Topic: Casting Time of Items

[providence13]

In our game, magic items cast as instants. This is powerful and sometimes frustrating for the GM (me), but it's goose/gander. 

[Marc R]

(Split out of another thread)

I suspect it works fine that way, I've played with three variations, all worked:

1) Cast as normal, with spells over users level cast as Type III. (RMC Core rule)
2) Cast as Type I, except instants, which are still instant (RMC Option 9.2)
3) Cast all item spells as instant (RMC Option 9.2)

The RMSS method is a 4th:

4) Cast as Type 1, even if the spell is instant.

I found going with #2, as you do, is zero problem as long as item casting counts toward the 1/round limit. . .when we said it didn't, it opened the door to Tim the Sorcerer style results ala "I firebolt the first 5 people to pass into the room with my wand."

As I said on the other thread, most massive exploits like that in the rules grow out of an intersection of two options/house rules, or are the unintended child of an option/house rule.

We didn't want to allow 5 firebolts to be fired in one round. . .and the problem wasn't with "Items all cast as instants" it was with "Item casting doesn't count toward the 1/round limit".

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

We didn't want to allow 5 firebolts to be fired in one round. . .and the problem wasn't with "Items all cast as instants" it was with "Item casting doesn't count toward the 1/round limit".

It think it's the core of the problem, indeed. It's not the time you time to pull the trigger, it's whether your gun fires single shots or allows bursts.
In my world, aside from using the RM2/RMC core rule (Marc's 1st point), magic-spell casting creatures or items can, by default, only perform single shots, with a "reloading time" of one round (I may point out that it is independant of the amount of PPs the creature or item has remaining after it has cast the spell, the way how many bullets a gun still has after it has fired is independant of its reloading time). It is possible to cast as many spells as one wishes in a round, but items can't do that, and it's quickly PP-expensive (f(n) = n x lvl + f(n-1), where lvl = normal level of the spell, and one can only cast another spell if the previously cast was instant or Class I).

[RandalThor]

It think it's the core of the problem, indeed. It's not the time you time to pull the trigger, it's whether your gun fires single shots or allows bursts.

Which is a great analogy. (And harkens to the Magic as Technology thread.) Why is it, we think it is totally OK to be able to "hose-down" and area, in effect attacking multiple enemies in a single attack/round in a modern or sci-fi setting, but not in a magic? Is it because we have the proof in front of us it is possible using modern weaponry? I understand peoples desire for the rules to give them balance (not really, I as GM determine that), but this is weird that we feel the need to put artificial (like there are any other in a fictional game  ) rules to limit such this in a fantasy setting. Is it to make the bow & crossbow still viable?

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

It's not the time you time (...)

*you take 

Why is it, we think it is totally OK to be able to "hose-down" and area, in effect attacking multiple enemies in a single attack/round in a modern or sci-fi setting, but not in a magic?

We consider magic to still be at the single shots era? It's not as if automatic weapons were created the instant guns were, after all. 
Other than that, there could be matters to speak about how, say, non-spell casters are single shots, semi-spell casters are semi-auto spell casters, and full-spell casters are full-auto spell casters, able to cast bursts of spells.

[RandalThor]

We consider magic to still be at the single shots era? It's not as if automatic weapons were created the instant guns were, after all. 

No, but it was way shorter than 2-3-thousand years....like in most fantasy settings when pertaining to magic.    <--- Mages trying to make the Automatic Firebolt Spell (for the last several thousand years).

[Cory Magel]

Realistically a good archer can take far more shots than is possible in RM time restraints.  The only reason this is limited is for balance reasons.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Thing is, IMO, that there are rules for modern weapon continuous fires and bursts. If those are balanced with the rest, why wouldn't continuous fires or bursts of magic?
Mmmmmhhhhhh... This make me wants to create rules for them, based on the attack actions in the Blaster Law... (OTOH, of course, the logical consequence of such possibilities is the way battles would be made, with fighters using full automatic firebolt firing wands instead of going into melee, the way swords became obsolete with the advent of modern guns so, if you want to preserve a "pure" fantasy sword&magic feeling, maybe it wouldn't be such a good idea...)

[markc]

IMHO it depends on how the item casts the spells, in my game here are the variants I can remember right now.


 1) Spell In Item Cast with help from Attuned: The spell needs the caster to complete the spell casting so it is as if the Attuned is casting the spell themselves.
 2) Item Gives the Attuned the Knowledge of the Spell: The spell is cast as per normal with the casting rules.
 3) Item Gives Spell Knowledge and Casting Level to Attuned: The Attuned uses the given casting level from the item to cast the spell.
 4) Item Stores Spell: The item stores the spell which is then released by Attuned as an instant. Maybe charged item, daily item, ect.
 5) Item has Intelligence and casts Spell:
    5a) Item needs help from Attuned: The spell requires the attention of the Attuned as if they were casting the spell them selves.
    5b) Item needs no help: The Attuned "asks" the item to cast the spell and the Intelligence begins casting as per normal spell casting rules.


Thought:
 So maybe items in the TC need a recharge time so they cannot just let all of their effects go off in one round vs a limit of 1 spell per round.


About Multi-Casting Items:
  IMHO once multicasting items were developed then there would be a big increase "scale" of power for the faction that had that ability.
MDC

[yammahoper]

Realistically a good archer can take far more shots than is possible in RM time restraints.  The only reason this is limited is for balance reasons.

Balance...and that no good mechanics have been created to deal with the issue.

There was a series of books...Dragonbone Chair/throne...I forget, anyway the mages in it meditated to store power, but they could unleash all their stored power in one mighty destructive blast, a situation best avoided due to the time needed to recover a large pool of power.

PP's represent this very well.  A mage able to unleash 10 fire bolts, all at the same target, is pretty much a guaranteed kill.  Tis is good for creating the "I aint gonna die, YOU attack him." mentality that keeps foes in check, or PC's.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

IMHO once multicasting items were developed then there would be a big increase "scale" of power for the faction that had that ability.

Well, sure. The way the advent of guns allowed Europe to conquer most of the world, the advent of multicasting items would allow the faction that develops it to do the same, until knowledge about how to do so becomes widespread.
I think one "problem" is that most fantasy worlds exist in a "time stasis" status quo where the normal principle of evolution doesn't happen to people, including the human race, with taking into account magic. Of course, this is mostly due to none of us being able to truly conceive how a true civilization of magic would evolve... I mean, just look at where we got from the little discovery of how to create (and control) electricity. Now apply that to all the wonders magic is supposed to be able to perform in RM... It wouldn't be much to say that the mere ability to cast a spell allowing one to fly, or create food, or cure disease, and to allow that ability to be replicated (through runes, items, etc.) would logically completely change a society from what we know ours did.

[Marc R]

I suspect the logic has less to do with "single shot vs rapidfire" and a lot more to do with "Killer 5 stroke combo!"

Teleport, fireball, teleport, fireball, teleport

And that's pre-school level gaming the logic. . .magic is not just a firebolt, it's a slew of reality warping effects, if allowed to cast 5 in a round, I'm sure any one of us could come up with a rather unstoppable 5 hit combo. . . .most of which will start and end with teleport, so nobody even knows you're there until they're taking damage and by the time they figure it out you're already gone.

It's less akin to single fire vs auto fire and more like "OK, so I pre-program the computer so we drop out of hyper, fire three photon torpedoes, then drop back into hyper."

Most sci fi games have rules in play to stop that, like "The hyperdrive takes 10 rounds to re-set" or some-such.

It's not hosing an area down with 5 attacks, it's stacking spells for grandiose unstoppable combos.

[yammahoper]

Grandios unstoppable combos are often quite real.

A machine gun leveled at you or a 12 guage is just that.  Sane people, when faced with a cop armed with that shotgun leveled at them, don't make sudden moves.  The cop just won, without firing a shot, precisely because it is a grandios unstoppable combo (trained oficer with five rounds of howling death at his disposal).  A crossbow can achieve the same effect, as can a knight in a crowd of unarmed people.  Why not the mage?  Can't the mage stare down the crowd, knowing in the end the crowd WILL kill him, but at least one of them has to volunteer to DIE first?

The game mechanics aint easy, but as far as gaming goes, it creates a delicious set of circumstance for drama and story telling.  The Mexican Stand-off is a classic.

[Marc R]

Drop a nuke from orbit.

I must not be explaining the logic of what I mean, as that's not the point. A potent attack is not the key, the key is that 5 spell combos allow you to select anyone, and then almost guarantee you can ambush them, attack them three times, and escape without a counter.

Casters can do things that normally cannot be done, but they can only do one at a time, this means spells only need to be balanced in and of themselves.

If you allow combos, you need to balance every possible combined spell effect. . .and the combinations possible are limitless.

Having the drop on you, and you choose to give in, is just one good move. . .and the way to stop it was to not get into that position to start with.

Cop and you enter each other's perceptions, then he draws, then you're screwed.

This is not the same as "A mage you can't see observing you from 10 blocks away with a spyglass, teleports onto a roof 50' above you, then fireballs you three times, then teleports out."

The assassin needs to sneak up, make rolls, get next to you, then ambush you, make rolls, and manage to kill you. The cop needed to have the shotgun, get in range and get the drop on you. . .the machinegun nest can't teleport across a continent to kill you at dinner and teleport home before anyone notices you're dead. . .it's not in any way shape or form a fair metaphor.

Three fireballs per round from an attacker you can't see or target isn't the same, it's a whole 'nother ball of wax, a totally different situation. . .and that's not the worst someone can do with 5 spells in one round, not nearly, it's just blunt and easy to see.

A better metaphor than your cop would be "Would you allow someone to run up 50', attack, then run back 50' without penalty or opportunity to counterattack?" and that's only about 1% as crazy as teleport-bang-bang-bang-teleport.

[yammahoper]

Ok.  I said nothing about combos.  I was talking about options for autofire, which would be the same spell fired multiple times, just like a gun.  I have no desire to alter the one spell a round rule.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

A better metaphor than your cop would be "Would you allow someone to run up 50', attack, then run back 50' without penalty or opportunity to counterattack?" and that's only about 1% as crazy as teleport-bang-bang-bang-teleport.

A plane can locate its target from miles away, fly up there, fires its many missiles and fly away before anyone with the appropriate counter-equipment can react. It's how countries at the top of technology would win against ones that aren't. So, yes?

This is not the same as "A mage you can't see observing you from 10 blocks away with a spyglass, teleports onto a roof 50' above you, then fireballs you three times, then teleports out."

A sniper can pretty much do that, without the teleportating thing: locate you without being noticed, shooting several times before anyone can react, and go away before anyone can reach him. Would you forbid that if you were playing in a modern setting? (I'm not even talking about using self-detecting rockets where the enemy wouldn't even have to be "10 blocks away" but could just do way worse than a fireball more often, whilst being way farer and unreachable.

[Marc R]

Ok.  I said nothing about combos.  I was talking about options for autofire, which would be the same spell fired multiple times, just like a gun.  I have no desire to alter the one spell a round rule.

Sorry, I read the opposite in:

Grandios unstoppable combos are often quite real.

I get what you are saying, in terms of autofire, but isn't that just "Triad of flame" or some variant spell in that line?

[jdale]

I think one "problem" is that most fantasy worlds exist in a "time stasis" status quo where the normal principle of evolution doesn't happen to people, including the human race, with taking into account magic. Of course, this is mostly due to none of us being able to truly conceive how a true civilization of magic would evolve... I mean, just look at where we got from the little discovery of how to create (and control) electricity. Now apply that to all the wonders magic is supposed to be able to perform in RM... It wouldn't be much to say that the mere ability to cast a spell allowing one to fly, or create food, or cure disease, and to allow that ability to be replicated (through runes, items, etc.) would logically completely change a society from what we know ours did.

I think it's a lot easier to run a campaign where magic is a known quantity, not something that advances in power rapidly. Most fantasy games not only work that way, but assume that the power level is decreasing. Great artifacts are left from an earlier age when magic was mighty. More like post-Roman medieval Europe.

Can you imagine running a game where magical techniques and spells were increasing in power and sophistication as fast as technology increased between, say, 1980 and today? I think it would be fascinating, but a ton of extra work for the GM!

[Marc R]

OLF, a sniper with a bow can kill you from over there, in the game as is, so could a caster with a single spell.

That's again, totally not the point.

The sniper is in the tower 10 blocks away, he fires once. . .he's still in the tower. . .you can go to the tower, you can shoot back at the tower, you can hide, combat resolves.

The mage is right on top of you with minimal or no range penalties to make his three attacks, then is gone. . he could teleport to another continent on the way out. . .what are you going to do about it?

Forcing the mage to one spell a round means he teleports in, you might not notice, he fireballs you, you notice and react, he can fireball you another 2 times if he wants to give you 3 rounds to find and counterattack him, then teleport out on the 5th round.

Which is not the same thing as the mage teleporting in fireballing you thrice and teleporting out inside one round. . even if you notice the mage, you have almost no time to react before he's gone and completely outside your ability to counterattack.

The plane attacking from over the horizon is firing, waiting a bunch of rounds for the missile to reach you and go off, and again, is still roughly in the area, not instantly back in it's hanger on another continent so the pilot can sip a beer with impunity.

The issue is not about unstoppable levels of force, hell, a dragon vs 1st level PCs is unstoppable force. . .it's about allowing someone to string an action combo inside a round that always starts with a nearly unstoppable ambush and ends with them escaping to nearly complete safety. . .within the round in which the target is being surprise attacked and likely gets no effective counter off.

You need to work hard to get yourself into a situation where you can ambush and then escape, it shouldn't be something a caster can do casually at will as long as they don't roll an UM 01-02.

That's the core issue. . it's not what combos make possible, it's what they make CASUALLY possible with little effort beyond "ABBBA combo seems like it will work.". . .I think it's game braking to make something that nasty casual. . .

Getting into the right tower, at the right time, with a rifle, without getting caught, hitting your target then getting away is not casual. Getting a plane with stand off attack capability to within attack range, with accurate spotting of a non line of sight target, without being detected or tipping of the target, hitting the target and then getting away also isn't casual.

[jdale]

The mage is right on top of you with minimal or no range penalties to make his three attacks, then is gone. . he could teleport to another continent on the way out. . .what are you going to do about it?

Forcing the mage to one spell a round means he teleports in, you might not notice, he fireballs you, you notice and react, he can fireball you another 2 times if he wants to give you 3 rounds to find and counterattack him, then teleport out on the 5th round.

I think there is an underlying issue here about the nature of the combat round. The combat round is supposed to be a representation of the shortest relevant unit of time in combat. You could model every single sword blow, but it would take forever and not make the game better. So instead it gets abstracted out to a longer round and you resolve the result of what happened in the round. Because of that, you can deal with actions and responses on a round-by-round basis.

If you stack up too many actions in the same round, it stops making sense. If someone comes around the corner, runs toward you, makes multiple attacks (magic or not), then runs away, it is reasonable to ask why you couldn't react before it was over. 10 seconds is long enough that you would not necessarily be flatfooted for the whole time (you might be - but it would not necessarily happen that way). If the amount of time required to do something significant that should be responded to is 1 or 2 seconds, you really have to abandon the 10 second round and switch to a 1-2 second round, so that there is a way to handle responses to such quick events.