Inexhaustible Magic

[Shreyas Sampat]

Even in Xanth there are inherent limitations to magic, though they are complex and character-unique.

There's a girl Surprise, for instance, who can do absolutely anything, but only once. Another character composes poems to drive effects, but again the poems work only once. (Thinking, some of these might come from other Anthony writing.)

Yet another character can create spots of color on anything; these spots don't do anything unusual, they're just differently-colored. But he can do this effortlessly, with only slight attention and an instant.

Looked at from a game-design perspective, Xanth characters have powers where scope and power are related to flexibility, and increasing one generally requires a decrease of another (though there are exceptions.)

[Mike Holmes]

Another side thing: I thought Gandalf used very little magic because he had been a rebel firespirit (Balrog?) during the wars of the Silmarils, and now was getting back in good with Manwe by doing his pennance in the form of an old man of reduced power watching Middle Earth for the spirit lords of the Undying Lands. Actually, I thought this was the general background of all the Istari.

That's accurate, I think. It's just more detailed than most people need. Those who've not read the Silmarillion don't realize that the wizards aren't human. So for practical purposes of matching people's perceptions, they are.

That is, people want to play something like Gandalf the aged human wizard, not Mithrandir, the godling. Not that the latter isn't playable, it's just not part of the standard fantasy canon. Note that in Decipher's new ME game, that they aren't allowed to use things not from the LOTR books, so they can't mention that Gandalf is other than a man.

Mike

[timfire]

John Burdick likens magic to superhero powers - they are inherint to the character - just like someone who is born pretty, they don't have to make an effort to look good. Though some who are pedantic may contest that Supermans x-ray vision isn't really "magic". No it may not be but can't magic work this way? Can't someone be born a magician?

I feel like I'm reiterating what others have already said, but I think you may be missing something here. Superhero's HAVE limits. First, they have very specific powers. That's a limit. Superman may be able to fly, use his superstrength, x-ray vision, etc. as much as he wants, but he can't teleport, pass through walls, or read people's minds.

Second, Superhero's in general have to abide by some sort of code, be it honor or goodness, or whatever you want to call it. That's a limit. Supermen would never kill a helpless orphan. If he did, all the other superhero's would turn against him. (Which brings up a sidepoint, supers without this sort of personal code are usually called villians.)

It seems that you are interpreting "limits" very narrowly. It seems you are only interpreting limits to mean mechanical limits, not social/ behavior/ cultural limits. It's entirely possible to have a game without mechanical limits, but there needs to be some sort of behavior limit, even if it's just "You have to act good."

But as was already said, a game truly without limts would be no game. At any point any player could simply say "I kill everyone on the planet and respawn them in my own image - I win and there's nothing any of you can do about it." What? They wouldn't say that? Why, what's limiting them?

[John Burdick]

It seems to me that the original poster is being perfectly reasonable. I don't see why people are bringing in the strawman of systemless play.

We are talking about games where the mechanical limits on magic do not involve any sort of bean counting during play. Discuss ideas for systems that meet this goal. I've given examples: In BESM, flight level 1, 4 points allows a character to fly and hover. Period.  No slots, mana, energy, endurance, penalty, or risk incured for the use of the power.

John

[Bluve Oak]

I think there are major misunderstandings going on here! lol.

We are not (weren't) disputing limits of power, but rather limits of usage. Comprende Amigos. See the difference?

As far as limits of usage go we have already established many themes, once again: it is exhausting, it is dangerous, etc.. Mike Holmes wrote a wonderful post earlier on the price of magic.

All I'm looking for is a system that treats these issues like everything else and I go back to my "swinging an axe is exhausting" example. Likewise taking an axe to your friends head would be a dangerous thing to do socially but not many systems have rules for penalizing one for doing so. It's common sense on the players part - if they want the adventure to continue.

Let's imagine Character A has a insy winsy fireball as his weapon. Character B has a Sword and shield.

All I want is for Character A to hurl that ball all day long if he wants in the same way that Character B thrusts his sword.

Character B COULD stab his King or misuse his power of swordsmanship in any number of ways but the repurcussions aren't stated in the system because it is assumed that Players want to play the game! When someone steps outside the ethical boundaries or misinterprets their characters personality it is all handled (by the GM) in the story.

In this sense I accept the ethical, character, dangerous etc. limitations of magic as handled by common sense (not by the system). But sure if someone does misuse magic then yeah maybe he gets a few points deducted and a slap on the wrist just as someone who misused his sword would.

Now, I may get replies saying that an "insy winsy" fireball is a limitation but this is a misunderstanding. As I have said before I don't mind the limitation of "leveling up"/"power scaling"/etc.. I just don't want any "in-system" repurcussions for using magic - especially in a very bland magic pool depleting way. The post is title "Inexhaustive magic" after all.

I hope this is clearer. I dearly appreciate all the input.

Heroquest may not exactly be like this but everything else I have read about it is turning me on and I am ordering the book.

[Shreyas Sampat]

So, wait.

If a system says, "If you do anything, it tires you and you're less good at doing that thing later", you still don't want to have anything to do with that, because there's an in-system repercussion, though it's global and not magic-specific. Correct?

HQ actually encourages magic to a great degree; not only is magic "free", it's on a wholly different plane of effectiveness, and can simply defure mortal opposition.

I think you'll get the most mileage out of a system that doesn't distinguish systematically between magic and mundane action, really. "Magic" implies "crazy special thing with limited access," which is exactly what you don't want.

[Jonathan Walton]

I think you'll get the most mileage out of a system that doesn't distinguish systematically between magic and mundane action, really. "Magic" implies "crazy special thing with limited access," which is exactly what you don't want.

Well, that's Nobilis all over.  Everything is a Miracle (by which I mean that everything that's not a Miracle is ignored by the system).  This means you have Level 0 Miracles (for fairly normal actions), but they are still treated the same.

[Shreyas Sampat]

Good point, and worded better than when I did it a while back: Bluve ruled out Nobilis as being too far beyond "standard fantasy fare", but I argued that a toned-down retooling of Nobilis would be just the ticket. (Drop Realm and replace Domain with something that boils down to "class" and you're halfway there).

[Jonathan Walton]

Exactly.  I used Nobilis to run a superheroes game once.  Had stats for Physical, Superpowers, and Idiom (basically your "Class").  Nobilis style ability levels would probably work in a dice-based system too, if you were really into Fortune mechanics.  Fudge dice might be a good option though, or some other system that would give you some variation on a given norm/level.

[M. J. Young]

All I'm looking for is a system that treats these issues like everything else and I go back to my "swinging an axe is exhausting" example.

So I repeat that Multiverser does this. The chance to hit someone with a fireball and the chance to hit someone with an axe are run by the same system. The fireball has one set of nuances and the axe another, but in the main the only "limit" on either is a chance of success roll built on character abilities, defender abilities, and situation (including bias).

The system handles scale effectively as well. A more powerful fireball is going to be more difficult to use; a less powerful fireball is going to be easier. Thus you can design a slow deadly halberd against a light fast knife, and you can design a slow devastating flame strike against a fast and easy fire stream.

It also scales for ability, so that the spellcaster who has been using his fire spell for a long time is more effective with it in the same way that a fighter who has been using his axe a long time is with his axe.

Nothing is expended to use the magic; it's a hit-or-miss proposition, just as with any non-magical skill or ability.

(It also incorporates relative success and relative failure, thus "hit-or-miss" also includes a scale of how well it hit or how far it missed, but that's not under discussion here.)

Sorry if that's not what you want; I just haven't seen any acknowledgment that this is or is not the sort of system you mean. It sounds like it is (character can use the skill all day long with no penalties or consequence, if desired, as much as he can use weapons), but your responses have not (that I've noticed) recognized this approach as viable within your expectations. Is it missing something I'm not seeing?

--M. J. Young

[Bluve Oak]

Well, I really like the sound of Heroquest but Nobilis is taking my interest too. I read at the HQ forum that the HQ system was similar to Marvel Superheroes so I downloaded all the MS files and it does look good but it is a superhero RPG and I prefer a fantasy/mythic setting, hence HQ. If Nobilis can be run as a superhero game than i'm sure I would dig it too.
So on your advise I will look further into:

* Nobilis (first port of call)
* BESM (have seen tri-stat dx - o.k. but...)
* Donjon
* Feng Shui
* Multiverser
* Ars Magica (Already checked it out - excellent but...)

[Jonathan Walton]

Best way to get a handle on Nobilis: read the extended Example of Play available as a PDF on the Guardians of Order site.  As for the rest, I hope you find a system that works for you or scrap together enough components to build your own.

[Ben Lehman]

John Burdick likens magic to superhero powers - they are inherint to the character - just like someone who is born pretty, they don't have to make an effort to look good. Though some who are pedantic may contest that Supermans x-ray vision isn't really "magic". No it may not be but can't magic work this way? Can't someone be born a magician? This is how I was thinking.

BL> May I suggest looking into Superhero systems, all of which support unlimited use of supernormal powers (magic, by any definition) with repurcussion (other than "with great power...")

a brief list:
Marvel Superheroes
Mutants and Masterminds
Risus Supers
GURPS Supers
HERO system
Blood of Heros

yrs--
--Ben

[herrmess]

Like Ian Charvill said earlier -- Earthdawn.

You can swing your spells all day long without so much as a drop of sweat. If anything, the warrior-types will tire earlier than your average mage ever will (but even this can be tweaked). One casts spells using the same system as for everything else, and the game remains quite "balanced" even at higher power levels.

The downside of Earthdawn is the Step system it is using. It is a good linear system, and very sound probability-wise, but it is also quite intimidating to many at first, mainly because it uses different combinations of dice for every Step. The system is also tied to a unique game world, which might not be to everyone's liking.

MarK.