Page 1 of 1

High mage question

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:18 pm
by Jareth Valar
Question with what other thought.

Elves can learn a second win of magic after a good bit of play, but how would you deal with the wind's extra effect?
Does a mage with the white and red wind choose between blinding or setting ablaze or does it do both?

Hopefully looking for honest on the question. Don't really give a flying snotling fart whether someone thinks 4th is crap and should go back to 2nd or whatever.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:27 pm
by Orin J.
If an elf has two different schools of magic to draw from, he has to keep his spell lists separate. Meaning if you know Blast for jade magic and then you learned bright magic, you would have to learn Blast again to cast it with the bright magic effects.

EDIT: Yes, this means paying the full costs for a new spell. There is no discount for relearning a spell multiple times.
EDIT EDIT: ten minutes? i sure showed up at the right time.....

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:07 am
by Jareth Valar
Orin J. wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:27 pm
If an elf has two different schools of magic to draw from, he has to keep his spell lists separate. Meaning if you know Blast for jade magic and then you learned bright magic, you would have to learn Blast again to cast it with the bright magic effects.

EDIT: Yes, this means paying the full costs for a new spell. There is no discount for relearning a spell multiple times.
EDIT EDIT: ten minutes? i sure showed up at the right time.....
Fair enough. Just reread the Arcane spells section an I can see what you mean. Completely glossed over the fact Arcane spells are treated as additions to the Lore.

Kind of got lost in the fact that some of the sentences in the Lore descriptions don't specify that the effect has to be a Lore specific spell. Most do, but not all. Makes more sense and balance this way I think.

Thanks for pointing it out. (**mumble grumble...should have seen that myself....rumble mumble**)

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:43 am
by Knight of the Lady
Here I come, and I will confess that I personally haven't even started a serious 4e campaign yet but I will post regardless.

That is that I suggest that not only getting a second wind for the mage, but I would actually recommend that for an additional buy the High Elf Mage will be able to combine spells, spells he/she can already cast, from different either the same or different winds, into the same spell. It will probably require a bit more papper work and some thoughts by the GM to ensure that it don't get completely out of hand. But I think it could keep the mage interested in what kind of cool combinations he/she can create and also show that the High Elves are on an entirely different level when it comes to magic than humans in the Old World.

I understand what the motivation for playing humans would be. And that would be that the High Elf will need to sink down alot of XP into the different combinations and stuff, while a human from the Collages can get more separate spells and raise differents stats, get skills and talents and other stuff, while the High Elf plays with his combination-of-spells toy. So hopefully allow for both to be fun to play but also allow for both to have a potentially different style to them.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:07 am
by CapnZapp
I think GW's restriction on non-elf mages blows from a player fun perspective.

That is, you only need a single wind to become effective. It's just boring to be so restricted. Essentially you have blue wizards (all much alike) and green wizards (all much alike) and so on.

But how many wizard character does a given player play? Maybe two.

So my obvious houserule is to look at the color wheel and encouraging the player to pick spells from the two adjacent winds as well. A Gold Wizard can pick White and Green spells, for instance.

It makes each Wizard character much more unique. It utilizes much more of the rulebook content per campaign. It doesn't pidgeon-hole a Wizard into just having one schtick.

But what about elven High Mages, somebody might ask. Honestly, I don't give a crap. You would need thousands and thousands AND THOUSANDS of experience points before that even becomes relevant. Lemme focus on the 99% of actual Wizard characters I see in-game and not on some special snowflake Teclis wannabe that honestly belongs in the WFB game anyway :)

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:07 pm
by easl
CapnZapp wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:07 am
I think GW's restriction on non-elf mages blows from a player fun perspective.
So my obvious houserule is to look at the color wheel and encouraging the player to pick spells from the two adjacent winds as well. A Gold Wizard can pick White and Green spells, for instance.

It makes each Wizard character much more unique. It utilizes much more of the rulebook content per campaign. It doesn't pidgeon-hole a Wizard into just having one schtick.
That completely undermines the Witch class though. One of possibly only two benefits to playing that class was that they can use the Witch! talent to pick arcane spells from multiple colors. Give an equivalent benefit to Wizards, and there's almost no reason at all to consider the Witch class as being a cool alternative, since you've given their only cool shtick to the Wizards.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:54 pm
by totsuzenheni
easl wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:07 pm
CapnZapp wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:07 am
I think GW's restriction on non-elf mages blows from a player fun perspective.
So my obvious houserule is to look at the color wheel and encouraging the player to pick spells from the two adjacent winds as well. A Gold Wizard can pick White and Green spells, for instance.

It makes each Wizard character much more unique. It utilizes much more of the rulebook content per campaign. It doesn't pidgeon-hole a Wizard into just having one schtick.
That completely undermines the Witch class though. One of possibly only two benefits to playing that class was that they can use the Witch! talent to pick arcane spells from multiple colors. Give an equivalent benefit to Wizards, and there's almost no reason at all to consider the Witch class as being a cool alternative, since you've given their only cool shtick to the Wizards.
I'm taken what's been written above as fact. With that in mind, if someone wanted to use CapnZapp's rule but also wanted the Witch to be worth considering perhaps some penalty could be imposed on the Wizards using adjacent colours, either in terms of the mechanics of casting or learning the spells, or in terms of punishment from their college and/or the law.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:38 pm
by CapnZapp
easl wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:07 pm

That completely undermines the Witch class though. One of possibly only two benefits to playing that class was that they can use the Witch! talent to pick arcane spells from multiple colors. Give an equivalent benefit to Wizards, and there's almost no reason at all to consider the Witch class as being a cool alternative, since you've given their only cool shtick to the Wizards.
*shrug*

Since witch is on the career path from hedge wizard, witches are plenty cool anyway.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:34 pm
by Knight of the Lady
Crabs are as they are.

But anyway, giving some basic rules for High Magic is certainly a thing that should be considered, by me if by no one else, for my own games.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:03 pm
by Jareth Valar
Knight of the Lady wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:34 pm
Crabs are as they are.

But anyway, giving some basic rules for High Magic is certainly a thing that should be considered, by me if by no one else, for my own games.
I would be interested in your thoughts, if you would be willing to share.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:20 pm
by Jareth Valar
CapnZapp wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:07 am
But what about elven High Mages, somebody might ask. Honestly, I don't give a crap. You would need thousands and thousands AND THOUSANDS of experience points before that even becomes relevant. Lemme focus on the 99% of actual Wizard characters I see in-game and not on some special snowflake Teclis wannabe that honestly belongs in the WFB game anyway :)
To be honest, and meaning no offense, the bolded statement of yours is how I've come to feel about most of your arrogant vitriol about 4th. :|

I appreciate most all input, but when you lay out your opinions like they are Empirical fact...after testing it you have concluded the game is crap, when you get tired of playing the way you do (and apparently having fun with) my house rule is here, etc. :roll: :?

Now in response to your actual statement about High Magic. Do you consider Dwarves having Runecasters (2nd I know for the time being, but that seems to be your personal Warhammer holy text) special snowflakes? It was exclusive to Dwarves. Also, if it's going to take forever before it becomes relevant, what difference does it make then? It's at best a paragraph on how it can be done, for those that would because it's in the fluff. :?

I, personally, want Wardancers to be reprinted in 4th. An even more attainable special snowflake. :D

An, for the recor, all snowflakes are technically special as no two are alike. ;)

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:08 pm
by easl
CapnZapp wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:38 pm
easl wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:07 pm

That completely undermines the Witch class though. One of possibly only two benefits to playing that class was that they can use the Witch! talent to pick arcane spells from multiple colors. Give an equivalent benefit to Wizards, and there's almost no reason at all to consider the Witch class as being a cool alternative, since you've given their only cool shtick to the Wizards.
*shrug*

Since witch is on the career path from hedge wizard, witches are plenty cool anyway.
Are you referring to 2nd Ed? In 4th they're not only separate careers, they're in separate classes.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:14 pm
by easl
totsuzenheni wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:54 pm
I'm taken what's been written above as fact. With that in mind, if someone wanted to use CapnZapp's rule but also wanted the Witch to be worth considering perhaps some penalty could be imposed on the Wizards using adjacent colours, either in terms of the mechanics of casting or learning the spells, or in terms of punishment from their college and/or the law.
Based on the setting background, I'd think that the appropriate 'penalty' would be greater miscasting rates and exposure to corruption. After all, that's why the elves suggested human wizards only focus on one color (or at least, that's the story they give...). And greater exposure to corruption is the penalty the witch career risks when they work their pan-color magic.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:32 am
by Knight of the Lady
Jareth Valar wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:03 pm
Knight of the Lady wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:34 pm
Crabs are as they are.

But anyway, giving some basic rules for High Magic is certainly a thing that should be considered, by me if by no one else, for my own games.
I would be interested in your thoughts, if you would be willing to share.
I'm all to happy to share what I've got on the subject right now. But please note that these are just loose ideas for the time being. Which may or may not be expanded on at a later date.

The basic idea is that since High Magic deals with all the magical winds, low level wizards would be able to effectively combine different spells from different winds into combo-spells. So that for example you can give yourself magical claws that also has the ability to banish daemons and gives off light to illuminate the dark. Either with a talent/trait representing High Magic training but with penalties the more spells and winds that are involved in a single combo-spell. But that the effects from the spells have cumulative penalties so the more bang, the harder it is to get it off.

Right now I don't pretend to have much in terms of mechanics but if I get around to try and design this I'll write it up. ;)

Re: High mage question

Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:06 am
by Hyarion
Here's one take on how I might do High Magic. This is somewhat off the cuff, so if you need any explanations please ask, I'm happy to go into further detail.

- Arcane spells can now combine lore traits from any lore(s) the wizard knows at a -10 penalty for each additional lore. (Blast benefits from Fire Magic's burning token and Shadow Lore's ignore armor for example).
- To do so, the player declares what spell they are attempting to cast, and under what lore they are attempting to cast it. "I'm casting Blast (Fire with Shadow) " The player needs to make a successful Channelling(Shadow) roll which does not add SL for the purposes of casting the spell, but represents his ability to successfully weave Shadow into the spell. The player would then Channel(Fire) as desired and cast the spell as normal.
- Arcane spells can potentially use different lore traits from any lore(s) the wizard knows. Suffocate is a Lore of Shadow spell. If the wizard chooses, it can generate a burning token as if it were a Lore of Fire spell and *not* ignore non-magic armor like a regular Shadow spell.
- Petty magic may now also take advantage of Lore traits (but only one) from any lore the wizard knows.
- None of the above options are mandatory, meaning if the player so wishes, they can cast Suffocate as a normal Shadow spell.
- All miscasts on Casting Rolls involving any of the above options are now rolled on the Major Miscast Table.
Consecutive Miscasts add a +10 bonus to your next miscast roll.
- High Magic options must be declared prior to casting the spell. If a miscast is rolled and Fate is used, reroll the dice and use the new result for seeing if something is successful, but the effects of the Miscast are unavoidable and are still worked out.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:48 am
by Knight of the Lady
Hyarion wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:06 am
Here's one take on how I might do High Magic. This is somewhat off the cuff, so if you need any explanations please ask, I'm happy to go into further detail.

- Arcane spells can now combine lore traits from any lore(s) the wizard knows at a -10 penalty for each additional lore. (Blast benefits from Fire Magic's burning token and Shadow Lore's ignore armor for example).
- To do so, the player declares what spell they are attempting to cast, and under what lore they are attempting to cast it. "I'm casting Blast (Fire with Shadow) " The player needs to make a successful Channelling(Shadow) roll which does not add SL for the purposes of casting the spell, but represents his ability to successfully weave Shadow into the spell. The player would then Channel(Fire) as desired and cast the spell as normal.
- Arcane spells can potentially use different lore traits from any lore(s) the wizard knows. Suffocate is a Lore of Shadow spell. If the wizard chooses, it can generate a burning token as if it were a Lore of Fire spell and *not* ignore non-magic armor like a regular Shadow spell.
- Petty magic may now also take advantage of Lore traits (but only one) from any lore the wizard knows.
- None of the above options are mandatory, meaning if the player so wishes, they can cast Suffocate as a normal Shadow spell.
- All miscasts on Casting Rolls involving any of the above options are now rolled on the Major Miscast Table.
Consecutive Miscasts add a +10 bonus to your next miscast roll.
- High Magic options must be declared prior to casting the spell. If a miscast is rolled and Fate is used, reroll the dice and use the new result for seeing if something is successful, but the effects of the Miscast are unavoidable and are still worked out.
I just want to say that I think that this is an excellent foundation for High Magic.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:14 pm
by Jareth Valar
Hyarion wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:06 am
Here's one take on how I might do High Magic. This is somewhat off the cuff, so if you need any explanations please ask, I'm happy to go into further detail.

- Arcane spells can now combine lore traits from any lore(s) the wizard knows at a -10 penalty for each additional lore. (Blast benefits from Fire Magic's burning token and Shadow Lore's ignore armor for example).
Solid thought. Have to play around with numbers, but -10 just seems a bit light at first glance.
- To do so, the player declares what spell they are attempting to cast, and under what lore they are attempting to cast it. "I'm casting Blast (Fire with Shadow) " The player needs to make a successful Channelling(Shadow) roll which does not add SL for the purposes of casting the spell, but represents his ability to successfully weave Shadow into the spell. The player would then Channel(Fire) as desired and cast the spell as normal.
Just to cut down on extra die rolls, they already have the concept of combined rolls (like Shadowing). Roll once and compare to both skills. SL is determined from the lowest of the skills IIRC. Both have to pass or no go. Maybe an option?
- Arcane spells can potentially use different lore traits from any lore(s) the wizard knows. Suffocate is a Lore of Shadow spell. If the wizard chooses, it can generate a burning token as if it were a Lore of Fire spell and *not* ignore non-magic armor like a regular Shadow spell.
This one, not so sure about. Sounds cool, but...
- Petty magic may now also take advantage of Lore traits (but only one) from any lore the wizard knows.
Chosen and frozen or choosable at time of casting?
- None of the above options are mandatory, meaning if the player so wishes, they can cast Suffocate as a normal Shadow spell.
Definitely.
- All miscasts on Casting Rolls involving any of the above options are now rolled on the Major Miscast Table.
Consecutive Miscasts add a +10 bonus to your next miscast roll.
Option, since you are effectively rolling twice/against 2 skills perhaps have the miscast count for all skills involved?
Possibly have combining winds ignore Aetheric Attunement? Or have Aetheric Attuniment be a per wind Talent? Just thinking out-loud.
- High Magic options must be declared prior to casting the spell. If a miscast is rolled and Fate is used, reroll the dice and use the new result for seeing if something is successful, but the effects of the Miscast are unavoidable and are still worked out.
I can see that.

Re: High mage question

Posted: Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:18 pm
by Thor
I like the idea of using the Lore traits, at the very least it shows a level of apprenticeship in learning how to combine the Winds of Magic before going on to study a Lore of High Magic and effectively retiring a PC.