You know me. That is as constructive as I can get without attacking and offending. I shall defer to others to tear into it.
Spontaneous magic is complex, but not severely so as you claim. A new ability is just an xp sink and does not work. Spontaneous magic works just fine the way it is. Perfect in fact. I would not change a single thing. Every argument you might raise against it will likely generate a response of "yes, and I like it that way, and I am always right".
The problem with this, and with combat decisions, is that an SG should allow a player no more than thirty seconds to make a decision. Stick and move, stick and move. Time pressure does not allow for thoughtful consideration.
Easy Sponts for newbs: start with an existing cannon spell and work from there. Or look at Erik Tyrell's list of many useful spells 5th mag or lower, as featured on Yair's spell wiki.
Spont Magic is supposed to be weak and ineffective. Otherwise, why bother learning the spell?
You aren't even poking it apart. You're just saying you're wrong, I'm right. A number of people who have commented here have recognized that there is something of a problem with spontaneous magic. If you don't feel there is anything wrong with it, indeed there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the game except the things that you think are wrong with it, then feel free to not comment at all. Now, if you are interested in a healthy discussion, please, by all means.
And to be clear, I wasn't debating you in that private message. I was inviting you to make a comment, but it doesn't seem you want to. You just want to say, "yes, and I like it that way and I'm always right." Very well, message received.
As long as I am not being offensive, or very much so. That was the main factor in curbing my tongue. But as an Archmagus of these forums, I felt it was important to let the community at large know that someone feels that the status quo is the best solution in this case. I did honestly approach it with an open mind, I was intrigued and I wanted to like the idea. But I just didn't, and felt I should share that. Everyone is entitled to my opinion :mrgreen:
I am not all about the status quo. There are tweaks I would like to make (upping xp, using more vis in the lab, more spell mastery options, etcetera). But spont magic is not one of them. I also did not want to repeat my nastiness from the Ritual Magic Debate. I had to edit down my original comment to basically "I don't like it", because the rest was vitrol I would have been ashamed of after I posted it.
I don't know if it is the best solution but I for one can't think of anything better and don't see much of a need to pursue the idea of perfecting spontaneous magic. I mean in theory it would be nice to have a faster cleaner way to design a spontaneous spell on the fly, but I don't see a way to do that without throwing everything that makes the system work out the window.
Like most elements of the game, now that we're all looking ahead a few years to the next edition there will inevitably be ideas about how to modify the rules and smooth over perceived problems. In that context, the OP was a great conversation starter.
That said, it needs to be clear on what problem it's solving and why that is the best solution to solving that problem.
There are two issues I have with Spontaneous Magic:
- The maths
- The divide by 2 or divide by 5 choice
Assuming that we have the same basic mechanic for Hermetic magic in the future, i.e. we generate a casting total that includes both a Technique and Form, we still need to generate that casting total for spontaneous effects, right?
Perhaps not. Or at least, not as such. First, let's look at the casting total itself.
Currently, we need a Stamina + Tech + Form + stress die to generate the basic casting total, which is then modified by aura and any other spot bonuses and penalties. But the stinger is that we then need to divide that sucker by at least two if not five. So we've done the maths to work out what we have, then we divide by two. Bear in mind that we've most likely already had to work out the target spell level and we've probably got that calculation still hovering on the fingers of our first hand before we moved onto the casting total.
So we need to keep it simple and for that reason I'm going to reject solutions that add any kind of new Ability or other limiting factor into the mix and I'm going to reject anything that tries to get me thinking in magnitudes when I'm just worked out the spell level and the casting total in individual levels.
What I'd do is... Generate the casting total as normal except you only use your lowest applicable Art in the calculation. Remove one Art from the calculation.
Next... do NOT divide by anything. Do NOT lose fatigue.
Okay, let's take a Prying Eyes spell. Level 5, yes? If, allowing for an aura penalty of 3, I can reach or exceed the level of the effect on my Stamina of 2 and my Intellego of 5 (my Imaginem is 7, so I exclude that), then I cast the spell. But wait, I can't make 5 from that, so I burn a pawn of vis for a +2, which is enough for me to cast the spell. I don't need to roll. Why would I? With the vis on hand, I can cast the spell quite effectively.
It doesn't cost me any fatigue as that just becomes needless paperwork and whose to say that we'll still have a fatigue mechanism anyway.
But what if I didn't have that vis? Then I would need a roll to make it. And it would be a stress roll***.
Wait, I hear you say, you can spend resources like vis to get away without having to roll? Well, yes. You're spending an asset, a resource, in lieu of taking the risk*, so you're incurring a cost or detriment in one area to save yourself some potential grief elsewhere.
"Mark, you're crazy", some fellow at the back mutters, "It'll never work. There's a way to game this so you can just keep on casting sponts all session long. And the effect levels might even be higher than you can reach now."
You're right. I hadn't considered that... No wait, I did. It doesn't matter. The player gets a more straight-forward casting total (as there's no division going on and potentially not even a roll), which provides a clearer and simpler view of what spontaneous levels they can realistically achieve. As for those levels, once you throw in a little vis then I can see powerful magi who already have significant arts getting some good numbers. And that's fine too. The players get to do cool magic straight off the cuff, which is what hooked me on Ars Magica in the first place.
Bottom line is this... That's one way I might change the spont casting process given the current rules framework. You could do the same for Formulaic too, of course - if you can comfortably reach the level with your arts alone, then why bother with the roll? And if you want to buy yourself out of the risk with vis, then go for it**.
- I'm sure the confidence mechanic has its place... somewhere... for some people.
** Don't penalise the players for using the vis you just gave them last session as a reward for a story well dealt with. Using vis should not automatically make the magical event intrinsically dangerous or risky. If you accept the risk and roll the die, then fair enough, let the vis count towards any botch dice. Players should be encouraged to use vis in the field rather than, from my own experience across a number of sagas, stockpiling it and refusing to use it for fear of botch dice.
*** Final point, not all elements of the above fit with my proposed 2D6 replacement for the D10 simple/stress die. In the proposed dice mechanic, the player can opt for the easy and low-risk 1D6 roll. Or they could opt for the more dangerous 2D6 roll with its chance of great failure and greater success. The SG could impose a 2D6 roll, of course, as is their want, but on the whole it's down to the player to determine the level of risk they want to accept.
This. Very much this.
I've always thought of it more as "But none of us have that spell" "Well, maybe you can do something anyway..."
Which is strictly less than the average like RAW does.
Shade of gumshoe, which works pretty well.
I think you may have missed some things.
Moving "base" (the one most often used) spontaneous magic to /2 normalizes what is the most common situation now, without the silly "I wait 2 minutes" bit. Removing the dice roll also means we don't have the situation where a player tries again and again until s-he gets the right result. One know what one can do.
This also, in setting, means that magi can usually use liberately spontaneous magic in their specialty... when it doesn't matter much.
As it is, for a flambeau to light every candle in a room requires a lvl 10 spell (base 2, +2 voice, +2 room), lvl 15 if s-he doesn't want to incant. Under the current system, this means a CT of either 50/75 (!!!) or exertion and a CT of 20/30. Under this system, this becomes something one can to without feeling tired. As you say, the 10-15 range is the one most often used, and this makes it available to the daily life of magi.
The second system aligns spont magic with formulaic casting, using the exact same rules for the 2 kind of magic. I like that. To know what you can cast in a hurry, you just look at existing spells, and cast. You know your totals, you already use them, no need to divide, so this is faster, and shouldn't bog down too much.
Removing fatigue mean that magi can try to be creative, flinging a lot of impromptu spells at each other in order to surprise their opponent and find a chink in their defenses. In a way, this is how I think certamen should work*. But having it be risky and wild fits well, IMO, the difference between structured, organized formulaic magic, and wild, untamed spontaneous one. This also keep a very real incentive for magi to learn these. And if a mage uses a lot of sponts, he's either crazy or desperate. This also opens up potential Diedne Mysteries (Reduced Botch Dice when sponting? Awesome!)
- I can see Certamen working like this:
- Drew the circle
- Fight using your own spells, including spontaneous ones.
- If you botch, take those dices as damage instead.
- Every damage isn't real, this is just an accounting exercise: At the end, you get fatigue equal to your highest damage level.
You're right.
We should take this into account.
So... Vis should not add any risk or botch die, per se?
Well, never say never. I'm still a storyguide, so I must still have an inherently evil streak in me somewhere...
Perhaps instead of /5 for no fatigue add a simple die and divide by 3...
The problem for me is the moment you introduce division, the complexity of the game skyrockets. It'll put off a lot of players who just don't want to math at the table; players who might otherwise be really interested in the setting / concept / whatever.
Personally I think introducing subtraction into the equation is bordering on a step too far. If you look at a typical formulaic spellcasting roll, it goes:
tech + form + stamina + aura + mastery + die roll
Take result, subtract spell level.
If result is greater than -10...
- (penetration score * penetration multiplier) - opponent's magic resistance
if final result > 0, spell happens!
Wow. That is a lot of math. Sure it isn't complex math, there's no square-roots in there, but it's a lot more math than is necessary.
Personally I'd be looking to revisit the entire concept of subtracting values. I'd instead go with something like:
Formulaic: tech + form + stamina + aura + mastery + die roll vs. spell level. If successful, spell is cast!
Spontaneous: (worst of tech or form) + stamina + aura + die roll vs. spell level. If successful, spell is cast!
To overcome magic resistance: penetration + bonuses for arcane connection + aura + die roll vs. MR + aura + die roll. If successful, spell penetrates!
While this will obviously have some serious knock-on effects and represents a significant change, the other thing it does is makes the math super easy and, for the most part, pre-calculable. The end result? Hugely improved speed of resolution for spell-casting in play, and far more accessible to the non-mathematician.
It also means that wizard conflicts won't be fought by powerful wizards casting cantrips at each other.
I started some notes on a D20 Ars port not long ago. I found it easier and more intuitive to add to the DC rather than subtract from the casting total.
So one thing you could do is add five to the base level of any spontaneous spell. Or add ten, or something. I've not looked at the numbers to see the impact. Someone here might like to do that.
Many ways to modify spontaneous magic and still have it work.
So, instead of calculating Casting Totals for Spont magic by dividing the Casting Score you instead multiply the effective level by 2 (for spending Fatigue) or 5 for not...(I'm going to have to rethink how Penetration works) perhaps this is easier?
Exempli Gratia:
You want to cast a Spontaneous spell of level 10. Your have some skill in the Arts involved, your Casting Score is 20.
Current system: You either get (20+stress die)/2, assume an average roll of 5,5 (and using standard rounding up conventions) this is level 13 which is ok. Or you get a flat 20/5=4 which is nowhere near enough. Spending Fatigue the Penentration is therefor 3+Pen.
New idea: Your target level is now 20 for spending Fatigue or 50 for not. As Casting Score is already at 20 the stress die is really not important (except for Penetration) but you need to spend the Fatigue and do it this way since unFatigueing magic is beyond you. With the average roll your Penetration is 6+Pen.
So yes, Penetration is x2 (or x5) this new way compared to the original way...unless you also use the same factor for Penetration as you use to multiply the effective level. So you need a level 10 spell -. effectively counting as 20 - and you specify that you want Penetration of 3 - effectively counts as adding 6 to the level - you get the same numbers as in the original rules. However if keeping Penetration as the 'open parameter' in the Spont youl'll still in most likelyhood run into the need for doing division to account for what you actually roll on the die.
It would be so much easier to just ignore this increase in Penetration and let it go. After all since Spont'ing is already so hard this amounts to small values. In my experience Spont rarely has a crucial need for Penetration. and if it does, it is often in such an epic and dramatic situation where you are seriously facing bad odds so why not throw a bone?
Another thing to remember here is that attunement bonus for talismans adds to Casting Totals not Scores, so per current rules this bonus is not divided! Effectively such a bonus needs to me multiplied by the same number as effective spell level (x2 or x5). Or am I getting my knickers on backwards? The differences between Casting Score and -Totals seem less in the new system. So let's reexamine the above example:
Exempli Gratia:
You want to cast a Spontaneous spell of level 10. Your have some skill in the Arts involved, your Casting Score is 20. You also have a talisman good for a +4 attunement bonus.
Current system: You either get (20+stress die)/2, assume an average roll of 5,5 (and using standard rounding up conventions) this is level 13+4. Penetration here is 7+Pen. Or you get a flat 20/5=4 modified by +4=8, which is nearly there.
New idea: Your target level is now 20 for spending Fatigue or 50 for not. With the average roll you get 20+5,5+4 if throwing the attumenent bonus into the mix, resulting in Penetration of 10+Pen. If we keep the attumement bonus aside we get a Casting Score of 26 and once we add it in it is +4x2 for a Penetration of 14+Pen. Wow, it just gets better and better.
Tellus: Help me out here, what's wrong with this math? Or anyone else?
This was indeed so for many years. But recently it got errataed:
Cheers
Awww, it was such a nice handout to deisgning a magus good at Spont'ing.
I hadn't actually spotted the error for many years, not until Tellus pointed it out. And I sort of liked it, since it gave just a little bit extra to talismans without IMHO upsetting the balance.
Anyway, it makes some things easier regarding new and simpler ways to calculate Spontaneous Magic.
Not sure if I would call it recent, as the change in attunement affecting casting score rather than casting total is in my digital version of the rules which was acquired in December of 2011.
I've played around with Christian's multiplication idea before (purely as a mental exercise), and decided that since the whole point of it was to make calcuations simpler and spontaneous penetration is usually irrelevant, why not just declare that spontaneous magic had a penetration of 0?
If your target has magic resistance, odds are you fail anyway if all you have is spontaneous magic.
Nice catch, I haden't noticed that - it must've been recent, as I searched for Talismans not that long ago.
Good to know.
Hmm. You can burn Vis. With Lifelinked Spontaneous Magic you can burn Fatigue, and even take wounds. While all this may not appear wise, it certainly is exciting, and even may get necessary. Do we really wish to do away with the hail-mary spont once and for all?
There was a debate on this forum, which led to the erratum: https://forum.atlas-games.com/t/the-break-room/102/1 .
Cheers