Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Content

How does magic work in this game? Good question! That is something we’ve been struggling with for (checks watch) a year! 😀 So it must be a thorny problem, let’s talk about it.

Hey folks, Matt Colville at your service. This post comes after whipping up a new Mage prototype (i.e. How I Spent My Saturday Instead Of Taking A Day Off And Playing Baldur’s Gate 3) and I’m pretty excited by it and I think it will work. But then, we always think that; that’s the purpose of testing. Disabusing us of our lofty fantasies.

I know how magic works in Orden, our fantasy setting. Spells are words, phrases, and sentences in High Draconic (need a better name for that. Looks great written down! Then you say it and everyone thinks you’re talking about a new conic section that’s shaped like a hydra). The First Language is baffling, almost impossible for mortals to master, but wizards make a go of it and some of them get pretty far!

Under this model, what does a Mage do in our RPG?

Well one way you could do it is give the player a bunch of words and let them make actual sentences by putting the words together however they want. Subjects, Verbs, Objects. But that doesn’t really work because that’s not how spells work. Or rather, if it were, it would be just Subject and Verb because the Subject is always “I” the spellcaster doing the Verbing. I can already hear the cascade of clacky keys from folks who want to argue about this. 😀

Indeed this is close to how spellcasting works in the classic Ars Magica rpg except not really. There are five verbs:

Creo=Create

Intelligo=Perceive/Know

Muto=Change

Rego=Move/Control

Perdo=Destroy

And then five objects:

Animal=Living Animals

Aquam=Liquids

Ignem=Fire

Aurum=Air

Corpus=Humanoids

You might imagine your character is speaking sentences on the fly, combining verbs and objects however you like! But actually no. 😀 “Creo Ignem!” is not a spell you cast that “creates fire,” it’s a school of magic that includes lots of bog-standard fantasy spells like Heat of the Searing Forge or Lamp Without Flame. Cool names though!

We could do that! And we did! And we didn’t like it! But we’re getting ahead of ourselves here. Ars Magica is a really cool game by the way, tons of cool ideas in there.

Another game that really does give the player the power to dynamically build unique spells including a single word, short phrase, or whole sentence, is Epic Spell Wars which is not an RPG, but rather a beer-and-pretzels card game that’s a lot of fun.

In Epic Spell Wars, spells have a Source, a Quality, and a Destination and as long as you don’t use more than one of the same type, you are free to combine them however you want up to three. You can cast a single spell, be it a Source, Quality, or Destination, or combine two or three.

And you get spells like… Midnight Merlin’s [S] Ballsy [Q] Meatier Swarm [D]! Which is very silly and fun. Each of those is also a spell, so you could just cast “Ballsy!” and it does something. But stringing three words together creates an… epic… spell. Epic Spell Wars. Good name! And it sounds a lot like how magic works in Orden!

But that doesn’t make a lot of sense in an RPG. Whatever else is true about Mages in this game, their kit is broadly as useful as everyone else’s and if you CAN cast a Word, Phrase, or Sentence then in some sense those things need to be balanced against each other. A competitive game like Epic Spell Wars doesn’t need to worry about that.

But if a single-word spell is about the same as a normal ability from another class, how then would a three-word spell NOT be like taking three turns all at once? It’s not that simple, there are ways to skin this. For instance, we built a Mage prototype that we figured would work and it looked like this:

With the Mage’s class resource being Eloquence and as they gain eloquence they can cast more “complex” spells.

If you read through this you might notice that there are single words, like Burn! And then short phrases like Burning Light and then longer more complicated phrases like Summon Fire Elemental. And if we translated all these names into Latin… I mean, Draconic, you’d see the same elements in different spells. All spells that summoned something would use the same Latin root, all fire spells would use the latin word for Fire or whatever.

But otherwise, this class works sort of like any other. You don’t really “spend” your resource, it unlocks more spells as the battle rages, but otherwise these abilities are very like all the other class abilities.

It’s worth taking a detour here to explain: what we’re testing right now are not “first-level characters,” we’re testing archetypes. A first level character will be much simpler than the characters we’ve been previewing here. Still more competent and heroic than your average d20 Fantasy hero, but not THIS competent. Not “summon a fire elemental at level one” competent!

Anyway, that mage is what we tested and it worked, in that you could play it, but it did not work when it came to delivering on the fantasy of being a Mage.

That was the feedback from the Mage player. “It worked, but I didn’t feel like a wizard.” Fair enough!

Why!?

Why is this such a pain in the ass? We had a whole round of mage testing with a Spell Misfire Chart you rolled on when you mispronounced Draconic and it didn’t matter how we implemented it, people assumed we meant “Like a Wild Magic Table which everyone hates.” Ok, well… that wasn’t what we were doing but starting from a negative position where you have to argue with people just to get them to look at your design is not a great way to start.

Another version of the Mage, we had basically reinvented the Linear Fighters, Quadratic Wizards problem. Great. Good news for people that like bad design!

The same playtest where we debuted this new Mage, we also debuted the Shadow, and Lars was the Shadow player. He likes playing rogues in video games and never liked the rogue in 5E, so I specifically wanted him to try the Shadow, and he liked it a lot. I was another player in that game and it was really cool to watch Lars use my design in novel ways I hadn’t imagined but which worked great.

Fury, Conduit, Tactician, Talent, Beastheart, Shadow, no problem. It was FUN to prototype these. Why is the Mage different? Why can’t it be like its siblings?

The Core Fantasy

Pretty disgusted with myself and my inability to crack this problem, I took a step back Saturday morning and thought.

This is a minor point but sometimes thinking about problems on your day off? You get different answers. You’re not working, so you’re free to think about problems without feeling like your ideas need to bear fruit.

So, take a step back, forget Orden and High Draconic, what is the core fantasy of being a Wizard? Because that’s what’s failing right now. We proved we could make a Mage that worked but was boring and the reason it was boring was: it worked like all the other classes. Thinking about that feedback, this answer popped into my head:

“Wizards break the rules.”

THAT is what people expect, I think. They mean “the rules of reality” but that often translates to “the rules of the game.” A, 18th level Wizard in 5e costs just as many “levels,” just as many experience points as an 18th level Fighter, but one of those classes is WILDLY more versatile and powerful. Eventually d20 Wizards can alter reality with a word while their fighter buddies are…swinging a sword! Cool! For the wizard.

Another way of looking at it is: wizards are the exception. Maybe they don’t break a rule, they just use it in some way no other class does. Ok but what rule?

The Buffalo

There’s a design principle I know as “use all the parts of the buffalo.” Which is also good advice for writers and it’s sort of the Writing/Design version of Occam’s Razor. Occam says “Do not multiply entities unnecessarily.” In other words, IF you can solve a problem with your story by using some existing character? Do it. Don’t invent a new one. This would have probably been one of the Classical Unities if Aristotle had been a playwright instead of a critic.

And there’s a moment when I’m writing a novel, or designing a game, or writing the story for a game, where suddenly you realize you have more solutions than problems and you can use THIS existing thing to solve this other problem.

That feels really good, that moment. That is when you know you’re onto something, it’s gonna work.

This principle is always in the back of my head and I started to wonder if there was anything about our game I could use to make the Mage more mage-like. And I literally started going through all the rules. Is there any rule we already have, that the Mage could use in a novel way?

Initiative

I pretty quickly hit upon Initiative and then I got a VERY radical idea. A lot of grognards are gonna laugh their asses off if this turns out to be how our Mage actually works. 😀

So you all already know how initiative works. “Who goes first” is basically random, a roll-off between the Heroes and the Enemies. Whoever wins gets to PICK someone (or a group, in the case of the Director) to act, from those characters who haven’t already acted yet in this round.

This is working. It does what we want and we’ve seen it work. And it gives us this interesting “end of round” space. So some abilities last until the end of my next turn, or my target’s next turn, but some–like triggered actions–reset at the end of THE round. We like this. Might not last! But right now we like it.

So…what if, right, what if…the difference between a Word, Phrase, or Sentence in spellcasting is…how many TURNS it takes to cast. Not how many rounds! That would be insane. But imagine an encounter with five heroes and five groups of goblins.

The wizard goes first and uses their action to begin casting Summon Earth Elemental. It has a casting time of 6 turns and the wizard using their action to start casting it is the first of those turns. (So spells with a casting time of 1 turn are your cantrips, or at-wills. They cast with a single action).

Now the Goblin Snipers go. That’s the second turn.

Another hero goes. Turn three.

The Goblin Shaman goes. Turn four.

Another hero goes, turn five.

A Goblin Spinecleaver goes, that’s turn six, so at the end of that goblin’s turn, the wizard summons an earth elemental. And this all happens in the span of a single round!

THAT is exciting to me. I think it might work? I don’t know what the range of “casting times” might be, that’s something we have to dial in, but I think at MOST it would be “one and a half rounds worth of turns.” So SOME spells you start casting now, might not fire until the next round? But those would be edge cases.

Also, this seems...natural. It seems well-adapted for our game because, since we don't have the d20 "Do I Lose A Turn" die, a LOT of stuff happens in a single round, Battles feel more compressed than a d20 fantasy game. Waiting rounds to cast a spell would be basically impossible, but turns creates a LOT of interesting gameplay where "keeping the mage alive" is suddenly actually important!

I wrote this up along with a lot of other rules about…what happens if you take damage while casting, can you decide to stop casting in the middle, and I think we have good and fun answers for this, but it needs to be tested!

This may not work. It might create weirdness. Weirdness like…at the beginning of the encounter when everyone’s alive, a 5-turn spell happens in a single round! At the end of the battle, when most of the enemies are dead, 5 turns might be TWO rounds!! ‘Cause most of the goblins are dead so they’re not taking turns!

Well, maybe that’s not really a problem. Probably if the battle is in that state? You’re not trying to cast epic spells anyway.

What if a battle only HAS a few enemies in the first place? Now spells take longer to cast in terms of “rounds” because people are taking fewer turns per round, because there are fewer people!

But I’m not sure that’s a real problem. Remember that Villains go many times in a single round. And we’re not imagining spells that take…fifteen turns to cast. I think 6 is a lot! So I suspect the actual edge case is; few enemies in this combat for whatever reason, so now some spells finish next round instead of this one. Not a huge deal. But we don’t know!

It might create weirdness where the mage always wants to go first and other characters object! Yeah that sounds like it might happen. But I’m not sure it’s actually a problem. It might be a feature! Suddenly, who goes first is an important choice! Whereas in d20 fantasy, there IS no choice.

No choice is a lot simpler! But this might be more fun? Might be miserable. Might be fun for some, miserable for others. We already know some groups don’t like our initiative system because they can’t decide who should go next and just argue about it, but we think the Director can handle that if we provide them some useful advice.

And if mages end up fighting to go first all the time? Well, we can give them a trigger that lets them start casting a spell as a reaction to someone else going. Does that trigger mean now 1-turn spells are FREE? I dunno, depends on the wording of the trigger. Maybe the trigger makes it explicit that you’re “stealing” your action from your own turn and so when your turn comes, if you used that trigger, now you only have a maneuver. Which we’d have to do anyway otherwise that trigger would let you get two “spellcasting turns” in one round. Game design folks!

So, it's weird, it's cool, it might suck, we don’t know. So we’re gonna test it soon. No one will be surprised if it doesn’t work, but we can only try to fix it once we know WHY it didn’t work.

The reason I think grognards will find this hysterical is…this is how ALL of AD&D was supposed to work back in the late 70s. ALL weapons and spells had a “number of segments” it took to cast/use where a Segment was a division of a round. Greatswords take longer to swing than daggers! I don’t personally know anyone who played with Segments and Weapon Speed. I know folks who sorta used these rules, but not as they were intended.

So it’d be funny if we end up stealing Segments from AD&D by way of convergent evolution. 😀

Anyway

We got a lot more posts percolating. We took our game to a local convention in Los Angeles and demo’ed it to some of our LA friends and some random passers-by, you’ll get a post about how that went. I still got a post on Negotiation I need to finish. I need to revise how Weapons work in our game and that’ll turn into a post eventually. AND we’ve spent quite a lot of brainpower on the Resource Economy that’s going to turn into an epic post at some point once we’ve had time to test it.

If you notice a drop in posts here it’s only because we’re at the stage where we need to start testing whole adventures and that takes a lot of time. We’ve got the single-encounter experience pretty-well dialed in and now it’s time to see how adventures with many Rests in them work.

But we still got lots to talk about. I gotta go revise how Weapons work now that we’ve lived with the design for a while and I’m excited about that. And I think this week we start testing a Big Adventure to see how our resource economy works.

Lots to talk about!

Thanks To You

Lastly, I want to thank everyone reading this for your support. This patreon (plus sales of our products) is funding the development of this game right now, which is an enormous privilege. What it means, practically, is that we don’t have to go to Crowdfunding right this second. And that means, once we do go to crowdfunding, A: the sample adventure and pregens will be a LOT more polished and close to final design. B: the time between going to crowdfunding and finishing the actual game is shorter. Because some of that development time is happening now!

That’s only possible thanks to you, so I really hope you’re enjoying reading this stuff! It’s SUPER cool for us to see folks in our discord talking about the design and how it's evolving. It’s very rewarding to see more and more people thinking like game designers and discovering the nuts and bolts (mostly nuts) of actually figuring all this out.

So, thanks again folks! More cool stuff soon!

Peace, out!

Files

Comments

Kuroshi

It's not an RPG example, but I like the way that this concept captures the cast times of mage characters I am used to seeing in MMOs. I'm excited to see how testing it goes.

Quest Bruv

I love these posts. I've played a decent number of TTRPGs, both as a player and a GM (I actually just finished running an adventure using your Circle Q setting in Kids on Bikes), and as part of all that I've done quite a bit of amateur game design. I've come up with items, spells, classes, and all kinds of other things, and it's led me to enjoy the games I play differently. I have toyed around with the idea of designing my own system, just for fun, to play with friends, and reading these posts has changed the way I think about design. Thanks for putting all this out there. It's a lot of fun to read and think about, and I think it will continue to change how I enjoy the games I play with friends and the stories we create.

Sean Teater

I think it would be terrible to try to do on the table, but I've been playing through Baldur's Gate 1 for the first time and been loving the time system. You really have to try to hunker down and kill the mages while they're casting with attacks and abilities that go off as quickly as you can manage, which turns higher level spells with low casting time into tools that punch way harder than their damage output might suggest. It creates a fun minigame, I only worry that the mage player might feel like they're always getting ganged up on/target by the DM. But, depending on how all the other systems shake out, it seems like it will still increase the tactical aspects of the game. I look forward to the next update!

Jerad Daugherty

I like the idea of initiative being a stat that the Mage prioritizes, it fits in really well when you read about mages and wizards in fantasy. Party enters combat and the mage either flings part of the opening salvo or ends up detonating a huge, fight altering spell.

slvgRPGs

This is is SO evocative! The situations this creates are running through my mind already; I hope the design works out!

Roman Penna

Cool to see how Mages are developing, using intiative like this is very interesting to me, and will be cool to see how it develops over time.

Emmanouil Tragakis

The solution of turns in order to resemble casting time is really interesting. Maybe as the Mage progresses they need less time to cast simpler spells? Also, it is challenging for the Mage player to guess which spell is the most appropriate for each occasion. But yet again, most Mages are supposed to be clever... My only concern is that Mage players might feel awful for not guessing correctly and thus that meaty high-level spell that needed 5 turns to cast is now not needed. But maybe (just maybe) the Mage can alter the casting as a reaction and thus they can cast a lower-level spell of the same school. Maybe this can be a feature of a subclass or a feat (should you choose to insert these in your game). Or maybe, when the Mage takes damage while preparing the spell (and thus amassing arcane energy) there is a chance that something wild happens. Btw, I love Wild Magic.

John Brocklehurst

The initial mage design reminds me of a Steve Jackson choose your own adventure book from when I was a kid. If you chose to play a mage you had to leaf through a spell book and choose 5 three letter word Spells. Pop, Bop, Rap etc. These would represent the Spells you knew for the entire adventure. The updated design sounds extremely interesting also. Protect the mage until they can decimate the bad guys.

Bryce Anderson

Super interesting idea! That sounds like it could deliver on the fantasy of channeling and casting spells. Especially when, in Orden, you’re speaking so more complex spells would take longer to get through. Real incantation-like.

Anastasia bat Lilith

I'm glad to hear that the Mage has taken a positive leap forward! Spells being X number of turns passing likely means that a wizard is "more powerful" either in a scenario where there's lots of PCs or lots of enemies. Both of those scenarios likely support the fantasy of the wizard? Raistlin is cool because he's frail, and able to conjure magic while his friends stave off the enemies. This seems like a similar sort of spellcaster, and I like it a lot. Hope it pans out!

Ian Hastings

Fascinating. I know, at least in D&D, that the idea is that while everyone has a turn the "action" is all taking place within the same 6 seconds. So no matter how many combatants are in combat it will always be 6 seconds per round. Now you can still determine when a spell goes off within those individual turns but the amount of time doesn't increase per round. I would say that if a mage casts a spell and the amount of time it takes goes to the end of the round, that is when it is cast. Having to track it over multiple rounds doesn't sound like fun. What if the mage goes last in round? That is why they pay Matt the big bucks. :)

Philip Richardson

Big fan of the casting taking turns. Makes the theatre of the mind I’ve always envisioned that much more “real.” A mage uttering their incantation while goblins charge at them and fire arrows makes so much sense. I’m excited to see how getting hit while casting or the made having abilities while casting could look.

Philip Richardson

I thought something similar. Nothing worse than waiting to do something cool and have another player “steal the kill.” Being able to refocus into a different spell at the time of it completing would be a potential solution to this. I was also curious when I’d see the “I love Wild Magic” in the comments! Haha!

Mark Rhodes

I really like this direction and am very interested in how the tests turn out. Back in 1st Ed days I played in an Against the Giants campaign that used a house ruled version of segments, initiatives and casting times (but not weapon speeds). Rounds were 10 segments, initiative was 1d6 +bonus for dex and that was the segment you went on. Spells took the time in segments the PH said and could be interrupted while they were being cast, so protecting your casters and trying to interrupt opponent casters was a big part of the combat tactics. It added a fun element of strategy that isn't present in subsequent D&D editions. There was also a house rule that fighters with two attacks went on their rolled init +2 and init -2 which gave us more to track but was more interesting than taking all your attacks at once. There's lots I don't miss about 1st ed, but I do kinda miss this homebrewed initiative system.

GubDM

We'll only know after it's tested, but my worry for the new design is the wizard ends up feeling like they have a "I did nothing" turn when they cast anything other than a cantrip. The payoff of the spell 6 turns later better be fuckin massive, massive enough that everyone at the table is seriously looking forward to it. Massive enough to change the conditions of the test.

GubDM

I love the idea of casting an AoE spell before the intended targets enter the AoE. Like predicting where they're going to go. Or creating an objective for your party to push the enemies into where the AoE will be.

Mattamue

I thought the same thing about the cast bar!

Barrett Froc

Finally, a reason for the mage to haste themselves! This is also how final fantasy tactics works it's spells, and it's my all time favorite video game. Love this design.

Simoom

I love it so much, I say go even longer than 6 rounds! Imagine the growing sense of alarm of the opposing side as the mage cast goes 4, 5, 6 rounds and the sudden scramble to interrupt whatever the hell that is, the dance of maneuvers of the more mobile classes as they go to converge. Definitely a meta change, hopefully for the general good! and I think it also feeds the mage fantasy well (megalomania. 😃)

Richard Miller

Feels like it's a good fix. As Sam said, tension ratcheting up as character's realize a mage on the other side is STILL winding up. "Quick, somebody stop them!" There may also be a case where the mage wants to hold off starting until after a big group of foes has gone to avoid getting dogpiled in the middle of lengthy spell. It maybe also provides a window to cooperative spellcasting, with assistants able to help reduce the number of turns needed to cast. As for triggered action casting, perhaps language along the lines of "You must take the spellcasting action on your turn before the spell can be completed." Triggered on turn one and takes three turns? Then if you don't act on turn two or three, you're going to still be holding that spell until you do take your turn. More choices for the players to make.

Wesley

One problem with the increasing rounds to cast a spell at the end of combat, particularly when turn order varies round to round, is the possibility of the wizard's turn coming around while they're still casting their previous spell. Maybe that's fine to you, but it feels off to me. More troubling to me is the way this will interact with party size. Like if there are only three players and the wizard wants to cast a spell that takes 6 turns he risks getting dogpiled like crazy whereas if there are six players its a lot safer. You could argue that it increases verisimilitude to have smaller parties struggle more, but this feels like something that arises purely from the game system and not the facts of the situation.

Jeff Love

Can anyone link the Spell Misfire Chart please? I'm interested to see how much it's not like a Wild Magic Table.

Otávio Schaitza

I wonder if eloquence as a class resource could be used as a discount to how long it takes to cast a spell so that, as rounds go past, you start being able to cast spells faster. Your 3 turn spell becomes a cantrip on round 3, and your 10 turn spell becomes castable in one round on turn 5, while taking two rounds, and probably not a good choice, before that

Otávio Schaitza

Also, for the initiative problem, can see a triggered action saying that if at the beginning of the turn you are not casting a spell, you can start casting a spell, and if you are already casting it doesn't trigger. Could allow mages to go first without going first, and maybe create some interesting space for low turn cost spells (maybe you can cast two in a turn depend on how you position yourself on initiative, or you can cast something between the end of a big spell and the start of the next turn)

Guichenocrate

I really like the idea of spells having a longer duration that other characters' abilities. Not only does it give the opportunity for PCs to interrupt or move out of the way of enemy spell-casters - giving side objectives during a fight. But it also opens up opportunities for party combos such as moving creatures into an upcoming AoE, shredding enemy resistance against the upcoming spell, other party members using resources to speed up the casting or alter/improve its upcoming effect. In my mind, there is a real concern about spending resources on a spell that ends up being of limited use by the time it is being cast. Maybe it is part of the design of the class but sounds like a "feels bad moment" - and cancelling or repurposing the spell sounds a bit "cheap". I hope you find ways to circumvent that potential issue. My mind went quickly to the idea of stages, with an immediate minor effect on turn1, then additional effects that trigger on subsequent turns as you expands its complexity.

Sergei Lakissov

Seems like this system would need a variable length for spells based on the size of the encounter. Or alternatively, the spells might have their "turn cost" based not just on the power of the spell but based on the encounter size for which such a spell would be useful. As an option, multiple-target spells might have their cost be based on the amount of enemies or allies they will affect. Just shooting off ideas for how to address the different party size problem.

soundaxiom

I like the idea! Especially if there were some spells that were like: 1. start casting and something immediate happens 2. the longer you 'charge up' the spell by muttering more Draconic, the bigger the payoff when you release it. I trust MCDM will figure out the best design and am excited to see how it shapes up :)

Arek Schneyer

Oooooh! Very interesting! I’ll be intrigued to hear what becomes of this Mage system. I myself made a d&d class that worked something like this, though I did it when I was like 17 and it was a awful class.

Otto’s Workshop

I really dig how the magic system works with the proposed initiative system. Cinematically, it makes sense for the Mage to begin casting once they see trouble, so a surprise round could really break an encounter or make it more intense. I’ll be curious what the next info drop will be for the Mage since what we see first for this game is combat, which makes sense. How will magic work for exploration and social interactions?

Kyle Lowman

Regardless of whether it works, I love this design for the Mage. This is the caster fantasy I've been begging for for years.

Tyler Bonheur

Long time listener, first time caller. I love MCDM and what you guys are about and this post made me more excited for this upcoming game than I ever have been. If it wasn't evident, I normally play a spellcaster in 5e and I can't wait to get my hands on this game. Keep up the good work! Also, shoutout to Running the Game videos. I suggest them to all my friends that want to try their hand at GMing. I feel like most of it translates real well to other games.

Plaidpoet

I love the turns idea for magic, it solves any high lvl spam that points or mana pool could have and it just feels really good to protect the mage while they do the spell/chat/read the book,ring the bell etc…

slvgRPGs

Casting time in turns is JUST the thing I needed to see; this idea is phenomenal! I'm totally using it to revive the game I'm trying to make!

Tony Sladky

The Final Fantasy Tactics fan in me is excited to hear how this works out.

Tony Sladky

Also, I wonder if the triggered casting thing could work with a "You can't take your turn until after this spell resolves" clause. Might be a bit too punishing if you end up missing a whole round, but may be less confusing than essentially taking two partial turns in a round.

Wizard Shenanigans

I came to the comments to say this too, I'm glad someone else noticed this is very FF Tactics. It might get too "wait and see what happens" but it would be interested to see some martial classes also have "charge-up" attacks that take multiple rounds to execute. "The barbarian pulls back their greataxe, readying themselves for a spinning cleave in 1/2/3 turns that will damage all foes within 5/10/15 ft" "the fighter runs forward and digs the base of their spear into the ground, vaulting themselves into the air. The come down in a devastating blow in 1 turn that impales an enemy 10ft away".

Jan Plewa

Really cool idea! Might not wait for the answers and playtest try this at home ;)

Nikos Nikolaou

Just joined and reading everything from the beginning to get up to speed in the design proses. I would flip this design on its head. The wizard doesn’t want to play first. His resource is mana, he gathers mana per turn starting with one . The more mana he has the more he can do, expending mana on his turn to cast a spell. That means if he chooses to play first he has only a cantrip to use, if he waits for a better moment, channeling all his might for a few turns he can do way more. Maybe he also has abilities that Chanel more power in his turn?

Nikos Nikolaou

Or that could be the big difference between sorcerer and wizard archetypes. Both use turns as a resource but one is more tactical and one more on the spot caster

Abjak180

I don’t necessarily see this making sense from a believability perspective. Do they just not have mana outside of combat? What about combat triggers the mana building? I actually really like the proposed system and think they could really make it work. I’m a big fan of the video game Dragons Dogma, and this immediately made me imagine that games spellcasting. Charging up a huge spell while trying to avoid damage results in an epic payoff.