Rituals vs Invocations

[thorr-kan]

One of the strengths of Palladium's magic system is that any spell can be a ritual or an invocation. I was introduced to this magic system through BTS1, so it really struck a chord with me. But over time and different game lines, I've come to wonder if certain spells shouldn't *always* be rituals.

Nightbane goes that route, making some summoning and some enchanting spells rituals only: Call Creature of Light, Call Nightland Denizen, Charm Weapons, Temporary Enchantment. For myself, I wonder if expanding that requirement to any circle, summoning, calling, binding, and enchanting spell might be an interesting campaign rule?

Has anyone used ritual magic similar to this in their game?

[Warshield73]

In general I have anything that creates (Golom, zombie, etc.) be ritual only. I also use rituals as a way to limit mages by allowing them to get rituals instead of invocations to limit its use in combat or other situations.

[thorr-kan]

In general I have anything that creates (Golom, zombie, etc.) be ritual only. I also use rituals as a way to limit mages by allowing them to get rituals instead of invocations to limit its use in combat or other situations.

I can see the former. The latter is an idea I hadn't considered. But it would be a logical outcome of setting decisions and of fighting cultists.

I think part of my preference for rituals for some spells is basing protection circles and summoning on translations of the Summoner's arts from Palladium Fantasy. That's an impression I got from reading BTS1 back in that day.

[ShadowLogan]

Some of the entries in the Wizard list do seem to be restricted to Rituals and do not allow Spell versions already. I'd also say anything that requires physical components is likely also a ritual even if it isn't stated to be.

[Warshield73]

Some of the entries in the Wizard list do seem to be restricted to Rituals and do not allow Spell versions already. I'd also say anything that requires physical components is likely also a ritual even if it isn't stated to be.

Agreed, this goes back to my anything physical rule. If you have to have a lump of clay or a dead body, ritual. Have to draw a circle on the ground, ritual only.

In general I have anything that creates (Golom, zombie, etc.) be ritual only. I also use rituals as a way to limit mages by allowing them to get rituals instead of invocations to limit its use in combat or other situations.

I can see the former. The latter is an idea I hadn't considered. But it would be a logical outcome of setting decisions and of fighting cultists.

I think part of my preference for rituals for some spells is basing protection circles and summoning on translations of the Summoner's arts from Palladium Fantasy. That's an impression I got from reading BTS1 back in that day.

The difference between invocation and ritual has been a problem from the beginning and it has never really been cleared up. Along these lines some spells would likely be invocation only. Call lightning, carpet of adhesion, spells along those lines might be invocation only.

What I would like, especially for BTS and Heroes but also for all other games, is a way for non-mages to cast rituals like you see on shows like Buffy and Supernatural. I do this with scrolls now but it would be better if there was a set system for this.

[thorr-kan]

What I would like, especially for BTS and Heroes but also for all other games, is a way for non-mages to cast rituals like you see on shows like Buffy and Supernatural. I do this with scrolls now but it would be better if there was a set system for this.

There was a post about this on one of the Palladium FB pages years ago that gave playtest rules for this. Alternatively, the d20 incantation rules in d20 Modern, D&D 3E's Unearthed Arcana, or Pathfinder RPG, would be a good fit.

Or judicious use of the variant rules in the Through the Glass Darkly from Nightbane. The Principles of Magic special skill lets you cast spells, the Sorcerous Proficiencies can grant your spells. A small sacrifice of skills for the ability to do a bit of magic.

[thorr-kan]

Here it is! FB login may be required. Not my content. Caveat Emptor. Etc.



ETA: And Pact Magic, as a bonus.

[Warshield73]

What I would like, especially for BTS and Heroes but also for all other games, is a way for non-mages to cast rituals like you see on shows like Buffy and Supernatural. I do this with scrolls now but it would be better if there was a set system for this.

There was a post about this on one of the Palladium FB pages years ago that gave playtest rules for this. Alternatively, the d20 incantation rules in d20 Modern, D&D 3E's Unearthed Arcana, or Pathfinder RPG, would be a good fit.

Or judicious use of the variant rules in the Through the Glass Darkly from Nightbane. The Principles of Magic special skill lets you cast spells, the Sorcerous Proficiencies can grant your spells. A small sacrifice of skills for the ability to do a bit of magic.

I'm not a huge fan of Glass Darkly but there are a few things to use there. I think the main reason I don't do it is that the magic system is fairly fragile and like I said earlier we don't have great definitions of what a ritual is vs an incantation. Also, I have rarely needed this in RIfts as there is almost always a mage in the group and really it just fits BtS and my dark version of HU/NB.

What I envisioned was a way for ordinary people to do rituals like protection circles, tracking spells, maybe even open a rift like you see in shows like Supernatural or even Buffy. To balance things out I planned to require non-mages to have components or even artifacts that an actual spellcaster wouldn't need. This would be a lot of work for a house rule so I never did much with it. The most of what I did list a few things for a couple of spells like portal to the Nightlands and such.

I think a system like this would work for most PB games but like I said especially for BtS, NB, and HU.

[green.nova343]

main thing I tend to see as the differences:

• Invocations can primarily only draw PPE from the caster/talisman/ley line. Rituals can have multiple people (including non-casters) contribute PPE...including a "blood sacrifice". Yes, I know that theoretically you could kill someone/some animal to cast an invocation, but that not only is messy on the carpet but you're going to go through sacrifices way too quickly.
• Invocations are fairly quick to cast -- 1 or 2 melee actions tops -- so are ideal for combat. Rituals require a lot more prep -- longer incantations, perhaps a "sacred place", might even require a celestial alignment (or simply using the extra PPE, see prior item) -- but theoretically should then result in a stronger spell strength.
• This is where we get into more "house rule" than canon rules. Invocations are what makes someone a wizard/mage/magic-user/whatever you call it. They're using their own magic knowledge, PPE base, &/or access to magic/TW items to push the spell out. Unpowered mooks need not apply. More importantly, the exact mechanism behind the spell (trigger word the caster prefers, hand gesture, etc.) can differ from mage to mage: could be cultural ("Ah, he's obviously from the Ice Islands, their Fire Bolt spells are distinctive"), could be where they were trained ("Hmmm...that particular forking of the fingers for Lightning Bolt with that arm twist, that's a hallmark of the Babbington Institute of Magery...") or who trained them ("Hah! Waving their arms around for Wind Gust like that...she must have studied under Professor McItridge, he was always big on dramatic gestures..."), could even be just the mage's particular preference ("You said he shouted "Fuego!" before torching the ogre with a blast of fire? Damn...that one is Big Trouble, steer clear of him..."). But a ritual...now you're talking about something where the steps are extremely rigid, almost certainly spelled out in a particular tome, probably banned on several planets & in multiple dimensions. Think the Necronomicon from Evil Dead, or the Book of Life/Book of the Dead from The Mummy. And when I say the steps are meticulously written down, I mean that while they might be written down in some ancient or esoteric language, they're written in such a way that any idiot who manages to read the words & follow the ritual's steps to the letter can cast the spell (provided enough PPE is provided), even if they're not a mage. Again, just like in Evil Dead or The Mummy, where simply reading the ancient Sumerian or Egyptian activated the spell (even though the readers not only didn't know what would happen, they didn't even believe that magic worked).

That last one is where you get all sorts of cults for your BTS1/2, Nightbane, or even Rifts campaign setting. Some idiot finds an ancient tome long thought to be lost, they (or someone they hire/threaten) translates it, & then they follow the ritual. Presto...some ancient eldritch horror is now walking the Earth again, or they managed to cast some Spell of Legend (although it sucked the souls of half the cultists to do so), or they're discovered by a mage lacking in any scruples who decides to take advantage of said tome.

[thorr-kan]

What I would like, especially for BTS and Heroes but also for all other games, is a way for non-mages to cast rituals like you see on shows like Buffy and Supernatural. I do this with scrolls now but it would be better if there was a set system for this.

There was a post about this on one of the Palladium FB pages years ago that gave playtest rules for this. Alternatively, the d20 incantation rules in d20 Modern, D&D 3E's Unearthed Arcana, or Pathfinder RPG, would be a good fit.

Or judicious use of the variant rules in the Through the Glass Darkly from Nightbane. The Principles of Magic special skill lets you cast spells, the Sorcerous Proficiencies can grant your spells. A small sacrifice of skills for the ability to do a bit of magic.

I'm not a huge fan of Glass Darkly but there are a few things to use there. I think the main reason I don't do it is that the magic system is fairly fragile and like I said earlier we don't have great definitions of what a ritual is vs an incantation. Also, I have rarely needed this in RIfts as there is almost always a mage in the group and really it just fits BtS and my dark version of HU/NB.

What I envisioned was a way for ordinary people to do rituals like protection circles, tracking spells, maybe even open a rift like you see in shows like Supernatural or even Buffy. To balance things out I planned to require non-mages to have components or even artifacts that an actual spellcaster wouldn't need. This would be a lot of work for a house rule so I never did much with it. The most of what I did list a few things for a couple of spells like portal to the Nightlands and such.

I think a system like this would work for most PB games but like I said especially for BtS, NB, and HU.

Having just rediscovered the cultists description in BtS1, it is possible something could be standardized from that.

[thorr-kan]

I'm not a huge fan of Glass Darkly...

How can you not love TtGD? It and Mysteries of Magic are master-class developments of the Palladium magic system!

Which don't suit everybody's tastes or tables; I get that. And my enthusiasm for them aside, I don't insist not likely them is badwrongfun.

Also, I have rarely needed this in RIfts as there is almost always a mage in the group and really it just fits BtS and my dark version of HU/NB.

It would fit a modern, lower mana world better, I agree. BtS, NB, HU, DR, even TMNT and N&SS/MC.

I think there's design space for a hedge mage and kitchen witch subsytem to fit this need. I also think there's room for a pact magic subsystem that is not a full-on witch or warlock OCC. This would be an excellent model for a fey bargain, someone who keeps the old ways, or a devout but mundane follower of something.

None of the three would be a threat to a real mage. But they would be useful allies to hunters, exorcists, or other adventurers. It could also server as an interesting focus for a PC.

I think this is a discussion that we might take to another thread.

[Library Ogre]

How can you not love TtGD? It and Mysteries of Magic are master-class developments of the Palladium magic system!

TtGD was open for a lot of MoM's development.

[Warshield73]

I'm not a huge fan of Glass Darkly...

How can you not love TtGD? It and Mysteries of Magic are master-class developments of the Palladium magic system!

Which don't suit everybody's tastes or tables; I get that. And my enthusiasm for them aside, I don't insist not likely them is badwrongfun.

I don't hate it, to me it's just not a great fit with NB. Some of the magic stuff is good and I have used it in the past. I do agree with you about Mysteries of Magic, even though I don't play fantasy that has been a great book to explain terms that had been left undefined for decades.

I think my biggest complaint with MoM is that it is too PFRPG. It should have been geared system not so much as a revision or update more of a polish. In fact I have been thinking about it and if they ever decide to do a system wide update, a Palladium 2.0 if you will, that might be a great way to do it. Here is a system wide magic book, here is psionics, just to play test it a little before the new system.

Also, I have rarely needed this in RIfts as there is almost always a mage in the group and really it just fits BtS and my dark version of HU/NB.

It would fit a modern, lower mana world better, I agree. BtS, NB, HU, DR, even TMNT and N&SS/MC.

I think there's design space for a hedge mage and kitchen witch subsytem to fit this need. I also think there's room for a pact magic subsystem that is not a full-on witch or warlock OCC. This would be an excellent model for a fey bargain, someone who keeps the old ways, or a devout but mundane follower of something.

None of the three would be a threat to a real mage. But they would be useful allies to hunters, exorcists, or other adventurers. It could also server as an interesting focus for a PC.

I think this is a discussion that we might take to another thread.

Agreed.

[thorr-kan]

[

I don't hate it, to me it's just not a great fit with NB. Some of the magic stuff is good and I have used it in the past. I do agree with you about Mysteries of Magic, even though I don't play fantasy that has been a great book to explain terms that had been left undefined for decades.

I think my biggest complaint with MoM is that it is too PFRPG. It should have been geared system not so much as a revision or update more of a polish. In fact I have been thinking about it and if they ever decide to do a system wide update, a Palladium 2.0 if you will, that might be a great way to do it. Here is a system wide magic book, here is psionics, just to play test it a little before the new system.

I can see that.

Palladium's systems, being "Megaversal," so seem to lend themselves to generic sourcebooks at first glance. I mean, if you squint a bit, Palladium Magic, Palladium Pyschics, Palladium Martial Arts, Palladium Kitchen Sink, all make sense. But then it would be a lot like the GURPS line. I'm not certain the change wouldn't remove Palladium's specific charm. But I've had similar ideas, so there's that.

TtGD was open for a lot of MoM's development.

Yeah, you and I have had a least part of this discussion a few times.

[Warshield73]

I agree that making the magic truly universal would make it generic but that is not really what I am proposing. A system wide magic book would define terms and maybe set up most of the invocations and rituals including listing ingredients and types of artifacts needed.

Each core book would then take that and make it specific to the setting by creating OCCs, the specific artifacts, and levels of PPE available. They could even have modifiers for the spells in terms of range, damage, duration, PPE cost, even the availability of the spell. This would make it much easier to run magic in all PB games while avoiding the problem of making the settings too generic.

For the purposes of this conversation I think the advantage of a system like this would be giving clear distinctions between invocations and rituals and could even allow for some variations. For instance a particular spell might be a level 3 ritual, fairly easy to create like a simple protection circle but maybe the invocation for it would be 6th or even 7th level as the concentration needed to manifest it without physical ingredients.

[ShadowLogan]

What I would like, especially for BTS and Heroes but also for all other games, is a way for non-mages to cast rituals like you see on shows like Buffy and Supernatural. I do this with scrolls now but it would be better if there was a set system for this.

Well for rituals you only really need x1 magic user by RAW, everyone else could be vega-bonds who participate (Nega-psychics, Borgs, and similar likely can't).

Still magic items might be a way to perform Rituals w/o being a mage. We know magic items can function for (and exist to be used by) non-mages to perform/cast magic. Perhaps this is how you get non-mages to perform rituals, the use of a magic "device" is involved as part of the ritual (though here I would think you'd end up with at least two versions of the Ritual: one for mages and one for "devices"). Said device should be related to what the ritual is aiming to create. The "device" might need to be procured before hand (ex. a Maxpray Shamblr gem from CB1r has necromatic powers to do necromatic like rituals), though in some cases I could see the construction of the "device" as part of the ritual using highly detailed instructions (usually involving Circle/Pentagrams, but here it has to be done a certain highly specific way given even Summoners in PF can't just duplicate a Circle they find willy-nilly and how I would look for inspiration on to get non-mages doing magic rituals)

[Warshield73]

What I would like, especially for BTS and Heroes but also for all other games, is a way for non-mages to cast rituals like you see on shows like Buffy and Supernatural. I do this with scrolls now but it would be better if there was a set system for this.

Well for rituals you only really need x1 magic user by RAW, everyone else could be vega-bonds who participate (Nega-psychics, Borgs, and similar likely can't).

Still magic items might be a way to perform Rituals w/o being a mage. We know magic items can function for (and exist to be used by) non-mages to perform/cast magic. Perhaps this is how you get non-mages to perform rituals, the use of a magic "device" is involved as part of the ritual (though here I would think you'd end up with at least two versions of the Ritual: one for mages and one for "devices"). Said device should be related to what the ritual is aiming to create. The "device" might need to be procured before hand (ex. a Maxpray Shamblr gem from CB1r has necromatic powers to do necromatic like rituals), though in some cases I could see the construction of the "device" as part of the ritual using highly detailed instructions (usually involving Circle/Pentagrams, but here it has to be done a certain highly specific way given even Summoners in PF can't just duplicate a Circle they find willy-nilly and how I would look for inspiration on to get non-mages doing magic rituals)

This is where we get back to the "poorly defined" part of our conversation. For an actual spell caster what makes it a ritual and not just an invocation? I mean yes a mage can do a ritual all by there lonesome but what else do they need? Crystals and gems? Chalk or salt for a circle? A flower from the tallest mountain or vine from the deepest trench? A Coke and a smile? What do they need?

Here's a good example, we are told in the books that fairy wings are used in rituals. Which ones? To do what? What if, in order to cast a ritual, you needed something either expensive or hard to get. I was thinking specifically about things like talisman, scroll, or amulet when I first started this but I also go back to shows like Supernatural and Buffy/Angel. Rituals should be more than slightly up-powered invocations, they should have something more and maybe allow for some things you can't do with invocations.

Imagine if while preparing for an attack and the tech guys are laying out mines and digging pit traps the mage is laying down rituals. Maybe the mage set up a ritual that when he runs on one spot it teleports him to another so he can move through the battle field or they are expecting something big so he links 3 or 4 Annihilate rituals to a single activation point so he can light up the heavy hitter with something big. This could give the scholarly mages some added punch without turning them into Superman.

As for two different rituals I had something else in mind. You start with a ritual for the mage, this is what it needs and this is the invocation you must speak. If you are a non-mage then it may be a "simple" matter of researching the requirements and seeing if you can substitute. Maybe the mage can do it on their own but for normies they need 3. Maybe the mage needs one ruby but normies need 1 each. Maybe the mage can make the necessary circle out of iron but normies need pure gantrium.

Just the way I was looking to go.

[ShadowLogan]

I look at it this way, if the description of the magic involved doesn't state XYZ is used in the ritual it isn't used in the ritual. Now some magic disciplines are good about requirements (Circle Magic) while others leave a lot to be desired (Wizard Invocation in general). I'm going to assume you are talking about the "leave a lot to be desired category", but here I don't have any easy answer because I don't think there is one. PERSONALLY I view Invocations as either being an Spell or Ritual without the option to do it the other way (avoids the issue of requirements, unless specifics are spelled out to allow one to do both ways which I don't think exists) and avoids the issue of the Rituals taking longer to cast for in a lot of cases just a boost to the Save vs Magic target number (that may or may not apply).

The lines like you allude to about Faire Wings could also be "undocumented" use (giving GMs some freedom for "plot device" requirements) or could be referring to specific branches of magic (that may or may not be in a given setting). This line of thinking is supported by the example of the Maxpray CB1r pg166 artifacts which leads me to this conclusion as they discuss a Circle Magic example that doesn't exist (in PF2E main book, don't know about a SB, and Circle Magic isn't covered in Rifts) and also repeats about Summoner/Diabolists/Necromancers desire to acquire them.

As for the Buffy Rituals, I sort of lost interest in the show during the 2nd season and couldn't really get back into it regularly so I can't comment on specific instances other than maybe the demons (including vampires) have (PB) "mystic" level understanding of magic at minimum that allows them to do Rituals, and Giles and Willow could be considered magic users I thought. Never watched Supernatural so I can't comment there.

[Warshield73]

Having just rediscovered the cultists description in BtS1, it is possible something could be standardized from that.

I finally had a chance to look at my PDF of BtS1 and I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Could you be more specific or give a page number?

On the other hand looking for this got me back into BtS 1e and man I had forgotten all the good stuff in there on magic that is not in 2e because Beyond Arcanum hasn't come out.

I look at it this way, if the description of the magic involved doesn't state XYZ is used in the ritual it isn't used in the ritual. Now some magic disciplines are good about requirements (Circle Magic) while others leave a lot to be desired (Wizard Invocation in general). I'm going to assume you are talking about the "leave a lot to be desired category", but here I don't have any easy answer because I don't think there is one. PERSONALLY I view Invocations as either being an Spell or Ritual without the option to do it the other way (avoids the issue of requirements, unless specifics are spelled out to allow one to do both ways which I don't think exists) and avoids the issue of the Rituals taking longer to cast for in a lot of cases just a boost to the Save vs Magic target number (that may or may not apply).

Most of the spells I am referring to are the ones in general spell magic. It says in most games that each is available as either invocation or ritual but you must choose which one you want. In BtS1 the Archanist character actually has a lot of detail on this. You have certain number of spells to start so you choose those, then you roll dice and that tells you how many spells where you know both the invocation and ritual, the rest you must choose one. Now some spells say specifically Ritual next to it so I always assumed these were only ritual and no invocation is available. Things like create mummy, zombie or golem actually have some detailed description of the rituals including cost for the eye gems and age of the corpse but I don't think the rituals for most spells need this. A general list of what you need for different types of spell and how many ingredients per level of the spell would work for most.

As for the advantages of ritual taking linger for just the advantage of saving throw that can be a big deal. 17 over 12 is an increase of 25% on a 20 sided die. I had a player, who when interrogating prisoners, would use the ritual for words of truth or domination just to save on PPE. I agree it would be nice if ritual also provided a range, duration or damage bonus when applicable but as is the ritual still provides an advantage for no additional PPE.

For purposes of what I am talking about general rules on what a non-mage needs to do the ritual by spell level would work. Increase casting time, require a specific time of day, provide a percentile chance of failure or of the spell going badly (I tried to cast domination on a prisoner but accidentally cast it on one of the participants), just a few things to make it possible for normies to do some magic but still give advantage to mages.

The lines like you allude to about Faire Wings could also be "undocumented" use (giving GMs some freedom for "plot device" requirements) or could be referring to specific branches of magic (that may or may not be in a given setting). This line of thinking is supported by the example of the Maxpray CB1r pg166 artifacts which leads me to this conclusion as they discuss a Circle Magic example that doesn't exist (in PF2E main book, don't know about a SB, and Circle Magic isn't covered in Rifts) and also repeats about Summoner/Diabolists/Necromancers desire to acquire them.

I think this is why I wish ritual magic was completely separate from invocations. A mage should need to read the spell while performing the ritual and create symbols. It should be more difficult to just "figure out" a ritual than a spell but again that is just how I would see it.

As for the Buffy Rituals, I sort of lost interest in the show during the 2nd season and couldn't really get back into it regularly so I can't comment on specific instances other than maybe the demons (including vampires) have (PB) "mystic" level understanding of magic at minimum that allows them to do Rituals, and Giles and Willow could be considered magic users I thought. Never watched Supernatural so I can't comment there.

I think from Buffy I focus on things like the revocation of invitation to vampires ritual but supernatural they were constantly using rituals, especially to trap demons and eject angels from an area. They also opened rifts to other worlds occasionally but those were seriously difficult.

This is why I would like to see this in BtS and NB. The ability for ordinary people to use some magic would be really useful in those settings.

[thorr-kan]

Having just rediscovered the cultists description in BtS1, it is possible something could be standardized from that.

I finally had a chance to look at my PDF of BtS1 and I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Could you be more specific or give a page number?

On the other hand looking for this got me back into BtS 1e and man I had forgotten all the good stuff in there on magic that is not in 2e because Beyond Arcanum hasn't come out.

Sorry; been awhile.

I was looking at the Step Four and Step Five on p93-97 of the paperback. Specifically, refer to the "Cults are a Special Case!" section, p94, and the "Ritual Magic and Cults", "Limitations of Ceremonial Magic", and "Summoning and Cults" sections, p95-97.

[Warshield73]

Having just rediscovered the cultists description in BtS1, it is possible something could be standardized from that.

I finally had a chance to look at my PDF of BtS1 and I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Could you be more specific or give a page number?

On the other hand looking for this got me back into BtS 1e and man I had forgotten all the good stuff in there on magic that is not in 2e because Beyond Arcanum hasn't come out.

Sorry; been awhile.

I was looking at the Step Four and Step Five on p93-97 of the paperback. Specifically, refer to the "Cults are a Special Case!" section, p94, and the "Ritual Magic and Cults", "Limitations of Ceremonial Magic", and "Summoning and Cults" sections, p95-97.

No problem, like I said it was a good excuse to reread the magic information in BTS 1e and there is some good stuff in there that you can't find in other books.

[thorr-kan]

No problem, like I said it was a good excuse to reread the magic information in BTS 1e and there is some good stuff in there that you can't find in other books.

The effects of ley lines on mages and psychics and magic have been modified and simplified in the more recent games. But still a lot of good info there.

[Warshield73]

The effects of LL being changed is one thing but some of the stuff In BTS 1e is, as near as I can tell, completely unique. The main thing I noticed about five types of places of power. Now in Rifts, RMB and RUE, only really talk about ley lines, nexus points and triads/triangles. 1e also talks about transitional places of power, which some of that is in Rifts but not entirely, but the big one to me is rips in magic. These are places where PPE bleeds through like a tiny LL but on a few feet around. These all come with charts and tables to help you create places of power and of course the usual examples for them.

I also spent some time in NB Through the Glass Darkly and there, in chapter 7, are magical sites. Legendary and minor sites are interesting but the general sites are I think the most useful for mages and might be good as places to use rituals. Places like blood temples, sacred groves and even just haunted houses all with examples are great for use in any game.

Again this is where I come back to the idea for a Palladium Book of magic that could be used for all games. How great would it be if you had all of these places spelled out, including the effects or spells and rituals, in one book and then all a new book has to do is just give setting specific examples.

Still good resources for those of you looking to spice up your games a little.

[thorr-kan]

I will get back to this, I swear.

The effects of LL being changed is one thing but some of the stuff In BTS 1e is, as near as I can tell, completely unique. <SNIP!> ...but the big one to me is rips in magic.

[
Unique it is. Rips of magic are a prime and well-loved (by me) example.

I also spent some time in NB Through the Glass Darkly and there, in chapter 7, are magical sites. Legendary and minor sites are interesting but the general sites are I think the most useful for mages and might be good as places to use rituals. Places like blood temples, sacred groves and even just haunted houses all with examples are great for use in any game.

That section is heavy on the atmosphere and light on the mechanics, but I agree with its usefulness.

Again this is where I come back to the idea for a Palladium Book of magic that could be used for all games. How great would it be if you had all of these places spelled out, including the effects or spells and rituals, in one book and then all a new book has to do is just give setting specific examples.

I'm with you. If I ever got tapped to manage a Megaverse 2.0 RPG, I have Ideas (tm).