Topic: Instantaneous spells

[Dalewarrior]

Do you gamers open an exception to casting one spell per round, and allow one spell caster to cast as many instantaneous spells as the character can, knowing that each instantaneous spell only costs 10% of the round to cast. Say, a semi-spellcaster fighter, could turn 4 arrows with 40% of activity spent and still attack with 50%. Or he could do even better with AM Speed or Haste.

OPEN MENTALISM LISTS, Attack Avoidance,
8-Aim Untrue I (F*) As Deflect I, except missile automatically misses.

There are more spell lists like this, namely the Beastmaster Combat Enhancement, and the Channeling Shielding Ways.

Cheers,
DW

[cdcooley]

No, but if you cast a Deflect II then I would let you deflect one immediately and then another at any later point in the round. There are some cases where some of us allow one of these instantaneous, defensive/utility spells and then one other spell. But if you based casting solely on the 10% activity there would be no need for a Bladeturn III as a 25th level spell. I would rule that if you wanted to repeat an instantaneous spell as the second casting then it could take effect immediately but you would have to spend additional time recovering to match the activity% required as if it had been an ordinary spell. There's a big difference between being able to do something quickly and being able to do it quickly many times in a row with no rest.

[Cory Magel]

We generally allow an unlimited number of non-offensive instant spells per round.
Once you have a character able to cast the instant version of Absolution you start to understand that specific limitation.

Smart players also start to realize that they shouldn't blow all their power points too quickly, so they don't go wild with them.

[MisterK]

Short answer : no, I don't.

I allow the use of triggered magic items in addition to spell casting, but not things like rune reading. Basically, anything that requires some kind of manipulation of magic is restricted to once per round.

On the other hand, I have a bias towards somewhat blurring the lines between casters and non-casters. Basically, casters can usually learn physical and combat skills more easily than in standard RM, and conversely, non-casters can usually learn spell lists more easily than in standard RM as well.

But that's still only one spell cast per round.

Even if you're hasted.

[nash]

Do you gamers open an exception to casting one spell per round, and allow one spell caster to cast as many instantaneous spells as the character can, knowing that each instantaneous spell only costs 10% of the round to cast. Say, a semi-spellcaster fighter, could turn 4 arrows with 40% of activity spent and still attack with 50%.

Absolutely not.  I may allow some flexibility with an instantaneous and non-instantaneous spell in a round, but unlimited (or 5 at least) spells a round makes already powerful casters even more powerful.

[Hurin]

I do not ever allow multiple instant spells in a round.

Remember that in RM1 and RM2, instant spells cost 75% activity to cast. 'Instant' didn't mean 'takes little activity to cast', rather, it meant 'takes little activity to prep'. However, in the course of the new intiative systems introduced in the RM Companions, this meaning was misunderstood and instant spells were assessed at less activity than originally intended. By RMSS, this was down to 10%, but the guys who wrote the original Spell Law never intended spells such as Bladeturn or Shield to only cost 10% activity.

[EltonJ]

I do not ever allow multiple instant spells in a round.

Remember that in RM1 and RM2, instant spells cost 75% activity to cast. 'Instant' didn't mean 'takes little activity to cast', rather, it meant 'takes little activity to prep'. However, in the course of the new intiative systems introduced in the RM Companions, this meaning was misunderstood and instant spells were assessed at less activity than originally intended. By RMSS, this was down to 10%, but the guys who wrote the original Spell Law never intended spells such as Bladeturn or Shield to only cost 10% activity.

Hurin, you're right.  I'm sure that I don't allow multiple Instant Spells in a round also.  Basically you need time to prep them.  Either somatically or verbally.

[Spectre771]

I thought the was an maximum of 2 spells per round if the spell caster was powerful enough and had the perfect set of circumstances (known RM2, they are hard to come to by).  In other words, not impossible, but extremely improbable.

[pastaav]

By RMSS, this was down to 10%, but the guys who wrote the original Spell Law never intended spells such as Bladeturn or Shield to only cost 10% activity.

Your comment sounds like a complaint, but what was really the point with the 75% instant spells?

In my book, the evolvement of instantaneous spells in the RM editions can only be described as improvements. The dynamics at the gaming table get better and better and it makes more sense to have the spells when you can use them without crippling your action options.

[MisterK]

By RMSS, this was down to 10%, but the guys who wrote the original Spell Law never intended spells such as Bladeturn or Shield to only cost 10% activity.

Your comment sounds like a complaint, but what was really the point with the 75% instant spells?

Like Hurin said, the point of instant spells in RM2 was that they never required prep rounds, whereas other spells could only be cast without prep if they were class I spells. Essentially, instant spells were class I spells regardless of level difference.

In my book, the evolvement of instantaneous spells in the RM editions can only be described as improvements. The dynamics at the gaming table get better and better and it makes more sense to have the spells when you can use them without crippling your action options.

That I also agree with. Overall, I think that having casters being able to act once per round in any case, and having instant spells only take a small part of the round was a vast improvement. Instant spells, in my opinion, were meant to be reactive, even if it was not the intent of the original game designers.

[Hurin]

I would say that changing Instant spells from 75% to 10% does have balance implications that need to be considered, mainly in two cases: First, for semis and any character that could both cast a spell and take other actions in a turn; and secondly, for casters because it opens up the possibility of more than one spell per turn.

The Semi Case: Is it intended that a Semi can cast a full Bladeturn III (giving -100 to three attacks against him) and then make almost a full melee attack (at -10)? That was not intended nor allowed in RM1 or 2 RAW. If you are fine with that significant shift in balance, then good for you. But that was not allowed in RM1/2 core.

The Two Spells Case: Similarly, it would be a major balance change (from RM1+2) to allow a caster to cast Bladeturn III and the also launch a Fireball (at -10) in the same turn. Again, this was not allowed in RM2. If you like your casters and semis more powerful, then you can be ok with that. But it is a significant change from the balance of RM1/2. So that's why I don't allow it.

[Cory Magel]

A lot of people don't realize (cause they are used to their own style) that how the GM runs their campaign has a big impact on spell casters strength.  If you have a GM that allows the party to fully rest up after every combat then spell casters gain a significant advantage as they know they can burn through all their power points in a single combat.  But if a GM runs a game where you have to consider when and for how long you are going to be able to rest it curbs that significantly.  Blow your wad in one fight and you become a 'man with a stick' (as we joked) in the next.

[Dalewarrior]

Thanks for your answers players. I think I'll make Instantaneous spells take 75% of the round with no preparation as in the RM2 rules. It depends on the campaign setting, and I'll do it this way.
Cheers,
DW

[Jengada]

I had a couple of thoughts about this that I'll share (thank you, jet lag.) I personally fall into the one spell/round camp, but I was thinking about how I would respond if a player really wanted to do more than one. In no particular order here are some things I would consider. They're largely based on the idea that doing this doesn't just depend on the caster, it also depends on the nature of how they draw their power. DMs who don't mind complexity (probably don't play Rolemaster!) could use different conditions for different realms.
1

• Spell class of spells after the first instantaneous spell in a round is increased. This could be as simple as saying "determine the class of any (N>1)th spell using twice its actual level. This will really reduce the pool of spells that fall into Class I. Normally instantaneous spells could be subjected to this when cast as (N>1)th spells in a round.
• Spells after the first instantaneous spell in a round have to make an Extraordinary Spell Failure Roll. That could be done several ways, but would reflect the potential consequences of rushing the power their body is handling.
• Spells after the first instantaneous spell in a round could cost more PP but with no increased effect. Think of this as a "haste makes waste" approach, where the extra points (1 for the first, 2 for the next, 4 for the next? extra 10%? 50%?) are required to "pull" the spell from the caster's body.
• Casting spells after that first instantaneous spell causes power fatigue of some sort - either reduced action for several rounds after, or stun, or loss of lots of fatigue points.
• If you use a 10-segment initiative system instead of one of the others, require a set number of segments after casting any spell before another can be cast.

Some of these could be combined. None are play tested, so any of them could whack things out, but probably less than just flat-out allowing any number of instantaneous spells in a round.[/list]

[Majyk]

Same. 

One spell/Round, but I do use 10% Instantaneous Defensive/Healing(your choice) spells with asterisks denoting such, to be cast “out of turn”.

I abhor the idea of a spelluser with a simple Landing spell not being able to cast it before being splatted upon the ground from a bridge being cut in the BBEG’s init go-round 1 phase before it’s their init turn…that is dumb.

The caster still reduces their % Activity by 10% for the Instant casting cost PLUS 10-50%(d10/2 as a random time drain) more for “cancelling their action” in order to respond to the unknown during the round - even for non-Declaration play - so this lessens Hurin’s note re: only a (-10) malus for doing so.

[jdale]

RMSS/RMFRP and RMU deal with the multiple spells per round issue simply by saying you cannot cast more than one spell per round. Even if you have the activity to do so. So, reducing the activity requirement (as they do) does not necessarily mean you also have to open things up for multiple spells per round. It does of course permit combining those instant spells with other actions like melee, especially for semis, so there are still balance considerations.