Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

[Lucius]

I posted this to Steve Long, but I decided I wanted to know what everyone else thought too....

 

I'm crafting a spell designed as a multipower.

 

The first slot is a straight energy blast.

The second adds Variable Effects and Variable Advantage.

Each succeeding slot has fewer dice, and more Variable Advantage.

 

(Three guesses what I was trying to recreate here....)

 

You have to buy the slots in order; as a wizard grows in wisdom, his basic blast spell becomes more flexible.

 

My question is, what happens when one of the advantages chosen is Personal Immunity?

 

Does that grant immunity only to THAT particular spell, i.e. useful if you want an area effect, but no help against another wizard's blast?

 

Does it grant immunity to another wizard who happens to be using the same EXACT configuration of advantages?

 

Does it grant immunity only to that particular SLOT - i.e. if it was chosen as an advantage on a slot 3 power, it makes you immune to another wizard's slot 3?

 

Or could the concept of "similar powers" be stretched far enough to say it grants immunity to any spell cast with this multipower by any wizard who bought it?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that Lucius knows how he WANTS it to work, which is none of the above - that it would protect against any power of the same or LESSER slot, and leave you vulnerable to the more experienced mage with higher slots....but that's surely not Book Legal.....

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

At its basest level it would provide the character with protection from the damage of the attack in case it were reflected back at them or was an AoE and the character was in the affected area.

 

Anything beyond that is GM preference.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

I think winthin the context of your game how you want it to work is fine. Just keep in mind that it's not By The Book. If all magic works that way and it's a universal expected event run with it.

 

And you know, sometimes we just have to do what we want instead of what the Rules say, it's all good in my book.

[The Monster]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

If and only if the multipower is really the same spell effect just with different options, I could see that Personal Immunity might reasonably provide immunity to anything from that particular multipower tree. So, for example, a Fireball mulitpower could provide immunity from any kind of fireball - but not flaming hailstones or fire elementals, etc.

A primary issue I can see is if pretty much all mages use Fireball for their attacks - it means mages would be mostly imune from each other...which does have some interesting ramifications. Not least of which is the desperate need to make sure you know what the other guy's going to throw at you, so you you can learn it to give yourself immunity!

Question is, are you really having magicians buy a seperate Multipower for each basic spell? Seems kind of expensive, but it does have possibilities.

[Lucius]

Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Those that remember the FIRST edition of Fantasy Hero may recognize what I was trying to do.

 

That magic system had a power modifier that allowed you to take a certain number of active points in a power and create with it any given combination of advantages - or no advantages at all - up to that active point total. The school of wizards featured in that game and in the scenario that came with it had a "blast" spell that worked that way.

 

The ONLY way under the current dispensation to get that kind of flexibility is to use a multipower with "graduated" slots as I have described. I actually created this set-up before FREd came out, and it was intended as an exception - I meant spells to mostly be bought straight-up without frameworks, but this one couldn't be constructed any other way.

 

I just got to wondering what would happen if one of the advantages were Personal Immunity. Somehow it seems "logical" to me if that provides an immunity to any "lesser" slots (i.e. the ones with more raw power but fewer advantages - remember, I stated they had to be learned in order.)

 

Oddly enough, apparently that IS "Book Legal." If I understood Mr. Long's answer correctly, the LEAST the power would do is protect against itself - and protecting against other people's powers is up to how far the one running the game wants to stretch the optional "may (or may not) protect against 'similar powers'" clause.

 

It could be said I'd have a generous interpretation, but then if I introduce a +1/4 "counter-immunity" advantage too......

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary begins singing "Then we raised our might/ in a ring of light/ to fight in a wizard's war...."

[KA.]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Lucius,

 

Not that it matters for your campaign, but there is something about this construct that I just don't like.

I think the main thing is, this seems like a real stretch of the definition of "Personal Immunity".

Now I know that it is 'book legal' to say that if two characters have the exact same mutant power source for their EB, that they may have Personal Immunity to each other's powers, but I see that as more of a shout out to Cyclops/Havok than a well-thought out game mechanic.

(No offense intended. )

To take that and stretch it further seems like making a bad thing worse.

So, here is my suggestion:

Why not put a -0 Limitation on the Multipowers and their slots that says:

"Does not work on a member of the same school with a higher Pool."

 

Why do I say -0?

Well, since everyone knows what the Limitation is, it would never be a surprise.

When Johnny Acolyte decides to take on Marvin the Arch-Mage, he knows good and well that his spells aren't going to work.

And when rival mages from different schools battle each other, which should be what happens most often, it will have no effect.

 

You could even take it to:

"Does not work on members of the same school."

This could lead to all kinds of cool intrigue.

When mages wanted to attack rivals from their own school, they could either do it:

Hand to Hand (always cool for some reason)

By Hiring Mages from other Schools (lots of plot hooks available here)

By using magic items that are outside their school

 

This seems like it might be the best way to go.

And it will keep the upper level mages from picking on the lower levels.

KA.

[Lucius]

Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Lucius,

 

Not that it matters for your campaign, but there is something about this construct that I just don't like.

I think the main thing is, this seems like a real stretch of the definition of "Personal Immunity".

Now I know that it is 'book legal' to say that if two characters have the exact same mutant power source for their EB, that they may have Personal Immunity to each other's powers, but I see that as more of a shout out to Cyclops/Havok than a well-thought out game mechanic.

(No offense intended. )

To take that and stretch it further seems like making a bad thing worse..

 

I can see what you mean.

 

 

So, here is my suggestion:

Why not put a -0 Limitation on the Multipowers and their slots that says:

"Does not work on a member of the same school with a higher Pool."

 

Why do I say -0?

Well, since everyone knows what the Limitation is, it would never be a surprise.

When Johnny Acolyte decides to take on Marvin the Arch-Mage, he knows good and well that his spells aren't going to work.

And when rival mages from different schools battle each other, which should be what happens most often, it will have no effect..

 

Well, for one thing, if I were to do that, it would be more than a -0.

 

But notice, the way it's set up, each power in the slot has a VARIABLE advantage. If you want immunity, you have to give up something else - admittedly not much, unless I increase the cost of the advantage (and I think most people would think increasing it is reasonable, if it's made as powerful as I'm talking about.)

 

Also, I would say you only get the immunity if a power slot with that advantage is ACTIVE at that moment. That may require buying Delayed Effect or Damage Shield or the like, too.

 

Admittedly, if you're expecting to duel someone with the same spell, you'd probably set up that way....of course, if I did allow a countervailing advantage as well, it could become a guessing game..."how many levels of counterimmunity is he likely to be using?"

 

I might even say that even a less-experienced mage could get around the immunity with an Analyze Spell roll to find a weakness.....

 

You could even take it to:

"Does not work on members of the same school."

This could lead to all kinds of cool intrigue.

When mages wanted to attack rivals from their own school, they could either do it:

Hand to Hand (always cool for some reason)

By Hiring Mages from other Schools (lots of plot hooks available here)

By using magic items that are outside their school

 

This seems like it might be the best way to go.

And it will keep the upper level mages from picking on the lower levels.

KA.

 

One player's barbarian was given a magick sword as a reward, made by one of this school of magick. The sword had a limit "Does not work against members of ...."

 

He never did figure it out, because he never tried to attack a member of that order. Well, he acted like he was going to once (the wizard was boasting that his magick force field made him invulnerable....the barbarian figured if that was so, swinging a sword at him shouldn't hurt him.....) Even when the normally glowing sword kind of "fizzled" and went dead, he thought it was a spell the mage cast....he didn't realize it was a property of the sword itself.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Insert palindomedary tagline here

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

That magic system had a power modifier that allowed you to take a certain number of active points in a power and create with it any given combination of advantages - or no advantages at all - up to that active point total. The school of wizards featured in that game and in the scenario that came with it had a "blast" spell that worked that way.

 

I thought it looked familiar. I've done it with a construct similar to the one you used.

 

The ONLY way under the current dispensation to get that kind of flexibility is to use a multipower with "graduated" slots as I have described. I actually created this set-up before FREd came out, and it was intended as an exception - I meant spells to mostly be bought straight-up without frameworks, but this one couldn't be constructed any other way.

 

I just got to wondering what would happen if one of the advantages were Personal Immunity. Somehow it seems "logical" to me if that provides an immunity to any "lesser" slots (i.e. the ones with more raw power but fewer advantages - remember, I stated they had to be learned in order.)

 

I'd say only as long as you have one of the Advantages set to Personal Immunity, and only as long as you have the points in the slot. And only to another incoming Power of the same SFX that also has the Personal Immunity Advantage placed on it.

 

If you take Variable Special Effect and Personal Immunity, expecting that you're going to be immune to, well, whatever you have your VSE set to, that's when you start getting beaten about the head and shoulders with a rolled up newspaper.

 

Oddly enough, apparently that IS "Book Legal." If I understood Mr. Long's answer correctly, the LEAST the power would do is protect against itself - and protecting against other people's powers is up to how far the one running the game wants to stretch the optional "may (or may not) protect against 'similar powers'" clause.

 

It could be said I'd have a generous interpretation, but then if I introduce a +1/4 "counter-immunity" advantage too......

 

So what would you apply the counter-immunity Advantage to?

 

Agreeing with KA. If you want "higher level" spellcasters to be immune to the spells when cast by "lower level" casters, there are other ways to go about that.

[The Monster]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

I think the generalized Personal Immunity mechanic has some very interesting potential. It does mean that magicians from the same school won't be able to hurt each other with their schools spells - IF they've got warning, so that they actually have the PI option up. So...the way to get rid of an opposing mage of the same school is to ambush him.

 

It also gives people, even mages, a reason to develop a good sword arm, since magic doesn't confer immunity from steel. Also, it seriously encourages people to do research on potential enemies, so that they know ahead of time what they're likely to be immune to, and develop alternate weapons. Conversely, mages would work hard to develop (if the system allows) spells of other types, so that they don't suddenly find themselves useless - and keep their additional abilities secret from enemies.

 

Really, it could put a whole other spin on the study of magic beyond "ooh, what's the next spell I get?"

[Lucius]

Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

 

 

So what would you apply the counter-immunity Advantage to?

 

.

 

I would think that's obvious. Just as you can take any slot and set part of the variable advantage to "personal immunity" you can set part of the variable advantage to "counter immunity" and then that slot's blast will hit someone who may have thought they were protected by their "personal immunity."

 

And it's not just a matter of "wanting more experienced spellcasters to be immune to less experienced spellcasters." After all, this whole thing started because I asked myself "WHAT IF they picked 'personal immunity' as one of the advantages?"

 

I may just say it won't even happen unless a player decides to ask the same question.

 

And it's certainly not a 100% "I'm a Master Wizard and no puny apprentice can possibly hurt me" thing. You'd have to have your spell set up that way, for one thing. And there may be ways around it even then, for another.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is singing along to the radio, but I don't think it got the words right....

"He's got this dream about frying some ham,

He's gonna get up some stews in his one nice pan,

And then he'll settle down

And quietly chow down.......

what do you mean, the name of the song's not 'Baker's Treat?'"

[Jhamin]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Now I know that it is 'book legal' to say that if two characters have the exact same mutant power source for their EB, that they may have Personal Immunity to each other's powers, but I see that as more of a shout out to Cyclops/Havok than a well-thought out game mechanic.

(No offense intended. )

 

 

While the Cyclops/Havok parallel is obvious, I always thought it was a good flavor bit in the right places.

 

"You cannot defeat me with the touch of Thanatos, I mastered that technique when I was but a student!"

[KA.]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

While the Cyclops/Havok parallel is obvious, I always thought it was a good flavor bit in the right places.

 

"You cannot defeat me with the touch of Thanatos, I mastered that technique when I was but a student!"

 

I'm not dead set against it, I just wouldn't want to see it expand.

 

Here's why:

Let's say for a minute that you have two new characters, Firebolt and Burner.

They both have the SFX of mutant fire manipulation (whatever that is).

Firebolt actually turns into a flaming form (like The Human Torch)

Burner is able to create fiery blasts by gathering and concentrating the friction caused by air molecules rubbing together.

 

If I was building Firebolt, I could easily see buying him something like:

+30 ED only vs. Fire based attacks

because he actually turns into a fiery form, so fire shouldn't hurt him.

 

Burner on the other hand, is a more 'normal' guy who is able to manipulate fire. But, if he suddenly found himself in the middle of a gasoline explosion, he could easily get burned up before he had a chance to use his powers.

 

However, if we just handwave "Same SFX = Personal Immunity to other guy's power", then Burner is immune to Firebolt's attacks even though he probably shouldn't be.

(Firebolt may very well be immune to Burner's attacks, because he bought the extra ED.)

 

I am not saying that anyone is suggesting the above.

 

What I am presenting is why I would not like to see this go too far.

 

I think it cuts down on character diversity, which is never a good thing.

 

I am also not entirely sure about the cost.

 

I know that if you bought the Personal Immunity it would be less useful than the Limited ED (depending on how the ED was Limited), but in a world where only Fire Mages can do Fire Spells, the PI will take care of 95% of any Magical Fire attacks you might encounter, with the occasional Dragon accounting for the rest if such even exist in this world.

 

Even though it was my idea, I really like putting Limitations on the attacks themselves so that they don't affect members of the same school.

 

It just seems cleaner to me.

 

There is even some logic behind it.

 

If think about what a place like Hogwart's devoted to Fire Magic would be like, it is pretty clear.

 

Things would be blowing up and bursting into flame every time a couple of kids got into a spat.

 

If the original designer of the spells had enough sense to want to avoid that, they could have designed them to not work on members of your own school.

 

Also, wizards being a somewhat tricky and suspicious bunch, might not want to teach spells to other wizards that could be used to fry them in their sleep.

 

By making sure that the spell you teach your apprentice can never be used against you, you could (literally) sleep a lot easier at night.

 

And it leaves things open for the whole Anakin/Darth Vader thing of a student that turns against the school and comes back to destroy it, and none of the school's spells work against him!

 

Good stuff all around.

 

Just my opinion.

 

You rule your world and know what is best for it.

 

I go in peace.

 

 

KA.

[Lucius]

Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Okay, let me get something straight.

 

What I'm talking about is a Personal Immunity to ONE SPELL.

 

One Spell that was built as a multipower because, as I explained, that was the ONLY way to build something as flexible as the original I was trying to update for the current Dispensation.

 

I'm not talking about taking one spell with Personal Immunity and being immune to All Spells.

 

I'm not talking about taking one spell with Personal Immunity and being immune to All Spells of a Given School/Order/Cabal/Whatever.

 

I'm talking about the ability to set up a given, very flexible spell, to grant immunity to other aspects of That Particular Spell.

 

The only things that makes it a wild card are:

1. The fact that I'm talking about a multipower. However, I think it's been established elsewhere as a general principle that in some ways, a multipower can already be thought of as "different uses of the same underlying power."

2. The fact that I'm talking about selecting it as part of a Variable Advantage.

 

Otherwise, it's no different than if it were a straight spell with Personal Immunity, that could easily be ruled to grant immunity to the exact same spell cast by another wizard who studied the same sort of magick you did.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Where was that palindromedary?

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

I'm really thinking you want to build the whole thing with "Does Not Work Vs. Anyone With Same Spell" rather than Personal Immunity. The former sounds more like what you're trying to do than the latter.

[Lucius]

Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

I'm really thinking you want to build the whole thing with "Does Not Work Vs. Anyone With Same Spell" rather than Personal Immunity. The former sounds more like what you're trying to do than the latter.

 

Um. No.

 

I'm not talking about "I have this spell, so no one else can use this spell against me."

 

I'm talking about a spell with Variable Advantage, and one of the advantages you can take is Personal Immunity. You can also not take it. In fact, most of the time, you wouldn't. Most of the time, you could probably find something more useful to do with that +1/4 worth of advantage than stick it in Personal Immunity, unless say you're also taking Explosion or Area Effect and don't want to get caught in your own blast. Only if you're paranoid about being ambushed by one of your own order would you routinely walk around with the spell configured that way; probably also with a Trigger set to automatically counterattack whoever tried to blast you.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is wondering why everyone is making it out to be so much more than it is.....

[Haven Walkur]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Hello, Lucius...I think the palindromedary is too sexy for its hump.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

One Spell that was built as a multipower because' date=' as I explained, that was the ONLY way to build something as flexible as the original I was trying to update for the current Dispensation.[/quote']

You know, on a side track from this thread's actual topic... Instead of using steps in a Multipower why not use a VPP for each Spell - it may actually cost less in the long run (or at least look neater). I don't know the magic system specifically so am going from what I gathered in the various threads you've posted regarding this.

 

VPP: The Spell; Magic Only -1/4; Only Specific Spell/Power -2; Cosmic;

 

Spell Of Blasting (say it's an Energy Blast); 60 point VPP; 28 Control Cost (88 Points Total) Allows you to morph the EB into anything using 60 Active points.

 

Compared to a Multipower of the same level and 5 Slots (which costs 90 Points); If you have even more slots than 5 the VPP becomes cheaper and easier to use.

 

Doesn't solve your Personal Immunity issue, but I think you had that under control if I remember your questions up in Steve's Forum.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Um. No.

 

I'm not talking about "I have this spell, so no one else can use this spell against me."

 

I'm talking about a spell with Variable Advantage, and one of the advantages you can take is Personal Immunity. You can also not take it. In fact, most of the time, you wouldn't. Most of the time, you could probably find something more useful to do with that +1/4 worth of advantage than stick it in Personal Immunity, unless say you're also taking Explosion or Area Effect and don't want to get caught in your own blast. Only if you're paranoid about being ambushed by one of your own order would you routinely walk around with the spell configured that way; probably also with a Trigger set to automatically counterattack whoever tried to blast you.

 

Well, okay. Per the rules, then, as long as you had Personal Immunity loaded into the Variable Advantage, you'd be immune to your own spell being reflected back at you or being caught in your own spell's Area of Effect. Anything more than that is a GM call. It is not unreasonable to say that you would be immune to anyone using the same spell against you -- I'd rule that it would be only as long as they had Personal Immunity loaded into their VA as well.

[KA.]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Um. No.

 

I'm not talking about "I have this spell, so no one else can use this spell against me."

 

I'm talking about a spell with Variable Advantage, and one of the advantages you can take is Personal Immunity. You can also not take it. In fact, most of the time, you wouldn't. Most of the time, you could probably find something more useful to do with that +1/4 worth of advantage than stick it in Personal Immunity, unless say you're also taking Explosion or Area Effect and don't want to get caught in your own blast. Only if you're paranoid about being ambushed by one of your own order would you routinely walk around with the spell configured that way; probably also with a Trigger set to automatically counterattack whoever tried to blast you.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is wondering why everyone is making it out to be so much more than it is.....

 

I think the reason this is getting so much static is that it isn't exactly what Personal Immunity is supposed to do, even though it is a technically book-legal option.

So how about this?

Since it it a kind of odd use of Personal Immunity, and it won't be used that often,

how about just making a +1/4 Custom Advantage called something like "SFX Immunity",

that says "Only works when attacked by the exact same spell".

 

I think the problem is that people are having a hard time wrapping their head around the idea that you basically want these guys to be able to designate "Personal Immunity" as one of their advantages, in case they are attacked by a member of their own school.

 

It isn't that it is illegal, it is just a little odd.

 

I do have a question, that you may have already answered. (I just don't have time to reread the whole thread, and I don't want to miss it by skimming)

Since these are spells with Variable advantage, how close does the match have to be?

It sounds a bit like "Rock Paper Scissors"

If I am using an 8d6 Fire Energy Blast w/ Armor Piercing and you have your slot allotted to an 8d6 Fire Energy Blast with Personal Immunity, does that work?

Or do you have to have yours allotted to 8d6 Fire Energy Blast w/ Armor Piercing and Personal Immunity?

Or do both of us have to have a slot allotted to 8d6 Fire Energy Blast w/ Armor Piercing and Personal Immunity, for it to work?

 

Sorry if this was already explained, just trying to get things clear.

 

KA.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

I would say they both have to have Personal Immunity, at the very least, and be extremely similar SFX. Being the same spell would cover SFX as far as I'm concerned. I'd thought originally about requiring them to both have the same suite of Advantages in the Variable Advantage, but that's a little too much.

 

Lucius, the real reason I'm giving you so much static is that it's a GM call. If you're the GM, do it and be happy. If you're not the GM, ask the GM.

[Lucius]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

You know, on a side track from this thread's actual topic... Instead of using steps in a Multipower why not use a VPP for each Spell - it may actually cost less in the long run (or at least look neater). I don't know the magic system specifically so am going from what I gathered in the various threads you've posted regarding this.

 

VPP: The Spell; Magic Only -1/4; Only Specific Spell/Power -2; Cosmic;

 

Spell Of Blasting (say it's an Energy Blast); 60 point VPP; 28 Control Cost (88 Points Total) Allows you to morph the EB into anything using 60 Active points.

 

Compared to a Multipower of the same level and 5 Slots (which costs 90 Points); If you have even more slots than 5 the VPP becomes cheaper and easier to use.

 

Doesn't solve your Personal Immunity issue, but I think you had that under control if I remember your questions up in Steve's Forum.

 

 

*blink* *blink*

 

I never would have thought of that. I'll have to give it some consideration. I never thought of using a Variable Power Pool and then limiting the hell out of it to restrict it to a very specific type of power.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary thinks it looks logical, but the palindromedary is often counter-intuitive.

[Lucius]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

I think the reason this is getting so much static is that it isn't exactly what Personal Immunity is supposed to do, even though it is a technically book-legal option.

So how about this?

Since it it a kind of odd use of Personal Immunity, and it won't be used that often,

how about just making a +1/4 Custom Advantage called something like "SFX Immunity",

that says "Only works when attacked by the exact same spell".

.

 

That's something like I was saying when I suggested a slightly higher limitation to use it that way.

 

I think the problem is that people are having a hard time wrapping their head around the idea that you basically want these guys to be able to designate "Personal Immunity" as one of their advantages, in case they are attacked by a member of their own school.

 

It isn't that it is illegal, it is just a little odd.

.

 

 

Frankly, I'll agree that it's more than a "little" odd.

 

I do have a question, that you may have already answered. (I just don't have time to reread the whole thread, and I don't want to miss it by skimming)

Since these are spells with Variable advantage, how close does the match have to be?

It sounds a bit like "Rock Paper Scissors"

If I am using an 8d6 Fire Energy Blast w/ Armor Piercing and you have your slot allotted to an 8d6 Fire Energy Blast with Personal Immunity, does that work?

Or do you have to have yours allotted to 8d6 Fire Energy Blast w/ Armor Piercing and Personal Immunity?

Or do both of us have to have a slot allotted to 8d6 Fire Energy Blast w/ Armor Piercing and Personal Immunity, for it to work?

 

Sorry if this was already explained, just trying to get things clear.

 

KA.

 

Well, I did say that perhaps there should be an advantage, "counter-immunity" to get around "personal immunity" and attack a mage with the latter. It would get to be like multiple stackings of "armor piercing" and "hardened defenses" in that case.

 

Or, since "variable special effects" is the one automatic advantage (on top of "variable advantages") maybe the right kind of skill roll - Analyze Spell perhaps - would let you figure out how to blast past the personal immunity, after seeing one your spells bounce once.

 

I would say they both have to have Personal Immunity, at the very least, and be extremely similar SFX. Being the same spell would cover SFX as far as I'm concerned. I'd thought originally about requiring them to both have the same suite of Advantages in the Variable Advantage, but that's a little too much.

 

Lucius, the real reason I'm giving you so much static is that it's a GM call. If you're the GM, do it and be happy. If you're not the GM, ask the GM.

 

I appreciate that. I just thought, based on what you said - "limit all spells to 'can't be used against someone with the same spell' " that you hadn't quite understood.

 

I very much appreciate everyone's feedback though, it's been interesting.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is reminding me I have a duty to attend to....

[The Monster]

Re: Personal Immunity...to What exactly?

 

Lucius, perhaps you could actually post an example of what you're proposing so that comments are relevant.

It might be more productive and diplomatic than inviting comments on a a vague description and then lecturing when people go on explorations of concept which turn out to be tangential or irrelevant to your specific idea.

 

From your recent more accurate lecture, it seems to me that you're best off just leaving Personal Immunity alone - that it just applies to your own spell and not anyone else's, period. Less confusing for everyone and you don't have to keep track of what slot(s) you have up every moment you're walking around (not to mention keeping track of what all the NPC mages are doing even when not expecting a fight).