PDA

View Full Version : The Magic System



maxwell123
21-04-2005, 10:43
What do you feel are the best and worst aspects of the current magic system?

How powerful an effect should magic have on the game?

What needs to be altered and why?

maxwell123
21-04-2005, 11:24
I like the way magic works in 6th edition. I think the removal of the card system and the reduction of the power of spells were good innovations this edition. I think the power of spells is just about right now.

I like the fact that wizards generate power themselves as opposed to the totally random 5th edition system. It makes sense that a magic heavy army would be able to harness much more power from the winds of magic than an army with less wizards.
It makes magic more reliable and able to used as part of the tactical plans of an army. In previous editions, random power generation made the magic phase extremely unpredictable. You couldn't plan anything around magic. 5th edition magic largely involved hoping to roll big, getting a heap of power cards and being able to cast your overpowered spells that could wipe out whole units in a single turn.

Individual spells are far less powerful now, but magic, whilst still not totally reliable (and nor should it be) can be worked into your armies' tactics better.

My main problem with the magic system currently is the ultra effectiveness of super magic heavy armies and the lack of effectiveness of medium level magic.

I certainly don't want to see any major change to the dice generation system, but I do feel a few minor changes are needed for better balance.

Here's a few ideas I think could help a lot:

*Make level 4 wizard lords count as a Lord choice and a Hero choice

Level 3 wizard lords would still count as a single Lord choice however.

What this would effectively do is limit 2K armies to 9 levels of magic (level 3, 3 level 2's) or 8 levels if you include a lvl 4 wizard lord (lvl 4 (lord and hero choice), 2 lvl 2's).

This change would make level 3 wizard lords actually used again, whilst not removing level 4 wizards from the game (though probably making them less common - which would be a good thing).

The effect of the extra spell provided by the level 4 though should not be underestimated. Especially if he has an arcane item giving him a further spell, that means your level 4 will have 5 spells compared to 3/4 for your level 3, making your level 4 pretty much guaranteed to get the spells you want, whilst the level 3 has a reasonable chance of missing out on the most powerful spells from your chosen lore.
I know I'd still use my level 4 Elf archmage from time to time, even with him taking up an extra Hero slot.
This way, the level 4 upgrade wouldn't be an automatic choice any more.

It isn't a huge change, although it does effectively cap the maximum magic level for 2K armies at 1 less power die (or 2 less if you have a level 4 wizard lord).

*Limit dispel scrolls to one per wizard

Scroll caddies are a blight on the game. Unfortunately, they are a necessary evil for some players, but are extremely boring and suck a lot of fun out of the magic phase.
I think limiting them to one per wizard would help improve medium magic armies significantly.

*Add a couple of anti-magic items to the common list

A couple of new common items available to all armies (e.g. a talisman or magic banner giving magic resistance (1), a dispel stone which grants +2 dispel dice vs a single spell, etc).

This would effectively provide low magic armies access to more resistance to magic, without making them able to shut down enemy magic too easily.

Wargamejunkie
21-04-2005, 15:06
I like everything that you have suggested with the exception of the lord lvl 4 wizard. To me you already pay more for them than a regular lord choice why penalize them more.

Neknoh
21-04-2005, 15:21
As said, I like it as well, though the level 4 Wizard would penalize Tzeentch players GREATLY!
Their ONLY option for a Lord is a Chaos Lord with the Mark of Tzeentch, making him a level 4 Sorceror, and Tzeentch MUST go Character heavy unless they play daemonic Legion.

Their mark benefits Characters, and characters only, but by making lvl 4 wizardlords cost 1 extra Character slot, a Tzeentchian Lord would penalize the Character selection as well.

And would Greater Daemons and Daemonprinces upgraded to level 4 wizards take 1 Lord and 2 Hero Choices?

As for Dispell Scrolls, why not just change them into something like: May use 2 Additional Dice to dispell a spell, it might be used either in conjunction with Dispell Dice or on its own, dispelling with 2 Dice.

That would balance it out a bit, making Scroll Caddies less effective while still keeping a decent Magic defence.

And, of course, there could be one or two things granting magic resistance 1 in the army lists, but not more, because if so, magic would be useless

Artemis_Quinn
21-04-2005, 20:01
Personally, I don't feel there are any real problems with the system in general for magical purposes. I feel that the problem does not lie with the characters but with the spells that they are allowed and not allowed access to.

Being a Skaven player I know that skaven Magic is one of the meanest things you can threaten your opponents with. Warplightning being a strangth 5 spell that the only real drawback is that I have a one in 6 chance of shooting myself once with it (and even lower than that with the warpstone amulet or the tenebrous cloak). I've seen that spell alone ploish off more units than I like to own up to.

I think that if spells like warplightning and both of the Heavens lore lightning spells were at least altered to where they weren't so superior to other spells other spells would be far more usable.

Then you would not hear the "hey, the magic phase is waaaaaaay too overpowered" argument so much if the few select "jerk" spells were watered down a bit. Then, Entirely mage armies could still focus around their wizards and other armies could bring their people to combat them some, but they wouldn't need two+ spell caddies. And sure the magic phase would still have at least some power, but why call the game fantasy if magic has no effect?

Well, that's what I think anyways.

maxwell123
21-04-2005, 20:20
I like everything that you have suggested with the exception of the lord lvl 4 wizard. To me you already pay more for them than a regular lord choice why penalize them more.

For the sake of game balance. Yeah, level 4 wizard lords are already expensive, but they are generally what make magic heavy armies so powerful.


As said, I like it as well, though the level 4 Wizard would penalize Tzeentch players GREATLY!

And rightfully so. Tzeentch Lords are a pet hate of a lot of players because they are such mighty wizards and so hard in combat as well.
A Tzeentch Lord is almost as hard as a Vampire Lord in combat and is a superior wizard.
A Vampire Lord currently takes up a Lord and Hero choice. A Tzeentch Chaos Lord should too.
It wouldn't hurt Tzeentch unfairly at all. It would just limit their magical power (and the maximum power available to ALL magic heavy armies, including Slann, High Elves and Dark Elves who are all superior wizards to Tzeentchian Sorcerors).

anarchistica
21-04-2005, 22:14
What do you feel are the best and worst aspects of the current magic system?
Best is that the dice system is easy and clear.

Worst is that it encourages taking as much magical power as possible, the miscast tables and the poor balance between risk and power.


How powerful an effect should magic have on the game?
About as much effect as 2 Lvl 2's in each army now have.


What needs to be altered and why?
I'd kill off the current system. Wizards would be divided in 3 categories: Mages, Shamen and Priests. Each would have 4 Levels.

Mages are those who've studied magic and know of it's powers and risks. Their spells would be more sophisticated, but they wouldn't take alot of risks. Levels would be: Apprentice, Practiced Magician, Archmage and 'Special Character'.

Shamen have natural magical powers, and only learn about the risk and power from practice. Generally, their use lacks sophistication, but is very effective and risky. High level Shamen would be those lucky enough to survive the use of magic for long enough to be able to control their powers to some extent, and they would be quite tough as they managed to survive all their failures. Levels would be: Talent, Shaman, Great Shaman and 'Special Character'.

Priests somehow force things to happen purely through strength of will. Since they do not tap into the Winds of Magic, there is no risk but that of failure. However, they can strain themselves too much, leading to a temporary lapse of power. Levels would be: Cleric, Priest, High Priest and 'Special Character'.

All spells would be similar to Drain Magic and Invocation of Nehek. You can cast them at a low level with little risk and effect, or at a high level with more risk and far more powerful effect.

Dice work nicely to represent magical power, though their generation would be far less dependent on the level of the caster, and more on the size of the army. In fact, i think it would pretty well if you get magical power based on the current size of your army, representing how the use of magic strains the body and encouraging people to not hold back when using it. This would allow for a system where all extra dice from items would be generated at the start of the battle instead of at the start of a turn.

Dice would represent willpower too, which can be used to dispel spells or cast priestly spells. This way a single priests could either stop a powerful mage from blasting his friends away, or give away a show worthy of the representative of a god.

High level Wizards would probably get +1, +2, etc bonuses to casting, perhaps re=rolls too. Also, all would have an inherent bonus for spells targetting them and spells from the Lore they use.

Hmmm, ok, rant there, sorry for the hijack. :p

maxwell123
22-04-2005, 01:31
Anarchista,

Wow. Some major changes there, but very interesting ideas nonetheless, albeit a little complex.
Remember, this game is designed for young players too and whilst I personally wouldn't have a problem with those rules, I think they would confuse quite a LOT of players.

The only part of your ideas I don't really like is basing dice generation on army size. It was a good innovation by GW to make power generation based on the level of wizards in the army this edition IMO and I don't feel the basic dice generation system really needs altering. A few tweaks to limit the upper levels would certainly help, but the way dice are generated works well.
Magic is more reliable now and can actually be included as part of your tactics a better than previous editions where individual spells were hideously powerful but magic itself was highly unpredictable.

An army with more wizards should have a greater number of dice. Perhaps the base 2 power/dispel dice could be made random, generating D3 instead, but other than that, adding extensive randomness and removing the solid dice base of magic armies will make the magic phase revert to be completely unpredictable and further isolated from the other phases.


All spells would be similar to Drain Magic and Invocation of Nehek. You can cast them at a low level with little risk and effect, or at a high level with more risk and far more powerful effect.

Giving ALL spells three separate levels may be taking it a bit too far, but I certainly would like to see more spells with multiple casting values than currently available. It'd be cool to have 2-3 spells in each lore with multiple casting values.

Trunks
22-04-2005, 01:47
I like how the magic system works on the whole.

These are the changes I would make though:

The "base" dice generated by the army would not be set at 2. Armies would generate one dispel die and one power die per 1000 points. Dwarves would get an extra two dispel dice to keep their anti-magic power up.

Wizards would not be able to act as little batteries that fuel each other. Each wizard would generate it's dice and no other wizard could use those dice. Any wizard could draw upon the base dice generated by the army existing though. I just hate the idea of four wizards showing up and only one casting the spells with the other three just running in random directions. It's goofy.

Those are the only real changes I'd make to the system itself.

I'd also like to see another anti-magic item or two given to each army that doesn't require a wizard. I'd like to see armies that don't "have to include a wizard" just for anti-magic power that aren't Khorne, Dwarves, or Lizardmen. I'm sure some heroic/villanous guy could find an anti-magic pendent or something. I'd like another option other than buying a scroll caddie.

The Phoenix
22-04-2005, 02:04
Wizards would not be able to act as little batteries that fuel each other. Each wizard would generate it's dice and no other wizard could use those dice. Any wizard could draw upon the base dice generated by the army existing though. I just hate the idea of four wizards showing up and only one casting the spells with the other three just running in random directions. It's goofy.That, by itself, might be all that needs to be changed. It a fairly simple rule and it prevents a single super powerful wizard from doing everything.

-Phoenix

anarchistica
22-04-2005, 03:05
Anarchista,
It's anarchist + ica, no capital. :p


Wow. Some major changes there, but very interesting ideas nonetheless, albeit a little complex.
No it ain't, it just seems that way.


Remember, this game is designed for young players too and whilst I personally wouldn't have a problem with those rules, I think they would confuse quite a LOT of players.
If i'd write it out it'd be easy to understand.


The only part of your ideas I don't really like is basing dice generation on army size. It was a good innovation by GW to make power generation based on the level of wizards in the army this edition IMO and I don't feel the basic dice generation system really needs altering. A few tweaks to limit the upper levels would certainly help, but the way dice are generated works well.
Nah, i'd like to see a bonus die for every, say, 20 models currently alive in the army. Kind of like with Greenskins now, but without the CC and range thing. Greenskins could produce double dice, as could Elves to balance from their fewer numbers, etc.


Magic is more reliable now and can actually be included as part of your tactics a better than previous editions where individual spells were hideously powerful but magic itself was highly unpredictable.
Yes, that would stay, it would even be more predictable and 'useful'.


An army with more wizards should have a greater number of dice. Perhaps the base 2 power/dispel dice could be made random, generating D3 instead, but other than that, adding extensive randomness and removing the solid dice base of magic armies will make the magic phase revert to be completely unpredictable and further isolated from the other phases.
If we keep the current rules, that should change to 1PD/DD per 1000 points, 0PD/2DD for Dwarfs. It makes more sense.

But consider numbers giving a bonus, it would help infantry and hurt cavalry and expensive characters.


Giving ALL spells three separate levels may be taking it a bit too far, but I certainly would like to see more spells with multiple casting values than currently available. It'd be cool to have 2-3 spells in each lore with multiple casting values.
Well i'm not saying it'd work for all spells, but for alot it can. I've been toying with the idea in my head, when i typed that it was first put on paper.

Lores would be based more on "general feeling", than actual spells. To give you a quick idea of what i have in mind (note it's 5 am here :p):

Lore of Fire

Scorch - S4 hits, 24" range

1D3 = 3+
1D6 = 5+
2D6 = 8+

Fireball - center on a model in the front rank, S4

3" template, 4+
5" template, 6+

Wall of Fire - 1" thick wall, models in it/walking through suffer S4 hit

4" wide, 10+
+2", +1 to cast

Fury - Target is Frenzied, 12" range

Single Model/Double Range, 3+/5+
Unit/Double Range, 6+/8+

Lore of Life

Master of Nature - Enemy within 6" of terrain feature within 6" of caster

D6 S3 hits, 3+
S4, +1
S5, +2
Double both ranges, +1
No range limit, +3

The Rain Lord - unit within 12"

Roll 4+ to shoot, 8+
Roll 6+ to shoot, 10+
24", +2

The Howler Wind - no shooting with S4 or less within 6" of caster, RIP

4+
12, 6+
18", 8+

Entangling Roots - 5" template or woods count as being difficult/very difficult terrain

9+
Enemy moving in it suffer S2 hit each, 11+

Etc. The costs make no sense but you get the idea. :p

twisted_mentat
22-04-2005, 03:56
I really like that idea of only each wizard being able to use their own dice..

and as it stands, Dispell scrolls are Pretty much required for any empire or bret player, espcialy with the level 4 slaan with 3 skink shamen armies, or tzeentch mage army of doom....dark elf sorceress PMSing army...you know, basicly every other army besides Orks and goblins...and khorne armies...

What has really set me off on the magic system is the very first game i played at the new Halifax GW store was aganst a horrible 16 power dice army, while i had a nice balanced empire force....Ie, no Hellblaster. Basicly, every turn he reduced my units with lightning bolts..scads of rerolls.....admittly, this put me off on both the magic system AND the 'on the fly' army building....

maxwell123
22-04-2005, 05:27
It's anarchist + ica, no capital.


LOL! All this time I've been calling you anarchista. I've been a Portent member for 5 years now and you've been on here as long as I can remember.
I've always thought it was anarchista.
I really should learn to read sometime. ;)


twisted_mentat,


I really like that idea of only each wizard being able to use their own dice..

I did like that idea, but the more I've thought about, the more I think it will hurt medium magic armies more than heavy magic ones.

Consider an army with 2 level 2 wizards. You may have one mage with two spells which he can't use that magic phase (i.e. enemy may be out of range, one might be a spell which boosts the mage in close combat or heals a wounded character, etc).
So, if one wizard is out of range or whatever and the other wizard is no longer allowed to use his power dice, then 2 power dice are rendered useless for that magic phase. That is really punishing against mid-magic armies which already have enough trouble getting their spells off.

Gorog Irongut
22-04-2005, 09:15
I personally like the way the magic system is now. If someone wants to waste all of their points on magic users, that leaves me to swamp them with the rest of my force as they will have little else but.

If I could change anything I would have them take the spells back towards they way they were in the last edition. The spells nowadays just don't have enough spunk in them. They're relatively ineffectual.

me

p.s. I'm a dwarf player so that's saying something.
p.s.s. It doesn't hurt to remember that dwarfs get 2 power dice during their magic phase as well as 4 in their opponents. It adds to Remains in Play resistance ability.

maxwell123
23-04-2005, 03:22
Hmm..instead of my previous idea about making level 4's count as a lord and hero choice, how about this:

**Maximum number of wizards in an army is limited to one less than the maximum number of characters**

i.e. If playing less than 2K, you are limited to 3 characters so would be allowed 2 wizards maximum.
A 2K game has a limit of 4 characters so you would be allowed a maximum of 3 wizards.

It's a simple solution (very easily added to main rulebook) which would cap the magic level at 8 in a 2K game.

twisted_mentat
23-04-2005, 04:41
p.s. I'm a dwarf player so that's saying something.
p.s.s. It doesn't hurt to remember that dwarfs get 2 power dice during their magic phase as well as 4 in their opponents. It adds to Remains in Play resistance ability.

Yea, dwarf and khrone players tend to not have as much trouble. But most other armies have trouble dealing with magic heavy armies without scroll caddies taking up all their hero spots.

As i said, before, Empire armies have alot of trouble dealing with the magic heavy army, unless you tool up your force to deal with that (which i've done recently in every tourny, but i really wish i could do something ELSE with my army...). Again, before someone says "but you get cannons!" a Mage is alot less likly to blow himself up the first time he's used than a cannon.

I may sound like i;'m just taking issue with empire armies, and you can make an effective anti magic one, but as i said, you end up with that as your must have army list for every game...

Something that also bothers me is that you're peanlized by taking a balanced army, one that isn't tooled up to do one thing...a balanced army with a little bit a magic, lets say, 6 casting dice, comes up against a 16 power dice Tzeentch army of doom...youre toast...unless his hell cannont missfires every time and does that missfire result that does a wound to ever magic user on the table 3 turns in a row and all his heroes die..

yes that happend to an oppent of mine once...

Gorog Irongut
23-04-2005, 09:35
I find magic to be a bit of a two edged sword. If you want to max out on it that means that all of those points can't go towards troops. I'd gladly face an all magic dark elf or tzeentch army. All I would bring would be masses and masses of orcs (or skaven or........... <insert army name here>). Sure they will kill a unit or two a turn. No great loss. When you get there, CR will decide the day and it won't be in magics favour.

The way I play when not using my dwarves is to bring one scroll caddy. It gives you the one turn necessary for an offensive army to get stuck in. Or stuck in enough that when the magic really does come flying down, it's minimized. Especially since many spells will not work against units that are in hand to hand. As long as you play offensively you have little to fear from magic.

It's when you try and set up a defensive line that things get hairy against an all magic army(or when the dice turn against you). You no longer get to dictate the when of an attack. This leaves magic plenty of time to work it's fun stuff. But perhaps I'm wrong in this as I've never found a viable way for me to play a defensive army.

me

p.s. all above arguments do not apply to the vampire count's army.

Three Headed Monkey
23-04-2005, 11:07
Nah, i'd like to see a bonus die for every, say, 20 models currently alive in the army. Kind of like with Greenskins now, but without the CC and range thing. Greenskins could produce double dice, as could Elves to balance from their fewer numbers, etc.

The night goblin mage storm army is bad enough as it is. Dont make it any worse!!!
:eek:

Also consider a Vampire Counts army. An all necromancer army raises a ***** load of zombies in the first turn. Then in turn 2, have a ***** load more power dice! This does not seem right. Strictly speaking, shouldnt a Necromancer's will get weaker as it extends to control yet more undead?

Your idea is a good one, however a little weak and abusable in some areas. Also, why would a wizard become less powerful as those around him die? Why should a lone wizard be worse off than one surrounded by its army (apart from the fact that he is surrounded by a friendly army)?

I agree with maxwell123. Making a level 4 wizard take up a lord and hero slot is a good idea. Really powerful wizards may only be seen in 3000+ point games, while only rarely in the standard army size of 2000 points, which seems appropriate. And as for Tzeentch, if you really want that extra power die, then get some more chariots. Anyway, perhaps a Chaos Lord with the MoT becomes a level 3 by default, and then can be upgraded to level 4 with more points and the hero slot.

Anyway, I have a friend that usually doesnt even use a Lord in 2000 point games with his Tzeentch force. And then only three heroes (one of em is a bray shaman). He still manages fine with 14 powerdice a turn. Plus you still get strong combat characters and kick ass troops. So you really cant complain at all, especially with all the other top end magic armies taking a power dive as well.

mageith
24-04-2005, 19:28
For the sake of game balance. Yeah, level 4 wizard lords are already expensive, but they are generally what make magic heavy armies so powerful.

Yes and no. It’s the dice caddies that do this and the availability to the dice pool.

Lizards cannot have third level wizards. So you have just cost them a character slot if they use a Slann. No options.

I can’t think of a reason to take a Lord wizards EXCEPT for the four levels of magic. I think this rule will not implement as you think.

Most vampire Lords are not even 4th level so will be unaffected.


The "base" dice generated by the army would not be set at 2. Armies would generate one dispel die and one power die per 1000 points. Dwarves would get an extra two dispel dice to keep their anti-magic power up.
Why not let dwarves have 2 per 1000 so it scales up and down?



Wizards would not be able to act as little batteries that fuel each other. Each wizard would generate it's dice and no other wizard could use those dice. Any wizard could draw upon the base dice generated by the army existing though. I just hate the idea of four wizards showing up and only one casting the spells with the other three just running in random directions. It's goofy.

Amen!!!



Those are the only real changes I'd make to the system itself.

I think the lores need a review.



I'd also like to see another anti-magic item or two given to each army that doesn't require a wizard. I'd like to see armies that don't "have to include a wizard" just for anti-magic power that aren't Khorne, Dwarves, or Lizardmen. I'm sure some heroic/villanous guy could find an anti-magic pendent or something. I'd like another option other than buying a scroll caddie.
One scroll per character. Change the scroll to an enchanted item.
Or give Magic resistance a range like 6 or 12 inches. There are many ways to get magic resistance now.

Mage Ith

mageith
24-04-2005, 20:37
twisted_mentat,
Quote:
I really like that idea of only each wizard being able to use their own dice..

I did like that idea, but the more I've thought about, the more I think it will hurt medium magic armies more than heavy magic ones.

Consider an army with 2 level 2 wizards. You may have one mage with two spells which he can't use that magic phase (i.e. enemy may be out of range, one might be a spell which boosts the mage in close combat or heals a wounded character, etc).
So, if one wizard is out of range or whatever and the other wizard is no longer allowed to use his power dice, then 2 power dice are rendered useless for that magic phase. That is really punishing against mid-magic armies which already have enough trouble getting their spells off.

The Personal Power Magic System. This is very similar to the current system in terms of dice generation. The main difference is use of power dice. A wizard can only use the dice he generates and the pool dice available to the army to cast spells.

Ramifications:

Wizard Lord: Will have available to him only six PD. He must decide if he wants to cast one powerful spell with 4 dice, two medium spells with 3 dice each or 3 weak spells at two dice each.

If he uses up the pool dice, this relegates any lower level wizards to using their own dice and casting 2 dice spells.

Each wizard is personalized in that he is a caster and not merely a power dice caddy.

Using two 2nd level wizards, there are now six dice available. This is easily divided between the two wizards requiring each wizard to attempt to cast or lose his dice.

Medium magic, which many players think is well-balanced, is virtually left unchanged.

Since the number of dice are limited per wizard this should result in more spells being cast per turn. This should render dispel scrolls slightly less valuable but items that add +1 to casting or dispelling would be slightly more valuable. Items that turn power dice into pool dice will be more valuable (diadem).

All magic items currently in existence work with this system except the Bretonnian Sacrament of the Lady.

Dispelling works the same way it does now.

Troublesome Lores:
Tzeentch: With their special way of generating pool dice, Tzeentch will be less affected than many other wizards. This is true now. The Tzeentch lore isn’t particularly strong.
Tomb King: Largely unaffected but Tomb King magic is considered balanced now by most.
Gut: Probably unaffected.

twisted_mentat
24-04-2005, 21:14
if you limited Scrolls without making it harder to cast spells/easier to dispell with dice, you'd basicly make every magic heavy army nearly unbeatable...unless your playing Khorne or Dwarves...

"oops, io only have 2 Dispell scrolls! and i'm up against a Lizardmen army with a slaan and 3 skink shamens....i wonder which lighting bolt i'll dispell....."

i still think just evening up the casting dice between players would be the most fair...having more mages = more spells to choose from, not magic artillery gone wild...

Sir Charles
24-04-2005, 22:28
Perhapse there should be a universal pool of dice that can be used for majic which the two armies have to compete for, make a test of some sort, maybe each side rolls a dice and the wizard adds its majic level to the roll, whoever has the higher roll gets the dice. You could also posibly have a ld test were the wizards levels are subtracted from their rolls lowest wins, and a failure means you have to roll on some watered down version of the miscaste table. You do this for every dice that wizard wants and only they can use it, but maybe have a condition that another wizard can sacrifise their chance to cast to add their levels to the other wizards, showing wizzards helping each other channel the winds of magic. The size of the pool could be based on the army sizes; maybe 1 dice for every 1000 points, number of wizards total; one per level,then maybe a random d6 roll that can either decrease the number or increase it based on a coin toss, and then also adjustments based on location. Then keep the casting system the same, may be alow the 1st spell in each list to be multi casted, but carry increased difficulty with each casting.

Crazy Harborc
25-04-2005, 00:15
At the risk of being branded a heretic.........It IS allowable to play without the use of mages/wizards/etc. as well as without bound items/spells. Heck, you could go futher, play without magic items as well. I'm NOT talking about everygame, just once in awhile.

I do NOT miss 5th or 4th editions with their game winning magic and super weapons used by super heros who could destroy units in one turn of HtH.

Fortunately, WHFB is well written enough to be easily playable as more than magic superheros with units thrown in to have something to destroy during each turn of the game.

twisted_mentat
27-04-2005, 03:52
At the risk of being branded a heretic.........It IS allowable to play without the use of mages/wizards/etc. as well as without bound items/spells. Heck, you could go futher, play without magic items as well. I'm NOT talking about everygame, just once in awhile.


yea, but you'd need to find someone elseto agree to doing that, and when 90% of your games are based around going to the GW store and trying to find someone there to play, its not possible.

maxwell123
27-04-2005, 05:11
The Personal Power Magic System. This is very similar to the current system in terms of dice generation. The main difference is use of power dice. A wizard can only use the dice he generates and the pool dice available to the army to cast spells.

Well, I still think this system may punish medium magic armies too much. If an army has 2 level 2 wizards and one is unable to cast either of his two spells (i.e. one may be a healing spell and there's no wounded character nearby, or a close combat based spell and there's no nearby combats, or his spells may have very short range and there's no enemy nearby), then that wizard's 2 power dice are rendered useless for that phase under the Personal Power Magic System. That would be extremely punishing for that mid level army, as at the very least, those 2 power dice could have been used to draw out some enemy dispel dice.

The Personal Power Magic System isn't the solution. Power batteries are only a problem in magic heavy armies currently, not low or mid magic ones.

I haven't heard anyone complain about a level 2 using another level 2's power dice in a mid magic army with 2 level 2's.
I have heard complaints about several level 2's serving as power batteries for a single level 4 however.


Medium magic, which many players think is well-balanced, is virtually left unchanged.

Well, some players think it is well balanced, but just as many, if not more, seem to think it is underpowered. I am of this belief. I feel it is too easy for a single level 1 scroll caddy to effectively mute the magical ability of a medium magic army.

I would like to see casting become a more common occurrence amongst medium magic armies, but for the really deadly spells to either become harder to cast or considerably riskier.

Basically, I guess I'd like to see low-mid casting value spells (i.e. lower casting value than 9+) able to be cast relatively frequently amongst mid-heavy magic armies and able to be used as part of their tactics.

The really powerful spells with a 9+ casting value should be cast very rarely and IMO be riskier and not able to be worked into your tactics as reliably.

One idea could be to increase the chances of miscast, the more power you use for a spell.
Perhaps make it so wizards miscast on double 1's or double 2's if using 3+ dice to cast.
Wizard lords would miscast on double 1's and double 2's if using 4+ dice to cast.

So, when using more power than the wizard can naturally control easily, the chances of a miscast become far greater than the chance for Irresistible Force.

This would encourage players to try casting less powerful spells more often and be a bit more careful about going for the most powerful spells.
Perhaps there could even be a separate miscast chart for the uber spells with more damaging effects.

mageith
27-04-2005, 13:54
Well, I still think this system may punish medium magic armies too much. If an army has 2 level 2 wizards and one is unable to cast either of his two spells (i.e. one may be a healing spell and there's no wounded character nearby, or a close combat based spell and there's no nearby combats, or his spells may have very short range and there's no enemy nearby), then that wizard's 2 power dice are rendered useless for that phase under the Personal Power Magic System.

I think you are over reaching looking for a problem here that will rarely exist. A wizard not in range to cast his spells is a tactical problem. I've had situations under the current system where my spells aren't usable when playing lower level magic.

In addition, Gav has already indicated he will be looking at the lores to make them more usable at all levels.



That would be extremely punishing for that mid level army, as at the very least, those 2 power dice could have been used to draw out some enemy dispel dice.

"Extremely punishing?" That's a major overstatement. This personal power system has been tried out and is used by many as a house rule already.



Well, some players think it is well balanced, but just as many, if not more, seem to think it is underpowered. I am of this belief. I feel it is too easy for a single level 1 scroll caddy to effectively mute the magical ability of a medium magic army.

Isn't that more a function of dispel scrolls? Dispel scrolls are a major complaint and I can't imagine they won't be adjusted either to something like one per wizard or one per character. That's such an easy fix.

But part of the prevalence of dispel scrolls is because there is NO OTHER defense vs. heavy magic. I often have dispel scrolls left over at the end of the day when playing against lower level magic. That's a waste of my points. If I could depend on magic not being so devastating, I'd surely take fewer dispel scrolls anyway. Some high level spells are so devastating (read game ending) the just MUST BE stopped. Only a dispel scroll can dependably do that.



I would like to see casting become a more common occurrence amongst medium magic armies, but for the really deadly spells to either become harder to cast or considerably riskier.

That's fine too. But now you are talking about what? Raising casting levels above 11/12? Changing the miscast table? If you've ever played Orcs or Goblins you experienced the most destructive magic and most evil miscast table. Yet Orc heavy magic works because of one little magic item that ALL spells get funnel through because one high shaman does all the casting. Increasing the miscast table won't help if there is an easy way around it.



Basically, I guess I'd like to see low-mid casting value spells (i.e. lower casting value than 9+) able to be cast relatively frequently amongst mid-heavy magic armies and able to be used as part of their tactics.

???? It is now, in a medium level game if players have a reasonable level of dispel scrolls. I've played lots of games like that.



The really powerful spells with a 9+ casting value should be cast very rarely and IMO be riskier and not able to be worked into your tactics as reliably.
One idea could be to increase the chances of miscast, the more power you use for a spell.
Perhaps make it so wizards miscast on double 1's or double 2's if using 3+ dice to cast.
Wizard lords would miscast on double 1's and double 2's if using 4+ dice to cast.

You mean doubles 1,2,3 I think? I'd have to calculate the odds but they feel very high. Plus it doesn't feel right to me. Better wizards should be able to cast better spells. Perhaps you could calculate the odds of YOUR idea for a better response.




This would encourage players to try casting less powerful spells more often and be a bit more careful about going for the most powerful spells.
Perhaps there could even be a separate miscast chart for the uber spells with more damaging effects.
I think you are offering complicated solutions for that can be fixed far easier. The fewer charts to which I must refer, the better I like it.

Here's one I used a while back. It may be a little harsh but is easily memorized.


Miscast table
Any spell that fails must refer to the miscast table. (Greenskins will roll a d6 in addition to the miscast listed below and will use the higher number.)

Miss by 1: Spell fails.

Miss by 2: Dazed: Spell Fails. He cannot cast any more spells this turn. He will recover on his next turn.

Miss by 3: Addled: Spell fails, wizard dazed but will only recover on his turn by rolling a 4+.

Miss by 4: Knocked Out: Same as addled and Wizard loses spell.

Miss by 5+: Concussion: Same as knocked out but each turn a wizard fails to recover he takes a wound with no saves allowed.

Sir_Glonojad
27-04-2005, 14:09
According to people who spoke Alessio at Games Day Warsaw, the magic system is going to be reworked in the 7th edition with the following changes:
- dice generated by wizard can only be used by him (her for DnD fans ;) )
- miscast table is going to be made more nasty, with instant mage's death viable.

The above changes are still being tested proposals, though,

mageith
27-04-2005, 14:22
According to people who spoke Alessio at Games Day Warsaw, the magic system is going to be reworked in the 7th edition with the following changes:
- dice generated by wizard can only be used by him (her for DnD fans ;) )

And Bretonnian damsals and from most Elves.
Its probably the easiest implemented solution.



- miscast table is going to be made more nasty, with instant mage's death viable.

Ooooo.
:) Funny 'death' = 'viable'



The above changes are still being tested proposals, though,
Trial rules, so to speak. :(

No word on lore revision?

Sir_Glonojad
27-04-2005, 18:48
Well, the only lore that was allegedly mentioned as powered down was... Skaven magic :eek:.

Well, viable was not the best word to be used, especially in the quasi-medical meaning variant I wasn't aware of. I just didn't want to use the word possible ;).

Now, on the topic - I must agree that mid-level magic armies are not a satisfactory experience and I often think that 70 points for 2 extra levels for my wizards is not worth it. There's got to be something done to that, I agree.

Now, as for an extra slot for a level 4 wizard - I do not know if it is really fair; IMO, they are not that powerful. Perhaps, they should have their price upped instead?
Or, if we indeed make them an extra slotter, why don't we have them know all the lore spells (upping the cost a little bit)? I believe that it would make them an attractive alternative, yet penalizing their army by a single dispel and power die. Level threes would still be attractive for those not-that offensive (or dependant) on magic, or those who prefer to produce many lower-level spells with uncomplex uses.

I really like Personal Dice magic system, and don't think it really penalises mid-magics really much; I'd just have "first spells" revised, so that they are usable in all situations.

Anarchistica: The idea is interesting, though I do not really know how it would work without examples (with lotsa pictures, as befits an engineering student ;) ) - lores with levelled spells, new dice quotas etc.

Oh, and I have an idea - how about increasing the general amount of dice in the game, to, say, 1PD/DD per each 500 points of the game? It would make the differences between different magic-powered armies smaller, and the magic itself a little less dependable (more spells cast, more dispelled, more miscasts, etc.).
Small magic armies would gain 50-100% dice for defense, while high-magic would get much less in percent. True, the difference would still be the same in dice, as it should be, yet the defensors would have a chance to dispel more than a single spell in a game (thus allowing them to block the worts ones).

maxwell123
27-04-2005, 20:57
Mageith,


You mean doubles 1,2,3 I think? I'd have to calculate the odds but they feel very high. Plus it doesn't feel right to me. Better wizards should be able to cast better spells. Perhaps you could calculate the odds of YOUR idea for a better response.

No, I meant double 1's and 2's. Where the hell did you get the double 3's from?
Yes, better wizards should be able to cast more powerful spells, but the more powerful spells should be significantly greater risk than the less powerful ones.


Okay, I may have exaggerated the problem with Personal Power Magic System a bit. That system would likely be a pretty good solution.

However, it still won't stop the power of magic heavy armies that much, especially ones that currently spread their casting around between wizards anyway.

You could easily both implement the PPMS and also the following rule:
Wizards casting with 3+ dice miscast on double 2's as well as double 1's.
Wizard Lords casting with 4+ dice miscast on double 2's as well as double 1's.

This, in conjunction with the Personal Power System, would help discourage players from throwing lots of dice with impunity.



But part of the prevalence of dispel scrolls is because there is NO OTHER defense vs. heavy magic. I often have dispel scrolls left over at the end of the day when playing against lower level magic. That's a waste of my points. If I could depend on magic not being so devastating, I'd surely take fewer dispel scrolls anyway. Some high level spells are so devastating (read game ending) the just MUST BE stopped. Only a dispel scroll can dependably do that.

Now you are the one exaggerating. Very few of the high level spells are game winning.
Direct damage spells aren't game winning. They only affect one unit most of the time. Indeed, I'd say there are only two direct damage spells which can be game winning: a well placed Comet of Casandora and Plague if the caster rolls well to see if it spreads.

Apart from those two in certain situations, the ONLY game winning spells are movement spells.

I actually feel the power of individual spells is about right. I wouldn't like to see the power of most spells toned down any further. The lores need a review, but for more flavour and better balance with one another, not because they are too powerful.

Crazy Harborc
28-04-2005, 00:23
Um..........try asking if an opponent would like to try a no spell casting game of WHFB. Several players at the local GW have said yes. Several say no. They have armies that MUST have magic to win.

Lately, I have been using a HE army with two mages. It really doesn't seem like "war"gaming. It's fun, just the same.

twisted_mentat
28-04-2005, 02:41
I just find the Lores pretty good, just that alot of peoples tactics don't suit many of the lores (lore of metal, beasts, Shadow). They all have their useses. Though most people just look for things that A) give ward saves B) Direct Damage C) Pyschology effecting spells.

Maybe Lore of Heavens should have a couple of small changes...Lightning bolt should no really have a range on it, but i do think you MUST have LOS...

The problem that needs attention is that a Magic heavy army that compleatly OWN any other army, with the exception of another magic heavy army...and Khorne and Dwarven

In no other Ed of FB was this possble....well, of 3 4 5 or 6...

BullBuchanan
28-04-2005, 19:27
personally i think its ridiculous to make the magic phase "weaker". Every army has their strength and they should be allowed to have it. Now I personally like the idea of limiting PD to the mage that generated them, and I may take It on as a personal practice. Let me give you an example.

yesterday I took on a bretonnian player with my brand new HE magic army(2000 points) It was my first time playing HE and I all but wiped the floor with him when It came to points, however. Because I had 850 ponts of mages this means I only had 4 small units of troops

10 archers
15 spearlves
15 White Lions
15 Swordmasters
5 Silverhelms
RBT

At the end of the game All I had left was 10 swordmasters,10 spearelves and 3 of my mages. sure It added up to around 1300 points, but thats because of my characters. Because My phase was the magic phase that meant I all but forfeited the combat phase. Declaring a 10 level magic phase cheese and not declaring a lance formation Grail knight unit charging getting 18 S6 attacks and 9 S3 attacks from horses is a bit of a double standard imo. in fact the only things I could do was use speels that negated armour, and let me tell you I had awesome rolls as well, without a good number of double six'x I would have been screwed. Also I was getting annihilated in combat. As you can see I had almsot no troops of my original starting army left. You get into CC with a mage he's dead. In fact in turn 2 my mage was run down and killed in a flee attempt, that greatly hindered me especially since he was my heavens mage, but luckily I had done enough damage in the first round to get by with what I had left. So really all if takes is better tactics from the person playing against Magic heavy armies. Almost no spells can be cast into CC. Theres maybe 4 or 5 and a couple are cast on friendly units so as long as your hard units stay in CC they have nothing to worry about. Also many spells require LOS so thats another factor. Use terrain to your advantage.

I think if you limit dice generated to the player who generates them, things would be more than fair enough without further altering to weaken magic. However if you do that then Dispell scrolls need to be 1 per mage or some other ammendment so that they cant just prevent you from casting any decent spells. I wouldnt like to see any further altering regarding the power of magic than this. It is more than balanced if this sytem were implemented or just put up as house rules.

anarchistica
28-04-2005, 22:49
Anarchistica: The idea is interesting, though I do not really know how it would work without examples (with lotsa pictures, as befits an engineering student ;) ) - lores with levelled spells, new dice quotas etc.
Well i'm currently thinking about a system without casting costs. Casting would be very similar to TK magic. Spells would have 3 levels (possibly more), with the difference in level being the amount of models it can target, the range, the amount of damage it can do, etc. The various levels of Wizards would cast spells at their own level but be able to increase this (at the cost of casting less spells). A Wizard could also put more power into one spell, making it harder to dispel. Very much the same as the Power Dice system, except without the dice, the sharing of dice and casting costs.

While casting costs are in principle a very good system to balance spells, it makes magic a bit too unpredictable, which means GW think it needs to be mega-powerful too (Stank, Ratguns, Warp Lighting, etc). A Wizard would be more likely to 'tire', but heads blowing up and such fun things are also possible.

Spell would work with points, 1 point being worth a randomly rolled spell and 2 points allows you to pick 1.

The difference between the 3 sorts of Wizards would be as follows:

Magi: Power +1, Will/Dispel +1, Spell Points +1.
Shamen: Power +2, normal Will/Dispel, normal Spell Points.
Priests: No Power (use Will to cast, which is less powerful), Will/Dispel +2, know all spells of their Lore.

This would be a basic system from which you could make changes for the various character types. I think it could be compatible with the current magic system too.

As a whole, magic would become less powerful, more predictable but still a force to be reckoned with. Magi would be wise and knowledgeable men quite capable of hurting the enemy. Shamen would be untrained and wild spellcasters, not caring much about the risks of magic. Priests would be capable of helping the army with several minor spells or one powerful one, or go full out on defense, hampering all but the most powerful enemy wizards.

twisted_mentat
29-04-2005, 03:17
Some intresting ideas....

I had an idea...maybe anyhting with a castling level MORE than...8+ can only cast if the mage hasn't moved....representing things like drawing pentragrams on the ground, gutting chickens, dancing with no pants on....

I mean, you cannot move and fire pretty much any missile weapon. So why should calling down a *******' Comet from outerspace be a matter of going "i think i want..THAT ONE?"

someone else i know mentioend that maybe thee should be a mage test, like a pyshic test in 40k...if you fail, you cannot cast, and if you fail with double 6s, then you have to take a winds of chaos test...i felt that would be intresting, but it would really REALLY hurt low LD armies...

Morskittar
08-05-2005, 19:59
Just had a ranom thought.

Taking a cue from WFRP's dangerous magic system, what if miscasts were based off the concept that having too many wizards not skilled enough to control the magic they're generating is dangerous?

Thus:

The target number for miscasting is equal to the number of wizards a player currently has on the table. So, a single 4th level or single 1st would miscast on double ones. However, five scroll caddies would miscast on double ones through fives.

I'm sure there are some scaling issues with this (large multiplayer games?), but I can't see any immediate problems. This might make it viable to ignore magic completely in an army, as your foe will be taking a larger risk in using too much.

redemptionist15
09-05-2005, 10:35
What do you feel are the best and worst aspects of the current magic system?

The dice system is good, as is the dispelling system etc etc.
The encouragement to go over-board on magic is bad.

How powerful an effect should magic have on the game?
Like everything in fantasy it shouldnt win you the game in one stroke, it should be part of your plan rather than just your plan.

What needs to be altered and why?

Well for starters wizards only using their own Power dice. 1PD/1DD per 1k of points.

I would like a riskier miscast table, with the number of wizards in your army affecting your roll on the table.

Showing that the bigger the gathering of magic casters the more riskier it gets for all casters.

For example, a +1 to your Miscast roll for every caster in your army (still alive). So an army with 3 level 2's would mean that the miscaster gets a +3 'bonus' to his miscast roll (obviously this would mean you make the top half of the miscast table nasty). To me this would balance a lot of things, it would encourage people to have a couple of powerful casters rather than a bunch load of them.

To balance the rule out for bigger games i would say when playing 2k+ you just halve the bonus modifier for the miscast table (rounding things up).

As always just an idea.

mageith
09-05-2005, 13:56
magic...
Like everything in fantasy it shouldnt win you the game in one stroke, it should be part of your plan rather than just your plan.

Yes! Perfectly said.



Well for starters wizards only using their own Power dice. 1PD/1DD per 1k of points.

OK



I would like a riskier miscast table, with the number of wizards in your army affecting your roll on the table.

Showing that the bigger the gathering of magic casters the more riskier it gets for all casters.

For example, a +1 to your Miscast roll for every caster in your army (still alive). So an army with 3 level 2's would mean that the miscaster gets a +3 'bonus' to his miscast roll (obviously this would mean you make the top half of the miscast table nasty). To me this would balance a lot of things, it would encourage people to have a couple of powerful casters rather than a bunch load of them.

It depends on the nastiness of the miscast table and the availability of magic items/abilities that negate it.

Do you want to encourage fewer but more powerful wizards? Why? Lizards and Tzeentch already have this. The combo of a powerful wizards and good Ld general is already powerful and now it would be more powerful, wouldn't it? In addition, most Slann don't even miscast and Tzeentch have the staff of change and Orcs have the Knobbly Staff all of which make these, some of the most powerful wizards, all but immune to miscasts.

Ith

redemptionist15
09-05-2005, 14:47
Do you want to encourage fewer but more powerful wizards? Why? Lizards and Tzeentch already have this. The combo of a powerful wizards and good Ld general is already powerful and now it would be more powerful, wouldn't it? In addition, most Slann don't even miscast and Tzeentch have the staff of change and Orcs have the Knobbly Staff all of which make these, some of the most powerful wizards, all but immune to miscasts.

Obviously the idea would need balancing with the whole game but essentially i would like to encourage fewer casters. Although this may encourage more people to take one or two powerful casters this can be balanced by the fact that it means only 1 real caster to take out (obviously taking out a slann or lord of tzeentch is a difficult thing, but i think MOT and its abilitys are broken anyway).

I feel this would balance things out in the sense that you can take 1 big powerful caster (putting all the eggs in one basket) who could easily be taken out by wizard hunters/bad miscast. Or you take the risk of multiple casters running the gauntlet of possibly disastrous miscasts. As it is for me, it tends to be the armys with multiple wizards that are broken (like the skaven SAD army with multiple warlocks).

Obviously items and abilitys that stop miscasts would have to be changed/modified, but i like the general idea of it. However just this rule on its own would not sort out magic.

Perhaps to help strengthen the rule some form of risk should be put on being a level 4 caster. I certainly feel this shouldnt effect Slann as to me they should be the purest and best casters.
One idea i have is if a wizard is using an amount of power dice equal to or more than his casting level when casting a single spell then he suffers an automatic miscast on any double 1's or 2's. This to me would help balance out the larger more destructive spells that level 3's and 4's can chuck around so easily without totally nerfing it.

Really im just bouncing ideas around.

Lordmonkey
28-05-2005, 18:08
One idea i have is if a wizard is using an amount of power dice equal to or more than his casting level when casting a single spell then he suffers an automatic miscast on any double 1's or 2's. This to me would help balance out the larger more destructive spells that level 3's and 4's can chuck around so easily without totally nerfing it.

Really im just bouncing ideas around.

I agree, as this would better reflect the arcane mastery of such high-level wizards, and encourage people to use a lord slot on a powerful wizard, instead of 2 hero slots on weaker wizards. However, i don't think this should apply to level 1 wizards, as they would become virtually useless (barring scroll caddy, of course :p)

Fredrik
28-05-2005, 22:07
I agree with the idea that some tweaks are all that is needed, the dice generating system is good as it is where it represents the defferent poewr off the wizards.

There are a few different ways to approach the problem.
hera are some off my thoughts.

If one feels that magic is good as it is but just needs to be a bit riskier. Then there is the idea to make the wizards roll on the miscast table the same amount off times as the number off power dice used for the spell when miscasting.
This will effectivly keep the number off dice used when a heavy magic army meets an army with less power dice just to lower the risks and thus making it easier to dispell.
And when facing another heavy magic user there will be lots off more risk involved ( more powerdice has to be used to get spells through ) wich nicly represents the more strian on teh mages whit all that power wielded on the field.

But in itself it won´t damage the heavy magic armies too much just make it a bit more easy to get by without lots off mages, since you wont get spells with 5 - 6 power dice just because they totally out gun thier opponents and no more then nessesary will be used and make it easier to dispell.
The heavy magic user can still muster the power to get spells throug but there will be higher risks.

This on i like since it doesn´t alter to much but on a miscast there can be multiple ramafications and most likely the magic round is over.

This still does not solve the problem with medium magic getting totally shut down by heavy users. Here i at the moment have no good ideas for how to solve it.

Another thing one could do is to look over the spells some off them are a bit too good, you know the ones i am talking about.
Well thats just a few thought from me.