Duration Caps on Spells?

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

So what's the problem? There is a very clear and logically consistent control for how long the Power remains active -- as long as the character pays END for it.

 

THAT is the answer I was actually looking for. Thanks!

[Frenchman]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Using Lingering in that fashion, you could incant, dance in a circle, and opt to not fly until the evening when it is most convenient, for instance. It merely decouples INITIALIZATION and IMPLEMENTATION.

 

So you do all the annoying an potentially interruptible initialization stuff to comply with the Lims on the Power, and then walk around until you feel like using the Power effect (within the duration of the Lingering).

 

Not to nitpick, but I thought that is what the Delayed Effect advantage does. There must be something more to adding lingering onto a constant power, since it is so much more expensive.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Not to nitpick' date=' but I thought that is what the Delayed Effect advantage does. There must be something more to adding lingering onto a constant power, since it is so much more expensive.[/quote']

Delayed Effect primarily controls how many Powers can be active at once, and is really more of a psuedo-framework that works across multiple Powers.

 

For a lengthy rail against Delayed Effect....

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=904473&postcount=152

[Archon]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Thia,

 

For your sorcerer, did you go with an End Reserve or personal end to power his spells? If you went with the reserve and it has a fairly long recharge period, it should take care of itself. After all, the player only has so much end, and it takes forever to get more. He can't leave the power on all the time. If he's still using it too much, consider adding a costs extra end limitation on the spell.

 

Of course, if you went with a quick recharge or personal end set up, then you have a different problem. For personal end, don't forget the long-term end rules. He'll exhaust himself pretty quick. For a quick recharge reserve, I'm not sure off the top of my head.

 

Archon

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Good morning, Archon!

 

Actually, the dirty git hasn't confirmed if he's signing on with the campaign or not, but I want to make sure the question is answered regardless. I want to make Sorcery tangibly different from Wizardry, so I'm going with an EC & END Reserve build, END recharges only after rest. Simple as that, 8 hours rest = END. Good to go. I haven't worried about "half rest" or anything, I'm content with it being a hard & fast rule, but that's something else entirely.

 

I'm also wondering if I need to cap the END Reserve in any way. Tossing a spell based on END is Active/10, whereas the general set of lims on a Wizard spell is Active/5 = Real, and it's the Real that gets slotted into the VPP.

 

Hrm. More pondering.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

One issue not mentioned is the "1 charge" restriction on Wizardry. This probably works OK for attack spells. For anything with a duration (eg. Flight, Force Field, Water breathing), 1 charge means "lasts for one phase and then shuts off". That pretty much forces Wizards to focus on attack spells, maybe some adjustment power spells, since they won't be able to set up defensive spells with any lasting time. That will mean one of two things - wizards with armor, or wizards with short lifespans.

 

Lingering might help with this. Continuing Charges would, but I expect the control cost of the VPP takes the 1 charge limitation, so continuing charges aren't an option.

 

[soapbox]To a large extent, it looks like you're trying to recreate D&D, especially Wizardry. My personal bias is that it's more efficient to get d20 mechanics by playing d20 than by shoehorning them into Hero system. [/soapbox]

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Oh, the control cost of the VPP does in fact have the limitation "All spells must have one charge" but it can be a Continuing Charge, because that was an issue I intentionally side-stepped up front with Killer Shrike's help. So yes, Forcefields and the like can be purchased with a Continuing Charge, which jacks up the Real Cost in the VPP slot, but hey. That's the price you pay.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

One issue not mentioned is the "1 charge" restriction on Wizardry. This probably works OK for attack spells. For anything with a duration (eg. Flight, Force Field, Water breathing), 1 charge means "lasts for one phase and then shuts off". That pretty much forces Wizards to focus on attack spells, maybe some adjustment power spells, since they won't be able to set up defensive spells with any lasting time. That will mean one of two things - wizards with armor, or wizards with short lifespans.

 

Lingering might help with this. Continuing Charges would, but I expect the control cost of the VPP takes the 1 charge limitation, so continuing charges aren't an option.

Using Continuing Charges (with or without Lingering) is the point. Access to Continuing Charges is actually a PRO to this sort of magic system as has been discussed at length elsewhere.

 

The VPP does not have the CHARGE limitation on it -- that would mean you could use the VPP itself once. It has a Limited Power Limitation stating what kind of Powers can go in the VPP -- Only Powers with 1 Charge.

 

[soapbox]To a large extent, it looks like you're trying to recreate D&D, especially Wizardry. My personal bias is that it's more efficient to get d20 mechanics by playing d20 than by shoehorning them into Hero system. [/soapbox]

My personal bias is to not try to tell other people what they can and cannot use the HERO System for. If he and his players want that sort of Magic System, then that is their business.

 

Besides, youre missing the point. He's not trying to play D&D in the HERO System. He's trying to play the HERO System, and modeling one or more Magic Systems that suits what he thinks a Magic System should be like, satisfies his players, or some combination thereof.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Eh, actually, Hugh, you may want to check an older thread of mine (maybe a couple pages back, "Overcoming the First Hurdle, building a *gulp* Magic System" in which everyone went to great length to help me understand what HERO does and how to make it do what I want a magic system to be.

 

Sure, there are things in d20 that I think are good ideas, and there are other things that I think are really bad ideas, but with HERO I can keep all the good ideas I want, do all the things d20 didn't let me do originally, and when it's done I have a fine tuned machine built to let me play the game I want to play, which isn't d20. And you could posit the argument that it isn't HERO, because HERO is a toolkit and eschews (barring specific material) genre conventions or any sort of personal construct that says "I do this, and only this."

 

Savinien told me long ago to not play d20 in HERO, but to play HERO. And Killer Shrike is right, I'm not trying to rebuild Wizardry: I haven't gone to any great lengths to build a "spells per day" chart, nor am I opposed to people drafting new spells. I just want a balanced, clean magic system that can be understood fairly easily by anyone within a few minutes explanation. Sure, d20 does some wacky things with durations, but I'm not looking for that, I just want to understand how HERO does it, and then go from there. The answer for this question was:

 

"You stop 'Flying' when you stop paying END." Hey, there we go. I was under the impression it only cost END when you were doing the flying, not at any other time. And Steve Long gave me a ton of pages to go home and cross reference to answer rules questions I coughed up. I'm really excited about playing HERO and creating a system that'll do what I need and meet me half way for the things I don't want to expend effort on.

 

Besides, you should see my Sorcerors. Definately not 3.5 friendly.

[Archon]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

Good morning' date=' [b']Archon[/b]!

 

I'm also wondering if I need to cap the END Reserve in any way. Tossing a spell based on END is Active/10, whereas the general set of lims on a Wizard spell is Active/5 = Real, and it's the Real that gets slotted into the VPP.

 

Hrm. More pondering.

 

That is a critical question. I'm going to run a few assumptions here for my suggestion.

 

#1) Shield spell costs 1 END per phase.

#2) Basic attack spell costs 4 END per use. (Attack spells could be EB, dispel, teke, etc.)

 

Total: 5 END per phase base.

 

Caster is SPD 3 and fights last 3 turns. (Actually I've rarely had fights last more than 2, but I'm being a pessimist.)

 

Total END use: 45 END for 1 fight for just combat spells.

 

Occasional spells:

 

Travel spell: 2 END per phase (Travel could be flight, running, whatever.)

Utility spell: 2 END per phase (Utility could be teke, shapeshift, literally anything.)

 

Each probably not used more than 2 turns in a day. Total END for Travel and Utility 12 END.

 

Subtotal: 57 END for a day's spell use.

 

Add some extra for the odd ball use that comes up. My opinion use about 80 END. If it's not enough, the player can spend more XP on the reserve. I realize this is the same amount I gave back over in the Magic System thread, but there's a reason I said 80 END back there. I figure this is enough for 1 to 2 fights, utility spells, etc. It also means the player has to ration his use for when needs a spell, not just when he wants a spell.

 

Archon

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Duration Caps on Spells?

 

So roughly 3x the base EC. I can live with that. That would mean that your EC is 30 (approx., which makes sense) and all powers in said EC must be worth 60 or more total AP. Then you'll need to improve each power before improving the EC again (to say, 40, thus 120, which is more powerful and still makes sense without breaking the bank).

 

Thanks, that actually confirms my gut instincts!