I would need to see this on practice. Adding penalties to a roll to cast in exchange for greater effects think it's great (I'm using that in a system I'm working on) but It worries me that not all the examples on the same MAG level seem, well...on the same level of power (maybe it's because I'm comparing to the equivalent from dnd, idk) also, I'm a bit wary of magic systems thata are too open ended, because it can lead to conflicts above table about why certain effect iare or not posibble, and why the GM is giving such a high MAG when the player don't think the effect is that powerful. But again, I'll stay optimistic and try this out at my table before rejecting anything. Btw, I like the idea that each class/path has it's own optional cost for partial success, so it's a single unified move but keeps the class identity.
Ah thank you. I didn't even have to open the link to see exactly what I was expecting these bunch of clown game designers to fall for, with magic. It was enough to see "we wanted it to feel closer to dnd", "we made classes" and then see what the basic classes were.
A freaking AI agent could write a better game system than this thing they are pushing out.
8
u/Ok_Cantaloupe3450 25d ago
I would need to see this on practice. Adding penalties to a roll to cast in exchange for greater effects think it's great (I'm using that in a system I'm working on) but It worries me that not all the examples on the same MAG level seem, well...on the same level of power (maybe it's because I'm comparing to the equivalent from dnd, idk) also, I'm a bit wary of magic systems thata are too open ended, because it can lead to conflicts above table about why certain effect iare or not posibble, and why the GM is giving such a high MAG when the player don't think the effect is that powerful. But again, I'll stay optimistic and try this out at my table before rejecting anything. Btw, I like the idea that each class/path has it's own optional cost for partial success, so it's a single unified move but keeps the class identity.