The Campaign Builder's Guild

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: sparkletwistI'd play more martial characters if they didn't tend to look pathetic next to spellcasters.

Quote from: Lmns CrnI'd play more D&D-style games if spellcasters were allowed to innovate.

I think that part of the overall problem is that fixes to each of these individual problems that are not well conceived can cause them to be in opposition. For example, D&D 4e closes the gap between martial characters and spellcasters, but it does so largely by confining spellcasters to a predefined list of tactical maneuvers that are basically just refluffed versions of the same tactical maneuvers martial characters get-- innovation is not really a thing. On the other hand, something like Mage tries to incorporate a really versatile "magic can do anything" sort of system, but the result is that a mage can indeed do anything and mundanes instead get left in the dust.

Ya'll know I usually have a lot of positive stuff to say about D&D 4e.

Fighters (and similar) really won out, in the 3.X -> 4e transition. Playing a fighter in 4e is fun as shit. Wizards and their ilk really lost, but then, I think that's probably what needed to happen, to some extent. Warrior-type characters needed an increase in the options they gave to players and their overall power, and casters needed a decrease in their overall power, but they got a pretty harsh decrease in their options as well.  Playing casters in 4e (with the exception of clerics, because I really like the design of their powers as a support class) feels weird; it's like you're locked into a track. You can be a wizard with a vast spellbook, but your powers are still really constrained; you can be a druid with the ability to shapeshift into any animal including animals which literally do not exist, but the only mechanical effect is a binary "are you in beast form y/n?" toggle which turns certain feats or powers on or off.

I dunno, I'm rambling slightly.

You bring up Mage, and so I want to say the thing that I think Mage does really well is that it quits trying to balance between magic-havers and magic-nonhavers, and since presumably every PC in the group is going to be a wizard, you don't need to balance magic against other archetypes. I mean, maybe this is boring of me or maybe I'm sacrificing a big part of what others enjoy in D&D-style games (that party variety), but I honestly think I'd like to see more games go: "you know what? everybody has crazy supernatural powers, that's part of the basic premise, now let's balance around that."

Quote from: ghostmanHow well does this approach work when it comes to magics that can do things such as make stuff fall upwards, steal memories off someone's head, allow one to speak with animals and plants, conjure visions of places and events far across space and time, take flight on a carpet or a broomstick, or cover a field with a cloud of thick fog?

The problem with FATE is that you have a very defined palette of actions (Attack, Maneuver, Block, Defense) that are each fairly flexible, but need to be hammered into shape. (That is also the chiefest strength of FATE, btw.) I'm going to try to handle your examples from least tricky to most tricky, but bear in mind I am a bit out of practice with FATE:

Quotesteal memories off someone's head

Straightforward: a mental attack where the concession/T.O. result you're looking for is "give me your memories."

Quotecover a field with a cloud of thick fog

Probably a maneuver to place an Aspect on the scene. Alternately, possibly a personal Full Defense against Awareness, depending on what you wanted the fog for, but that makes a bit less sense to me.

The real issue with casters vs. non-casters in FATE is in maneuvers like this-- non-casters can also do stuff like place scene-long, scene-wide aspects, but they have to fight a lot harder to justify it in most cases.

Quoteallow one to speak with animals and plants

Aspect on yourself ("Can Talk To Plants") or aspect on a plant ("This Is A Talking Plant"). Or perhaps more interestingly, give the ability to a druid-type character as a stunt (which would mean that it's always on.)

Quotemake stuff fall upwards

Depends what you want it to accomplish.

Take somebody out of combat? Make it a physical attack, let them defend with Athletics, and let them be Taken Out by falling into the sky or Concede with "I'm too busy hanging onto the ground to continue opposing you."

Make a room hazardous? Maneuver to place a "Gravity Is Messed Up" aspect on the zone, and tag it whenever anybody's doing anything challenging therein.

Put an opponent's weapon/macguffin out of reach? Maneuver to place a "Stuck to the Ceiling" aspect on the object.

Access something high up? Maneuver to place a "Falling Up" aspect on yourself, or maybe just sub in your magic skill for Athletics to make that check.

Quoteconjure visions of places and events far across space and time

Dresden Files had a system for this, and I'm unable to remember how that was set up. I think it was just handled like a roll to look for anything (Investigation, only using your magic skill instead), with the assumption that you'd need to bring a lot of power to bear to overcome the high obstacle modifiers representing great distances and whatnot. Having a lock of hair or knowing someone's true name or whatever would count as aspects you could leverage to help overcome that difficulty.

Quotetake flight on a carpet or a broomstick

FATE is really weird about travel, distance, positioning, location, etc. Several different ways to handle this sort of thing depending on what kind of game you're working with. You could put a "Flying" aspect on yourself, but that seems a little oversimplistic to me. If you're doing the flying in combat, you might have to mess with extra vertical zones or some crap. Might be easiest to design a flying carpet or whatever as a special item that, for instance, lets you ignore certain types of barriers (that you could fly over) and use your magic skill instead of Athletics to dodge attacks or something-- at least, that's how I think the sample Spirit of the Century character with a jetpack is handled mechanically.

Quote from: GhostmanHow well does this approach work when it comes to magics that can do things such as make stuff fall upwards, steal memories off someone's head, allow one to speak with animals and plants, conjure visions of places and events far across space and time, take flight on a carpet or a broomstick, or cover a field with a cloud of thick fog?

I think the key here is to not think of things in terms of "what can this magic do" but "what outcomes does this magic allow?" LC made a good explanation of how FATE would mechanically handle the various things you listed. I'll just add that once we've decided what effect we want, there are a wide variety of ways to fluff how we get there. Someone without flashy sorcery or the ability to conjure things out of thin air need more good luck or fortuitous circumstances to make it work out for him, but he didn't pay refresh for any fancy magical ability, so he's usually going to have a few extra fate points to ensure he can get exactly that.

Quote from: Lmns Crn"you know what? everybody has crazy supernatural powers, that's part of the basic premise, now let's balance around that."

This was the approach I took for Asura.  :grin:

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Lmns Crn"you know what? everybody has crazy supernatural powers, that's part of the basic premise, now let's balance around that."

This was the approach I took for Asura.  :grin:

I almost used Asura as an example, but I thought that something about one of your previous examples made me question doing that for some reason, but now I've re-read the thread and can't find what threw me, so I dunno, senility, maybe?

Do people play totally mundane PCs in Asura-- people without Conduits or anything? Is there a consideration for balancing that against a party otherwise decked out with Prana?

ed: Lately, the word "prana" is making me think of prawns. Delicious, grilled prana with a twist of lemon. :yumm:

A few of my own...

I'd play more Fighters if military tactics and strategy (the command of troops, etc) were given greater weight.  I always feel that where spellcaster's roles at higher levels should be to command increasing powerful (super)natural forces, Fighters and the like should command increasing powerful military and/or political forces.  Things like domain managament, cohorts, and followers used to be baked into the game a little more, but recent editions have tended to neglect such aspects - or leave their mechanics totally dependent on DM fiat - in favour of giving fighters increasingly spectacular physical powers.  Which, don't get me wrong, can be totally cool in and of itself in some games, but sometimes (especially in stuff like E7) I prefer things a little more mundane/gritty.

I'd play more Rangers if the abundance of magic and/or supernatural powers present in most parties didn't make things like woodsmanship, hunting, finding clean water, getting shelter, and survival skills superfluous after a few levels.  When a bunch of party members can cast Create Water, Create Food and Water, Purify Food and Drink, Detect Poison, Heroes' Feast, Endure Elements, etc, things that should be really valuable skills, like foraging and tracking down game to feed the party, kind of feel useless.  Also I'd play more Rangers if more games took place in the Wilderness for extended periods of time, not half a day's hike from the nearest town.

Quote from: SteerpikeI'd play more Fighters if military tactics and strategy (the command of troops, etc) were given greater weight.  I always feel that where spellcaster's roles at higher levels should be to command increasing powerful (super)natural forces, Fighters and the like should command increasing powerful military and/or political forces.  Things like domain managament, cohorts, and followers used to be baked into the game a little more, but recent editions have tended to neglect such aspects - or leave their mechanics totally dependent on DM fiat - in favour of giving fighters increasingly spectacular phyiscal powers.  Which, don't get me wrong, can be totally cool in and of itself in some games, but sometimes (especially in stuff like E7) I prefer things a little more mundane/gritty.

This kind of progression sounds awesome. I love the aesthetic of gradually taking command of worldly/otherworldly powers.

Quote from: Lmns CrnDo people play totally mundane PCs in Asura-- people without Conduits or anything? Is there a consideration for balancing that against a party otherwise decked out with Prana?

There is a consideration for balancing mundane characters against a party in the sense that I want Asuras to feel powerful but I also want a group of humans with sufficient numbers, technology, and tactics to still pose a threat. However, a normal human in a party of Asuras would likely be quite outclassed, and the system just basically accepts this.

Quote from: SteerpikeI always feel that where spellcaster's roles at higher levels should be to command increasing powerful (super)natural forces, Fighters and the like should command increasing powerful military and/or political forces.

I like this idea in theory, but I think mechanically it'd have to get over the problem that a lot of mid-to-high level challenges simply can't be overcome by any number of purely mundane guys. For example, if flight is needed, the Wizard can just fly. The Fighter will either need a magic item or some sort of superhuman leaping ability based on his sheer physical strength. A bunch of guys who also can't fly won't do much.

I wonder if the main obstacle is the idea that you've got a party of character working toward the same goal.

I mean, if you've got a game where high-level warriors become generals and lead armies, what do you do when you've got two such characters in your group, always have two armies? Share the command? How do you work that out?

Quote from: Lmns Crn
I wonder if the main obstacle is the idea that you've got a party of character working toward the same goal.

I mean, if you've got a game where high-level warriors become generals and lead armies, what do you do when you've got two such characters in your group, always have two armies? Share the command? How do you work that out?

That is a basic idea in a class based game, that people have DIFFERENT areas of ability.  The fact that one guy can fly and another guy has followers and connections is the point of a D&D/class based game.

And in this case, the idea would be to have rules where 2 guys synergize, if they are working towards the same goal, or neutralize, if they are not.

Quote from: sparkletwistI like this idea in theory, but I think mechanically it'd have to get over the problem that a lot of mid-to-high level challenges simply can't be overcome by any number of purely mundane guys.

It is definitely a problem based on the normal campaign model (increasingly deeper dungeons and nastier monsters).  Along with an increase in actual mechanics for leading armies and creating a fiefdom or whatnot a greater emphasis on those sorts of things would be necessary.  So in terms of traditional fantasy I'm thinking of something like the Battle of Five Armies or Helm's Deep - sure Gandalf plays a key role in those battles and flings around the occasional lightning bolt or flash of light, but the battle is ultimately won by armies and by the leadership and actions of their very Fighter-y leaders (Aragorn, Theoden, Bard, Dain, Thorin, etc).  There's still room for spectacular feats of arms but tactics and strategy become increasingly important.  The lack of a mass combat system, of course, exacerbates the neglect of military matters, I think.

EDIT: Incidentally, part of my motivation for starting Underdeep was to capture exactly the sort of experience I'm describing above...

Quote from: Lmns Crn"you know what? everybody has crazy supernatural powers, that's part of the basic premise, now let's balance around that."

I made this same example to Sparkletwist in chat, but maybe it's a worthwhile response in this thread, too.

In the game King of Dragon Pass, there is an event which can happen in which one of your dudes hurls a spear at an enemy, jumps on top of the spear he has just hurled, rides said spear past the enemy, and decapitates him with a sword as he spear-surfs by.

This is, of course, awesome.  But it's not necessarily the sort of thing that people want or expect from a "fighting class."  My last character in Haveneast was a thoroughly mundane spear-using ranger, and I probably would have balked at being offered that kind of power or "maneuver," because it doesn't feel appropriate for the kind of character I wanted or the experience I wanted to have.  I didn't want my character to perceive himself as equal with, for instance, a sorceress who could spit acid (Sparkletwist's character); I wanted that to be weird and strange to him.  If I can surf a spear into the sunset, suddenly those strange and scary wizards are just ordinary adventurers with somewhat re-flavored abilities.

This comes down, I think, to the original argument of "low magic" versus "high magic" - more supernatural powers and physics-breaking craziness is not necessarily better for all people.  I'd rather play a game in which all characters were mundane non-casters than a game in which all non-casters had "crazy supernatural powers;" my reaction to casters being too strong is to reduce their physics-breaking ability, but I'd rather remove it than give it to mundane combat classes.

I don't mean to suggest that PF mundane classes are "done right" and that everyone else should be brought to the level of the PF fighter, because we've had plenty of chat discussions ridiculing some of the choices Paizo made for fighters and feats.  To me, however, the fundamental difference between non-magic and magic characters is that the former excels within the laws of physics, while the latter does not excel but can occasionally break said laws.  I really do believe there can be a balance here; I don't think that the only way to make non-magic characters useful is to make all characters physical-law-breakers.  But it may require careful thought to figure out how to let spellcasters break the laws of physics in a way that maintains parity with those who excel within them, without reducing spellcasters to the situation they were in back in the day when a 1st level wizard basically fired one magic missile and called it a day.

Quote from: Steerpike
I'd play more Rangers if the abundance of magic and/or supernatural powers present in most parties didn't make things like woodsmanship, hunting, finding clean water, getting shelter, and survival skills superfluous after a few levels.  When a bunch of party members can cast Create Water, Create Food and Water, Purify Food and Drink, Detect Poison, Heroes' Feast, Endure Elements, etc, things that should be really valuable skills, like foraging and tracking down game to feed the party, kind of feel useless.  Also I'd play more Rangers if more games took place in the Wilderness for extended periods of time, not half a day's hike from the nearest town.

All of this - I've always felt that survival can, done well, be just as interesting and tense as combat and this is where the Ranger (and to a lesser extent, Druid) should excel.

Quote from: HippopotamusDundee

Quote from: Steerpike
I'd play more Rangers if the abundance of magic and/or supernatural powers present in most parties didn't make things like woodsmanship, hunting, finding clean water, getting shelter, and survival skills superfluous after a few levels.  When a bunch of party members can cast Create Water, Create Food and Water, Purify Food and Drink, Detect Poison, Heroes' Feast, Endure Elements, etc, things that should be really valuable skills, like foraging and tracking down game to feed the party, kind of feel useless.  Also I'd play more Rangers if more games took place in the Wilderness for extended periods of time, not half a day's hike from the nearest town.

All of this - I've always felt that survival can, done well, be just as interesting and tense as combat and this is where the Ranger (and to a lesser extent, Druid) should excel.

Quote from: PCThis comes down, I think, to the original argument of "low magic" versus "high magic" - more supernatural powers and physics-breaking craziness is not necessarily better for all people.  I'd rather play a game in which all characters were mundane non-casters than a game in which all non-casters had "crazy supernatural powers;" my reaction to casters being too strong is to reduce their physics-breaking ability, but I'd rather remove it than give it to mundane combat classes.

Quote from: Steerpike
I always feel that where spellcaster's roles at higher levels should be to command increasing powerful (super)natural forces, Fighters and the like should command increasing powerful military and/or political forces.

Without being too pedantic and boring, it does go back to the basic idea of matching game style and setting with system.  Pathfinder is a class based (read ensemble and niche protection), level-based, combat-balanced system with powerful magic use built for high-Magi/high power games with a small skill system to add some simulationist flavor.  Skills such as Steerpike mentions for the Ranger are not supposed to be equivalent to magic, so very quickly, the skills are overshadowed in a system like this.  Normally, a skill based system is used to put all skills, diplomacy and stealth and Damage bonus and necromancy, on a more level playing field. 


I am now going to take a better look at Underdeep, BTW.

Quote from: Polycarp

Quote from: Lmns Crn"you know what? everybody has crazy supernatural powers, that's part of the basic premise, now let's balance around that."

...

This comes down, I think, to the original argument of "low magic" versus "high magic" - more supernatural powers and physics-breaking craziness is not necessarily better for all people.  I'd rather play a game in which all characters were mundane non-casters than a game in which all non-casters had "crazy supernatural powers;" my reaction to casters being too strong is to reduce their physics-breaking ability, but I'd rather remove it than give it to mundane combat classes.

...

Yeah, don't get me wrong-- I should clarify what I mean. (And none of this stuff I'm saying is specifically about PF, because I don't know PF.)

I think a central part of the problem is the mixed-party format (some caster PCs and some non-caster PCs), and the way it combines with caster progression.

I'm not advocating spear-surfing, scimitar-slicing samurai (though in a certain style of game that might be fun for a bit) when I talk about a game where "everybody has crazy supernatural powers, that's part of the basic premise", I'm saying we should stop pretending casters and non-casters can ever really be balanced while casters are crazy earthshattering mofos. If your game premise includes playable WyzzardLords who can reshape continents, bend time into a mobius strip, and whip the very powers of Life and Death into a light and fluffy soufflé, then maybe all the players should play WyzzardLords, and let that be the scope of the game.

That way your balance questions are "how do I balance a WyzzardLord with the Mobius Timeline powerset against a WyzzardLord with the Feng Shui Continent Rearranger powerset," and not "how do I balance a WyzzardLord against a schmuck with a sword so that they both feel interesting and important?"

Alternately,

The other model that I think has potential is if you keep the diverse party model that includes casters and non-casters, but you seriously clamp down on the scope and scale of casters' power. So in your group that has a warrior, a rogue, and a caster, that caster is perhaps "the herbalist who lives in the woods outside of town" or "the Queen's farseer" or "the pyromancer who didn't quite finish his apprenticeship", etc. That way, even if they eventually become the best herbalist/farseer/pyromancer in the world, their powerset is constrained enough that they're on par with their adventuring companions, the best fencer/general/dragonslayer and infiltrator/assassin/con-artist in the world. If you're going to have a mixed group, you've got to deal with the issue that a high-enough caster who feels like it can be better than someone else at the only thing they do, which is the standard D&D 3.X (and PF too, I assume) model.

Quote from: Lord VreegI am now going to take a better look at Underdeep, BTW.

It had to end far sooner than I'd have liked, but it was a blast while it lasted.

Quote from: Luminous CrayonIf your game premise includes playable WyzzardLords who can reshape continents, bend time into a mobius strip, and whip the very powers of Life and Death into a light and fluffy soufflé, then maybe all the players should play WyzzardLords, and let that be the scope of the game.

Yeah, I can get behind this idea. I think there are some ways that a "badass normal" can still contribute while rubbing shoulders with WyzzardLords, but it's challenging to implement them.

Quote from: Luminous CrayonThe other model that I think has potential is if you keep the diverse party model that includes casters and non-casters, but you seriously clamp down on the scope and scale of casters' power.

This is generally my preferred solution for grittier, low fantasy type games.

With Pathfinder I think the easiest way to create this feel without rewriting all the spell-lists and spellcasting classes is to:

(1) Use a Low or Standard Fantasy point buy so that ability scores remain low - so if a spellcaster wants to dish it out and cast lots of bonus spells they're going to be even more weak/fragile/clumsy/absent-minded than normal.

(2) Implement something like E7 to prevent access to everything over 4th level and keep spells/day reasonable.

(3) Keep magic rare enough that mundanes are suspicious or scared of it and may even try to harm casters in some places, because supernatural things are Evil.  Even Clerics can be like this - most clergymen would be Experts and Clerics in the world are like Joan of Arc or whatnot and get mistaken for Witches as often as not.

SteerPike, I actually love doing the 'magic is rare and unknown' thing.  In Celtricia, especially in the Collegium game, it is the opposite, but one of the things I loved doing with the Accis game is making magic of all sorts much more rare and mythic.  Casters are rare, and 95% of priests cannot work miracles.