Magic System design

#1

What are your favorite magic systems? What makes it your favorite? What systems do a good job of defining non-combat effects, as opposed to combat-oriented ones?

I’ve read up an ok amount on spell systems and game design in general, the best source of which I’ve read is “Design Patterns of Successful Role-Playing Games” by Whitson John Kirk III. Check out pages 164 to 260 for most of the relevant information.

One thing that’s really been holding me back from my game’s design is a working magic system. Here’s a kind of break down of what I got so far:

  • There are four sources of magic: divine, ancestral (spirits within), abyssal (spirits without), and runic
  • There are four categories of spells: offense (versus targets), affect (versus objects), support (versus allies or self), obtain (versus non-existing entities)
  • Each source of magic specializes in two of each category
  • Spell slots are unlocked by the player’s choice as they develop. There are no concrete class-provided abilities, and instead you develop a path specialized towards magic to gain spell slots
  • Spells are leveled based on your source. Casting a spell has two costs: A number of spell slots equal to the spell’s described cost, and a metaphysical damage cost to represent the effort required to cast, which is equal to the spell’s tier you unlock it at. Think of it as “spriritual hit points”, the cost of which can be reduced by specializing against specific spells.

From there, it otherwise functions very similarly to D&D 5e, but because there are no concrete classes the spell list is EXTREMELY open, and this is the primary part I’m having a ton of trouble balancing.

7 Likes
#2

Honestly I just bail on any system that has highly codified magic. If I were to design a system with magic these days I’d just use the general resolution mechanic and have magic give fictional positioning to the character to do flashy, creative stuff.

11 Likes
#3

I imagine you’d like Ars Magica’s magic system a lot, then!

5 Likes
#4

For me the question of magic systems fuses two concerns:

  • how do the fictional metaphysics work?
  • how do I negotiate narrative authority with players?

The reason it’s such a perennial question seems to be that magic is difficult to define in the fiction and thus unlike other kinds of fictional control over the narrative, can’t be bounded. However, in sufficiently narrative systems, it turns out that magic isn’t necessarily any trickier to negotiate than other kinds of in-fiction phenomena. The difference, I think, is the idea that we need to have a complex understanding of the fictional metaphysics.

Crap! Meeting starting. Can’t finish my thesis. TLDR What Would A Good Non-Magic Narrative System Do?

4 Likes
#5

Honestly I love the Mage playbook style: Answer a few questions about what your power source is, and use that to entertain the fiction.

the problem with any codiied magic system I’ve ever run into is that it eventually turns into science with the bending of it’s rules and hard limitations.

8 Likes
#6

I’m in the more open-ended camp as well. Ars Magica and Mage: the Ascension have that kind of “here are your spheres of influence” plus “here’s about what you can do and/or how much it’ll cost you” combination of guidelines, and whatever individual actions are pretty freeform.

In almost the complete opposite direction, I also like the kind of point-buy stuff that Champions/Hero System and GURPS had going. There wasn’t anything particularly “magic” about it, but the idea of a menu of effects with commensurate costs that balanced with each other (supposedly) made me happy. A 10-point effect does x damage and costs y to power, a 20-point effect does 2x damage and costs 2y to power, this 10-point effect is roughly equivalent to that 10-point effect, and so on. This is all in theory, though. In practice, it’s just a lot of being bogged down in math. Which is a lot less fun than, “Stand back; I’m about to warp reality in some unforeseen way with a single die roll that will tell me if it goes the way I think it will.”

Out of curiosity, what’s the motivation for the two separate costs for spellcasting?

6 Likes
#7

It’s the mechanic I came up with for the concept of emphasizing being caster-focused versus just pumping up a ton of spell slots. A well-trained spellcaster exerts much less effort on casting magic, and not being well-trained also exposes you to danger against creatures who might damage you in non-physical ways.

Additionally, spell slots are useful in other ways - I’m thinking about rebranding it to something differently named, since it can be used in abilities such as bardic inspirations and such.

Something worth explaining: The Abyss is an immaterial world atop the material plane where spirits go when their physical body perishes. Heroic characters (PCs!) are capable of leaving the protection of their body when they in order to do more after death. A lot of creatures that inhabit that realm typically will deal metaphysical damage when causing harm - thus, those who focus on casting will typically have an easier time dealing with such harmful creatures. Since the system is super flexible with how progression functions, this is a way to reward casters with specialization. Slots are relatively easy to obtain, but your metaphysical points are capped by your highest (for caster types) and lowest (for martial types), plus your rank, so unless you’re specializing in spells to lower the metaphysical cost of the magic you use you’re much more limited on the usefulness of your spell pool.

3 Likes
#8

Hi, I’m new here. But i have an idea for a magic system and would love thoughts and feedback.
I’m thinking of a system where you can do what you want, if you make your roll. You have items in the fiction that can modify your roll (positively and negatively) and you have a skill level that gives you a Plus. So the more the try to do, the better you have to roll to succeed with it. I like it in general… what I don’t like is the big chart I’ve made to delineate the negatives you get at certain power levels or effects.

For example, if you’d like to throw a 3d6 fireball, it’s a -3 to your magic roll. If you want that fireball to fill a room, add another -2. The dice system is PBTA-ish, so you’ll roll on 2D6 to determine 106-failure / 7-8 Limited Success / 9-12 Success. If you have two levels (+2) and your standing on a Lai line, (+2) you have an even roll -1.

Is that too wonky?

4 Likes
#9

Hi Moe! I’m not super familiar with PBTA in terms of what the expected evaluations of outcomes should be, but check out that book I recommended on TTRPG game design, it’s got some good clues about how to go about designing an impact like that. It’s a free PDF you can find by just searching the name! “Design Patterns of Successful Role-Playing Games”

4 Likes
#10

Personally, I like how Dresden Files (Fate) handles magic.

I’ve created a Fate magic of my own that some people like.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0kstQO9Gc1dME5BRXJnTjhfMkU

Basically, I make the distinction of the following magic domains:
MAGIC DOMAINS:

  • Magic Force
    (energy, light, elements:fire/air, kinetic energy)
  • Nature Magic
    (plant/herb, heal, life force, elements:earth/water, animal)
  • Mind Magic
    (mind control, sensory/mental illusion, magic veil)
  • Spirit Magic
    (summon spirit/supernatural being, divination, insight)
  • Alchemy
    (transform matter, enchant object, make potion)
  • Transfiguration
    (shapeshift, enhance skill, change appearance)
  • Metaphysics
    (teleport, open astral portal, astral projection, bend reality)

Usually, I assign a magic domain to a character and then wing it.

4 Likes
#11

But my absolutely favorite magic system is Unknown Armies with Adepts and Avatars.

5 Likes
#12

So I am designing a generic roleplaying system for personal use and I handle magic a little differently. One of the core concepts of the game is working together with the GM and party to design your own skills and combat powers. Players can create 3 combat powers that are essentially spells (when placed in a setting that is appropriate) and are balanced and approved upon by the GM. There is no readying of spells ahead of time as I feel that constricts players options.

The system is also very modular as the base system does not account for things like cantrips and non combat spells so players can have a grimoire of another 3 spells that are more applicable outside of combat. The group in session zero can also set rules on whether they want to use a spell ready system (a module included in the book) or an ingredient based system etc.

The system is also levelless and classless so players can grow naturally through roleplay, learning new spells through practice, grimoire acquisition or by even seeing spells be cast and attempting to recreate them (with silly or disastrous effects when failing to do so).

The goal is to reward players for creativity and not constrict them to a specific set of rules and list of spells. The GM is given the ability to balance the spells so that they are not too overpowered but can take into consideration how that spell can grow to be more powerful through progression.

Hope that makes sense!

2 Likes
#13

Slightly off-topic, but did anyone ever play Secret of Evermore? I’ve not yet found one, but I did like the alchemy system which required you find different components to power your “spells”.

Another interesting magic system in a video game was Magicka, where you had to combine elements to make a spell. Not great gameplay at a table, but it was a fun idea to see on the screen.

5 Likes
#14

I have played both and absolutely love the ideas they present. I love games that incorporate team attacks and games that use world lore to help immerse players. Alchemy is such a cool, underdeveloped system.

2 Likes
#15

I am a serious adherent of the “bullshit artist” style of rpg magic. Make it sound like magic, tell me how you think it should work, then give me a possible downside if the dice go badly; nigh-unpronouncable terms, sympathetic links, and fetishy bits involving seemingly mundane items get you bonus points from me. I have sometimes enjoyed domain- or sphere-based magic systems, but it entirely depends on how interested I am in the fiction for those varieties. I never cared all that much for Mage, but I love the Malazan Book of the Fallen system that involved pocket dimensions called warrens that each had a flavor or style that could be tapped by users for different things.

4 Likes
#16

I like magic that is non-vancian (spell-based), generally, because I think it’s too limiting. But I’m open to both rule based magic, and poetic/storybook magic aside from that and actually think it’s interesting to include both types in the same world at times.

3 Likes
#17

Have you seen how Freebooters of the Frontiers handles magic? A magic-user has a Power stat spends that to cast a spell, much like the way you describe it. It has a table of the effects you can ‘buy’ — range, # of creatures affected, significance of magic (parlor trick on up to miraculous, although I’m not naming the categories right). Spell names are randomly generated, and then it’s up to the player/character to define what the name means, which provides a nifty creative constraint.

6 Likes
#18

I really dig that idea, @Christo of gamifying magic in that sort of way to make you think on your toes and use it as a sort of resource. Magic is such a cool idea that I feel is often implemented in the most mundane of ways!

3 Likes
#19

The magic in Freebooters is even cooler (IMHO) in that you can push to use a spell differently in different situations as long as you can sell the GM on it. All of it is based on the spell’s name.

7 Likes
#20

I will be looking into this! Never heard of the system but it is on my radar now!!

2 Likes