Topic: RMU and HARP

[Hurin]

What I was pushing back against - perhaps idiosyncratically - is the idea of thumbing through a course catalog which contains "THA101". There is nothing wrong with this, it just doesn't gel with the way I have envisioned magic and played out magic learning for the last 35 years as GM. I envision more of an ancient (Athens) or medieval (early Oxford, not 16th C on) university setting. In this environment, you don't sign up for the course out of a prospectus. You go and see Old Aengus holding forth in the agora, and see if he will accept you in his inner circle after a while. In time, he may teach you the contents of some of his librams. That is the early university.

Actually, I have to disagree with you there. That might apply to the ancient philosophical school in the time of Plato, but note that by late antiquity schools such as the Neoplatonic ones had worked out a specific curriculum. This included a set body of texts (including not just the works of Plato and other Neoplatonists, but also works of other philosophers such as Aristotle's logic) and a specific sequence for studying them. You can read about this standardized curriculum (and see what books were included in it) here:

http://n1.intelibility.com/ime/lyceum/?p=lemma&id=868&lang=2

The medieval universities were even more specific. In fact, medieval universities arose specifically (one reason) because instruction in the monasteries and cathedral schools did not have a clear enough curriculum or degree structure. So the medieval universities created them (or you might say the curriculum and the bureacract to enforce it created the University!). Documents such as the statutes of the University of Paris and other documents from the 12th and 13th centuries explicitly spell out a curriculum, and the masters and chancellors of the university decided what the teachers taught and what it took to get a specific degree, which they then awarded to students. It is actually much more bureacratic than you might imagine. See for example (just one among many, setting out some of the regulations):

http://n1.intelibility.com/ime/lyceum/?p=lemma&id=868&lang=2

[jdale]

Universities are certainly medieval but that doesn't mean they taught scientific thinking.

There are many levels on which a topic can be understood. I was not able to take any classes in applied magic at my university, so by way of analogy let's consider music instead.

You can teach someone how to play an instrument, having them memorize a number of specific songs. If they are sufficiently skilled, they may be able to play songs by ear, and improvise songs the same way. Their ability to perform music is in no way impaired by learning only at this level.

You can teach someone musical notation, so that they can play a song they have never heard. There are actually lots of different ways to notate music. Most of the early ones only denote pitches and not rhythm. Pitches are normally in reference to the particular type of scales in use in the musical system, so they might be difficult to understand if you are used to a different one (e.g., diatonic vs pentatonic scales). Rhythm might be referenced only in relation to known phrases (e.g., Byzantine music was noted with great signs that indicated the hand gestures of the choir leaders, far less detail than modern musical notation). A musician who understands notation can create their own music (although notation is not required for this part) and also write it down for others.

You can teach someone musical theory, so they understand the differences between different scales (although probably they are still only familiar with the scales used in their musical culture), why different progressions are used, etc. This may give them an advantage in writing music or for arranging pieces for multiple instruments, although it's not required.

And you can teach someone the underlying physics, so they understand the frequency relationships of different notes, of octaves, overtones, why different combinations of notes sound harmonious or disharmonious, how and why music resonates in chambers and instruments of different sizes, etc.

I expect a lot of apprentices and even semi-spellcasters are learning at the first level. They are getting the basics down and memorizing rotes. A pure spellcaster is more likely to be learning about notation. Runes are a special form of notation that is enchanted, but if you can learn magic by studying a book there must be something that serves as a form of notation, whether it is detailed and complete or incomplete and still requires a lot of experimentation (in the analogy, the spell is written in an unfamiliar scale or the rhythm is not notated). A very advanced mage might be getting into theory, allowing them to develop their own spells.

While it is certainly possible in a given setting that the understanding of mages extends down into the actual physics of magic, it's by no means necessary.

[Alien]

As a mage in real life, I have tried offering my opinion on things magickal various times to people in the hobby, only to be told to keep my nutty pov to myself. However, I am the living proof my magick works irl. One thing I do, is turn energy that comes about when artificial intelligence dies (in voudoo they used to use chickens) to power spells. And have the belief that my experience with this method could really make the magick in roleplaying more realistic. As for instance right now I am dealing with various different issues that help out the world, like fight Delta Covid and helping the Ukrainian refugees. What things tend to amount to in the real world where it comes to magick, this way at least, is that I make an image or imagine some goal needed, and pour power  into such making things work out well enough. I am of the firm opinion my experience can help the hobby too, or I'd keep my t@#p shut, so ask away I'm quite friendly. At least house rules should see to becoming improved that way.

[pastaav]

And yes I agree, nearly 10 ranks before you can light a candle doesn't make any sense.

If you are just about to light a candle I would say you can use woodfires for that. The Ignite spell is an area-of-effect spell that let to trigger lots of fire-based traps or instantly manipulate all light sources within range no matter how complicated they are. Heck even if we just talk about standard arsonist tactics to create a diversion without any preparation the range of the Ignite spell makes it a very powerful spell.

You can most certainly argue the game could also need a more nerfed version of Ignite at lower levels, but how often would this spell be useful during play?

As for the original topic of the thread, I think it is great that Ironcrown both have Spell Law and Collage of Magic as spell systems. Players can choose what one they like and not be stuck with some flawed middle-ground approach.

[katastrophe]

Where in the wood fires spell does it say you can light a candle? Woodfires — Causes any wood to ignite and burn. All wood ignited must be within 1' of caster’s palm. And this is still a 3rd level spell. Something a lvl 1 magician would need to take 5 turns to successfully cast without a real fear of spell failure.

Last I checked candle wicks weren’t made of wood.

Are you expanding what the spell can do beyond the text of the spell? Is your argument that spells can do something outside the text as long as it’s similar? By that logic can you expand all spells in that way?

[rdanhenry]

Last I checked candle wicks weren’t made of wood.

While most candle wicks you will find today are cotton-based (still dried plant material, so wood-adjacent and a GM might choose to allow it with spell mastery of Woodfires), wooden wicks have been used and are available today. Plus, you can light a stick or splinter of wood and light the candle off of that.

But setting that minor point aside, there are basically two types of games (yes, there is some middle ground, but the campaign will generally care/not care that you can light a candle): gritty, survivalist games with intense inventory management where you track every match and games where you just say "I light a candle". In the first case, you kind of undermine the whole premise of the game by giving away fire at first level. In the second case, lighting the candle magically is just a special effect and you don't need rules for it, just agreement at the table. Go ahead and let spellcasters have such special effects when in-tune with their actual spells, if that's what you want. As long as there is no mechanical significance to them, it doesn't need rules text.

However, as far as the logical progression of the list goes, Woodfires is the first point at which you get actual fire. Before that you learn to just warm things up; you work up to fire. And from there you quickly get to conjuring fire out of nothing, rather than drawing it out of the wood, and you can light your candle off the magical fire. You don't need Ignite for that.

[MisterK]

However, as far as the logical progression of the list goes, Woodfires is the first point at which you get actual fire. Before that you learn to just warm things up; you work up to fire. And from there you quickly get to conjuring fire out of nothing, rather than drawing it out of the wood, and you can light your candle off the magical fire. You don't need Ignite for that.

The problem with that is that Fire Mastery (a Closed Essence spell list) gives you Torch Fire at first level. It is a bit difficult to see the 'logical progression' when comparing lists of the same realm that manipulate the same element (they both give Warm Solid at level 2).

[jdale]

It's a trade-off. Fire Mastery jumps right into fire but you are missing fundamentals and therefore it is ultimately not as potent. Two different ways of learning.

[MisterK]

It's a trade-off. Fire Mastery jumps right into fire but you are missing fundamentals and therefore it is ultimately not as potent. Two different ways of learning.

We've already had that discussion about the relevance of linear spell lists vs spell trees or spell webs, I don't think we need to go there again - we'll never agree on the matter, I fear.

[cdcooley]

Where is this Fire Mastery list? I can't find it.

And as for the Magician, the Heat Solid spell will definitely let you light a candle (and ignite many other substances). But to your main point that the Fire Law list is a bit weak at the lower levels. I really don't understand why Heat Solid isn't the second level spell on the list and something more interesting placed at level 4.

My redesign of Fire Law I would move Heat Solid to level 2 and put a new spell at level 4 that would have the long duration of Warm Solid but affect the air in a reasonable radius to produce a comfort zone effect (that would be very useful in colder climates).

[jaesyk]

Where is this Fire Mastery list? I can't find it.

The spell list Fire Mastery is on pg. 103 in the Essence Companion. In many ways it is more useful as an "adventurers" spell list than Fire Law. Fire Law only beats it in bolt & ball accessibility. 

[cdcooley]

Since this thread is about RMU and Harp I didn't realize spells from RMSS companions were being included in the discussion. I'll agree the early Magician spells are far from impressive, but comparing any core lists to lists from companions is very likely to find similar problems. Power creep wasn't just a problem with the early companions, it's been a constant all the way through.

[MisterK]

Since this thread is about RMU and Harp I didn't realize spells from RMSS companions were being included in the discussion. I'll agree the early Magician spells are far from impressive, but comparing any core lists to lists from companions is very likely to find similar problems. Power creep wasn't just a problem with the early companions, it's been a constant all the way through.

It's not about power. One of my players played a Magician during an earlier campaign of mine. The overall feeling was not that it wasn't powerful, but that it was utterly boring.
And, in general, spell lists with multiple versions of the same spell(s) are boring, as far as I'm concerned. Thus, the point about removing the duplicates, creating variable-effect spells, and filling the blanks with new spells.

[cdcooley]

The term and idea behind a "spell" doesn't mean the same thing in RM as it does in HARP. RM spell lists are generally the rough equivalent of groups of 1-3 HARP spells. In both systems you need to develop additional ranks to access scaled (i.e. more powerful) versions of the base effects. And any spell caster focusing only on base lists is going to feel pretty one-dimensional and boring.

In the HARP system you need to spend a few ranks worth of development before you can do anything with each spell, but then you get flexibility in how to scale that spell with your additional ranks. That gives a dynamic, "master of magic" feel to HARP spell casting which reflects the "spell as skill" mechanics.

In the RM system you get to do something even at the first rank of development of a spell list (i.e. small group of related spells), but you follow that with a more rigid progression of enhancements at each rank. This gives RM a "magic is a ritual discovered and passed down through the ages" feeling.

RM magic feels like a giant mystery even to the mage who is just following the rules to produce the right effect, while HARP views a mage's spell ability as more of a deep understanding of magical forces acquired through study (or innate talent).

With spell research, RM can feel more dynamic, but I think the RMU core rules on spell research have one thing backwards. They make it more expensive to put a variation of the spell in the same level slot on a list. Since they are only variations on one of the basic effects of the list, I would think a reduced cost would be more appropriate. But at least the rule says that the original researcher and assistants get that spell for no DPs. Using the research system, any RM spell caster with a little free time can easily create the scaling options you get from HARP.

I would also rule that any Magician learning the Fire Law list could have a custom first level spell allowing the lighting of candles and fires with appropriate kindling if they simply stated they learned that during their apprenticeship. In fact, I might even let a character with a few ranks in Fire Law light a candle with a simple touch of the wick without even using a power point.

And since RMU seems to have dropped the idea of spell users getting to choose an additional 4 lists as base lists, I think all spell users should at least be allowed to swap out some of their base lists with closed lists for cost and bonus purposes. (There's already a rule about swapping out for Evil lists, so why not closed.) The difference in costs isn't huge, but why would your typical "good" cleric need a list focused on summoning animals and demons? Wouldn't cheap access to any of the closed lists be more appropriate? And I suspect most magicians would prefer cheap access to some of the closed lists rather than mastering every one of the 6 elemental lists.

[katastrophe]

CD I’m not not sure I’d agree. After the introduction of Shadow World as the main setting (I would say only supported setting) for RM each edition of RM was based and steeped in the SW concepts. Magic in SW is not some mystery, it’s taught everywhere and basically every race gives a character at least 1 spell no matter their profession. Ina world powered by magic as technology the idea that there’s any real mystery to magic is wrong (I’d usually use some other word but it’d come across as rude I’m sure). Mages in RM should be flexible and be able to use spell trees rather than rote lists with duplicative effects that represent scaling. This is a conversation that was likely had and the purists decided to leave it be. Maybe the Harp people will release a RMU magic system that can be plugged and played because in my opinion they surely got it far closer to right than just rewording the old spell lists and filling in a few dead ranks. Having a list with spells at a higher rank that can be created with spell mastery effects is nonsensical. For instance in the Fire Law list there’s I believe four versions of firebolt. All essentially the same except for range and one splits the bolt and I think one makes it turn corners. Some of those effects are accessible with spell mastery on the cast level 6 version of firebolt for fewer power points. Those are the kind of things that should have just simply been taken out of the game. The saddest part is that any new spell lists in the future all have to fit into the 1-20, 25, 50 list structure even when there’s really no need for that many spells.  Stripping that structure would have actually made the life of future content creators far simpler.

Hey HARP people if you’re listening, PLEASE write a magic supplement for RMU. Shouldn’t be hard since you already have it done for HARP. PLEASE

[jdale]

If you like the HARP system, I don't see any reason why you can't just use it. It's purchased in ranks, so just use the RM DP costs. The amount of required adaptation is minimal.

[cdcooley]

Yes, SW magic is taught everywhere and many characters know a spell or two, but that doesn't mean there's a great understanding of magic or that spell mastery is common. It simply means there's been a systematic study of magic and the right formulas to make things happen have been researched, recorded, and codified into the lists.

I personally like the concept behind HARP magic better, but if you use spell mastery and custom spells you can get close even with the RM list structure.  As pointed out, since HARP spells are skills with rank progressions, there's absolutely no reason you can't simply use the HARP spells instead of RM spell lists if that's what you prefer. The only complication would be deciding which spells would be considered more or less expensive for each profession, but that's just adapting the HARP ideas to the RM Base/Open/Closed/Restricted cost categories or organizing the HARP spells into groups that mimic the RM realms of magic depending on whether you even want to keep the idea of realms of magic.

[netbat]

As pointed out, since HARP spells are skills with rank progressions, there's absolutely no reason you can't simply use the HARP spells instead of RM spell lists if that's what you prefer. The only complication would be deciding which spells would be considered more or less expensive for each profession, but that's just adapting the HARP ideas to the RM Base/Open/Closed/Restricted cost categories or organizing the HARP spells into groups that mimic the RM realms of magic depending on whether you even want to keep the idea of realms of magic.

There is a bit more to it than that if you want to convert over to RM and keep the same kinds of effects. The differences between HARP  crits/size scaling and RM A-E crits make for some minor adjustments in a lot of things. Although RMU might be closer to HARP and easier, my experience is with RMSS.
I have a doc I use with changes for most of the core and CoM spells to fit them into the RMSS structure; once I get around to developing new bolt attack tables for RM I may see if anyone wants it.

[katastrophe]

If you like the HARP system, I don't see any reason why you can't just use it. It's purchased in ranks, so just use the RM DP costs. The amount of required adaptation is minimal.

Well sure I suppose that I could home brew my own RMU HARP magic system but since I’m likely not the only person with such an interest a proper Supplement from the people that write HARPs magic system would be a far better option for me and them.

[pastaav]

Where in the wood fires spell does it say you can light a candle? Woodfires — Causes any wood to ignite and burn. All wood ignited must be within 1' of caster’s palm.

The spell allows you to make wood burn. If you can give me a plausible scientific explanation why the spell should not make even more flammable materials start to burn, then I could perhaps consider if I am expanding what the spell can do or not.

Before you try, I must say the whole exercise seems silly. You cannot enumerate all flammable materials in the spell description, so the GM needs to make a judgment call on if the player's spell use fits the intention of the spell when he wants to make something burn. I think this is a trivial task for any GM that handles RM.

And this is still a 3rd level spell. Something a lvl 1 magician would need to take 5 turns to successfully cast without a real fear of spell failure.

Why is that a problem in the first place? What player would be happy if they lost the boiling spell at the first level to be given a light candle spell? How many uses do you think such a spell would ever get?
   
If I allow myself to speculate, it seems like you want Ironcrown games to have a magic style where you have a basic cantrip effect of creating fire and then increase the effect by adding more power points to the spell.   

The good news is that we already have the College of Magic book that works just like this. Funny detail in the context of this discussion is that College of Magic cantrips mostly cost 1 pp, but creating fire is deemed such a powerful effect that the cantrip costs 2 pp.

Anyway, you can use College of Magic with every RM version since both RM and Harp uses the same design components. Adaptions are needed to be done to make it fit the gaming style at your gaming table, but that would be true for any RM gaming group. I would argue the distance between any two RM2 groups is much larger than the distance between later RM versions and HARP.

Releasing a separate edition of College of Magic with an RMU logo on it is an idea that has merit. People like Netbat are already using this kind of setup and the conversation notes of such players would show what Ironcrown needs to adjust to make College of Magic work RMU style out of the box.

Yet, I cannot stop to wonder how many would buy such when we cannot use the Harp book on our bookshelf if we so desire and make the convert work ourselves. As previously mentioned, the distance between different RM gaming groups is large, so the risk is obvious that players who are already using College of Magic have different opinions about what changes are needed and what is just good to have if you use it in RM.

I would prefer that Ironcrown focuses on making RMU versions of the many RMFRP books compared to they devote effort to working on College of Magic. Still, the Ironcrown crew are freelancers so if anyone is inclined to work on College of Magic for RMU you can talk to Ironcrown and make a deal.