Schools of magic

image: twitter - @ahruon

From the gamist point of view, there are plenty reasons to divide magic into colors in an RPG

- increased replayability

- increased difference between various PC casters

- increased customization and sense of identity. Say that novice wizards start with one color, expert can add a second and masters can add a third That makes for organic character customization which comes up through gameplay, not at character creation. Much more if you pair it with all or some spells being "found" in-game.

- different types of wizards build world. Factions, tensions, zones on the map that belong to ones or others. The whole Kanto is built over making zones for each pokemon type, but the same can be said about Ravnica.

- the opportunity to create different legendary spells or magic items tailored to specific types, which can be quested for by their respective PCs. This type of "item hunting" is one of the best things you can have when you play a sandbox.

And, lets face it, I want to create something inspired by Pokemon Magic since ages. It's one of the best examples of good gameplay-oriented worldbuilding in history, and there is a lot to steal from it.

After thinking a lot about this,  I think that the correct number of schools for my project should be around four or five in the book, with around 10 spells each (lets say: 6 basic, 2 expert and 2 legendary). But instead of closing them in a wheel (as MTG does) keep it open so one could create custom schools or spells around any concept one should want (chronomancy, technomancy, etc. Sense of taste not included) while still being compatible with the existing lists. As I was doing my research, I found out that the uneven GLOG does "in spirit" much of what I am striving to do, but of course, I am going to do it my way anyways. 

So, first of all, lets see some examples of magic schools portrayed elsewhere.

You got eight of them in post-3e D&D: abjuration, alteration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, invocation, and necromancy. This particular case is interesting because types are defined mostly around their "role" in game: alteration and illusion are suited for adventuring tricks, conjuration and invocation are more suited for combat, with necromancy having a very defined use. To put it in a way, wizards are much more "pigeon holed" in what they can or cannot do.

Pokemon, on the other hand, is divided by theme (lightning, plant, water, etc) but the role of every theme is mostly the same: beat the other guy down. 

Magic the Gathering's five colors fits nicely between both examples: Colors have a solid definition in theme, and while all of them can take you to "zero life" they play wildly differently. And while they have limitations and specializations, they feel like they are built around a theme in-game and not around utility in a design room as 3e D&D does.

Ideally I want to conceive five wizard schools and try not to rip off MTG straight in the process. Five is a curious number to base something, as there are much lesser correspondences than with the number four (four directions, four elements, four seasons, four quadrants on an X/Y graph); though it is used on chinese systems (earth-metal-wood-water-fire) or japanese ones (wind-fire-water-earth-void). Also japanese use a five season calendar that divides summer into a rainy and a dry season.

So, to begin with, here is a table in which (you/I) can roll up some wizard schools. Your school spell list gets one spell for each type below, but for one that is unknown to them (roll). Two other types get one and two extra spells respectivelly, for a total of 10 spells. A school with three types of offensive spells is likely to be a very quarreling faction, while one that focus on alter the self or alchemy will look more like a sect of cultivators.

1 offensive (damage + certain status alterations)
2 healing (damage and or status alterations, including death)
3 divination (prophecy, ESP, commune-style questions, etc. Tapping into the "hidden" side of everyday things, such as travelling through mirrors or speaking with animals, also goes here)
4 summoning (other entities, forces or objects)
5 enchanting (alter things and people, also non-violent combat moves such as sleep)
6 altering the self (transformation or other power ups)
7 alchemy (preparing potions or other consumables, probably buffed in uses to compete with instant spells)
8 protection (any kind)

Now, roll two or three times for the themes of the school. These will help you give form to the spell list, and hint which forces or mythological animals power your advanced spells. Just forget for a while that these are the official pokemon types.

1. Fire
2. Water
3. Grass
4. Electric
5. Ice
6. Fighting
7. Poison
8. Ground
9. Flying
10. Psychic
11. Bug
12. Rock
13. Ghost
14. Dark
15. Dragon
16. Steel
17. Fairy
18. Normal

Suit yourself to choose what each of this words mean. Fairy in the pokemon game is used mostly as mind-alteration (which make more sense on the Psychic type IMHO) but it can be interpreted in a more open way and make it about fate, bending space and time and other works of elves and demigods. It feels natural to expand Ghost into necromantic/exorcist territory, while type: Normal is probably best used as representing animals and other beasts (druidic style)

Now roll twice for your thematic colors

1. Red
2. Blue
3. Yellow
4. Orange
5. Purple
6. Brown
7. Black
8. Green
9. Pink
10. Indigo
11. White
12. Emerald
13. Lavender
14. Turquoise
15. Gold
16. Silver
17. Bronze
18. Cyan
19. Magenta
20. Go monochromatic. You can always choose this instead of any result. If this is your only result, roll again.

EDIT: link to Dont worry, I've got a Sword where the author has worked on the same topic.

EDIT 2: 8 Schools of Magic by Reckless Dweomer

source (a game called wizards of unica)

The Gender of Magic

It came upon me that there are two kinds of magic users. 

There is one kind that goes out exploring, learns spells and throws fireballs from a staff. This is the one we model in D&D. They activelly seek to get into the monster's lair and take out their magic loot. This is Gandalf, this is the Dying Earth guys and also any wizard you see casting Bolt2 in Final Fantasy games. You can even argue that White mages and Priests from Dragon Quest belong to this group. Kvothe from The Kingkiller Chronicles does not have a staff, but it's otherwise a perfect example. Their magics are visible and obvious; immediate. They often embody the concept of Glass Cannon (fragile but potent combatants), but still a cannon. They are the Yang (or male) side of the casters, and we usually call them wizards. They often learn their craft by reading books in posh wizard colleges or equivalents and in their extreme variant do not require any special inner wisdom: just memorizing shit and repeat some words boldly. Their magic tends to have very clear rules for casting, very scientific with little mysticism.

The Yin (Female) kind also appears much in fantasy, but rarely in the form of main characters. Yin implies a degree of passiveness, so they are not specially suited to star in an adventure book, though they might fit better on more introvert, small-scoped novellas. Yin magic users do not cast flashy spells, but rather do things like influencing others or preparing potions. They are not usually adventurous but stay at home; sometimes for years or for life, improving their magical skills often in solitude. Their magic is not "shot" but instead often requires a degree of intimacy. It also works subtler and slower: they seduce, think, trick, deceive and plot to get their goals, to the point that sometimes it's not clear where the manipulation begins and the magic ends. We usually call this casters witches, and when they appear in a story is very likely that they are helping characters or villains. Rhea de Coos, Malefica, or the Fairy Godmother. Though they're often women, some male mages in fiction embody this archetype, for example Merlin in his mentor facet, Flagg from Eyes of the Dragon or Jafar from Aladdin.

In rpg games we usually play wizards. I don't think there is nothing bad at it: they just work better for what D&D does. Playing a witch is a little more difficult. Mind that if what she does in-game is to shoot elemental spells and go killing monsters 4 loot you are essentially playing a female wizard. The very act of being an adventurer is Yang on itself, while Yin would be concerned to introspection and travelling "the world inside you" (which can be awesome on itself but not an usual part of D&D). Yin wizards are present as NPCs such as antagonists, the alchemist hirelings or the potion sellers. 

But as the Tao shows, Yin holds Yang inside and viceversa. So every single thing, and every magic user in existance has, of course, a little bit of both. To traduce this to rpg mechanics: If we assume both approaches of caster to be the same class (Magic User), how likely is that a Wizard can cast lots of spells, but require an alchemist to prepare a potion for them? and how likely is that said alchemist has researched lots of potions that are EVIDENTLY MAGICAL, but hasn't cared of learning a single level 1 spell? I think that the lines should blurr a bit in there. Still struggling to make my "perfect" magic system/class, and got stuck thinking about this. Ideally, a class should let you advance your character on either field, instead of making you choose between artificially created distinctions like "the Wizard class" or "the Alchemist/witch class". I've found this documents that might serve as inspiration in future attempts to create it. The challenge is that the more you push a character to become a "brewer" you put more emphasis on downtime, which might not sync well with the biorrhytm of the rest of the party. 

There are, of course, some tricks like making potions "quantum" (as in, you are given X potion points each downtime, then you spend one point to produce a potion that "you always carried with you"). To make this ability organically mixed with the "fireball gun", magic users could choose to learn a potion recipe instead of a spell, with potions being more potent than level 1 spells, but not more than level 3 spells. This way one could advance freely between the wizard and witch concepts, while having a good reason to specialize in potions at the start of the game (more potency in exchange of more complexity) and a good reason to not do it (more spells, in the end they might be more useful, you never know). Also with spells get more powerful the more level you have (such as magic missile) it might compensate little at the start, but a lot when you are level 10 or more. 

And, for closing, let me ask you a question: do you feel that you have ever played a "witch", in the Yin sense of word?