I'm weighing a few different methods for how characters gain access to spells and augments, and am seeking feedback on these options.

1. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. They can use any augments for that spell for free.

2. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. They can purchase augments for that spell at 5 XP per difficulty increase of that augment.

3. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. Augments are all tied to implements, so you can only use a range augment if you are wielding a staff.

4. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. Augments are acquired narratively, by discovering scrolls or spellbooks.

5. Characters gain spells narratively, by discovering scrolls or spellbooks--presumably they would begin play with at least one such spell. They could cast any spells, and use any augments contained within their spellbook, so long as it remains on their person.

I'm leaning most toward characters gaining a spell via ranks, but having to spend XP for augments. In addition, there would be narrative sources for using spells or augments, so a character could gain access to particular augments or spells narratively, or monetarily.

Considering adding some additional spells to those listed in the book (some other posters have created interesting spells for Enchantment and Illusion) that are not available through skill ranks. Maybe things like teleportation, or flight? Although those feel like they should be generally accessible. Maybe "forbidden" or "lost" spells, like Necromancy?

Speaking of Necromancy: Would you just use Conjuration? Also thinking of other applications of Necromancy besides raising the dead, such as draining life force (could use the Harm half of the Heal/Harm Force power from Force and Destiny).

I just plan to introduce spells through a tier 1 ranked talent. Introducing spells through narrative means is not out of the question either.

It depends on the effects of necromancy you're going for. Summoning the dead would be Conjure. Draining life would be attack.

I'm heavily split on the issue, mostly because there are Talents that give non-spllecasters similar abilities to spells, which means they have to be constantly double dipping (Melee Ranks+Talents) while Spellcasters get everything at the word go. For the moment, I'm limiting casters total number of spells to how many ranks in Magic they have (Attack/Utility are free) and letting them pick what spells outside that they learn: Three ranks in Arcana sees the player knowing Attack, Utility, Barrier, Conjure, and Curse. Effects are free under this system. I like the idea of tying effects to XP costs, but am not sure how much that might impact things overall. Maybe a weird combo of "Ranks equal total number of spells known AND Effects per individual spell known" or tying it to Knowledge.

I don't know, I think magic is pretty well balanced in the book already. While the skill its more versatile than other skills, it also costs strain to use, and has a higher difficulty than a mundane skill. Would you make a fighter spend EXP on a shield to get the defensive quality? Then why should a wizard have to spend XP on the defensive quality for barrier?

As for necromancy, I would just flavor other spells. Harm is just an attack. Raising a skeleton could be a conjuration (maybe reduce the difficulty by 1 for having a skeleton to raise).

The issue is that spells end up providing more versatility than other actions, and they appear to scale up significantly--you can't use that shield to absorb damage for multiple allies, for instance. And while I haven't used Genesys yet, my concern is that other attacks or skills are being rolled against defenses, which players and NPCs can influence to a degree with talents, whereas static difficulties can't really be affected. It doesn't seem like the intent is to be able to use things like Dodge against spells, right? So, attacks are often going to have one or more challenge dice being applied to them, which can turn up Despairs, but it looks like spells won't often have that issue.

As for Necromancy, the point of Harm that I was looking at wasn't just causing damage, but siphoning wounds or strain from the target you've damaged.

It explicitly says attacks are combat checks. Combat checks apply defense, dodge, adversary, and whatever else the target comes up with exactly as if it was a ranged attack against them. As for anything which isn't attack, they cover that in the Resisting Magic sidebar on p. 214 by basically saying, "apply upgrades anyway." On the original subject, to get the most out of their spells a caster needs both ranks in their magic skill and ranks in knowledge (which is only a career skill for one of the spellcasting careers) plus many of the talents which could apply to combat checks can also apply to the attack spell.

Harm/Drain Life could be a Talent that augments Attack Spells:

Talent Rank 3: when casting the Attack Spell you recover Wounds equal to uncanceled success on the check.

or

Talent Rank 3: before casting the Attack Spell you may make a Drain Life Prepare manoeuvre to heal wounds equal to the total damage caused to a single target of the Spell.

For ways to earn spells it’s going to be highly dependent on the feel you want for your campaign. I personally like the idea of having a set of 3 talents for every Spell. Tier 1 Basic allows you to cast the spell, Tier 3 reduces the difficulty by 1, Tier 5 reduces the strain cost by 1.

11 hours ago, yeti1069 said:

I'm weighing a few different methods for how characters gain access to spells and augments, and am seeking feedback on these options.

1. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. They can use any augments for that spell for free.

2. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. They can purchase augments for that spell at 5 XP per difficulty increase of that augment.

3. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. Augments are all tied to implements, so you can only use a range augment if you are wielding a staff.

4. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. Augments are acquired narratively, by discovering scrolls or spellbooks.

5. Characters gain spells narratively, by discovering scrolls or spellbooks--presumably they would begin play with at least one such spell. They could cast any spells, and use any augments contained within their spellbook, so long as it remains on their person.

I'm leaning most toward characters gaining a spell via ranks, but having to spend XP for augments. In addition, there would be narrative sources for using spells or augments, so a character could gain access to particular augments or spells narratively, or monetarily.

Considering adding some additional spells to those listed in the book (some other posters have created interesting spells for Enchantment and Illusion) that are not available through skill ranks. Maybe things like teleportation, or flight? Although those feel like they should be generally accessible. Maybe "forbidden" or "lost" spells, like Necromancy?

Another option would be to treat casters like D&D wizards where you have a list of "spells"with fixed effects and augments. Burning Hands, Flame Strike, and Fire Ball would be mutually exclusive and you would need to learn them separately. Whether by research, purchase, or random treasure.

While this requires players and GMs to make spells in advance it also opens up the option to have things like sorcerers who can use magic in a more freeform fashion, crafting spells on the fly with augments. Then maybe you limit the number of augments available using talents to expand upon them.

11 hours ago, yeti1069 said:

1. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. They can use any augments for that spell for free.

I basically went with this option, although I give casters the Attack and Utility spells for free. With a couple of Genesys play sessions under our belt, and coming from a year of FFG SW, magic feels pretty balanced to our group.

Our melee and ranged guys have done more damage, but the casters have had a lot of fun with the versitility of magic, getting a lot of milage out of the narrative use of the Utility spell.

@Richardbuxton has a great idea with Talents that modify spell types. That would be a perfect way to address Necromancy - and maybe even solve the Polymorph/Shapechange question.

Just a first draft for a tiered access to additional effects: https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-L0nw97wybxV1NzgThdu/-L0o3GY0kWz4sFSWGD_P

15 hours ago, yeti1069 said:

1. Characters gain 1 spell per rank in the appropriate discipline. They can use any augments for that spell for free.

This is the basic direction that I am looking as well but to include (possibly ranked) talents to reflect the ability to use specific spell affinities or effects (fire, ice, animals, etc). I am still working on the specifics but as an example: With Primal, Conjure, and the Spell Affinity Talent: Ice a caster could conjure ice demons or ice related monsters (snow leopard), basically animal, nature, or elemental things. Arcane, Conjure, and Spell Affinity Talent Ice might conjure ice sword, ice bridge, etc. It would be easier to cast in the snow and harder to cast in the desert.

If you check out the Terrinoth Adventure in the Support section of Genesys and look at the NPC's included, they have Talents for Pyromancy and Necromancy at least. A great starting place to see where FFG is going with these kinds of Talents.

I like the one spell type per rank, with Utility being free. It offers them a sense of progression in what they can do, not just a greater chance of being able to do it.

I'm not sure I'd force them to take Attack as the first spell type though. Let the player decide. Particularly in a system with firearms co-existing with magic, Attack might not be the most useful spell type anyway.

I definitely don't want to offer Attack for free. I would, however, give Utility for free at rank 1 in addition to whichever spell the player chooses. I know that, for me, I could definitely envision playing a caster who never takes or uses Attack, instead preferring to buff the party, debuff (curse) the enemies, or focus on crowd control in some other fashion.

1 hour ago, yeti1069 said:

I definitely don't want to offer Attack for free. I would, however, give Utility for free at rank 1 in addition to whichever spell the player chooses. I know that, for me, I could definitely envision playing a caster who never takes or uses Attack, instead preferring to buff the party, debuff (curse) the enemies, or focus on crowd control in some other fashion.

Yeah, that is a good point. Actually, we have a paladin and a druid, neither of which have used Attack spells yet. They may well have not picked Attack as one of their 'spells known' had I not given it to them for free.

I was thinking over this some more today, and was feeling like charging XP for the augments may be too punitive, as that cost begins to really add up and pull away from advancing your character otherwise. What do you all think?

Another option could include allowing players to select a number of known augments equal to their casting characteristic. So, say someone had 3 Int and 2 Arcane, they could choose 2 spells to know, and 3 augments for each of those spells.

I just feel like I want some limiting factor on spell augmentation.

There's also the idea I've seen kicked about of crafting particular spells that players choose from, such as "Fireball," which would always include the augments for range, blast, and burn, but then I think we're skewing too much toward D&D, and I'd like to avoid that I think.

What if all the Spells are learned through 5xp talents but the Enhancements must be learned through narrative and financial means. Weapons have the attachments system that’s a financial way of improving the weapon, why not the same for spells?

My problem here is bad GM’s have too much control.

What would be a reasonable cost to purchase, say, a spellbook containing an Additional Effect for a spell? Would the rarity be based upon the +Difficulty of the Added Effect? Would we + or - the rarity factor based on which skill is needed for the spell effect vs the location (arcane would be more prevalent/cheaper in a wizard's school, while divine would be more readily available at a temple, etc...)?

29 minutes ago, yeti1069 said:

Another option could include allowing players to select a number of known augments equal to their casting characteristic. So, say someone had 3 Int and 2 Arcane, they could choose 2 spells to know, and 3 augments for each of those spells.

I just feel like I want some limiting factor on spell augmentation.

I considered this, but decided to playtest it for a few sessions without restricting augments. I did have a player manage (after a couple of failed attempts) to summon a silhouette 3 ally, so balance may prove to be a consideration.

Also, I could see it being very rewarding for the players to unlock augments over the course of their characters' development.

1 hour ago, yeti1069 said:

There's also the idea I've seen kicked about of crafting particular spells that players choose from, such as "Fireball," which would always include the augments for range, blast, and burn, but then I think we're skewing too much toward D&D, and I'd like to avoid that I think.

I created a Signature Spell and Spell Focus talent to give my spell casters a chance to feel a bit more unique in their magic use (though they haven't been purchased or used yet):

Signature Spell

Tier: 3; Activation: Active (Incidental); Ranked: No

When aquired, choose one spell type and up to three effects. Once per encounter, spend two strain to reduce the difficulty of your character's Signature Spell by two, to a minimum of Easy.

Spell Focus

Tier 2; Activation: Active (Incidental); Ranked: No

When aquired, choose one spell type. Once per round spend one strain to add one success and one advantage to your character's next magic skill check made to activate their chosen spell type. Until the end of your character's next turn, add one failure to all magic skill checks made to activate spells of any other type.

I think I'm missing something here. Half the discussion seems to be about limiting the number of spells a character has, while the other half seems to be about how to let characters learn spells.

If you're looking to limit how many they have, then I don't really have any suggestions to offer/add to what's been said already.

If you're looking for way to let players learn new spells, I'd say borrow a page from 7th Sea 2nd Ed's 'Stories' aspect. Start by determining the difficulty of the spell's casting per the normal rules. Then turn that into a number of steps that the character has to complete in order to learn the spell. You can then make those steps part of the story, either the character has to seek out external guidance, such as a teacher or a benefactor that grants the ability; or they dedicate time in study or meditation or something. That way the character is limited to 'spells per level' (which I've always abhorred) and at the same time still has to progress in order to acquire new spells.

For example: Say a character wants to learn an attack spell that slams into an opponent, knocks them back and maybe dazes them a bit. This would be an attack spell, with Impact, and Non-Lethal. That would be three purple D8s. So, the character has to complete three steps in order to learn the spell. The particulars can be flexible depending on the character and the campaign. For external sources of knowledge, maybe they learn from another magic user, or an elemental, or their deity of choice. Said benefactor may give them a set of three tasks that have to be completed. After all three tasks have been completed, they now know the new spell. If they learn the spell on their own, then maybe require that they have to spend a number of hours per day in study or meditation, for a number of days determined by the spells difficulty. For instance, maybe they have to study for at least 4-8 hours a day for three days. Or maybe they have to study for a number of days for each die in the difficulty. In this case, they'd have to study for 4-8 hours a day, for a total of nine days (3 days x 3 dice) before learning the spell.