Topic: Spell Lists the Good, Bad...

[markc]

 
RM Spell Lists: The Good, Bad and...

 
Note 1: this is my opinion on the subject that I have built over the years from playing role playing games as well as discussing issues about RM (2/RMSS/FRP then C (to a lesser extent))

 
Note 2: In an effort to remove formatting issues I wrote this in a word processing program but my old lap top here still tends to insert the cursor at random places at times. This maybe do to interactions with security software and Windows.

 
Note 3: A bit long, sorry.

 
Spell List Format-Description:
In general spell lists are designed to fir on one page.
Good: This is good for ease of paper management for your character, if you use a electronic device remember how long spell law is in general.
Bad: Some spells/list concepts  need more room to explain how to use them. For example I talked to a person who had about 5 pages of info about the Lay Healer Prosthetic's base list and he was looking to expand it to 20 pages. Also some concepts like magical familiars can have whole books written about how to use them and various options.

 
Spell List Format-Ranks:
The idea that you spend DP and either have a % chance to get a block of spells or spend DP and automatically raise your ranks in the list is and easy(er) way to balance PC vs monster power, IMHO.
Good: Simple idea spend DP get effects
Bad: In other games you have a number of spells to pick from at a given level and are not locked into a specific spell. It can be also very hard to add new spells to a list when all of the slots are taken with existing spells.

 
Spell Power vs Power Point (PP):
I often see people have trouble with the idea that more PP means the spell is more powerful and thus should be harder to resist.
I do not see it this way, IMHO the amount/part of the amount of the PP cost of a spell is forcing a magical effect to occur based on how you learn to generate the effect. So each list teaches a set of methods to generate effects that build upon each other and those methods have a impact of the PP cost of generate spells.
Why is this my opinion? If you look at effects the same effect can occur in different ranks on different lists depending on list type. So in general the same spell effect will cost different PP on the following scale (least to more PP) base list, closed list, open list then training package/prosaic list.
If you assume PP cost wholly related to ability to resist then you can have the following issue, an effect is rank 5 on a base list, then 8 on a closed list, then 12 on an open list and finally rank 20 on a training package/prosaic list. So just because the base list gets the effect earlier on the list it is easier to resist (using some RR ideas) then the same effect generated on a prosaic/training package list.
Good: Spell List PP idea is a good way to balance abilities gained over level.
Bad: IMHO just using PP cost of spell does not work with idea that base lists get effects before other lists.

 
PC Level vs Spell Parameters:
In games in which you have a high level you get strange interactions with level and cast spells perimeters.
  For example (just made things up to make it easy to see issue) a pure arms PC/NPC gets a light spell at rank 1 and they are level 51, the duration of the spell is 1 min/level. In this case the time the spell is active is 51 min, where as a pure arms PC/NPC who does the same thing at 1^st level has only a 1 min duration for the same amount of knowledge.
In general the PC/NPC level should have nothing or very little to do with their ability to have a spell last longer.
Good: In general most games are at fairly low level and this is not an issue or the issue does not arise that often.
Bad: If you play at higher levels or at levels where there is a greater disparity between the two their can be issues.

 
I think I had more things to say but I keep getting interrupted and pulled away (taken me about 3 hours to post the above).
BTW, I do not know if there is anything Ugly about RM Spell list idea but I am sure there might be some who have opinions on this.


MDC
 

[markc]

For got a couple of things:


SL in general:
Has held up great for how old it is and how RPing has changed through the years.


Fix for Level and spell parameters:
Now I use the following formula to determine things instead of level: Ranks in List + other mods. I am not going to go into all of the other mods I use but I do use talents and flaws as well as have tested other things.


MDC

[rdanhenry]

Using PP spent to influence the RR is not a core rule in any edition of Rolemaster.

Using ranks in a list as the level at which the spell is cast is an option in every copy of Spell Law that I have, though it might not have been in 1st edition. But if you take level to represent personal power and might of their "aura", it is easy enough to rationalize the core rule, at least for suitable settings.

Spell Law has always had additional sections to deal with areas of spell use that cannot be easily fit into the spell list listings of spells (which went 5-6 lists to two pages in RM2 Spell Law and have run over to additional pages for longer lists in every version).

As you recognize, there are pros and cons to each of these features, but these have long been recognized, as shown by the long history of optional rules and supplemental sections, so I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with your post.

[jdale]

I like the fact that, in Rolemaster, your base spells continue to be relevant and important no matter high level you get. Basing the RR on the caster level and not the spell level is important for that. Although you have access high level spells, because power point costs increase faster than your available PP, you're never going to be able to rely just on those high level spells, they will always be something you have to use carefully. That's not true for your target's improved RRs due to their higher level, which applies on every RR.

I like that your higher level spells are related to your lower level spells. It gives some coherence to your character, rather than just being a bundle of random tricks. Spell lists achieve that, slot systems don't.

I like that you pick up interesting tangential tricks along the way, things that are related to your important spells but maybe things you might not have actually selected. You may not use them very often but they can spur creative solutions. Spell lists achieve that, other systems for making spells related (e.g. spell prerequisite trees like GURPS) don't.

Long spell durations and such for high level Arms characters are a bit quirky, I don't know about that. On the other hand, it helps keep those spells relevant at high levels. In some other games, if you pick up a 1st level spell somehow (multiclass, feat, racial trait, etc), it quickly becomes irrelevant and pointless. If it was a choice between giving the Arms character duration/range/area based on their level vs based on their number of ranks in the list, I would stick with the current system.

[markc]

a) PP to influence RR's:
In general the level of a spell to resist is equal to its rank, rank is equal to its PP cost from simple math A is related to B and B is related to C thus A is related to C.


I also do not remember a core rule to spend more PP to increase a spells level, but it has been sometime since I have looked at the Spell Manipulation Skill and if something was in there about that.
I have in the past tested ideas of increasing PP's to influence RR's but in general did not find a system that worked well with the other RM rules.


When I get a chance I need to look at the options in SL as I do not remember it saying anywhere that you can use ranks in the list instead of the PC's level. I do have physical copies of RM2, RMSS, MERP and maybe RMFRP somewhere  and I might have a copy of RM that I picked up in a RPG bundle deal on ebay.


MDC

[jdale]

a) PP to influence RR's:
In general the level of a spell to resist is equal to its rank, rank is equal to its PP cost from simple math A is related to B and B is related to C thus A is related to C.

Is that an argument about how you think it should work? Because it's not how it does work.

RMSR pg 81 and RMFRP pg 52: "The attack's level (caster level if it is a spell, attack level if a poison or disease or fear)..."

It's also printed right on the RR table T-3.4 in both RMSR and Spell Law. "Attack Level *" and the footnote "* The Attack Level is the level of the caster."

In RM2 Character Law & Campaign Law, it's likewise in the footnote on the RR table, pg 39. "For spells the attack level is the caster's level."

Undoubtedly there are optional rules somewhere but the core rule in all editions of RM is that the RR is vs the caster level, not the PP, not the spell level, not the number of ranks.

[markc]

JDale,
Thanks for the info, it seems that I either misremembered or the person who taught me had a house rule.
(They/him/her worked on one or some of the early RM books and often I asked why things were the way their were in that game. Yes I am being very vague on the person or people for various reasons.)


MDC

[Hurin]

It might have been an optional rule in one of the Rolemaster Companions. But JDale is right that the core rule is that the RR is based on caster level.

[terefang]

It might have been an optional rule in one of the Rolemaster Companions. But JDale is right that the core rule is that the RR is based on caster level.

that is Spell Law Chapter 10.1 page 28

10.1 SPELL ATTACK VARIABILITY
If this optional rule is used, the Attack Level of a spell is equal
to the number of power points the caster expends to cast the spell
and not the level of the caster. To cast a spell, the caster must still
use at least a number of PPs equal to the level of the spell.
However, a spell caster has the option to use more PPs than the
level of the spell cast in order to make the spell more potent and
harder to resist (reflecting the same capacity of the higher level
spell user to be more effective, but requiring effort to reach this
higher level of effectiveness).

and RoCo6 Chapter 4.2 page 26

4.2. SPELL RESISTANCE ROLLS WITHOUT LEVEL
When using this optional rule, the level of the attacker
and the level of the defender have no effect on spell Resistance Rolls ...

and Chapter 4.3 page 27

4.3 VARIABILITY IN ATTACK LEVEL BASED ON LIST KNOWLEDGE
In Spell Law Section 10.1, a spell caster is allowed to vary the
amount of PPs that he puts into a spell, but he may only put in PPs
up to his level. If using this optional rule, a spell caster may put PPs
into a spell up to the level to which he has learned the list that
the spell is on.

[Hurin]

Thanks for finding that Terefang! I stand corrected: it was an optional rule right in Spell Law, and fleshed out a bit more in the Companions.

The more you know!