Topic: shielding Combat Maneuver and Spell casting

[Turbs]

Another mechanics question

A warrior mage using Shielding Combat maneuver is engaged in melee combat,
he then attempts to cast Elemental weapon.

in this case does he lose his DB bonus for the combat maneuver when he switches his focus to cast the spell?

[Leyoz]

I have couple more questions:

Can you learn this style for two identical weapons? E.g. two daggers etc.

Does the Db apply to all situations? Missile combat etc?

[Thom @ ICE]

Every round the individual declares their action. If they declare casting "Elemental Weapon" during that round they no longer are performing the Shielding Weapon Combat Maneuver - so yes, they lose their combat maneuver bonuses.

The skill as described is only functional for 2 different weapons due to the requirement for "at least an equal number of ranks in both weapons to be used in the combination as he does with this style"

[Turbs]

how does casting an instant spell.. i,e, bladeturn apply to this same situation?

[Thom @ ICE]

By the rules as written... An instantaneous spell takes no time and can be cast in any round without disrupting other actions except for spellcasting. If your declared action was casting a spell and someone attacks you, it then depends upon who won initiative. 

* If you win initiative, your spell was completed before the attack, therefore you can cast bladeturn after your other spell, but still in the same round and block the attack. 
* If your foe has won initiative, you cannot cast bladeturn unless you disrupt your spell.

If you are fighting in combat and wish to use bladeturn, officially you can use it once per round without negatively impacting your attack/parry in any way - even if you don't win initiative.  Therefore it effectively gives you extra DB against one attack as long as your PP are available.

Personal opinion - I like to treat Instantaneous spells the same as I do Sudden Dodge. It allows you to do something outside your normal action, but it then becomes your action - either for that round or the following one.  This way it maintains balance.

Rules as written...
Joe and Steve face off with swords.  Joe is a far more experienced warrior with a +100 OB. Steve has only +20 OB, but he knows bladeturn and has a lot of PP available.
Joe declares an all out assault (no parry) because he knows he is far better than Steve.  Steve declares an all out assault (no parry).  Joe wins initiative and attacks, but Steve casts bladeturn scaled up to (-100) and Joe barely hits him.  Steve attacks and has his +20 OB giving him a greater chance of landing a major wound and after 3 rounds has badly wounded Joe, but each round he continued to use bladeturn to prevent Joe from landing a blow.

Thom's version...
Joe and Steve face off with swords.  Joe is a far more experienced warrior with a +100 OB. Steve has only +20 OB, but he knows bladeturn and has a lot of PP available.
Joe declares an all out assault (no parry) because he knows he is far better than Steve.  Steve declares an all out assault (no parry).  Joe wins initiative and attacks, but Steve casts bladeturn scaled up to (-100) and Joe barely hits him.  Steve used bladeturn and therefore cannot attack this round.  Steve wins initiative and attacks Joe, landing a solid blow.  Joe retaliates again attacking all out (no parry) and Steve decides to cast bladeturn. Joe's attack is turned aside, but Steve's already used his attack for the next round so Joe's attack is a killing blow and Steve is dead.

In other words, I've got no problem allowing instantaneous spells to stop that one attack, or deflect the one arrow, or allows him to land without issue.... I just don't like giving it to him as an extra free action during any round as long as he has PP.  It should either replace his action that round, or count as his action for the next round.  He could continuously use bladeturn to repeatedly defend himself, but in that situation he really shouldn't be able to attack - but that's just my personal opinion.

[Turbs]

i like that idea..
I am also concerend about a level 5 PC having a Db of 99 without any parrying (by using a main gauche with shield training as the shielding weapon and soft leather armour) and an OB of 110
and being able to cast instant blade turns to bump that DB..even unscaled it gaves the PC +124 DB plus an all out attack at +110 all at level 5

I personally feel this needs to be reviewed or nerfed.
[/my2cents]

[Ecthelion]

Thom, IMO your change of handling Bladeturn spells would render these spells almost useless. What's the point of learning Bladeturn then, if all it can do is buy you 10-20 seconds of time until your opponent finally hits you?

You also used a very extreme example, where a) Joe has fully knowledge of Steve's still with weapons but no knowledge of his spell casting skills and b) where Joe acts without caution. If he was either aware that Steve can also cast Bladeturn (and why shouldn't he since he already knows about Steve's weapon skills) or if he only parried a bit of his OB, then he would still in most cases win the combat once Steve runs out of PPs.

I can understand that another free action feels a bit too powerful. But instead of practically removing the instantaneous spells it would IMHO make more sense to perhaps have an instant spell cause a -10 to OB (or other actions in the round).

Just my 2 cents

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

A scaled Bladeturn will burn PPs and extreme bladeturns burn huge amounts of PPs and have huge scaling penalties. -100 Bladeturn is a 24 PP spell with a -90 scaling penalty. If the caster succeeds, he's safe for a round against one attack. If the spell fails, he's thrown PP away and wide open to attack. Casters go through PPs faster than fighters tire of swinging their swords.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[Thom @ ICE]

Yes, I used an extreme example, and true that I did not include all of the modifiers for the spellcasting roll.

Go with the simple statement... 
The official rules give spellcasters an extra action to assist their defense compared to what a pure warrior can.

The premise is that the spell is useless unless it can be cast instantaneously (similar in concept to Sudden Dodge).
*  In the spellcasters situation they are able to see the attack, react to it by gathering mana and casting a spell, and then continue their action without any impact except the one scenario where it may interrupt their active casting of another spell.
*  In the warrior's situation they are able to see the attack, react to it by suddenly dodging out of the way, but they lose their action for one round in exchange (either current or next).

I don't see the need to give spellcasters an additional advantage.  If anything the mental, physical and mystical effort required to suddenly cast a bladeturn spell should be far more impactful to the spellcaster's other actions than simply dodging out of the way physically would be to a pure arms user.  In the past I have had the same discussion so I am not saying anything is changing (that's not my place to do). I am simply pointing out the official rule, and my own personal comments regarding it.

[Old Man]

...
* If you win initiative, your spell was completed before the attack, therefore you can cast bladeturn after your other spell, but still in the same round and block the attack. 
...

So HARP breaks the old RM maxim of "one spell per round" eh? Interesting ...

[dagorhir]

...
* If you win initiative, your spell was completed before the attack, therefore you can cast bladeturn after your other spell, but still in the same round and block the attack. 
...

So HARP breaks the old RM maxim of "one spell per round" eh? Interesting ...

If my understanding is correct, characters are limited to one normal spell and one instantaneous spell per round.

[Thom @ ICE]

Correct.  At most one normal spell and one instantaneous spell per round.

If they do not win initiative then it is assumed that their standard spell is in process of casting when they are attacked, and in order to cast the instantaneous spell they would need to cancel their standard spell (no PP loss).  This limits them to 1 casting for that round.

If they win initiative then it is assumed that their standard spell completes normally before they need to cast the instantaneous spell, and both can be completed.

[Falenthal]

Correct.  At most one normal spell and one instantaneous spell per round.

If they do not win initiative then it is assumed that their standard spell is in process of casting when they are attacked, and in order to cast the instantaneous spell they would need to cancel their standard spell (no PP loss).  This limits them to 1 casting for that round.

If they win initiative then it is assumed that their standard spell completes normally before they need to cast the instantaneous spell, and both can be completed.

The concept has more logic (and is easier to understand) than anything else I've seen. I'll use this criteria also.