The Campaign Builder's Guild

Some jerk in some bitch/rant thread brought up his insoucient pet peeve, that many supposed creators just plug in a generic system that may or may not have anything do do with the setting itself.
[spoiler=jerk]
That Vreeg guy is pretty jerky sometimes.[/spoiler]

What does this mean?  Matching crunch means making setting-specific circumstances story goals match the scoring system,how much you can cast when, how is the power of a spell socred, do they work everytime or are the success % rules, and do you used generic spells or write your own?  What did you want to accomplish, and did you?

Also, in the fluff level, where does the power come from that creates a spell?  Do you have necromancers and pyromancers, or do you use differnt divisions?  What makes one class/type/faction/school of caster beeter or worse than another?

And after looking at this and answering some of these questions, what do you do next?

[spoiler=work]I'm going back to work, I'll check in later.[/spoiler]

Well, i generally strive to somehow base the power of my magic-users in the cosmology of my setting, or at least describe it so their powers are relatively explained (unless it's a mystery of course). I've tried to make a more natural distinction between different types of magic, instead of it just being the same type of magic with same results.
Can't really say much about my crunch yet since i don't have any.
Was this something like what you wanted us to say?  

Crow,
I am not looking for any one answer.
Rather, this thread is to explore how different people have or have not adapted this critical fantasy cornerstone to their settings.  

I first contemplated this issue decades ago, when I reaized the rules I had been working on did not lend themselves to the way I wanted magic to work in my setting.  And I could not find rules that were even close.  So I had these choices.

1) totally compromise the setting ideals and go with published rules.  
2) partially compromise the setting goals and try to mutate the rules somewhat.
3) create the setting I wanted to and have magic work the way I intended, and create my own damn rules.

So I had this conversation with myself already, but it had a huge effect on Celtricia.  And a few threads have recently sparked up on this, as well as people on the wiki working on their own systems.  

So I felt we would examinine this effect in detail.
so My questions to you would be:

1) how powerful do you want magic to be?  What kind of frequency distribution do you want magic to have (how pevalent is magic at differnt power levels?
2) how do you want to score the power of magic, and how do you want to have caster's use that score?  Spell levels?  Spell levels cast per day?  
3) how fast does magic come back/regenerate?  does it come back in a linear fashion?

There are several variations of magic I have used before. My favorite is definitely mana based (like what Celtricia has). I find that mana based systems scale to power much better than level based systems (which is where we get the fireball problem). From a mana based standpoint I have found that it is easy then to jump to a theme oriented magic style. This is generally true since unless there is something in your setting that would make mana impossible (this is usually rare) you can easily shape it to suit things best. Anyhow enough with that long-winded overview and on to your questions.

1.
Well magic takes many forms for me but I am biased towards either one of two systems. System one magic is not very prevalent, it is known about by most but accessing it is very difficult. Only those that have dedicated their life (i.e. - Magicians) can tap its power. In general the spell curve for this one remains pretty similar with plenty of spells at each power level. The second one has magic as very common. Anybody with some basic training can begin to tap its power (again, Celtricia is like this). The spell curve for this one is different. While many people have a grasp on some simple helping spells, only the masters can access the highest level spells. On the low end of the curve (cantrips and other simple spells) there are loads of spells to deal with different things (smelt ore for blacksmiths, grind flour for millers, and so on and so forth). The higher level spells that magicians use are more difficult to uncover and thus rarer. There are still a fair few, but as you get up in levels the amount of available spells to learn goes down. A variation that I have used in both versions is a DC check that allows skilled casters to slightly modify their spells.

2.
Well with the mana system it is a simple issue of base spells that get more powerful with the more mana you dump into them. This means you can throw out some big spells, but you will drain yourself pretty fast.

3.
This depends. In a system where only actual casters can tap it, it has to regenerate on a regular basis so they can keep up with the other classes. However, when anyone can potentially use it, it comes back slower as it is just a supplement to their primary abilities, except for the magicians themselves... whom just get certain bonuses such as a larger mana pool and perhaps some increased regeneration.

I usually start from an idea about the role that I want magic and religion to play in the campaign and/or world, plus my personal bias about how I like spell caster characters to work. I then work this out both ways:

In fluff, what does this imply about the kind of metaphysics that is consistent with these goals? How will cultures and philosophies and technology and so on be affected? Will this create a consistent and desirable theme or feel to the world? If not, tweak the concepts a bit until I get to something I'm satisfied with.

On the crunch level, what mechanics will be needed to support the desired role for magic and technology? How do you make this work for PCs, PC-class NPC's, and the general population?

For example, if I wanted a game where religion was largely formal and ritualistic, and true magic was rare and limited only to gifted individuals, I'd want to work out a concept of gods and magic that was consistent with that, then put in mechanics for religious rituals, specialized TALENT score for magical ability, special rules and cultural elements for magical training that play up the rarity of the talent, etc.

Ah yes fluff. I think that plays a great deal of importance in all of my settings (but I always did prefer to sit on my fluffy clouds as the captains of crunch sailed the sea below). Especially in designing magic it is important to lay out your fluff on how you want things to feel. Like I said before mana based systems are quite flexible in what you can put them into. However, it is the fluff that helps you design how they are put into the system. It is yet another part of the puzzle of campaign design.

I am working with a custom system of mechanics that is designed to be simple and flexible. I give players a small number of stats and encourage them to combine them in creative ways to do awesome things, whether that's swinging across a canyon on a rope, sailing a ship through a terrible storm, or punching the king of the goblins in the jaw. To a large extent, players should use their creativity to define their actions, not select from a pre-supplied list of options.

Magic in my system should be the same way, though it's necessarily a bit more specifically defined than other types of actions. The goal is to use magic to give players more options, then turn them loose in the same creativity-based system and let them define their own actions. Rather than list a huge tome of spells that characters might learn, I just use magic to give them broad, general options: "You can breathe energy into things," or "You can touch magic currents," or "You can interact with spirits," or "You can affect the way others perceive you." Then I turn them loose and let them figure out their own applications for those abilities.

In other words, I wanted to treat "doing things magically" and "doing things without magic" the same, as much as possible, and let magic become just another useful tool, like a sword or a screwdriver or a ladder or a compass.

I decided early on in the process that I didn't want magic to be a strong force in combat, or to invalidate or replace other types of skills. I broke this rule a little bit later with one rather martial magic-using tradition, but for the most part, it holds strong. Magic is useful and potent, but if you want to cause carnage on a massive scale, you need to get an army, not a mage. Merlin used his power to clear the way for Arthur, not to steal the show; I wanted magic users from the same tradition-- subtle, supporting roles.

One thing that's always bothered me about traditional representations of magic is daily limits. Lots of systems set up non-magic characters as having a steady power curve-- they never really run out of juice until they're dead-- but magic users have a jagged curve-- they wreck reality's face, but only four times per day. I didn't want to impose seemingly-arbitrary limits on magic's use, and I wanted to even out that power curve a bit.

So, magic is keyed to the same stats as physical exertion. You will eventually get exhausted and be unable to use any more magic until you rest, but for the same reason and in the same way as you will eventually get exhausted and be unable to move any more furniture until you rest. Some magic powers involve the same kind of expenditure of Vigor and Focus that non-mages are using anyway, and other powers can be kept up all day with no real limit or exertion. (Of course, this only works because the power level has been toned down, and all the truly earth-shattering stuff has been left to other systems.)

As a final premise, I wanted distinct traditions of magic with their own styles and types of power, rather than a single, shared pool of abilities that all mages access. So, Tradition A mages study heavy tomes, use special tools, manipulate the magic of others directly, and expand and sharpen their senses. In contrast, Tradition B mages strengthen, heal, and revitalize others with their special clays and magic breath, Tradition C mages manipulate spirits and souls using the power of water, Tradition D mages command the wind by virtue of their supreme mental balance, and Tradition E mages can subtly read and affect the emotions of others. There's little overlap between the traditions, and they all have a distinct set of powers, a distinct way of using them, and a unique feel.

I guess I'm not really sure what else to say on the subject.

yes, the puzzle.
Another way to look at this thread is in terms of starting with fluff (this is how I want my game to play, this is how I want the story to be written, this is the balance I want, etc), ansd then making the crucnh match it, not the other way around.
Celtricia, for example, had an over-arching goal to 'maintain mortaility'.  I wanted a group of 10 orcash to still be dangerous to a fighter that had been played for a year, but I still wanted to show enough progress to keep the players 'Maslow-ian, actualizing' urges satisfied.  Magic had to scaled to match that.  So sometimes it means starting from the beginning.  

Magic isn't defined or even mentioned yet in my setting. When it does crop up, it will be less along the "class a can cast spells from list b using statistic c" lines, and more like innate abilities for certain non-Human/vaguely-magical beings.

Quote from: LordVreegAnother way to look at this thread is in terms of starting with fluff (this is how I want my game to play, this is how I want the story to be written, this is the balance I want, etc), ansd then making the crucnh match it, not the other way around.

Word.

I solved the whole spells per day in a fairly simple way.  A caster has a number of slots that can be occupied by a particular magical process, and a certain capacity for juggling occupied slots.  To use a power, simply stick it in a slot.  Depending on the power, that slot is now either temporarily useless, permanently useless (a really bad idea) or simply preoccupied with maintaining that power.

For instance, Humbert the Unremarkable has three slots and can maintain two at once.  He allocates one to his familiar (so that he doesn't have to maintain it any more, and to provide a reliable, intelligent companion), and uses one of them to channel levitate pretty much constantly.  The third one is usually reserved for throwing handfuls of superheated flame at people's faces.  As a last resort, he has the forbidden spell Melt Your Brain, which, well, melts your brain... but at the cost of permanently removing one slot.

This system allows potentially constant use of petty magic, but the big stuff (which can use up more than one slot at a time) puts slots out of commission, sometimes reducing a sorcerer's arsenal permanently.

Quote from: Salacious AngelI solved the whole spells per day in a fairly simple way.  A caster has a number of slots that can be occupied by a particular magical process, and a certain capacity for juggling occupied slots.  To use a power, simply stick it in a slot.  Depending on the power, that slot is now either temporarily useless, permanently useless (a really bad idea) or simply preoccupied with maintaining that power.

For instance, Humbert the Unremarkable has three slots and can maintain two at once.  He allocates one to his familiar (so that he doesn't have to maintain it any more, and to provide a reliable, intelligent companion), and uses one of them to channel levitate pretty much constantly.  The third one is usually reserved for throwing handfuls of superheated flame at people's faces.  As a last resort, he has the forbidden spell Melt Your Brain, which, well, melts your brain... but at the cost of permanently removing one slot.

This system allows potentially constant use of petty magic, but the big stuff (which can use up more than one slot at a time) puts slots out of commission, sometimes reducing a sorcerer's arsenal permanently.

This is really quite remarkable.

I'm curious about what types of decisions it leads your players to make, particularly regarding forbidden spells like Melt Your Brain. Do they go out of their way to learn these things that they'll hopefully never have to use? Do they avoid spending points on these spells (or however they're learned, if not with a point-system) that will certainly cripple their minds if they ever see action?

I don't use a point system.  All magic arts are acquired through roleplay, and so my players see arcane power a little differently than they might if it were on a budget.

Also, spell slots (or "motes") are recoverable.  You can perform black a ritual to steal someone's soul and turn it into a mote (although that is a pretty debased thing to do), you can siphon one from a place where a great miracle was performed, you can bargain one from a god... the list goes on.

My goal is ultimately to blur the line between magical mechanics and roleplay.  Using magic has tangible effects on your identity as a magic user and a spiritual being.

Alas, the system is in its infancy and needs some nutting out.  In fact, that's what my new magic thread is about...

So this is what you've been up to while you were away. Simply phenomenal.

I have read your Anima thread, but wasn't sure whether you were intending it for comments, or what sorts of feedback you were looking for. I love the ideas in that thread and in this one, though, and the combination of the two tidbits of information has fascinating implications.

Humbert's Dilemma (as this shall be called henceforward from now unto the ending of the world) is actuallu part of an intrinsic part of setting design.

How strategic do you want your casters to be, and how do you want that strategy to be played out in the game.  Traditional D&D asks caster's to memorize their spells they think they will need for the day.

SA (Or CL in today's incarnation) has slots that allow use of low level abilities pretty much all day, or to have single shot (or REALLY single shot) abilites.

I set things up so that we have a mana system in 11 different power sources, but that tougher spells cost more and COST more types of mana (and you can't recover all your spell points back at the same time).

But be aware what 'Humbert's Dilemma' you are trying to present your caster's with.