FinalHavenLarp.com

you're going to need to get a bigger mouth.

I really believe we have been way way too influenced by D&D.

Why is it that magic systems have buy ins and then once you have bought in you gain a multitude of powers?

Why isn't there just 4 warrior levels and you expend essense to do a variety of combat related feats?

Why is magic so special?

GM_Chris wrote:Why is magic so special?

Because it's MAGIC, duh.

Anyway, if you want to talk about D&D look at 4th edition. Everything DOES work the same. And it's hella boring, IMOHO.

Pathfinder for the win.

GM_Chris wrote:I really believe we have been way way too influenced by D&D.

Why is it that magic systems have buy ins and then once you have bought in you gain a multitude of powers?

Why isn't there just 4 warrior levels and you expend essense to do a variety of combat related feats?

Why is magic so special?

HA HA (says very grandly)

i have never played D&D, or any MMO's, a fact i am proud of.

....i sat here for a while writing and deleting until i came to the conclusion that its imposible to answer your question, becuase its not real, we dont know how it works, that right there is why its special, if it were common i dont think it would be special, or at least we would not view it as special

Why not make the warriors more like mages not make mages more like warriors.

It is absolutely lame to have a spell that "turns the caster into a warrior". My experience with all magic systems is that people become a mage, and they are weak, and then after a time they are then able to not only rain down holy hell on everything, but also gain every skill from every class as well as the figthing abilities of the warrior.

I believe that is utterly unfair.

I think this goes back to Tolkien, and the likes. (and even farther. Beowolf.)

a game needs to decide what their mages do. if they rain fire, they get no melee, or what ever.


eastern(asian) magic has alway been more warrior oriented(warrior monks and the stuff.)

in FH we have both.

who is to say the warrior ith +10cr isn't protected by a magic force field? no one.

in FH, you have the empath. (a free from wild mage) and the arcane. (complex.)

i think it's all about the mythos in your own world.

I'm with Chris on this one, folks.

Magic is, for all intents and purposes, something supernatural. Sure, someone who casts a spell in invoking magic in a very direct way, but why is spellcasting the way in which we most readily conceive magic? I think we're generally limited by our own preconceptions of what it means to be a mage, and that stops us from exploring new territory.

We divide up the physical world into very finite skill categories, and those who specialize in a particular form find that their abilities don't necessarily help them in other forms. The rouge isn't the best warrior, the warrior isn't the best healer and so on. This happens because we're very comfortable with the limits of our physical reality - we live in it and know how it works. We expect those focused in one area to be limited in others.

Sadly, even the most well developed metaphysical system can't replace that kind of experience, but since none of us have experience wielding true magic, we tend to lump magic into one big category and give arcanes the keys to the kingdom. It's as if they have gained unchecked ability to manipulate metaphysical reality - so long as they go through the proper motions. Would we ever do that for the physical world? Would we ever design a discipline in which nearly any physical feat were capable with the proper pretext?

The quick rebuttal to such a question again involves the supernatural nature of magic - but what defines supernatural? The limits of ability? The limits of perception? Of expectation? Is anything that seems impossible or unlikely to us, with our reason and physical experience, then deemed supernatural and therefore magical? Age old links between technology and magic aside, I think there's an ample harvest of ideas to be found in this field of inquiry.

Perhaps our first inclination would be to impose the limits of structure on the metaphysical world. This has been done before: schools of magic, arcane vs. divine, elemental attunement; all for the purposes of mirroring our own divisions of the physical world onto the metaphysical. By giving mages a specific portfolio we make them specialists, who like the rogues and fighters of physical proficiency, have a metaphysical proficiency that does not necessarily translate to other applications. This approach is generally a known quantity, so I'll leave it be for the moment.

Since this is an experimental thread, what if we achieved a balance by stripping the structure from the physical realm? This would look much like what Chris mentioned - a person with pool of points and an assortment of options before them. The systemic details would be challenging, but no more so than those for metaphysics.

Perhaps more interesting still, what if we removed the division between the physical and metaphysical entirely? If, as I noted above, our perception of what is natural and supernatural is based on our own perception of ability, than what of the perception of someone living in a world that is not so (arguably) devoid of magic? Might they not consider channeling, casting and invoking as natural as walking would be to you or I? Might the concept of magic be bound in the eye of the beholder? (Which, again, calls up references to technology yet unseen).

My point, if I might unearth it from the pile of pondering under which I have so happily buried it, is that perhaps we ought to be balancing the capacity of a character to accomplish things - regardless of the label we attach to their method of execution.

I can get behind that idea. I personaly don't like spell's that augment the caster's fighting prowess through additional soak or added damage in melee because you are stealing the warriors thunder.

Magic is as special as you want it to be. I'm pretty sure we all have that D&D magic system stuck in our heads and it transends into LARP because that's what we know and that is what we are comfortable with. Magic is generally defined as limitless. In almost every larps lore there is some story about a magical catastrophe that was world changing. At the point your players hear that they have a preconcieved notion that if that guy could blow up half the world with magic, why can't I make anything else happen in that equivelant?

Magic is so similar to technology and science in the aspect that it potential is limitless. You can heal, protect, or destroy with both. But...a single human being is only capable of mastering so much technology. You may be able to build an atom bomb but it does not mean you are able to create a supercomputer. No one human has mastered every aspect of technology. Should our fantasy people be aloud to master every aspect of the equally powerfull magic? I know it's fantasy but let's suspend disbelief for a moment and think about it.

. You may be able to build an atom bomb but it does not mean you are able to create a supercomputer. No one human has mastered every aspect of technology



NO comment.

In the creation of my secret LARP rules I had to ask my self questions I asked when we did CARPS and FH, but I am feeling better at it in my old sage. The question is what do I like and then how do I impliment it.

1) From a mage perspective I tend to like the creepy witch with all of the talismans and potions. I really regret having alchemy and arcane separate but we did it I think because of the influence of CARPS which was influenced by NERO. This is not the D&D wizard, but maybe more like the wizard in Conan. This means you have very powerful things you can do. Arguably you would have the most powerful abilities, but the downside is you dont have alot of opportunity to use them and thus are relegated to simple charms to help others.

Now for the reality. Not being able to do many things is not very much fun. Every character should probably have a standard amount of stuff they can do constantly like say swing a sword/throw packets, some common situational stuff, and then the once an event WOW factor.

2) I like the blending between warrior and mage that Anime shows. The reality is I don’t know how to make that work in the LARP settings. Basically warriors should have their WOW moments, but they should be different that than the MAGE wow moments.

3) I hate nekkid mage syndrome. A warrior looses their sword and armor and they suck yet a wizard, in alot of systems keeps on going at full strength. LOTR fixes this by the wizard needing a staff. I like this concept.

4) Large pools do not work. I understand some of you disagree, but I am trying to tell you that most people have a very difficult time, AND the people who claim to be accurate, you are not as accurate as you believe. The reality is as the pools go up accuracy goes down. The reality is as pools go down diversity seems to follow

5) I think FH has made some strides, doing something other LARPS have not done (removed times per day) I believe there is more progress to be made. How can you get creative enough to have small polls (HP pools, mana pools, bla bla bla), diversity of CAPRS in character creation/progression, small list of combat calls?

The issue with magic and FH, and no offense intended:

The setting just doesn't explain magic in any specific sort of way, which leaves people open to decide whatever they want to happen or describe it.

Since magic doesn't have a unique flavor in the setting, people describe it how they want to. Ergo, most people default to what they know.

I don't personally feel that having a magic "pool" is anymore innately problematic than say "combat reflexes," which I do not have in my system. I will agree that the numbers need to stay as small as possible though.

I feel it's worth magic being more complicated IF it is more interesting and less generic. In a more generic system, you have to go with what's simplest since it has to fit multiple people's interpretations of "how it works." In FH, magic is not "complicated" or varied, you can't put a square peg in a round hole. You can pretend the peghole is square so your square peg fits, but that doesn't charge the fact that the peg-hold is STILL round.

I received a great piece of advice when I started brainstorming mechanics: Don't try to make a generic system, make something that is distinctive to your setting.

It may mean that my system won't appeal to enough people to have a supporting audience. That's ok, I accept that and the fact remains that I'm never going to make a living off of running a LARP or building a system, so at least I should personally be happy with it.

I wouldn't mind seeing Arcane and Alchemy done a different way. Heck, just take them both backstage so that arcanes can only cast one time use scrolls of their level they get in game, and potions have to be bought with gold.

Hmmm...

That gives me an idea...

I don't personally feel that having a magic "pool" is anymore innately problematic than say "combat reflexes," which I do not have in my system. I will agree that the numbers need to stay as small as possible though.

I hope I didn’t give the impression that I have issues with pools. Hit points is a pool, armor soak is a pool, combat reflexes is a pool.

FYI, magic in FH is not nearly as generic as you might think. The problem is that the setting is so cataclysmic there is not allot of info, and the development of a long standing world has unfortunately lead to comic book syndrome in some areas which is unfortunate. I also agree things need to be much much more concrete. I find myself constantly in arguments that have turned out to be a difference in how people generally perceive reality. I am a very abstract thinker and most people are not nearly as abstract as I am. Therefore, I tend to see alot of things as "the same" while other people see them as vastly different. I have come to appreciate that a system needs to be more concrete and the mechanics need to be a direct extension of lore while at the same time allow for very abstract character concepts. In FH we started with a blank slate and wanted to see what lore would be created. It is very interesting and rich. The environment did not dictate what FH was to become, the players, and only the players have done that. It is a much different approach than CARPS where we created a concrete world and players had very little impact on all things going on in it. There probably needs to be a mixture.

I think I am the one who started "my secret larp rules" which I have not worked on in a long long time. I apologize as it is not the point of this thread and was distracting. I was just pointing out some stuff I thought about when I was thinking about a different set of mechanics to help fuel ideas.

As with the arcane idea. I would rethink elements the pool size, make it small, get WAY out of the box, and tag it with exact lore.
For a magic lore I really really liked go to www.dragonage.com

Yeah, I've been playing it since release but really haven't made it too far. I like the world but I get enough angst at the LARP, so I've mostly been just playing the preludes.

But even in Dragon-Age, as far as the story is concerned, magic only works one way, and while the STORY for it is great, it's mechanical application is NOTHING like the story would suggest it should be. It's another generic magic system. You have mana, you cast spells. Period.

Edit: Also, magic is way overpowered in DA. It still overshadows everything else. The only balancing factor is in your limited background story for being a mage.

I'm waffling between points and a "memorization" spell-tag type system. I may do both, actually, since I have multiple forms and sources of magic in my setting.

Yeah, we got waaaaay off track here, but realistically, this wasn't a rule-question thread anyway, maybe it should be bumped to another one?