A thought about magic damage

[Fenixcrest]

A very simple house rule occurred to me just now, which I find rather appealing:

Perhaps magic receives a damage bonus from INT. As we know, INT costs the same per degree as STR does, but, in most cases, provides significantly lower value (perception and background skills, that's about it). However, let us say that all magic receives a damage/effectiveness bonus from INT, the way physical melee attacks receive STR bonuses- Bonus active points from INT, up to base effectiveness.

So, a wizard with INT 30 and a 4d6 Normal Damage fireball could do up to 8d6 with that fireball.

Any thoughts?

[ghost-angel]

Interesting.... I wonder how it'd work in play.

Normally the mitigating factor is that an attack either adds STR Damage or has Ranged.

You're effectively allowing Ranged and Added Damage into one attack.

[Fenixcrest]

Interesting.... I wonder how it'd work in play.

Normally the mitigating factor is that an attack either adds STR Damage or has Ranged.

You're effectively allowing Ranged and Added Damage into one attack.

Yes, I had considered that. My general thought is that, since INT provides much less combat utility than STR, then the benefit of being able to use it at range would balance out... particularly since, using these rules, a magic user would be encouraged to dump a lot of points into INT rather than STR, leaving them with not much to work with in terms of physical damage, lifting, leaping, grappling, and physical defense.

[Thia Halmades]

I'm in agreement with g-a on this (HA! Who's surprised, raise your hands? No seriously, put 'em up... YOU! In the back! I saw that!) and I would think if you wanted to do it, then you'd want to stick to the RAW in terms of point balance and level it as an HR for +1/2, INT Adds to Damage. I grasp and appreciate the premise of INT = More Powerful, but there are other ways to model it that are less game-bending.

Not breaking. I don't think you'd break much of anything, but you'll see a serious upswing skew in Wizard Damage without an accordingly improved ED or rED defense. Currently, the party Druid drops lightning from the sky for 2d6. He fries mooks like I fry eggs. Often, and to tasty, tasty results. So you can do it, but I would not personally recommend it.

I'm doing something Similar for Pokemon, however, the reasoning being that in that system, the creatures already have both a "Special Attack" and a "Physical Attack" stat, and the balance works out very differently, as they're all built to fight, basically, from the ground up. Normal PCs are not just cute'n'cuddly fighting machines, so you'll see a difference there.

[CTaylor]

Perhaps magic receives a damage bonus from INT.

I've built some spells like that, using HKA or Hand-to-Hand Attacks that base their damage on Strength (and some items that use Ego, your willpower makes the weapon work better). It doesn't need any tweaking, really. STR and INT are the same cost, they are going to be roughly the same level in a heroic game for their equivalent users (a mage will have about the same INT as a warrior will STR, perhaps a bit higher).

[Thia Halmades]

I've built some spells like that, using HKA or Hand-to-Hand Attacks that base their damage on Strength (and some items that use Ego, your willpower makes the weapon work better). It doesn't need any tweaking, really. STR and INT are the same cost, they are going to be roughly the same level in a heroic game for their equivalent users (a mage will have about the same INT as a warrior will STR, perhaps a bit higher).

See, that's exactly what I'm saying, just not nearly as eloquently. Indeed, like I said, so long as it's paid for, you're good to go. And you could, reasonably, HR your "HKA" spells to INT over STR, and then of course, "INT Adds to Damage" is +1/2, just like STR would be.

[Outsider]

Presumably INT will have to be prorated for advantages on the spell, as STR is for advantages on a weapon.

Adding 1 Damage Class to a hammer takes 6.25 STR, rather than 5, on account of the +1 Stun Mult
Adding 1 Damage Class to a pick takes 7.5 STR, rather than 5, on account of the AP.

So, adding 1 Damage Class to a fireball would take 10 INT, rather than 5, on account of the Ranged and the Explosion.

Also... will spells be required to have an INT Minimum that has to be met before excess INT will add damage, as weapons have a STR Minimum?

[CTaylor]

You could add an extra limitation to put an INT minimum on a spell, but the default would just be like an HKA spell: no STR minimum on those either. In theory a mage could create a sword that has +1 OCV and D6+1 killing damage, but no strength minimum, then hand it to a warrior. It would just be cheaper to buy the strength min on it. Same thing with Intelligence.

It's fun to experiment with different stats like this. Necromantic spells cost Body to cast rather than END in my game, for example. Some spells use STN instead of END, to represent tremendous effort. It makes things more interesting.

[Thia Halmades]

Presumably INT will have to be prorated for advantages on the spell, as STR is for advantages on a weapon.

Adding 1 Damage Class to a hammer takes 6.25 STR, rather than 5, on account of the +1 Stun Mult
Adding 1 Damage Class to a pick takes 7.5 STR, rather than 5, on account of the AP.

So, adding 1 Damage Class to a fireball would take 10 INT, rather than 5, on account of the Ranged and the Explosion.

Also... will spells be required to have an INT Minimum that has to be met before excess INT will add damage, as weapons have a STR Minimum?

Phenomenal point. I hadn't even thought of that. r3ppz0rz.

[Outsider]

You could add an extra limitation to put an INT minimum on a spell, but the default would just be like an HKA spell: no STR minimum on those either. In theory a mage could create a sword that has +1 OCV and D6+1 killing damage, but no strength minimum, then hand it to a warrior. It would just be cheaper to buy the strength min on it. Same thing with Intelligence.

It's fun to experiment with different stats like this. Necromantic spells cost Body to cast rather than END in my game, for example. Some spells use STN instead of END, to represent tremendous effort. It makes things more interesting.



No, no STR min on a spell sword. But it would need UbO and Ranged if the mage was going to lend it to his pal the warrior.


Anyway.. another thing to think about would be not allowing excess statistics, be they INT or STR to more than double the pre-excess result of a spell, just as excess STR can't more than double the DCs of a weapon.

Otherwise a magician with a 30 INT and a 15 STR could do something like the following :

Abra-ca-stabya! :
1 (5) Hand to Hand Killing Attack, 1 pip.
__(-1) Requires Skill Roll, difficult skill roll (-1 per 5 Active points)
__(-1/4) Gestures
__(-1/4) Incantation
__(-1) Focus, Obvious Accessible (Wand)

With his 30 INT this spell gets boosted to a 2D6+1 Killing attack.

Then, since it is an HKA, he applies his STR, pushing it to a 3D6+1 Killing Attack.

All for 1 Character point!

[CTaylor]

another thing to think about would be not allowing excess statistics, be they INT or STR to more than double the pre-excess result of a spell

Sure, it doesn't change the rules at all, it just changes the stat used.

[Outsider]

Would a spell based HKA get to use both INT and STR boosting though?

[CTaylor]

One or the other, or you'd have to buy an advantage to let it use both (+1/2 maybe? it's not worth much because you still reach the maximum level of effect).