Author Topic: 'Elemental shield' failures?  (Read 3405 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dark Schneider

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 694
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • El único, genial e inimitable Dark Schneider.
'Elemental shield' failures?
« on: September 23, 2007, 03:45:06 AM »
IMO it has 2 failures themselves:

1. Spell duration, 1 min/lvl, I think 1 basic purpose of these spells is protection against cold/hot weather zones, then the duration could be at least 1 hr/lvl.

2. Protection against elemental attacks, the level 8+ spell, 'armor', it protects against ALL natural element (heat, cold, light...), but only give us a +20 (RR or DB) against elemental attacks, how can be this possible?. In other words, with the level 9 spell I can insert my hand into magma (natural heat) or dance in fire but if I receive an attack I have ONLY a +20 DB?. We have some racial resistance, as dwarves, that have more (+40 for heat), so is a bit rare that a dwarf has more DB against heat attacks but in the other hand he can't do the same things (dancing in fire he has poor future).

- So, IMO, this can be corrected by modifing the spells themselves:

1. The low level spells give us protection enough against weather, but low defense against attacks, the duration for these spells is 1 hr/lvl.

2. The high level spells give us real combat protection, they are very more powerfull,
for that they protect against ANY natural element, see that this is infinitely more protective than indicate a degree limit as low level spells (in nature we can reach very high temperatures). For this, the duration for this spells is 1 min/lvl. So they should give us very more than a simple + 20 RR or DB.

I think it is not unbalanced, because the more powerfull spells have a cost of 15-19 PP for only 1 min/lvl of protection and there are for 1 target only.

Then the question is the DB for high level spells, 'armor', because for the more high level spells is the same but reducing damage too.

Offline Balhirath

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 234
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: 'Elemental shield' failures?
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2007, 04:41:56 AM »
Well the argument is that magical elements are 'supercharged' or pure versions of the natural ones, so magical heat from a firebolt are much more intense than heat from magna.

I'm guessing that you are talking about the Elemental Shields spell lists, so here's a suggestion.
Instead of changing the spell, make a option on the Resist X spells so that it can be used in a less powerfull way to Protect against natural elements only for a longer duration.
I find the 1hour/level a bit to much for a lowlevel spell so I would say 10m/level for the Resist spells and 1hour/level for the x-Armor spells.
Half that for the spells that have a 10' radius.
That way you get what you want without having to make too many changes :)
I'm new here, but have played RM2 on and off for 20 years. :)

Offline Ecthelion

  • ICE Forum Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,497
  • OIC Points +0/-0
    • Character Gallery
Re: 'Elemental shield' failures?
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2007, 05:35:04 AM »
That sounds like a good suggestion, Balhirath.

Offline Ravenheart

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: 'Elemental shield' failures?
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2010, 06:54:32 AM »
Ages old topic, but still...

We use that +20 DB against elemental attacks as a penalty to critical roll as well as +20 DB. This way elemental shields take an edge from those firebolts.

This is a house rule, of course.

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: 'Elemental shield' failures?
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2010, 10:14:16 AM »
 As a house rule I double all elemenatl DB protections spell provide. An old House Rule from the person who taught me RM2.
 
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline VladD

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,468
  • OIC Points +10/-10
Re: 'Elemental shield' failures?
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2010, 10:48:37 AM »
I think that the "supercharged" notion is bollocks: if you stand near magma, say 10', then you get singed and it might prove deadly, while a firebolt has to hit you to even come close. Dipping your hand in Magma will automatically reduce it to a carbonized crisp, while a firebolt will only have that effect on a roll of 100 for the critical.

In my campaign the lower Resist spell protects vs 200 F if its heat and the heat armor spell vs (arbitrary) 2000 F, or still not enough to traverse magma with your swimming skill, or go kite flying in a thunderstorm with electricity armor. That is why the spell simply gives a combat bonus of +20 DB. The 2000 F is however enough to travel in the desert or stand near a dwarven forge without problems. It is just my way of keeping things in check.

Game on!
I think that any spell that gives complete elemental immunity at a lower level than 25th is a potential campaign breaker. There should ALWAYS be ways for a GM to pick on his players or the campaign simply cannot be exciting anymore. The elements are a good way of keeping things exciting.

The low duration can be amended using several augmentation spells or even skills and it is kept low due to the inherent power.

Game On!