Topic: Bladeturn / Deflections

[Marrethiel]

A topic in the BETA test thread reminded me of something one of the RM2 group mentioned recently. We were talking about the house rules we have used so often that we think them the real rules. This convo started because of a couple of threads in these forums. So my friend mentioned the fact that the Bladeturn and Deflections spells are Force type, not Utility; force spells as a rule get RR's.

So should an RR be given to the attacker?

Though I'm always reluctant to apply logic to any game system (a dark and perilous undertaking), it actually seems rather consistent. If I were to cast a sleep or enchantment (fear etc) to stop the weapon attack the opponent would obviously get an RR, so why not for Bladeturn / Deflect.

Or have we been "doing it wrong" for the last 20 or so years?

[Cory Magel]

Common sense tells me: Sleep, Fear, etc are being cast on your attacker.  The Bladeturn/Deflectins spell is not being cast on the wielder of the weapon, but on the weapon or missile itself.  Therefore no RR.

The system tells me: RMSS Bladeturn and Deflections are Utility spells.

In RMU they appear to be labelled "E" which is Elemental (which is... odd, no idea what to make of that).
I'm pretty certain you don't get RR's vs them in RMU.

[jdale]

If it was a Utility spell, it couldn't affect a weapon held by an opponent at all. If it was Force, the opponent would get a RR. If it's Elemental, it's a real physical effect (rather than a resistable magical influence), resolved according to whatever the spell description says.  Seems reasonable to me.

That's how I read it anyway.

[tbigness]

I will have to intercede here. Force does not = RR's. It is applied as a physical condition that obscures, impedes, or blocks as a wall, shield or battering ram.  It interferes with the natural progression of the attack swing to bounce, missile shot to veer of a solid object of force.

[jdale]

RMU says (page 11):

Elemental (E)
Elemental spells are those in which the magic of the spell creates, summons, and/or manipulates some real physical element which then has effects on other things, such as the target of a Fire Bolt. These typically involve the six elements manipulated by Magicians: Cold, Earth, Fire, Light, Water, and Wind, but also include other elements, most notably the elements of sense involved in Essence illusions. Illusions are spells that create or manipulate a physical element perceived by one of the six senses used in Spell Law: sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch (i.e., feel), and Presence. (See Section 10.8 for a detailed treatment.)

Because the elements are simply real parts of the physical world, rather than spell forces, their effects do not allow for RRs except in certain cases in order to avoid having the effect “stick” to a target (Section 10.15).

Force (F)
These spells directly apply magical force to an object or being. Targets get an RR to avoid being affected. Targets do not get an RR for indirect spell effects (e.g., a Force spell is used to heat water that someone later jumps into).

(Emphasis added.)

I will also note that a Wall of Force (e.g. 50th level spell on Open Channeling Barrier Law, not to mention almost all the other barriers on that list) has type "E", not "F", . The Shield spell is type "E" as well.

The wording is different but the rule is functionally the same in RMSS. I don't know about RM2/RMC.

[Cory Magel]

We did once use Deflections to make a foe jumping down to a raised mine cart railway miss the railway (and fall to his death).  Granted, a very opportune moment and the right spell... but the GM probably should have given the foe a RR in that case.  That's a rather odd-ball example however.

[tbigness]

maybe not a RR so to say but a maneuver check would have been more appropriate.

[Ynglaur]

I think I would have applied a -100 to a Moving Maneuver, in lieu of automatically sending the hapless fellow to his death.  Still, that's quite clever.

[Marrethiel]

I guess I've always interpretted (in my head) these spells acting on the attacker directly (eg, as the arrow is about to be fired the arrow head is "Deflected" half an inch), but simply putting it as an instant forcefield affect eliminates this and moves it to the RMSS version of a utility spell (of indirect force).

I'm content with that.

@Cory: common sense is the Dark Path I spoke of

[Hurin]

Interesting question.

I had always seen Bladeturn and Deflections kind of like a wall of air, in which case I wouldn't allow the missile or weapon an RR.

But now that I have reread the Bladeturn and Deflections spells more carefully, it seems more that the spell really is a force spell acting on the missile or weapon. So I am leaning towards yes, force spell, RR.

[tbigness]

The force is against an inanimate object in effect. There is no RR vs a physical force being applied to a weapon weather deflecting or turning. I don't get where people are coming up with this concept. These spells repel the attacks like a raincoat repels water, it deflects the attack with a barrier, although some of that attack may penetrate through, it is still a barrier in this instance.

[Cory Magel]

Exactly, I'm with tbigness. Even if you want to call it a force spell you are casting it at the weapon/missile, not the attacker.  Now, if you use it against a natural attack... could be a different story.  I guess then you get into the discussion of if it should be consistent or not.

[Hurin]

I'm not disputing that you are casting the spell at an object.

But, as Jdale pointed out, objects get RRs against force spells. Even inanimate objects get an RR.

[Cory Magel]

I guess it becomes a matter of if you think that the wind itself, which supposedly pushes the attack out of line, is itself magical.  It seems the simplest explanation of the spell is magic creates a wind.  How far off is that from magic heating up water and being unable to roll a RR vs the hot water?

This seems to simply be a GM interpretation of a spell that I personally do not believe was intended to be resistible in the first place.

[jdale]

I've always considered items held/worn by a person to be within their aura, and therefore they get the RR (if there is one at all). I can't find a rule that says that though. But it doesn't seem to be just me, e.g. http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=11849.msg149690 Maybe it's actually a rule somewhere.

Assuming you go with that logic, if Bladeturn was a type F spell, the target would get an RR. Just like if you tried to set their sword on fire or melt their armor.

Whether the attack is pushed out of the way by wind or force or luck is color, and may vary depending on what spell list it happens to be on and how it is described there, not to mention GM whim, but if the spell Type is the same, that defines the mechanic.

[Cory Magel]

They are U spells in previous RM versions (no RR).  So, aside from a sneaking suspicion that they just didn't think about the possible ramifications of changing them to an E spell in RMU, it would appear the spells are not intended to be resistible... well, aside from the creative use our group made of it.  That, I think, would have justified some kind of roll to avoid it (even if it was just a Agility or Tumbling check).

[yammahoper]

No rr.  The spell is cast on a non resisting target and that target gains the spells benefit, just like a Prayer spell would give +X to RR's and MM's, the Deflect/Bladeturn provides DB.  No rr is needed and their is no resisting the spells active affect.

[tbigness]

+1 Agreed

[Hurin]

Actually, having reread the spell, I would say that nothing in the spell suggests you actually have to have a weapon involved. The spells says its 'effect is against 1 melee attack', which presumably includes martial arts and natural weapons.

I wouldn't get too mislead by the 'Blade' in the title of the spell. It seems to be colorful language that is not entirely accurate, at least if the description of the spell is anything to go by.

[Cory Magel]

You're right Hurin... but it we're talking about if it should be resistible or not the fact that it's being cast on a sword vs your hand might actually impact the ruling for some GM's.

I don't think the spell is intended to be resistible... but it's still going to create disagreements around the table, so it should be clarified.