Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Let's talk about Lacrymas' homebrew fantasy setting where paladins are eunuchs

Grampy_Bone

Arcane
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
3,640
Location
Wandering the world randomly in search of maps
Another control freak DM who can't handle magic or players actually winning fights. News at 11.

Almost as bad as 2E shills who think everything over 4th level is 'high level play' and hyperventilate when they see a 3rd level spell.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
4,189
RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In
Not really, at least not entirely. Divine magic requires, by design, filters. One such filter is the theme itself, spirituality and nature.

Why is theme of being a researcher/philosopher/scholar any worse than spirituality and nature? Even if you wanted to make a setting that reflects bronze-age then ancient scholars could still be wizards.

Another filter is the religious dogmas. You can't be a priest without a religious dogma, you wouldn't be a priest otherwise. You'll have to think up a very, very good reason for why mages allow themselves to be corralled and controlled by anyone, including other mages.

Mages are controlled by other mages in many other setting without problems: Harry Potter, Warhammer Fantasy, Dragon Age, Dresden Files, Gothic etc. Magic users allow themselves to be controlled by others for simple reason: siding with other more powerful wizards will grant you benefits, opposing them might get you killed.

Arcane magic is also individualist and only requires force of will by the user, there is no outside force regulating it. It's not that it isn't possible to create a setting in which mages don't present such a huge narrative problem, it's just that they are very, very rare, and I'm not sure they have good reasons for that either. I have also chosen to concentrate on other stuff and not have to think about a way to justify arcane magic restrictions.

These kinds of settings aren't very, very, very rare. There is no reason for Wizards to not be limited by outside forces. People live in a society and it's better to be Kings's advisor with fully-stacked laboratory and 20 assistants rather than being an outcast researching spells somewhere in the swamps, wasting your time conjuring food and fending off alligators.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
Bioware: "Mages are too powerful in our setting, therefore we are going to create an order of knights who take a very dangerous drug to make themselves ultra mage killing machines so they can keep the mages in line."
Lacrymas: "Mages are too powerful, I will remove them"
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
Not really, at least not entirely. Divine magic requires, by design, filters. One such filter is the theme itself, spirituality and nature.

Why is theme of being a researcher/philosopher/scholar any worse than spirituality and nature? Even if you wanted to make a setting that reflects bronze-age then ancient scholars could still be wizards.

Another filter is the religious dogmas. You can't be a priest without a religious dogma, you wouldn't be a priest otherwise. You'll have to think up a very, very good reason for why mages allow themselves to be corralled and controlled by anyone, including other mages.

Mages are controlled by other mages in many other setting without problems: Harry Potter, Warhammer Fantasy, Dragon Age, Dresden Files, Gothic etc. Magic users allow themselves to be controlled by others for simple reason: siding with other more powerful wizards will grant you benefits, opposing them might get you killed.

Arcane magic is also individualist and only requires force of will by the user, there is no outside force regulating it. It's not that it isn't possible to create a setting in which mages don't present such a huge narrative problem, it's just that they are very, very rare, and I'm not sure they have good reasons for that either. I have also chosen to concentrate on other stuff and not have to think about a way to justify arcane magic restrictions.

These kinds of settings aren't very, very, very rare. There is no reason for Wizards to not be limited by outside forces. People live in a society and it's better to be Kings's advisor with fully-stacked laboratory and 20 assistants rather than being an outcast researching spells somewhere in the swamps, wasting your time conjuring food and fending off alligators.


You are thinking of individual mages, while I'm coming from the perspective of the political power mages can wield. Why would he be a king's advisor and not the king himself? Even if it's about individuals, Voldemort in Harry Potter is a thing which happens even with the control of other wizards. What would've happened if there were more than 1 Voldemort? He represents the logical conclusion of wizards in that setting. The control of mages in the Dragon Age setting breaks down the moment the mages decide to rebel, which they regularly do and even become a huge problem by the second game. The control is always illusory.
 
Last edited:

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
Every problem caused by arcane magic can be caused by divine magic just as well.
Not really, at least not entirely. Divine magic requires, by design, filters. One such filter is the theme itself, spirituality and nature.
"Spirituality and nature" makes you sound like a new age crystal seller. Healing spells have a far bigger potential at driving military conquest than conjuring fish and chips. All magic is unrealistic, as fantasy tends to be. It's just that people don't play a druid so that they can run population models, anymore than wizard players are interested in solving math equations.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
Every problem caused by arcane magic can be caused by divine magic just as well.
Not really, at least not entirely. Divine magic requires, by design, filters. One such filter is the theme itself, spirituality and nature.
"Spirituality and nature" makes you sound like a new age crystal seller. Healing spells have a far bigger potential at driving military conquest than conjuring fish and chips. All magic is unrealistic, as fantasy tends to be. It's just that people don't play a druid so that they can run population models, anymore than wizard players are interested in solving math equations.
Good thing only Paladins can heal in my setting, huh. And of course the healing source the churches control (or tend to control).
 

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
Every problem caused by arcane magic can be caused by divine magic just as well.
Not really, at least not entirely. Divine magic requires, by design, filters. One such filter is the theme itself, spirituality and nature.
"Spirituality and nature" makes you sound like a new age crystal seller. Healing spells have a far bigger potential at driving military conquest than conjuring fish and chips. All magic is unrealistic, as fantasy tends to be. It's just that people don't play a druid so that they can run population models, anymore than wizard players are interested in solving math equations.
Good thing only Paladins can heal in my setting, huh. And of course the healing source the churches control (or tend to control).
But it doesn't really matter who can heal, just that magical healing exist. You can name them however you want.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
But it doesn't really matter who can heal, just that magical healing exist. You can name them however you want.
That's why it's a theocracy. Whoever controls the healing source has the power. The difference is that someone else can overtake that power and replace the churches. No empire lasts forever.
 

Bara

Arcane
Joined
Apr 2, 2018
Messages
1,320
Ok, now i want to make computer role playing crpg game too. Where do i start?
81qBLux5%2B0L._SL1500_.jpg


:happytrollboy:
 

Larianshill

Arbiter
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
1,719
That's why it's a theocracy. Whoever controls the healing source has the power. The difference is that someone else can overtake that power and replace the churches. No empire lasts forever.
How is it different from arcane?
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
That's why it's a theocracy. Whoever controls the healing source has the power. The difference is that someone else can overtake that power and replace the churches. No empire lasts forever.
How is it different from arcane?
How can you overtake a mage's power and replace them? Unless you are a mage yourself, which doesn't change the status quo, just the face.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
There is only one other source of magical healing in my setting (and there are no "true" resurrections). Paladins are essentially eunuchs, sworn to one of the churches with a strict vow of chastity. If they break that vow and someone finds out, they get castrated. I figured they should get something special, i.e. Lay on Hands is the only character-based healing, in order to "justify" the immense requirements.
Secret paladin self help brotherhood dedicated to "restoring" fallen members in 3... 2... 1...
:martini:
Is laying hands on another guy's (mutilated) junk gay?
:philosoraptor:
This is probably the most pressing question for most of the 'dex, so it cannot be left unasked.
:troll:
 

Storyfag

Perfidious Pole
Patron
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
15,899
Location
Stealth Orbital Nuke Control Centre
But it doesn't really matter who can heal, just that magical healing exist. You can name them however you want.
That's why it's a theocracy. Whoever controls the healing source has the power. The difference is that someone else can overtake that power and replace the churches. No empire lasts forever.

So... why can anyone replace the churches full of divine spellcasters who control the only source of healing magic, but it is IMPOSSIBIRU to replace the mage guilds full of arcane spellcasters who know jack shit about healing magic and do not have any paladins to command?
 

Bara

Arcane
Joined
Apr 2, 2018
Messages
1,320
That's why it's a theocracy. Whoever controls the healing source has the power. The difference is that someone else can overtake that power and replace the churches. No empire lasts forever.
How is it different from arcane?
How can you overtake a mage's power and replace them? Unless you are a mage yourself, which doesn't change the status quo, just the face.

There are capagins and adventures designed and based around such things...
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
DraQ there was an episode of Misfits where a woman had miraculous healing powers but refused to heal venereal diseases because she didn't want to touch junk all day. Also, the healing can't restore lost bodyparts, only poisons, diseases, wounds, etc. Either that or you bring great shame by laying hands on yourself to restore your cock.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
There are capagins and adventures designed and based around such things...
But that only targets a symptom and not the cause. You can topple a single mage with a lot of effort, but that power still remains in others and it's even worse if it's a political institution.
 

Storyfag

Perfidious Pole
Patron
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
15,899
Location
Stealth Orbital Nuke Control Centre
Taking a nap after reading this thread has caused me to think of an interesting (to me anyway) take on Magic that I may use in a setting/campaign I run in the future.

Magic is ultimately freedom from and rejection of the physical universe and its laws, as by its nature magic ignores and breaks them. But the universe reacts against magic and bends causality to try to diminish the ability of magic to reject the physical laws.

This will manifest mechanically by the cost of magic not being mana, spell slots, or anything else like that. All use of magic results in penalties to future rolls, and other random or DM decided occurrences, that impact the magic user, the duration and magnitude of which depend on the power of the magic used. The power of magic a wizard can use will not be limited by skill or experience, instead the magnitude and duration of penalties can be reduced as more experienced wizards understand how better do magic in a way that minimizes the universe's backlash.

The backlash also manifests itself in consequences for those closely working with, associated with, supportive of, or maybe even just physically near the wizard, especially for more powerful uses of magic.

The magic system would also want to very strongly encourage free creativity from magic using players in thinking up the magical effects they would like to cause on the fly, as opposed to a list of very specifically defined spells.

As a result wizards tend to be very individualistic, chafe at restrictions, and prone to selfish motivations. Many may philosophically view the universe as a trap to be escaped from or defeated in some way, while societies and others tend to view them, and magic in general, as a source of danger to others. Both due to the power they can wield, and also the impact of the backlash their magic use causes on those around them. The universe bending causality to react against the magic also provides additional reinforcement for societal norms that reject magic.

There would also be anti-wizards. They would be wizards who use magic, but use it in a careful way that is done to counteract and mitigate previous uses of magic. Magic used carefully in this way would not produce little to no backlash from the universe. The way anti-wizards would manifest in society would likely be strongly tied to religion and authority and may take on the social form of divine magic, or magic done in accordance with the will of the gods/religious powers.

Just the initial spark of an idea though. Needs some more thought and iteration.

Also, I am sure someone is about to provide a link to some system or setting that already basically has magic work this way showing I am not original in any way.

White Wolf Paradox called, they want you to C&D infringing the MtA copyright.
 

Storyfag

Perfidious Pole
Patron
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
15,899
Location
Stealth Orbital Nuke Control Centre
There are capagins and adventures designed and based around such things...
But that only targets a symptom and not the cause. You can topple a single mage with a lot of effort, but that power still remains in others and it's even worse if it's a political institution.

And how is that different from toppling a single high priest? That power still remains in others and it's even worse if its a college of cardinals.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
4,189
RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In
You are thinking of individual mages, while I'm coming from the perspective of the political power mages can wield. Why would he be a king's advisor and not the king himself? Even if it's about individuals, Voldemort in Harry Potter is a thing which happens even with the control of other wizards. What would've happened if there were more than 1 Voldemort? He represents the logical conclusion of wizards in that setting. The control of mages in the Dragon Age setting breaks down the moment the mages decide to rebel, which they regularly do and even become a huge problem by the second game. The control is always illusory.

Because normal people outnumber wizards 1000 to 1 and in most setting wizards can and has been killed by normal people, especially when outnumbered. Also, in DnD Wizards are not the only people capable of using superhuman abilities, but merely one of many such groups.

EDIT:
Also, why would a Wizard ever become a king if Clerics exist?
 
Last edited:

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
That's why it's a theocracy. Whoever controls the healing source has the power. The difference is that someone else can overtake that power and replace the churches. No empire lasts forever.
Saying it's controlled by the church is the same cop out as "spirituality & nature". It's because your clerics are not interested in running population & environmental models, then. In real life we have weaponized pathogens, not fish and chips. Regardless of who would control such an advantage, healing spells would sooner or later lead to WMDs. At which point your fantasy arrives at the "everyone is sitting on their nuclear warhead" stage, and it turns out you were playing Total War: Castrated Crusade all along.
(if you ever publish you game under this title, I demand royalties)
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,948
Pathfinder: Wrath
RE: Why can't we topple mages the same way we can the churches in my setting? Because the power (both political and magical) of mages comes from within, not from without (like the source of healing). Someone else can come and replace the churches to control the source of healing, you can't replace mages in this way.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom