Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aquillion]

I would like to have at least some representation for most of the different 'traditional' types of magic in Dwarf Fortress, including spells.  Like I said, it would be best in my book if there wasn't one centralized "theory of magic"; magic should be like real-world religions, with entirely different contradictory theories for it scattered over the world.

I like the mood and overall way magic is used in the Malazan book of the Fallen, but I strongly dislike the idea of taking anything like one of those New Fantasy-style overly technical explanations for magic (whether it's Warrens or Sphere or the One Power or some other horrible capitalized term) and making it The Official Dwarf Fortress Magic System. (Actually, even within that series they had different types of magic, including the Holds, strange rituals, Elder and modern warrens, and more, but that's something else.)  There shouldn't be a sense, in my book, that there is any one real understanding of magic -- in particular there should be no big capitalized made-up words (no Spheres or anything like that), except possibly ones that are randomly-generated with the setting, as a culture or school-of-magic specific thing.  Doing that sucks all the mystery out of magic.

As for dwarves, they are rarely shown as traditional wizard-style spellcasters.  Most of what people have suggested before has Dwarven magic focused on things like runes and artifacts -- crafting, basically.  Mostly 'low magic' rather than high magic.  I would add some alchemy based around using the magical (and non-magical) properties of existing substances in the game world, like using dragon's blood for explosive properties or the bile of a basilisk's eye to turn something to stone.  I'm thinking Dwarves generally shouldn't have access to "high magic" outside of possibly their artifacts and maybe alliances with foreign wizards or other magical factions, though.  (You might pay a wizard a large amount of money to place wards around your fortress, say, or to perform a divination that answers some specific question.)

[i are not good with compu]

Due to that illustration and an endorsement of the original Final Fantasy's magic system (it is the best Final Fantasy, dammit), I just want to say I endorse this thread for what little that is worth.  I also think that making suggestions on magic is a little early in the game, but hey.   I disagree with the "magic makes you crazy" bit, which I will expound on in my reply to Aquillion's post:

I would like to have at least some representation for most of the different 'traditional' types of magic in Dwarf Fortress, including spells.  Like I said, it would be best in my book if there wasn't one centralized "theory of magic"; magic should be like real-world religions, with entirely different contradictory theories for it scattered over the world.

I like the mood and overall way magic is used in the Malazan book of the Fallen, but I strongly dislike the idea of taking anything like one of those New Fantasy-style overly technical explanations for magic (whether it's Warrens or Sphere or the One Power or some other horrible capitalized term) and making it The Official Dwarf Fortress Magic System. (Actually, even within that series they had different types of magic, including the Holds, strange rituals, Elder and modern warrens, and more, but that's something else.)  There shouldn't be a sense, in my book, that there is any one real understanding of magic -- in particular there should be no big capitalized made-up words (no Spheres or anything like that), except possibly ones that are randomly-generated with the setting, as a culture or school-of-magic specific thing.  Doing that sucks all the mystery out of magic.

As for dwarves, they are rarely shown as traditional wizard-style spellcasters.  Most of what people have suggested before has Dwarven magic focused on things like runes and artifacts -- crafting, basically.  Mostly 'low magic' rather than high magic.  I would add some alchemy based around using the magical (and non-magical) properties of existing substances in the game world, like using dragon's blood for explosive properties or the bile of a basilisk's eye to turn something to stone.  I'm thinking Dwarves generally shouldn't have access to "high magic" outside of possibly their artifacts and maybe alliances with foreign wizards or other magical factions, though.  (You might pay a wizard a large amount of money to place wards around your fortress, say, or to perform a divination that answers some specific question.)

I agree with your sentiments concerning the technical aspect of magic.  Although I guiltily indulge in settings like that, personally (in high school at least, I enjoyed every book in the Wheel of Time.  Yeah.), it would be ruinous to apply to Dwarf Fortress.  We don't need a why and a how for magic for the same reasons we don't need a why and a how for most big questions about the setting (why are Gobbos evil, why are elves annoying hippies etc etc.) - it's better left up the player if anything.

That said, the traditional use of magic (which is mostly combat oriented, subtle or not), doesn't really add all that much to Dwarf Fortress either.  A fireball here and a bolt of lightning there, applied sparingly, is great and fun, but if it's the main focus of magic it will be dull.  Considering Dwarf Fortress's gameplay style, there is deeper and more interesting value in utilitarian uses of magic.  Rather than trinkets or attacks, magic like the example in the OP (divining the presence and source of pollutions) is what would truly enhance the game.

I would rather avoid the mage-centric world where everything is good when and where mages deem to make it so, but in a different way from just making it a destructive tool or giving mage's some a mental crutch (which seems very much like a cop-out to giving any thought to giving magic real balance).  To risk getting philosophical about it, a mage's imbalance of power and living quality comes directly from that destructive power.  If you can destroy a civilization, you can also make them do everything for you (especially in return for destroying their enemies).

Rather, magic should be given real utility, so that any benefits from magic are expressed throughout the concerned population as a whole, in a subtle manner.  No industrial revolution, but a race inclined to magic is enriched indirectly with better crops, a marginally healthier population, etc.  Being able, for example, to tell that it will be a particularly stormy winter, or that the mayor shows early signs of mental illness, or divine the best time to harvest and plant, etc. don't directly enhance a mage's status in the way described both in the OP and in your post, Aquillion, but are of greater potential use in the context of the game than, say, a fireball. 

To wrap up, a mage should be useful in the same way a worker is useful, just in his own way.  Every worker has a specialty, and I would say a mage should to - and that specialty is mystery.  Making work in the uncovering everyday mysteries is the secret to making the mage useful but not overpowered.

[Roara Wolf]

I think I tl;dr a few of the posts in this topic, but a lot of the ones I've read were good ones.

Personally, I agree that magic in Dwarf Fortress mode should be rare. Not minor or ineffective - just rare. I think that sorcery should all-in-all have the same impact that artifacts do. I think that there should be skills such as healing, alchemy, etc. which look close to magic, but ultimately either fall short while still being more practical and common than actual magic, or - if a magic user so desires - may be a tool for a magic user's studies.

When it exists, I think that magic should be able to be applied to any area of life, but rarely be worth whatever price tag associated. On the subject of prices, I think that the prices of any particular magical effect should be pretty much randomized, and I think a great deal of a mage's time won't be spent casting magic so much as studying it. I think that entire years could by with a spellcaster doing nothing more than constructing and researching a new spell.

Speaking of randomness, I think that should be a huge factor in making magic generally useless. How useful, for example, is a spell which the sole function of it is to turn a wooden chair into a iron chair, at the cost of a piece of fruit, some of the caster's vitality, and a few hours of casting, particularly if it has the nasty side effect of pushing everyone in a 50 square radius two steps closer to madness, and can at times kill small infants who are nearby? Not very. We've got a large set of side effects and problems, and all we get from it is being able to - very slowly - turn wood and fruit into iron, but only if we've converted the wood first into a chair shape, and after which we must melt the iron down, unless a chair is exactly what we wanted.

But then what's the use of magic if it can't be useful? A spellcaster will answer that any spell, potion, or enchantment can be refined. Over years, a few of those naunces might be removed. Someday, you may even get a powerful art of converting wood into iron, and should you train an army of spellcasters into archmagi, you might even get a working factory.

But I include that I think magic should take time - time to learn, time to master, time to perform. Barring all other costs, magic should take large investments of time. I don't think any mage short of Legendary in whatever magic skills there might be should be able to perform anything remotely useful. A mage short of legendary may be able to learn a few spells, and might even contribute to research - much in the same way a dabbling miner may be able to help mine out a fortress for five hundred dwarves. And even once a mage masters the general skills and theories, it should still take long periods of time studying and mastering each individual spell - even moreso if they're the ones inventing the spell. Time to master the spell, time to copy the spell, make spellbooks, sort through them, research created spells, study the effects of various objects.

One thing common in fantasy settings is that wizards of any reasonable talent are generally old men who have been performing their art since a young age, spending a good amount of time studying under another old man who followed the same pattern. They just seem to forget to include this vital point during actual gameplay for the sake of mechanical balance.

And of course, the point that others raised is the extensive resources it costs to research magic things. Even if you get that fireball spell to accurately function as a weapon with no real side effects and fairly efficient costs, and even if you do spend years training a small squad of mages to be able to cast it effectively... the sheer monetary value of all the resources that would have gone just to research and master such a spell would probably be equivilant of a typical artifact, and the costs to train mages to cast it would likely be even higher, nevermind the original wizard who had to invent and master the spell in the first place.

That all said, I do believe there's a Wizard arc planned, where instead of playing a fortress, you play a wizard. That'll be awesome. I cannot wait to research spells that turn doors into walls and walls into chairs and stuff. Oh yes.

[Silverionmox]

We don't need a why and a how for magic for the same reasons we don't need a why and a how for most big questions about the setting (why are Gobbos evil, why are elves annoying hippies etc etc.) - it's better left up the player if anything.

Well, no. Goblins are evil because of the demons. Elves can be appalled at killing living beings because they can fulfill their own needs through other ways. "Goblins are evil, because they are!" is one cause of blandness in fantasy that DF seems to attempt to alleviate.

That said, the traditional use of magic (which is mostly combat oriented, subtle or not), doesn't really add all that much to Dwarf Fortress either.  A fireball here and a bolt of lightning there, applied sparingly, is great and fun, but if it's the main focus of magic it will be dull.

Agreed.

Rather, magic should be given real utility, so that any benefits from magic are expressed throughout the concerned population as a whole, in a subtle manner.  No industrial revolution, but a race inclined to magic is enriched indirectly with better crops, a marginally healthier population, etc.

I disagree: magic should not be reliable. If magic is reliable, magicians could differ in nothing from ordinary workers except raw power. It's power and effects should vary with some known and lots of unknown variables. Apart from that, magic can provide effects that are not available otherwise, but I would try to avoid technologism: smuggling modern technology into medieval settings with the excuse "It's magic!".

[i are not good with compu]

We don't need a why and a how for magic for the same reasons we don't need a why and a how for most big questions about the setting (why are Gobbos evil, why are elves annoying hippies etc etc.) - it's better left up the player if anything.

Well, no. Goblins are evil because of the demons. Elves can be appalled at killing living beings because they can fulfill their own needs through other ways. "Goblins are evil, because they are!" is one cause of blandness in fantasy that DF seems to attempt to alleviate.

I suppose we have different takes on it, because I don't see that as a real explanation.  What I was implying was a canonical backstory, whereas Dwarf Fortress just has rough guidelines if anything.  Which is exactly how a game like this (Make-your-own-story, ultimate sandbox sort of thing) should be. 

And there is no dearth of extensive, technical backstory out there in the fantasy world, just the opposite 

Rather, magic should be given real utility, so that any benefits from magic are expressed throughout the concerned population as a whole, in a subtle manner.  No industrial revolution, but a race inclined to magic is enriched indirectly with better crops, a marginally healthier population, etc.

I disagree: magic should not be reliable. If magic is reliable, magicians could differ in nothing from ordinary workers except raw power. It's power and effects should vary with some known and lots of unknown variables. Apart from that, magic can provide effects that are not available otherwise, but I would try to avoid technologism: smuggling modern technology into medieval settings with the excuse "It's magic!".

Well, I'm not saying that it should be reliable.  I'm just suggesting that it should be useful.  And if there is not an emphasis on usefulness, well, who's going to care about it?

Also, the examples I gave are not something that technology specializes in - prediction is a dicey game at best, and complex systems like a brain or the weather are not things we can delve into with a great success rate yet, especially over a prolonged period.  In that respect, magic could be very different from technology, both of the setting and modern. 

Edit:  Fixed the format, fuck.

[Kazindir]

I think magic should be more to do with alchemy with a side order of...big ritual gubbins. And possibly be one and the same as religion and be wholely without an in character defined mechanism.

No fireball slinging or easily castble spells. (Although Urist's Unexpected Concatenation does intrigue me.)

I reckon as well as creeping insanity, dwarf sorceror-priests should have to deal with demons as well. And when I say "deal" I mean "get eaten by". They might come and eat your face when you try and throw a fireball, giving you a tentacle demon running amok in the fortress. 



Urist McZzap cancels read tome, gazing at the corners of the room with a terrified look.

[Areyar]

I tried to get a joke out of the lame concept of dwarves only having acces to low/runic magic and other races having uber wizards.

It's a dwarf explaining to a human liason that use of powerwords such as FUCK will be reason enough for a hammering by mandate of the counsil. For the betterment and well-being of all the world naturally, not petty jealousy.

http://www.box.net/shared/e2qdl0bbd7#powerword_fuck
Also my first tablet drawing.

edit: not funny though.

[Mel_Vixen]

Are fireballs like the ones from demons so much worse then crossbows?

[Mikademus]

This thread is a failure. On two accounts: First, there is already some mightily fine threads on magic, and this discussion would have been much better in one of those. Secondly, in the future, when magic might be implemented and Toady presumably will go through the threads, this one will not be found due to its useless title. Thus, all this heated and intermittently constructive discussion is wasted.

If you accepts that this is a discussion for the sake of the discussion itself, it is fine and well, I myself am a master time waster; but since every second post invokes Toady as a deity and tries to establish the poster as the sole interpretor and soothsayer of His will and intentions, it is a bit silly, partly since Toady isn't a higher force or an automaton that will implement everything in logical extrapolation of this Words, and partly because this thread will probably be overlooked when it is time to sample the waters.

My personal solution to this problem has been to suggest topic-dedicated sub-fora to the suggestions forum, where magic would be one such. Another solution would simply be for a moderator to join this thread to one of the other major ones, preferably "Magic: by dwarves for dwarves".

[Granite26]

RPG in a video game usually means 'character level system overshadows player skill', at least to me.

Erm, player skill in RPG games? If there is a gaming genre, which doesn't require any "skill", that must be the RPGs. It has nothing to do with the char level system at all imo.
I mean just think, in FPS or RTS games for example you definitely need to be skilled and talented in order to be successful. [CS, CS:S, CoD 1-5, Quake serie, Starcraft 2 etc.]
Now I must admit that you need skill in some MMORPG games also, but only for the PvP part...a good example is WoW. However the PvP in those games has nothing to do with the RPG genre itself. It's just button smashing. 

There is player skill in WoW, but level differences are more important than skill. (IMHO)

[Roara Wolf]

This thread is a failure. On two accounts: First, there is already some mightily fine threads on magic, and this discussion would have been much better in one of those. Secondly, in the future, when magic might be implemented and Toady presumably will go through the threads, this one will not be found due to its useless title. Thus, all this heated and intermittently constructive discussion is wasted.

If you accepts that this is a discussion for the sake of the discussion itself, it is fine and well, I myself am a master time waster; but since every second post invokes Toady as a deity and tries to establish the poster as the sole interpretor and soothsayer of His will and intentions, it is a bit silly, partly since Toady isn't a higher force or an automaton that will implement everything in logical extrapolation of this Words, and partly because this thread will probably be overlooked when it is time to sample the waters.

There's irony in here somewhere.

But seriously, if this topic reaches a hundred pages or something, he'll probably look at it... if only to make sure we're not doing random BS in the suggestion forum, or something.

So let's aim for a hundred pages!

Are fireballs like the ones from demons so much worse then crossbows?

This is a powerful point. Once, I had a legendary adventurer made from awesomeness and awesomeness. The difference between dragon breath and crossbows is that one actually hit this god amongst men. Which one was it? The crossbows.

Of course, they generally bounced off even when they did hit.

Though I dare say that fireballs are more dangerous by far, but only if a wildfire results. Once wildfires become more realistic, then it'll be a bit more even.

However, I do have a counter point. If you've ever played Armok 1, you'll find that some of its spells had the ability to just snap off the target's limbs, or blow them up entirely. I see no reason that these spells shouldn't be able to exist in DF2 either; that'd be awesome and so brutally like an Armok game. Instead, though, I think they should be equivilant to some crazy kind of magical artifact, and take years of learning to actually master - just for the spell itself, nevermind becoming an archmage powerful enough to learn it to begin with.

In fact, one thing I'd like to see from the spell side of any magic system that exists is individual skill levels in each spell, or something similar to that. That way there can safely be spells of mass destruction, with the only catch being that the only people who could accurately, without any chance of backfire or misdirection, cast a spell that blows someone up into very small pieces (or something equally deadly) would be someone fully mastered both in magic in general and the spell in specific as well.

I still think that time-of-training/researching/etc. should easily be enough balance to prevent magic becoming too powerful/game breaking. Then again, I don't think magic could become too powerful to begin with; it's hard for me to imagine anything in DF being overpowered, so long as someone (with enough training) could theoretically kill a dragon by throwing sand at it really really hard. Its deliciously high level of brutality, I think, would easily prevent that from happening. I mean, look how dangerous a completely legendary, uberattributed warrior is, equipped in even high quality iron/steel! And we're not even touching adamantine.

[Silverionmox]

That's where the difference between magic and technology comes into play again: using magic requires a lot of personal effort, while in our world the laziest bum can make use of the engineering efforts of Mr. Kalashnikov.

[Areyar]

same goes for forestfires...

[Captain Failmore]

had to man

[Areyar]

pretty neat sketch.

sorta on topic:
I've always felt that paladins were kinda a cheat. So if roleplayed right, the player has pretty little choice in (sorry) his actions. The cheaty (beardy) part starts when the paladin ignores his higher calling and just becomes a warrior with magics.