The cost of magic

magic should always have a cost. Killing things in a dungeon to gain more power just isn't enough. I'm actually paraphrasing Orson Scott Card. In either case I've played a fair number of games and typically magic doesn't have much of a cost to it. X numbers of spells in DnD and Pathfinder, drain in SR, mana points, and material components. Actually one of my favorite systems for magic was in the book "Mistborn" but then again their version of magic wasn't all powerful. Any thoughts? what should the cost of magic actually be?

Depends on the setting. I love the drain mechanic in Shadowrun, I also like how drain is handled in Hellfrost for Savage Worlds. Never been a big fan of D&D fire and forget, but I like the way all the powers are handled in D&D 4e. The cost of magic in most fantasy rpg's should be about the same cost as a fighter swinging his sword or a ranger shooting an arrow. All of this is my preferred style though and it doesn't sound like yours. I want my rpg's to be encounter based so I know the abilities of the PC's and can balance the fight accodingly, when dealing with diminishing daily resources you get weird things like the mage saving all the big spells for the last encounter making what should be an epic climatic battle a cakewalk.

Depending on the world I've had a few different ways to represent the cost of magic, varied by theme. Magic is Corrupting: What is says on the label. It's not a quick progression, but it's there. Every time a spell is cast the caster gains a number of points. Once those points reach X they get a minor problem (perhaps they become pallid, for a necromancer, or develop headaches). After that it increases in severity every X number of points. Note also that depending on the type of corruption there might be social repercussions involved. Magic is Painful: Once more, what it says on the label. Doing magic hurts. Either it's literal (the character experiences pain for a prolonged period, giving penalties to actions etc or they take damage, which will take time to heal) or it's figurative (as in their soul/mind is slowly burned, as per the style mentioned above, but with temporary problems such as Callous, Social Stigma or Confused). Magic is Expensive: Well, magic has a price and that price is paid in dollars. Materials cost a fortune and rightly so. Lower spells cost a fair bit, higher spells can only be cast by those with enough wealth or a willingness to steal. In a world like this the most feared mages would probably be CEOs or pop-stars. Magic brings the Wicked: And then we have one classic that I think is sadly under-used. When you use magic you light a torch in the darkness that guides only god knows what the way of the mage. Perhaps they're creatures that feed of magic, or things that want to get through to our world (or back to theirs) through the workings of the mage... or simply by burrowing into his body and slithering inside his soul to eat their way through. Perhaps they're just crazy people out to kill anything magical for some reason. Have fun with it! Magic is Unreliable: Using magic to light a cigarette is about as clever as using a molotov cocktail for the same purpose. It could be done, and with enough practice it might even do the trick you need it to, but it would still be a sure sign of being off your rocker. Big time. Every time someone casts a spell roll a catastrophe die (or something similar) to decide whether something goes wrong. If it does, don't let the spell fail, let it do what it should have, but Add to it. The fire to light the cigarette spreads wildly out of control, the teleportation moves them where they should've been but somehow they're moving, fast, along the ground when they arrive, the spell to summon and control a ghast works just fine... except that the four other ghasts don't seem to actually be under the control of the mage... Those are just some examples/ideas for you, none of them really suitable for DnD/Pathfinder if you ask me but all of them having lots of potential for fun in one world or another. Another fun treat is to have two or more types of magic, each with it's own tradeoff(s). Gives the players reason to carefully consider what they learn, if any of it.

I personally do not think that magic should have any additional cost/penalty/what-have-you other than the limitations listed by the system. If you add extra stuff to magic then you have to add it to people that swing weapons as well to factor in that they are getting tired from swinging a x lbs. weapon around many times. And then at that point you are just re-writing the game. Magic tends to have a cut off. You can only cast X number of spells, you only have Y amount of mana etc. A person swinging a sword in the games has no limit to how many times they can hit things save for the common sense of the DM/GM/ST

The 40k games have magic (psionics or whatever it's actually called) give a change at Bad Things Happening. There was another game I tried to play (but fell through) where players had a health track for physical damage and mental damage; casting magic required spending health from either or both tracks, putting you closer to "death" for each spell you cast. There was some strategy, obviously, as being up against an enemy that wouldn't deal any mental damage made spending mental health on spells fairly safe, and vice versa. (Casters could also pick up a feat to give them energy points that could also be spent on spells.)

Phisto Roboto said: I personally do not think that magic should have any additional cost/penalty/what-have-you other than the limitations listed by the system. If you add extra stuff to magic then you have to add it to people that swing weapons as well to factor in that they are getting tired from swinging a x lbs. weapon around many times. And then at that point you are just re-writing the game. Magic tends to have a cut off. You can only cast X number of spells, you only have Y amount of mana etc. A person swinging a sword in the games has no limit to how many times they can hit things save for the common sense of the DM/GM/ST I disagree. Magic should have some cost, for good reason. It's better in many regards than a sword. Besides the ability to be at range, it has many possible effects. The world's best swordsman couldn't coat an enemy in a layer of hoarfrost using only his sword, why should a scrub mage fresh out of the academy be able to, for free, with no more effort than the warrior swinging his weapon? Add to that the fact that casters are usually in the middle or back ranks in a party. If we're in a hall travelling two-abreast, who is in front? Right, the ones that need to be, or the ones that can take a hit. Those are also the ones getting hit. Being without magic confers more danger to the PC. So now we have two points in favor of magic: 1) Much wider array of effects 2) Generally works at range and I'll bet there are more. A cost or drawback to using magic, particularly large amounts of it, is what keeps Fighter as a realistic profession. If i could always cast a spell as easily as swinging a sword, why would I _ever_ choose to swing the sword?

Phisto Roboto said: I personally do not think that magic should have any additional cost/penalty/what-have-you other than the limitations listed by the system. If you add extra stuff to magic then you have to add it to people that swing weapons as well to factor in that they are getting tired from swinging a x lbs. weapon around many times. And then at that point you are just re-writing the game. Magic tends to have a cut off. You can only cast X number of spells, you only have Y amount of mana etc. A person swinging a sword in the games has no limit to how many times they can hit things save for the common sense of the DM/GM/ST Well, like I said, I don't think those ideas are suitable for DnD/Pathfinder etc, or games like them, but in a lot of games magic isn't useful in direct combat and you don't have "classes" as such. Stuff like that. In short, in some worlds changing magic doesn't change the balance between the characters, which in turn means that fiddling with it to get a specific feel isn't much of an issue. Heck, in some Pathfinder games I've seen people remove magic entirely, or introduce limitations and make it a prestige-class instead (with some new benefits). There's a lot of things you can do if you want to introduce costs to magic :)

Brian said: The 40k games have magic (psionics or whatever it's actually called) give a change at Bad Things Happening. There was another game I tried to play (but fell through) where players had a health track for physical damage and mental damage; casting magic required spending health from either or both tracks, putting you closer to "death" for each spell you cast. There was some strategy, obviously, as being up against an enemy that wouldn't deal any mental damage made spending mental health on spells fairly safe, and vice versa. (Casters could also pick up a feat to give them energy points that could also be spent on spells.) The Dresden Files RPG does something like this. spells cause mental stress, sometimes a lot of it. Mental stress can take you out of combat if you're not careful, but can also cause such pleasant consequences as migraines, blurred vision, mood-swings, and the development of new phobias/manias.

Steve S. said: and I'll bet there are more. A cost or drawback to using magic, particularly large amounts of it, is what keeps Fighter as a realistic profession. If i could always cast a spell as easily as swinging a sword, why would I _ever_ choose to swing the sword? Because, as in D&D 4e, the game is balanced to make swinging a sword as effective and easy as slinging a spell. Just choose to play games that have that design conceit and the problem is solved. If you go with a game that has linear fighters and quadratic wizards, then you're going to want to balance it out somehow (by making wizards weaker at the outset, for example). But even that balance is shoddy at best. Ask any high-level fighter in D&D 3.Xe.

For me it is the hardest thing to balance. How do I bring balance to something that ignores the laws of physics? Well.... To balance the extrodanary, all that I can think is to go to extrodinary measures.

The way I see it, for magic that does something any other character could do, the cost should be minor to non existent; it's just a special effect really. Real magic is the big stuff: teleportation, battlefield magic, resurrection, calling a horde of monkeys to strip the wealth of an entire city, summoning the torpedoes of a long sunken submarine, and the like. Most systems do balance these in their own way, whether it's limiting their uses, injuring the caster, or having the caster cough up snakes for a few days. I've found that a big challenge to these balancing factors is making sure they don't get dodged, which is often very easy to do. In Shadowrun, my players have a chronic problem with bulking their drain resistance to ludicrous degrees, and in most cases never risk serious drain to begin with. In Pathfinder, spellcasters often define the resting period for the party, at least early on. The answer to both these is, of course, to push harder to hit those limits, and not let them rest until they really can't take any more. Now, if you mean balancing magic thematically, then my suggestion is to remove the special effect stuff, and leave in the big things. Remember not to hose any character that relies on the special effect stuff though. I've found that this is an acceptable method to keep magic from seeming commonplace and mundane, and to emphasize it's power and otherworldliness in a campaign. Of course, I could be wrong.

I briefly played a TTRPG called Fantasy Imperium that used a pretty gritty magic system. In addition to the chances of catastrophic failures (summoning wrathful angels to kill you, hurling your soul into a planar void, developing physical deformities), the magic system itself had some downright scary spells. Magic users were viewed with extreme animosity in this game, and with good reason. You could cast a spell to age someone 100 years, give them the curse of King Midas, or causing their next child to be stillborn (yes, that was an actual spell).

I disagree. Magic should have some cost, for good reason. It's better in many regards than a sword. Besides the ability to be at range, it has many possible effects. The world's best swordsman couldn't coat an enemy in a layer of hoarfrost using only his sword, why should a scrub mage fresh out of the academy be able to, for free, with no more effort than the warrior swinging his weapon? Add to that the fact that casters are usually in the middle or back ranks in a party. If we're in a hall travelling two-abreast, who is in front? Right, the ones that need to be, or the ones that can take a hit. Those are also the ones getting hit. Being without magic confers more danger to the PC. So now we have two points in favor of magic: 1) Much wider array of effects 2) Generally works at range and I'll bet there are more. A cost or drawback to using magic, particularly large amounts of it, is what keeps Fighter as a realistic profession. If i could always cast a spell as easily as swinging a sword, why would I _ever_ choose to swing the sword? Fighting via a weapon has just as many potential effects. Not only can you do awesome things in combat (trip, disarm, tackle, non-lethal, push, parry etc.) but you also have the potential to do a lot of ranged stuff as well. Bows are quite nasty in the hands of a skilled fighter or ranger. So they both have their own ability to do a wide variety of things, like everything it is up to your imagination. The effects of a wizards spells are just that much more apparent is all. Also I am unaware of any system in which a magic user fresh out of the academy can demolish a fighter. As for the cost, once again they do have them. Being only able to cast so many spells per day or until your mana/spell points/what-have-you run out is a cost. It literally limits how many spells you can cast before you are drained. A warrior doesn't have a set number of swings of his weapon that he can make before he gets tuckered out. That is the trade off, yes you get to do some crazy as stuff with magic but you can't do it all day every day. To impose an even great cost upon them is unbalancing the game. Now for your points about them being ranged, that is a good point, they are ranged but it is highly unlikely that EVERY combat you engage in will allow you to take advantage of that fact. Small areas, ambushes, friendly fire...they all conspire against a spell wielder. So not only is it limited to your imagination as a player but it also falls into the hands of the DM to not make ideal conditions for the ranged units for every single fight. At the end of the day though it boils down to personal preference, if people want to make using magic even harsher than normal that is cool. Fewer people will use it as they turn to a more reliable and/or practical form of combat.

It's also worth remembering that (in D&D, at least) there is a wide set of levels where casters are most effective not at dealing direct damage, but at buffing and debuffing so that the combat folks live longer and hit harder. Your little (1d4+1)*2 magic missile really doesn't do much damage compared to a twf rogue who can garner 8d6 sneak attack damage in a round, or a fighter with combat reflexes and reach who can wipe out an entire army of mooks running through his space. On the other hand, casting Grease on an enemy _guarantees_ the rogue will get their sneak attack damage. Casting Enlarge Person on the fighter will double the size of his reach, and allow him to kill that many more mooks. In terms of game balance, things are not too bad until you get to the very high levels. Casters & combat folks working together will always outpace monoculture groups. If it's a thematic issue, sure, no problem. Have magic users' hair fall out. But at the same time, that barbarian swinging his sword and chopping kobolds in half? He should develop a callous indifference towards the lives of others. The rogue who steals from the noblemen? There had better be wanted posters up in the next town. If you're going to impose a cost on one set of classes, there should be similar realistic costs imposed on the other, to maintain balance.

I'm not looking to alter DnD, just to clarify.I don't care for the system, there is too much player agency. Roll playing the natural consequences of your players actions is ultimately just good gm and player practice. If you aren't doing that you should probably be playing hero quest or DnD 4ed. but thanks for the ideas on magic. I'm more intrested in what would make some people want to use magic while others flatly refuse it. Why wouldn't every one chose to be a magician? And don't say personal choice. That is a cop out way to not give reasons for the way people act.

Too much player agency in D&D? Your edition warring aside, I'd say there's too little player agency in most D&D games I've seen thanks to the plethora of control freak DMs. One reason someone might not choose to be a wizard is because of the cost of tuition. Who wants to be paying off mage college loans well into 10th-level when you can pick up a sword, a few semesters of vocational training, and get out there and start earning?

"I'm more interested in what would make some people want to use magic while others flatly refuse it. Why wouldn't every one chose to be a magician?" -- William P. Are you wanting an answer from a game mechanic perspective or a roleplaying one? Game mechanic because I want my character to be magical or not, hopefully the game will let me do cool stuff with my sword or bow like 4e so the choice isn't because I want to do cool stuff. Roleplaying wise it might not have anything to do with choice, in plenty of literature and other fiction people are born with a certain magic spark that can be nurtured into great power. So martial characters were just not born with that spark, or were and never given any training. If it is something you can just learn and anyone could do it, the reasons could be just like real life. Why am I not an award winning scientist, athlete, or entertainer? No natural talent, no economic opportunity, no ambition, all kinds of reasons. Then we get into the whole fantasy side of things that vary by setting. Maybe magic does come with a price, like your sanity or dealing with evil outsiders, maybe every spellcaster has to have a pact with some fey lord, demon prince, or divine being. Maybe in your world magic is fueled by your soul and you loose a little portion every time a spell is cast.

John's listed some good reasons why narratively, people would not have access to magic. Here's a couple more ideas: Magical knowledge is controlled by a closed group of individuals, and very few are selected to join that secret society and share in the power. Access to magic requires some hereditary anomaly - perhaps one of your ancestors had to be a member of a mystical race. Activating the parts of the psyche that allow you to control mystical forces requires an expensive or difficult ritual. There is a fixed number of magicians in the world. Each magician has one apprentice. The apprentice only becomes a full magician upon their mentor's death.

Headhunter Jones said: One reason someone might not choose to be a wizard is because of the cost of tuition. Who wants to be paying off mage college loans well into 10th-level when you can pick up a sword, a few semesters of vocational training, and get out there and start earning? This is one of the most amusing thing I've read in a while. =)

William P. said: I'm more intrested in what would make some people want to use magic while others flatly refuse it. Why wouldn't every one chose to be a magician? And don't say personal choice. That is a cop out way to not give reasons for the way people act. I like how 7th Sea addressed sorcery within their setting, specifically with how it was viewed differently based on which country/culture you were dealing with. For example, I loved how using Porte openly in Montaigne could get you beheaded by the revolutionaries :p

Bullets in rifles are magic to people with knives.

Here is how magic works in the home-brew i am running D&D 3.5 Drellisian Sun Light This world has two stars - Karrym and Drellis - which orbit each other. Drellis, the blue dwarf star, outputs a wide range of charged particles and radiation in its stellar wind. In this high energy protoplasmic soup, there is something that interferes with the normal flow of magical energy. When Drellis eclipses Karrym, all forms of magic are weakened. Mages themselves feel this effect as their magic is weakened also. Mages widely believe that there exists a magical side to the blue star's energy. Something within the light of the blue star poisons magic. Mages call this dark essence or anti-magic . Dark essence interferes with the flow of "normal" magic causing spells to weaken, fluctuate or fail completely. It also has a randomizing effect on spells, often altering a spells target or generating side effects. The Drellis effect Because of this unique stellar situation (twin stars orbiting each other), The world experiences a regular pattern of magical fluctuation. This pattern has three phases, each lasting one week (nine days) : In the Karrym Dominant Position, Karrym completely eclipses Drellis and blocks all dark essence. During this phase, magic throughout the world is more powerful and more easily controlled. In the intermediate or "balanced" position, the two stars share the sky. However, the gaseous envelope around Karrym partially blocks the dark essence and magic on Khoras achieves a balance. In the Drellis Dominant Position, Drellis eclipses Karrym and none of its dark essence is blocked. During this time, magic throughout the world is greatly weakened. Magic Here are some specific examples of how the Drellis Effect distorts magic and spells. These are just a few examples. Any single spell could result in dozens of variations and, each time, the effect might be different. Use your imagination and keep the players on their toes. Generally speaking, spell distortions are annoying, inconvenient and sometimes dangerous. But they are rarely lethal. It is usually just enough to discourage mages from relying on their magic too much during a Drellis dominant phase. Healing Spells Spell works normally but the healing occurs in painful spurts of regrowth. Spell works normally but healed flesh is scarred and has no sense of touch. Spell causes damage rather than healing. Spell heals, but causes a similar amount of damage to the healer. Spell works but the repaired flesh quickly deteriorates. In other words, the effects are temporary and the repaired wounds will slowly return. Divination Spells The spell gives wildly incorrect predictions. The spell causes a random form of insanity in the oracle. The spell gives a vision of the future, but then strikes the diviner temporarily blind. Movement Spells Spells which give flight or levitation result in a pair of huge wings which do not vanish when the spell ends. Teleportation will be wildly incorrect (and dangerous). Miscellaneous A spell which normally purifies food will work, but will also make the affected food highly addictive. A spell which affects the vision of a creature will cause the eyes to emit bright beams of light. Conversely, it could permanently blind the user in one eye when the spell ends.

Ok - I've got to side with those making the argument that magic is already limited enough in D&D/Pathfinder. Honestly, who could argue that it is too powerful? Unless folks aren't playing by the rules. In Pathfinder - guess how many spells a 6th lvl wizard gets / day with a 21 intelligence (not counting zero lvl). The answer - 14. Oh - and lets not forget that pesky spellbook rule. Two new spells per level for free past first level. After that - the wizard either "finds" spells in game or has to purchase scrolls to learn new spells. That's right. A level 6 wizard can legally know 4 3rd-level spells for free. Then they have to pay 375gp per scroll and 160gp to copy that scroll into their spell book. Hope you're playing with a GM who hands out gold like candy. Let's not even talk about the cost for scribing scrolls. That's 14 chances to do SOMETHING. Chances. Not 100% successes. Most damage spells have some sort of save or resistance. Even defensive/battlefield control spells can have saves/resists. So - lets say you memorize 3 fireballs. And your target makes saves all three times. Basically you've burned 3 spells to do about 40dmg. 40dmg in 3 rounds. Wooo frickin HOO!!! Oh ... and once that spell is cast - it is gone for the day. Once you cast your only memorized Haste - your fighter is SOL for a secondary encounter. Already cast your only Glitterdust and the target made his save - SOL. OH and lets not forget area of effect. If your party mates are too close - forget using ANY AOE spells or they'll all be making saves as well. Like that Tentacle spell? Not in close quarters. Like Glitterdust. Not if your fighters are in melee. (unless you want to burn feat slots to change this). How many arrows does a ranger have? Only 14? And lets assume by level 6 that ranger has found himself a magic bow with some good exploding arrows (which a wizard can do for the ranger btw). He's already better than the wizard at dealing ranged damage. And as for the person that complained that the fighters are always the ones up front ... THAT'S THEIR JOB! A wizard has how many HP? What is a wizard's AC? Compare that to a fighter. There's a reason they're called tanks. In D&D/Pathfinder, wizards a force multipliers. Playing one correctly (by the rules) is challenging and time consuming (researching what spell to memorize/buy/scroll). ___ If anything, I'd love an option to allow for burning CON in D&D/Pathfinder to allow wizards to cast extra spells/day so that wizards can have more utility over a long fight or in a dungeon with multiple encounters/day. Or do all your games only consist of 1 encounter/day? ____ Edit: I also forgot to mention that wonderful Concentration check rule. In combat or in less than PERFECT conditions - roll a concentration check to cast a spell. Failed? Oh too bad - what spell did you try to cast? Oh, that's gone for the day. Thanks for playing. And did I mention spells that have roll-to-hit requirements? You know what a wizards base attack bonus is at level 6? Not high enough to hit most proper CR-rated targets. That's wonderful. Again - what spell did you just miss with? Its gone for the day. Too bad.

This is the exact sort of thinking I want to get away from. DnD/Pathfinder magic has no flavor, no cost, no moral decisions. It is a mechanical tool as acceptable as a hammer, or swinging a sword. The limitation of only casting something a few times a day is not a cost. It is a limitation. You are able to break physics, conjure things into existence, fix the unfixable, heal the unhealable, and the cost is only being able to do it 4 times per day? Limitation is fine and game balancing, but cost is giving up something of equal value to oh say.... bringing a man back from the dead after 60 years. Hell I would even say throw in social stigmas about magic, but most GMs/Players are entirely against that.

I quite like the way it's handled in Shadowrun honestly. Sure the players have the option to try and bolster their drain defences, but when it comes to the roll they can be out of luck and get drained like crazy, but as far as I've gathered this thread is more about the roleplaying consequence of playing a spellcaster. Once again I quite like Shadowrun handles this. A person awakens at some point in their life and start to become aware of the magical powers that rest within them, although they will be very dangerous at first as the mage has no real control over them yet. What's more interesting is that many don't believe magic exists and laws prevent people from using their abilities if they don't have a valid license. Therefore magic is kind of a taboo in the world, which means you shouldn't flash your powers just to light at cig or to impress the ladies. That and as has already been mentioned spirits find mages interesting and are actively attracted to them if they use their powers. Not to mention that a mage can overcast a spell, but doing this will add the chance of applying physical harm to oneself. Personally I got a little tired of D&D and how magic is treated. Generally speaking I just find the way the world handles the concept of magic more intruiging in Shadowrun. Although Planescape and Ravenloft do have some very interesting takes on the concept of magic and the forces behind it.

So ... William P. ... what you're really saying is you're anti-magic. Fine. Run a campaign without magic. But realize - magic is MAGIC!!! It is meant to bend the rules of reality. If you want to put additional arbitrary costs on magic - think about doing so in a balanced way - by putting costs on swinging swords. Otherwise you'll have a group of sword swingers that are wondering why their mage isn't doing anything to help out. "Hey Mage!! How about lending a hand!??!" "Sorry, can't. I cast mage armor and am exhausted." "Somebody please kill the mage."

Actually so far he's been talking about, as I've seen it, magic over all, and not at all about the DnD type of magic. It's not a "you have a mage" situation, it's more of a "if I wanted to flavour magic in this world and turn it into an optional X for NPCs/PC/whatever what suggestions do you lot have for possible drawbacks of it?" That's just how I've perceived it though, I might be wrong :)

Ok - so lets go with the idea that this is a grand re-imagining of magic in RPGs. I personally am not a fan of the Pathfinder/D&D magic system but not because I think it needs to be more limited/cost more. I hate the fact that it is 100% based on gold and rules that about 1% of players adhere too (how many GMs check to see if wizards have all needed spell components?? Thought so). If you've ever read Robert Jordan you'll see a rather interesting magic system which is based on: This is my attempt (in 5 minutes) to translate a book magic system to a d20 system (and I already know about the d20 Wheel of Time - in fact I own the book). Constitution : How many spells you can cast per day (with abilities to cast beyond limits with extreme consequences) Level : The more you cast, the better you get until you hit a maximum strength based on genetics (lets go with combo of NATURAL con and int bonuses - i.e. to hit spell lvl 9 you'd need a natural 20 and 19 con/int... hard to do). Intelligence : How many spells you can know/lvl OF ANY SPELL LVL (a lvl 1 caster could learn a lvl 3 spell .. see wisdom check below). Wisdom : How easily you learn new spells you see (simple DC check ... 10+spell lvl vs 10+wisdom modifier) So - a level 1 caster has access a number of spells/day based on Intelligence (how many he knows) and Constitution (how many he can cast) ... HERE'S a cost for you ... casting tires you out. The more you cast, the more tired you become (based upon con modifier). You can CHOOSE to cast beyond your con modifier limit ... but you lose 1 con point/spell that recover at a rate of 1 con point/day. You can also attempt to cast a spell you've seen and learned (based on Wisdom) but are too low level to cast typically. This would entail automatic double con point reduction and fatal fail check if more than a certain number of levels higher than your current level (say 3). If you kept with the Wheel of Time more closely, there would be no limit on how many times/day a person could cast a certain spell as long as they had the CON to cast them. This makes more sense for almost ALL fantasy stories. Also a system like this - it gives new purpose to skills like Perception, Knowledge Arcana, Spellcraft. You can no longer learn new spells by buying a scroll. You have to find someone to train you or watch the spell being cast and roll Wisdom/Spellcraft/Knowledge checks. Modify this up and you've got a system that more accurately reflects magic in fantasy series. Keep the character generation rolls or point buys honest and you'll have a self-limiting system (i.e. it will be DAMN hard for a character to cap out stats to hit 9th Spell Level). You'll have to have two HIGH natural stats and one semi-high stat). An Elf, getting a minus 2 CON is going to have a damn hard time capping out 9th Spell LvL. In fact, assume damn lucky rolls of two 18s for CON and INT. 16 CON + 4 ability modifiers (earned by Leveling of course) is 20. The 5th and final ability modifier goes to raise INT to 19. At level 20, the Elf finally hits spell lvl 9. In traditional progression, a wizard gets 9th spell level at 17th lvl.

Oh believe me, I'm aware of the convenient Spell Component Pouch (my current lvl 6 wiz has one). 5gp for EVERY spell component you'll ever need. Realistic. Nope. Does it cover scribing scrolls. Nope. Does it cover ALL spell components you will need? Nope. "For material components and focuses whose costs are not listed in the spell description, you can assume that you have them if you have your spell component pouch." So - for Black Tentacle - that octopus or squid tentacle component isn't in your pouch automatically. But that really wasn't the point of my entire post. My post was about reimagining magic to help OP with his question. Which I hope gave him one other option to those already posted above.

Gathering materials in a spell component pouch is a part of your one hour spell prep.

I'm also not against magic being powerful. Hearing that a mage is gunning for you should feel like the US Government just announced they are sending a preditor drone to your house. As some one mentioned before significantly advanced tech looks like magic. But again I'm digressing. I'm looking at risk vs reward for my own selfish purposes of a home brew. my original thought was it takes a drug like substance to use magic. It's addictive and causes a cushioning from reality. I found too many issues trying to balence this mechanically. My current version is that to use magic you are possessed/partnered by a horrible soul eating child scaring baby seal bashing demon. Your contract give

William P. said: I'm also not against magic being powerful. Hearing that a mage is gunning for you should feel like the US Government just announced they are sending a predictor drone to your house. As some one mentioned before significantly advanced tech looks like magic. But again I'm digressing. I'm looking at risk vs reward for my own selfish purposes of a home brew. my original thought was it takes a drug like substance to use magic. It's addictive and causes a cushioning from reality. I found too many issues trying to valence this mechanically. My current version is that to use magic you are possessed/partnered by a horrible soul eating child scaring baby seal bashing demon. Your contract give I think I see what you're getting at now. So, coupled with my above homebrew option (which took 10 minutes and is nowhere near robust) with the below, I hope I can help give you some ideas. The addictive nature of spell casting is intriguing. You could potentially couple that with Will saves and CON reductions to make it work mechanically (i.e., the higher level the spell, the more addictive the power is and you must save vs. {fill in the blank} or suffer CON reduction and fatigue). I personally don't like the possession aspect (personal opinion - if it works for your world great). Possession would lead me to believe that all magic users are then evil (because they're possessed by a demon) ... unless you allow them to make a will save daily to see who controls the body (but if the demon isnt in control - can the wizard perform magic?) I do like the social stigma (people distrust magic/power wielders) and therefore magic wielders are segregated or shunned (making it harder to learn new spells/travel/etc...). Again - I go back to Jordan's Wheel of Time for a perfect example of how social stigma can effect wizards as a COST/risk. Male casters were hunted and killed. Female casters were generally maligned and in some countries outlawed. There was an entire order whose sole purpose was the eradication of casters. And that order had agents all over the world who were willing to take a risk of breaking local laws to kill a caster. That would work I think for your ideas. Couple that with a mechanic that the more you cast the more fatigued you become and you've got a very big risk vs. reward. It becomes hard to exist as a caster, learn and advance as a caster, and function as a caster. Imagine a mage casting a fireball in a city where magic is outlawed. Not only did this potentially fatigue him, it got the attention of every gaurd and informant around. The mage then has to try and hide or flee. Great RP opportunity. Some ideas.

The home brew isn't d20. And the perception that all magic users is great. But I even dislike the good and evil