ICME Advanced Magic System

#1

Looking at the ICME Advanced Magic system, it seems to have become a form of Vancian/spell slot/limited resource magic system. You have a set of Stun Points that you spend to cast spells. Once you spend all your SP you can no longer cast spells. Unlike Vigilante City you can’t recover these Stun Points with a recovery roll. You can recover SP with a long rest in safety (or potions).

Personally, I dislike Vancian magic. One of the appeals of ICRPG to me is the “roll to cast” system. I also like the ICRPG:Magic system because there’s a way to recover HP (Recovery roll).

I know I can just use the “roll to cast” in ICME or house rule the SP recovery from Vigilante City for Advanced Magic (or even use the ICRPG:Magic system), but I’m wondering what was the reason for this change. There’s already limitations/danger for using Magic in ICRPG/ICME: Spell Burn, Mercurial Mishaps.

#2

It looks to me like magic was balanced around the commitment to sticking to turns in previous iterations. I believe RH said as much in previous videos. Also, the advanced one was balanced by that and hp costs. Looking at ICME, it seems not to stick to turns as much and the HP cost is gone.

Maybe that’s it? Not sure.

Personally, I prefer the basic magic system with mercurial magic table bolted on but to each their own.

#3

The two options for running magic in ICRPG have been discussed at great length.
The simple roll-to-cast method is what almost everyone uses. As the system and audience grew, there was a wide desire for a more in depth OPTIONAL system…thus the OPTIONAL casting system here was born, and eventually cleaned up.

My fav mage I ever played in ICRPG used the optional system, using HP (old way) instead of SP (new way)… it was a fantastic experience because I could tailor my strategies to the moment. If good-old roll-to-cast fits best, just use that and don;t sweat the more complex system :slight_smile:

#4

Thanks for the response.

I like the idea of the being adaptable as a Mage so the optional system appeals to me. In the old HP cost method (and the Vigilante City SP system) you always had a way to regain the fuel that powered the spells (Recovery roll). In the new Magic SP way, you don’t have that option. I’m just wondering what was the reason for the change.

It’s the whole “don’t remove the fence before you understand why the fence is there in the first place” thing. :slight_smile:

#5

I really like the ability of mages in the advanced system to boost the power for their spells, but I’m not keen on using either HP or SP as a metacurrency for doing that. Also, I don’t love the “schools” of magic, but that is largely a matter of taste, and I don’t have a better solution, so… shrugs

#6

Me too. I like versatility the Advanced Magic system provides. Personally, I like the HP/SP meta-currency system as well.

I’m just not a fan of a meta-currency system that has sleep as it’s general replacement method (Vancian, spell slot, etc).

#7

The Advanced Magic rules also has this bullet point:

Any time you are attacked, damaged, or hit in any way, whether you resist the damage or not, lose 1 STUN POINT

So does this mean if my wizard with 10 SP is in a combat and is attacked 10 times and successfully defends 10 times now has 0 SP?

#8

I like using just a casting roll, spell burn, and backfire are enough to keep the hero from relying too much on their magic.

#9

Make a ruling. You’re the GM.

#10

Just had an idea for a rule as an alternative to SP/HP burn. Mages can cast spells at higher power; for every level of power increase, rolls after casting involving the casting attribute are HARD for 1 TIMER per level of increase. So a spell cast at level 2 power would have 1 timer of HARD rolls; A spell cast at 3 power would have 2 TIMERS at hard; each level of mastery gives you a timer-free power increase.

Does this make sense? Does it feel weighty enough?

#11

Yes, but I’m just trying to understand the reason for the change and the rules as written for the new magic system.

#12

Interesting idea with the timers. What does it mean to have two times? Do they add?

#13

My initial thought is that they would add. If you wanted to, you could as an alternative say that tasks are double hard for a timer, then hard, then back to normal for a 3rd power spell; ot if you wanted to be kinder, double hard, then back to normal.

#14

Without intending any disrespect, there is nothing ambiguous about the rule as written, and you are presenting an edge case as a hypothetical. You didn’t ask about why attacks that don’t hit or do damage do SP, you asked whether attacks which were successfully defended against do SP.

#15

Yeah, it might have been better to ask my question about loosing Stun Points in another thread.

But, yes, it’s a edge case. I wrote it that way to confirm I understand the rules as written.

Maybe this would have been a better way to ask about that rule:

Based on the rule I quoted above, if one the following cases is true then the Mage will loose a Stun Point:

  1. If the Mage is attacked.
  2. If the Mage takes damage.
  3. If the Mage is hit but then resists the damage somehow.

In theory. a Mage can loose all their Stun Points without ever casting a spell.

Do you (or anyone else) read it the same way?

#16

It’s hard to get used to the idea that ICRPG is a book of suggestions and not “Play it RAW and shut up!”

#17

I didn’t read the rules, but from what I am reading then yes a wizard could lose all of his SP before he ever get the opportunity to cast spells.

My suggestion? Consider Stun Points like Concentration, but as a resource. Use it as a lever to cast some spells, when energy is forcefully projected from the wizard, and when an enchantment needs to be maintained. In that manner, it makes sense for a wizard to be unable to cast spells while getting smashed from all sides by aggressors.

As an additional lever, you may use HP costs as a requirement for stronger spells, up to you. The more levers, the more toys you’ll have to play with.

(probably yet another) Sorcerer type
#18

Yeah, that’s how I read it as well.

Hmm. Stun Points as Concentration is an interesting idea. I’ll have to think about that.

My current thought is house rule that an Advanced Magic character can use both HP and SP to pay for spells. SP would only be lost by casting spells and can only be recovered after a long rest. So you can cast spells to a certain point (SP) without too much trouble but after that it starts to drain you (HP).

Also, I was thinking of making the Mage have 2 different “flavors” that a Player can choose:

  1. The “Sorcerer” Mage would just be the basic roll to cast with the list of spells. The Sorcerer cannot create potions or create spells. They suffer the basic Spell Burn and Blunders.

  2. The “Wizard” Mage would use the Advanced Magic rules with the changes I mentioned above. The Wizard gain all the benefits and problems that come with Advanced Magic (Roll or Burn, Mercurial Failures, Spell Creation, etc.).

#19

I think flavors is a good way to look at different spellcasters! What do you mean by Advanced Magic character, what does he gain over an acolyte? And what would HP represent to you, when casting a spell with it?

Oh, also, do you use a table of blunders for your game?

#20

He means using the advanced magic rules - not that the spell caster is necessarily more “advanced” in the fiction.