Celtricia...in small, bite sized chunklets

[LordVreeg]

Vreeg's First rule of Setting Design.
"Make sure the system you choose matches the game you want to play, or else the game will eventually match the system".

So shouldn't a setting designer create as much of their setting's internal workings as possible before deciding which mechanics will fit them best?  By your statement one should either be starting with both mechanics and setting during design or should never post until they have completed both aspects for one part.  The former has the danger of breaking your rule by letting what already exists in mechanics twist the ideas rather than the other way around.  The latter means that there is much of the setting design process that must be done alone, not a method some people want to go through.

SCMP, I could write a whole friggin' book on the creative process.  And maybe that will be part of of another post.  But yes, a GM needs to keep at least some ideas of both Fluff and Crunch in their head during the creative process.  Nor do I want to pretend to be the authority on this.  But I need to point this out.  The creative process normally starts with a fluff idea, or a fluff goal, or a feel...but at some point, early on, as LC and I both found out, you have to try to match up crunch with it.  Now, both fluff and crunch may change with time.  But this is part of the process.  
And in terms of creativity, we all work somewhat differently.  Your way is as valid as any.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

And in terms of creativity, we all work somewhat differently.  Your way is as valid as any.

Well it's an attempt to play a form of Devil's Advocate, giving advice contrary just in case someone works better my way but thinks they're alone.

EDIT: I mean for one thing what if you don't know enough systems or are good enough at understanding mechanics to pick out or modify so that it/they fit?

[LordVreeg]

God, I love threads like this. I feel like I am attending a setting design masterclass. I am reading and rereading the long post about guidelines on designing a magic system, and there is really a huge amount of information to think about here.

Here's a quick thought.

Rules For Spell Point Reclamation
Spell points also take a while to return to the caster. The caster's Spell point reclamation skill determines this. That skill is a 50% auto dropdown from the spell points, so until the caster grows in power, the spell point reclamation skill is normally ½ the casters actual skill in that type of spell points. This translates into the caster reclaiming at .05* their reclamation skill per hour while active, and .15* their reclamation skill per hour while sleeping.
                Also, a caster can reclaim up to 3 different types of spell points back in a given hour while awake, but up to 5 different types per hour while sleeping.
                So this means a character with 20 spirit points has probably a 10 Spirit reclamation skill. He will reclaim .5 points an hour awake, and 1.5 an hour while sleeping.
The Alternate rule I have been working with is a little more complicated, but I like the affect more.  The top half of a PC's spell points come back at 10% of the SPell reclamation ability per hour.  The last 50% come back at .2 of the reclamation skill.  It adds some tougher decisions for casters, as they can cast some of their points easily, but after they get down to half, they came back more slowly.  And the caster has to get the hard ones back first...[/ic]

So for me, recharge and recharge time is vital.  And this also changed with playtesting, BTW.

I think it all has to do with what power level magic is compared to other effects.  There are other means to limit this, casting time, context-specific, rarity of reagents.  But if you do not use these, or recharge, then you have to dramatically weaken the effects of magic to match up with more mundane or skill-based abilities, or risk a massive in-game imbalance.  DOes that make sense?

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

I have some questions for you regarding your question and what they mean or how they should be used.

1) what does it do to the setting?

What do you mean "do"?  What function does it serve for people?  What story role does it play?

2) what does it do to the game played at the table?

1) What is the source(s) of magical power, and how is the power accessed?

About how exacting should this knowledge possibly be (irregardless of whether the hypothetical subject doing the knowing is the GM or an in-world person)?

2) And what type of spells would LOGICALLY be powered by this/these sources.

"Logically" as in "everything other than the plain impossible" or "what fits without a lot of convoluted explanation"?

Thirdly, How does magic power return?

Is "it never goes away" an acceptable answer?

[Acrimone]

When all else fails, return to Wrede:

http://www.sfwa.org/writing/worldbuilding4.htm

That whole article -- not just the magic part -- is pure 100% gold for this sort of thing (the CBG sort of thing, I mean).

[FREAKIN' AWESOME HORSE]

[blockquote=Luminous Crayon]One watershed moment I discovered was when I made the switch from designing "subtractively" (i.e., taking an existing system and pruning/adjusting it into shape) to designing "additively" (starting from nothing and building up.)

I started out by modifying D&D-- I had no ambitions for my work besides having a custom-tailored D&D world. But start adjusting D&D spell lists and players are going to feel a lack, even if you add new things to compensate for what you are taking away. (D&D 3.X is a particularly strong example here, because the whole concept of casters revolves around the idea of their unlimited versatility, and players are used to a succession of additional sourcebooks that present additional options without removing previous options. They're not used to having their options curtailed.)

Starting from scratch and building up is a lot easier in terms of building themed magics without players feeling constrained. I've got this world where no caster can teleport, throw fireballs (or similar damage spells, etc.), conjure things from nothing, go invisible, turn you into a newt (or whatever), fly... the list goes on. These are staple abilities for magic-users in a lot of systems, and if I'd started with one of those systems and cut all this out, it'd feel butchered. Since I'm building additively from scratch, though, it just feels like I chose to go in different directions.[/blockquote]

Yeah, additive construction is definitely the more intuitive way to go. This is mostly the approach of Haveneast, which I recently posted a thread for to get people to list magical effects for me to find out exactly what I did and didn't want to do. It started out as just a bunch of images of sorcerers who had signature sets of abilities, but eventually I got to the point in my head where I was like "okay, what other things haven't I mentioned in the core list of users that can be done?" It leaves your world a lot more personal, and I believe you were actually around in the chat to see some of the most notable elements of the magic system come to be (the specific foci, the limited methods by which elemental magic can be wielded, etc.)

That is not to say, however, that the other method isn't ineffective in designing a system. At the bare minimum, taking a magic system like D&D's and tearing it into bits, throwing the ones you want into one pile and the ones you don't into another can be a good way to find new setting themes to try. My favorite one to speak of is actually something that I believe the 3e Manual of the Planes suggests: create a world that is completely lacking a certain school, or all schools but one. Then all you have to do from here is redefine what the schools are and you've potentially got the workings of a new magic system. I've toyed with concepts for a few different settings that only possess one kind of magic: necromancy, divination, and rune magic ala Glyph of Warding and Symbol are examples of that. The trick in going this route is to not actually use that particular system after you've torn it down - it's just there for ideas.

[LordVreeg]

When all else fails, return to Wrede:

http://www.sfwa.org/writing/worldbuilding4.htm

That whole article -- not just the magic part -- is pure 100% gold for this sort of thing (the CBG sort of thing, I mean).

It's a great checklist, and I felt, after looking at it, that it was saying the exact same things, but in a query format.  Acrimone, great link.

[LordVreeg]

Campaign Builders Guild, Y'know? Not Fluffy writers guild

Ok.  What about the frequency ditribution, and the powerr growth curve found therein?  What about synergies bewtween systems, and formats of casting (Quickfire, ritual, etc)?  I've looked at HExx, Hen Mut and the Bronze setting, and I'm still trying to figure out any of these.

[Llum]

Campaign Builders Guild, Y'know? Not Fluffy writers guild

Ok.  What about the frequency ditribution, and the powerr growth curve found therein?  What about synergies between systems, and formats of casting (Quickfire, ritual, etc)?  I've looked at HExx, Hen Mut and the Bronze setting, and I'm still trying to figure out any of these.

1. Hen Mut is not on the forums yet (just the map on the wiki), perhaps your thinking of something else, Corcadia? (I know, I have too many settings and junk but :P)

2. What do you mean by synergies between systems? Do you mean like potential "gaming system?", because I would custom build a system from scratch for each of them, at need. (It's something I enjoy, it's also something I do with my friend a lot, we discuss game design fairly often. Usually for computer games but concepts can be transfered.)

That being said, for me, magic is usually one of the less important things once I decided if it exists or not. How exactly it recharges and other minutae aren't something I usually think about. However

Frequency:
-Bronze Setting:  Varies from population to population, fairly common. One per 100 to one per 1000
-Hexx: Actual straight up learned magic is rare. Racial magic is very common (everyone has it to some extent)
-Div 2.0: Varies, everyone does in the Second Divergence, while only 1 per million or so in the Third Divergece. (4th and 1st have no magic). On Loftsphere it varies by culture, depending on their preferred method of warfare.

Power growth curve:
-Bronze Setting: Barring involvement from Gods (beings of sentient magic), not too much. Nothing special, mostly just more destructive power (in the form of beams)
-Hexx: Not too sure, mostly true "power" is artifact dependent.
-Div 2.0: Can become very strong, but it's all relative. Eventually a normal human/uplifted animal/augment will seem like nothing. But then you'll run into champions, Star Children, Reptoids. Humans are originally extremely low on the badass scale. And there will always be something that can squash you like a bug (Powers, Elder Powers)

Formats of casting:
-Bronze Setting: Quickfire is about three quarters of what magic is. Ritual casting is in its infancy (people have only been playing around with magic for a little while) and not very developped. Mostly it's about attracting animals (to hunt), helping crops, junk like that.
-Hexx: Depends on the race, usually Quickfire but more powerfull stuff being Ritual (think Dresden Files kinda format, if not in how it works)
-Corcadia: Pretty even distribution. Ritual casting is much more advance and flexible. Quickfire is prevalent (cause it's helpful) but Rituals can do all kinds of junk.

[Superfluous Crow]

I was wondering, if you come up with a great magic system, only it is so complex that it is difficult to implement game-wise, would you "ruin" the great magic system to make it more playable? Hypothetically.

[LordVreeg]

I was wondering, if you come up with a great magic system, only it is so complex that it is difficult to implement game-wise, would you "ruin" the great magic system to make it more playable? Hypothetically.

I'm going to assume this is directed at me.

Normally, this question comes in another guise, the 'realism vs playability' combat system question.  And, in answering that, as I was discussing with Llum last night, There are advanced Guildschool combat rules that I don't use, dealing with reach, Aoo, fient, parry, hit location, slash/mash/pierce, etc.  I've used them before, but they bogged down an already roll-heavy system.[note=automate!]  These rules are projected to return whenever my boys get off their asses and build the combat assist module...[/note]

And in the same way, I do have a few advanced rules for spell reclamation that I don't bother with normally.  The fluff and the gameplay would be better served having spell points that are under half of the caster's maximum come back [note=feel]this further serves the 'feel' of magic, in that lots of little lesser spells are used somewhat regularly, but no one wants to spend too many spell points [/note]quickly, but once the caster digs deeper into the well, they come back at 1/4 that rate.  So a single dimensional example (and remember, most spells use multiple sources of power), lets say a caster has 20 spirit points.  This normally means, without any help from a skill, that they recover .5 spirit points an hour while awake.  SO if they cast a spell that uses 5 spirit points, in 10 hours, they will be back to their full 20.  However, if they cast a spell costing 11 of their 20, the first point takes (.5 per hour/4=.125 per hour) takes 8 hours to get back, and the remailing 10 points take 20 hours to return.  

You can see where this would change spell casting behavior.  You can also see where it would drive all my PC's and myself insane, requiring a spellpoint whiteboard or tracking system.

yes, CC, I have already removed some complexity from the system, complaexity that better represented the Fluff and that fit the game I wanted to play.  But I ran into that 'playability' issue.

Now, you use the term 'ruin'.

This is a different discussion, in that I have been kind of working on the need to match up crunch and fluff without taking the generic way out.  But any system can be taken too far. I'm over 500 spells in the book, and realizing there is a long way still to go.  

I didn't 'ruin Guildschool to make it more playable, but I did have to compromise slightly to create a basic version and the advanced version that will be used when I have a cumperter assist or players willing to do a litle more bookkeeping.  But You are right to point out that the more 'perfect and representative' the system, the more convoluted it could get, and there is a pushback you might run into in playtesting.

[Superfluous Crow]

I was also thinking in the way that you could come up with a fluff magical system which you might have used in some fiction and when thinking about your game. But when you tried to implement it game-wise you realized it was nearly impossible.  What would you do in this situation?

[Eladris]

In IRC I mentioned having an independent magic system for Wake long before I ever ran games for it using the d20 system.  I built a combat system around the magic system, but my players never bought in.  Here are the "schools" of magic.  These loosely correlated with the Houses, too, which lost a lot of meaning (and were hard to develop as a result) in the system migration.

I think system very much dictates setting and vice versa.  Unfortunately, assuming you are playing tabletop, the system decision is not yours alone.

Portals

You have glimpsed the fractured web of the Tangle and understand in part the hidden connections between all things.  Logical and emotional relationships govern proximity in the Shattered Universe and by tugging these invisible strings you can move objects through physical space.  With training you can summon creatures, and with mastery tie two Spheres together with a Gate.  Summon a sword into your hand, save a friend from a fall off a treacherous ledge or skip the crowd in Lumin's Gate District with command of Portals.

Dreams

You walk now upon worlds conjured from the memories of gods, whose Shattered infallibility left cracks in a once pristine facade; subtle imperfections that allow you to influence existence in much the same way.  Your will bends the experiences of those around you: that gnome, he can fly; that arrow, it veers and finds its mark with ease; that lamp, it burns without oil.  Each Sphere is a book and, while you may not be the author, no one will mind if you scribble your Dreams in the margins.

Mists

What lies in the gaps between Spheres?  Were these events so mundane that the gods merely chose not to recall them from oblivion?  The fog of time shrouds the bright points of our memory and leaves most of life a mystery.  You have learned to forget -- or maybe revel in the mystery -- and can will the Shattered Universe to do the same.  By cloaking in memories in Mist you can remove events and objects from existence: heal a wound just taken by negating the attack; hide a sock or key as payback for a slight; destroy a Gate between two Spheres.  Be warned, strong memories can be difficult to forget and wondering about whether or not you truly exist can be a danger if the answer is 'no'.

Wards

The Tangle exists by the grace of the gods, however, like the legs of a newborn colt, its foundations still tremble.  The memories of traumatized deities sometimes fade or warp by the actions of others, but you can bend your will to help keep the Shattered Universe stable.  You reverse the meddling of others: send that summoned creature back whence it came; return the flying gnome to the ground; hold the Mists at bay.  The Wards you wield maintain order and provided the gods precious time with which to mend reality.

[LordVreeg]

In IRC I mentioned having an independent magic system for Wake long before I ever ran games for it using the d20 system.  I built a combat system around the magic system, but my players never bought in.  Here are the "schools" of magic.  These loosely correlated with the Houses, too, which lost a lot of meaning (and were hard to develop as a result) in the system migration.

I think system very much dictates setting and vice versa.  Unfortunately, assuming you are playing tabletop, the system decision is not yours alone.

Boy, that says an absolute ton, doesn't it?  We've spoken about this from all sorts of direction, Eladris post speaks volumes.  

[LordVreeg]

OK.  
So I got some good action on that particular one.
Now, the next on this thread is going to stick with magic, but deal with spells.
vague effect vs specific spells.
A few handwaves and the spell is created on the fly based on a some rule guidelines, or very specific flavor driven spell lists?
Or do you cheat and just transcribe the spells someone else wrote for their campaign?   More on this later, but I figured the last subject was toporous, and it was time for some more stomach-roiling looks at our artworks.