Spellcasting tactics

[badcat]

I've never understood the underpowered thing. My main problem with RQ magic was the Glorantha angle; it never felt like fantasy magic as in some favorite books. No, a full-fledged Rune Priest I wouldn't call 'underpowered' anywhere. Magic World shouldn't be compared to RQ2 directly, though; it has an entirely different feel, especially when logically expanded.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by badcat

I've never understood the underpowered thing. My main problem with RQ magic was the Glorantha angle

I think the problem was, from the view of the mainstream D&D crowd was that RQ had to area effect spells. No fireballs, no lightning bolts. A spellcaster couldn't take down a half dozen people at once, at least not until RQ3, and then the Magic Point cost pretty much prevented them from doing it again for a couple of days.

But when it came to augmentation magic, RQ was probably unmatched in power, especially RQ3.

[badcat]

Could be, but I seem to remember some really devastating cult spells.

Wierd thing about spell power in general and power levels in particular was that almost everybody I knew said they enjoyed AD&D more at low level than when levels got to 10+, but I couldn't get most of them to try a BRP game. They would moon over those really nasty high level spells above spell level 5 but rarely were any of that power used in play; meanwhile my RQ2, later SB1 group was using the BRP equivalent sometimes right out of the gate...especially in the Stormbringer game. Talk about powerful spells. RQ2 was no slouch when it came to power levels and being a member of the correct cult for that sort of thing, though, for sure.

What you said about the perception of power because of some area effect spells was one of the reasons I so desparately wanted to play a Magic World based game in those days. It is one of the key differences between it and RQ...Magic World could easily 'copy' the D&D feel, using BRP.

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

No, I just like the idea of being able to do something to stop someone from casting a spell. It is part of the genre. Plus I also think that is makes a lot of sense that a guy who is getting feathered with arrows isn't going to be able to get a spell off, unless it is quick.

Of course. But as far as I understood you spoke not from material weapons which interrupts spell casting. You spoke from spells like disruption which do this as additional effect because the rules allows it. Maybe you can explain it ingame why your character has the knowledge how to gain the interruption advantage but this also means somehow that magic is handled in a way like a gadget and finally it de-mystifies it.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Plus, I like the idea of more powerful spells taking longer to work. It can add some drama too, as the other characters have to protect the caster so they can complete the spell.

In SB the magic seem to be very powerful. But there is a serious payoff for the sorcerer, as it is mentioned in many classic sword and sorcery (eg conan) stories too. In SB a spell could easily last many hours. More often than not he has to do his summoning magic in absolute secrecy. And he is almost never sure if it works out or how long it will last to find a good demon servant. There are many ingame events I, as GM can introduce during the time a spell is cast and it makes alot of fun to play the summoned creature.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

But thats RQ battle magic. For another setting, I might favor something else. I'm rather fond of Ars Magica for the flavor and feel of magic. At one time I adapted parts of it to replace the RQ3 Sorcery system. O like the idea of learning types of magic and getting better spells in that type as you skill improves.

Ars magica is very nice. It has a Jack Vance flair. (Lyonesse, Green Pearl) But its much too complex for me and I dont like the rest of the AM rule system.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

Wish I had a copy of Authentic Thaumaturgy. I'd like to see it. I'm just dying to throw together a more mystical/arcane magic system for BRP. Strombringer's magic system is just too overpowering. Guy with demon beats guy without demon. Not a fun situation to role-play.

I dont agree. Its great for roleplaying, because it matters which efforts and sacrifices the sorcerer has to make to get his demon. Or do you think that I as GM tell the player just to roll his dice after he intends to bind a new demon servant and that was it? Never. Getting a certain demon can be a whole sub-adventure. (with every cruel consquence for the player)
So I think the difference between your games and my games is that in your games "magic knowlegde" is to know how to cast a 1 point spell to interrupt a 2 point spell cast, while in my games "magic knowlegde" is that your powerful demon could acutally eat you if you dont sacrifice every 66 hours a virgin to him.

Originally Posted by Atgxtg

One thing about me though is that my "style" of play varies depending on what sort of game/setting I'm trying to run.

With this I am with you. But I dont play games anymore where magic is handled with many funny colored effects, 100p pages of crunchy rules etc. This reminds me too much to a game called...you know which one I mean.

[badcat]

Just out of curiosity, did both you guys miss the part in Stormbringer where under the rules you can use the bound demon abilities as though the effect were being cast as a spell? As in throwing a flame bolt via a bound fire elemental, and so forth? You could use each bound entity with such useful powers up to three times an hour without breaking the binding, although some of them would be 'used up' in the process... I don't remember if SB4 and SB5 had that or not.

The worst part of Stormbringer was trying to keep control of the damn sorcerers, I used to dread seeing Melniboneans and Pan Tangians rolled up.

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by badcat

Just out of curiosity, did both you guys miss the part in Stormbringer where under the rules you can use the bound demon abilities as though the effect were being cast as a spell? As in throwing a flame bolt via a bound fire elemental, and so forth? You could use each bound entity with such useful powers up to three times an hour without breaking the binding, although some of them would be 'used up' in the process... I don't remember if SB4 and SB5 had that or not.

The worst part of Stormbringer was trying to keep control of the damn sorcerers, I used to dread seeing Melniboneans and Pan Tangians rolled up.

No, annd I wish you here. IN fact, that was my point. A srocery overpowers any other character is SB.

[badcat]

I was asking a specific question? There is no doubt that sorcery was overpowered; it was intentional game design, as Melniboneans were supposed to be that way. Human sorcerers were not overpowered. SB1 was not what you would call balanced in many ways. Intentionally. Now, back to my question, did you know about the rule I mentioned?

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by Enpeze

Of course. But as far as I understood you spoke not from material weapons which interrupts spell casting. You spoke from spells like disruption which do this as additional effect because the rules allows it. Maybe you can explain it ingame why your character has the knowledge how to gain the interruption advantage but this also means somehow that magic is handled in a way like a gadget and finally it de-mystifies it.

Huh? So if you run someone through with a sword and that messes up thier spell it's okay, but if you blast them with magic and it intterpts their spell it isnt't?
I don't get your point. My "ingame" explaination is thag if I either am waiting for someone to cast or see someone casting and then act fast and hurt them and in so doing it stops them from completing the spell. Much the way my "ingame" excuse that decapitating someone stops them from counter attacking, or doing much of anything else.

As for demystifying magic. Well, kif it is a complete mystery then no one can do anything with it. Some demystification will exist the second you create any sort of structured system for it, and some sort of structure is inherent in any RPG.

I also think that anyone who was learned magic would have some "ingame" understanding of that magic, the same way someone who has knowledge of First Aid or World Lore has knowledge of injuries and geography.

Originally Posted by Enpeze

In SB the magic seem to be very powerful. But there is a serious payoff for the sorcerer, as it is mentioned in many classic sword and sorcery (eg conan) stories too. In SB a spell could easily last many hours. More often than not he has to do his summoning magic in absolute secrecy. And he is almost never sure if it works out or how long it will last to find a good demon servant. There are many ingame events I, as GM can introduce during the time a spell is cast and it makes alot of fun to play the summoned creature.

None of which changes the fact that if and when a sorcerer is successful in binding a demon, he now has power that completely outclasses non sorcerers. Once one guy gets demonds its starts a demon arms race to stay in the game.
Strombringer probably demystified magic more than RQ did. Virtually every significant NPC in the book and supplements was literally dripping of demons just to keep from being left behind in the tactical arena. Even Elric is given demond armor in the RPG to keep up with the Pang Tangians.

Originally Posted by Enpeze

Ars magica is very nice. It has a Jack Vance flair. (Lyonesse, Green Pearl) But its much too complex for me and I dont like the rest of the AM rule system.

Which rule system. One thing that I don't like about AM is that, thanks to changing ownership and authors, the rule system gets changed with every edition. It is now sort of a injoke "tradition" that the combat section will be rewritten from scratch with each edition.

Originally Posted by Enpeze

I dont agree. Its great for roleplaying, because it matters which efforts and sacrifices the sorcerer has to make to get his demon. Or do you think that I as GM tell the player just to roll his dice after he intends to bind a new demon servant and that was it? Never. Getting a certain demon can be a whole sub-adventure. (with every cruel consquence for the player)

None of which changes the overpowering nature of SB magic. It completely dominates the game, and if you put so much empasis on the summoning, then all the non-sorceroers are going to be standing around helpless BEFORE the wizard gets his demon, too.

Just what do the rest of your players do while the sorceror is off in secret running a solo adventure to get his demon?

Originally Posted by Enpeze

So I think the difference between your games and my games is that in your games "magic knowlegde" is to know how to cast a 1 point spell to interrupt a 2 point spell cast, while in my games "magic knowlegde" is that your powerful demon could acutally eat you if you dont sacrifice every 66 hours a virgin to him.

No, more like you are running one player in a solo while I'm running a group.

Ohm and that demon can't eat you if you waste him with another demon or elemental after 65 hours. Useful to keep in mind when your running low on virgins.

And why do you think someone would go through all that crap and risks to get a demon. Ohm yeah, becuase they let them overpower anyone who doesn't have a demon. So all the other players might as well stay home and "phone it it".

Originally Posted by Enpeze

With this I am with you. But I dont play games anymore where magic is handled with many funny colored effects, 100p pages of crunchy rules etc. This reminds me too much to a game called...you know which one I mean.

Everyone has their own favorites, both to like and despise. Just to get a broader picture. What games do you play besides SB?

[Atgxtg]

Originally Posted by badcat

I was asking a specific question? There is no doubt that sorcery was overpowered; it was intentional game design, as Melniboneans were supposed to be that way. Human sorcerers were not overpowered. SB1 was not what you would call balanced in many ways. Intentionally. Now, back to my question, did you know about the rule I mentioned?

But,from what Enpeze posted I don't think he agrees about the overpowering nature of SB magic. SO the point is in doubt.

The problem was SB, especially SB1 played lousy with magic. Side with magic kills side without isn't good for an RPG no matter what side of the conflict the PCs are on.

And human sorcerer could be unbalancing too. It wasn't the higher ranked abilities that were a problem. Generally summoning Beast Lords, Elemental Lords and Lords of Chaos is not something done too often. It was the demonds and elementals that caused problems. Sick a slamander after a character who lacks magic and they are dead.


But to answer your question...
Yeah, my character used to keep a salamander bound in a ring for just such contingencies. I also recall stuff about binding and releasing demons to call up later. There were some restrictions, too, but I'd have to dig out my book for the fine details.

[Enpeze]

Originally Posted by badcat

Just out of curiosity, did both you guys miss the part in Stormbringer where under the rules you can use the bound demon abilities as though the effect were being cast as a spell? As in throwing a flame bolt via a bound fire elemental, and so forth? You could use each bound entity with such useful powers up to three times an hour without breaking the binding, although some of them would be 'used up' in the process... I don't remember if SB4 and SB5 had that or not.

The worst part of Stormbringer was trying to keep control of the damn sorcerers, I used to dread seeing Melniboneans and Pan Tangians rolled up.

Yes of course I know and use this rule. But PC sorcerers are rare in my games. I like to use them rather as neutral NPCs or enemies. (like their classical role in REHs hyperborea) In my games I am caring for the inherent logic of the setting. So there is no D&D grouping like: here is our thief and here our fighter and over there is our sorcerer. Not my style I think.