Forums of the Megaverse®

Okay I had a funky idea. I was going to make my Mages have to take an oath or make a promise of some sort ro use magic. On my dark new world I have 6 powerful magical beings that police the magical beings and mages of the world. This oath would if broken have consequences. A few might be:

-Loss of magical powers for a set time, Until a certain quest/Mission is done, The damage they did was undone or permanently. this loss would be based on the crime.

-Imprisonment in Oberons hidden prison for the more dangerous/unredeemables.

The oath would be something along the lines of:
-a healer not using offensive magic in situations that were not defensive action,
-A healer not able the cure "natural" disease or conditions.
-An elementalist can not use the opposing elements.
-A necromancer must respect all cultural death rituals.
-A warmage using only combat based magic..that sort of thing.

(In a time crunch so I'll add more tomorrow.)

Check out the Sacred Oath under the Nature Magic. Might give you some ideas.

what's a "Warmage"? There are a lot of classes that can fight, there's no real warmage distinction, especially sinse most casters have no limit to how many spells they can be taught a level there's no reason one caster can't do all roles well.

Really, palladium's mages don't fall neatly into warmage/healer roles, and they all tend to learn utility spells on the side. a mid level wizard tends to fill all caster roles single handed.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:what's a "Warmage"? There are a lot of classes that can fight, there's no real warmage distinction, especially sinse most casters have no limit to how many spells they can be taught a level there's no reason one caster can't do all roles well.

Really, palladium's mages don't fall neatly into warmage/healer roles, and they all tend to learn utility spells on the side. a mid level wizard tends to fill all caster roles single handed.

That was sort the notion. to use existing classes in in a more "Magic Accountable" setting. As for a war mage I can see battle magi being ideal for it. But I can understand learning utility spells. I just sort like a twist in things. This oath idea will be added to my dark new world somehow.

The oath could be a goal or a loyalty to an organization as well to I suppose. for instance a member of the Society of sages might vow to not harm fellow members and not cast helpful affects knowingly on dragons.

this wouldn't really work with existing characters, however you could introduce some new occs and culture for this to work. Something along the lines of witchs/warlocks who get their power from an outside source.

Rimmerdal wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:what's a "Warmage"? There are a lot of classes that can fight, there's no real warmage distinction, especially sinse most casters have no limit to how many spells they can be taught a level there's no reason one caster can't do all roles well.

Really, palladium's mages don't fall neatly into warmage/healer roles, and they all tend to learn utility spells on the side. a mid level wizard tends to fill all caster roles single handed.

That was sort the notion. to use existing classes in in a more "Magic Accountable" setting. As for a war mage I can see battle magi being ideal for it. But I can understand learning utility spells. I just sort like a twist in things. This oath idea will be added to my dark new world somehow.

The oath could be a goal or a loyalty to an organization as well to I suppose. for instance a member of the Society of sages might vow to not harm fellow members and not cast helpful affects knowingly on dragons.

Well yea, battle magi are obviously a good canidate for warmage, but they are basically the only ones. the majority of Mages are just Mages, equally adept at all things magery.

but my point is unlike other games there is absolutely no limit to how many spells one mage can learn, and thus there is never any need to specalize. You can legally get a level 1 shifter with all spells level 1-15, including all necromancy and temporal spells.

I'm not saying the oath idea is bad, i'm saying trying to divide punishment along warmage/healer mage routes won't work in palladium OCC's because when you do get a mage with every healing spell (there's only like 5 or 7 so) and 40 offensive spells and 30 utility spells, how do you classify him?

The oaths are fine, but the oaths can't make any reference to roles, or assign punishments based on roles, because palladium mages don't fall into roles.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:

Nekira Sudacne wrote:what's a "Warmage"? There are a lot of classes that can fight, there's no real warmage distinction, especially sinse most casters have no limit to how many spells they can be taught a level there's no reason one caster can't do all roles well.

Really, palladium's mages don't fall neatly into warmage/healer roles, and they all tend to learn utility spells on the side. a mid level wizard tends to fill all caster roles single handed.

That was sort the notion. to use existing classes in in a more "Magic Accountable" setting. As for a war mage I can see battle magi being ideal for it. But I can understand learning utility spells. I just sort like a twist in things. This oath idea will be added to my dark new world somehow.

The oath could be a goal or a loyalty to an organization as well to I suppose. for instance a member of the Society of sages might vow to not harm fellow members and not cast helpful affects knowingly on dragons.

Well yea, battle magi are obviously a good canidate for warmage, but they are basically the only ones. the majority of Mages are just Mages, equally adept at all things magery.

but my point is unlike other games there is absolutely no limit to how many spells one mage can learn, and thus there is never any need to specalize. You can legally get a level 1 shifter with all spells level 1-15, including all necromancy and temporal spells.

I'm not saying the oath idea is bad, i'm saying trying to divide punishment along warmage/healer mage routes won't work in palladium OCC's because when you do get a mage with every healing spell (there's only like 5 or 7 so) and 40 offensive spells and 30 utility spells, how do you classify him?

The oaths are fine, but the oaths can't make any reference to roles, or assign punishments based on roles, because palladium mages don't fall into roles.

I considered that angle, Nek. and to be honest I think it is quite workable. It just needs help to expand on the Oath as a Role maker...I added Orginization and devotions to gods as well. Mages who have magic that can't offensively cast with dread of punishment would be interesting. and to add that cannot cure natural Illness/disease to healer and theres some quality RPing.

Adding a punishment to role just means the Player needs to be picky about his spells and stick to there role vs. do it all. The original intent is to get the most RP out of a mage. Since I by and large do not divide priests and mages..only differences are the priest believe in gods. and devotion to a god I would count as an oath/condition of service so there basicly mages with divine backing. But I still need to test the Dark new world fully so I get to see how it works then. I'll still try to improve on the concept though and yeah I like costructive criticism. So your commentary is appreciated. I'll need to some how caps spells without capping spells..Hmmm

I guess my only question is how does capping spell learning or forcing mages into roles increase roleplaying options. by the very definition your limiting them.

If someone wants to play a dedicated healer or battler, that's fine, but why does it have to be mandatory?

Rimmerdal wrote:Okay I had a funky idea. I was going to make my Mages have to take an oath or make a promise of some sort ro use magic. On my dark new world I have 6 powerful magical beings that police the magical beings and mages of the world. This oath would if broken have consequences. A few might be:

-Loss of magical powers for a set time, Until a certain quest/Mission is done, The damage they did was undone or permanently. this loss would be based on the crime.

-Imprisonment in Oberons hidden prison for the more dangerous/unredeemables.

The oath would be something along the lines of:
-a healer not using offensive magic in situations that were not defensive action,
-A healer not able the cure "natural" disease or conditions.
-An elementalist can not use the opposing elements.
-A necromancer must respect all cultural death rituals.
-A warmage using only combat based magic..that sort of thing.

(In a time crunch so I'll add more tomorrow.)

IIRC, Mysteries of Magic had something on magical oaths.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:what's a "Warmage"?

He may be refering to a certain type of magic user from one of the Rifters. Not near my books so I can't look it up right now.

I'd make it the player's choice as to which oath they swear to and then enforce it, but not by the Mage Police. I would use something passive and insidious. For example: every time the mage breaks the oath they've chosen, their PPE is reduced or their magic is less effective by X% or loss of a full caster level.

Grell wrote:I'd make it the player's choice as to which oath they swear to and then enforce it, but not by the Mage Police. I would use something passive and insidious. For example: every time the mage breaks the oath they've chosen, their PPE is reduced or their magic is less effective by X% or loss of a full caster level.

The players pick the oath anyway. The "Mage" police hunt down and capture mages who break oaths. I do like he PPE reduction. Could even have them not recharge PPE for set time as a test.

The Beast wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:Okay I had a funky idea. I was going to make my Mages have to take an oath or make a promise of some sort ro use magic. On my dark new world I have 6 powerful magical beings that police the magical beings and mages of the world. This oath would if broken have consequences. A few might be:

-Loss of magical powers for a set time, Until a certain quest/Mission is done, The damage they did was undone or permanently. this loss would be based on the crime.

-Imprisonment in Oberons hidden prison for the more dangerous/unredeemables.

The oath would be something along the lines of:
-a healer not using offensive magic in situations that were not defensive action,
-A healer not able the cure "natural" disease or conditions.
-An elementalist can not use the opposing elements.
-A necromancer must respect all cultural death rituals.
-A warmage using only combat based magic..that sort of thing.

(In a time crunch so I'll add more tomorrow.)

IIRC, Mysteries of Magic had something on magical oaths.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:what's a "Warmage"?

He may be refering to a certain type of magic user from one of the Rifters. Not near my books so I can't look it up right now.

Was just an example a mage who could cast only Combat related magic. The battle Magi are a close fit.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I guess my only question is how does capping spell learning or forcing mages into roles increase roleplaying options. by the very definition your limiting them.

If someone wants to play a dedicated healer or battler, that's fine, but why does it have to be mandatory?

The oath need not be for a dedicated haler or battle mage. the oath could be to use there magic in the service of a cause, a specific organization or even to follow certain rules. Say a necromatic order that is not allowed to defile the dead or some similar concept. It means if they have to bury or properly "clean" up the dead they raised when there done.

another one for necros' could be can only raise willing subjects and ask for their aid. Might fun for a necromancer to request the dead allow them selves to be raised and they may have a cost for raising them beyond PPE like passing a message to living relatives, ensure they get buried at a certain spot and similar requests.

The oath will be mandatory but need not be restricted like the example, Nek.

again though, by making it manditory, no matter the subject of the oath, your removing more role playing possibilies than you're adding.

Agreed.

I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

I don't see this as being a problem if the Oath is a choice. Then it can add to character creation. If the Oath is mandatory for anyone making a magic using character then it's no longer a net addition to character creation but becomes a limiting factor.

I agree. I mean, what is in the nature of magic that makes people swear a formal oath to learn it?

I mean, don't get me wrong. I get what your going for, I really do, I just don't think your implimenting it in quite the right way. It's actually a good idea to make it mandatory for wizards to have a motivation to take up the arcane arts, and it even makes sense that there would be organizations and orders that require members to take a particular oath.

But by saying every mage everywhere has to take an oath or magic simply will not work, period, dosn't make sense. what's worse, your assuming that the motivation/determination to become a mage HAS to take the form of an oath.

What about all the other motivations that don't need an oath?

Basically, my argument is, if you want to say "For this game, all mage characters must serve a god/organization/cause that requires them to take an oath geared twords their particular service", is one thing. it's like saying "This is a military game, all characters are special forces from around the world assembled to make a Dream Team covert ops group (Great, now you gave me an idea for a Ninja's and Superspys game), but each character is sworn to the service of their sponsoring organization".

It's another thing to say "All magic in the universe only works for people who swears an oath about how they use it". And it's something that dosn't make a lot of sense, and rules out any other motivation.

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

No, my point is, having this oath for a specific breed of magic users would be fine. Witches, Warlocks, Priests and True believes already have this kind of thing, and the shaman's have similiar sets of rules they have to follow in order to keep their magic. The thing is though, all of these mages get their magic from an outside source.

Ley line walkers, TW's and almost every other caster on the other hand aquire their magics for themselves through study and hard work. Your idea means that their efforts are essentially meaningless because you're trying to lump all of them into one big group, where they never really learn anything, just borrow it since your idea says that anyone that disobeys the oath loses their magics. That's why I don't like it.

That being said, if you actually made a new group of casters that had to follow this oath as part of their training and like the above casters I mention get their powers from an outside source, then it works.

On the other hand, a more interesting way to do it is to arrange a whole new faction. Maybe something akin to a witch hunter group that hunts mages that don't follow magic rules that they've set up. Basically a more militant/anti-magic group of cyberknight like characters. They have no problem with mages that hold true to their rules and can even help them, but any that don't follow their rules are all targets.

Galroth wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

I don't see this as being a problem if the Oath is a choice. Then it can add to character creation. If the Oath is mandatory for anyone making a magic using character then it's no longer a net addition to character creation but becomes a limiting factor.

Power has a price. Even ones born of nature. Besides if we didn't have limits why not give everyone magical powers and be done away magic as a class then? An oath is something most player add anyway...

SO its really not that hard a concept, but hey to each his own.

Prince Artemis wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

No, my point is, having this oath for a specific breed of magic users would be fine. Witches, Warlocks, Priests and True believes already have this kind of thing, and the shaman's have similiar sets of rules they have to follow in order to keep their magic. The thing is though, all of these mages get their magic from an outside source.

Ley line walkers, TW's and almost every other caster on the other hand aquire their magics for themselves through study and hard work. Your idea means that their efforts are essentially meaningless because you're trying to lump all of them into one big group, where they never really learn anything, just borrow it since your idea says that anyone that disobeys the oath loses their magics. That's why I don't like it.

That being said, if you actually made a new group of casters that had to follow this oath as part of their training and like the above casters I mention get their powers from an outside source, then it works.

On the other hand, a more interesting way to do it is to arrange a whole new faction. Maybe something akin to a witch hunter group that hunts mages that don't follow magic rules that they've set up. Basically a more militant/anti-magic group of cyberknight like characters. They have no problem with mages that hold true to their rules and can even help them, but any that don't follow their rules are all targets.

A Mage who gets his power internally still has to have a motive too and works hard. Otherwise the universe would be full of Batman's if such ability came easy. and ya I already have Witch hunter groups. Those Oberon's trackers. Magic like a gun it can is often misused.

But I get the idea. unless you have all the power and none of the responsibility players aren't happy. It seems when ever there's consequences of a set nature people complain or call it unfair say its not fun. But for the record I do see your points.

Prince Artemis wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

No, my point is, having this oath for a specific breed of magic users would be fine. Witches, Warlocks, Priests and True believes already have this kind of thing, and the shaman's have similiar sets of rules they have to follow in order to keep their magic. The thing is though, all of these mages get their magic from an outside source.

Ley line walkers, TW's and almost every other caster on the other hand aquire their magics for themselves through study and hard work. Your idea means that their efforts are essentially meaningless because you're trying to lump all of them into one big group, where they never really learn anything, just borrow it since your idea says that anyone that disobeys the oath loses their magics. That's why I don't like it.

That being said, if you actually made a new group of casters that had to follow this oath as part of their training and like the above casters I mention get their powers from an outside source, then it works.

On the other hand, a more interesting way to do it is to arrange a whole new faction. Maybe something akin to a witch hunter group that hunts mages that don't follow magic rules that they've set up. Basically a more militant/anti-magic group of cyberknight like characters. They have no problem with mages that hold true to their rules and can even help them, but any that don't follow their rules are all targets.

I like this idea... but with more of a Mystic Knight bent... and not with oaths that restrict a caster to a specific role but with a more Hippocratic oath style...

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Prince Artemis wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

No, my point is, having this oath for a specific breed of magic users would be fine. Witches, Warlocks, Priests and True believes already have this kind of thing, and the shaman's have similiar sets of rules they have to follow in order to keep their magic. The thing is though, all of these mages get their magic from an outside source.

Ley line walkers, TW's and almost every other caster on the other hand aquire their magics for themselves through study and hard work. Your idea means that their efforts are essentially meaningless because you're trying to lump all of them into one big group, where they never really learn anything, just borrow it since your idea says that anyone that disobeys the oath loses their magics. That's why I don't like it.

That being said, if you actually made a new group of casters that had to follow this oath as part of their training and like the above casters I mention get their powers from an outside source, then it works.

On the other hand, a more interesting way to do it is to arrange a whole new faction. Maybe something akin to a witch hunter group that hunts mages that don't follow magic rules that they've set up. Basically a more militant/anti-magic group of cyberknight like characters. They have no problem with mages that hold true to their rules and can even help them, but any that don't follow their rules are all targets.

I like this idea... but with more of a Mystic Knight bent... and not with oaths that restrict a caster to a specific role but with a more Hippocratic oath style...

Well, there's already a sort of basis for that group with the creation of the mage bane in merc adventures

Right and if take the Mystic knoight and redirect the magic they use to a certain element it can work smoothly. Even the Fusionist can be a good method of this to a certain degree.

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Prince Artemis wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:I don't see it as limiting in a bad sense. We all are motivated by some event to follow a path and in some cases that path motivates us in to do what we often think we never would do. Look at Batman or any hero. Do you think they woke up and said "Hey, I wanna grow up and be a Vigilante..They did so to because the NEEDED to. A mage is similar..One does not take up magic on a whim. Even if the goal is total power over the mystic forces.

Its simply as a game mechanic that applies a system for why a person chose to be a wizard and gives there magic a particular flare.

Truth is, Artemis, I see it as making a mage actually have to have a reason for taking up the mystic arts. not just learning it out of curiosity or "Because I can" is not exactly RP material. During character creation most have a back story to there characters. So is it really that hard to tie the oath and back history together? I mean I'm that far out of the box?

Though I'll admit I did miss one factor. Motivations change over time in some cases so having an option to change the oath should take care of that. The "oath" made may change over time so I should put a quest or location that allows the oath to be altered. Could be like the mystic city of Shambala or a monastery like place mage history is kept..might add a little color to the idea of learning magic.

No, my point is, having this oath for a specific breed of magic users would be fine. Witches, Warlocks, Priests and True believes already have this kind of thing, and the shaman's have similiar sets of rules they have to follow in order to keep their magic. The thing is though, all of these mages get their magic from an outside source.

Ley line walkers, TW's and almost every other caster on the other hand aquire their magics for themselves through study and hard work. Your idea means that their efforts are essentially meaningless because you're trying to lump all of them into one big group, where they never really learn anything, just borrow it since your idea says that anyone that disobeys the oath loses their magics. That's why I don't like it.

That being said, if you actually made a new group of casters that had to follow this oath as part of their training and like the above casters I mention get their powers from an outside source, then it works.

On the other hand, a more interesting way to do it is to arrange a whole new faction. Maybe something akin to a witch hunter group that hunts mages that don't follow magic rules that they've set up. Basically a more militant/anti-magic group of cyberknight like characters. They have no problem with mages that hold true to their rules and can even help them, but any that don't follow their rules are all targets.

I like this idea... but with more of a Mystic Knight bent... and not with oaths that restrict a caster to a specific role but with a more Hippocratic oath style...

Hmmm Make them like doctors, lawyers and Police Officers in a sense.

Rogue_Scientist wrote:I saw you post this idea to the EU Facebook page. Wasn't wild about it then, either.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I guess my only question is how does capping spell learning or forcing mages into roles increase roleplaying options. by the very definition your limiting them.

This.

I thought about how to answer you two. But only came to a single reply. Years ago we did a D&D campaign. one in which we used characters based on roles, not classes. In it we set limits thinking the run would not be fun.

We were FAR from wrong. it made us actually work a little harder and really dig deep to make the so called "limited" characters shine. and they did. Not from the spells or weapons they used, but how they were played. It was fun and I would try it again.

Mind you there was no single Mage, thief or Fighters guild..it would be a new GM's hell to set up the background. but for vet or a good GM it was fun.

So lesson today is..Limits are not bad or restrictive. enjoy them.

Ley line walkers, TW's and almost every other caster on the other hand aquire their magics for themselves through study and hard work. Your idea means that their efforts are essentially meaningless because you're trying to lump all of them into one big group, where they never really learn anything, just borrow it since your idea says that anyone that disobeys the oath loses their magics. That's why I don't like it.

PR, I have disagree here. in our heads we have natural tendencies and wiring that make us who we are. People can do certain actions or the can't. Whether there wired that way or have histories that make them go that way. so we all have our own limits to start with. and all mages need to study anyway to some degree. so all work hard. I never will take that away.

You need understand Oberon is THE physical personification of magic and aware of uses it. and expects people to keep there word. (of course Oberon is not the Only source of magic..I have a few demons and other entities willing do deal out magic too for price.)

Again, that essentially means "I'm Joe the ley line walker. I've spent years unlocking the mystical secrets of the universe. I can fly, create wood out of mid air, and shoot fire and lightning with my will power and internal energies.....as long as I have someone else's permission to do so. Because if I don't, my will power means less than lickspit and all that studying was effectively me learning how to beg for someone else's power."

Ok, let me clarify things a bit. I'm not saying your idea is bad. I'm not saying that it can't work and can't be enjoyable. What I'm saying is, it's flying in the face of everything already established in the system for the existing spell casters.

It would be like me saying that everyone in the Coalition States are magical faeries. It could be fun as all hell but it is direct contradiction of the existing system.

Prince Artemis wrote:Again, that essentially means "I'm Joe the ley line walker. I've spent years unlocking the mystical secrets of the universe. I can fly, create wood out of mid air, and shoot fire and lightning with my will power and internal energies.....as long as I have someone else's permission to do so. Because if I don't, my will power means less than lickspit and all that studying was effectively me learning how to beg for someone else's power."

Ok, let me clarify things a bit. I'm not saying your idea is bad. I'm not saying that it can't work and can't be enjoyable. What I'm saying is, it's flying in the face of everything already established in the system for the existing spell casters.

It would be like me saying that everyone in the Coalition States are magical faeries. It could be fun as all hell but it is direct contradiction of the existing system.

Its not permission, its about the caster holding true to the oath they made while learning magic. Oberon does not select the oath for the mage, the mage does as part of the learning process or by his motivation to learn magic. You seem to be missing that. A lot of you are. that just means a mage who breaks his oath needs to look over his shoulder.

But like I said its a moot point since RIfts is about "all the power and none of the responsibility." (at least magic wise). I just want any power user in my game staying true to something. not just going around for Fits and giggles being a power. Power needs a goal.

Rimmerdal wrote:

Rogue_Scientist wrote:I saw you post this idea to the EU Facebook page. Wasn't wild about it then, either.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I guess my only question is how does capping spell learning or forcing mages into roles increase roleplaying options. by the very definition your limiting them.

This.

I thought about how to answer you two. But only came to a single reply. Years ago we did a D&D campaign. one in which we used characters based on roles, not classes. In it we set limits thinking the run would not be fun.

We were FAR from wrong. it made us actually work a little harder and really dig deep to make the so called "limited" characters shine. and they did. Not from the spells or weapons they used, but how they were played. It was fun and I would try it again.

Mind you there was no single Mage, thief or Fighters guild..it would be a new GM's hell to set up the background. but for vet or a good GM it was fun.

So lesson today is..Limits are not bad or restrictive. enjoy them.

But that's it, it didn't shine because you were limited in your role, it shined because you hauled out and put a lot of effort into the role.

That will happen anytime everyone puts their all into their characters. "limited role" only served as a focus. But you can do it without it, you just have to make yourself.

And that's why so many of us are aginst it. We learned how to put our all into our characters without artifical limits, and we wouldn't want to go back, sinse putting your all into a character who is this way, not because they have to, but because they want to, is actually the next step over.

Which is more interesting, a mage who puts their all into their craft because that's what the mechanics force him to do, or a mage who does the same thing because he wants to be better than the lazy rabble?

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

Rimmerdal wrote:

Rogue_Scientist wrote:I saw you post this idea to the EU Facebook page. Wasn't wild about it then, either.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:I guess my only question is how does capping spell learning or forcing mages into roles increase roleplaying options. by the very definition your limiting them.

This.

I thought about how to answer you two. But only came to a single reply. Years ago we did a D&D campaign. one in which we used characters based on roles, not classes. In it we set limits thinking the run would not be fun.

We were FAR from wrong. it made us actually work a little harder and really dig deep to make the so called "limited" characters shine. and they did. Not from the spells or weapons they used, but how they were played. It was fun and I would try it again.

Mind you there was no single Mage, thief or Fighters guild..it would be a new GM's hell to set up the background. but for vet or a good GM it was fun.

So lesson today is..Limits are not bad or restrictive. enjoy them.

But that's it, it didn't shine because you were limited in your role, it shined because you hauled out and put a lot of effort into the role.

That will happen anytime everyone puts their all into their characters. "limited role" only served as a focus. But you can do it without it, you just have to make yourself.

And that's why so many of us are aginst it. We learned how to put our all into our characters without artifical limits, and we wouldn't want to go back, sinse putting your all into a character who is this way, not because they have to, but because they want to, is actually the next step over.

Which is more interesting, a mage who puts their all into their craft because that's what the mechanics force him to do, or a mage who does the same thing because he wants to be better than the lazy rabble?

Ah yes that is true, nek. I can save my Oath mechanics though. Its simple really. See the problem is that I have only Oberon as a source of magic. Hmmm now I need to make Demons, devils and fairies as sources of magic energy. make sort of a magical cold war. I will add other powers like oberon who are willing to deal for power. saves the oath concept and allows for rogue wizards. that should work.


As to the spell capping I have a general purpose-mage with an MoS of sort that can do that for me. the MOS includes skills, some abilities and a pre-selected list of spells they can learn. I can even throw in a few funky catches like a priest of Loki needing to have products of his magic or items he uses bear the colors red and black to some extent.

I'll need expand my mage class MoS's (need to include Priests and ) but that easier than rewriting the Dark new world magic system I have done.

Well, Nek and all you have been a great help. If you know any cool Mythical Demons that may allow Faust like deals feel free to let me know. I'll look around myself. a magical Cold war is much more fun than on guy running a worlds magic.