I could write until I'm blue in the face about my critiques
of Lev Grossman's The Magicians, but
there are a couple of things I like about it.
First, the descriptions of what it's like to learn magic and
cast spells feel right, and are possibly the best descriptions of really outré
magic since Jack Vance. Like, to an extent where I think maybe some RPG
publisher should consider paying him the royalties necessary to quote those
sections at length in their rulebook.
Second, in The
Magicians, casting more difficult spells isn't just harder to do, it's also
more dangerous. (Actually, I believe Grossman goes so far as to imply that the
general difficulty of casting a spell is only loosely correlated with the
danger of casting it incorrectly. If I recall correctly, there are some fairly
simple spells that are surprisingly easy to mess up with some truly horrifying
consequences for failure.)
DCC already models this somewhat. The effect of a critical
failure definitely gets worse as the spell level increases. Corruption becomes
more corrupting, misfires miss more spectacularly. But while higher level
spells are more likely to have a simple failure, they're not any more likely to
have critical failure. The Magicians
makes a pretty persuasive case though, that they should be.
So, here's my house rule. When casting an arcane spell, the
risk of a critical failure is equal to the spell level. 1st level spells still
fumble only on a natural 1. 2nd level spells fumble on a roll of 1-2, 3rd level
spells fumble on 1-3, and so on. As usual, only burning Luck, not spellburn,
can avoid the corrupting and tainting effects of a critical failure, and
misfires cannot be avoided. However, only a single point of Luck needs to be
spent to avoid corruption, regardless of the critical range. Furthermore, for
casters with an arcane affinity for a
spell, regardless of the spell's level, the critical failure range is always
only natural 1.
No comments:
New comments are not allowed.