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

[Lacrymas]

Wizards can create their own spells in D&D. Not many people know or make use of that but you can. And yeah, my setting is limited to lvl 6 and only for legendary saints. Anyone can do anything they want in my setting, it just has severe consequences. We mustn't confuse mechanical restrictions with narrative ones too.

 

[Ol' Willy]

The funny part is: wait till he runs into psionics.

If you mean DS it doesn't make sense because everyone in DS setting has psionic powers

 

[Storyfag]

Wizards can create their own spells in D&D. Not many people know or make use of that but you can.

And you're so weak a GM that not only are you incapable of dealing with the existance of that rule, but also instead of hourseruling it away you houserule away all mages and come up with insane troll logic to justify it.

And yeah, my setting is limited to lvl 6 and only for legendary saints. Anyone can do anything they want in my setting, it just has severe consequences.

So their dogma/ideology/deities/whatever don't actually limit their divine magic at all?

 

[Lacrymas]

Wizards can create their own spells in D&D. Not many people know or make use of that but you can.

And you're so weak a GM that not only are you incapable of dealing with the existance of that rule, but also instead of hourseruling it away you houserule away all mages and come up with insane troll logic to justify it.

And yeah, my setting is limited to lvl 6 and only for legendary saints. Anyone can do anything they want in my setting, it just has severe consequences.

So their dogma/ideology/deities/whatever don't actually limit their divine magic at all?

It's not about me dealing with that rule, it's about what is possible within the setting itself. And by "doing what they want", I mean they can break their vows, go against their ideology, do taboo things, etc. Not that they can pull bullshit spells out their asses. It just has severe consequences, like Paladins getting castrated if they get caught.

 

[Storyfag]

Wizards can create their own spells in D&D. Not many people know or make use of that but you can.

And you're so weak a GM that not only are you incapable of dealing with the existance of that rule, but also instead of hourseruling it away you houserule away all mages and come up with insane troll logic to justify it.

And yeah, my setting is limited to lvl 6 and only for legendary saints. Anyone can do anything they want in my setting, it just has severe consequences.

So their dogma/ideology/deities/whatever don't actually limit their divine magic at all?

It's not about me dealing with that rule, it's about what is possible within the setting itself. And by "doing what they want", I mean they can break their vows, go against their ideology, do taboo things, etc. Not that they can pull bullshit spells out their asses. It just has severe consequences, like Paladins getting castrated if they get caught.

Well, then if you had wizards who are limited to the 6th circle (and even those who aren't) there is nothing stopping them from being similarily limited by severe consequences if they broke whatever rules you envision, just as divine spellcasters are, no?

 

[barghwata]

 

[Lacrymas]

Well, then if you had wizards who are limited to the 6th circle (and even those who aren't) there is nothing stopping them from being similarily limited by severe consequences if they broke whatever rules you envision, just as divine spellcasters are, no?

Sure, but that doesn't fix the vagueness of arcane magic, which is my main problem, regardless of whether they are limited to lvl 6 or not. I also don't want floating brooms or books, enchanted lights, glowing elf-women alla LotR (there are also no elves in my setting btw), cities in the skies, old wizened sages with vague abilities, teleportation, invisibility, etc. in my setting too. My end goal is to create my own RPG system.

 

[Cael]

Well, then if you had wizards who are limited to the 6th circle (and even those who aren't) there is nothing stopping them from being similarily limited by severe consequences if they broke whatever rules you envision, just as divine spellcasters are, no?

Sure, but that doesn't fix the vagueness of arcane magic, which is my main problem, regardless of whether they are limited to lvl 6 or not. I also don't want floating brooms or books, enchanted lights, glowing elf-women alla LotR (there are also no elves in my setting btw), cities in the skies, old wizened sages with vague abilities, teleportation, invisibility, etc. in my setting too.

It seems to me that you are playing the wrong game.

"I hate fantasy, but I insist on breaking a fantasy game to fit my hate."

Seriously, man. Go play MERP.

 

[Lacrymas]

Or I can create my own setting and play within it with my friends. Which is what I do.

 

[Cael]

Or I can create my own setting and play within it with my friends. Which is what I do.

Yeah. Your "friends".

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

Wizards can create their own spells in D&D. Not many people know or make use of that but you can.

And you're so weak a GM that not only are you incapable of dealing with the existance of that rule, but also instead of hourseruling it away you houserule away all mages and come up with insane troll logic to justify it.

And yeah, my setting is limited to lvl 6 and only for legendary saints. Anyone can do anything they want in my setting, it just has severe consequences.

So their dogma/ideology/deities/whatever don't actually limit their divine magic at all?

It's not about me dealing with that rule, it's about what is possible within the setting itself. And by "doing what they want", I mean they can break their vows, go against their ideology, do taboo things, etc. Not that they can pull bullshit spells out their asses. It just has severe consequences, like Paladins getting castrated.

But there are settings where using magic has consequences. In Warhammer RPG every time you roll double on spell power there is chance of chaos manifestation which in theory can even kill your caster. In Call of Cthulhu learning spells results in character's sanity dropping and are often accompanied with rising their 'Cthulhu Mythos' skill which in turn limits your maximum sanity. The setting is a bit like communism. It's great at solving problems that cannot be found in any other setting.

 

[Cael]

Wizards can create their own spells in D&D. Not many people know or make use of that but you can.

And you're so weak a GM that not only are you incapable of dealing with the existance of that rule, but also instead of hourseruling it away you houserule away all mages and come up with insane troll logic to justify it.

And yeah, my setting is limited to lvl 6 and only for legendary saints. Anyone can do anything they want in my setting, it just has severe consequences.

So their dogma/ideology/deities/whatever don't actually limit their divine magic at all?

It's not about me dealing with that rule, it's about what is possible within the setting itself. And by "doing what they want", I mean they can break their vows, go against their ideology, do taboo things, etc. Not that they can pull bullshit spells out their asses. It just has severe consequences, like Paladins getting castrated.

But there are settings where using magic has consequences. In Warhammer RPG every time you roll double on spell power there is chance of chaos manifestation which in theory can even kill your caster. In Call of Cthulhu learning spells results in character's sanity dropping and are often accompanied with rising their 'Cthulhu Mythos' skill which in turn limits your maximum sanity. The setting is a bit like communism. It's great at solving problems that cannot be found in any other setting.

MERP is the same with regards to consequences of casting spells. They exist, but you draw the attention of Bad Things(tm) if you get too "loud".

 

[Lacrymas]

I'm not interested in consequences of arcane magic use, especially when it's an attempt to "balance" arcane spellcasters. I'm interested in consequences for doing human things and how people react to those.

 

[Cael]

I'm not interested in consequences of arcane magic use, especially when it's an attempt to "balance" arcane spellcasters. I'm interested in consequences for doing human things and how people react to those.

And yet magic still exists. How about that?

You, dear boy, is delusional with hatred. Not that rare in current year, given the existence of a particular part of the political spectrum. But this is the first time I have seen this virulent a reaction to a set of RPG rules.

 

[Latro]

This is why storyfags are ruining the genre.

 

[Storyfag]

Sure, but that doesn't fix the vagueness of arcane magic, which is my main problem, regardless of whether they are limited to lvl 6 or not.

What vagueness? Whish is a perfectly defined spell. Nobody uses the rule about custom spells, and houseruling it out of the question is a matter of snapping your fingers anyway.

I also don't want floating brooms or books

Animate object is a 5th circle spell, so would be extremely rare in your setting and likely out of the hands of your players' characters anyway.

enchanted lights

Better ban clerics then, Light is a cantrip available to any.

glowing elf-women alla LotR (there are also no elves in my setting btw)

That's Thauamturgy. A cantrip ironically available only to clerics. You should ban them asap.

cities in the skies

Well, by limiting available magic to the 6th circle this has been dealt with sufficiently.

old wizened sages with vague abilities

Quick! Disband all monasteries! Execute all monks! Also burn down libraries.

teleportation

Better ban the 6th circle too. And the 5th.

invisibility, etc. in my setting too.

Nuke druids from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Lets just drop magic altogether and have glorious medieval TTRPGs instead.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Lets just drop magic altogether and have glorious medieval TTRPGs instead.

Join Post-Apo crowd, dude

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Lets just drop magic altogether and have glorious medieval TTRPGs instead.

Join Post-Apo crowd, dude

I'm more of a SF guy, but post-apo can be decent too.

 

[Lacrymas]

Storyfag, you are assuming I haven't banned these spells already.

 

[Storyfag]

Storyfag, you are assuming I haven't banned these spells already.

If you did, you are intellectually dishonest to cite their existance as a reason for banning mages.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Storyfag, you are assuming I haven't banned these spells already.

If you did, you are intellectually dishonest to cite their existance as a reason for banning mages.

Banning mages needs no reason though.

 

[Storyfag]

Storyfag, you are assuming I haven't banned these spells already.

If you did, you are intellectually dishonest to cite their existance as a reason for banning mages.

Banning mages needs no reason though.

Of course it doesn't.

Yet Lacryxir insists on making up reasons for that. Reasons that, as has been demonstrated, are criminally lacking in regards to internal consistence and logic.

 

[Lacrymas]

Storyfag, you are assuming I haven't banned these spells already.

If you did, you are intellectually dishonest to cite their existance as a reason for banning mages.

That's a bonus to the mage ban. And I already said wizards can create their own spells in D&D, that's where the vagueness comes from.

 

[Storyfag]

Storyfag, you are assuming I haven't banned these spells already.

If you did, you are intellectually dishonest to cite their existance as a reason for banning mages.

That's a bonus to the mage ban.

What's the bonus? A chance to be intellectualy dishonest? Whatever floats your boat, I guess. But do not expect us to be understanding. The RPG Codex does not scale, and all that.

And I already said wizards can create their own spells in D&D, that's where the vagueness comes from.

What vagueness? Nobody uses the rule about custom spells, and houseruling it out of the question is a matter of snapping your fingers anyway.