View Poll Results: What types of magic should there be in the BRCS? (revised)

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1. 3 tiered system -standard (PHB)/battle level/realm level. (Battle magic is different – either separate spells or metamagic std ones {TBD}. Realm and unmodified std spells have no effect on Battlefield)

    8 30.77%
  • 2. 3 tiered system -standard (PHB)/battle level/realm level. (Similar to the 2nd ed system with std, realm and special battle spells affecting battle)

    10 38.46%
  • 3. 2 tiered system – standard/realm level (only realm spells affect the battle)

    0 0%
  • 4. 2 tiered system – standard/realm level (standard spells have an effect on the battlefield without any modification. realm spells have no effect on battle.)

    5 19.23%
  • 5. 2 tiered system – standard/realm level (no spells affect battle)

    0 0%
  • 6. Other – please be as specific as possible

    3 11.54%
  • 7. Abstain

    0 0%
Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53
  1. #1
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,946
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Try this one instead. Since people were getting off topic or at least some said the poll was confusing. Let's see if we better capture the question here.

    Please read this description since it helps explain what is going on.

    For choice 1 - 3 tiers, but at the battle level it requires something special to have magic affect the battle. This would either be a separate list of battle spells or metmagiced standard one. Realm and non-modified std spells haveve no effect.

    For choice 2 - 3 tiers, but similar to the 2nd ed system. That is battle magic is comprised of standard spells, realm spells and new battle spells

    For choice 3 - 2 tiers, standard and realm magic. Only realm magic has an effect on battles

    For choice 4 - 2 tiers, standard and realm magic. Only standard magic has an effect on battle, no special modifications required. Realm spells do not afffect battle.

    For choice 5 - 2 tiers, standard and realm. Neither has an effect on battle.

    For choice 6 - other. If you have another idea then list it and be specific.
    Duane Eggert

  2. #2
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Ashland, NH
    Posts
    1,377
    Downloads
    6
    Uploads
    0
    I voted for option 2, but I wanted to qualify that choice:

    If choice #2 (Battle Magic w/ overlap of personal and realm magic) gets a significant number of votes, but the community remains fairly divided on the issue of whether or not to include battle magic at all (which seemed to be the case in the last poll), then there is another option:

    Include Battle Magic as a completely optional addition (variant) ruleset. If personal and realm spells have a battlefield effect, Battle Magic isn't going to be a necessary addition, but it could be a good one for those who like the idea and system. There seems to be enough interest to at least do this, but there may also be enough votes against battle magic to insist that it is a default part of the BR campaign setting.

    An Appendix section for Battle Magic might work very well.

    ************************************************** ****************

    Whatever options are chosen, I'd also like to see a system where the Warcraft skill affects any sort of magic used on the battlefield, representing the strategic use of magic to best possible effect.

    This might be something as simple as making a Warcraft check to affect the spell's DC in regard to unit Morale saves against it. This could be on a sliding scale, perhaps along the same lines as turning checks (-4 to +4). A well-placed fireball at the right moment (all of which could be summarized by a single Warcraft check) is far more devestating than a poorly placed and/or timed one.

    It would be nice to improve the effects of well-placed, well-timed beneficial spells, too, but I'm less certain of how this might really work, as most enhancement spells will probably have static effects and harmless saves only.

    Perhaps the modifier for beneficial spells could become a unit Morale bonus (or penalty, if poorly utilized) for the spell's duration?

    Osprey

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    aberdeen, scotland
    Posts
    281
    Downloads
    87
    Uploads
    0
    I dont seem to have the same problems as many say they have had with the old battle magic system probably because we always play very low level campaigns.

    I would mention a few things I have thought about with these posts coming up.

    To represent the harm caused by chanelling so much magic.

    One possibility is that casting a battle spell costs an amount per level in xp along with any other costs.

    Another that a spellcraft check must be made else suffer something like paralysis or con damage.

    Battle spells must be memorised weakening a wizard in individual power during a battle.

    I always liked the three teirs and still do but I think there should be definate risks involved. Battle magic is far to weak as it currently is so anything would likely be an improovement.
    MORNINGSTAR

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    california
    Posts
    317
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by graham anderson@Feb 26 2005, 08:37 PM
    I dont seem to have the same problems as many say they have had with the old battle magic system probably because we always play very low level campaigns.

    I would mention a few things I have thought about with these posts coming up.

    To represent the harm caused by chanelling so much magic.

    One possibility is that casting a battle spell costs an amount per level in xp along with any other costs.

    Another that a spellcraft check must be made else suffer something like paralysis or con damage.

    Battle spells must be memorised weakening a wizard in individual power during a battle.

    I always liked the three teirs and still do but I think there should be definate risks involved. Battle magic is far to weak as it currently is so anything would likely be an improovement.
    Why would there be harm and xp cost in channelling battle magic when their is not such penalties when channelling the much greater amouns of magic involved with realm spells.
    Build a man a fire and he will be warm for a night. Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    aberdeen, scotland
    Posts
    281
    Downloads
    87
    Uploads
    0
    Why would there be harm and xp cost in channelling battle magic when their is not such penalties when channelling the much greater amouns of magic involved with realm spells.
    Because realm spells take a month to cast along with needing leylines or sources which take even more time to prepare.

    Battle magic needs to be cast very quickly on a battle field.
    MORNINGSTAR

  6. #6
    Senior Member RaspK_FOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Moschato, Athens, Greece
    Posts
    1,130
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I am pro having standard spells being capable to affect the battlefield, with the large notion that most spells would work differently if cast with the Battlemage feat or some such which would allow special entries (written for each spell separately) to play out on the field.

  7. #7
    Member Bokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Lawrenceville GA
    Posts
    32
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I like option one, but I see a couple of major issues with it:

    1) Sorcerers would have to pick battlespells as some of there very limited spells known slots. A sorcerer would therefore have to sacrifice useful adventuring spells in order to be effective on the battlefield, so basically you would have two different types of sorcerers- battle sorcerers and adventuring sorcerers, because they don't have enough available spells known to be effective at both.

    For the same reason, I don't think option two is viable either, unless sorcerers get extra spellslots that must be spent on battlespells.

    2) Requiring a feat would fix the issue, however what would be the justification? If I am a sorcerer that can cast fireball, I would wonder why my fireball wouldn't work on the battlefield until I learned how to become a battlemage. If I was out in the middle of a raging battle and saw a unit of archers forming up to rain missiles down on my position and therefore cast a fireball at the middle of there formation... only to find that they are immune because I haven't researched battlemagic. That would be ludicrious!

    This same reasoning would also work for option three; why would a source holding be required to cast a fireball on the battlefield?

    I agree with some of the posts from the previous thread, magic should have some effect, so that eliminates option 5.

    That leaves us with option 4, which is how I voted. :unsure: Of course we will have to list how many hits a unit takes from spells, what the range in battlefield squares is, etc. I wanted to vote for option 1 (with the feat required) but I just couldn't do it.
    Kill 'em all, let the God's sort them out!!

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    10
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I am very much torn between 2 and 4. I feel very strongly that standard spells should have an effect upon the battlefield but am uncertain as to how much of a (new) system for battlefield magic is required. Hmm ...

    I think I'll have to go for option 2. Option 4 means losing a lot of the big stuff from the battlefield and it's just too interesting a concept to ditch. So, I'm voting for 2 and will try to lay out my opinions on how that system should work (in my opinion) if and when the vote moves the project in that direction.

    It's all jolly exciting though, isn't it? ;-)

  9. #9
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Ashland, NH
    Posts
    1,377
    Downloads
    6
    Uploads
    0
    1) Sorcerers would have to pick battlespells as some of there very limited spells known slots. A sorcerer would therefore have to sacrifice useful adventuring spells in order to be effective on the battlefield, so basically you would have two different types of sorcerers- battle sorcerers and adventuring sorcerers, because they don't have enough available spells known to be effective at both.

    For the same reason, I don't think option two is viable either, unless sorcerers get extra spellslots that must be spent on battlespells.
    Um...if Battle Spells are metamagic versions of personal spells (which is quite possible with Option 1 or 2, then a sorcerer can simply prepare battle spells in normal spell slots on the day of the battle.

    This sort of Battle Magic actually gives sorcerers more power than they had before, as now their normal spells are given a whole new scale of effect - without sacrificing a single known spell exclusively for battle spells.

    The main difference between options 1 and 2, as I understand it, is whether or not personal, battle, and realm spells are allowed to overlap or not.

    In option 1, there is a strict delineation betweeen the 3 spell types:
    personal spells = adventure scale only
    battle = battle spells only (and maybe certain metamagicked personal ones? What's that about? Doesn't that pretty much ruin the simplicity of strict seperation of spells and their scales of effect?)
    realm = domain scale only, no battlefield effect

    In option 2, there can be overlap between all 3 levels depending on the spells cast.

    I wouldn't assume, however, that the Battle Magic system will necesarrily end up being a reprint of the 2e system. I for one prefer a metamagic idea as described above, so that sorcerers don't get a raw deal and mages don't get spread even thinner in their spell research. It's bloody hard being a true mage in BR, I have little desire to make it even more challenging (like finding yet another suite of research options for them to spread through their domain actions).

    Osprey

  10. #10
    Senior Member Thomas_Percy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    139
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    OTHER

    2 tiered system – standard/realm level. Standard spells have an effect on the battlefield without any modification. Realm spells have effect on battle, too. Because why not if battle takes place in the province with my source and I have a month for preparation.

    I'm not an enemy of battle spells, but I see two ways to handle it:
    1. As a variant rule
    2. As an integral part of the system with a possibility of using it in the Sunless Citadel every other adventure.

    I don't like partial solutions "I give you new power, but you cannat use in the swamps, I don't know why, but rules tell so". Every time I meet sth. like that in the game I ask DM "why", and if the only anwswer is "because it's a rule" I come back from the fictional world of rgp to the powergamers' workshop.

    If player wants to use Subversion realm spell to Charm a goblin, that's his choice. My job as a rule maker and DM is trying to fereseight and balance every possibility of using of new powers.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.