the magic chapter of ARIA might help.
mfg
-
6d10 has a mean of 32 and only a 15% chance of getting above 40. 2d100 has a mean of 101 and only has a 15% chance of getting below 55. That seems like a meaningful difference to me. You will very likely get a result 3x as big.
The traditional way of handling arcane is simply by increasing the failure chance. I would rather leave the failure chance the same as other spells, but put the uncertainty in the spell effects themselves. Yes, if you do it often, you will eventually have a spell that barely sputters into being, but in RMSS an extra one out of 50 times the spell won't work at all. I think my kind of failure is more interesting.
It is not something that you see in RM2/RMSS arcane lists, that's true. Unless you want to take a spell like Phasing, on the Ethereal Mastery spell list in RoCo 1, where you have a chance of randomly dying during the spell. I don't find that very satisfying either.
But I will take your post as a vote against my approach....
-
Or you can handle it like weapon breakage; assign specific spells (spell lists, more likely) numbers like breakage numbers (1-X) and if the spellcaster rolls a double within that range something unusual happens. It doesn't have to be bad, just unexpected - a chart all sorts of weird things should be made to roll on. I would increase the "Arcane Breakage" number if a spellcaster was casting a spell hurredly or just at a negative for whatever reason (like injury, fatigue, etc...).
For Example: Repel Entity Sphere (20th level on the Arcane Temple spell lists), could have a AB# of 1-5 normally. But the caster is injured and at -20 to all actions, which translates to a +1 to the AB#, for a total of 1-6. So, if they roll any one of the following numbers: 11, 22, 33, 44, 55, or 66, they get an Arcane Surge Event.
I would make the chart like a critical chart with the least problematic events low, so that modifiers can be issued for different reasons, such as failing the spell which could be a +10 or +20 on the table. If you have it go to 150 or even 200, it can have lots and lots of strange stuff, from the caster's skin/hair/eyes/whatever changing color to the spell turning into a totally different spell (randomly determined, even the school so it can be a channelling, essence, mentalism, or another arcane spell).
With this, you have a new way of doing arcane magic, but don't have to learn a new system/method.
-
But I will take your post as a vote against my approach....
If you really want to keep that uncertainty element, you could make it more RMish and mod one parameter (AoE, Range, Duration) based on a Base Attack Roll (BAR).
in the 2d100 example (avg = 100) an unmodified BAR of 82 on column "Arcane Spell/Other" would give a result of 140 (100+40%), you can surely extrapolate from here.
OR you could do as i did and change the rpg system entirely for magick styles.
PS: i actually like the style of spells on your lists for an arcanist and will probably convert them over to my homebrew.
2c
-
RMU has no BAR, so that doesn't save a roll. It could work for other versions of RM. Personally, I like the cases where the player doesn't know. I suppose it is a bit capricious? But that's magic.
-
RMU has no BAR, so that doesn't save a roll. It could work for other versions of RM. Personally, I like the cases where the player doesn't know. I suppose it is a bit capricious? But that's magic.
Pick a random number from 1-100 and the closer they roll to it the more haywire it goes within a certain range? Just change the number each time it actually has an impact.
-
RMU has no BAR, so that doesn't save a roll. It could work for other versions of RM. Personally, I like the cases where the player doesn't know. I suppose it is a bit capricious? But that's magic.
sorry i'm still on old school RM2, since i have never considered seriously to "upgrade" myself to a later version.
mfg
-
Pick a random number from 1-100 and the closer they roll to it the more haywire it goes within a certain range? Just change the number each time it actually has an impact.
since RMU seams to have dropped the BAR it would not be beneficial to the flow of the game to add another pick and roll.
but judgeing from the RMU(BETA) files another mechanic could be used.
just let the world (the arcane weave) make an unmodified RR against the spell:
- for each 10% failed add +10% to the parameter
- for each 10% succeded add -10% to the parameter
you even could add modifiers for special sites like nodes, temples, etc.
mfg.
-
Pick a random number from 1-100 and the closer they roll to it the more haywire it goes within a certain range? Just change the number each time it actually has an impact.
since RMU seams to have dropped the BAR it would not be beneficial to the flow of the game to add another pick and roll.
You don't need to, just use the normal roll.
-
You don't need to, just use the normal roll.
that reminds me of one of the RMCs where you were supposed to switch the digits of one particular roll and lookup the result on another table ... ;D