Topic: Spells and talents which add targets

[DangerMan]

How do you handle spells / talents which adds one (or more?) target(s) for a spell?

Do you allow full directed spells OB on both attacks? Im guessing most do not. I would rule one full OB attack and one +0 attack.

What about basic spell attack? One basic spell attack roll for both targets? Two rolls? One roll for primary target, and none for the latter?

In character law this talent is merely 10 points (yeah, I know CL is broken concerning costs, but Im not going down that road). Im thinking this talent is very powerful, but have yet to see it come into play. This is about to change, though..

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Do you allow full directed spells OB on both attacks?

When it comes to spells, except for mayhap a few exceptions, the spell's description says how to manage the skill split, the usual way being to only allow the directed spell (rank) bonus to apply to one attack; others may be to equally split the skill or to choose the splitting.
For my part, rather than to have a different rule for each spell, depending on its description, and another for the talent's case, I ruled than the skill rank bonus is always equally split and there's only one roll die, in order to minimize the number of rolls and maths, therefore the combat's processing time.

What about basic spell attack? One basic spell attack roll for both targets? Two rolls? One roll for primary target, and none for the latter?

One basic spell attack roll for both targets for the aforementioned reason.

[DangerMan]

Thanks OLF!

How did this work out? How powerful is this talent?

[yammahoper]

I handle it like two weapon combat: the "off hand" attack recieves a -20.  Attacks against a second target recieve an additional -20.  Normal skill is applied.

[DangerMan]

I handle it like two weapon combat: the "off hand" attack recieves a -20.  Attacks against a second target recieve an additional -20.  Normal skill is applied.

Sounds very powerful? At least for the talent where you could do this every round at no cost. If you use a spell in the prior round (or possible spellmastery) to add the target I could see this working

[yammahoper]

It is no less powerful than if the spell user has a 70+ skill in spell mastery, which would allow casting the spell every round with +1 target.  It does allow lower level casters to have talent equal to a level 7 or better caster. 

OTOH, it does mean you can throw a few more villians at the party.  Some of those NPC's are gonna save eventually, or the crit roll will be 17...let the player be powerful, they like it.

[yammahoper]

It is no less powerful than if the spell user has a 70+ skill in spell mastery, which would allow casting the spell every round with +1 target.  It does allow lower level casters to have talent equal to a level 7 or better caster.  Also, the bonus to BAR attacks is traditionally fairly low, around +17 to +40, so a -20 or -40 penalty is significant.  Diected spell OB also tends to be lower than weapon OB's.  Since a fighter can get a second attack for a -20 mod (with TWC), why not the spell user?

OTOH, it does mean you can throw a few more villians at the party.  Some of those NPC's are gonna save eventually, or the crit roll will be 17...let the player be powerful, they like it.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

How did this work out? How powerful is this talent?

Oh, well, on one hand, it's quite powerful (but not for the double-target part and more for the fact it doubles the radii of the areas of effect) but OTOH most "important" mages have it so it's almost a staple of being a mage and willing to become powerful, making it relatively less powerful (I mean, if any and all mage of importance has it, it's a normal thing with which to deal and it's the "normal" way mages and magic are, at some level). Of course, it being a talent determined at "birth", meaning a birth gift, that "most important mages have it" implies that you have little chance becoming powerful if you don't have the talent (implying it is a powerful talent) but, well, it's like saying that being highly intelligent makes it easier in life to become someone of importance. It's true but it doesn't mean much more than being intelligent is a plus in life because, all in all, there are a lot of intelligent people.
In a nutshell, it's an interesting talent that makes the one who is gifted with it more likely to become powerful, but the actual "power" of the talent only depends on how rare you make it to be. If only one person out of a billion has it, it's incredibly powerful. If one person out of a million has it, it's powerful enough to be noticeable. If you go by the RoCo I, you have 1% on the magic abilities table to obtain it. Even by extrapolating on the other other tables, if one person out of a thousand has it, it's merely a talent that gives you a plus in life.

Diected spell OB also tends to be lower than weapon OB's.  Since a fighter can get a second attack for a -20 mod (with TWC), why not the spell user?

Ah, but weapon OB is a comparative skill (the opponent can lower your score with his own weapon score, i.e. "parry"; as your OB increases, so does your opponent's) whilst the DS OB is an absolute skill (there's no skill to lower yours, only magical ways that just don't increase as fast). In other words, in general, your melee OB isn't much higher than what your opponent can oppose you (through parrying) so lowering it by 20 may be a dilemma. OTOH, your DS OB can quickly exceed by a large margin the penalties your opponent can give you (because, aside from magical ways, they remain constant) so lowering it by 20 is quickly not a big deal.

[JimiSue]

i agree with Yamma on this one. In Space master you can use a weapon in each hand (for the sake of parity let's call them flamer pistols so they are a) affecting an area and b) rolling purely for heat criticals so are quite spell-like. The player can attack different targets within a 60 degree arc (I think) at a -20 penalty (to both attacks) using his developed OB (in this particular case he would technically need to develop that specific pairing as a dual wield - so the balance there comes in the increased skill cost as any ranks he has in using flamer pistols separately does not help him when dual wielding). And he can do that twice a round since he has two fire phases and two weapons capable of shooting twice per round, so 4 attacks of flaming death. Note though if one of his opponents dies along the way he suffers additional -20s for each time he changes targets, and that is something I would also apply to a spell user spraying bolts out of both hands like a christmas tree. And naturally, a magic user doing that kind of thing will make him target of choice for an incoming attacks since everyone knows that finger-wigglers tend to be heavy on damage but light on defence.

This is dangerous. However, I find that letting the player realise that if *they* can do that kind of thing, so will their opponents. I find this tends to make them self-nerf and be less keen to try out this particular stunt.

[DangerMan]

Thanks guys. I never said og thought it was too powerful and simply want to get an idea what I'm in for.

Im going to let the player decide wether he wants to split the OB or have one +0 attack.

I'm also thinking this talent is gonna be a sine qua none for mages, along with eloquence and aura / archetype, and IMO thats not too good a sign 

[yammahoper]

i agree with Yamma on this one. In Space master you can use a weapon in each hand (for the sake of parity let's call them flamer pistols so they are a) affecting an area and b) rolling purely for heat criticals so are quite spell-like. The player can attack different targets within a 60 degree arc (I think) at a -20 penalty (to both attacks) using his developed OB (in this particular case he would technically need to develop that specific pairing as a dual wield - so the balance there comes in the increased skill cost as any ranks he has in using flamer pistols separately does not help him when dual wielding). And he can do that twice a round since he has two fire phases and two weapons capable of shooting twice per round, so 4 attacks of flaming death. Note though if one of his opponents dies along the way he suffers additional -20s for each time he changes targets, and that is something I would also apply to a spell user spraying bolts out of both hands like a christmas tree. And naturally, a magic user doing that kind of thing will make him target of choice for an incoming attacks since everyone knows that finger-wigglers tend to be heavy on damage but light on defence.

This is dangerous. However, I find that letting the player realise that if *they* can do that kind of thing, so will their opponents. I find this tends to make them self-nerf and be less keen to try out this particular stunt.

What he said (obviously a genius)...and, uh...can I play SM with you?

 

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

In Space master you can use a weapon in each hand (for the sake of parity let's call them flamer pistols so they are a) affecting an area and b) rolling purely for heat criticals so are quite spell-like. The player can attack different targets within a 60 degree arc (I think) at a -20 penalty (to both attacks) using his developed OB (in this particular case he would technically need to develop that specific pairing as a dual wield - so the balance there comes in the increased skill cost as any ranks he has in using flamer pistols separately does not help him when dual wielding). And he can do that twice a round since he has two fire phases and two weapons capable of shooting twice per round, so 4 attacks of flaming death.

Technically, it's not the same, though. You're talking about multiple attacks rather than one single and same attack splitting and attacking two targets. In your SpaceMaster example, the guy shoots four times. In our mage's case, he shoots only once but his spell is able to split and hit several targets (two, with the talent, three with the triad spells).
In game terms, the difference may lie in the number of rolls: in the former, it's obvious the person has to roll four times but in the latter, SL is unclear whether only one roll is made or multiple rolls are made. (For my part, I consider one attack equals one roll, the way you don't roll the result of a fireball for each target...)

[JimiSue]

Sorry, I neglected to comprehend that part Depends on how the spell funtions though. If you're talking about a lightning bolt kind of thing then I can easily see how the bolt could arc to subsequent targets, in which case it wouldn't be unreasonable to impose a maximum distance for the arc (maybe a number of feet per skill ranks in the directed spell). If you're talking about a more discrete missile, like maybe an ice bolt, then how are you adjudicating the in-game effect?

a) Is it a penetrating strike, so the magical force effectively goes through the target to affect someone behind? In which case a reduction in OB would suffice...
b) if it's a glancing ricochet then I would apply a penalty to both target's rolls because that is tough to calculate in combat on the fly, and if you're ricocheting you're not getting a proper hit on your primary target... or,
c) you can simply say that the caster gets to shoot more than one missile, in which case treat it as a multiple attack, where his penalty on the second one is dependant on how much of his action he's putting towards it.

You are rich with options

And Yamma, will be starting a new game next week actually

[DangerMan]

Well, it's not just the bolts, it's all spells. As for the logical and scientific justifications; please consult signature.

[JimiSue]

Again, I only read part of the question. I do great in exams, really

The spell roll is essentially how well you do when casting the spell, regardless of other parameters. Therefore I'd say one roll, apply to all targets. I don't have an issue with spells affecting multiple targets when they are not directed spells, I see the mental procvesses involved as bweing basically identical, it's just that the mage's increased knowledge and experience means he knows how to make it work such that the magic squirts out at two (or more) individual targets. If I was feeling mean I'd probably say that each additional target adds a small % onto the spellcasting action - 10 or 15% or so seems about right to me.

But *always* remember - whatever the PCs can do, so can their enemies. And I find that often times, their enemies are higher level and therefore have access to more bells and whistles.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Sorry, I neglected to comprehend that part Depends on how the spell funtions though. If you're talking about a lightning bolt kind of thing then I can easily see how the bolt could arc to subsequent targets, in which case it wouldn't be unreasonable to impose a maximum distance for the arc (maybe a number of feet per skill ranks in the directed spell). If you're talking about a more discrete missile, like maybe an ice bolt, then how are you adjudicating the in-game effect?

The same way? If a lightning bolt can split in two, why wouldn't an ice bolt?

You are rich with options

Or not. We may need an official stand about the matter but, the way I understand how the triad bolts are managed, it's: use the same roll for all the targets, only applying the directed spell bonus to one.

[yammahoper]

For triad spells, I have always used full directed spell OB for all of them.  I find the two attacks at 0 OB rediculous for such a high power spell.  Might as well tell a warrior TWC allows an extra attack at 0 OB.

Do what's fun, forget everything else.  Yes, I understand some might like the 0 OB attacks, just not I.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

For triad spells, I have always used full directed spell OB for all of them.  I find the two attacks at 0 OB rediculous for such a high power spell.

It's not "at 0 OB", though, it's without the directed spell bonus as defined in SL, which is a totally different matter. As detailed in the example presented in SL, p18, section 8.4 "Elemental Attack Spells", it means the skill rank bonus, not the total skill bonus. If you play with the RoCoII profession bonuses, a Magician (for instance) gets a +3/lvl to his DS (rather than +1/lvl in the original SL) so at level 20, he's at +60. With a good AG (say, +20), he's at +80. Since elemental spells are his specialization (I mean, he has five to develop), the way a fighter would seek for items granting him a bonus in melee combat, I don't think you could expect a good 20th level Magician not to have some item granting him a bonus in DS; let's say it's a +15. It means that, even without the benefit of his directed spell skill rank bonus, he has a +95... which is a whole lot since, as I explained previously and contrary to your melee fighter TWC example, his opponent cannot "parry" his elemental spell!

[yammahoper]

....full directed spell OB...

If it is resolved with 0 ranks, do you apply the -25 for no skill? 

 

Your post does point out one of the on going problems ICE has with its RM line: no continuity.  I just pulled down my of Mentalism/Channelin/Essence, and page 18 in each book is spell list, not rules.  RM1, RM2, RMSS, RMFRP, RMC, etc, all published and sold right now in a frenetic attempt to please everyone but only resulting in system chaos.  Of course, trying to please everyone typically results in a complete fail.

Which is why I refer to my game as my game, MY Rolemaster.  My disgust with the failure to produce one product line to support with the admitted limited resources  of ICE (or whatever they call themselves, I do not care) is being tempered with the passing of years, until some obscure rule posting breaks the seal and it swells up again.

Still, I appreciate your post OLF, even if it did dig into my despair over RM being close to a steaming corpse.  But I digress...

So the rule in one version of spel law says to subtract the bonus from your skill for skill ranks and just apply stat mod/item or level bonus, etc?  How stupid and over complicated can a rule be.  Now, I agree subtracting a small number isn't hard, but it is rather tedious and so uncessary, especially after considering how hard it is to get to the mid teens in level so the spell can actually be cast and then forcing the playerto slow down play just a little more to calculate a new OB...

All is moot.  Anyway, I wrote full directed spell OB because I will and do and shall always include the rank bonus. 

Viva le RM.

[Temujin]

Thanks guys. I never said og thought it was too powerful and simply want to get an idea what I'm in for.

Im going to let the player decide wether he wants to split the OB or have one +0 attack.

I'm also thinking this talent is gonna be a sine qua none for mages, along with eloquence and aura / archetype, and IMO thats not too good a sign 

A +0 attack is useless unless the target has 0 DB.  Also, keep in mind that "extra target" applies to a lot of spells.  It would work on a healer as well as a magician, or on a mentalist.  I fail to see why the Healer would get to heal 2 targets with this merit, that the sorcerer would get a BAR applying to multiple targets(or multiple BARs if you prefer), a mentalist to have a three-way mental communication, while the magician would get a wasted attack.  (Yes, I also agree with the point that the triad spells are broken, at least in RMSS).