Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Variant rule for a variant setting

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Variant rule for a variant setting

    Paradox pools depend on the highest dot level Arcanum in a spell instead of the Gnosis of the caster: one die in the pool per extra Reach per dot of Arcanum. So 1 extra Reach on a spell using Matter 5 yields 5 dice in the Paradox pool. Opinions and feedback? The intent is to fit the rules better to a vaguely sword-and-sorcery setting, where mages risk causing mighty havoc by working mighty spells, not simply by being mighty in themselves.

  • #2
    Originally posted by LadyLens View Post
    Paradox pools depend on the highest dot level Arcanum in a spell instead of the Gnosis of the caster: one die in the pool per extra Reach per dot of Arcanum. So 1 extra Reach on a spell using Matter 5 yields 5 dice in the Paradox pool. Opinions and feedback? The intent is to fit the rules better to a vaguely sword-and-sorcery setting, where mages risk causing mighty havoc by working mighty spells, not simply by being mighty in themselves.
    If you want to make spells harder to cast just remove one free reach per level.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Epimetheus View Post
      If you want to make spells harder to cast just remove one free reach per level.
      Harder isn’t the point. The intent is to make the risks associated with Paradox dependent on the power of the spell instead of the power of the caster.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by LadyLens View Post
        Paradox pools depend on the highest dot level Arcanum in a spell instead of the Gnosis of the caster: one die in the pool per extra Reach per dot of Arcanum. So 1 extra Reach on a spell using Matter 5 yields 5 dice in the Paradox pool. Opinions and feedback? The intent is to fit the rules better to a vaguely sword-and-sorcery setting, where mages risk causing mighty havoc by working mighty spells, not simply by being mighty in themselves.
        Interesting concept, but I don't think It's going to have the result you want. 3-dots is when an Arcanum really "comes online", especially when it comes to combat magic. This means you've only made flashy combat easier for Gnosis 7+ mages. It would actually be a huge nerf for starting characters who would be rolling 3x the paradox for their combat spells.

        This change would make it easier for high-Gnosis Mages to use low-level magic, but it's not as much as a help as it might seem. For one, more Gnosis means also more mana you can spend to mitigate the increased Paradox. For another, a Master of an Arcanum is already going to have buckets of free Reach for their one and two dot spells, they should rarely need to over-Reach at all. And Rotes make everyone a Master for the purposes of Reach. The rules change would only be a real benefit if your high-Gnosis mage makes a habit of using Arcana they only have a couple dots in (and no Rotes) to begin with. And again, proper combat magic starts at 3-dots for most Arcana; being able to cast 1-dot spells with less Paradox doesn't help in combat much. Also, your Paradox pool goes up by one for every previous time that character has rolled paradox in the same scene, irrespective of Gnosis, making repeatedly over-Reaching quite dangerous either way.

        Originally posted by LadyLens View Post
        Harder isn’t the point. The intent is to make the risks associated with Paradox dependent on the power of the spell instead of the power of the caster.
        The system already does this indirectly: you have more free Reach the more you exceed the Arcana requirements. If you are able to cast a four or five dot spell, you almost never need to over-Reach for one and two dot spells, thus avoiding risking Paradox in the first place (unless Sleepers are around, but that's mostly a separate issue).

        Your concern seems to be that a higher-Gnosis Mage loses the ability to cast lower-level magic without risking larger Paradoxes. But this isn't really the case in practice. Consider a Gnosis 2 mage who over-Reaches to cast a Fraying spell at Sensory Range: they are now risking one die of Paradox. Compare to the Gnosis 5 Master, who can cast the same spell without over-Reaching at all, with a free Reach left over to boot. Yes, the Master rolls two more dice per over-Reach, but odds are they don't need to over-Reach in the first place. Your change would cause the Gnosis 2 Mage to roll three paradox dice instead, while the Gnosis 5 Mage is unaffected.

        To achieve your intended result, you could maybe look at modifying Rotes instead, which already make paradox significantly less of a problem for low-dot spells, and have a decreasing effect the higher level the spell. Perhaps make lower level Rotes easier to create and/or xp efficient to learn.




        The longer I study science the more I am convinced that it is functionally indistinguishable from what our ancestors would refer to as sorcery. And I would know, being both scientist and sorcerer.

        Comment


        • #5
          I read the intent of this change to be more punishing for high level magic (more powerful, flashy stuff), but/and leveling the effect across all levels of gnosis (more or less). And I think this achieves that effect fairly well.


          This changes emphasizing that the complexity of the magic is the most dangerous thing, rather than pushing spell factors - and I think I like that, and it may result it there being more frequent/bigger paradoxes.

          But It is a good point that high level mages will have more mana to buy off paradox without risking any greater amounts. I wouldn’t expect it to be much of a problem in my games (I personally haven’t played/ran a game above power stat 5), but I’m sure that varies. If that is a concern, you may want to consider adding additional drawbacks to having high gnosis, as bigger paradox pools are supposed to be the main one.
          Last edited by Seraph Kitty; 02-15-2021, 09:40 PM.


          Second Chance for
          [ATTACH=CONFIG]temp_709_1572548741915_354[/ATTACH]
          A Beautiful Madness

          Comment


          • #6
            I guess it could work, if you removed the free reach with Arcanum mastery.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Epimetheus View Post
              If you want to make spells harder to cast just remove one free reach per level.
              Originally posted by MovingMind View Post
              I guess it could work, if you removed the free reach with Arcanum mastery.
              oooh, dang. If you only got free reach for each dot your arcana Exceeds the practice? That alone would be really punishing; pretty much guaranteeing that any work of Un/Making has paradox, unless it’s done in a ritual. And the 4 dot practices are scarcely better- they’d still have the utility (for a Master / rote) that they could be used in combat without paradox, but only at their weakest.
              I rather like that; it’s pretty mean.

              I think that alone would curb the use of higher practices at all levels of the game, and incentivize finding clever ways to “set up” big spells or find a way to get what you want out of lower practices.
              Combined with LadyLens’ hack... just the instant + at range basic combo for use in combat means that a mage’s very best spell will be risking hefty paradox - unless they find a way to be clever.

              One thing to watch out for, though, is “thrown” spells. If you have to scrounge for every Reach, I’d bet these become much more common. [at my table, most of us considered those rules to be ‘too complicated for not enough benefit’ most of the time.] If LadyLens is aiming for overtly magical stuff to be less common, the incentive to chuck a fireball instead might be counter productive.
              On the other hand, if the goal is to force mages to take bigger risks for their best stuff, thrown spells could reliably ‘escalate’ the scene; once someone is throwing obvious magic, everyone else is really motivated to Handle Them.


              edit: this idea was brought up in multiple posts
              Last edited by Seraph Kitty; 02-17-2021, 06:01 PM.


              Second Chance for
              [ATTACH=CONFIG]temp_709_1572548741915_354[/ATTACH]
              A Beautiful Madness

              Comment


              • #8
                The main intents are to make Paradox a function of a spell’s power (Arcanum and Reach) instead of the mage’s (Gnosis), and also to give mages a very strong reason to be very careful about risking Paradox, especially with higher-dot effects.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think your hack accomplishes both of those things.
                  By my reading of the gnosis chart, characters would be dealing with higher paradox pools than they otherwise would throughout most of the game - which I would agree is strong reason to be careful about paradox, and does emphasize that mighty spells wreck mighty havoc. While gnosis 7+ mages can potentially get lower paradox pools than they would with RAW, as Scriptorium points out, I think that there's still a substantial enough pool that it counts as a strong reason to be careful about paradox throughout any gnosis rating. And it is neatly tied to the rating of the spell, not the power of the mage, which accomplishes your first goal rather directly.

                  One of the questions I have, though, is what long-term impacts do you find desirable as a result of this system change, in regards to how PCs play mages, spend their exp, and conceive of their character's choices - even if those impacts are not 'the goal'?


                  Second Chance for
                  [ATTACH=CONFIG]temp_709_1572548741915_354[/ATTACH]
                  A Beautiful Madness

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I’m not sure how it will play out, of course, but I suspect that the main effect will be to encourage players to focus mostly on the lower end applications of their characters’ Arcana, and to spend more on mundane skills, especially since rotes are now extremely valuable due to allowing additional Reach.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What if you use a system that give free reaches based on Gnosis instead of the Arcanum rating? I mean, in addition to make Paradox base dice pool Arcanum dependent? This way, i think that you still make difficult to cast high level spells and still make it easier to high Gnosis characters to cast such spells.
                      To clarify my suggestion: a character with Gnosis 4 casting a Patterning spell would have a 4-dice base Paradox (because it requires an Arcanum rating of 4), and gains one Free Reach (because of his Gnosis 4, which is equal to the Arcanum rating needed to cast the spell). You could tweak this numbers a little to create the appropriate level of dificulty.


                      "The universe is basically an animal. It grazes on the ordinary. It creates infinite idiots just to eat them."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Focusing on the lower-rating arcana effects and investing more in skills do seem like potential outcomes - and, it sounds like, desirable outcomes from your perspective.
                        Some other potential outcomes might be...
                        - As Scriptorian pointed out that there wouldn't be any ineherent drawbacks to high gnosis, and with better mana resources to buy off paradox, players might be incentivized to boost gnosis as much as possible.
                        - You point out that rotes become very valuable for the free reach they provide. There could also be more investment in Praxis, as bonus steps or reach in the primary spell factor are an option from exceptional successes.
                        - There could also be a stronger push also craft legacies, especially ones centered around their most favored spells, to avoid paradox altogether.
                        And because of how Arcane EXP is earned and spent, these kind of investments in magical resources could be pretty likely.

                        I can also imagine seeking ways to get as much free reach as possible - such as by using more 'aimed spells', more rituals, trying to arrange circumstances so that high level magic isn't witnessed by sleepers, ect. And possibly players being more argumentative as to what magic would be "obvious to a Sleeper"

                        Some of these outcomes could be more or less desirable, and might influence whether to use or further alter the hack. I believe that this is the perspective some of the other posts were coming from when they talked about 'intent'.



                        Second Chance for
                        [ATTACH=CONFIG]temp_709_1572548741915_354[/ATTACH]
                        A Beautiful Madness

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X