| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 01:51:36
You know I just had a thought. How would metamagic be incorporated in 2e? In the Myth Drannor boxed set it states that phaerimm use verbal-only versions of spells (that aren't adjusted in level) without a 'feat' to accomplish it. I know we could just say that a verbal-only version is simply 1 level higher...but is there a more intuitive way of doing this? The 2e Realms is actually filled with examples of 'metamagic' use without any rules to apply (it's usually explained as a boon from Mystra who reveals the secret to worthy mages...which is fine with me...but I would like to here other's thoughts).
Some examples of this:
1. The phaerimm mentioned above.
2. Dragon magic (originally shown in FOR 1 Draconomicon).
3. The Weavespinner "template" (for lack of a better way of describing it) shown in the Magister book.
4. Numerous examples of El using magic, even before 3e came along (obviously a special case, but still an example). One can add the various Magisters and other Chosen to this example.
5. Sammaster was said to be a master of metamagic in the Cult of the Dragon book (a 2e source).
6. There are other general examples in various writings, some in the 'ask Ed' scrolls. Some are 3e specific but others are 2e days. |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 14:33:51
quote:
I think the de-powering of magic came about simply because in earlier editions, spellcasters very much lorded over all others at high levels.
That is true but I think this is not (as much) the case these days because monsters and PCs are generally more powerful these days.
quote:
I agree that there should be some in built stat requirements for spellcasting
Obviously I agree but I would apply this to all classes. Spell casters would just have more stringent requirements.
quote:
I always was of the view that the 1E way was the best...
The point you made in the rest of your comment is quite true. I would actually take it a bit further. All spells would be added through research. Either pay someone else to teach you (already researched), add it from a scroll (still have to research it but it's cheaper) or full-blown research.
quote:
As for your "ancient scrolls" point, I don't think you need an all-encompassing explanation...
The example you give here gets to my 'more expansive' reasoning behind how such things should work. Also, consider that idea stolen. 
quote:
In my D&D, lore always trumps rules. In the hands of a judicious and balanced DM, a great story explanation will always prevail over an all-encompassing, "balanced" piece of crunch. The secret is not to give the unique benefit to the PC on a plate, but to make him strive long and hard for it.
+100 to this. I'm always about the story over everything else and I generally don't worry about how powerful (or weak, for that matter) PCs are if a good story can be told through the game. In order to make things dynamic I don't always make everything 'difficult' for them to earn. RL sometimes just drops things in your lap...no reason why it can't be a nice item, spellbook, etc.
quote:
The in built tension in 1E in terms of resources, level advancement and power increase has never been replicated in subsequent editions, IMO. I say get rid of the cookie cutter and give individual DMs the tools and inspiration to weave in special stuff that allows one PC to be unique from another in ways different from feat choices or skills learned.
Another +100 for this. I would just add that this is still possible in 2e/3e by DM fiat. I'm not familiar with 4e to speak to it but I'm sure you're assessment is accurate.
Quick edit on this point: I also prefer the XP advancement from 1e/2e days. Advancement is far to quick in 3e. Having said that, I actually prefer the point-buy system for gaining new abilities (GURPS style although the 2e alt rules incorporated the idea.
Cheers. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 06:15:51
I think the de-powering of magic came about simply because in earlier editions, spellcasters very much lorded over all others at high levels.
I agree that there should be some in built stat requirements for spellcasting but was also of the view that what limited magic-user (yes, I'm using the 1E term) power back in the day was quite simply the DM. Unlike later editions where a level increase saw a wizard get a range of new spells automatically, I always was of the view that the 1E way was the best - you had to find your new spells or be taught them (for exorbitant amounts of money). Of course, the DM controlled what was found and what was available. This had the additional benefit of using up magic (spells being placed into spellbooks from scrolls and thereby erased, for example) and PC gold; and the most sophisticated campaigns had magic-users trying to research their own magic (again with the accompanying cost in time and resources).
As for your "ancient scrolls" point, I don't think you need an all-encompassing explanation, but rather a more localised, in-game one. If the scrolls come from the Archsorcerer Jerthar of Nuvorene, it gives you a chance to come up with stuff specific to your campaign - like the fact that he possessed the diadem of Geladaunt (which enabled him to add a random 1d4 extra dice of damage to his evocation spells - and caused him 1d4 damage for every extra level of damage given) or had successfully drunk Torbard's Elixir (which gave him the ability to choose one spell per level he could cast to function as if affected by what in 3E terms would be the maximise spell feat), etc. etc.
In my D&D, lore always trumps rules. In the hands of a judicious and balanced DM, a great story explanation will always prevail over an all-encompassing, "balanced" piece of crunch. The secret is not to give the unique benefit to the PC on a plate, but to make him strive long and hard for it.
D&D has evolved significantly over the decades, with 4E being the most egregious example of "you can do anything because you're the hero!"-gaming. The in built tension in 1E in terms of resources, level advancement and power increase has never been replicated in subsequent editions, IMO. I say get rid of the cookie cutter and give individual DMs the tools and inspiration to weave in special stuff that allows one PC to be unique from another in ways different from feat choices or skills learned.
-- George Krashos |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 05:33:56
Actually, with 3e removing caps is less of a problem. During the 1e days a 20th level wizard could throw a 20d6 fireball and the monsters of that era were weaker. During 2e this problem was solved by capping the spells. But in 3e where you still have the 10d6 cap but monsters are much stronger. Magic has gotten progressively weaker across editions (something that rather aggravates me, personally) while monsters (and really PCs in general) have gotten stronger.
That fighter in 2e that was limited to 9d10 hit dice can now have 20d10 (or more). Now, someone might say that spell casters can make use of metamagic feats and that's true. But the added hit points are built into the class...spell casters have to sacrifice precious feat slots to improve their magic, and let's not forget that the our fighter has feats to improve his character too.
This is one of the reasons I started this thread. I want more flexibility in my homebrew magic system. Also, I'm not a fan of 'class balancing' in the game (such balancing is often times arbitrary and illogical). I am, however, a fan of entry requirements for classes (i.e. it should be easier to become a warrior than a paladin, IMHO). That is another thing that was lost with 2e. I'm not saying the average player shouldn't be able to be a paladin...just that it should be easier to enter the fighter class than the paladin class.
I've been toying with an idea for 'balancing' wizards in my campaign (given the fact that I'm looking at restoring some of the power they've lost across editions). The 2e system had ability score requirements for specialist mages (such as Cha 15 for an Enchanter). So I'm thinking that the ability to cast ANY enchantment spell could require a Cha 15. I've also thought that a wizard should have a combined Int+Wis score of 30 (a hold over from the old Lankhmar campaign). I doubt I'll take it THAT far but you guys get the point.
I also think I want a system where too much spellcasting leads to fatigue, exhaustion and (if a mage CHOOSES to push too far) death (this would be by choice only though as a wizard would know when they are beginning to risk death so it can't be accidental by just a bad dice roll).
Still, I like the idea of ancient scrolls carrying more powerful versions of spells...but then that leaves us with a question as to why a wizard can't duplicate the effect in modern times. Yes we can use the simple 'Mystra wont allow it' rule...but I prefer more expansive reasoning behind such answers. |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 04:19:30
I remember reading about the days when spells had no caps, prior to the Time of Troubles and 2E. I've sometimes thought about how to do metamagic type situations in the Realms myself at times. Though I admit I haven't done much with it other than have an idea or two.
The closest thing I've come up with is "Ancient" or "Netherese" spells.
Say you find an old magic missile scroll from Netheril labeled Myrdin's Battlestrike, same in all aspects of magic missile, 1st level etc, but you can max out your bolts at 7 instead of 5. As I have not tested this yet in game play, I imagine could be fairly unbalancing if not sufficiently rare. Well, probably flat out broken, but you get the idea. ;)
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 04:14:02
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
Microlite d20 (a stripped down version of the d20 rules in the mold of Old School/OSR games) has magic system that costs hit point per spell cast. The rules are available for free online.
There was a 2E wu jen variant that did that, too, in Dragon magazine. They had a limited selection of spells, and the spells were powered by hit points -- so they got a warrior's CON bonus to help out, and a couple more martial abilities to balance it. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 02:34:31
Microlite d20 (a stripped down version of the d20 rules in the mold of Old School/OSR games) has magic system that costs hit point per spell cast. The rules are available for free online. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 10 Feb 2014 : 02:24:30
Dragonlance. FR has a few specific spells.
There were variant rules in PO:S&M for Spell Fatigue, with overload or accumulation escalating up to Severe (Dex check to stand) and then Mortal (save or die) fatigue level - somewhat resembling mentions of spell overload in DL novels. There was option "Hazardous spells" - 1 hp/spell level, ST/half.
It was also recommended for some magic variants - e.g. "Channeling" uses spellpoint pool adjusted for Wis and Con and also fatigue (still better than the whole "Cuteness Is Magic" of 3e sorcerer).
Net Wizards Handbook variants systems #3 (skill-like) and #5 (hybrid) allowed improving casting check via "personal sacrifice" - loss of HP (healed normally) or attributes (recovering slowly). |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 09 Feb 2014 : 23:33:43
Has anyone ever played the Star Wars d20 game? In my core rule book for it Force Powers are used by burning up Vitality Points (hit points). In that game though, VP are replenished with rest (not just sleep, you automatically get so many points back per round...so they come back pretty quickly). Has anyone ever used a similar system for magic (which is outlined in the alt rules in 2e...just slower replenishment)?
In such a system utilizing a metamagic skill/feat becomes a matter of using more points to 'energize' it. I would still require a purchase of the feat or require a skill check to modify the spell successfully though. Thoughst? |
| Faraer |
Posted - 08 Feb 2014 : 22:43:42
A lot of what D&D has called 'metamagic' is usual practice in the Realms and reflected in various ways.
When I did a classification of Realms magic some years back, the broad category 'Art' included some 170 spells, broken down into categories like spell reading, spell duplication, spell inscription, spell trigger, contingency, mantle, combination, spell augmentation, permanency, inhibition, spell stealing, dispelling, detection and concealment.
As George says, much is done by the crafting of variant spells, and the published ones are just a sampling of the many variant magics created through investigatory tinkering, parallel development, competitive one-upmanship and so on.
Part of the Art also consists in the control and flexibility possible for skilled wizards each time a spell is cast: a Realms spell is not the rigid thing the rules have to present for simplicity and game balance's sake. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 08 Feb 2014 : 22:11:37
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
You know I just had a thought. How would metamagic be incorporated in 2e?
"Would"?
quote:
In the Myth Drannor boxed set it states that phaerimm use verbal-only versions of spells (that aren't adjusted in level) without a 'feat' to accomplish it. I know we could just say that a verbal-only version is simply 1 level higher...but is there a more intuitive way of doing this?
Yup. The way it was done: Phaerimm, Naga, Dragons and suchlike are highly magical creatures with non-humanoid anatomy, thus they use magic differently - specifically, usually they don't need anything other than verbal component. By the same token, this means at least non- Song spells would need spell research to be useable at all, even if completely cribbed from a ready manual, and some descriptions agree with that (Naga need to tweak spells).
quote:
5. Sammaster was said to be a master of metamagic in the Cult of the Dragon book (a 2e source).
...which also expounds upon the school of metamagic in details and examples, also giving a Wizard "kit" (more of a subclass at this point) specialising in it (along with Abjuration)? What was the question, again? 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
I've no direct experience with 2E metamagic, but I believe the concept is implemented through other spells.
These would be spells that affect spells, thus 'metamagic'.
Yup. quote:
This isn't an exact example, but say a wizard wants to cast a metamagic Fireball, let's pick 'maximized'. They would have a Maximize metamagic spell memorized that is expended at the same time as the Fireball is cast. The spell energy of the Maximize metamagic spell would be channeled to maximize the Fireball.
Nope. One, most metamagic spells are prefixes affecting "the spell cast next round" - i.e. effectively add casting time, except disruption affects only modification, not the main spell.
Two, there was no "maximize" other than IIRC some special-case divine effects - which IMO is a good idea, as it doesn't make sense in-universe.
quote:
An example could be something like the Simbul's Spell Sequencer from BG2. You memorize the sequencer spell, cast it, and it asks you to cast the spells you want to sequence into it. From then on the spells are stored there until used. The same with Contingency, Mantles, etc.
Yup, lots of spells that require spell charges - especially Contingency/trap type. Which of course means effectively they are cast as prefixes too.
quote:
I suppose one could use proficiencies, but those are few to come by.
Yup, skillpoints-wise, 2.0 suffered from stinginess almost as much as 3.x from inflation.
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Reviewing the alternative 2e rules I (re)learned that characters received 3-5 points upon leveling up to apply to additional abilities and skill improvements. Fact is, 2e was already transitioning into 3e with these rules. [...] Also, with all of the examples we have of characters (especially wizards) with 'extra' powers that seem to defy the rules I started to think about how this could be accomplished rules-wise. And really, the answer has been there all along.
...namely, that while this is left to kits in 2.0, this sort of customization is supported in 2.5 (Player's Options).  |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 31 Jan 2014 : 21:37:46
Yeah I'm starting to realize everything that was lost when 2e went out of print...flexibility being second to the 'flavor' lost with the transition (I think the 2e system works better for the Realms). The only thing I really just gotta have from 3e are skills and feats...you pretty much keep everything else. And the skills/feats were already being added through the alternative rules if one wanted to use them. 3e then becomes a great resource for additional ideas and abilities to 'reverse engineer' into the system. |
| Kris the Grey |
Posted - 31 Jan 2014 : 19:42:39
2E is a much more flexible system than it gets credit for in my humble opinion.
I'm hopeful that 5E will resemble it in that way (it seems to be following that path to some degree if the various playtest packets are any indication). |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 31 Jan 2014 : 01:20:06
Reviewing the alternative 2e rules I (re)learned that characters received 3-5 points upon leveling up to apply to additional abilities and skill improvements. Fact is, 2e was already transitioning into 3e with these rules. Anyway, seems like a decent enough way to incorporate new abilities for PCs under 2e but I had an additional thought. I would tie the points into actual XP gained. So, every 10k xp gained nets a character an additional point. This allows high-level players to really customize their characters. Of course, NPCs would follow these same rules.
Also, with all of the examples we have of characters (especially wizards) with 'extra' powers that seem to defy the rules I started to think about how this could be accomplished rules-wise. And really, the answer has been there all along. We can simply treat obtaining some of these powers as magical item research...except that the item to be enchanted is the PC (or his soul if that is more appropriate). This allows the DM to make the process as difficult and as expensive as necessary. On top of that, this process can be combined with the point system. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 23:29:15
2E Tome of Magic and PO: Spells & Magic described metamagic ... other 2E products treated metamagic as a proper “school“ and even introduced the Incantrix (a sort of metamage specialist). Characters like Halaster, Sammaster, the Chosen/etc already exceed normal rules, they could possess unique metamagic talents which won‘t be available to others. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 21:03:01
Yup, I've already begun to review that as well. In fact, there are metamagic options available in the system! The only issue is that you spend the points at character creation and don't gain points later. I think characters of all classes should be able to grow and evolve over time...so allowing points upon level up that can be spent as they wish may work. But, thing is, one could simply allow feats in 2e (modified for that sytsem of course) just as easily. That option is also simpler...and simpler is USUALLY better.
Hopefully Dalor and Hoondatha will chime in with their thoughts as they are 2e players. |
| Kris the Grey |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 16:38:21
Don't forget that in 2E you have (through Players Option: Spells and Magic) the ability to use the Spell Points system, which gives you a chance to employ a metamagic style 'overcharge' or 'undercharge' of spells by using more or less spell points to memorize/cast them! |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 10:25:14
Just bought the 101 Variant Spells...nice and cheap.
I started reviewing the 2e proficiency system again. I'm ok with beginning characters having more than 4 skill points as found in 3e as one can argue that a few years have gone in to those skills. My problem is gaining new nonweapon skills at full points (plus ability bonus if applicable). It's like they studied for a few weeks and BAM! they're master astronomers or something.
I'm thinking if I start running a 2e game I may allow a metamagic skill with each type of metamagic having a different threshold to use (so silent spell would have lower requirement than quicken spell). So, a wizard with Metamagic 15 may be able to silence and still a spell but be unable to quicken it (because he needs Metamagic 18 or something). The wizard still needs to pass a skill check to succeed. Conversely, I could have Metamagic be a weapon skill instead (I think I could argue that one logically). Perhaps each metamagic 'feat' becomes a weapon in this case?
On a side note, another thing I dislike about 2e is the dual/multiclass system. I see no reason why characters of any race can't multiclass freely with up to 3 classes. I also don't like the level limits imposed on demihumans. These rules seem vary arbitrary to me. I do, however, favor more stringent entry requirements for classes. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 06:15:52
That's easy enough to translate. The maximized fireball would simply be a level 6 spell Irulon's Deathsphere.
As Arcanamach said, it's a somewhat ho-hum solution. And I see where he's coming from.
Figure the core spells are the oldies, but goodies, almost like basic necessities or standard ingredients. The spells that are most common because they're the base stock from which other spells of that type are derived. It's up to the skill and knowledge of the wizard to spice up the spell for the desired effect, sometimes "on the fly" or "they'll whip something up". Like the master chef who takes chicken broth and makes it more than chicken broth.
As for variant spells, the 3E lineage of games is quite adept at it.
See 101 Variant Spells by Rogue Genius Games, which aims for something more ambitious than a simple fireball to iceball variant. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 05:11:14
I always thought from a 2E perspective that the answer lay in variant spells. In other words, a maximised fireball was "Irulon's Deathsphere" and that you had to find and learn the spell in question to use it. This harks back to some of Ed's earliest Pages From the Mages articles where he showcased variant versions of burning hands and other spells to avoid cookie cutter spellcasters and to keep the mystery of magic alive. In 3E, with the right feat the majority of the spellcasting population can cast a maximised fireball. Nothing very exciting about that.
-- George Krashos |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 03:56:09
Heh, I find the 3e skill system more realistic. With 2e, if you have a high score (say 17) you have a very high chance of success from day one...that just doesn't track with me. In 3e, you can take 10 and receive your +3 bonus to do average things in your skill (like cooking the eggs) but still need a standard check to be highly successful (cooking a gourmet meal). In 2e, you're a gourmet cook from day one (and I just don't see it for most beginning characters, some of which start out as teenagers). Plus, in 2e you start out with the maximum points you will ever have in a skill unless you get an attribute boost, which takes away the ability to learn more with the skill (attribute increases are rare in most 2e games). |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 03:39:47
The proficiency system works more like a "Trained/Untrained" system. The proficiencies you have are ones you're trained in.
For instance, everyone can cook, at least well enough not to starve. Regular non-proficient person can fry his eggs, boil some pasta, and generally make plain serviceable dishes. He'll get by, but most won't hire him for the skill.
The cooking proficiency means you're trained in it (or you've had enough experience that it becomes a skill you consider you're proficient in). Having the proficiency means you're at least at the level of short order cook. People who have good proficiency checks in cooking, means they could be gourmet chefs. It's inevitable some people are better at something even with the same training. A really dedicated person can spent more proficiency points in the same skill and improve it.
It's not a great system, but after some use of it and thought on the matter, it's surprisingly simulates real life. Think of them as informal degrees and certificates. You either have one or you don't. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 03:19:27
There were 'metamagic' spells offered in Tome of Magic (squaring the circle was one) but I don't care for that option. 3e allows it to be an ability (through feat selection) but 2e spells require you to lose spell slots. Delayed blast fireball is an example of simply making the spells higher level but that was mentioned in my first post. Those options lack something for me.
If it were me, I'd likely apply the abilities either as 'templates' (like the weavespinner example) or build in choices for wizards as they level up where they can select various options (maybe apply a point system, some powers cost more than others...and so the wizard gets fewer abilities by taking the strongest ones).
I like the proficiency idea too though. Frankly, I don't like the 2e proficiency system (who starts life with almost maximum knowledge in a skill?) and it really would take very little work to adjust the typical 2e adventure for use with 3e skill points. So, wizards could have a metamagic skill with more points allowing for better metamagic powers. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 02:47:26
I've no direct experience with 2E metamagic, but I believe the concept is implemented through other spells.
These would be spells that affect spells, thus 'metamagic'. This isn't an exact example, but say a wizard wants to cast a metamagic Fireball, let's pick 'maximized'. They would have a Maximize metamagic spell memorized that is expended at the same time as the Fireball is cast. The spell energy of the Maximize metamagic spell would be channeled to maximize the Fireball.
An example could be something like the Simbul's Spell Sequencer from BG2. You memorize the sequencer spell, cast it, and it asks you to cast the spells you want to sequence into it. From then on the spells are stored there until used. The same with Contingency, Mantles, etc.
For familiars, I believe in 2E, it was just a spell you cast in a suitable location where the desired animal lives. Then a familiar would be attracted to you.
One of the mechanics I would use for some of these abilities would be to permanently occupy a spell slot of the appropriate level, much like the 3E Archmage's abilities or the 3.5E Reserve spells from Complete Mage. There are few options outside of spell slots to 'balance' the addition of abilities.
I suppose one could use proficiencies, but those are few to come by.
A kit ability may also offer some benefit for an appropriate disadvantage. However, kits in 2E varied greatly, some offered great benefits with strong disadvantages, some were mostly flavor for both, some offered powerful benefits for relatively minor disadvantages, or vice versa. Spell slots are more quantifiable. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 01:59:51
Another example: The Last Magister (Talatha Vaerovree of Innarlith) had the ability to cast and hold multiple spells simultaneously (spells that required concentration to maintain). The only place I've seen a 'rule' for this sort of thing is in GURPS...it can be done by taking the Compartmentalized Mind ability and applying it to spell casting.
I'm not necessarily looking for rules on this stuff...just want to know how fellow scribes and sages would incorporate these into game play. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 29 Jan 2014 : 01:55:13
I'll also open this topic up to Item Creation rules and Pathfinder's bonded items and familiars. BTW, I agree with Dalor, from another thread, that the 2e item creation is better. Just want to see how folks might incorporate these concepts into a 2e game. |
|
|
