The Keen Use Of Stationary Magic.In a fantasy world of magic, such as most It is, therefore, only natural to assume the relative power of a spell or spell effect is often indicative of the level of the magic user that cast it. Yet this may not always be the case. For the normal practitioners of magic, their spell repertoire often includes mostly, or even possibly only, standard spells found in the game books. Not all players rise to the challenge of writing their own spells, and even when they do, not all GMs are particularly good at adjudicating their relative power, or foreseeing the game balance consequences, before a spell they prematurely green-lighted comes back to seriously bite them in the ass. But I digress. It is assumed, however, that despite what PCs typically do or use during the normal course of a campaign, most magic users (PCs or NPCs) actually do turn out a few unique spells over their entire lifetimes. For the PCs, this may or may not happen during the actual campaign, so it usually doesn't affect the current scenario. However, if the GM is up to it, players may create a few unique spells suitable for the game environment that won't disrupt game balance, and are, therefore, acceptable to the GM. Hopefully, if done properly, these spells will be commensurate in power with existing spells, and thus they will not prove to be too powerful or too weak for the decided upon level of the spell. In that way, even the power of those nonstandard spells, just like most standard spells, should normally be indicative of the level of the spell caster. Sometimes, however, it is possible to create a spell that is more powerful in some ways, though more severely limited in others, yet it may still achieve an acceptable balance. Sacrifices in one quarter may allow gains in another quarter, and if this "give-and-take" doesn't prove to be unfair or untenable, or in some other manner unmanageable for the game world, it may be allowed by the GM. One of the most noteworthy means to this end is the sacrifice of mobility or flexibility. The standard ability to cast a spell wherever you are, whenever you need it, and to adjust its parameters on the spot as needed, makes a spell incredibly useful. Can you imagine how limiting it would be if spells only worked in one place and only at one particular time, or only with fixed parameters? For the typical adventuring practitioner of magic, these stationary and/or fixed parameter spells would be virtually worthless in the field. This is why most standard spells are already assumed to be mobile and versatile, and this power is built right into them. Yet, suppose this mobility and/or flexibility were not required for a spell. It even makes sense that a spell custom made for one, and only one area, and one, and only one application, might capitalize on the fact certain random elements needn't be contended with, and thus the normal power used to deal with such matters could be used elsewhere. Or, put another way, it makes sense a well-studied area would already take into account what would normally be random elements - like the direction of the ether wind, or the planar density of mana, or some other fantasy factors for which we assume normal magic users have to take account. Thus, a stationary spell that already knew such factors in advance wouldn't waste time or power to account for them as the spell was triggered, and therefore that power could be employed elsewhere, such as greater range, or greater power (dice), or longer duration, etc. and/or the spell could be cheaper, or more powerful in some other ways, and/or more easily cast - i.e. managed by a lower-level spell caster than the raw power might otherwise suggest. For example, take the standard Fireball spell. While mobile, the spell caster may choose to adjust its number of hit dice (up to his or her limit), pick any target (anywhere within his or her range), and decide when to cast it, or not cast it. This flexibility is quite powerful, and even frequently necessary for fieldwork. But suppose they didn't need to retain that flexibility. Suppose instead they wanted to cast it in one and only one place, designed it to hit one and only one location, and to go off only upon the occurrence of one and only one condition or set of circumstances. Properly studied and researched for use within a particular area, the same level magic user - who might normally only be able to cast a 6-dice "mobile" Fireball, for example, might easily be able to cast a 10-dice "stationary" Fireball, or reach a greater range, or use lesser, possibly cheaper material components, or might simply still cast a 6-dice Fireball, though be capable of casting it at a lesser level, such as a 2nd-level spell instead of a 3rd-level spell. NOTE: GMs need to carefully assess the "give and/or take" of each spell here to insure what is "sacrificed" is commensurate to what is "gained" for such specialized spells. If they are not careful, some stationary spells may be overly harsh and so deadly and powerful that they become game killers. GMs must exercise caution and foresight. As a good rule of thumb, think in terms of "slight" advantages rather than huge ones. As always, actual GM experience comes in time, so if you feel you've made a huge mistake for a stationary spell's power, tone it down, learn from that mistake, and move on. Would these "stationary" spells as possibilities adversely affect game balance? Possibly, yes, if it didn't require much time or effort, and thus became real possibilities PCs and NPCs could do on the fly, in the field, or on the run or under the most haphazard conditions that they would forever be cropping up and getting in the way of normal scenarios with a staggering frequency. But suppose it wasn't so quick or easy to manage this trick. Suppose instead it took time and research. Then it would only occur in fixed locations, and this limitation might suffice to preserve the required game balance. I believe it does just that, and as such, it allows for a few nice applications of magic that will enhance the flavor of many games. Fixed magic frequently will find applications for home defense or home improvements, but bearing in mind the additional cost of research for these specialized spells, their application will still be relatively rare. Just because spell casters can do such things, their natural tendency to use standard spells they already have and save themselves a ton of work, rather than do all that extra work, pay all that additional money, and go that extra mile, just for a limited use spell, will win out, more often than not, so these spells will remain relatively rare ones. Also, unlike normal, mobile spells, even if such stationary spells are captured - as in a spellbook - they are useless elsewhere, and such spells do not propagate around the world, which is another reason why they remain relatively rare. So, just as normal spells need to be researched, so, too, will fixed spells. They would not simply be extensions of existing spells, but brand new spells, taking up time, money, effort, etc. just like any other spell a spell caster chose to research. For example, again, let us take the Fireball spell. The standard mobile version can be used anywhere at any time, but a fixed version must be independently researched, will cost nearly the same to research as the standard spell, but can only be used for the one location where it was designed to fit. (It may be cast at higher levels over the years as the caster increases in levels, but still only at that one location, so it is a limited use spell). It's not even like one has research a fixed Fireball spell that can be cast wherever one wishes to set up a fixed trap, but each research effort is tailor made for one and only one location. Such a costly research project is worthless everywhere, except for the one location it was designed to fit, and therefore it must be worth the effort, the time, and the money it takes to conduct this research. Far more often than not, most magic users will feel the additional effort isn't worth the slight advantages. Still, sometimes it may be worth it, and the judicious application of such fixed spells upon the game world environment may add spice to the campaign setting. NOTE: Once a fixed or stationary form of a particular spell is researched, the GM may decide it is not necessary to research a stationary version of that same spell for a new location and that one could be used elsewhere. HOWEVER, even if the GM allows the players to forego paying more money, they should NEVER allow them to forego the extra time it takes to study and become intimately familiar with the new area where the spell caster wishes to employ a fixed version of their spell. For example, a wizard must first research and pay for (or find and understand) the normal Fireball spell before they can research a fixed version for location X. Then they can research and pay for a fixed version for location X. Afterwards, they may use that spell in other locations, such as Y or Z, even without having to pay more money for research, but only after taking the lengthy time to become intimately familiar with and study location Y or Z. This must take at least the same amount of time it takes to research a new spell, but the only additional costs that may be incurred would be the cost of living in that area for that period of time. And note it is not just living in the area, but deliberately and painstakingly studying the area for the express purpose of employing the fixed spell. All of this might save the spell caster some money in research costs, but never the time. Stationary magic is not quick to concoct, as the time requirements are part of the game balance, and thus they will remain relatively few and far between. Now I know some will say, "Ah, this is just a cheap GM trick to use more power against the players without having to risk giving out greater rewards." It may even seem that way since this could have the effect of making a tougher challenge for the players while the same level magic user is at the heart of the challenge, and there is no reason why they would have greater treasure than one of their level normally would have. However, the fact of the matter is that the GM may use any amount of power they wish, and set the rewards to whatever they feel are appropriate, or, in short, the GM doesn't need to use such tricks, and they aren't "cheating" the players when they do use them. We know this since the GM isn't trying to beat the players and win the game while the other players lose. That's nonsense. In a roleplaying game, the GM isn't trying to win, but rather they are trying to tell a story and/or entertain the players, and it's perfectly fair that they may employ certain liberties or use certain dramatic licenses to achieve this goal or level of showmanship. NOTE: As an aside, whenever GMs need to increase the power level of the challenge, this also has the unfortunate effect of increasing the improbability of the scenario, and the more improbable something is, the more unrealistic it appears. For example, an ancient red dragon is rarer than a young red dragon, and one might hope, for the sake of realism, there aren't too many ancient red dragons littering the fantasy world. This is particularly true when such overly fantastic things do not occur just once or twice in one's lifetime, but seem to occur on a regular, almost daily basis. Thus, any excuse to increase the power of a challenge without also increasing the improbability will make the scenario more realistic, more believable, and that much more enjoyable since one isn't constantly being forced to swallow such implausibly regular occurrences that it almost makes one think the entire world was created solely for their own amusement. I mean, even if that's exactly what our fantasy game worlds are, it shouldn't appear that way to our characters, and the characters should remain blissfully ignorant of the true nature of their universe. But I digress. Yes, occasionally NPCs (or even PCs if their players have a penchant for mapping out their character's home defenses, etc.) will have stronger fixed defenses or interesting magical applications than their actual level seems to warrant or justify, but these increases in power shouldn't be too staggering or impossible to contend with for the party of PCs. If they are, that's just the GM throwing a no-win scenario at his or her players, or providing insufficient clues such a target is currently, at least for the moment, beyond the party's capabilities, and perhaps best left for later. I'm not saying GMs shouldn't have such insurmountable obstacles in their worlds, for sometimes the correct PC response is to run away, retreat, or to avoid attacking a target head-on, but I am saying good GMs take care to balance their scenarios so the players may still possibly win or succeed, provided they cooperate with one another, pay attention, and play smart, naturally. And yes, should the PCs assess the power of some spells tossed their way, they may sometimes get an erroneous read on the true level of their opponent. For example, normally getting hit with a 10-dice Fireball trap implies a 10th-level or even higher-level opponent, but if it were a fixed Fireball trap that was specially researched for that particular hallway, their opponent might only be a 6th-level wizard, for example, and not a 10th-level wizard. As you can see, this method adds the fun and power and challenge of certain aspects of a 10-level encounter, but since it's only a 6th-level encounter, you get all the same fun, but the encounter is far more probable and believable, since 6th-level wizards are far more common and plausible than 10th-level wizards. So while players may feel cheated the eventual treasure hoard is more in line with that of a 6th-level wizard than a 10th-level one, the challenge is worth more XP, and it's not quite as tough as a real 10th-level wizard would have been, either. Only some of it is that challenging - not all of it, and in particular, the endgame battle would be against a lower-level spell caster than the fixed spells led the players (or characters) to believe. Besides, it keeps them guessing and prevents them from becoming too complacent or too certain of their facts, and that's usually a good thing since the unknown is often far more exciting and interesting than what one already knows. But apart from the occasionally tougher than expected NPC - mostly in the way of their fixed defenses - the primary advantage of fixed magic is in the justification of a more elaborate and highly complex magical society without the encumbrance of staggering improbabilities of such quantities of "apparently" high-level magical effects. For example, large cities require huge quantities of fresh water. A government could build lengthy aqueducts and bring water in from many miles away, just as the Romans did, but this mundane method is not the only option. Standard Create Water spells, however, would yield water in far too little a quantity, and take far too many spell casters. Even if the entire population were capable of casting that spell, it would be a full time job just to supply a large city with the required water. But those are mobile spells that are design to create water anywhere you need it at any time you need it. Fixed spells have other possibilities. A spell to permanently open a minor gate or hole to the Elemental Plane Of Water might be beyond the plausible capabilities of most NPCs, but that's because such power levels are usually considered from the perspective of existing spells, most of which are fully mobile. A fixed spell to achieve this result would be lower in level, and thus quite plausible for a high level caster. A government, in particular, could afford to set up a few of these. Then, if such a gate were opened at the bottom of a large tank or container, water would flow into the container until it filled to the point where the water pressure of a full tank would be equal to the water pressure at the point on the Elemental Plane Of Water where the gate was opened. Thus, the tank would fill, but not overflow, since the flow would stop once pressure was equalized. But as water was used or taken out, the level would lower, the pressure would decrease, and the water would flow again until the tank's pressure balanced the gate pressure again when it filled to the top. From the tank, short aqueducts could carry water around the city, but these would be within the city and not particularly be vulnerable to enemy attack, as miles and miles of aqueducts outside a city's walls would normally be. Plus, one could set up such a city virtually anywhere, even in the heart of a desert or anywhere else, despite being countless miles away from the nearest source of fresh water. This is just one example of a magical application one might contrive for a magically sophisticated society, and it has the advantage of not requiring impossibly high-level magic users to accomplish it, or an implausible number of magic users to maintain it. Thus, it's plausible, believable, and interesting. In contrast, Continual Light street lamps could be researched for each location, but the research cost incurred for each location would be more than the cost of the mobile spells - which can be cast anywhere you wish - so a special stationary magic spell for this application would NOT be developed. However, since the spell is continual, or the duration is sufficiently long, a standard spell for this magical application could already reasonably be cast throughout a large city without stretching the bounds of credulity. In the final analysis, even on a magical world, the bottom line comes down to a cost analysis for each proposed application. Another example would be dead zones, or rather, controlled zones of magic, wherein one, and only one person could perform magic while all other magical applications would not work. This could be impossibly expensive to cast if it were mobile, or of great duration, but as a fixed application, such a zone could reasonably be constructed and have an almost infinite duration. A high-end shop, or any location that might warrant the expenditure of millions of gold pieces to TOTALLY thwart any magical attempts at theft, spying, or what have you, while maintaining the ability of the owner to still use magic items or their own spells, might be well worth the price. Magic Shops, in particular, if they exist on your world, could benefit from such protection, and since such protections are fixed and stationary, they make much more sense and are not unreasonably too powerful such that they would be ridiculous. As a final consideration for this article, it is possible to go the other way for a new spell. For example, one might first increase its level, or raise the cost of the material components, or decrease its range, etc. By first increasing its difficulty by adding more limitations, one might see new possibilities before finally settling on an advantage. For example, consider the normally 2nd-level mobile spell, Rope Trick. Recall this spell is mobile since it may be cast anywhere you feel like it any time you wished. But its duration is only one hour/level. How useful might such an extra dimensional space be if only its duration were considerably longer? One might imagine a higher-level version of this spell, but of much greater duration - possibly even infinite duration - but that would probably only come at a staggering cost, possibly making it even higher than a 9th-level spell. The GM might feel such a mobile spell of infinite duration could only be balanced at such a high level. But once you imagine this spell, then proceed to subtract its mobility. Make it a fixed spell, and one could finally arrive at a reasonably balanced spell for the game that was fixed, infinite in duration, but cost a VERY expensive material component, or be a spell that took a very high-level spell caster to cast. In this example, one might end up with a spell that creates a small extra dimensional space of infinite or near infinite duration, though this spell would obviously either be much higher than a 2nd-level spell, or certainly require something more rare and expensive than some powdered corn extract or a simple twisted piece of parchment; it might take, for example, a braided and twisted length of mithral-laced rope - very expensive - or a twisted platinum loop wrapped with phase spider web - very rare. Also, GMs should compare such new spells to existing magic items of similar function. For this example, a stationary "hole" might be compared to a portable hole, the idea being such a stationary spell would be less offensive, game balance-wise, than a portable hole, and thus such a spell should cost less than that particular magic item. However the GM balanced it, a new, reasonable spell would be created for their world, and secret extra dimensional compartments might become an almost common occurrence on that world. Better than a safe for valuables, in some ways, since common thieves could never find them, let alone pick their locks, they might still be located with Detect Magic or similar spells, or temporarily open up for a successfully cast Dispel Magic spell. GMs should decide upon the exact nature of such a spell before employing it on their world, naturally. As you might guess, there are a variety of ways to tweak a standard spell's cost or parameters, and one may play with its balance in many ways, but ultimately, the GM must decide if the cost or limitations warrant its power and if that new spell will help or harm their world. But this is not new, for GMs have always been doing that. For the purposes of this article, however, I only wish to point out and emphasize the possibility of using fixed spells, or stationary magic, as part of this process so both players and GMs may think in these mobile vs. stationary terms during the give and take process for creating new and interesting spells for their games. With a little thought, many such stationary magical applications may be invented, and for those who love magic and magical settings, this approach allows them to achieve many interesting things without also having to necessarily assume magic is so common or so easy as to almost be ridiculous. I know many dislike magic and magical settings as it already is, and for a variety of reasons, but at least one of those reasons need not be the improbability of it all. A GM may create a magically sophisticated society and still remain well grounded through the utilization of the concept of stationary magic, all because high-level effects may be achieved by lower-level casters, just as long as those effects are stationary. I hope some of you, too, will find or invent interesting applications for stationary magic for your worlds. In fact, if you do, or already have, I'm always interested in hearing new ideas, so thanks in advance for dropping me a line. And, as always, Happy Gaming ;-) Email Jim Your Comments (Send Praises, Critiques, Complaints, Suggestions, Ideas, Corrections, Or Submissions.) © February of 2007 |