Topic: An idea for Magic House Rules...

[RandalThor]

I think issue 1 is dealt with by issue 3. In fact, I think that issue 3 is a biggie. There is a huge difference in being 100 ft away than being 10 ft away from your enemy. (Look up "21 feet" for law enforcement.)

Issues 2, 4, & 5: are weird in that just because you transport someone 100 feet by long door doesn't mean they get the same acceleration as if they were falling. Does the friendly version splat you like that? In this regard, the bonus should only be the spellcasters bonus with the spell, mitigated by the targets DB or something like that (AG bonus x2, maybe). So no +5280 "OB" on a long door attack.

Really, the best use of the spell offensively is to use it to transport an enemy over a cliff, and that is only usable in certain situations. Otherwise what you are doing is sending your enemy away from you so you (the group) can regroup without splitting up.

And I already said that I believe that spell should have a higher starting point, though, yes, that isn't "in the rules" as they are now.

[Marc R]

I'm looking at it as worst case scenario. . .and long dooring the target straight up. . .from there gravity causes the falling. . . .if you can long door to the top of a building, you can long door 300' straight up. . .

This is from prior experience, and how people in RM1/2 used long door/teleport offensively.

[jurasketu]

Guys...

Would ya'll do me a flavor?

Quit using Long Door as an example of a spell that could be used offensively. The spell description PLAINLY states that the TARGET of the spell and NOT the caster gets to choose where they will teleport (and would have to *know* the specific location if out of sight). So, you really can't use it offensively in any fashion.

Now... A Change Object Size on the other hand... Or a Long Door Object...

Robin

[Marc R]

J, the point above was to change the spell to make it possible. . .hence the "house rules" in the title of the thread. We're quite aware of what the spell says. 

Changing a wooden spike into a tiny splinter of wood, adding it to someone's food, then it resuming normal size was a popular use of object size tampering.

As a non lethal version, shrinking a spike down into a tiny nail, hammering it into a door or wall with your dagger, then letting it re-grow was often good for snapping a lock, cracking a hard object, or other shenanigans.

[jurasketu]

J, the point above was to change the spell to make it possible. . .hence the "house rules" in the title of the thread.

Oh. Sorry. It would probably help if I read the ENTIRE thread... 

[RandalThor]

Ooops. I totally forgot the whole "straight up" scenario. (I do love the shrinking stick idea, very nasty!)

Still, the minuses already there (most specifically, the range), coupled with an increase in base cost (level, effectively) as well as increased scaling options make it "balanced" in my book. Also, still going by what J said, the target must teleport (or long door) but they get to choose the direction, so if you don't want to go with the increased cost/level, this is still a good way to limit the "save or die" aspect of the spell. (The orc chieftain ready to slay the human interloper suddenly finds himself two valleys over, near the entrance to one of his other orc clans. With a deep throated growl he enters and begins to round up all the warriors to go back and retake his lair! Meanwhile, the group has been both patching up their injuries and ransacking the place, because they are fairly certain that the orc chieftain will be back. And he will be pissed!)

But all this just confirms my general dislike of "adventurer" based magic systems. I prefer the magic system to seem more like it developed naturally in a world sense, not that it was totally hijacked by a very small subculture. Yes, the vast majority of the systems out there have been designed because of carryover, or "legacy" ideology from earlier systems - it is easier that way. The massive amount of utility spells out there, so that they can do things we can or that can be done in far future sci-fi settings, has gotten on my nerves.

Plus, by limiting the vast array of spells, it is easier to design adventures. You don't have to take into consideration the myriad of methods the group can use to overcome the encounter. I now, much more prefer the "sword & sorcery" style where the magic is rare and fairly low-powered and very high-powered (just nothing in between: low powered mages have amped up parlor tricks, while the powerful ones are able to move mountains).

[Marc R]

If you leave the target in control of the spell, it's non offensive. . . .the spell changes location, it doesn't impart momentum. . . .they'd teleport behind you and give you solid stabbing from the rear hex side.

[RandalThor]

Except that they HAVE to teleport the FULL distance - that is the offensive aspect. In that case, you just give them the choice of lesser of two evils (unless they also want to get away).

[Marc R]

If you leave the target selects destination part of the spell alone, they can teleport anywhere up to the limit. . .just like currently. . .you can long door 10'. . .it's not a fixed move of 100', it's "up to 100 feet" in the spell description. If the target picks, they can choose to teleport anywhere within the distance allowed by the amount of PP put into the spell, not automatically to the max range of the spell.

[RandalThor]

Well, we are talking about making it usable as an offensive spell, but maybe that one isn't practical in that sense, so you wouldn't do it. In this case, long door is out as an offensive spell, problem solved. Each utility spell will have those elements about them that make them usable offensively or not and will need to be dealt with accordingly.

The "shrinking stick" scenario you mentioned is a great use of a utility spell and there are multiple layers as to why it should be allowed. I mean really, you have to get the person to drink it down. If they are even slightly suspicious of you (and I would assume that the orc chieftan of the clan you just invaded would be very suspicious of you) it is likely very hard to get them to drink something you gave them. Now, you could describe the "perfect" scenario, but even then there are reasons as to why the person is drinking the mini-stick. Role-playing reasons and roll-playing ones, I am sure. (The "perfect" part of the scenario has to be set up some way.) So long as the group went through some series of trials to get them to that point, I don't see a reason not to allow those things to work. Not EVERY action needs to be able to be resisted/challenged that very instant. If there were numerous hurdles prior, that should be good enough at least some of the time. [Plus, we always forget that there can be ROLE-playing drawbacks to doing things. PCs that go around doing such horrific things would get a dark "reputation." If that is what they want - and what the campaign is about - then fine, if not, they are going to have problems dealing with "normal" society.]

What people do when they think of these rules is go to the worst-case scenario. And you know what? IT'S THE WORST CASE SCENARIO FOR A REASON. The majority of other scenarios won't work out that way. Though, if you find through play that a particular spell is too easy to abuse in some way, feel free to alter it so that it is harder, that is OK, and doesn't need to be done prior to gameplay. (As far as I am concerned)

[providence13]

Ooops. I totally forgot the whole "straight up" scenario. (I do love the shrinking stick idea, very nasty!)

I don't know if it would work in this system, but I had similar ideas on Darts of the Javelin, Darts of the Lance, etc.
A dart that attacks on the Lance/spear table would be pretty tough.

I guess you could have slingstones of siege.. siegestones...

[Marc R]

The logic might not work right, in the sense expanding may screw up the shot. . .but making a barbed giant arrow, shrinking it, then firing it. . . .after it hits, the duration cancels and the arrow expands into a lance size in your flesh. . .should jump up additional damage.

[jurasketu]

Expanding the arrow (or stick) both work - but I would give the target a chance to 'resist' since the magical effect occurs within their aura and would cause them harm. I think that is what Mr Rasyr suggested on another thread...

For military (field, siege and ship), a flying wizard (at 500+ meters altitude to avoid ground attack) with bag of river stones and a wand of Change Size... Expand size into boulder, boulder falls - talk about artillery fire... So unless the enemy can counter with flying wizard of its own to fly Combat Air Patrol - we're talking SERIOUS air support.

[Marc R]

The aura issue is questionable, in that the magic is negating, not activating. . .it's not like your aura can make a 5 round spell last 6 rounds or infinite time.

It's arguable if a caster could say negate a fly spell cast on someone else before the duration runs out, and if that would provoke an RR, as it's causing them to fall, but if the actual duration runs out I'm not seeing how an RR would change anything.

I wouldn't allow you to grow an arrow in someone, but if a shrunken spear grows from arrow to spear size because the duration ran out, that's another story.

[RandalThor]

I think the key word for J's point is "within." By stating that the harmful effects of the spell in question will take place within the individuals body (& aura), he should be given a chance to resist the magic. I can understand that, though don't completely agree, partly because of the reason LM brings up, partly because of personal ideology on the subject. (Much of which was mentioned in a prior posting.)

The magician using his aura to cancel a spell on someone else is another story altogether. That would be like a cancel essence, cancel channeling or cancel mentalism effect just by using your aura. If you want to give your mages that power, well then all sorts of fun can be had....

For military (field, siege and ship), a flying wizard (at 500+ meters altitude to avoid ground attack) with bag of river stones and a wand of Change Size... Expand size into boulder, boulder falls - talk about artillery fire... So unless the enemy can counter with flying wizard of its own to fly Combat Air Patrol - we're talking SERIOUS air support.

I would imagine if it was possible for one side to do the bombing, the otherside would have ways of trying to counter - unless the magic that makes the bombing possible is very new so no counter would have been devised as of yet.

[RandalThor]

I spent a little while going over the spells in HARP and believe that my original statement (If I can hurt you without your blessing, I should be able to help you without it) as the vast majority of the utility spells are either self or of an aid type spell. So, if I can fireball you, I can give you a +5 Boost to your Strength mod. That is not to say that doing so is necessarily the smart choice, just possible.

Though, so long as you don't play like it is a miniatures game, where every effect is immediately known, then even using Long Door on you opponent could garner you a benefit as they accidentally transport themselves in Theda direction an errant thought sent them. (I think that when the spell caster uses Long Door on his friends he tells them how it works so they don't screw up.)

A few notable exceptions: Darkness (put it on the target so they cannot leave the area of darkness until the spell expires, a good way to get away from someone), Invisibility (not exactly sure as to why you would, but I imagine there are some scenarios where it would come in handy), Mist Form (changing that ogre that is kicking your group's butt into intangible mist is a good way to keep it from killing you), and Changing Ways (I like the idea of you are captured by the local law and use it to change someone else to look like you while you take the form of a jailer and escape, very fun sounding to me).

So I think that the option should be there, but it is up to the individual utility spell as to if it is practical or not.

PS: In all of this, I am going with the descriptions as written and not adding/altering them in any way.

[Marc R]

As an aside, I was at a party Sat night in which I overheard a discussion, about in WoW, casting a speed spell on a friend while they were attempting to negotiate a narrow twisty ledge over a gorge, resulting in a deadly fall.

I know rewinding back to RM2 days, my GM just declared all spells affecting others required a RR, including healing. . .the oft ominous "Are you willing?" declaration whenever someone cast on you. . . .the occasional heinous events where a caster did something other than what the target expected. The rule that the unconscious are always willing, which counter-intuitively keeps PCs alive. . . .since the villian can, when confronted by a KOed PC expect to be able to charm/forget/sleep the PC, rather than just cut their throat to be safe.

It was a lot of fun, it certainly lead to a lot of paranoia about casters in general (how do I know if I should be willing?).

Even then, a line was drawn before allowing low level spells to be "RR or die" spells. . .it's the boiled blood, frozen head, shrunken heart kinda utility spells that have to be U, and non usable in combat. . . though, as an amusing sidebar. . . .

If you created a benchmark for "deadly RR or die" (Say 30pp to just toss a number off the cuff) I'd have no problem with adding a scale to each of those "not to be used in combat" spells akin to:

Mage Seal: +19 PP, may be used on living beings (mouth, eyes, nose, etc) Stamina RR to resist.

[jurasketu]

Hun. Well whatta ya know... Check this out...

I was perusing the Vivamancer spells in CoM yesterday for an unrelated reason and suddenly saw a relevant item.. The Animal Transformations, Creature Transformations and Plant Transformations spells have an Unwilling Target Scaling option +12 PP, +16 PP and +12 PP respectively (not sure why the difference in cost).

SO... It would seem there is a precedent for turning a Utility Spell into one that affects an unwilling target. Currently, I errata all spells with durations to allow scaling up to 10 minutes per rank using the duration scaling rules from CoM. So it would seem reasonable to errata most Utility Spells that have a target other than self with a +12PP (or +16PP?) scaling option for unwilling target. That certainly wouldn't unbalance anything. If you can scale a spell +12PP - you are likely powerful enough to have an *actual* attack spell.

Robin

[Marc R]

Certainly makes sense, though I'd be more willing to allow a +12 or +16 mist form than allow a 2pp U spell to be RR or die for 14 or 18 pp. . .The scale of the size of the PP kick should depend to some degree on if it's going to do something to the target, or just kill them. . .for that I'd still want a total cost somewhere closer to 25-30pp.

[jurasketu]

Certainly, if the Utility Spell turned into Attack causes instant death, you could go with +24PP.

But that leads to an odd observation, there appears to be no spell in HARP + CoM + Codex that is truly make RR or Die. Plenty of attack spells that use the critical tables that certainly could result in instant death. And many attack spells render the victim defenseless and subject to death. But, I mean why doesn't a Necromancer have a "Word of Death" spell or something a la Harry Potter?

Of course, I never understand why wizards in Harry Potter didn't use enchanted machine guns and why Jedi or Sith don't carry grenades or rockets (use the Force to fling rockets perfectly at bad guys seems particularly effective). I always love the Terminator movies because the Terminators used firearms.