Topic: spell initiative

[markc]

Back to Initiative; You could also provide a penalty to spell casters who cast an instant in a round.

 Also since you are adding rules and changing them feel free to change the definitions of instant and normal spell casting. IMO you have to since you have a result you want, ie ability to cast a normal spell and a instant spell every round. So again IMO change the way the two spells work or the way they are cast.
 So maybe the caster spends time gathering energy and then uses it to cast spells. The reason it takes longer to cast normal spells is that it takes time for the caster to build up energy. But since instant spells do not take a lot of energy they can be released any time during the build up.
 In the above explanation the caster spends time building up energy and very little time thinking about the spell being cast. Maybe it is the 1/10th of a sec is all that is needed to release the proper spell.

MDC

[providence13]

OK, (heheh)
Now that it can be a field that works for someone/thing instead of a field that works against someone/thing..
Would it be just crazy wacky to cast the spell as an instant, with the target identified.... then the caster can do something else (move, attack, whatever works for your game), using %Act remaining and not have to monitor the field effect?

If I make the spell changes, I want to know how long before my campaign slides into a void of chaos.

[Marc R]

See the aforementioned "Hold the spell" rule from page 230 of RMFRP SL.

If you cast it then drop it to run off, it stops working. . .if you cast it and hold onto it, you have to concentrate, and take the various penalties for concentrating.

You can still run/attack, but are limited to 50% and can't cast.

[markc]

See the aforementioned "Hold the spell" rule from page 230 of RMFRP SL.

If you cast it then drop it to run off, it stops working. . .if you cast it and hold onto it, you have to concentrate, and take the various penalties for concentrating.

You can still run/attack, but are limited to 50% and can't cast.

 Write this down and give it to your players. IMO it is a very important ruling for the game.

MDC

[providence13]

 So maybe the caster spends time gathering energy and then uses it to cast spells. The reason it takes longer to cast normal spells is that it takes time for the caster to build up energy. But since instant spells do not take a lot of energy they can be released any time during the build up.
 In the above explanation the caster spends time building up energy and very little time thinking about the spell being cast. Maybe it is the 1/10th of a sec is all that is needed to release the proper spell.

I'm going to print this out and stick it on my wall.
Maybe instant can also be read as instinctive.. Some kind of adrenaline rush from an instinct to use PP. (Adrenal Casting! Run away....)
Thanks everyone. I'm not trying to say it's right. But I'm comfortable with this level of wrongness.

[pastaav]

OB and DB are often referenced interchangeably as inverse values, even when they shouldn't be, I suspect this is one of those moments. . . .but in "subtracting from the attack" it succeeds in referencing neither. . .I suspect in this instance, since it's a U spell, it should be taken as a "one off" limited DB bonus to a target defender rather than an OB malus to a target attacker, since the latter would provoke an RR.

I think the wording of the spell is very deliberate to make sure the spell neither mess with the aura of the attacker or the aura of defender. The wording of the spell suggest that works like a magical barrier between them, and thus it cause no RR.

If you want to house rule you are of course free to change stuff, but there is nothing in the spell description that give the attacker or the defender a reason to get a RR.

[Marc R]

exactly

[providence13]

pastaav,
Thanks for the input.
NO, I don't want an RR.
I think you and Lord M are saying the same thing and I agree. I don't like how the spell is worded in relation to the other spell description. Deflections affects missile(s) in flight, faster than the eye can see. While Bladeturn affects not the actual weapon, but the die roll.
These can be held until you need it IF you spend 50%Act concentrating. It doesn't matter that this would likely put you out of the realm of full Observation %Act. It is a very special kind of circumstance..

[providence13]

Would it be just crazy wacky to cast the spell as an instant, with the target identified.... then the caster can do something else (move, attack, whatever works for your game), using %Act remaining and not have to monitor the field effect?

Perhaps I've had too much eggnog, but I'd like to explain a thought here. The "Hold spell effects" reference is good and I'll use it. What I meant in the above post was more like... the spell lasts for the rest of the round OR until its obligations have been met. A fire and forget spell.

Barney Brittlebone doesn't notice the cutpurse pulling a dagger and heading in his direction. 90' away, Prestidigitatus, casts Bladeturn on Barney and turns to climb down a ladder to the street below. Prestidigitatus knows that the first good swing on Barney will have less of a chance to hurt. (For my changes )He also doesn't have to even think about the spell, monitor the spell, pick a target for the spell etc. He is now done with the spell.

I understand holding the spell, I just disagree about casters ability to determine which blow in a series of blows will land on the defender, or that they can see arrows in flight and react to prevent them.
So, if I make the spell last until its obligations are met OR the end of the round.. would that upset things/cause a loophole that players will be able to exploit. To me, it's more cut and dry than "holding"; but I could be wrong.

[Marc R]

A fire and forget version, or one that worked on attacks you were unaware of, would be nice, but should be a higher level than the more limited versions, or on a more powerful list (i.e. a base list).

That is essentially a slightly different spell. . .this is akin to "I want to cast a firebolt at the first person to come around that corner." vs "I want to cast a spell that places a waiting firebolt that will attack the first person to come around that corner, while I go off and do something else."

[providence13]

A fire and forget version, or one that worked on attacks you were unaware of, would be nice, but should be a higher level than the more limited versions, or on a more powerful list (i.e. a base list).

I don't have the experience with these matter that you guys possess, and that's why I really appreciate everyone's feedback.

As to the above,
Shield is 2nd under Shield Mastery: -25 to appropriate attacks; just like a normal shield. 1 minute/lvl
Deflections is 5th lvl and has no duration whatsoever; but subtracts 100 from a missile attack only.
Bladeturn is 7th lvl,, has no duration and subtracts 50 from a specific kind of attack, melee.

So, the power level, IMHO, is appropriate and paid for.
My version wouldn't be "attack that you don't know about", as much as "attack that might happen". weak bubble shield for only one specific kind of attack and only for that specific round. No mastery to extend the round either.

[Marc R]

Having a spell that you can cast and ignore would allow you to then cast another spell, without having to interrupt to go deflect, which is indeed a big power jump.

The major difference between a -25 shield and a -100 deflect is that the latter effectively (without a lot of luck or OB) negates an attack completely, while the -25 is just a degradation, the attack is still likely to make it through just with less effect. (a -100 malus is more than 4x as large as a -25 due to the nature of diminishing returns logic)

If indeed the deflect/bladeturns were "at power" for a fire and forget version, you'd see hordes of people on this board complaining about how the curent time/attention limited versions are underpowered or marked up over level. . .the absence of such complaints would seem to indicate that limited as they may be, people are satisfied with their current casting costs/levels.

If you allow said version, I suspect the result would be casters who start each round with a bladeturn or deflection then proceed to beat on people with spells under that hanging -100 defense, then re-cast as soon as that magic is expended.

I said this above somewhere. . .the system already has a fairly strong pro-caster bias, said change should only be made if all your PCs are casters, or you're ready to offer some parrallel jack up to the non casters to let them bone up their defenses similarly so this doesn't over tip the system to the casting side.. . .like shield missile parry at no penalty, or multiple opponant shield DB bonus as two for instances.

[kevinmccollum]

Just fyi, Bladeturn used to be -100 to a melee attack, just like Deflections. I'm not sure why they dropped the bonus on that except the cry: "I can't hit him if he casts it."

[providence13]

Well, the rest of them use the borrow init to add to OB OR borrow from OB to add to init. Up to 20 pts.
Then the casters whined that it made fighter types "way" too powerful.


So, officially, do casters have to roll initiative for Instant spells like Bladeturn or Missile Deflections?
Do they have to actually beat the init of the person attacking for someone to receive the help the spells provide.?

[Marc R]

Considering the root logic of the system, reaching back into RM2, where spells always go first, the answer would be no, the spell always goes off first, with order of initiative only modifying order of melee, but casting phase always preceding missile phase. That was the way the spell worked when originally written. . .this isn't the RM2 board though.

Using an activity/time method, likely the caster would be able to see the archer in process and get an instant off before the archer could complete the shot.

More appropriately on topic in this sub board. . .Stepping forward into RMFRP. . .If the archer wins initiative and declares a snap action, they should shoot before the caster can cast. . .if the archer chooses to fire on normal or deliberate, and the caster snap casts, they can get it off first, despite losing the initiative. The round is more complicated than just initiative. . . .snap/normal/deliberate declaration takes precedence, then initiative order.

You could rule as GM back to the days of RM2, and the spirit in which the spell was originally written, and let it go off first.

OTOH they did modify the spell in it's conversion over to RMFRP, and the complaints about the fact that in RM2 a caster with a -20 quickness bonus who rolled as badly as possible on init could cast a deflection every round and get it off before an archer with a +30 Qu bonus who rolled as well as possible on initiative could shoot them. . .and repeat it every round while devoting their remaining activity to fleeing to cover on movement phase was part of the reason why the ordering of the round was changed in RMFRP to make it potentially possible to shoot or stab a caster before they could teleport away or blast the attacker regardless of initiative and relative speed.

Keep in mind, that by extension, if an instant bladeturn or deflection goes first regardless of initiative, it then makes sense that any instant spell does the same. . .which covers not only many defensive spells, but a horde of offensive spells as well, enough that pretty much any pure and most semis will have a spell attack that they can use to front load every combat and win initiative regardless of the roll. You're much more wary going to take a shot at a priest (unless you shoot them from ambush) if you can expect them to pop you with something like Blinding or Absolution before you could possibly shoot them.

I played enough RM2 where casters always went first, and had a great time. . .so I won't say it'll ruin your game, if you like it go with it . .I'm not telling you not to do it, just warning you that from my experience, it will shift power toward casters and make melee / missile characters less effective . . .be prepared for any non caster PCs to get frustrated about it. (And for people to start just killing casters from surprise ambush rather than risk an open confrontation where the caster has such a dramatic speed advantage.)

[providence13]

So, casters should roll initiative for their instants. They should roll init just like everyone else and it's entirely possible for the instant spell to NOT be fast enough for its effect to actually help someone...
hhmmmmm.
Thanks so much for the RM history. I sometimes think that the spells/rules I read are for an entirely different game. Sometimes they are.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

So, officially, do casters have to roll initiative for Instant spells like Bladeturn or Missile Deflections?

Officially, Casters have to declare their actions and roll initiative just like everybody else. It does not matter what they are declaring (except, that they cannot declare that they are casting a spell that does not have a target). They still roll initiative.

Everything else derives from those declarations, and those rolls.

Do they have to actually beat the init of the person attacking for someone to receive the help the spells provide.?

Note what I said above, and then go back to Reply #11 and what I said there, as well as the link I provided in that post, as well as what I said about the wording of the spell, that it indicates that the missile attack must already be in progress.

Essentially, what it boils down to (and this IS very simplified) is that a spell user cannot declare an instantaneous spell that does not have a target (i.e. Deflections) because it requires the arrow to be in the air. However, the caster can either wait for the archer to fire (by declaring that he is waiting for the proper target), or he can cancel his declared action and then cast the instant (or he can continue on his declared action hoping that the arrow does not hit).

It doesn't matter the "phase" of the round, those are the three main scenerios in regards to Deflections spells.

Other instantaneous spells will depend upon their description, and what is accomplished by their casting.

[Marc R]

So, casters should roll initiative for their instants. They should roll init just like everyone else and it's entirely possible for the instant spell to NOT be fast enough for its effect to actually help someone...
hhmmmmm.

One of the modifications from RM2 to RMFRP was to put casters, shooters and melee on the same time frame, due to the issues caused in RM2 where casters went before shooters who went before melee. . .It was not just spells, there were as many complaints about the fact that standing in melee range, if you were stabbing me with your dagger, while I did a point blank throw with my dagger, my shot always went off first regardless of initiative. . .Even when RM2 came back as RMC, the decision was made to scrap the old phased system in favor of a new mechanism due to those order-of-action complaints.

So simply, yes, if a caster either chooses to cast in a later phase, or fails initiative for the same phase, the attack will go off before the spell intended to defend against it, despite the fact the spell in question is instant.

Thanks so much for the RM history. I sometimes think that the spells/rules I read are for an entirely different game. Sometimes they are.

Evolution at work.

So, officially, do casters have to roll initiative for Instant spells like Bladeturn or Missile Deflections?

Officially, Casters have to declare their actions and roll initiative just like everybody else. It does not matter what they are declaring (except, that they cannot declare that they are casting a spell that does not have a target). They still roll initiative.

Everything else derives from those declarations, and those rolls.

Do they have to actually beat the init of the person attacking for someone to receive the help the spells provide.?

Note what I said above, and then go back to Reply #11 and what I said there, as well as the link I provided in that post, as well as what I said about the wording of the spell, that it indicates that the missile attack must already be in progress.

Essentially, what it boils down to (and this IS very simplified) is that a spell user cannot declare an instantaneous spell that does not have a target (i.e. declarations) because it requires the arrow to be in the air. However, the caster can either wait for the archer to fire (by declaring that he is waiting for the proper target), or he can cancel his declared action and then cast the instant (or he can continue on his declared action hoping that the arrow does not hit).

If a caster declares deflection on the arrow fired by an archer they can see in the motions of firing, and the archer's next action is indeed to fire, would you really as GM tell the player they have to hold action, then cast, taking more than the 10% activity needed to cast the instant?

Frankly, requiring the caster to await firing, and be able to see the missile, strikes me as impossible. . .you can't really see a sling bullet in flight, or a crossbow bolt at short range. . .they move so fast for their size that to unaided perception they appear to depart the weapon and appear in the target. . .If the official ruling were that you needed to be able to perceive the missile in flight, then deflections simply couldn't work against point blank crossbow shots at all, unless the caster were hasted, or otherwise capable of perceiving things going on in micro time frames beyond normal human capability. . .similarly, deflections would fail to work in dim or poor lighting. . .you can see the archer / slingman / crossbowman fine. . .but there's no way unaided human sight is ever going to perceive the missile itself in flight. . .As GM I wouldn't bend the spell that way, so that in effect it only works on slow missiles, or fast missiles at medium range or beyond, or in pristine lighting conditions with a contrast background to make it possible to see the missle in flight.

As long as the attack is in progress and you can see the missile attacker, pushing the requirements any further than that would seem to start piling on complications that render the spell much less effective than it's apparent intent.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

1) I didn't write the RMFRP rules, I am only interpreting them as they were written. As always, as a GM, you are free to disagree with that interpretation.

2) It is a game, whether or not somebody could "see" the arrow in flight in real life has no bearing. The spell description (RMSS Spell Law, page 89) clearly says "passes", which indicates motion. It also clearly states that the caster "must be able to see the missile", but says nothing about the person who fired it.

Thus, the official ruling on it is pretty much as the spell is written since the spell is written clearly. The Caster has to see the missile as it passes within the range of the spell (note: the missile does NOT have to be aimed at the caster).

3) Also, if the archer is outside of the range of the spell, "seeing him about to fire" is worthless, as the missile has to be within the range of the spell.

4) So long as the character has the activity percentage to cancel his current action and cast the instantaneous spell before the missile attack completes its activity percentage, then the mage is good to go.

5) Unless the caster KNOWS that somebody is about to fire a missile in his general direction, and thus is watching for it, it is recommended that the caster need to make a combat perception maneuver of some sort to notice the missile.

[Marc R]

1-3)

The area of effect deflects the missile at 10' (or 100' for aim untrue), but I don't see how that has any bearing on the declaration of deflecting the arrow.

For example:

Caster A declares deflection on the arrow the archer 100' away is going to fire.

A) Archer fires the arrow within 10' of the caster - Arrow gets deflected
B) Archer doesn't fire, or fires the arrow so it never goes within 10' of the caster - Arrow not deflected

vs

Fighter declares missile parry in same situation, with an area of effect of themselves.

A) Archer fires on them, Fighter's missile parry works
B) Archer doesnt fire on them, Fighter's missile parry is moot.

Just because the fighter had no missile to parry, didn’t mean they weren’t allowed to declare missile parry.

The area of effect has a great impact on if the deflection actually works. . .but I don't see that it actually matters in the declaration. . .

I've known plenty of situations, where confronted by an opposing group, a caster will declare deflections on the crossbow bolt in the crossbow held by the guy over there. . . .and if that person fires at the caster or anywhere within 10' the bolt gets deflected seems to be how every GM actually uses the spell.

To offer you a similar situation in which the range of the spell is dramatically important to the result, but utterly irrelevant to the declaration:

Caster declares "I fire bolt that charging guy" who happens to be at 120' and outside the 100' range of the spell. . .but, by the time the caster's action comes up, the charging guy has charged in to 60'. . . .I don't know any GM who would not allow the caster to declare the action up front. . .if the situation they expect to take place fails to happen in the intervening actions (like if the charging guy stopped at 110') then by pre-declaring what turned out to be an impossible action you're faced with either casting the bolt and having it fizzle 10' short, or cancelling the casting. . .that doesn't mean you’re not allowed to make the declaration in hopes that the situation will work out to make the declaration workable. . .same thing with deflections. . .if you declare it on the arrow the archer is about to fire. . .then it should work when the archer actually fires within 10’ of you. . .and fail if they don’t fire, or fire outside the range of the spell.

4) I'm not sure how that would make sense. . .if the caster declares a snap deflections, and the archer declares snap fire, if the caster loses initiative to the archer, they will be shot before the spell is cast due to order of actions. . .if they cancel an action to snap deflect and lose initiative, they still get shot before they can cast. Initiative and phase of declaration matter in RMFRP. .

5) But conversely, if an archer is blatantly firing at them, I don't see how it makes sense to wait for the arrow to be in flight before casting. . .a 10% instant then take more than 10% activity to use.