The Deal with Magecraft, and what it should be

Indeed, the element of Magic can only be used so often, that makes it fair. Magecraft just keeps on chugging.

Also, the "do's and don'ts" list doesn't really work, it's an awkward bandaid that can't possibly hope to cover all of what you should and shouldn't do with it, so it won't really solve the problem except for create a bunch of restrictions that Magecraft, if kept in the same spirit, shouldn't really have. It is ultimately the same concept as the examples, giving a feel for the power level of DCs... but that apparently didn't solve everything. It's still a headache to many DMs. Magecraft isn't even necessarily broken, either, that's not the main issue - it's a headache. It's some that the needs to be carefully kept in line, and as such if we keep it's kind of thing, its abilities probably need to be kept to something clearly optional. The issue with just counting on the DM to ban it is that if something is listed as a main talent, players can find it especially irritating when the DM rules something out like that, and might argue about it, and many DMs would probably throw up their hands and say "okay okay, I won't ban it." So... magecraft as something optional perhaps, with magical fiddling more core, and perhaps Magecraft with both it and MT as a prereq (magical fiddling would likely not have MT as a prereq).

Also, the argument against the change that almost all wizard builds would have to respec their character sounds like a huge indication that it is overpowered. Any time something is good enough that you feel bad for not taking it - that's a flag that something's wrong.

An ability that has lots of glorious opportunities for experienced DMs with a strong understanding of balance and game design... But provides headaches and is unstable in the hands of the new DMs (or DMs that aren't studying game economies) that this system is supposed to be friendly and supportive towards?

Sounds like a good candidate for an optional expansion.

Other than that, I like the idea of magecraft focusing more on fiddling with existing magical effects as originally intended - the way Mechanics lets you fiddle with locks and similar - than on the current "do anything". It would make the talent far less able to replicate other abilities and limit its overall craziness. Might just be a band-aid though.

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:Other than that, I like the idea of magecraft focusing more on fiddling with existing magical effects as originally intended - the way Mechanics lets you fiddle with locks and similar - than on the current "do anything". It would make the talent far less able to replicate other abilities and limit its overall craziness. Might just be a band-aid though.

You know...what about a sort of "Arcana is Mechanics for magic" mindset? You don't need to take a utility talent to mess with a machine using Mechanics, so how about Arcana letting you fiddle with magic on its own? Mechanics could let you pick a lock on a door, Arcana could let you adjust a spell locking it enough to let you through. On the flip side, Mechanics doesn't let you just summon a machine out of thin air, and neither would Arcana, by itself, allow you to create magic where none already existed.

I forget who off the top of my head, but someone pointed out today in another thread that Arcana is currently a sort of feast-or-famine skill: it's the most useful skill if you have Magecraft, but if you don't, it's actually pretty useless except for magic detection and possibly the "magic Endurance" use some GMs give it. If Arcana did something like I proposed it'd be potentially useful for all characters, not just those that have Magical Tricks or Magecraft.

With such a change you could essentially leave Magical Tricks and Magecraft the way they are now (though perhaps with a daily limit to MC), with MT allowing unlimited creation of minor magic spells and MC a more powerful version.

As the title says, this topic is for people to talk about Magecraft, what's wrong with it, and how to fix it. Not just for the new ability system but just in general.

Personally I see Magecraft and it's predesser It's Witchcraft to be basically just the talent to take to "do magic" and the whole limits of what power you can get well the resolts depend on the character, the arcana stat, the result of the skill check roll, and how the GM feels if it "made the DC" or not. What totally bugs me is that the Devs had heard that there was people who was talking It's Witchcraft no matter their arcana stat, the reaction was from the Devs: "This isn't what we wanted that Utility to do! This is for High Level Arcana only!" So then they retoolled it till we got out Magecraft/Magical Tricks... Which, I really still to this day, don't really understand that opinion of "do magic" is only for high level arcana, cause personally I think it was a GOOD thing that people of all types of arcana stats where taking it. Anyone should be able to "do magic" as it were. And if anything that's what the system is moving to with turning Magecraft Optional and stuff... So arcana will be able to just do magic somehow. Or something I don't really fully know the details to what that change will be for the Arcana stat and the rest of them.

So then back to the main topic, Magecraft. From where I see it, we got like a 3 (possible 4) teired build up for how magic should go with the system. Right now it stands at:

Level 0: No Magecraft/Magical Tricks taken.

Level 1: Magical Tricks only taken. (personally this level just strikes me as extreamly weak and pointless, yet some people can make it work, good for them)

Level 2: Magical Tricks & Magecraft taken. (therefore full power of the do anything magic, is taken if you got 15 or higher in arcana, which I think it absurd that in this one little area the system demands builds to made first if you want a mage of any kind, sure you can reflavor other utilties, but that doesn't have the same feel when compaired to having the grabbag of all magical options to do that Magecraft provides)

Xel Unknown wrote: What totally bugs me is that the Devs had heard that there was people who was talking It's Witchcraft no matter their arcana stat, the reaction was from the Devs: "This isn't what we wanted that Utility to do! This is for High Level Arcana only!" So then they retoolled it till we got out Magecraft/Magical Tricks... Which, I really still to this day, don't really understand that opinion of "do magic" is only for high level arcana, cause personally I think it was a GOOD thing that people of all types of arcana stats where taking it. 

You misunderstand. We heard that the power was varying hugely by DMs, though many were setting the DCs to do things so low that anyone could use it to do great things and people who *maxed* into the arcana stat did utterly broken things. When something is so powerful that it's awesome in non-specialized builds and utterly insane in specialized builds... That's the definition of a power imbalance. When something's power is based on how high your Arcana skill is, and it's still really good for people who only have a 5 in arcana... It's going to be insane for people that have an 18.

We also wanted there to be a way for someone who didn't have a high arcana stat to do useful magical things. Variety in magical effects shouldn't just be limited to arcana-maxers. So we created Magical Tricks - a stat-independent ability for people of all types to use magic in nifty ways.

So the current draft of the abilities does its best to make a specialized version of the ability (magecraft) that requires a substantial investment into the arcana skill to use, plus taking two talents. Then, there's magical tricks which doesn't care about your arcana stat and only takes one talent. However, despite our added information to the Magecraft ability and discussion of what different DCs mean, DMs are still setting DCs that make it really overpowered in some games and underpowered in others.

Ultimately, I expect we'll make Magecraft an optional tool for DMs (I'll still use it) but not a core rule... Rather redescribing the arcana skill as basically a, "Mechanics-for-magic". Mechanics doesn't let you create whole machines out of nowhere, but it lets you fiddle with traps and devices to get them working or tweak how they work. Same for Arcana.

Don't we have a thread for this?
Like.. two of them?

Probably. I didn't check the thread, just responded to the email notification. Now I realize it's a new thread, it *does* seem highly redundant. Probably should continue discussion in one of the existing threads.

Thank you tech wizzard! I feel silly that I also forgot about this one when I did that eariler...

If anyone has magecraft, it's Pingcode.

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:Ultimately, I expect we'll make Magecraft an optional tool for DMs (I'll still use it) but not a core rule....

Personally, I'm all for having more optional supplements. This system has been playtested for over a year now, we've started to get a feel for things that are difficult/confusing for a new DM or contentious, Magecraft and a Tons of Fun table being the prime examples. With them being optional modules, DMs can feel free to take them or leave them without feeling like they're banning parts of the core system.

Character customization is a huge aspect of the system and it does it very well, but what about customization of the system itself? I think it'd be great if one person could take the core rules, a Magecraft expansion, Paper Shadow's Combat expansion, and Pingcode's Heal expansion and run a campaign that conforms to their vision and plays very differently to someone else who takes the core rules, my Talent Specialization system, and a Tons of Fun Expansion. And then a third person could run a completely different-feeling campaign by taking yet another permutation of optional elements.

What's interesting is that if Arcana's definition is properly updated, there will be less of a need for even having Magecraft at all.