I tried to write up my issues with the Mage over on the Something Awful forums, but I didn't get much response. I guess it was a tad rambly, though:
---
Okay, this is me trying to put into words my beef with the Mage spellcasting as opposed to the Wizard's. I know that a lot of you are having fun with the Mage, and I'm not denying that, but trying to explain why it doesn't gel with me.
It's not grounded in a specific action.
Like all good moves, it starts and ends with the fiction, and it's grounded in a concrete action. I mean, you can't just say "I use magic to solve this problem!", you have to describe how. But whenever you do anything that counts as "attempting to solve a problem with magic", you roll that move. That's not… specific enough for me, I guess. Hack and slash doesn't say "when you attempt to solve a problem by melee combat". Shapeshifting doesn't say "when you attempt to solve a problem by shifting into animal form". The one move that's as generic is Defy Danger, and it highlights what Mage casting is missing (for me). In one end it's generic since the danger to be defied isn't specified in the move, just like the problem to be solved isn't in the casting move. On the other end, "how do you do it", Defy Danger provides categories (like "… by powering through") etc. Mage casting is generic in both ends. The player freely describes how they go about solving, and doesn't change anything in the move.
(For reference, using this classification wizard casting is (very) specific in the solution but doesn't assume any problem at all. You could cast a wizard spell even when there wouldn't be any apparent problem to solve.)
Also, unlike Defy Danger where their description is grounded in the fiction very concretely since they can only do things that make sense (so no leaping over buildings), Mage casting can choose from anything at all accomplishable by magic as long as it's not in their opposed elements.
This means that the Mage's "Cast a spell" move has no internal sense of scale. Defying Danger limits what you can do based on who you are physically. A fighter could plausibly power through a horde of Goblins while a halfling Thief could only power through a swarm of rats, and neither of them could ever (use that move to) power through hewn stone walls. This is fair to everyone since everyone agrees on the power scales of physical feats. Wizard casting also works, since the spells clearly include scales. And we get level progression along that power scale, too! At first level, "plausible for a magician of your sort" clearly includes summoning one spirit for one question. At fifth level, you can summon a monster to fight by your side. At ninth level, you can summon anyone to your side by teleport!
In contrast, all things described as "problems" that magic could solve are not equal in my mind. This includes the problem of a Mage attempting to solve super-epic problems - and the move would trigger, right? It also includes the other end of the scale, where the Mage wants to do some small prestidigitation. The Wizard does not make that much easier than other spells, granted, but it does differentiate in some way - easier spells are easier to keep memorised, so keeping it in your array isn't as much of a sacrifice as keeping a high-level spell. Move-wise, I won't say the Mage only has a hammer and thus everything looks like a nail, but… all the Mage's tools look like a hammer and they're definitely all the same size, regardless of the size of the problem.
So I guess two problems:
- the lack of a sense of scale
- it's generic in both ends (both what the problem is, and what your solution is)
---