Magic

Magic is brought into the world through the Wield Magic Move. Spell power is at one of four levels:

Cantrips - simple fleeting magic with no power cost and can be cast at the whim of the mage. A Cantrip cannot cause Harm.

Minor Magic - standard magic with a cost of 1 Power and a successful Wield Magic Move. If not enchanted into an item, the magic can last up to a scene, affects one subject and, if offensive, causes 3 Harm. The effect scope of this magic equates to what one person could achieve.

Major Magic - powerful and complex magic with a cost of 2 Power, that requires a Magical Focus, and a successful Wield Magic Move from a mage that has had 5 advancements. The magic can last a lengthy period of time, affects multiple subjects and, if offensive, causes 4 Harm including to Large creatures. The effect scope of this magic equates to what many people people could achieve.

Legendary Magic - immensely powerful magic with a cost of 4 Power, that requires a Magical Focus, and a successful Wield Magic Move from a mage that has had 5 advancements  and specific and complex narrative requirements as to time, place, astronomical alignments, item of power or sacrifice. The magic can be in effect for generations, affects whole regions and, if offensive, lays waste to cities, lands and communities. The effect scope of this magic equates to what legions of people could achieve over many years.


Describing Magical Effects
Within the confines of the magical tradition and the available spell power level the mage has complete freedom to describe the desired magical effect. Once the Wield Magic Move outcome is known, the GM can respond to the effect and embellish or illustrate consequences to the magic. The creation of a magical effect is a dialogue between the caster and the GM and creates new truths in the game.

The unintended consequences of magic become more pronounced the higher the level of power.

Where’s the Harm in that?

So, here we are at a crossroad. There are probably two ways that I can go, making this perhaps a T junction? Let’s hope it is not a roundabout, as I'm not sure that the beauty of such traffic management systems have sufficient international currency to keep you with me.

One of the many great things about Uncharted Worlds is the way the game handles Threats. Any opposition, any at all, is boiled down to a narratively flexible description, with assets and some nefarious agenda. Mostly, and forgive if I simplify something that is already elegantly simple, any character opposition in the game is handled with a consensual narrative dialogue. If you have the right assets to handle the opposition, and therefore have sufficient weight to influence outcomes, then you can make your Move and deal with the opposition. We’re talking one combat Move to take out a Threat, perhaps with a little help from your mates.

Now Threats themselves are malleable. They will form and reform around the results of the character Move, fluidly adjusting or expiring depending where you get on your 6-/7-9/10+ range. One Threat could become two if an opposition group splits. If you don’t take them out for the narrative they will fulfil their agenda and start writing story up and down your arse.

As a GM you’ve got nothing other than some cards with Threat names written on them and an enduring capability to make consistent calls on what makes narrative sense, when to trigger Moves, and how to respond to the outcomes. Don’t look for opposition stats (let’s leave starships out of here for now) or weapon capabilities or armour points. Look for what makes sense, be a fan of the characters and lavish descriptions of the action. Scary without the stat blocks? Just a touch. In large part it is liberating. Most of my players responded well and enjoyed the to and fro of descriptions and that the dice were rolled a couple of times. Certainly helps with the ‘play to find out what happens meme’ and a joy for GM prep. I'm sticking with it.

Characters do have Harm tracks and they are well implemented in Uncharted Worlds. Five levels of ascending brutality, the fifth being the great goodbye.

1. Minor
2. Major
3. Severe
4. Critical
5. Fatal

Take a major wound but already have one? Your new wound rolls up to the next level - Severe. Take a third and it rolls up to Critical. There’s only so much punishment that anyone can take. They remind me of the Fate damage stress track. Check out p.60 of the book for a summary.

I can take this path but, perhaps, I’ll back up and offer the more standard Harm tracks for opposition too. I’ll have to note the Harm levels that weapons, or incisive verbal attacks, do and maybe account for the protection of opposition armour, accounting in a way that doesn't require me to roll anything.

I'm conscious that other PbtA games go down this clock route of Harm ratings. My instinct is that I will follow that route, but it feels like a big design deal. Perhaps I'm being a little weak on this, but I did a lot of FGU in the 1980s, so you are just going to have to cut me some slack.

Advantage and Disadvantage

I’m anticipating that the Traits in Races, Roles and Origins will afford characters advantages in play. Mechanically i’ve been wondering how to represent this advantage.

PbtA games are on a 2d6 roll with Stat modifiers in the range -1 to +3 and results always measured on the -6/7-9/10+ scale.. The dice range is quite a tight bell curve, so a mechanical +1/-1 is significant. I considered using Advantage and Disadvantage dice but I think mathematics is telling me “no”.

The rule would have gone along the lines of:

Whilst At an Advantage, roll 3 dice and take away the lowest value die. Only remove one die if there is a tie for lowest. This roughly equates to a +2.

Whilst At a Disadvantage, roll 3 dice and take away the highest value die.  Only remove one die if there is a tie for the highest. This roughly equates to a -2.

Mongoose Traveller introduced Boon and Bane dice on a similar 2d range with a typical Task requiring 8+ for success and with modifiers for Stat and Skill. So, not a million miles away. I like the notion that the dice result is affected one way or the other before applying modifiers.  However, instinct tells me that, within PbtA systems, this rule introduces too much swing in the results creating a substantial advantage/disadvantage.

So, maybe, I’ll just revert to whilst At an Advantage/Disadvantage gain a +1/-1 DM to the roll either just once or ongoing for the scene.

Hmmm…?