Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

[lordredraven]

During my spare time at work, and when not sketching Pufnstuf, I have been kicking around the idea of a fantasy hero campaign. Most of the world fluff I have worked out. The question I am stuck is how to let players have access to spells. I know the dangers of MPs making spells so cheap that wizards will have the right spell at the right time every time. I am more leaning toward not allowing any frameworks for them. Singularly bought powers. I have also been reading in FH that many campaigns like Valdorian do this with a cost multiplier to make the spells cheap enough to have a few well defined effects. What does everyone think of these cost multipliers? Have you used them for spells in your campaigns, and if so how did they turn out?

 

The other stumbling block I came across was if I do use say a .5 multiplier to make spells slightly cheaper, do I do this for magic like abilities that aren't spells? Am I going to force the dragon-man player, hypothetically, to pay the normal cost for his breath weapon, when the character that just defines it as a magic spell gets it at half off?

 

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

Just set campaign guidelines for limitations on spells like gestures, incantations and some magical seeming stuff that works with your campaign( for example, not vs blooded silver) and your cost should be good. Personally, I went the multipower route though and only have one even approaching a "swiss army wizard". Define magic how you think it should work with the limits you think it should have that your players can deal with and in my experience at least, you should be good.

[Netzilla]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

One of the best ways I've found for limiting magic overuse is through requiring all spells Cost END from an Endurance Reserve with a slow recovery. Set reasonable limits on the size of the END Reserve and you won't have to worry about wizards casting spells for everything. How big this is depends on how powerful you're willing to let spells get. If the typical spell is limited to 40-50 AP, that comes to an average of 4-5 END per spell. Limit the reserve to 40-60 END and limit the recovery to 6-8 per hour and wizards will have to be a bit pickier about when and where they use their spells. Plus you don't have to make the AP limit a hard limit has higher AP spells will have a high cost in END (and if you're using Requires a Skill Roll, the skill roll penalty will be rough as well).

 

As to using cost multipliers, there's a number of ways to do this. Officially:

* The Turakian Age, gives all spells a 1/3 cost break (but not for other supernatural powers) and the spells (in my oppinion) have a very "D&D" flavor to them. Power-wise, they're generally in the 60 AP range though several get higher. Typically this makes individual spells (considering they typically have around -1 or -2 worth of limis) pretty cheap (5-10 pts each). This makes magic very powerful, especially at character point ranges of 75/75+.

* Tuala Morn makes all spells skill-based in cost, so typical spells effectively only cost a few points each. However, the spells themselves tends to have several limitations that make them less "D&D" and more mythological in feel.

* The Valdorian Age magic system gets a bit involved. It makes use of a Multipower for general spells and they have a mandatory -2 1/2 Valdorian Sorcery limitation, making individual spells rather cheap (2-3 points each) and the pool is usually somewhere around 20 points. However, you also have to purchase and END Reserve (with very restricted Recovery) (which costs around 10 points), a Summon for a 200 pt "patron" (around 15-20 pts) and a handful of related skills. The main limiting factors with VA Sorcery are in the Favors/Debt system where all spells only work at the behest of various supernatural beings, leaving the sorcerer in danger of owing some very bad things some very big favors.

 

Note: all of the above points values are off the top of my head and may not be exact but they should be in the ballpark.

[darelf]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

#1 best way to control magic:

 

Allow only spells that you ( the GM ) have created. They then buy spells from that list.

 

that's all I got

[Old Man]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

Could try an EC, maybe.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

I've got Turakian Age on order, and haven't yet run FH 5th Edition, but really, I'll probably use them. They make spells inexpensive (or, rather affordable), but given that a wizard will probably have to drop 10 points to get a decent effect, while the party warrior can spend those same points on 3 martial arts maneuvers, or 2 HTH combat levels, or (if he's REALLY focussed) +5 OCV with his favorite pigsticker ...*

 

 

*I know that non-spellcasters can buy super-skill type effects. I also know, from my 4th Edition FH game, none of them WILL.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

Turakian Age Spells themselves are actually pretty cheap.

 

It's the Skill needed to not blow yourself up that isn't.

 

Fighters are buying Martial Maneuvers, CSLs and WF. Mages are buying Spells and Spell Skills. from my experience they aren't off balance very much, if at all - the one TA campaign I got into lasted 3 sessions sadly.

[Markdoc]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

Basically the cost multiplier (shouldn't that be cost divisor?) is a way of getting all the advantages of a multipower, without any of the disadvantages.

 

To put it in perspective, using the spells straight out of the Grimoire, the 10 points mentioned earlier could buy you +4 SPD (page 13), create a wand that lets you cast 3d6 RKA fireballs plus a whole bunch of other cool stuff (page 130), bury an opponent miles below the earth's crust (page 77), create a small continuous NND does body that will soon slay the stongest, most heavily armoured warrior, (p40), summon a 395 point mummy, etc, etc.

 

Changing the divisor will help (a lot), but it won't solve the fundamental problem. Rather than rely simply on a mechanic to restrain your mages, I agree with what others have suggested: build your magic system (and preferrably restrict the spells available) to give your magic the "flavour" you want. Various mechanics to restrict the number of times magic can be used per day/encounter is another good idea.

 

I do use multipowers (and other frameworks) and so far have never had a problem with a "swiss army mage", even though my games tend to run for years, because of the way the system is built up and the fact that I build all the spells and control access to them.

 

cheers, Mark

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

Basically the cost multiplier (shouldn't that be cost divisor?) is a way of getting all the advantages of a multipower' date=' without any of the disadvantages. [/quote']

 

Well, HD makes you multiply by a decimal when you enter the number.

[Fitz]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

I don't allow any Power Frameworks in my campaign, except for individual spells with variable effects. I use the 0.33 cost multiplier proposed in TA (for spells only - innate magical abilities are at full cost) and have found it to work fine in practice. I limit magic use by decreeing that it always costs Long Term END, and must cost END (no zero-END spells in my campaign, thanks very much!).

 

The cost multiplier makes individual spells cheap enough to be reasonably affordable (especially if heavily Limited), but not so cheap that anyone will start with a repertoire of hundreds of spells.

 

I've tried a whole lot of different magic systems, and none of them has been perfect. This one has the advantage of simplicity, which is a big plus in my book.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

I really don't like the cost multipliers. I greatly prefer frameworks. To each his own I guess.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Spell cost multipliers? Use them or not

 

I use a hybrid of my own design from Killer Shrike's (http://www.killershrike.com) system. I have casters purchase an "IVPP" -- an InVariable Power Pool. They pick spells from the list I built from the spells I translated, and then slot the real cost into the VPP, using 2x the total VPP value (to give them plenty of manueverability). KS uses a 3x VPP model and his own spells, but you can find my notes on the topic with a quick search through the boards. I've done 5 levels of Wizard and 4 levels of Cleric, and KS has done Damn Near All of 'Em, IIRC. Feel free to pull from either, that's why we put 'em up.