A cornucopia of magic systems

David Johnston wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2006 14:08:52 -0700, "Peter Meilinger"
> <p_meilinger DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>>And for that reason a game that calls itself "Generic" and
>>"Universal" shouldn't try to live up to those terms when it
>>comes to magic systems?
>
> These days GURPS has pretty much the exact same kind of power design
> system Hero does in principle. Anything Hero can do in the way of
> superpower design, GURPS can do.

One problem is that in GURPS, you can never reduce the cost of an
Advantage to less than 20% of the base cost, even if you pile on
truckloads of Limitations. You can in Hero System. This means that you
can take an Advantage which is quite powerful and then reduce its cost
significantly, like to 5% of the base cost, if you limit the
circumstances and ways in which it can be used. That's a good thing.

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 05:01:26 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter.TakeThisOut@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:

>David Johnston wrote:
>> On 1 Aug 2006 14:08:52 -0700, "Peter Meilinger"
>> <p_meilinger.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>And for that reason a game that calls itself "Generic" and
>>>"Universal" shouldn't try to live up to those terms when it
>>>comes to magic systems?
>>
>> These days GURPS has pretty much the exact same kind of power design
>> system Hero does in principle. Anything Hero can do in the way of
>> superpower design, GURPS can do.
>
>One problem is that in GURPS, you can never reduce the cost of an
>Advantage to less than 20% of the base cost, even if you pile on
>truckloads of Limitations. You can in Hero System. This means that you
>can take an Advantage which is quite powerful and then reduce its cost
>significantly, like to 5% of the base cost, if you limit the
>circumstances and ways in which it can be used. That's a good thing.


<shrug> Since that's just a minimum off the base cost and things like
range, area of effect, rapid fire, extended duration cosmic, and
armour divisor aren't part of the base cost of a power, theres no real
limit to the maximum power you can bring to bear for a quite moderate
cost if you are taking things like Costs 20 Fatigue, Bombardment,
Nuisance Effect, Pact, 8 hours preparation time, and Limited Use Once
Per day. You could devastate a planet quite inexpensively.
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Peter Meilinger wrote:
> Jefferson wrote:
> > Peter Meilinger wrote:
> >
> > > I like a lot of the various GURPS magical systems, but the one
> > > thing that's always annoyed me is that not a single one of them
> > > is truly generic and universal. They're specific systems with
> > > specific rules rather than a general framework that would
> > > allow you to create any type of magical system you want.
> >
> > So what? I've never seen a rules framework for affecting the
> > world that would enable to create any system they wanted.
>
> And for that reason a game that calls itself "Generic" and
> "Universal" shouldn't try to live up to those terms when it
> comes to magic systems?

Because, when it comes down to it, no one system would cover all the
ways magic has been treated in folklore and literature.

> > > For that reason, I like the Hero rules more when I'm trying
> > > to create or emulate a certain type of magic.
> >
> > Hero rules are about the worst possible when it comes to
> > emulating skill-based magic.
>
> And I disagree. What are the odds, huh?

I would rather take an existing GURPS magic system and modify it than
create a system from the ground up. Much less work.

Hero rules are fine if the mages are effectively super heroes; rather
than knowing a hundred different spells, they know perhaps a half dozen
that they can vary in effect.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Peter Meilinger wrote:

> I like a lot of the various GURPS magical systems, but the one
> thing that's always annoyed me is that not a single one of them
> is truly generic and universal. They're specific systems with
> specific rules rather than a general framework that would
> allow you to create any type of magical system you want.
> For that reason, I like the Hero rules more when I'm trying
> to create or emulate a certain type of magic.

Here's one that our group came up with. It was for a different system,
but it translates well enough into GURPS. (Below is a 3e treatment,
since I declined to plunk down $100 for 4e while 3e still works.

New Advantage: Magic
25 points per level

This is the ability to perform magic. The level of Magic is added into
the Magic Skill.


New Skill: Magic
M/VH, No Defaults

This is the ability to create Magical effects. The player defines the
effect, and the GM assesses a penalty (always at least -5) to attempt
the effect.


Also included in our system were a number of lookup tables for things
such as distance, mass, velocity, duration, etc, each with associated
difficulty penalties. These were most useful for defining the limits of
effects.
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Jefferson wrote:
> Peter Meilinger wrote:
> > Jefferson wrote:
> >>Peter Meilinger wrote:
> >>>Jefferson wrote:
> >
> > Mostly it's because I don't think it actually is the most generic
> > and universal parts of the system, since you have to either
> > use the speicfic systems in the books or do all the work
> > yourself. Using the character creation system, I can make
> > a TL 0 hunter/gatherer, a TL 6 Tommy, or a TL 13 Starfleet
> > Officer. That's generic and universal, and GURPS is better
> > at that than HERO, in my opinion.
>
> Yes. The _roleplaying_ stuff. Magic, technology, and so forth
> are roleplaying items, they're campaign items.

Which are used to give the roleplaying the style and flavor you
want. Honeslty, I'm not sure I get where you're coming from
here. It sounds like you think GURPS would still be generic
and universal even if it had no rules at all for magic and
technology. I mean, it would still give you all you need to
role-play, you'd just have to do all the work yourself when
it comes to the campaign stuff.

>
> > Using the basic GURPS magic system, I can make... Well,
> > a character who uses the basic magic system.
>
> Or uses magic as advantages (the psionic model), or gains
> temporary gifts (the shapeshifting model), or uses magic items
> (the gadget model). Not to mention that the basic magic system
> has both spell-casting, ceremonial, and priestly forms; variable
> mana levels, enchanting rules, power boosters, . . . All
> straight out of the book.

Are all the rules for that stuff in the basic book now? Actually,
what is considered the "basic" book now? Last I heard you
needed at least three books to have the core rules. Would
all of that be covered in those books, without having to buy
extra costly books that you don't necessarily want? If so,
I'll grant that GURPS is a lot better than it used to be.

>
> Furthermore if you can create a Star Fleet officer you shouldn't
> have any problems creating an Ethshar Wizard

There I disagree. I have had no problem at all using HERO
to create every Ethsharitic wizardry spell I've tried, and
I specifically went through all the books looking for
descriptions or even just spell names. HERO's great for
Witchcraft, too, and it's easy to come up with a system
for HERO's Warlocks as well, though in my opinion
they're just not really suitable as PCs. I mean, you
can do anything at all you want until you drop dead?
Not exactly balanced.

If I'd wanted to create all the Ethshar wizardry spells
in GURPS I'd have had to either make do with already
existing spells, possibly with some changes, or
create stuff from scratch. If GURPS Powers changed
that, I'm very glad to hear it. Is Powers considered
part of the core rules, though?


> , or a Deryni Healer,
> the amount of background information required is the same. Try
> and create a TL 13 Space Officer from a universe whose technology
> you've developed from scratch and you've actually got _more_
> problems than creating a mage.

I'm not disagreeing. I just don't see why the fact that technology
can be harder than magic means it's okay to skimp on the
magic.

>
> > If I want to
> > spend extra money on extra books, I can make characters
> > who use those specific magic systems, too. Using just the
> > base HERO rulebook I can make characters who use damned
> > near any magic system I can imagine.
>
> How about a magic system based on C. J. Cherryh _Rusalka_ and
> it's sequels? What about the partly innate, partly learned
> abilities of Katherine Kurtz's Deryni books? Both of these were
> well beyond HERO's background, but were rather easily done in
> GURPS, even in 3rd edition.

I'm not familiar with either of them. How were they beyond
HERO's background? Can you give specifics? Do they
do things that can't be modeled using the HERO power
rules? I can quite easily believe they can't be modeled
easily, but HERO has enough vague "anything you
want" powers that it's hard for me to believe they
can't be modeled at all. Can you give me an example
of a specific power or ability you think HERO can't
model, so I can see if I agree?


> > Well, you've got me there. Of course, lots and lots of people like
> > to have MAGIC systems in their ROLEPLAYING games, and
> > when they're playing a generic and universal ROLEPLAYING
> > game they might want a MAGIC system that can emulate
> > anything they can think of.
>
> See above. Magic isn't roleplaying its background or world
> development. Since Hero has only one background it's impossible
> to customize to world that don't share that background.

HERO does not have only one background. I don't even know
what you mean by that. The core book is very light on
background details, specifically because they know GMs
will create their own. The various supplements have
different backgrounds suited to their settings. Are you
trying to say that the Champions superhero setting is
all that HERO has? It's not, actually. And even if it
was, can you explain how exactly it's "impossible to
customize to world(s) that don't share that background?"
Because it's actually very, very easy to use the HERO
rules to play in a setting or world of your own design.
I honestly don't understand how you can think differently,
since people do it all the time.


>
> [snip]
>
> >>Since that was a relative statement, you shouldn't have any
> >>problems naming three systems that are worse than Hero at
> >>emulating skill-based magic. What are they?
> >
> > Well, let's see. There's the old TSR Boot Hill rules.
> > The old TSR Gangbuster rules. The old TSR Star Frontiers rules.
> > The old non-TSR Alma Mater rules. The old non-TSR
> > Ghostbusters rules* (actually, was that TSR?) And of
> > course the GURPS rules before the Powers books,
> > and possibly after it, too.
>
> Since none of these have magic systems (with the possible
> exception of Ghostbusters, which I'm unfamiliar with) all you're
> saying is that HERO is better than games which don't have magic
> systems. . . . Notice the "almost" in my statement above?

No, actually. I don't see the word "almost" in anything relating
to this particular point. Could you point me to it?

> > That was easy. Now, so I can see where you're coming
> > from, could you name three systems that you think are
> > better than HERO at emulating skill-based magic?
>
> Off the top of my head: GURPS Powers; GURPS Spirits; Aria; Mage
> The Ascension; DC Heroes; For Faerie, Queen, and Country;
> Magitech; In Nomine; Marvel Super Heroes; and Unknown Armies.
> (Heck, even Vampire The Masquerade is better than HERO in this area.)
>
> > And how exactly are you defining "skill-based magic?"
>
> A system where multiple magical effects are possible based upon a
> character's training and knowledge and where it is possible that
> a character might produce a new effect without changing
> attributes.

I don't agree with all of your choices, then. The Marvel Super
Heroes rules I'm familiar with, for example, have no particular
skill component to them. You use your Power rankings and
your attributes to create effects, and I don't rememeber
being able to produce brand new effects, either, though I
could easily be forgetting some variable power.


> In HERO, the first part is just extremely difficult
> -- the second part is impossible.

It's really not. Serious question, not meant to be insulting:
How familiar are you with the HERO rules? It's extremely
easy to model levels of skill using the power rules instead
of just the skill rules, and for creating brand new effects
you've got the Variable Power Pool mechanics, which
can let you do literally anything you can think of that
the GM will allow.

Pete
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Tail Kinker <groves_ca.TakeThisOut@yahoo.co.uk> writes:

> Here's one that our group came up with. It was for a different
> system, but it translates well enough into GURPS. (Below is a 3e
> treatment, since I declined to plunk down $100 for 4e while 3e still
> works.
>
> New Advantage: Magic
> 25 points per level
>
> This is the ability to perform magic. The level of Magic is added
> into the Magic Skill.

This sounds like an advantage already in GURPS 3rd Ed: "Magical
Aptitude". 15 points for level 1, +10 points per additional level.
Learning spells is bought against (IQ + Magical Aptitude), instead of
just (IQ).

In GURPS 4th Ed, it works much the same way, but is called "Magery"
and starts at level 0 for 5 points, +10 points thereafter; i.e. the
same point cost, but distinguishing between having Magery at all and
having a bonus to spells.

Did you decide not to use this, or did you decide it should just cost
more?

> New Skill: Magic
> M/VH, No Defaults
>
> This is the ability to create Magical effects. The player defines
> the effect, and the GM assesses a penalty (always at least -5) to
> attempt the effect.

GURPS Basic Set doesn't have this, but GURPS Magic has Improvisational
Magic, which gives more guidance than just "GM figures out a penalty".

If you *really* want "player can try to create any magical effect",
check out the GURPS release of Mage: The Ascension.

> Also included in our system were a number of lookup tables for things
> such as distance, mass, velocity, duration, etc, each with associated
> difficulty penalties. These were most useful for defining the limits
> of effects.

Yes, this is where any magic system needs to be scaled to what the GM
and players like in terms of power level. There's no possible reality
check, so it just comes down to how the designers feel magic "should"
work.

--
\ "If sharing a thing in no way diminishes it, it is not rightly |
`\ owned if it is not shared." -- Saint Augustine |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Jefferson wrote:
> Peter Meilinger wrote:
> > Jefferson wrote:
> >>
> >>Yes. The _roleplaying_ stuff. Magic, technology, and so forth
> >>are roleplaying items, they're campaign items.
> >
> > Which are used to give the roleplaying the style and flavor you
> > want.
>
> That's the HERO games model; yes. However, that isn't the only
> possible model. Other models include roleplaying based on the
> underlying structure of the world, roleplaying based on the
> nature of possible abilities, roleplaying based on the innate
> difficulties of certain abilities, roleplaying based on equipment
> (or lack thereof), etc. I switched from HERO specifically
> because it didn't allow me to play the sort of games I wanted to
> play. The sort of games it does allow are very flexible, but
> that doesn't change the fact that there are games that it simply
> doesn't allow, and that GURPS does.

I disagree with that, but not too much. I'm not sure I understand
exactly how the HERO rules are set up so as to not allow you to
play the type of game you want, since I've never had or heard of
any problems with it on such a basic level. I can certainly
understand and believe that HERO isn't as good as GURPS
or other rulesets for what you're trying to do, though. In my
experience HERO is a very good tool for some uses, a decent
one for others and a passable one for everything else. That
is of course just my experience, though.

>
> [snip]
>
> >>Or uses magic as advantages (the psionic model), or gains
> >>temporary gifts (the shapeshifting model), or uses magic items
> >>(the gadget model). Not to mention that the basic magic system
> >>has both spell-casting, ceremonial, and priestly forms; variable
> >>mana levels, enchanting rules, power boosters, . . . All
> >>straight out of the book.
> >
> > Are all the rules for that stuff in the basic book now?
>
> Yes.

Good. Very good, actually. Wonderful, even.

> > Actually, what is considered the "basic" book now?
>
> _GURPS Basic Set Characters_ and _GURPS Basic Set Campaigns_.
> Everything above except the enchanting rules are in _Characters_.
> With these two books you can play a generic _anything_ game.

Right, and I'm glad to see it's just two books again. Wasn't it
three for awhile there, and that only after things got really
confusing for awhile?


> However, if you want to define your specific options better, you
> should pick up a book that discusses options: FANTASY, SPACE,
> POWERS, etc.

Of course, and in my opinion that's where GURPS shines
compared to HERO. Its sourcebooks are not only great
for use with GURPS games, almost all of them can be
easily used with any system you prefer to use. HERO has
some neat source material, but nowhere near the variety
and quality that GURPS has. I've always preferred the
HERO core rules, but the GURPS supporting stuff.

> > I'm very glad to hear it. Is Powers considered
> > part of the core rules, though?
>
> Because of the modular nature of GURPS, using the term "core
> rules" really isn't appropriate.

I don't know if that's true. As you say above, you have to
buy two books if you really want to be able to run a game,
right? I'd call those two the core rules. I suppose technically
you could probably do it with just the Characters book,
depending on how exactly it's set up. I mean, I used to
run AD&D games when the only book I had read was
the Player's Handbook.

> POWERS has the official rules
> for dealing with grouped advantages.

As in racial templates and suchlike?

> > I'm not disagreeing. I just don't see why the fact that technology
> > can be harder than magic means it's okay to skimp on the
> > magic.
>
> Because trying to cover everything means that the books would be
> 10 times larger (or more) with 90% of the content being useless
> to most of the buyers. Thus, the company wouldn't be able to
> stay in business.

True. But you seem to be saying that they should concentrate
on technology to the detriment of magic, which would still
make their content useless to quite a few of their customers.
If I want to play a fantasy game, the high tech content is
going to be useless to me.


> For _Rusalka_ you specify the results you want, and then let the
> spell work out its own way of achieving it. However, you must
> keep in mind the possibilities involved and limit the spell to
> avoid having it follow a course that you don't want. This
> doesn't work in HERO because HERO specifies _effects_ and doesn't
> allow you to determine _results_ directly.
>
> In the Deryni books the effects a mage is capable of is dependent
> on training and education. Given sufficient training a mage can
> pick up new magics quickly. All HERO mechanics that were
> experimented with didn't result in the proper flavor.

I see what you mean. I could probably come up with something
that would satisfy me, but that wouldn't do you too much good.
If it's a matter of flavor and style, yeah, HERO might just not
work for a particular group.

> > Serious question, not meant to be insulting:
> > How familiar are you with the HERO rules?
>
> Not very. However, whenever I try to play HERO I quickly run
> into problems. I've sent a number a HERO GMs back to the books
> trying to figure how to do the things I want to do, and got a few
> to admit that HERO doesn't do the things I want. If you're
> willing to accept HERO's underlying assumptions (oversimplified,
> that characters are 4-color heroes) it works fine. If you don't
> accept the game's underlying assumptions a HERO game will break
> faster than practically anything else.

I don't think I agree with your final sentence, but I do agree that
HERO tends to favor the cinematic playing style, in a way that
GURPS favors the at-least-somewhat-realistic style. Or at least
it used to. I'd be very happy to learn it does better with cinematic
stuff now.

Actually, I may just be thinking of superheroic as opposed to
all cinematic games. I never, ever liked the GURPS Supers
rules for anything beyond a Wild Cards or otherwise low
powered setting. None of their optional rules for giving the
game a four-color feel worked worth a damn for us, and
tended to break the game just as fast as you've experienced
with HERO. Other cinematic stuff could be kind of kludgy
at times, but otherwise worked pretty well.

Pete
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Steffan O'Sullivan wrote:
{...}
> I can understand your point of view. However, I'm not sure you
> understand mine. Mine is that an RPG book should be named with
> the characters, not the players, in mind. To the *players*, this
> is indeed a discussion of the magical. But I'm assuming the content
> of the book (I haven't seen a ToC) is much more than that to their
> characters. It allows methods of casting spells, yes? In which
> case one of the many synonyms for performing magic should be used,
> of which Thaumaturgy is only one example, and Thaumatology is not.


as the characters should never get a hold of any of the rpg books as
the books describe the intimate workings of the world they're part of
and made from... why then should the book be named for the characters
and not the players? The players will be the ones using the book.

Though personally i agree that Thaumatology an invalid book title
unless the book is exclusive to miracles instead of miracles, magical
feats, how a player could create a character to preform said feats, and
how a game master could design new methods of determining the effects
of aforementioned feats and miracles.
I disagree as to the target of the book though, they're very obviously
for players and game masters, not characters. if you fond a book that
said 'roll 3d6 and compare against your skill to determine if you
successfully hit the target.' would you think it was refering to you
or to some game?
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

Chuk Goodin wrote:
> On 4 Aug 2006 11:47:44 -0700, "Peter Meilinger" <p_meilinger.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Are all the rules for that stuff in the basic book now?
> >
> >Right, and I'm glad to see it's just two books again. Wasn't it
> >three for awhile there, and that only after things got really
> >confusing for awhile?
>
> It was one core book, and then two "optional" Compendia that practically
> everyone used (CI for characters, C2 for Everything Else). Now it's two
> core books, plus you'll really really want POWERS if you have a game with
> any unusual abilities.

Although CII was a distant third in that trio; I got it before CI and
found it much less useful.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

On 4 Aug 2006 12:10:09 -0700, "oniakki@gmail.com" <oniakki.RemoveThis@gmail.com>
wrote:


>as the characters should never get a hold of any of the rpg books as
>the books describe the intimate workings of the world they're part of
>and made from... why then should the book be named for the characters
>and not the players? The players will be the ones using the book.
>
>Though personally i agree that Thaumatology an invalid book title
>unless the book is exclusive to miracles i

Bah. Nonsense. They've already established that thaumatology is for
their purposes skill of knowning the theory of magic and thaumaturgy
is the actual practise of magic.
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

On 4 Aug 2006 11:47:44 -0700, "Peter Meilinger" <p_meilinger.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > Are all the rules for that stuff in the basic book now?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>Good. Very good, actually. Wonderful, even.
>
>> > Actually, what is considered the "basic" book now?
>>
>> _GURPS Basic Set Characters_ and _GURPS Basic Set Campaigns_.
>> Everything above except the enchanting rules are in _Characters_.
>> With these two books you can play a generic _anything_ game.
>
>Right, and I'm glad to see it's just two books again. Wasn't it
>three for awhile there, and that only after things got really
>confusing for awhile?

It was one core book, and then two "optional" Compendia that practically
everyone used (CI for characters, C2 for Everything Else). Now it's two
core books, plus you'll really really want POWERS if you have a game with
any unusual abilities.

>Of course, and in my opinion that's where GURPS shines
>compared to HERO. Its sourcebooks are not only great
>for use with GURPS games, almost all of them can be
>easily used with any system you prefer to use. HERO has
>some neat source material, but nowhere near the variety
>and quality that GURPS has. I've always preferred the
>HERO core rules, but the GURPS supporting stuff.

Have you been following the 5th edition stuff? Lots better support now.
(Maybe not quite up to GURPS standards, but some really good stuff.)
--
chuk
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4 Aug 2006 12:10:09 -0700, "oniakki@gmail.com" <oniakki.RemoveThis@gmail.com>
wrote:

<snip>

>as the characters should never get a hold of any of the rpg books as
>the books describe the intimate workings of the world they're part of
>and made from...

Why not?

No, seriously. If you put that rule in place, you cut off a sizable
subgenre of "infinite worlds" stories, sometimes called
"transfictionality stories". Why limit yourself that way?

<snip>
- --
Rob Kelk Personal address (ROT-13): eboxryx -ng- tznvy -qbg- pbz
"As far as Doug is concerned, "dignity" is just a tragic disease that
other people suffer from."
- Bob Schroeck, talking about his V&V character, 15 March 2005

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBRNQUhwKYYCCCxJ/PEQLfyQCgkPEtuVMX0diw2fGj6KRGyrjDkMsAn0KX
LRlGgi5KhyH85o0v/JXmpVJD
=/Ham
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems 

In article <1154490919.536691.243940.RemoveThis@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Peter Meilinger" <p_meilinger.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jefferson wrote:
> > Peter Meilinger wrote:
> > > Jefferson wrote:
> > >
> > > And for that reason a game that calls itself "Generic" and
> > > "Universal" shouldn't try to live up to those terms when it
> > > comes to magic systems?
> >
> > People have no problems with the generic and universal aspects of
> > GURPS when it comes to world design, technology, politics, etc.,
> > etc. Why pick on magic when that's one of the _most_ generic and
> > universal parts of the system?
>
> Mostly it's because I don't think it actually is the most generic
> and universal parts of the system, since you have to either
> use the speicfic systems in the books or do all the work
> yourself. Using the character creation system, I can make
> a TL 0 hunter/gatherer, a TL 6 Tommy, or a TL 13 Starfleet
> Officer. That's generic and universal, and GURPS is better
> at that than HERO, in my opinion.
>
> Using the basic GURPS magic system, I can make... Well,
> a character who uses the basic magic system. If I want to
> spend extra money on extra books, I can make characters
> who use those specific magic systems, too.

I take it you are talking about GURPS 3e because GURPS 4e piled everything
into GURPS 4e Magic. 'Standard', Ritual Magic, and Clerical all in one book
and there are actual mechanics for doing them. THere is enough you can
emulate about any magic system where you have the underling theory about.
For example here is how I emulated the magic system of the Slayers anime
world:

It is clear from what Lina says in the first series that spellcasters are
magicians in this setting. This gives you Magery (Ritual) as the main
advangtage. Also Lina tells us that spells draw their powers from three
sources: the Mazoku (demon/monster race), general spirits, and the Œgods¹
and a little internet searching reveals these are Kuro-Majutsu (Black
Magic), Seirei-Majutsu (Shamanism/Spirit Magic) and Shiro-majutsu (White
Magic) paths. To emulate the the varing power levels adding a reaction roll
for the being who is being invoked makes the most sense machanicwise (so
two rolls minimum are usially required for most spells) with something akin
to the Demonic Contract (M157) but without the taint problem for better
reactions and even using Lend Fatigue to further boost the casters spell.

For example the Mazoku Dark Lords in the Slayers universe seem to be very
free with their fatigue as long as a spell is either cast in anger (+1 to
+5) or to cause destruction (+1 to +5 the more destruction the higher the
bonus). So the more mayhem and havoc the caster wants to create the better
the reaction will be which in turn increases the energy available to the
spell. This is why Lina's Dragon Slave is so powerful especially if she is
mad when she casts the thing resulting in Lina becoming known as the
³Walking Force of Destruction², ³Enemy of All Who Live², and ³Dragon
Spooker².

So for Slayers the reaction table could look something like this:

Poor: Caster has to use their own HP (Darklord) or FP (Kami) to power
spell. However if the caster survives they get a +1 reaction bonus for each
additional time they cast the new spell up to a maximum of +5.
Neutral: treat the caster as if they are in a very high mana area.
Good: as Neutral but treat fatigue as per demon contract with no obvious
down side.
Very Good: As Good with called on being matching FP by Wizard with Share
Energy.
Excellent: Entire energy cost of spell provided by Share Energy.
 >> Stay informed about: A cornucopia of magic systems