Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!jagardner
From: jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner)
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: Limiting Magic
Message-ID: <12325@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Apr-85 17:28:04 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.12325
Posted: Wed Apr  3 17:28:04 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Apr-85 05:17:58 EST
References: <1179@reed.UUCP> <26000002@siemens.UUCP> <12303@watmath.UUCP> <260@tilt.FUN>
Reply-To: jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 61

>The three solutions Jim mentioned are all silly.  Encumbrance is a good
>idea but making magic items oversized (a potion == the size of a bottle
>of soda.  Be real.) is overdoing it.  The critical-mass concept of magic is
>just plain stupid.  Can you imagine 2 high-level MUs shaking hands.  Whoops,
>too much magic in a certain volume.  BOOM!!  Magic as manna is pretty bad,
>too.  It made for a great story, but think about the implications.  Do
>you REALLY want to tie your world to this kind of system.  Imagine keeping
>track of how much manna has been drained from each area of your world.  Ugh.
>
>My solution:  Let'em cart around as much magic as they want.  First,
>figure out how much they'll be bogged down by all the junk they're
>hauling around.  If somebody wants to carry around two staves, 10
>wands, and a 2-handed sword, let him. 

Silly?  Silly!  No, no, no flaming...but I think what we have here is
a difference in gaming styles.  I see no reason, for example, why a magic
potion must come in easy-to-swallow quantities.  It's an interesting
break in convention that could lead to amusing results, and make the
players pay attention to what's going on...anything to break the Munchkin
mentality that was described so well in the recent posting to net.games.

Similarly, I think the "magic as manna" set-up could make a very
interesting background to a campaign; I'd be surprised if it hasn't
been used by someone somewhere.  Keeping track of how much manna there
is around wouldn't be hard -- you just assume that there is sufficient
manna around for simple magic, and gross expenditures in one location
will deplete the supply.  The GM can throw in the occasional "dead spot"
here and there to keep things interesting.  In fact, one could make a
very interesting scenario on exploring a dead spot, figuring out what
sucked all the manna away.  There must be something gross in the area,
and facing it without magic would be a challenging role-playing experience.

The "magic as radiation" set-up is also an interesting world background.
Why can't gods fight each other?  Because they're too powerful to be in
the same place at the same time.  Why do powerful rival wizards leave each
other alone?  Same reason.  Remember, we are not talking about reasonable
quantities of magic here; we are trying to limit players who want to
arm themselves to the teeth.

Ray Chen's suggestion is another reasonable approach, but I point out
it does NOT solve the problem given in the original message.  The problem
was that two first level MUs spent a year making 100 bottles of an
Illusion potion, then set out to thump the baddies.  If you assume
that they can fit those bottles in a single bag of holding, they don't
need to worry about anything.  They keep one bottle on their person
and 99 bottles in the bag.  When they reach into the bag, they know
they always get what they want, so there's scarcely any delay at all.
With one or two bottles in their back pockets, to guard against sudden
surprises (e.g. someone grabbing the bag in combat), they're laughing.

Furthermore, I point out that it is going to be more trouble for
the GM to keep track of how long it takes to draw a sword or find a
potion in a bag than it is to tell someone at the start of an adventure,
"Sorry, you can't carry that much with you."  That bogs things down at
precisely the wrong moment: during combat when things are usually slow
enough already.

			Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo