Home Forums Fantasy General Fantasy Magic Spells in Large/Abstract Fantasy Battles

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #15417
    Avatar photoBrigadier General
    Participant

    What is your take on magic in mass or abstract fantasy battles?  My first thoughts are to limit the amount of spells per caster per battle. Say 1 to 3 max spells, and perhaps one duplicate of a previously cast spell.

    formerly known as "wargamer1972"

    #15418
    Avatar photoMike
    Keymaster

    Oooh good question.
    Back in the days of WFB 2nd edition we played some big old games over along old time.
    We started by banning ‘ravine’ which if memory serves was a level 4 battle magic spell that caused a ravine to open up, and any troops under it had to make a save or die.
    IIRC the heavier the armour the more likely they were to fall in and perish.
    We lost some very strong and powerful units to that spell.

    It very much made the games less fun, so we banned it.

    Then we ended up banning all magic except level 1 magic.

    I think the best thing about fantasy games is the variety in the races, rather than the magic.
    The setting of course will influence how much magic is present and how powerful it is.

    If I were to play with magic again I would rather see it do things like affect die rolls (courage spells etc) and create effects like mist and rain, wind and so on rather than be like WMDs.

    #15474
    Avatar photoJames Rivera
    Participant

    I’m growing to like the way Kings of War by Mantic Games have incorporated magic in their mass fantasy game.  Spells either reproduce an attack effect similar to a regular units attack or provides support in some fashion to allied units.  For example a low level sorcerer might attack with magic rolling 3 attack dice, while a powerful sorcerer with 5 attack dice, compared to a typical bow armed unit throwing 5 attack dice.  The magic however may have a longer range or penetrate armor (reduce saves) more easily.  In this fashion the spells have a battlefield effect without breaking the game.  A caster when not attacking might choose to use their action to support allies in some fashion, i.e. add distance to their charge, restore some damage, make an allies next attack hit just a little harder.  Again the spells have a tactical effect on the battle without breaking the game.  Because of this there really isn’t any need to limit the number of castings available to a magic-user.  Its a relatively simplified system, but that’s sort of the motto for the whole Kings of War game.  I’m finding it gives a surprisingly good game when all is said and done.

    BTW, if you think its worth checking out, they have a free download of the basic rules on their website.  At the following link, about half-way down on the page on the left.

    http://www.manticgames.com/mantic-shop/kings-of-war.html

     

    #20287
    Avatar photoJohn McBride
    Participant

    Hi,

     

    There’s a lot to be said for the fairly limited number of spells as in, e.g., Rebel Mini’s MIGHTY ARMIES. (Or, on a tactical level, SONG OF BLADES AND HEROES)

    Otoh, lots of us enjoy fiddling with spell lists and minimaxing with points systems and such. Depends of whether your prime pleasure is planning a game or actually PLAYING it!  (Playing is obviously the desired end, but lots of us spend far more planning, willingly or not. How many hours of faculty meetings have I whiled away with army lists?!?)

    In PRIDE OF LIONS magic can be quite important, though rarely decisive. It is the equivalent of, say, electronic warfare plus off-the-board artillery. Leadership (issuing orders, motivating troops, rallying routers, etc.) is at leasat as important, and the battle is usually decided by the clash of rival battle lines. As it should be.

    But the magic system CAN be complex enough to be a sub-game in its own right, if players want to do it that way. One mid-level mage per side means a small impact on the outcome, particularly since the rival mages will often cancel out.

    But give each side several mages, working from more than one spell list and with varying levels of power, and 1) the game slows down; 2) the magic battle becomes a separate “game”; and 3) magic may decide who wins.

    Or maybe not; there’s the old Cold War joke: what do two Soviet tank generals say to each other when they meet in Paris?  Answer: “Hey, I wonder who won the air war?”

     

    #20292
    Avatar photoRhoderic
    Member

    I’d favour a system that limits magic in a less predictable way than a set number of max spells, ie some sort of dangerous “overload” mechanism that makes heavy reliance on magic a foolhardy enterprise. Some “game within a game” aspects (mental duelling between opposing magic-users, deflecting enemy spells back at the enemy or absorbing their power, and so on) would be alright if it doesn’t go too far. Magic items would be useful to that end, but the sheer amount of items in WHFB (at least back in 5th and 6th edition when I was playing) is too many for my tastes.

    I’d want some variety in spells between magic-users of different allegiances/”themes” so that not everyone is chucking the same fireballs at each other.

    If a ruleset purports to be generic and customisable, I’d want it to let me “modulate” the degree of manifestness or subtlety of magic to fit the setting I’m going for. For one setting I might want wispy, intangible-seeming magic, and for another I might want teleportation and lightning bolts.

    All of that together is a big ask, I know. It’s my hypothetical ideal ruleset I’m describing here. In practice I can settle for less 

    #20301
    Avatar photoJohn McBride
    Participant

    Well, you might give PRIDE a look. It’s close to your ideal in several ways.

    A mage begins each turn with a certain amount of power, typically a d16 or a d20. Each spell has a difficulty level, from 3 (easy) to 10 (hard). The mage chooses his spell and rolls his power die. If the total exceeds the difficulty, the spell works. If the die roll ties or is below the difficulty the spell fails.  IF THE DIE ROLL IS A MAXIMUM (e.g. a 20 on a d20 or a 16 on a d16) then the spell works but the mage has suffered a brainburn; his turn ends and next turn his power die is reduced a level (e.g. starting at a 612 instead of a d16).

    A mage can attempt a second spell if his first one worked, but is now tiring and rolls a smaller die: d20 to d16 to d12 to d10 to d8 to d6 to d4. He can cast multiple spells until he fails one, but at increasing odds of a brainburn.

    So choosing between powerful hard spells and easy/weak ones is important, as is knowing when to stop.

    A mage can choose, instead of attempting to cast a spell of his own, to BLOCK an enemy spell; he rolls his die (and still risks a brainburn) and subtracts half the roll from an opponent’s roll.

    Or he can BOOST an opponents by ADDING half his roll to an enemy roll, which might empower what would otherwise be a failure into succeeding, but also sharply incresases the odds that the opponent’s augmented roll is too high and so becomes a brainburn.

    Spell lists have a lot of similar generic spells, but also many that are unique to cultures or philosophies. The hyena folk worship Entropy, for example, and have lots of bad luck and Murphy’s Law spells.

    Spells (including Boost and Block) are cast simultaneously using cards.

    There’s also illusions, divine pagan magic (Thor has his lightning), undead nihilism, Godfearers (ethical monotheists) Gifts, dwarven rune magic, etc. It is pretty customizable but not very generic.  We start with the minis and then describe a culture, and then decide on spells that make sense within it. The points system works pretty well, and e.g two weaker spells users have advantages as well as disadvantages agiainst a single stronger mage who costs the same points. (The weaker guys have a harder time casting the powerful spells but are actually stronger on defense, blocking enemy spells.)

    #20307
    Avatar photoRhoderic
    Member

    “Brainburn”. There’s a word that makes me wince. Wouldn’t want to be a wizard in a world where there’s brainburn 

    Although, it also sounds a bit Scottish… Brainburn whisky, anyone?

    #20310
    Avatar photoJohn McBride
    Participant

    Yup. And we use the colored “pipecleaner” fuzzies as markers, and for brainburns the mini gets a nice orange one twisted into a circle, like a crown! In a big battle a  mage could end up with several!

    #20407
    Avatar photoWarren Beattie
    Participant

    I’m definitely not fond of the kind of overwhelming magic that some editions of Warhammer were and are infamous for. That said, I’m not opposed to Kings of War’s level of magic (zap and heal) but it’s perhaps a little too simplified for my tastes. Same with HoTT. (I know KoW 2.0 has expanded magic a bit, but there are other things putting me off it that haven’t been addressed, at least not in the cheat sheet)

     

    Rhoderic: I like the level of balance that Mayhem strikes. Six basic spells that must be bought out of the army’s points allowance, plus extra spells and rules for ‘binding’ in the expansion. Maybe not the sheer high level of customisation you might want, and you do have the ‘same old’ fireballs and teleportations; but some of the spells, especially the binding rules, might be more the kind of subtle magic you’re also looking for. Casting spells is initially like any other action during a player’s turn – you pay for it out of your army’s generated action point (command point: Cp) pool, with each subsequent action by the same unit (i.e. the wizard) in the same turn costing more Cps. There are also a couple of levels of penalties should the spell not be completely successful or if it’s a total failure. Then some of the spells also have additional consequences that might be applied in addition to the standard penalties. Magic can definitely be a foolhardy enterprise in this game!

     

    MAYHEM

    #20413
    Avatar photoJohn McBride
    Participant

    Yes, NOT being WH is something many of us aspire  to!  I last played HOTT 20+ years ago and found it fun but maybe a bit bland. MIGHTY ARMIES is similar (pips to move) but has a different and more robust feel in play and in its point system and army lists. Still limited spells, I think.

    Gonna start a related but different topic.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.