Variable magic effects idea

[Deleriad]

Saw an interesting blog post by Goodman Games today for their DCC game which explained how they're implementing variable effects in a D&Dish style game. Basically, if you cast a magic missile successfully you know you'll get something like magic missile but not the details. This made me think how easy it would be to do it in RQ sorcery.

In sorcery the "effect" is based on skill so if your skill is 55% you could call the spell's effect "level 6." E.g. Enhance {Stat} adds +2 to the stat per level.

You could make this more variable by saying that the effect value depends on the actual number rolled. So if you succeed and roll 24 then the level of effect would be 3. To ginger it up a bit you could also say:
If you roll doubles your level of effect is doubled so rolling 33 would normally give level 4 but would be doubled to level 8.
If you roll a critical then the effect level is equal to your skill level doubled. E.g. skill of 63 is normally level 7 but if you roll a critical you get level 14.

This makes sorcery much less of a done deal. It's not very Gloranthan but it might make for a fun variation and if you like a little danger with your sorcery then you could say if you get a double and get a level of effect greater than you can normally achieve then there's a risk of "losing control.

Skill over 100? Add the excess to the level of effect you roll. E.g. skill 114 would add 2 levels of effect (14%) to the number you get from your roll. Added after any doubling.

 

[PhilHibbs]

Aah, sorcery, a subject that I'm much more at home in!

This makes sorcery much less of a done deal. It's not very Gloranthan...

Interesting idea - and I don't see anything that makes this "un-Gloranthan" (imagining a House Committee on Un-Gloranthan Activities - sounds like a Lunar idea to me). Some might say that Sorcery is scientific and predictable, but having a variable level of effect is no different to rolling dice for Wrack damage. It does involve extra bookkeeping, though - I have the effects of the party sorcerer's Enhance spells built into the character spreadsheets, so with this, every time she rolls the dice I'd have to change the stat bonuses that they get. And if she rolls low then she'll be tempted to cast it again if there is a tough fight coming up, slowing down the action.

As writ it's going to reduce the effect of the average spell, the "double on a double" (update: and the crit, which I missed when I replied originally... double max effect, wow, that's pretty huge) mitigates this a little.

I think a good place to use this would be for experimental spells that haven't been perfected yet, or recently learned spells, that maybe haven't been taught but learned from imperfect materials (e.g. another order's stolen grimoire). Then you'd need some mechanic for determining when the bugs in the spell have been fixed.

 

[Deleriad]

You're right to say that it would possibly cause frustration, especially with characteristic altering spells because you would never know what you're getting and there would be a lot of impromptu maths involved. As quite a lot of RQ sorcery is pretty functional then it might be just too wacky. Having Marvin the Magus with 97% Wrack rolling a 12 and ending up with a spell that ought to be called "tickle" might be good for laughs but possibly not great for long-term sustainability.

What it would do is, in many ways, roughly halve the power of sorcery. E.g. if your skill is 100% then your average "effect level" is going to be something like 5.5 rather than 10.

 

[PhilHibbs]

What it would do is, in many ways, roughly halve the power of sorcery. E.g. if your skill is 100% then your average "effect level" is going to be something like 5.5 rather than 10.

6.9 actually. *Update* No it's more than that... recalculating... 7.34 including the double-on-a-double.
Mean average effect levels on a success for various skill levels:
25% = 2.6
40% = 3.42
50% = 4.18
51% = 4.63
75% = 6.23
80% = 6.44
81% = 6.88
95% = 7.73
100% = 7.34
101% = 8.14
The big jump at 101 is where a 99 goes from a fail to a double-success. Oh, and it should be 9.14 due to the +1 bonus.
*Update*: Just corrected a mistake at lower skill levels where any roll between 1 and 9 would be considered a double because the first and last digits are the same... oops...

 

[PhilHibbs]

An interesting statistical quirk is that your "average effect on a success" drops dramatically for skill levels 1-9 and then jumps back up again. This is because a 1% skill will always get a Level 2 success, a 2% skill gets a Level 2 success half of the time, 3% gets Level 2 one third of the time... etc. This is clearly outweighed by the increased chance of success though, "average level of effect on a success" is a somewhat misleading statistic at low skill levels.

 

[Deleriad]

Those numbers are higher than I expected. Clearly the chance for a critical is bringing up the average. It would mean that someone with a skill of 100% has a 1/10 chance of getting a spell with an effect level of 20. Bit too gonzo for my tastes.

You could make it simpler and less gonzo:
If you succeed then your effect level is equal to the number rolled divide by 10 rounded up as normal. On a critical your effect level is equal to your skill/10 plus 1. E.g. skill of 73, means that a critical gives you effect level 9 (8+1). You could then, if you wanted, say that for damage spells (e.g. Wrack) the damage done simply equals the effect level generated. That actually looks relatively sane and reduces the number of dice rolls.

 

[Mugen]

Why would you restrain yourself to Sorcery ?

I had a similar idea some time ago : use the 10s on the d100 roll as a "Degre of Success".

On a critical roll, the die was read as a "10". In case of a skill above 100, the 10s above 100 were added to the DoS.

Then, I used this for every aspect of the game. For instance, damage was DoS+weapon bonus.

 

[Deleriad]

Why would you restrain yourself to Sorcery ?

I had a similar idea some time ago : use the 10s on the d100 roll as a "Degre of Success".

On a critical roll, the die was read as a "10". In case of a skill above 100, the 10s above 100 were added to the DoS.

Then, I used this for every aspect of the game. For instance, damage was DoS+weapon bonus.

You're right. I have seen this system before. Back in the early 00s when I wasn't actually rpging but I kept dragging out my RQ3 books I remember theory testing it. For some reason though it just never felt very RQ-like to me. That said, it seems like a good mechanic if you embed it properly in the game.

 

[PhilHibbs]

I had a similar idea some time ago : use the 10s on the d100 roll as a "Degre of Success"...
Then, I used this for every aspect of the game. For instance, damage was DoS+weapon bonus.

Interesting idea. It has some knock-on effects that need to be ironed out, though, such as, how do you figure if a sorceror has successfully cast Enhance Damage on a particular weapon? How does this affect Truesword?

 

[simonh]

If you like the idea of unpredictable sorcerous magic effects, or just toning down the effectiveness of sorcerous magic in common situations the basic concept is fine.

How about using it for situations where a player is casting magic in a stressful situation or without preparation time. This would avoid complicating the actual skil roll and it's interpretation.

Just say that if the character is casting routine buffs such as characteristic boosts or weapons enhancements they have time to prepare and so get the maximum effect. In situations whwere they don't, like combat or off the cuff, use the die result to give the magnitude of effect.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Simulacrum]

Maybe you could extend standard casting time, to rounds rather than CAs, for a normal/full effect spell that can also be manipulated; then allow a "cantrip", a quick and dirty spell, unmanipulated, with a casting time in CAs and a variable intensity based on the dice roll.

Interesting ideas in this thread. I quite like the thought of a "spell slinger" with a fast and furious but slightly uncontrolled aproach to magic. It may also have an application for a non spell-caster making use of an artefact or potion to grant them use of magic they cannot normally do. The maximal outcome is based on the grimoire skill of the spell's provider, but something may well be lost in translation.

 

[Mugen]

I had a similar idea some time ago : use the 10s on the d100 roll as a "Degre of Success"...
Then, I used this for every aspect of the game. For instance, damage was DoS+weapon bonus.

Interesting idea. It has some knock-on effects that need to be ironed out, though, such as, how do you figure if a sorceror has successfully cast Enhance Damage on a particular weapon? How does this affect Truesword?

I think that in those cases I would require to compute damage as if a critical had occured.

 

[Deleriad]

Maybe you could extend standard casting time, to rounds rather than CAs, for a normal/full effect spell that can also be manipulated; then allow a "cantrip", a quick and dirty spell, unmanipulated, with a casting time in CAs and a variable intensity based on the dice roll.

That's a thought. It would work for a more overly swords&sorcery system where magic is normally expected to take a long time to cast so casting it in a hurry leads to unpredictability.

It might also work for an Ars Magica like separation between improvised magic and formula.

On the gonzo side, I quite like the possibility of run-away magic. E.g. say on a double you kept it and rolled again and they exploded so each double is rolled again. you might roll 44+66+53 for a total of 163, effect 17 and then have a "run away" table which gives some options for what happens if you cast magic with an effect higher than your skill level (mixture of good and bad options). Most PCs would spend a Hero Point to re-roll so they'll be safe most of time.
e.g. Runaway table. Roll d20 and add the excess levels you generated.

1-10: spell takes effect as cast
11: the spell forks. an exact duplicate is cast but with different, randomly selected targets.
12; the spell forks and you choose the targets.
13: spell explosion. All within the spell's effect level in metres except yourself take damage based on the spell;s effect level (use the wrack damage table)
14: spell explosion; You also take the damage.

And so on. rather gonzo but might fit a s&s setting where magic is dangerous and unpredictable.

 

[PhilHibbs]

...how do you figure if a sorceror has successfully cast Enhance Damage on a particular weapon?

I think that in those cases I would require to compute damage as if a critical had occured.

What I mean is, RAW says that the Grimoire skill has to be high enough at 2 points per 10% to cover the weapon's maximum rolled damage, so a 50% skill sorceror can't cast it on a 1d10+1 weapon but can cast it on a 1d10 weapon. With all weapons doing variable damage with no upper limit, what level of effect is reqiuired? It would have to be based on the weapon bonus, I think.

Also, with this system, you are by default allowing sorcerors to improve on their attainable level of success by spending extra time, since they can now succeed with a higher number thereby getting a higher level of success - not a problem, if that's what you want, just pointing out the knock-ons. It also goes some way towards restoring the average level of success nearer to the RAW.