Non-artificial ways of limiting access to magic...

[soltakss]

Originally Posted by NickMiddleton

Quote:
Originally Posted by soltakss
...They are adventurers and are the rarest kind of adventurers as they are, by and large, successful ones and don't end up eaten or naked in a ditch...

We obviously play very different styles of BRP...



Nick Middleton

You meet a bandit, he attacks you, you kill him, you strip him of his armour and throw him into a ditch.

What did you think I meant? Oh, hmmm, perhaps occasionally .....

[Sven Norén]

Maybe he meant that PC:s in his experience ususally are NOT very sucessful, and by and large DO end up eaten or naked in a ditch?

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by RMS

In theory, I certainly understand this POV. However, SB1-3 is the most unbalanced RPG I'm familiar with and yet it provided more hours of fun than any game, other than RQ, that I can remember. So my experience is that balance between spell casters and noncasters isn't really that big of deal in practise.

I'd say that probably says more about the people you played with than the system involved, however.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by RMS

Out of all of the ideas for limiting magic that I've seen, I like the attempts that Corum made for corruption from exposure. I like the idea of having bigger magic effects have greater and greater chances of permantly warping the character mentally or physically. I'd allow stats to modify that chance, so that there's a natural reason to want a really high INT/POW to mitigate the odds of something nasty happening to a spell caster, but still have that chance hanging there. If you want more magic in the setting, make it so that small spells have no chance of corruption and that it kicks in at some predetermined level.

In my experience, except for particularly self-immolating players, that just means that most people never use the levels where its a problem, and tend to resent it as a mechanic because the GM can use it freely (as he can write up another NPC of whatever power level he wants without concern) while the players in practice, can't.

[Atgxtg]

I think the key issue isn't really about balancing the power of the
characters, but insuring that each player can have fun and contribute to the session. In other words "niche protection".
As long as each character has some ability that they can do better than the others (or better than the magical substitute) then it doesn't really matter if the wizards can dish out a lot more damage.

Of course, if Wizards CAN dish out lots more damage, they become the number one target and usually end up being the first ones hit when attacked. That in itself can make he other characters more useful. If foes start doing massed arrow fire on mages to stop them from unleashing powerful magic, parity is achieved. Ars Magica doesn't have Protection/Damage Resistance, and so mages rely on Shield Grogs.

[Nightshade]

While that can work after a fashion, I'm not sure that making fighting specialists feel that their real function is to protect the mages so they can do the real work is an ideal solution.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

While that can work after a fashion, I'm not sure that making fighting specialists feel that their real function is to protect the mages so they can do the real work is an ideal solution.

Not in an of itself. As long as the campaign does not revolve around combat ala D&D, then aqny sort of "niche" will work. For instance, in one SB campaign I ran, the Melnibonean passenger and the captain of the ship he was on had a disagreement of the terminal kind.

The PC with Shiphandling proved to be very valauable. Just give the character something else to do that is important besides combat, and then combat won't be so important to the group.

Even with Magic World, mages are limited by thier POW. Make them spend a lot of POW in a short time, and they run out of energy. Even a Magic World wizard with a 17 POW and POW 17 staff can "only" throw a dozen 3d6 damage spells before being utterly wiped and defenseless.

Thorw a couple of quick encounters back to back and the mage starts to run out of ability. Not just for offense, but in all areas of magic.
A good warrior doesn't loose ability as quickly. Barring injuries and normal fatigue, he can fight at full effectiveness all day long.

[Nightshade]

[quote=Atgxtg;2778]Not in an of itself. As long as the campaign does not revolve around combat ala D&D, then aqny sort of "niche" will work. For instance, in one SB campaign I ran, the Melnibonean passenger and the captain of the ship he was on had a disagreement of the terminal kind.

The PC with Shiphandling proved to be very valauable. Just give the character something else to do that is important besides combat, and then combat won't be so important to the group.

[quote]

I don't think on the whole that's simply true; and the reason I say that is that even if useful outside of combat, combat both tends to be too intensive (the mechanics are more specific and detailed) and more critical (combat is much more likely to be life and death, at least in most fantasy subgenre) than most other endevors. And of course, it still doesn't deal with the issue that a fighting specialist is as combat oriented if not more than a mage, so anything that ignores the combat contribution of the latter will do the same of the former.

(In addition, in some cases mages are better at _non_combat actions than their specialists; a mage can end up being a better intrusion specialist than most roguish types with the right spells available, for example).

Even with Magic World, mages are limited by thier POW. Make them spend a lot of POW in a short time, and they run out of energy. Even a Magic World wizard with a 17 POW and POW 17 staff can "only" throw a dozen 3d6 damage spells before being utterly wiped and defenseless.

Thorw a couple of quick encounters back to back and the mage starts to run out of ability. Not just for offense, but in all areas of magic.
A good warrior doesn't loose ability as quickly. Barring injuries and normal fatigue, he can fight at full effectiveness all day long.

But of course you can't really ignore those, particularly the injuries. I agree it isn't as severe in Magic World as in many versions of RQ, because there's a very limited set of sources of additional mana.

[TRose]

Here my opinion. I like to have several types or schools of magic in the worlds I run from the powerful sorcerers and wizards of legends to the village wise woman who practice folk magic( Or as it used to be called spirit magic) and also magic from Priest and divine sources. Your Powerful wizard is similar to your specialized surgeon who very good at what he does , but his training does not leave time for much else while your village wise woman is more like an EMT who has time to learn other skills as needed. Your average warrior may not have time or ability to learn sorcery , but could perhaps pick up some folk magic to even things out when his sword skill is taken into account.
If magic truly worked chances are different cultures and people would use it in different ways ,or at least that's my opinion.

[drohem]

Cultural, religious, or societal morals and/or taboos are the way to limit or grant access to magic in any given game world.

This can seem artificial at face value, but it's not really.

Culture 'X' says that in order to become an apprentice, you must pass a test. This test translates in game terms to having a certain level in 'Z' skills or 'Y' characteristics.