squirewaldo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:04 pm
I like these ideas. It is not necessarily a 'simpler' mechanism than the Vancian system of D&D (which I detest on multiple levels) so much as 'logical'. It makes sense. If I am going to have to learn something I would like it to be logical.
While it's certainly not as easy as basically "do whatever you want," which is what I understand some more free-form systems to be, I feel like it strikes a good balance between that freedom and bookkeeping: the only things you really need to keep track of are 1) patterns you've used in the past, 2) your max Intensity, 3) which spells you know, and 4) your Mana Points. Worth noting here that in the Mage class I was planning on initially granting access to 1, 2, maybe 3 spells, with others becoming available at higher levels.
squirewaldo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:04 pm
The process of 'learning' a spell is also an interesting concept, perhaps even on the fly. If you can imagine it you can do it... maybe. Once you master it you can use it again. At least that is what I understood.
Yes, the intent here is definitely for casters to be able to do this on the fly, that's how it was in the Marvel game as well. Adds a bit of the spontaneity I was looking for.
squirewaldo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:04 pm
The issue of intensity seems to be an area where there could be some complexity, but that may not really turn out to be so complex.
Also agree, this is where I was hoping someone could suggest some straightforward formula... plug in a few numbers based on the effect you want, and get your required Intensity. Along the lines of the m20 4x5 system, which does a good job in that regard I think. I haven't figured out a way to do an easy conversion of that unfortunately, although maybe I'll have to take another pass at it.
squirewaldo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 16, 2022 10:07 pm
1 negative... but I will have to think more on this. The 8 basic schools you based the magic on don't seem to make much sense. It may be better than nothing, but is it? Or perhaps a different collection of schools? Some make more sense than the others.
Yes, you could certainly argue that the traditional D&D arcane schools were arbitrary. I think they make sense in their own way, but maybe that's just because I've been used to giving them due consideration since 2E.
I went with them for a couple of reasons, but the main one is compatibility with all the spells already out there. For example, you could see a neat spell in an old issue of Dragon, state that as your desired effect, and you already know whether you can cast it as-is based on your max Intensity and the spells you know. Even better, suppose you know the spell but can't put enough Intensity behind it. Rather than just saying "sorry, you can't," you can just dial the effect back some and still pull it off. Provided you make your DC check, of course.
That said, I did neglect to put Necromancy back in there, the last of the traditional schools from D&D. In a campaign I'm working on necromancy is something special, but for this ruleset I'm working on now I should err more on the side of generally compatible.