One thing I like about OSR (and old school) games is that they are often somewhat simpler than modern games (but not always).
But I don't find "traditional" spell casting particularly simple. You have a caster level, a spell level, and these numbers are different (and the relation is not always obvious, although mostly if you divide caster level by two, that's your maximum spell level). In addition, the number of spell slots vary in non-predictable ways. And, of course, the spell level is not only connected to power, but certain spells are available in certain levels... AND they scale with CASTER level. Take fireball (3rd-level), for example; an incredibly powerful spell at higher levels, but not much stronger than sleep (1st-level) the first time you get it.
And don't get me started on the Cleric:
First, the cleric’s spell progression is very peculiar when compared to the magic-user and the elf. For example, a level 6 cleric gets access to spells of level 3 and 4 simultaneously for no obvious reason. Compare this to the magic-user: despite requiring a lot more XP to level up, the MU does not have access to level 4 spells until level 7.
Second, spell levels seem almost arbitrary. Cure Light Wounds (healing 1d6+1 HP) is a 1st level spells, while Cure Serious Wounds (2d6+2 HP) is a fourth level spell. With a 5th level spell, you can raise the dead... or create lots of food.
Then there are deities, which will punish clerics that stray away from their path – or that cast reversed spells, making these kinds of spells a bit less versatile than they appear.
[...]
the game allows clerics to research their own spells, but there seems to be no obvious parameters on how to do so, since the spells are so different. Moreover, it makes it harder to “convert” clerics to the options presented in this book. Because of this, you will find a few alternatives below to make your job easier if you want to use this book for clerics. In addition, we added a few options to tweak the cleric in various ways.
This is from my Alternate Magic, BTW. It contains many options to simplify (but also enhance, twist, etc.) old school magic systems. If that's what you're looking for, you'll certainly find something useful in this book!
Spell points, for example, are a good alternative; or using HP to power your spells. Both options are presented in the book, and they require a bit less bookkeeping than the usual system.
But I also have a radically minimalist version which I didn't include in the book, because it is not perfectly compatible with OSR spells... but it is close enough, IMO. And it has a few advantages: less analysis paralysis (the default action is casting the most powerful spell available), a single number to keep track of, and so on.
Anyway, here you go.
When you cast a spell, you do so at your maximum caster level. For example, a 10th level MU casting fireball deals 10d6 damage, or affects 10d6 HD of creatures of HD 4 or less, or heals a total of 10d6 damage, etc.
We'd have to rewrite most spells to be entirely dependent on caster level. There is no more "spell level".
The next time you cast a spell, you do so at one level lower (i.e., as a 9th level caster). The caster goes weaker during the day, and is recovered after a night of rest. This means a 10th-level caster can cast 10 spells, each less powerful than the last one.
But what if I am a 10th level wizard, and need to cast a 2d6 fireball against a measly kobold I found in my way? Well, you're casting as a 2nd level wizard. Roll 1d10 (because you're in 10th level); if you roll 1 or 2 (because you're casting at 2nd-level), you grow weaker (9th level), but otherwise you remain unchanged.
Maybe you can use 1d4 for the first few levels, to give the beginning MU a few extra spells before running dry, and go all the way up to 1d12 (d6 at level 5, d8 at 7, d10 at 9, and d12 from level 11 until 14). Maybe limit spells to level 10 to keep things simple... a 14th level spell-caster can cast at least four of them at full power!
Not sure if this is worth developing further (it requires re-writing most spells, as I've mentioned), but it seems promising.
Apparently my first post on this dissappered into the ether.
ReplyDeleteI loke this idea, but I wonder if it's worth instead of rewriting all spells to do a 'build a spell' system based on cantrips known. Cantrips cost no power and you attribute spell points to get specific effects. The idea of 'roll to see if you lose a spell point' could be a specific die roll, but I wonder at the idea of setting thresholds on a percentile for 'perfect cast' (no points lost) to lose 1, 1d4,1d6,2d4 spell points (2d4 is the highest I would go). Perhaps the balance may be that you can 'gamble' fewer spell points, and you cannot lose more than what you gamble. So if you are being clever with how you cast spells, you can get more out of them.
I also had the thought of taking your 'cap at 10 spell levels' and take a page from the spell point rules and have 'regular' spells up to 5th level (half the 'max spell level') with 6th and higher level effects being a different 'style' of spell more like rituals than combat spells. They are still available to the players but perhaps they require uses of skills (like your relevant specialist skills perhaps?) to pull off, or enable them to go beyond the 10 spell point limit.
I am now wondering if you could generalize this level point system to your fighter, Expert, Mage, Priest system.
Somehow, I can't see your post here, but I can see it inside blogger. Here it goes:
Delete---
I find this idea an interesting take on spell casting! I am always torn on spell-casting because while I am frustrated with the 'nitty gritty' spellcasting of traditional spell-casting in D&D, I am also unsatisfied with say Monster of the Week where you roll for success or failure on a very general 'spell casting ability. I do like the idea that you cast at your best ability and just get depleted over time. I also like the idea of build a spell (which I mentioned on other post comments) because it can be used to facilitate the idea of going after research notes that is/was a common enough trope in D&D wizard adventuers. Perhaps some synergy of being able to build a spell with the number of spell points and then roll to see if you keep all the spell points or lose some portion (with cantrips being base level always available spells). I do like the idea that the spells you can do are based on the cantrips you have (see Sphere's of Power system or the domain system for Clerics in 2e). Would it be too much fuss to have instead of a single die roll you have a percentile with different thresholds? I say that because you can then design pretty much any given 'die' based on the ranges within the percentile for say 'keep all' or 'lose X amount of spell points'. Whether X is a set number or it's a die roll (ex. 0,1,1d4,1d6,2d4) for 5 general categories of base 20% chance each with a modification based on casting stat (for example keep the X = 0 range the same at 80+ but increase the X = 1 by the stat modifier and X = 1d4 range by half the modifier, while the X = 2d4 range shrinks by the stat modifier and the 1d6 shrinks by half the modifier). So the 'perfect cast doesn't get impacted, but the character does become more 'efficient' at casting spells as the casting stat improves. Note that I am being very general here, so 'modifier' can be the 'standard' modifier of 5e or a different formulation (example stat - 10). Another thought with the rewriting spells is to have your '10 levels cap' match to around the 5th level spell cap, with 6th and higher levels spells being able to use greater number of spell points (perhaps at this roughly 'every two levels rate'). This is mostly for things like evolving a spell like Haste to Time Stop, or Magic Missile to Meteor Swarm. In essence unlocking 'higher mysteries of magic' that are meant to be big show stoppers. It may also be worth taking ritual casting into account as a means to possibly trade time for essentially getting a 'perfect cast' or being able to caste above your number of spell points (because you take the time do build up to something you wouldn't be able to do in a moment). But that may be more of a 'completionism' view of a system rather than anything strictly required. Going back to the earlier discussion on having Crafting skills as specialist skills, perhaps rituals are another application of Arcana/Nature/Religion for your Wizards, Druids, Clerics akin to crafting and alchemy.
Anyway! I love the "build a spell" idea and I'm working on that too.
DeleteMaybe with spell dice: roll a number of dice, and combine then in various ways to create the desired effect. The idea you mention (roll to see how many you keep) is great. I think I've read something like that in Necropraxis.
The implementation is the hard part... but I'm interested in "cutting out the middleman" completely. You have 5 spell points (or dice, levels, etc.) and you deal 5d6 damage. Or, if you prefer, 4d6 damage and get your fifth d6 to multiply the distance, etc.
I did think of using a similar idea for fighters/rogues. I would definitely do that for 5e: combat dice, expert dice, etc.
However, for OSR games, I'd avoid making thieves and fighters more complex than they are.
Fair point about keeping Fighters and Rogues simpler for your OSR system (perhaps save it for your Advanced system!)
DeletePerhaps you have a base spell effect (damage, damage reduction, etc.) for your cantrips, along with a certain amount of spell dice that you can use to expand your effect. I would say that you control precisely all parameters but the damage roll (avoid misfires). So you spend a die to increment the distance by X amount past default. If you scale cantrips similar to 5e, this means that your damage cantrips can have greater range but same low level damage.
As far as 'what do you keep', perhaps a 'roll below your level' on a d12 works well enough, with 12+ meaning they get free casts equal to their level-11/day (basically treat them as 1 level lower for the next casting etc. until they start loosing spell dice).
Keeping the cantrips around as 'permeant dice' is also useful because it gives some 'free' flexibility to reflect character skill without (hopefully) too much fuss.
I want to add onto this that because Magic users always have cantrips, they still have neat 'small spells' to play with that allows them to grow into system mastery for new players (as well as the arc of the character progression).
DeleteI guess the idea with 'do you lose a spell point' does work best as a scaling die that works well enough, since it doesn't change so fast to be confusing.