All limitations should result in bonuses on success probability.
This is what I am interested about. There might exist a compilation of these limitations so that it can be calculated accordingly.
A database could be created to calculate specific limitation such as after cast delay, sacrifice promise/penalty and other limitation that anyone could think of. This would make the ruling from referee to another more consistent on such subject.
The database could be search to find that specific limitation and if it have not existed yet then the new limitation could be added with the bonus that comes with it and how the bonus should be calculated.
So any suggestion of limitation and how the bonus should be calculated would help me to create a form to ask how the limitation should be calculated. This is still in planning stage of course so any suggestion would be appreciated.
I think that 'Fifty Magic Limits' may have been an attempt to create this compilation you desired. I bumped it for you.
I have read that but I also need how the limitation is calculated.
Could you give values to those limitations and how much the bonus will increase if certain conditions are met?
So any suggestion of limitation and how the bonus should be calculated would help me to create a form to ask how the limitation should be calculated.
For magic skills, the rule of thumb is that anything which makes a spell twice as difficult or half as powerful gets +10, and anything that makes it half has difficult or twice as powerful gets -10. For anything that has less than a doubling/halving affect, the bonus or penalty is done by percentage rounded to the nearest ten percent for +/-1. For anything that more than halves or doubles, each halving or doubling creates a base for the next, that is, if we start with ten minutes one doubling is 20 minutes for +10, and the next doubling for +20 is 40 minutes, and the next doubling for +30 is 80 minutes, and the same fractional differences are used based on the percent to which the value is doubled or halved again.
That obviously means that a lot of such decisions are very subjective. I can easily say that if a magic skill takes twice as long to cast before it does anything, that doubles the difficulty. If, however, I say that the magic skill once cast cannot be cast again for as long as it took to cast it the first time, that is a considerably weaker limitation--it did not really make the skill twice as difficult or half as powerful, but it did put some limitation on it. To make it more difficult, if that limitation says that I cannot cast any other magic for that period, that is a considerably more potent limitation than one which says I cannot cast this spell again for that period--particularly if I have five other practiced spells that do the same thing that are not prevented by this limitation.
As far as thinking of all the possible limitations, I think one thing Eric's thread demonstrates is that we're never going to have them all. There is certainly some benefit to having a database which we can check to determine how other referees have rated various limitations (and power boosts), but if I'm sitting at the table at Ubercon or Days of Knights or even in my own kitchen, I'm going to check the cheat sheets I have with me and if it's not there I'm going to make a decision on the fly.
As a footnote, I think it would be a mistake to put such a list in the hands of players. I have no problem with any of these scenarios:
- Character lands in a world in which magic is sung, and learns magic from that world, discovering that the fact that it is sung increases its chance of success.
- Character meets someone who sings some of his magic, and decides to try singing magic, and so learns that singing will increase the chance of success of his magic.
- Character discusses magic with another character and learns that some mages bonus their magic by singing it, so incorporates this into some of his spells.
- Character wonders whether singing might help his magic, and so tries it, by which he gets bonuses.
- Player reads on a list somewhere that singing will get him a +5 sit-mod bonus on his magic under the heading "loudly or forcefully" and so has his character sing spells to get that bonus.
This is not always easy, by any means. I know--it is particularly difficult for me. For example, I devised the bias level scale assignments (the 0@0 to 15@10 scale was devised by E. R. Jones, and the negative side also by him, but I filled in all the blanks with what went where). That means that the concept of what psionic skills are easy and which ones are difficult is my own vision of that field (and the same with magic, technology, and body skills). That means that it makes perfect sense for my character to believe that mind reading and telepathy are easy, telekinetics more difficult, force generatives much more difficult, and so on. He's right, because he thinks the way I think. I have to avoid using my knowledge of the game's bias system in selecting which skills I want to learn next; but I also have to use my own "knowledge" of what skills are easier to learn and which ones harder in selecting which skills my character will attempt to learn next.
In something of the same way, if I'm designing magic skills I am certainly allowed to build bonuses into the skills based on what my character believes would make a difference to the power of the skill, and that's going to match to some degree what the rules say will make a difference; but I also have to keep that within the bounds of what my character would do. So for example with the Architect, nearly all of his earliest spells were bonused by virtue that he recited scripture directly from the Greek New Testament--in essence a quirk that he knew worked. He learned that it worked because he thought it likely that it would and he tried it in a world where that was a very good approach to magic (fighting vampires). My on-board character doesn't do magic that way. He sings most of his magic, because in the first world he entered all of the many magic-using characters performed magic by song, and I happen to be a professional level singer/musician who not only knows a lot of songs (many original) but has the ability to write a song to the purpose pretty much at the drop of a hat. He has used other forms of magic since, but has never quoted from the Greek New Testament, despite having it with him. That's because he has never thought of it. And that in turn is because I will not allow myself to do that which I oppose in the actions of other players: using knowledge of game mechanics to create bonuses in spells that the character has no particular reason to know would make any difference.
I will also admit to a certain prejudice in individual circumstances in this. Were Scott or Graeme to post a spell ritual and then after it post a listing and calculation of the bonuses and penalties he believed it would receive to get a final sit-mod, I would happily thank him for saving me the work--because I am confident that in their cases they designed the ritual with an eye to what it is that their characters would do in that situation, and subsequently did the legwork for me, the ritual not at all influenced by the numbers beyond that degree to which the character's past experience would lead him to believe that doing things this way works better. Were certain other players to post the ritual followed by the math, I would probably be a bit angry, because I know that they're playing the numbers, designing the skill to get those numbers because as players they are aware of the numbers of which their characters are completely unfamiliar. I don't mind when Adam does it, because his character has had some horrific failures and some brilliant successes, and it's reasonable for anyone with the amount of experience in magic his character has had to have learned a lot of things that work and to include them. So it isn't so much playing the numbers that irks me but using player knowledge of the math of the system to boost character chance of success in ways that are clearly out of character for the character.
In short, its good to kick around ideas like that list to get a feel for the possibilities, and even to make stabs at numbers for specific limitations. What I don't want to see is players pulling items from that list and expecting to get specific bonuses for using specific tricks.
One of the things that makes Multiverser magic interesting is precisely that the players and their characters don't know the "tricks". It results in individual characters stylizing their magic in particular patterns. A lot of the Architect's magic has that Greek Scriptures base, while my other character's is mostly music. Graeme's has a lot of engineering influence, Harry involves a lot of references to Norse deities, and Adam couches his in the styles of Hackmaster and Dungeons & Dragons. It results in a lot of great color in the game, because the characters look for things which work for them by trial and error, not for things on the list somewhere that provide prepackaged bonuses.
--M. J. Young
What I don't want to see is players pulling items from that list and expecting to get specific bonuses for using specific tricks.
The database could be made private for the referee only which probably would mean that there exist a login system and moderator to check if the new limitation is valid.
I am also thinking of an AI or expert system to ask related questions that a referee might ask but that might have to wait for later.
I wonder if I have to put limitation name, base value, target value (if increment is enabled), linear/exponential increment (if increment is enabled), and other modifier in the form.
I don't think we use exponential increments.
--M. J. Young
The doubling or halving is exponential increments but the last doubling is calculated linearly.
So, the point of this proposed system is to take the power of judgement away from the referee? In the sense that he won't have the power to say how bonused or penalized the magical spells attempted by his players are based on his own experience? Not really a good idea, in my opinion. Even in the best of circumstances, the referee needs to be able to think on his feet and improvise in situations, especially in Multiverser. As long as you remember the cardinal rule (We Play Games to Have Fun), everything else will fall into place; even if once in a while that means that a close die roll turns out to be a mere suggestion. While that may not be a rule that could be committed to paper, if bending the rules a fraction causes everyone to get more enjoyment, where's the harm in that? I trust the referee implicitly to bonus my spells fairly, because it simply isn't up to me. Having a good time is a mutual agreement, but as a player, my primary concern is far from how the rules work; it is how to deal with the task
at hand in the fashion my character would most likely deal with it. As the referee, my duty is to fairly bonus or penalize skills based on specific situations which warrant the alterations according to my experience, not anyone else's. I don't know much of you, but you seem like the type who likes to have these tools to help you keep things fair... there is no shame in that. I'm more a seat of the pants type, personally, so my reaction to the idea of having a strict coded system like the one you've described is, why? I won't use it anyway, heh.
The referee is your best friend at the table. He's the only one who has any say as to whether or not the dragon will come and eat you.
Ky
Ky,
I'm not sure every GM would agree with you, although I suspect most would that dice need to be fudged. The advantage of a list is not that it forbids fudging, but that it gives you a guideline.
I can see where it's coming from as a supplement to the magic skills worksheet. I just don't really see the necessity of referring to it because I have a pretty good idea of how to make magic spells in Multiverser, and, well, you know... I'm the baseline intelligence, so anyone who doesn't must be stupid.
That was a joke.
Ky
So, the point of this proposed system is to take the power of judgement away from the referee?
Not at all. The system only helps the referee to decide what the sit mod would be especially the calculation involving lots of doubling or halving. As Tad said, it only serve as guideline like the other rules.
This makes me wonder if it is better to make a doubling or halving sit mod calculator rather than calculating the whole skill.
Another reason for this proposed system is to create a database for the next system which is an AI capable of asking related question to the player related to the limitation then calculating the sit mod automatically. The result will then be sent to the referee which would revise the calculation if needed. This would save the player and referee time because the AI will ask about the limitation that the referee would ask anyway. This AI system is intended for forum game because if it is live game then the referee could ask the questions directly. This AI system however must wait until the proposed system is finished.
I have a pretty good idea of how to make magic spells in Multiverser
Making a magic spell is easy, calculating it on the other hand is not so easy because it depends on a lot of factor. These factor is what this system intends to calculate. For referee who does not like to calculate, this system would probably help them.
Yeah, by making a spell I meant from both sides, referee and player. Actually, in a sense I quite like the idea of a system which could calculate the penalties or bonuses a skill would get completely on its own. It wouldn't be as good as a referee, but it would be one step closer to a Multiverser based MUD.
Ky
Multiverser based MUD
That is what I hope will be created soon. If that can be done then I think it will attract more people to Multiverser.
I also think that it will need a world library to choose which world that it will simulate but that phase is still further ahead.
Before that, I think that a battle calculator would also be great tool to have.
I wonder if I should do the above first to simulate the MUD feel.
Well, a Multiverser based MUD... Although it would be admittedly cool, the idea is extremely daunting. Battle isn't so much the problem.. nor the idea that you verse out instead of dying... it's the freedom in the Multiverser system that would be lost. The interaction with npcs need to be seriously revamped. If you made it so that there were multiple paths that could be followed in each world you might alleviate that a bit.. For instance, the story progresses in basically a preset direction in each world based on ge rolls and attribute checks. I'm just throwing ideas out there at random because I really have thought about a Multiverser in terms of a MUD very frequently, and although I personally love the concept, first of all, it's an insanely difficult undertaking, and secondly, MUDs have very much fallen even more out of favor than they once were due to the popularity of MMORPGs, the number of free ones, and the technological advancements which have made them very available.
Ky
it's an insanely difficult undertaking
Yes, I know. A very well thought system must be build to simulate the referee.
That is what makes it so interesting.
MUDs have very much fallen even more out of favor than they once were due to the popularity of MMORPGs
A Multiverser MUD have more potential than a normal MMORPG. If the MUD can be created, then probably the MMORPG could be created too. The Multiverser MUD will be an experiment to see if MMORPG version could be created although I think the transition to graphical phase is optional. I think the MUD version will make the imagination run wild which is why I like Multiverser in the first place. Certain graphic could be added to help the player to understand the environment but other than that I think it is better to let the mind to simulate the situation.
I trust you have a copy of the rule book.
the Multiverser system is one of the most complicated game systems I have ever seen. Compiling even one chapter of skills would be nightmarish, four would be beyond worst fears. What you're talking about is beyond that;. It's like you just rolled a thirty when you came up with the idea. You're talking about coding every skill you can imagine and leaving the door open for people to create every skill they can imagine; the complexity of a computer program which can deduce from your skill description the specific bias level and intensity without assistance from a human is damn near impossible for someone with even a low professional skill level in computer languages and coding. Put simply, the idea is stupid, not crazy. but let's move away from skills and pretend that there was a solution to that problem. Now the problem is in certain other attributes... Persuasion, for instance, or even the trifecta of persuasion, charisma, and animal magnetism.
As you know, these three attributes largely determine the character's ability to alter the world and are very important in gameplay. The player will have his options severely limited because even in the best of circumstances, his character will be bound by the strictures imposed on him by the system. Not only this, but it is possible for a player to have a successful charisma check concerning another player's character, thus either averting a battle between them or gaining his trust while he robs him blind;
in spite of all the problems, MUDding is fun. If it is something that could be done, I'd like to see it happen. I don't think it's possible to capture Multiverser in a game program, though...
Ky
coding every skill you can imagine and leaving the door open for people to create every skill they can imagine
Which is why a database would probably help.
I also wonder if an AI could be made to convert natural language to appropriate script.
without assistance from a human
And how does this human choose that specific bias level and intensity?
What is the question that the human ask to get that result?
Can this be replicated by the AI?
I don't think it's possible to capture Multiverser in a game program
In current game program, probably not possible. I wonder if a heuristic system will do the trick.
Yes, some sort of Multiverser computer game would be very cool. And it would probably have to start as a fairly limited choice thing...I remember playing 'Nine Princes of Amber' where the choice to get ahead was pretty close to 'do it this way or die'. It might be neccessary to start there.
We encountered something of this problem when we attempted to put together a "stripped demo" version. The obvious solution for that was that a lot of skills were packed into the indigs of the four incorporated worlds, and players could learn the skills from the indigs but could not create their own.
I'm inclined to think that a templates library, search engine, and modifications system might work. That is, the character has to tell the system what he wants to do, and then something like Ask.com it comes back with a list of "questions" for which it has answers. So the player says, "I want to become invisible," and the computer picks up the word "invisible" responds:
- Which of these is closest to what you want?
- I want to pass unnoticed.
- I want not to be attacked in the combat as long as I don't attack.
- I want to have a transparent body.
- I want to be shrouded by some kind of screen that causes people to see through me without seeing me.
- I want to hide behind a magically produced illusion that looks like this wall.
- I want to become non-corporeal by having my body slip into an adjacent dimension from which I can observe without being physically present.
It's still a massive undertaking, and probably real people would have occasionally to add new listings in response to new questions.
As to worlds, yes, these would have to be under construction fairly constantly. I'm also inclined to think against story worlds, unless it's possible to create worlds in isolation--that is, we could create the Dancing Princess, as long as if ten people entered it individually it would run itself for each of those ten people without the actions of any of them impacting the setting for any of the others.
--M. J. Young
Creating worlds in isolation?. Doable. that's a great system for the skills, but as you said yourself, a massive undertaking which would require years of work, and I would imagine it ro end up being such a large program that it would create a ton of lag. Perhaps, though.. If you put it on a seperate port, and allowed players to log in to create their own skills which were then saved to their character file with the actual roll for learning to be attempted at a later date, you could save yourself a lot of time in the skills department. Anyone who wanted to create their own ability could do it on the alternate port, and you could even take it largely out of character for purposes of facilitating the process. You would have a system which first asked what bias area, then listed the bias levels, then listed the bias skills. Of course, you would still need to create hundreds if not thousands of skills that players would use.. Such as walk, run, communicate, use lighter, operate magical device and so on.
Ky
Right--and you have the additional problem of getting the computer to distinguish situations--when the character can walk without a check, when the check is appropriate, whether it's bonused or penalized. And it has to be able to interpret outcomes when someone uses a skill creatively, such as using a fire-based attack to cook dinner.
Very tricky overall.
--M. J. Young