Topic: EAR: cover and position penalties vs. corner and following

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

I never really wondered about the matter because I never really got PCs powerful enough to cast the corner and following bolts but, since there already are cover and position penalties, when exactly do you use such bolts?
What I mean is: suppose your target is hidden around the corner and you know where he is. The -60 "Full cover" penalty states it applies when the target is "detected but not sighted" and the example given ("partially behind a tree" which would be covered by the -30 "Partial cover: less than 1/2 target sighted" penalty) indicates that "detected but not sighted" really mean hidden behind something (if "cover and position" wasn't obvious enough) rather than, say, being hidden inside the mist. So, it means you're able to target your, well, target albeit at -60. Why a need for a corner bolt then, even more since using it would halve your OB, which would probably result in way more than a -60 penalty considering it's a 20th or 25th level spell, level at which your directed spell OB is more than likely to exceed 120... OTOH, if you need either a corner or a following spell to hit a target whenever he's hidden behind something, what's the use of the cover and position penalties? When can they then apply?

[providence13]

Interesting topic!
I'm surprised this hasn't come up in my games yet. Although the PC's don't have the skill to cast the spells, some of their Spell Mastery is getting high enough to allow it. (Following, Cornering, etc. are all mods I have for the skill.)
Since Lightning Bolt is as Shock Bolt, I think this helps us. Shock Bolts are shot from the palm, so Lightning bolts follow the same pattern. This sounds like a straight line-of-sight, to me. Straight line. If you see/notice/perceive  people out side of this straight line, maybe this spell is not for you.

Mages can't always draw a straight line to their opponent.   

[RandalThor]

Well, the easiest thing to do would be to halve the penalty. But, I like the idea that for the first shot, at least, you get rid of the penalty; this would come as a big surprise to the target who thought they were safe behind the tree, wall, whatever. After that (provided they are still able to function) the target would have to think of another way to keep from getting whacked.

Other than that, I imagine that it is used to attack people who may have started out in your line of sight, but moved out if it through their movement. (Another problem with the round sequence: all a character's actions taking place in the same fraction of a second during the round, instead of spread out across the round as is natural.) So, at the beginning of a round the mage has the orc chief squarely in his sights and he is going to lightning bolt the sukka! Unfortunately, the chief is smart enough to see that the fight is going against him and that a retreat is in order. (He didn't get to the ripe old age of 27 by being [too] stupid.) So, he decides to scram, in a hurry. The mage isn't ready with the lightning bolt spell yet, so the chief gets "away" through a side tunnel. the mage decides to go for him anyway with the cornered lightning bolt. (I would probably go with a negative modifier in this case.) Of course, I also don't play with the regular RM action sequence in which spells automatically go first in a round.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

This sounds like a straight line-of-sight, to me. Straight line. If you see/notice/perceive people out side of this straight line, maybe this spell is not for you.

There's always a straight line to somewhere. Now, if you mean that there may be an obstacle to said straight line, how can your target be "partially covered" or "fully covered" if there's no obstacle in the straight line allowing you to see/notice/perceive him? There's no obstacle! So, he's not hidden/covered! Whilst, if there's an obstacle (and he's covered), there's the cover and position penalty to take of such a situation, so there's no need for the corner or following spell!

Other than that, I imagine that it is used to attack people who may have started out in your line of sight, but moved out if it through their movement. (Another problem with the round sequence: all a character's actions taking place in the same fraction of a second during the round, instead of spread out across the round as is natural.) So, at the beginning of a round the mage has the orc chief squarely in his sights and he is going to lightning bolt the sukka! Unfortunately, the chief is smart enough to see that the fight is going against him and that a retreat is in order. (He didn't get to the ripe old age of 27 by being [too] stupid.) So, he decides to scram, in a hurry. The mage isn't ready with the lightning bolt spell yet, so the chief gets "away" through a side tunnel. the mage decides to go for him anyway with the cornered lightning bolt.

But why wouldn't the -60 "Full cover" penalty apply then? After all, the mage has to know where he is anyway (meaning, to detect his location a way or another) since even it's a prerequesite even to the corner and following bolts. Since the mage cannot see the orc any longer, isn't the orc "detected by not sighted", meaning susceptible to the -60 "Full cover" penalty?

Of course, I also don't play with the regular RM action sequence in which spells automatically go first in a round.

You see, it's even more disturbing since these spells existed from the beginning of RM, back when spells would fire before the target could move anyway...

All, in all, since I wasn't apparently clear enough, both the corner and the following bolts state the mage has to know his target's location. OK. So he knows it. Now, can he see his target at all? If he doesn't at all, isn't his target "detected but not sighted"? In which case, the situation is already handled by the cover and position -60 "full cover" penalty! If he does but only partially, isn't his target "less than half-sighted"? In which case, the situation is already handled by the cover and position -30 "partial cover" penalty! In other words, such penalties already cover all situations where the target is detected/the target's location is known: he's sighted, he's partially sighted, and he's not sighted. Then, what are the uses of the corner and following spells?

It goes:
Do you know your target's location?

• Yes. Do you see him?
  • Yes, fully. You can fire at him with no penalty.
  • Yes, but only partially. You can fire at him, using the -30 "partial cover: less than half-sighted" penalty.
  • Not at all. You can fire at him, using the -60 "full cover: detected but not sighted" penalty.
• No. You cannot fire at him.

So, when would you use the corner or following bolts?

[jdale]

By that logic, you could also fire arrows around corners. It's just a cover penalty after all.

I don't think normal bolts (or arrows) can make turns or go through solid rock or walls. Cover means the line to the target is partially obstructed, but not fully. It's also possible the view is obstructed but not in a way that will prevent attacks (e.g. bushes). The cornering bolts can actually make turns to deal with 100% cover that cannot be shot through.

There are lots of ways to know the location of a target that has gone around a corner. Presence, for example, or simply seeing the target go around the corner.

[providence13]

Do you even use cover bonuses for these spells?

OB is halved for 90 degree cornering bolts. If it only needs to turn one corner, then you might not have cover.

Following bolts may make as many turns as necessary.. (as long as the opening is larger than 6" radius). Good luck finding cover. These things are smart missiles.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

By that logic, you could also fire arrows around corners.

In such a case, the rules state that "if a combattant is completely protected by cover, and is making no attack himself, the GM may rule that no attack can be made against him", though. Normal missile combat rules also make a difference between "soft" and "hard" covers. Not in the case of elemental bolts.

Cover means the line to the target is partially obstructed, but not fully.

So, it's a "full cover" penalty even though the target isn't fully covered but only partially covered, yet it's not a "partial cover"?

It's also possible the view is obstructed but not in a way that will prevent attacks (e.g. bushes). The cornering bolts can actually make turns to deal with 100% cover that cannot be shot through.

That would make a little bit more sense, I guess. Except for the "soft" and "hard" part covered by the normal missile combat rules existing, which would imply such matters were taken into consideration when RM2 was written, so them not even being mentioned in the case of elemental bolts would imply elemental bolts do not make a difference between "soft" and "hard" covers.
I mean, you have "half soft cover", "half hard cover", "full soft cover", "full hard cover", "half cover" and "full cover". If "half cover" doesn't mean "both half soft cover and half hard cover", if "full cover" doesn't mean "full soft cover and full hard cover", and "full cover" means "the view is obstructed but not in a way that will prevent attacks", and there's even a difference made with all of these and "a combattant is completely protected by cover, and is making no attack himself", what the hell is being behind a "full soft cover", a "full hard cover" and a "full cover"? Are bushes a "full soft cover"? Then what are "full hard covers"? Are bushes a "full hard cover"? Then what are "full soft covers"?
In the example given in the book, the target is partially behind a wall (something through which arrows cannot get) and it's considered a "half hard cover". Wouldn't it be considered then a "full hard cover" if the target was fully covered by it?

Do you even use cover bonuses for these spells?

No, but the point is that halving your bonus would most certainly give you a higher penalty than merely applying the cover penalty.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Let's sum up the cover situations:

1. Target is hidden behind something, and there's no opening to reach him. You cannot shoot him anyway, as corner and following bolts need an opening (I'm not even opening the can of worms that'd be to consider whether the spellcaster has to know where the opening is!).

2. Target is hidden behind something, and there's openings to reach him.
   2.1. Target is completely protected behind something.
      2.1.1. Missiles cannot pass the obstacle and target doesn't even make attack so he doesn't ever reveal himself. Point covered by the cover rules. Mentioned in the missile rules (you cannot shoot him) but not the bolt rules. Doesn't that mean the bolt rules consider him as being fully covered, thus being already managed by a rule?
      2.1.2. Missiles cannot pass the obstacle but target sometimes reveals himself (for instance, in order to shoot). Point covered by the cover rules. "Full hard cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "full cover" in the bolt rules?
      2.1.3. Missiles can pass the obstacle. Point covered by the cover rules.  "Full soft cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "full cover" in the bolt rules?
    2.2. Target is partially protected behind something.
      2.2.1. Missiles cannot pass the obstacle. Point covered by the cover rules. "Half hard cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "half cover" in the bolt rules?
      2.2.2. Missiles can pass the obstacle. Point covered by the cover rules.  "Half soft cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "half cover" in the bolt rules?

See? The cover rules cover, well, all the possible situations, when it comes to missile rules. If you assume that since RM2 thought about all of them for the missile cover rules, it also did for the bolt rules and match both rules, then... when would you use the corner and following bolts?

[RandalThor]

Do you even use cover bonuses for these spells?

OB is halved for 90 degree cornering bolts. If it only needs to turn one corner, then you might not have cover.

Following bolts may make as many turns as necessary.. (as long as the opening is larger than 6" radius). Good luck finding cover. These things are smart missiles.

If the spell already has in place a set of modifiers, I do not think it is appropriate or fair to add more. It seems to me that the spell, by having its own special modifier(s), is saying: "Use this instead of what you would use regularly. It supersedes the regular rules."

[markc]

Let's sum up the cover situations:

1. Target is hidden behind something, and there's no opening to reach him. You cannot shoot him anyway, as corner and following bolts need an opening (I'm not even opening the can of worms that'd be to consider whether the spellcaster has to know where the opening is!).

2. Target is hidden behind something, and there's openings to reach him.
   2.1. Target is completely protected behind something.
      2.1.1. Missiles cannot pass the obstacle and target doesn't even make attack so he doesn't ever reveal himself. Point covered by the cover rules. Mentioned in the missile rules (you cannot shoot him) but not the bolt rules. Doesn't that mean the bolt rules consider him as being fully covered, thus being already managed by a rule?
      2.1.2. Missiles cannot pass the obstacle but target sometimes reveals himself (for instance, in order to shoot). Point covered by the cover rules. "Full hard cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "full cover" in the bolt rules?
      2.1.3. Missiles can pass the obstacle. Point covered by the cover rules.  "Full soft cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "full cover" in the bolt rules?
    2.2. Target is partially protected behind something.
      2.2.1. Missiles cannot pass the obstacle. Point covered by the cover rules. "Half hard cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "half cover" in the bolt rules?
      2.2.2. Missiles can pass the obstacle. Point covered by the cover rules.  "Half soft cover" in the missile rules. Wouldn't that be "half cover" in the bolt rules?

See? The cover rules cover, well, all the possible situations, when it comes to missile rules. If you assume that since RM2 thought about all of them for the missile cover rules, it also did for the bolt rules and match both rules, then... when would you use the corner and following bolts?

 I like the above rules.


 Following Bolts and Corner bolts:
{Note I am doing this from memory as I do not have my books at the moment}
  IMHO Corner Bolt would be used when you target something around a corner. In this case I am thinking about a target being a square or object but it could also be a person. The Spell would then use its range to reach the appropriate target or location.
  Example: My bolt spell has a range of 300 yards (I just made this up), I walk around the corner after studying my target who is 100 yards away. I go around the corner 40 yards, so my range is now 140 yards to the target. After the correct time I cast my spell(s) and they go off perfectly. The bolt would now corner at the 40yrd mark (or slightly after the 40yrd mark so it does not hit the wall) and I get to roll an attack on the target.
  Example Following Bolt:
   Following Bolt [Spell] in this case would allow me to designate a target and make more then 1 corner for the spell to follow.


Not official rules but how I would so it.
 In both Examples above I had the caster notice or study the target in some way and then cast the spell (I know this is RM2/C/X but in RMSS/FRP you would use the targeting skill IMHO to get the right target location for the spell. Do not use Targeting for attack spells as I am so often reminded of.). If you do not know where the target is or you are guessing then IMHO I would assign some penalties. In RM2 I think I would require an observation roll to locate the exact spot and then based on that roll provide penalties or a bonus to the OB attack roll.   


MDC

[providence13]

Casting X instant spell gives +5 OB for that round.
Casting an instant is 10%Act.
Making an attack requires 100%Act -1OB/-1%Act.
So it looks like casting this spell results in a -5 OB.

But it doesn't because the spell specifically tells you the result. You get a +5 OB for the round.
(This example is for RM/FRP and may not apply to all RM versions. Might even be some of the reason for different versions.)

On the other hand, Olf may have found something that works great. I'm all for simplification and rule precedents. 

On the Observation and Targeting points,
Not many spells state something concrete like Following bolts "may make as many turns as necessary".

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Following Bolts and Corner bolts:
{Note I am doing this from memory as I do not have my books at the moment}
  IMHO Corner Bolt would be used when you target something around a corner. In this case I am thinking about a target being a square or object but it could also be a person. The Spell would then use its range to reach the appropriate target or location.
  Example: My bolt spell has a range of 300 yards (I just made this up), I walk around the corner after studying my target who is 100 yards away. I go around the corner 40 yards, so my range is now 140 yards to the target. After the correct time I cast my spell(s) and they go off perfectly. The bolt would now corner at the 40yrd mark (or slightly after the 40yrd mark so it does not hit the wall) and I get to roll an attack on the target.
  Example Following Bolt:
   Following Bolt [Spell] in this case would allow me to designate a target and make more then 1 corner for the spell to follow.

So, the corner and following bolts wouldn't be for when the target is hidden behind an obstacle but for when the caster hids himself behind an obstacle? I like that, and it's coherent with the cover and position rules. I think I'll go with that.
Thanks markc.

[markc]

Following Bolts and Corner bolts:
{Note I am doing this from memory as I do not have my books at the moment}
  IMHO Corner Bolt would be used when you target something around a corner. In this case I am thinking about a target being a square or object but it could also be a person. The Spell would then use its range to reach the appropriate target or location.
  Example: My bolt spell has a range of 300 yards (I just made this up), I walk around the corner after studying my target who is 100 yards away. I go around the corner 40 yards, so my range is now 140 yards to the target. After the correct time I cast my spell(s) and they go off perfectly. The bolt would now corner at the 40yrd mark (or slightly after the 40yrd mark so it does not hit the wall) and I get to roll an attack on the target.
  Example Following Bolt:
   Following Bolt [Spell] in this case would allow me to designate a target and make more then 1 corner for the spell to follow.

So, the corner and following bolts wouldn't be for when the target is hidden behind an obstacle but for when the caster hids himself behind an obstacle? I like that, and it's coherent with the cover and position rules. I think I'll go with that.
Thanks markc.

 Thanks,
 The only other use I can see is when the caster is using some sort of vision augmentation (spell) to see above a battle field (area) and can direct a bolt that way.  For modern games I do not think I would allow a caster to use TV to cast spells in areas they know very very well but I could change my mind. By Very Very Very well I mean studied for 3 years, maybe more. Yes I said studied for 3 years not live in for 3 years.


MDC

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

For modern games I do not think I would allow a caster to use TV to cast spells in areas they know very very well but I could change my mind.

There's a way to perform that in RM2. Through the use of the Arcane spell list, Crystal Visions (RoCo V, p75), a caster is able to spy a location or person, up to 100 mi/lvl (yeah!), and cast a spell on a specific target in said location, or the spied person. Granted, it's an Arcane spell list, and the caster needs to know it at at least level 25 but... Kinda powerful (though not more than spying a location with a satellite and shooting missiles from thousands kilometers away so one may argue it's not really broken).

[markc]

For modern games I do not think I would allow a caster to use TV to cast spells in areas they know very very well but I could change my mind.

There's a way to perform that in RM2. Through the use of the Arcane spell list, Crystal Visions (RoCo V, p75), a caster is able to spy a location or person, up to 100 mi/lvl (yeah!), and cast a spell on a specific target in said location, or the spied person. Granted, it's an Arcane spell list, and the caster needs to know it at at least level 25 but... Kinda powerful (though not more than spying a location with a satellite and shooting missiles from thousands kilometers away so one may argue it's not really broken).

 Yes but does the caster have that kind of range?  And if he does would you know about it?
MDC

[JimiSue]

I would go with a distance thing - for me the -60 represents a chance to be caught in the ouside of the effect, so it hits with less intensity (such as hiding behind a rock or tree or obstacle, but if the caster and target are both say 20' away from a 90 degree bend there is no way the target could get caught - in which case a corner bolt would be required.

GM's call, basically