Re: [dq-rules] Three things magical

[Rodger Thorm<dqn@earthlink.net>]

1)  I agree that it's an easy one to miss.  But it's in the 2nd Ed. as well,
in the box for MAGIC back in the experience point tables.  I had rules-lawyers
in the campaign who pounced on that one early on.

2)  I agree with Bruce (and others) who've said it does not need to be
prepared.  I tried to quickly find something that explicitly stated so (one
way or the other) but couldn't find it.  It may be, as Bruce says, in Arcane
Wisdom (I didn't check there).

3)  I think the idea of allowing a desperate mage to cast from Endurance is
more a matter of style and of campaign tone than of rules.  As a 'desperation'
move, it probably doesn't come up too often, but when it does, it's probably a
fairly heroic moment.  Personally, I might allow that to a character who had
*mastered* (ie Rk 6+) a spell, but I wouldn't let a character with only Rank 1
try it.

  I don't like the idea of putting more FT into a spell to increase cast
chance.  More power usually doesn't increase precision.  However, if you're
going to do that, I'd suggest the following:
a) If the spell is not cast successfully, there is an automatic backfire (ie
miss the Cast Chance by 1 or more), plus the points spent in casting are
subtracted from EN rather than FT.
b) If the spell is cast successfully, but made it by less than (20 - Rank)
then a backfire also occurs as well (but subtract 30 from backfire roll;
result less than 01 means no backfire effect).  If backfire effect is 26-56,
the spell follows the backfire.  [Ex. Aahz casts E&E Rk 8 Charm with increased
FT, but his modified roll is only 7 under Cast Chance, so the spell is
successful, but he also suffers a backfire.  The backfire roll is (77 - 30 =
47), so the spell takes effect on a random character in range.]

  --Rodger



On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:22:35 +1000 Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au>
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:59:28 -0000, "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com> wrote:

>1)	Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all general 
>knowledge spells.  I did not know this, and boy was my Hero level 
>fire mage pissed off when he found out!  I did not give him the exp 
>back, but that is ok, because?

Easy to miss because (a) it's only in 3rd edition (and one of the few 3rd
ed. changes I actually like) and (b) even in that edition, it's hidden in
the XP costs section ....

>2)	I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets 
>etc) still had to be prepared!  My Fire Mage was walking around with 
>so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a flamethrower.  
>Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with fireballs in 
>consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in the party 
>retroactively dead!

No, invested items do *not* have to be prepared; however; I don't blame you
if you're reading the 3rd ed. rules and asking "where does it say that?"
This is a clarification from Arcane Wisdom.

>3)	This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow desperate 
>characters to use endurance to cast spells.  Does anyone else play 
>this way?  This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster?

I do not and would not use such a rule.

I have a different house rule though: adepts can expend *extra* FT to cast a
spell.  Each additional point raises the chance of success by 5%, but also
incurs a risk of an "overload".  The chance is (extra FT spent, squared).
We're still muddling on the exact effects of an overload; we don't want them
to be just like a normal backfire, but we don't want them either too trivial
or too horrible.  The point of the rule is to allow the adept to cast those
hard-too-cast spells if/when they need to ... at risk of something
unfortunate happening, and of course at the risk of running out of FT to
cast *other* spells.  (It also makes the "spend 2x/3x/etc. FT" backfire
results potentially *very* nasty!)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst              bprobst@netspace.net.au    ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia      MSTie #72759  SCA #80160
"Well, look at that.  'Breach hull, all die.'  Even had it underlined."
ASL FAQ              http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free $5 Love Reading
Risk Free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/NsdPZD/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/H_ewlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Post a message, send it to:   dq-rules@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/