Forums of the Megaverse®

RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

Since it is Palladium that defines what the canonical spell prices are, yes, they are.

The price of something can be affected by lots of elements. By cannon most mages protect the secerates of magic. So that means that A not every mage will havethe spell, and B that the mages that know the spell may not be sharing.

In addtion if you look under the section of RUE that covers learning spells, you see a list of sources, magic shops, guilds, adault and ancheint dragons elder mages (9th level). and magic kingdomes "may" have colledges. Then goes on to say that normaly only low level spells are commonaly avaible. In other words they show that magic spells are gained from specialist or verry high level mages. That said people protect the high level spell knowldege.

So if not every one knows the spell to start with and most the people that have spell are not sharing it that means you have a verry verry low supply, while almost any mage that can cast it is a potenal demand. So out of 100,000 mages that want said spell every year only 1-2 may get the spell, and they are not all that likly to share it with others. That shows a mind set that justifes the high price. Mages often care about more than money heck I realy do not see mages wanting for much by selling servises they can make a perty good living. How much whold you pay to have a lost love one braght back from the dead or to have a safe room in your house where demons can't touch you? By sharing secerts that can make you good money you create potental rivals.

Subjugator wrote:Since it is Palladium that defines what the canonical spell prices are, yes, they are.

I think you misunderstood my question. Given the spell prices listed in the books, do you feel that those prices are about right or do they under-value or over-value spells.

I'll go back to the original post and make this a poll (assuming I can do that after the fact).

--flatline

Ninjabunny wrote:

Subjugator wrote:Since it is Palladium that defines what the canonical spell prices are, yes, they are.

What Subby said.

Except his answer doesn't match the question. I'm pretty sure he thought I was asking "should prices really BE that high?" when what I was really asking (maybe poorly asked, hence his confusion) was "do people really think that the prices listed are unreasonably high?"

The reason I'm curious is because on and off I see posts complaining about the high price of spells, yet when I look at the prices I'm unimpressed since raising $1M doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

--flatline

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

These are just the Absolute Lowest a mage will agree to when setting a price for teaching a spell to another mage. Most often the prices will be set even higher. Remember that spells of these levels represent years and possibly decades of research by a mage. So the mage will seek to get the most out of it if they teach such a spell.

There will be mages (Most) that will not teach said spells no matter what money or treasure is offered. His spells are his tools for working. And if he just "hand them out" to any joe shmoe for a pittiling then he will loose work and other mages will seek him out and kill him.
------------
If I had a second vote I would of voted "Wait, your GM lets you buy spells?" too.

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

I actually think those prices are lowballing it. Most 10-15 spells should be worth more than mecha. 30,000,000-100,000,000 is probablly more reasonable.

All depends on the spell and the game/GM. IMO
The prices listed are the suggested prices. They are not set in stone.

Ninjabunny wrote:I do have to wonder if the rue list lowest price they would go how high would they go?

I hear Nurni enterpises can get you the spell, just sighn over your whole solor system and every one it. well if you have the authorty for it, athou knowing nurni they might still enforce it even if you did not.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

These are just the Absolute Lowest a mage will agree to when setting a price for teaching a spell to another mage. Most often the prices will be set even higher. Remember that spells of these levels represent years and possibly decades of research by a mage. So the mage will seek to get the most out of it if they teach such a spell.

There will be mages (Most) that will not teach said spells no matter what money or treasure is offered. His spells are his tools for working. And if he just "hand them out" to any joe shmoe for a pittiling then he will loose work and other mages will seek him out and kill him.
------------
If I had a second vote I would of voted "Wait, your GM lets you buy spells?" too.

So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

I think the prices are reasonable. Though to say that raising a million credits is easy is a load of malarkey (and i know you can come up with a bunch of ways you could, and we would disagree on them).

I say so because most of the population can't do it. There are exceptional people who can do it fairly easily, but they're rare (proficient business men, high level PC's with amazing skills/abilities to peddle, essentially anyone with the resources and know-how).

Also, a great deal of that is up to the GM.

flatline wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

These are just the Absolute Lowest a mage will agree to when setting a price for teaching a spell to another mage. Most often the prices will be set even higher. Remember that spells of these levels represent years and possibly decades of research by a mage. So the mage will seek to get the most out of it if they teach such a spell.

There will be mages (Most) that will not teach said spells no matter what money or treasure is offered. His spells are his tools for working. And if he just "hand them out" to any joe shmoe for a pittiling then he will loose work and other mages will seek him out and kill him.
------------
If I had a second vote I would of voted "Wait, your GM lets you buy spells?" too.

So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

If I am GMing your staring money has to be spent in game. IE spening it is not and hand waved as part of creation unless it was a special budget to get someting at start such as in N&SS X for cyberware, or using the creation rules for robots.

Nekira Sudacne wrote:

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

I actually think those prices are lowballing it. Most 10-15 spells should be worth more than mecha. 30,000,000-100,000,000 is probablly more reasonable.

Being able to change the weather at will, raising the dead, creating high mdc materials out of incredibly cheap materials, granting spell casting power to laymen, creating magic items for free quickly.

Nekira's prices seem about right.

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

RUE also states:
They are rarely available for sale; 1-10% chance.

Also:
Add a 10% premium for offensive spells and add 20% for metamorphosis and summoning spells.

And:
Prices will change from establishment to establishment, some charging 10% less, others 50% to 200% higher.

So, depending on what spell you're after, it could cost CR 3,200,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

For some spells, yes.
But I tend to think that they're LOW for a lot of spells.
Really, I think that spell function and capability should affect the price a lot more than just the spell level.
Summon & Control Rodents would cost 1.2 to 3.2 million credits, for example... which seems pretty high considering that all it does is summon rats.
Meanwhile, for 90,000, you can learn to make yourself invisible... which seems to not only be generally cooler, but to have a lot more utility and demand.

On the other hand, spells like Talisman or Close Rift, etc. should cost a lot MORE.

flatline wrote:So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

1) No one has ever asked me if they could do so, so I don't know. (spells)
2) No one has ever asked me if they could do so, so I don't know. (equipment)

The last few times I GM'ed they were pick up games.

flatline wrote:So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

Most Mage classes are "born" with a certain number of spells right off the bat, and so officially don't necessarily have to be "paid" for.

While many Adventurer Classes also have a set of starting gear as part of their OCC, and also don't usually have to pay for their starter kits.

And of course if either the Mage or the Adventurer wants to buy extras, they'll have to pay (with money or otherwise).


Your point?

Panomas wrote:

Damian Magecraft wrote:All depends on the spell and the game/GM. IMO
The prices listed are the suggested prices. They are not set in stone.

Agree-

And prices are more dependent on a mages desperation to sell them than anything; If you should find a desperate mage be sure and thank your GM-

well I did encounter a mage desperate to sell a spell once. Turns out he was a well trained CS agent and his training room was raided by 25 CS SF in 15 min. So glad I did not take him up on his offer like the other guy did.

I tend not to trust when some one is desperate to give you something good for way to good a deal.

Funny. Out of 18 votes, 16 of them are in favor of either more or the same level of restriction that exists right now. That would tend to indicate that your perspective on this is not the popular one, Flatline.

...not that popularity is necessarily an indicator of rightness. In the various societies of the world, slavery has been quite popular at one time or another, and I view it as anathema.

what happened to the normal /sub at the end of your posts? Who are you and what you do with subjugator?

Thought I'd included it.

/Sub

(the /Sub is a coding thing - the / means 'end', and sub refers to 'subroutine' in old 6502 assembler code...so it's my little dumb joke of 'end sub(routine)' which is a way of saying, 'end Dennis' post')

Subjugator wrote:Thought I'd included it.

/Sub

(the /Sub is a coding thing - the / means 'end', and sub refers to 'subroutine' in old 6502 assembler code...so it's my little dumb joke of 'end sub(routine)' which is a way of saying, 'end Dennis' post')

I know it was your way of saying you where done posting just your last few posts lacked it for some reason. Every thing ok?

Yup...just doing homework.



/Sub

Ugh...I just signed a homework post with /Sub.

Had to erase it.

Subjugator wrote:Funny. Out of 18 votes, 16 of them are in favor of either more or the same level of restriction that exists right now. That would tend to indicate that your perspective on this is not the popular one, Flatline.

...not that popularity is necessarily an indicator of rightness. In the various societies of the world, slavery has been quite popular at one time or another, and I view it as anathema.

ummm... so far as i can tell, his "perspective" is that he doesn't think they're really expensive at all. it's a bit of a judgment call, but statements like "Do people really feel that spell prices are high?" and "yet when I look at the prices I'm unimpressed since raising $1M doesn't seem like a big deal to me" would seem to indicate that he doesn't think they're too expensive at all. if anything, i would say that his "perspective" is most likely that the spells should cost *more* than that, not less.

you really should read more carefully before you go assigning agendas to other people. so far, both of your answers in this thread have made me wonder if you even bothered reading before you responded.

@ OP: i tend to agree with KC on this one. some of the spells are worth that much. some should probably be more, or even just not available in the vast majority of cases (for example, i would consider anti-magic cloud to be a spell that you teach only to someone that you REALLY trust. in contrast, something like illusory terrain, while powerful, is not nearly as worrisome. and spells like amulet, create magic scroll, and talisman should fetch even higher prices because it is likely that those spells are the teacher's main source of income).

and, some should probably be less. like the summon and control rodents spell that KC mentioned, and i would probably include id barrier as another example.

although on the other hand, it would be rather ironic if those unimpressive spells cost so much simply because nobody ever bothers learning them (i mean, really, if you manage to hit level 11 with your ley line walker or whatever, are you going to pick the worst spell, or the best one?), and therefore trainers are rare

i also find it rather amusing that summoning spells are the most expensive kind. why, you ask? because high level summoning spells should be the most commonly known of all kinds of spells in the setting. a standard shifter can pick up a level 15 summoning spell at level 2 if they want.

Subjugator wrote:Ugh...I just signed a homework post with /Sub.

Had to erase it.

LOL my bad just genualy a sudden change in behavor is a warning sighn. Usaly when I notice it in a another soldier I have to ask- Are you planing on hurting yourself? Do you have a plan?

I usaly post durring comercial breaks so I have to read and post fast so I do not normaly edit what I say. That is the reason I am the master of type-os.

Shark_Force wrote:although on the other hand, it would be rather ironic if those unimpressive spells cost so much simply because nobody ever bothers learning them (i mean, really, if you manage to hit level 11 with your ley line walker or whatever, are you going to pick the worst spell, or the best one?), and therefore trainers are rare

i also find it rather amusing that summoning spells are the most expensive kind. why, you ask? because high level summoning spells should be the most commonly known of all kinds of spells in the setting. a standard shifter can pick up a level 15 summoning spell at level 2 if they want.

Good points!

Shark_Force wrote:ummm... so far as i can tell, his "perspective" is that he doesn't think they're really expensive at all. it's a bit of a judgment call, but statements like "Do people really feel that spell prices are high?" and "yet when I look at the prices I'm unimpressed since raising $1M doesn't seem like a big deal to me" would seem to indicate that he doesn't think they're too expensive at all. if anything, i would say that his "perspective" is most likely that the spells should cost *more* than that, not less.

you really should read more carefully before you go assigning agendas to other people. so far, both of your answers in this thread have made me wonder if you even bothered reading before you responded.

Given that I'm neck deep in another conversation with him where he's supporting the idea of a movement in Rifts earth to sell spells for five credits (or less) and has said the following:

flatline wrote:This is why I feel the high prices for highly useful spells is unsustainable. No ideological movement required.

I daresay YOU should read more carefully before you start telling others who are wrong.

/Sub

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:ummm... so far as i can tell, his "perspective" is that he doesn't think they're really expensive at all. it's a bit of a judgment call, but statements like "Do people really feel that spell prices are high?" and "yet when I look at the prices I'm unimpressed since raising $1M doesn't seem like a big deal to me" would seem to indicate that he doesn't think they're too expensive at all. if anything, i would say that his "perspective" is most likely that the spells should cost *more* than that, not less.

you really should read more carefully before you go assigning agendas to other people. so far, both of your answers in this thread have made me wonder if you even bothered reading before you responded.

Given that I'm neck deep in another conversation with him where he's supporting the idea of a movement in Rifts earth to sell spells for five credits (or less) and has said the following:

flatline wrote:This is why I feel the high prices for highly useful spells is unsustainable. No ideological movement required.

I daresay YOU should read more carefully before you start telling others who are wrong.

/Sub

based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Shark_Force wrote:

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:ummm... so far as i can tell, his "perspective" is that he doesn't think they're really expensive at all. it's a bit of a judgment call, but statements like "Do people really feel that spell prices are high?" and "yet when I look at the prices I'm unimpressed since raising $1M doesn't seem like a big deal to me" would seem to indicate that he doesn't think they're too expensive at all. if anything, i would say that his "perspective" is most likely that the spells should cost *more* than that, not less.

you really should read more carefully before you go assigning agendas to other people. so far, both of your answers in this thread have made me wonder if you even bothered reading before you responded.

Given that I'm neck deep in another conversation with him where he's supporting the idea of a movement in Rifts earth to sell spells for five credits (or less) and has said the following:

flatline wrote:This is why I feel the high prices for highly useful spells is unsustainable. No ideological movement required.

I daresay YOU should read more carefully before you start telling others who are wrong.

/Sub

based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Sounds more like he's simply arguing the blanket cost based on level is unsustainable, because some spells are going to be popular enough that they'd drive the price down (or at least should).

Shark_Force wrote:based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Then maybe you should find out what YOU are talking about before you tell someone else they're not finding out what they're talking about.

He's said more than once in the other thread that he thinks they're priced too high.

Sorry you opened your mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about. I'd suggest finding out before you try to instruct others in the future.

/Sub

Shark_Force wrote:

Subjugator wrote:Funny. Out of 18 votes, 16 of them are in favor of either more or the same level of restriction that exists right now. That would tend to indicate that your perspective on this is not the popular one, Flatline.

...not that popularity is necessarily an indicator of rightness. In the various societies of the world, slavery has been quite popular at one time or another, and I view it as anathema.

ummm... so far as i can tell, his "perspective" is that he doesn't think they're really expensive at all. it's a bit of a judgment call, but statements like "Do people really feel that spell prices are high?" and "yet when I look at the prices I'm unimpressed since raising $1M doesn't seem like a big deal to me" would seem to indicate that he doesn't think they're too expensive at all. if anything, i would say that his "perspective" is most likely that the spells should cost *more* than that, not less.

you really should read more carefully before you go assigning agendas to other people. so far, both of your answers in this thread have made me wonder if you even bothered reading before you responded.

@ OP: i tend to agree with KC on this one. some of the spells are worth that much. some should probably be more, or even just not available in the vast majority of cases (for example, i would consider anti-magic cloud to be a spell that you teach only to someone that you REALLY trust. in contrast, something like illusory terrain, while powerful, is not nearly as worrisome. and spells like amulet, create magic scroll, and talisman should fetch even higher prices because it is likely that those spells are the teacher's main source of income).

and, some should probably be less. like the summon and control rodents spell that KC mentioned, and i would probably include id barrier as another example.

although on the other hand, it would be rather ironic if those unimpressive spells cost so much simply because nobody ever bothers learning them (i mean, really, if you manage to hit level 11 with your ley line walker or whatever, are you going to pick the worst spell, or the best one?), and therefore trainers are rare

i also find it rather amusing that summoning spells are the most expensive kind. why, you ask? because high level summoning spells should be the most commonly known of all kinds of spells in the setting. a standard shifter can pick up a level 15 summoning spell at level 2 if they want.

Ok tell me how---

RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

Is not saying that he thinks they are to high?

does he need to add that for you to understand him.

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Then maybe you should find out what YOU are talking about before you tell someone else they're not finding out what they're talking about.

He's said more than once in the other thread that he thinks they're priced too high.

Sorry you opened your mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about. I'd suggest finding out before you try to instruct others in the future.

/Sub

naw much more fun to say what ever you want and then change you mind 50 times a min.

I think I just broke the sarcasim meeter.

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Then maybe you should find out what YOU are talking about before you tell someone else they're not finding out what they're talking about.

He's said more than once in the other thread that he thinks they're priced too high.

Sorry you opened your mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about. I'd suggest finding out before you try to instruct others in the future.

/Sub

yeah, assuming you're talking about the "free magic" thread, i see him mentioning that he thinks that some spells should cost less (he specifically mentions talisman, which i tend to disagree with since that's a spell which you can use to make money by means other than selling it, but that's neither here nor there; he makes no statements in that thread that i could find where he believed that spells in general, or spells other than talisman in particular, are too expensive, merely that certain spells should be more commonly offered, more commonly sought after, and should probably cost less due to more competition... with no indication regarding how much less he considers appropriate. considering there is a range of costs for spells, this actually fits in just fine with canon, so... yeah. i don't know where you're carrying baggage from, but so far as i can tell, you're probably attributing other peoples' opinions to him).

and ironically, while going through that thread, i do see him stating that he thinks paying 40-50k for a low level spell (ie the official canon value, not a significantly reduced value as you seem to think he's insisting would be reasonable) seems pretty reasonable in a world where that's how much you sell a laser rifle for.

you got any actual quotes to back that claim up about what he thinks? because i'm not seeing him making any sort of broad, sweeping statements other than the fact that he generally doesn't consider the scenario as described to have enough information, and that some spells should have costs brought down by competition (which they likely will, in a free market... like, say, atlantis, or phase world. not that such a free market necessarily exists in north america. precisely which spells those are is mostly left to the readers' imagination).

Shark_Force wrote:

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Then maybe you should find out what YOU are talking about before you tell someone else they're not finding out what they're talking about.

He's said more than once in the other thread that he thinks they're priced too high.

Sorry you opened your mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about. I'd suggest finding out before you try to instruct others in the future.

/Sub

yeah, assuming you're talking about the "free magic" thread, i see him mentioning that he thinks that some spells should cost less (he specifically mentions talisman, which i tend to disagree with since that's a spell which you can use to make money by means other than selling it, but that's neither here nor there; he makes no statements in that thread that i could find where he believed that spells in general, or spells other than talisman in particular, are too expensive, merely that certain spells should be more commonly offered, more commonly sought after, and should probably cost less due to more competition... with no indication regarding how much less he considers appropriate. considering there is a range of costs for spells, this actually fits in just fine with canon, so... yeah. i don't know where you're carrying baggage from, but so far as i can tell, you're probably attributing other peoples' opinions to him).

and ironically, while going through that thread, i do see him stating that he thinks paying 40-50k for a low level spell (ie the official canon value, not a significantly reduced value as you seem to think he's insisting would be reasonable) seems pretty reasonable in a world where that's how much you sell a laser rifle for.

you got any actual quotes to back that claim up about what he thinks? because i'm not seeing him making any sort of broad, sweeping statements other than the fact that he generally doesn't consider the scenario as described to have enough information, and that some spells should have costs brought down by competition (which they likely will, in a free market... like, say, atlantis, or phase world. not that such a free market necessarily exists in north america. precisely which spells those are is mostly left to the readers' imagination).

His opening statement where he ask if the cost was high.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

Athou formed as a question it is direct link to him posting the rue price.
So he is looking for people to agree with him that they are high.

Blue_Lion wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Then maybe you should find out what YOU are talking about before you tell someone else they're not finding out what they're talking about.

He's said more than once in the other thread that he thinks they're priced too high.

Sorry you opened your mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about. I'd suggest finding out before you try to instruct others in the future.

/Sub

yeah, assuming you're talking about the "free magic" thread, i see him mentioning that he thinks that some spells should cost less (he specifically mentions talisman, which i tend to disagree with since that's a spell which you can use to make money by means other than selling it, but that's neither here nor there; he makes no statements in that thread that i could find where he believed that spells in general, or spells other than talisman in particular, are too expensive, merely that certain spells should be more commonly offered, more commonly sought after, and should probably cost less due to more competition... with no indication regarding how much less he considers appropriate. considering there is a range of costs for spells, this actually fits in just fine with canon, so... yeah. i don't know where you're carrying baggage from, but so far as i can tell, you're probably attributing other peoples' opinions to him).

and ironically, while going through that thread, i do see him stating that he thinks paying 40-50k for a low level spell (ie the official canon value, not a significantly reduced value as you seem to think he's insisting would be reasonable) seems pretty reasonable in a world where that's how much you sell a laser rifle for.

you got any actual quotes to back that claim up about what he thinks? because i'm not seeing him making any sort of broad, sweeping statements other than the fact that he generally doesn't consider the scenario as described to have enough information, and that some spells should have costs brought down by competition (which they likely will, in a free market... like, say, atlantis, or phase world. not that such a free market necessarily exists in north america. precisely which spells those are is mostly left to the readers' imagination).

His opening statement where he ask if the cost was high.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

Athou formed as a question it is direct link to him posting the rue price.
So he is looking for people to agree with him that they are high.

No, actually that comes across as more of an incredulous 'Do people really feel spell prices are high?', not that flatline actually thinks them to be high. He's asking if they feel they're high because he doesn't believe that they are.

Nightmask wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:

Subjugator wrote:

Shark_Force wrote:based on what i'm reading in this thread, his opinion is that spells are not very expensive. you can bring your baggage from wherever you want, but there is absolutely nothing here to indicate he feels spells are expensive, or that they should be cheaper.

Then maybe you should find out what YOU are talking about before you tell someone else they're not finding out what they're talking about.

He's said more than once in the other thread that he thinks they're priced too high.

Sorry you opened your mouth when you didn't know what you were talking about. I'd suggest finding out before you try to instruct others in the future.

/Sub

yeah, assuming you're talking about the "free magic" thread, i see him mentioning that he thinks that some spells should cost less (he specifically mentions talisman, which i tend to disagree with since that's a spell which you can use to make money by means other than selling it, but that's neither here nor there; he makes no statements in that thread that i could find where he believed that spells in general, or spells other than talisman in particular, are too expensive, merely that certain spells should be more commonly offered, more commonly sought after, and should probably cost less due to more competition... with no indication regarding how much less he considers appropriate. considering there is a range of costs for spells, this actually fits in just fine with canon, so... yeah. i don't know where you're carrying baggage from, but so far as i can tell, you're probably attributing other peoples' opinions to him).

and ironically, while going through that thread, i do see him stating that he thinks paying 40-50k for a low level spell (ie the official canon value, not a significantly reduced value as you seem to think he's insisting would be reasonable) seems pretty reasonable in a world where that's how much you sell a laser rifle for.

you got any actual quotes to back that claim up about what he thinks? because i'm not seeing him making any sort of broad, sweeping statements other than the fact that he generally doesn't consider the scenario as described to have enough information, and that some spells should have costs brought down by competition (which they likely will, in a free market... like, say, atlantis, or phase world. not that such a free market necessarily exists in north america. precisely which spells those are is mostly left to the readers' imagination).

His opening statement where he ask if the cost was high.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

Athou formed as a question it is direct link to him posting the rue price.
So he is looking for people to agree with him that they are high.

No, actually that comes across as more of an incredulous 'Do people really feel spell prices are high?', not that flatline actually thinks them to be high. He's asking if they feel they're high because he doesn't believe that they are.

I am not shure where you getting that the statement is worded in a way that bias that is high. Even without a posting history from him, the fact he asking in that mater shows a preconcluded notion on his part. He did not ask if it was off or wrong he asked if people feel tht it was high. So the Idea that it was high was already in him that it was like that.

Blue_Lion wrote:

Nightmask wrote:No, actually that comes across as more of an incredulous 'Do people really feel spell prices are high?', not that flatline actually thinks them to be high. He's asking if they feel they're high because he doesn't believe that they are.

I am not shure where you getting that the statement is worded in a way that bias that is high. Even without a posting history from him, the fact he asking in that mater shows a preconcluded notion on his part. He did not ask if it was off or wrong he asked if people feel tht it was high. So the Idea that it was high was already in him that it was like that.

No, the asking of the question does not show a pre-concluded notion on his part. The most one can perhaps conclude is that he's got a feeling people thought the prices were too high and was expressing his disbelief that that was the case, one certainly can't conclude that he feels they're too high in fact the opposite would be the conclusion one would have to arrive at.

I have a crazy thaght how about we wait tell he logs on and says what he thinks himself. Rather han every one guessing if he is the sorce let him clear it up.

Subjugator wrote:Funny. Out of 18 votes, 16 of them are in favor of either more or the same level of restriction that exists right now. That would tend to indicate that your perspective on this is not the popular one, Flatline.

I think you are mistaken about what my position is. I am one of the votes for "Too Low", at least with regards to the highest level spells. The prices for low and mid level spells are fine.

From a game play perspective, it bothers me that a 15th level spell can be purchased for less than a typical suit of power armor.

My personal preference in-game is:
Levels 1-10, as listed
Levels 11-15, $1M - $30M, based on the utility and rarity of the spell

--flatline

Having caught up with what was posted while I was asleep, I see that there is a lot of confusion about where I actually stand on this.

I'm sure that some of the confusion must come from the fact that in other threads, I've repeatedly expressed the opinion that super desirable spells like Talisman should be priced lower than they are, at least in stable economies. It's okay if this thread decides it wants to explore that idea, but that was not my intent for this thread.

--flatline

Blue_Lion wrote:

flatline wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

These are just the Absolute Lowest a mage will agree to when setting a price for teaching a spell to another mage. Most often the prices will be set even higher. Remember that spells of these levels represent years and possibly decades of research by a mage. So the mage will seek to get the most out of it if they teach such a spell.

There will be mages (Most) that will not teach said spells no matter what money or treasure is offered. His spells are his tools for working. And if he just "hand them out" to any joe shmoe for a pittiling then he will loose work and other mages will seek him out and kill him.
------------
If I had a second vote I would of voted "Wait, your GM lets you buy spells?" too.

So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

If I am GMing your staring money has to be spent in game. IE spening it is not and hand waved as part of creation unless it was a special budget to get someting at start such as in N&SS X for cyberware, or using the creation rules for robots.

That's fair. I'm cool with with "yes, yes" and "no, no". It's only when those questions are answered "no, yes" or "yes, no" that I start to suspect a double standard.

--flatline

What about the free magic movement sorry I just had too

I have never had a character ask if he could spend his starting cash on more spells. Most starting cash is under 20,000 which would be a spell of 4th level or less, which most spell casting classes that can buy spells can get access to either in generation, or soon thereafter. So I wouldn't have a problem with it. I think the most starting coin one can start out with (barring Altess, which I'll ignore) is the Temporal Wizard at 180,000 credits with max rolling. But, they have access to everything as it is anyway, so what's the big deal with one or two more spells?

I like the price list for spells and I think it's just fine the way it is. I look at it in a few ways though:

1. Yes, it is a price list and for some spells and some spell casters, this is the credit amount they will want for a spell. And you might scoff at someone paying a million credits for, say, Superior Teleport. But there are spell casters that would take it. Like an Ancient Dragon who was willing to trade a spell for a million credits in gold bars.

2. It's also a barometer for converting funds to work. Says I have an NPC willing to trade Reality Flux for some service. So I take the amount of the spell (500,00 in this case) and use that as a guide for creating an adventure where at the end of it, that would be the payout. This is also something that would happen pretty regularly. Yeah, a high level spell represents a large investment in time research and whatever for a wizard. But that same wizard, while researching his NEXT spell, might realize he'd rather pay someone to bring him the Coconut of Quendor that he requires rather that leaving home to find it himself.

flatline wrote:Having caught up with what was posted while I was asleep, I see that there is a lot of confusion about where I actually stand on this.

I'm sure that some of the confusion must come from the fact that in other threads, I've repeatedly expressed the opinion that super desirable spells like Talisman should be priced lower than they are, at least in stable economies. It's okay if this thread decides it wants to explore that idea, but that was not my intent for this thread.

--flatline

Sorry about confusing what you said thanks for clearing it up.

flatline wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

flatline wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

These are just the Absolute Lowest a mage will agree to when setting a price for teaching a spell to another mage. Most often the prices will be set even higher. Remember that spells of these levels represent years and possibly decades of research by a mage. So the mage will seek to get the most out of it if they teach such a spell.

There will be mages (Most) that will not teach said spells no matter what money or treasure is offered. His spells are his tools for working. And if he just "hand them out" to any joe shmoe for a pittiling then he will loose work and other mages will seek him out and kill him.
------------
If I had a second vote I would of voted "Wait, your GM lets you buy spells?" too.

So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

If I am GMing your staring money has to be spent in game. IE spening it is not and hand waved as part of creation unless it was a special budget to get someting at start such as in N&SS X for cyberware, or using the creation rules for robots.

That's fair. I'm cool with with "yes, yes" and "no, no". It's only when those questions are answered "no, yes" or "yes, no" that I start to suspect a double standard.

--flatline

When I do GM I try to see to it that every one is held to the same standard, but the important thing in the game is every one has fun.

Gryphon wrote:I haven't had anyone try to spend their starting case, but I have had at least three cases of characters reducing their starting funds by a half, or in one case down to a tenth, and deliberately choosing gear that was sub-optimal. I am not entirely certain why one of them did this, since he was basically kitted out by the party immediately after arriving, but the other two wanted to have a certain degree of poverty bought about by hard luck on their part, so they were willing to hop on board with any group really.

As for spell costs, I have to admit that some spells shouldn't be priced by their level or P.P.E. costs, but by their extreme utility. Create Scroll, Talisman and similar, as well as Teleport and such. Straight up damage spells are a dime a dozen, and their cost should reflect that, but some of them are way, way more utilitarian in nature, such as sub particle acceleration, which not only deal really decent damage, but are also useable to recharge everything up to mega-damage scale e-clips.

I would also like a much stronger indicator of what spells are actually rare, rather than having to guess based on level and utility.

A strong indicator would be nice...
But seeing as no other magic system has ever thought to do this I doubt it will ever happen.

Blue_Lion wrote:

flatline wrote:

Blue_Lion wrote:

flatline wrote:
So during character creation, do you allow mages to spend their starting money on spells using the prices listed?
If not, do you allow characters to purchase weapons and equipment using the prices listed?

If you didn't answer both those questions the same way, why not?

--flatline

If I am GMing your staring money has to be spent in game. IE spening it is not and hand waved as part of creation unless it was a special budget to get someting at start such as in N&SS X for cyberware, or using the creation rules for robots.

That's fair. I'm cool with with "yes, yes" and "no, no". It's only when those questions are answered "no, yes" or "yes, no" that I start to suspect a double standard.

--flatline

When I do GM I try to see to it that every one is held to the same standard, but the important thing in the game is every one has fun.

Sounds like you have the right priorities.

Most of the time the GMs I've played with let us spend our starting funds during character generation if we wanted to. We just had to clear each purchase with them. Looking at one of my old temporal wizards, it looks like I purchased Cleanse ($10k), Telekinesis ($20k), Mend the Broken ($40k) and Sustain ($40k) for a grand total of $110k. Temporal Wizards start with 3d6 x $10k in starting funds, so I must have had an average roll. If I had had a better roll, I probably would have purchased Energy Field ($30k) since that's my goto spell in combat. Or maybe I purchased some other equipment (I can't tell from this sheet what the character's starting equipment was).

--flatline

Damian Magecraft wrote:

Gryphon wrote:I haven't had anyone try to spend their starting case, but I have had at least three cases of characters reducing their starting funds by a half, or in one case down to a tenth, and deliberately choosing gear that was sub-optimal. I am not entirely certain why one of them did this, since he was basically kitted out by the party immediately after arriving, but the other two wanted to have a certain degree of poverty bought about by hard luck on their part, so they were willing to hop on board with any group really.

As for spell costs, I have to admit that some spells shouldn't be priced by their level or P.P.E. costs, but by their extreme utility. Create Scroll, Talisman and similar, as well as Teleport and such. Straight up damage spells are a dime a dozen, and their cost should reflect that, but some of them are way, way more utilitarian in nature, such as sub particle acceleration, which not only deal really decent damage, but are also useable to recharge everything up to mega-damage scale e-clips.

I would also like a much stronger indicator of what spells are actually rare, rather than having to guess based on level and utility.

A strong indicator would be nice...
But seeing as no other magic system has ever thought to do this I doubt it will ever happen.

that whould be a large ammount of effort from the game desiners to make shure that it matched how desirble they wanted the spells. I do not think it whould be verry likly to accure.

The rules aren't very good for spell costs and nor should they be. Different spells of the same level should have different prices depending on rarity and I wouldn't expect the writers to go to the effort of assigning costs to every spell. I'd rather the books ignore the prices completely and leave it in the hands of the GM.
A level 2 Ley Line Walker can meditate on a Ley Line for 48 hours and then walk away with a Spell of Legend. Using those silly rules, that LLW can then sell that knowledge and retire from adventuring quite happily. The rules allow for this but the GM shouldn't and that causes issues in the game. That spell may be a Spell of Legend, but it should also be extremely common considering the generic caster class gets it at a very low level - availability matters far more than spell level and the rules don't cater very well for that.

flatline wrote:RUE says that the price for a spell that is level 10 through level 15 is nominally between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Do people really feel that spell prices are high?

--flatline

The price isn't the real crime, the real crime is that it takes 2 days per spell level to learn each of those spells. Like the rest of the party is just going to wait for you...

Rifts as written is pretty anti magic.