Ygg Magic (and wake me up someone!)

[Christoffer Lernö]

Ok,

Ygg stuff has been kinda dead lately. Not very surprisingly considering I've been extremely busy this last month. I do want to get myself started again though, so I'm gonna write a little something on the magic stuff.

It's gonna be a "what do you think?" text, but no, that doesn't mean you need to write the system for me ;)

I have some basic framework for the magic as it is, but the whole thing could as easily be tossed out the window. Essentially I decided to group spells into a few "levels", 5 or 7 or whatever. Doesn't really matter. It's just a thing of conveniance to let the GM easily figure out the power level of the spell so that it can be plugged into the rest of the system.

As you might know, Ygg magic isn't very balanced. Basically you can do a lot of mess if you know magic. It's paid for in taint though. The current draft has rules where you kind of "download" magic from the demonic dimensions and store it inside of you. The more you downloaded in total, the worse off you are (with demonic corruption manifesting physically). Also if you store huge amounts of demonic energy at once you also get some bonus bad effects.

This only balances the magic slightly. The other thing is that amulets actually work well against magic (unlike most games where they add a small bonus at best). AND, most importantly, iron protects against demonic magic (Yes that means a full plate would kick ass)

Now beyond that demonic magic is extremely powerful. I've made a point out of making the demonic magic colourful, and unlike any other fantasy game I'm familiar with, almost all spells have secondary effects.

Still, this isn't very new, and although I made up colourful descriptions for the spells you pointed out this might not be the ideal solution.

However, going to one extreme and letting players actually customize spells on their own doesn't seem to be the ideal solution. I see horror scenarios where players recreate the AD&D fireball (a ball of fire hurting the opponent but without secondary effects as actually burning anything or have any impact damage to know people off their feet) and other faceless spells.

Ideally I'd have a game where players combine their spells from different types of magic like demon summonings, demon possessions, elemental control, mind influencing spells and so on. However it quickly gets rather technical and hard to balance too. And most of all it doesn't help with creating a sense of wonder.

So I was thinking that maybe every spell would be different for every spell user in details, reflecting their different personality. So maybe for the deathlanterns the shape of the demons, and their colour might be different, small things. But on the whole it's recognizable as "Death Lanterns". (And why? Well because I'm thinking that such a spell would be a 'ready made spell' well documented and known and learned pretty much the same way by everyone)

Basically I guess I envision the ready-made spells I provide are spells which have been devised long ago and then polished many times to need as little demonic magic as possible (because more magic required means more taint).

The obvious consequence here might be to allow for on-the-fly magic with a significantly higher magic cost because they're not "optimized". You could argue that if you're just doing a variation of a spell you know, you go up one level in magic usage. A new spell which still is similar to one you know is +2 and a totally new spell might be +3. And that's compared to what the optimized version of the spell costs. So our deadlights might be level 1, but do it on the fly without knowing any similar spell would be a level 4 spell and require a lot of magic energy. That way we have a loose customization.

Another way would of course be a skill roll and somehow be able to add effects depending on the quality, but I'm a little reluctant to do so, because it adds an uncertainty into the magic which I dislike. (Although it is present in many systems).

I have to cut this short, but does my proposal sound ok to create wonder? I mean customized details when you learn a spell, then possibility to vary spells on the fly with increased cost.

Is it enough?

[Andrew Martin]

I'm not sure why you want to "balance" magic for. Perhaps you could explain more about this aspect?

How about this a magic system:
Mages, and others who can use magic, name their spells and their level of skill in each spell. When casting the spell, the player rolls the dice, reads off success level (if using a good system, the dice shows the success level), and that's the amount the player can alter the scene by according to the description of the spell. The success levels used is also the ammount of taint gained. Alternatively, extra success levels for the magic spell can be earned by adding levels of taint to the PC, one for one.

To avoid this problem:
> a ball of fire hurting the opponent but without secondary effects as actually burning anything or have any impact damage to know people off their feet

"messy" spells could have a tradeoff, in that the more messy the spell (success levels spent on damaging surroundings), the more levels of taint can be gotten rid of. Reasoning being that the forces of evil like widespread descruction as well as corrupting mages.

Just a couple of suggestions.

[Lance D. Allen]

As a side suggestion (and perhaps this is just the gamist I generally prefer not to acknowledge clawing his way to the surface) it might be a good idea to allow for the successes from the spell to be used to either a) up the level of effect or b) lower the amount of taint.

Example: I cast Generic Spell A, and get a total of 5 successes. I decide that 3 successes will do the job I want done, so I put 3 successes toward the spell effect (which means I gain 3 taint) and then put the other two into taint reduction, which means a total of 1 taint, rather than 3.

This would mean that the better you are at a spell (ie, more familiar, more time put into optimization, etc.) the less taint you will gain in the casting. This might end up with players casting spell after spell and getting absolutely no taint, because they put enough points into reduction. To avoid this, it might be an option to make a minimum 1 taint for each casting.

This brings up another question.. A magician is going to either be very miserly with their spells, or they're going to quickly become demons, unless there is some way to reduce their total taint. Either of those options doesn't strike me as particularly fun. Therefore, I'd like to see some way to reduce taint outside of the suggestions just given. Some ideas to get you started:

Each day that you do not cast a spell: -1 taint.

hours each day spent in meditation/purification: - 1/2 of hours (round down, of course) from your taint.

Spiritual quests: - variable taint

Expenditure of experience/character points: - variable taint (ever wonder why the warrior gets buffed up after a lot of exercise, but the magi just seem to stay frail?)

Anyhow, those are a few ideas off the top of my head. Do with them what you will.

[Le Joueur]

"What do you think?"

...I decided to group spells into a few "levels", 5 or 7 or whatever. Doesn't really matter.

...This only balances the magic slightly.

...Although I made up colourful descriptions for the spells you pointed out this might not be the ideal solution.

...However it quickly gets rather technical and hard to balance too. And most of all it doesn't help with creating a sense of wonder.

...I'm thinking that such a spell would be a 'ready made spell' well documented and known and learned pretty much the same way by everyone.

...Basically I guess I envision the ready-made spells I provide are spells which have been devised long ago and then polished many times to need as little demonic magic as possible (because more magic required means more taint).

...it adds an uncertainty into the magic which I dislike.

...Does my proposal sound ok to create wonder? I mean customized details when you learn a spell, then possibility to vary spells on the fly with increased cost.

Honestly?  I'd have to say that "a few 'levels,' 5 or 7," of "polished" "ready-made spells" "known and learned pretty much the same way by everyone" is, in my opinion, about as far the opposite of "creating a sense of wonder" as you can get.  So, no, not "ok."

Don't get me wrong, I'm right there agreeing with you about adding "an uncertainty into the magic which I dislike."  Me?  I write mechanics to help simplify how the group understands what's happening in the game.  That means I balk whenever anyone suggests something that 'randomizes' the outcome.  (If I throw one kind of spell and a completely unexpectable thing happens, it pretty much squicks me to the magic system.)

Think about the 'sense of wonder' this way.  Several decades ago, there were rumors around that some kind of black man-like creatures lived in a harder to access part of the world.  Nothing conclusive could be obtained.  There were pelts and sightings, but at the time these could not be verified.  Finally someone sent in an intrepid band to investigate.  What did they find?  Mountain gorillas.  Imagine coming upon these gentle creatures, the gorillas in the mist.  That is the sense of wonder.  If you have lists of "polished" "ready-made spells" "known and learned pretty much the same way by everyone," it'd be like encountering gorillas in the zoo for all the wonderment that creates.

Notice that the creature in question was never 'in question.'  It was a definite, predefined beast, simply not one ever known before; so this is not to be mistaken for a call for those types of games where you say 'magic do as you will,' and whatever happens happens.  That's random, chaotic, and in my opinion that "uncertainty" neither of us likes.  It's just that the other extreme, well-established taxonomy, defeats the sense of wonder as well.

What We Did:

To keep the 'unknown' without sacrificing detail or incorporating "uncertainty," Scattershot has a very clearly defined schedule of 'possible results' that say nothing about the mechanisms for creating them.  Wanna turn critters blue?  Scattershot will tell you how many critters you can turn and how well they'll resist, but not

how you do it.  Wanna make critters fall in love with you?  Same number except the "how well they'll resist" part now results in a 'how much they love you' part.

We require, in a 'sense of wonder' setting, that the players do not simply state the affects per our mechanics; in fact, if they do so there's a hefty penalty to that act.  How is that different?  There are no 'groups of spells,' in fact, no spells at all.[/list:u]What I've Done:

I wanted to run a 'sense of wonder' game with

spellcasters, as in arcane, tower-bound, long-beard-wearin' spellcasters.  The players wanted a very Self-Sovereign, Joueur game, sooooo...I had each create their own custom spell list (and this was before Scattershot).  I required each to determine what kind of 'presentable' techniques there were for each spell (they all chose 'a magic word per spell' as well as 'a magic word per target').

Whenever they wanted to cast a spell (I had made pains to declare entities within each scene in careful order to fit the prepared 'target word lists') the player would, with great dramatic flourish, utter their spell words and then I would, in equally dramatic flair, describe the effects.

We found that the arcane wording, unknown spell effects (well, they weren't common knowledge at least), and dramatic presentation went a long way towards establishing and supporting the sense of wonder.  (It worked especially well when one player cast a spell on another, who had no idea why they'd become 'the prime target' for all the enemies they faced, because the target of the spell had no idea who it was.)[/list:u]How Should You Do It?

I can't really say; it's your game.  You have to decide what you want it to do and how you think that can be done.  All we can do is say whether what you suggest would work according to our experiences.  There is no 'right way.'

What I can say is that "polished" "ready-made spells" "known and learned pretty much the same way by everyone" will not support the 'sense of wonder'

with the spells.  It might not be necessary for every part of your game to capture the 'sense of wonder' (in fact, doing so may create too few 'anchor points' for the players resulting in a feeling of chaos not 'wonder').  I'm inclined to believe that 'wonder' is created when the miraculous occurs amidst the ordinary.[/list:u]Overall, I think you need to decide what you want to capture the 'sense of wonder' with and how your game will do this in the 'big picture.'  Trying to capture a 'sense of wonder' in sixteen different ways will lead first to inconsistency.  Figure out what 'sense of wonder' is to you, decide what techniques will be used throughout your game, and only then decide if the spells need to capture the 'sense of wonder' or simply support it from the outside.

I wish you the best of luck because your project is giving me all sorts of ideas about my own.

Fang Langford

[Christoffer Lernö]

First off, Andew and Wolfen: Thanks for suggesting things about the taint and stuff, but now let me tell you why I can't use it straight away :)

I don't know if I've been clear enough about this in my earlier writings on the subject of magic in my world, but the taint and stuff is intrinsically linked with "the way magic works" in my gameworld, so there isn't much to play around with with the taint system. Although I haven't given you a presentation for it, the reason is that I'm pretty much decided on it (mainly because the rules come from my idea of the world rather than the other way around).

Now I was planning to design the rest of the magic the same way, so I have a few legacies from the setting which have to be fulfilled. Aside from the taint thing, the idea is that magic works in several very different ways, but all powered by demonic energy in some way.

"Ways" to work magic is through:

Using pure demonic magical energy (which has the ability to infuse itself into other matter, change shape and appearance and move freely according to the mage's will)

Using demonic spirits to animate items (basically possession, but you can do it to items as well)

Using demonic spirits which can have many different shapes, but which will obey the mage's command.

Using demons which can take many shapes and some which can be invisible and pass through solid objects

Using demonic entities to subjugate other nature spirits and to control weather and wind

Using mind control powered by demonic energies

And so on and so on...

Magic is used by:
1. Using the right words and gestures to call upon ancient demonic pacts
2. Channeling demonic energy and shaping it according to need
3. Calling upon demons to do the magician's bidding (possessions, summonings, whatever)

So most magicians would learn formulae and methods of shaping magical energies certain ways. The magician has the ability to control demonic energy and entities, so spells have a possiblity to be varied a little even after they are invoked.

This is simply what the world dictates, so I have to fulfill that with the game system. For this reason, a totally freeform thing is unsuitable (I think)

About the concern of magicians turning quickly into demons and stuff. Well, yes, that's the whole point of it. It's not AD&D. I believe you can make a really cool mage without throwing fireballs all day. In addition there are several ways to reduce taint (like tattooing magical seals for example), so even if you screwed up you can get a little back for a price.

But no, I definately don't aim for a game where mages actually run around using magic all day. I'm not trying to make a paper RPG out of Diablo II (besides, isn't there already a D20 conversion of that game?)

As for Andrew's "balance" question, it's again a matter of the world. If magic is all powerful and there is nothing to stop it, why isn't the world ruled by magicians? YES I know there are games out there where the world is/has been ruled by mages, but Ygg is not supposed to be one of those games. So, there has to be a reason.

Now Fang, as for your suggestions, I'm listening and thinking about what you're saying.

As usual I want to keep the cake and eat it too :) I don't want to write spell lists, but as I see it doing so is the only way to really ensure that that magic becomes in line with the world. In fact every spell will provide a little background for the game in it's way.

The way I see it is that either I could write a few essays (And I've already written some!) on how magic works in my game. From that the GM and players could make up pretty much any effect and also figure out what side-effects each spell could have.

OR

I could simply provide people with a lot of spells which conform with "how magic works" and let people concentrate on a good story and nice scenes instead.

Are there more alternatives?

[Valamir]

Why don't you start with the mechanics you hashed out in your last thread

Standard, Advantaged, Improvise and go from there.

One of your worries is that you really want spells to have secondary effects but were afraid that in a free form system that wouldn't happen.  Seems to me, that if you treat secondary effects like concessions, players will be plenty motivated to have several of these attached to their spells.

Since you aren't really worried about game balance for magic, there isn't a real need to be concerned with the secondary effect both giving a bonus to the roll AND itself being useful (as opposed to concessions we were talking about earlier where the concession was a disadvantage you voluntarily took to get a bonus).

Come up with a list of standard effects...not spells so much...effects.  You're off to a good start in your last post by having what Demon magic is capable of listed off...start to convert these principles into common standard effects.  The kind of effects you'd get with a "standard" roll.

Have the effects each have a low difficulty that when assembled into a full spell has a high difficulty.  A difficulty that is very hard to make without taking concessions/secondary effects to bring it back down in the range of doable.

Seems to me you already have all of the pieces in place, you just need to assemble them.

[Christoffer Lernö]

I think at second glance that I was wrong to write that "capturing a sense of wonder" is my primary goal, because as you write Fang, the best thing is to make it extremely mysterious and unknown.

In fact, I ran a game where noone really knew about magic, but one guy had this background roll where it stated he knew a little magic. That magic turned out to be nothing more than to make up fire. But considering that in the world there was practically no magic users at all, that was incredibly mystrious and far out.

However, that's not the feeling I'm looking for.

I already wrote this in a pm to Valamir, but it might be useful to state again:

Maybe this is easier to explain if I tell you that most of my inspiration of what magic should "look like" in my world comes out of comic books.

Now spells in those tend to be more like some sort of super power than anything else. Maybe the power needs incantations and rituals, or maybe the magician just calls up those magical demonic fetters out of nowhere. It doesn't really matter. What's pretty much constant is that it always a) looks interesting (or "cool", take your pick) and b) the effect is always the calculated one unless some other opposing power screws it up somehow.

In comics spells are constructed for maximum visual appeal and "WOW!"-factor, rather than anything else. And I think that's a good thing. After all, magic in my world is not the focus.

So, sorry about the confusion.

I had some talk with Valamir and what he is proposing (if I understand you right Valamir) is using my combat system allowing for spells to be retcon:ed into the world using director stance if you roll high enough.

In other words, if you roll high enough you can create a spell which you then declare is an ancient spell with this and that history and the GM just have to accept it.

Now the problem with that is that it would be very hard to run an illusionist game this way, and despite me avoiding to define what I mean by that in another thread, I think it should be pretty straightforward what I mean. But of course I can state it clearly: If the game is supposed to be run with the illusion that the world is fully thought out and alive in the mind of the GM who then presents this world and all that happens in it to the players, it's gonna be a problem if the players get the power to alter the past of that world (it's gonna destroy the world illusion if you will)

On the other hand, there might be a way to salvage the idea by allowing creating themed spells, where the standard effects can be extended. The spell roll (which I still dislike though, I prefer not to roll for spell effects really) together with concessions would then work like an on-the-fly spell construction kit where concessions create the colourful secondary effects I like.
This is nothing new though, it has been suggested before in other threads. I still don't feel it's a perfect solution though. Just wanted to clear that up. Now I'm gonna go back and look at the old Ygg threads. I remember there were a lot of ideas for the magic system. Maybe there is something I can use there.