[Forum Philosophy] #1 - The Cost of Magic

[Superfluous Crow]

That could work in a level-based game. Obviously less useful in a game without them : D

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

But SCMP, what do you do when you have the top level magician with the Super-spell; What's going to keep him from using it all the time?

Nothing.  It's the damn Super-spell.
If the BBEG has already got it you've lost.  That's why the heroes get involved before he gets it.
If Good Guys get it they either A) win like they're supposed to after going to all that hard work to get it, B) lock it away for some reason behind as much convolution as possible.

The key to realize is that in my system the better the spell is the harder it is to get to the point where you can cast it at all.  And if you do manage to put in all that hard work and all that time, probably giving up your entire life, well they YEAH, you're allowed to use it all you want, you've earned it.

[Matt Larkin (author)]

That could work in a level-based game. Obviously less useful in a game without them : D

Also of limited application to fiction.

There has to be something that keeps it from being too easy for the characters in the story--but this can be a consequence in the story. Also, in fiction, waying the cost of magic versus its benefit can be another source of conflict or tension, which is what drives fiction.

Also, to paraphrase Taylor, the cost allows the rest of the world to remain resembling our own to the degree the author desires. By lowering the cost to say, as SCMP mentions, only the effort needed to learn the magic, you likely create a world very different than our own. By raising the cost very high, you limit how crazy people will get with magic.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

......only the effort needed to learn the magic, you likely create a world very different than our own.

Well that does happen to be my style. ;)

But you may be forgetting something: if the cost is learning one only has to raise how much learning it takes to keep magic at that constant level.  If we're talking average Medieval life-expectancy of 35 years then if it takes 60 years to get to the good stuff then on average you're not going to get a lot of mages with the good stuff.  And they might not live long enough to use it.  Heck, what if it takes 35 years of working at it to even start on magic?  Forget about life-expectancy, who's going to spend that much of their life in pursuit of basic-level power?  Don't knock learning as a limit till you've thought about how hard it can be.

We're also talking about magic in a vacuum, focusing only on costs while forgetting about other factors that can limit magic.  Weakpoints, for one: having all the magic in the world won't save you if there's something that can get around it, be it a special material (or perhaps a common one) or simply a well-thought-out plan.  Lack of variety is another one: if all the world's got are spells of divination and other subtle stuff you can be the world's most powerful mage, but you're just as vulnerable as the next schemer to a well-placed sword.

[Eladris]

I'm not sure I like costs associated with magic for game settings.  One of the modifications to D&D 4e I've really enjoyed is unlimited "basic" magic in the form of At-Will powers.  There was nothing fun about using your lone spell in previous editions and then flailing away with a quarterstaff or sling for the rest of the day.

That being said, I think it's tough to not have some built in cost as a storytelling device.  I prefer costs that have social ramifications rather than meta-physical.  Scarring, taboo, etc. are more interesting to me than some rough and arbitrary boundary imposed by "the universe" or magic itself.  The latter just makes a lot of magic systems feel hokey (namely the Wheel of Time, where everyone a main character meets after book 3 is "stronger in the One Power then anyone since the Age of Legends" blah).

[Mason]

I had a few outlines for short stories I want to write (someday). The only people in the stories fantasy world are children. It was actually pretty interesting, as they would study relentlessly to harness a gift that would leave them just as they came to understand and be able to harness its full potential. Such is life.
  I don't see how it could fit into a games actual mechanics though. Just a thought.

[Steerpike]

[blockquote=Sarisa]The only people in the stories fantasy world are children. It was actually pretty interesting, as they would study relentlessly to harness a gift that would leave them just as they came to understand and be able to harness its full potential. Such is life.
I don't see how it could fit into a games actual mechanics though. Just a thought. [/blockquote]I'm planning on similar characters in Xell, the Innocent.  They're meant to haev a William Blake/Phillip Pullman feel; basically they're spellcasters who have tons of power during their youth, but it rapidly dwindles and dissappears during puberty.

On the more general topic, my favorite cost for magic is the Lovecraftian option, sanity.  Probably best implemented in the Warhammer 40k universe.

[Superfluous Crow]

Sanity is pretty neat i agree. Warhammer also uses the out-of-control option where the magic either goes horribly awry or burns up yourself.

[Matt Larkin (author)]

I tried the sanity variant in Unearthed Arcana (for 3.5 D&D, though it came from d20 Call of Cthulu), but found it didn't work for me or my group.

The options in WFRP sounds similar to that CC, unless that's the same game you're talking about. It worked pretty well.

[Matt Larkin (author)]

and prior to Rand purifying the source, madness for men.[/spoiler]


Actually, the idea of exhaustion brings me to Shadowrun's drain mechanic. I think it works great for a game system. You can use unlimited magic, but trying magic near your limits is liable to tire you (i.e. deal some stun damage--push it far enough and you can knock yourself out, maybe even kill yourself). I think it's great for games and captures the typical flavor of the cost of magic in many works. Unfortunately, it's not terribly original as a mechanic in literature.

[Eladris]

I like exhaustion for a cost of magic mechanic in games, but for the same reason I like 4th edition: physical and mental exhaustion can be used as a cost for all exertion, leveling the playing field in terms of availability of actions across all classes and roles.

You're right, though, in that my main gripe with WoT was the availability of magic and not necessarily the cost.  I enjoyed the madness aspect more in the character of Taim than Rand (Therin gets old, but this is probably a product of my opinions on the series than the actual writing) and generally like sanity as a cost for magic.  Warhammer, as pointed out, is a really good example; psykers, lashback, Chaos, etc. -- all great stuff!

What about physical health as a cost?  Not just life, but loss of blood/limbs/etc?  We mentioned forcibles from the Runelords series in another thread, but not here and its one of my favorites.  Basically, by using brands that channel a specific trait, the "Grace" or "Strength", etc., of one person can be transferred to another.  The process cripples the giver and imposes the cost of care on the taker.  It's a really delicate and beautifully thought out system.

[Lmns Crn]

I cheat; I dodge the issue entirely.

The whole idea of magic having some kind of cost or currency associate with it is tied up with the idea of magic being vastly more powerful than comparable non-magic solutions. This shows up all over the place: magic is either more powerful or more versatile (or both) than the kinds of things characters can do without access to it. If you treat it that way, of course you need some sort of limiting factor to keep it from getting out of hand. By convention, one of the most commonly-used limiting factors is that magic has limited use before its wielder has to rest.

But if you don't ramp up magic's power to enormous levels in the first place, there's no reason you need a limiting factor.

So, I've scaled things back. Magic still provides mages with unusual abilities in the Jade Stage, and allows them to do things that would be impossible for non-mages. But it doesn't replace conventional, non-magic ability. Mages don't get to wipe out whole battlefields full of soldiers with a flick of the wrist, become invisible, mind-reading super-spies with a couple of incantations, and so on. They get some interesting tools that may help them with these professions and tasks, but they're not catapaulted to excellence simply by virtue of knowing magic. There's still a need for soldiers, sailors, doctors, scientists, diplomats, spies, bodyguards, assassins, and the like-- mages aren't taking their jobs.

So, mages get to flex their magical muscles as much as they like to. Their ability to "magically multitask" is limited only by their concentration, and their power to sustain effects for long periods is limited only by their physical and mental fatigue.

It's important to note that this is exactly the way non-magical skills and concentration and fatigue work. Multitasking with magic uses the same mechanics as playing chess while decrypting a coded message while doing your taxes. Long periods of magic use mentally fatigue you just like marathon calculus sessions, all-night deadline-rush writing projects, or having dinner with your in-laws who insist upon talking about politics constantly. Long periods of magic use physically fatigue you just like long periods of moving boxes, playing basketball, or punching nazis in the face.

I'm really proud of this, and I think it's an important type of mechanic for making magic feel the way I want it to: i.e., not dissimilar from various types of real-world specialized mental disciplines (like being a nuclear physicist, a cardiovascular surgeon, an avant-garde musician, a test pilot of experimental aircraft, etc.) Essentially, it means there's not a discrete "magic system" that I'm working with; just a view of magic that fits fairly seamlessly into the existing system.

[Matt Larkin (author)]

As an aside, I think if the heroes don't have access to magic the need for a cost is somewhat mitigated.

In Conan, only evil sorcerers seem to magic, but we don't know that the magic made them evil or if they paid a price for it. Song of Ice and Fire seems similar.

[Llum]

In Conan iirc magic is akin to demon-worship.

As for ASoIaF,[spoiler] can you really say that Daenerys Targaryen is evil?

And the red witch character, is she evil? How about the Onion Knight?

Finally, is Eddard Starks wife really evil because she ressurected?[/spoiler]

[Matt Larkin (author)]

[spoiler]No but the witch that does the spell for Daenerys Targaryen is evil.

And the red witch character, is she evil? Maybe.
How about the Onion Knight? Did he do magic?
Finally, is Eddard Starks wife really evil because she ressurected? - she doesn't do magic, she is victimized by it[/spoiler]