Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

[Robyn]

Here's the story: wizards are immune (invulnerable, unaffected by, pick your favorite term ) to magic that has the same "source" as their own magic.

 

Here are the mechanics: mandatory Limitations on all their own spells to save points by "cannot affect other wizards who use same SFX", or Personal Immunity for each spell (I'm not quite sure how this would work out).

 

Here's the question: by preference or experience, how would you handle this or recommend another GM to handle it?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

I'd go the personal immunity result. All attack spells have it and, by campaign ground rule, the immunity extends to all spells using the same effect.

 

Magic will cost a little more, but you're getting a defense from other magic with it, so it seems reasonable.

[McCoy]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

I think I'd probably go with the personal immunity, and handwave that if you have personal imminity to your own spells, you have immunity to other wizards of the same "school."

 

IIRC when I did Cyclops and Havok I used a 3 point Life Support immunity for them to be immune to each other's powers.

[Lucius]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

One of these two:

 

Both. Have each spell have the Personal Immunity Advantage, and a Limitation "No Effect on Wizards of the Same Order/School/SFX Source/whatever."

 

Neither. Because the advantage and limitation cancel out so to speak, make it a campaign ground rule that magicians can't be effected by spells of a type they know.

 

Just realize that if there are no restrictions on learning magic, lots of characters will want to learn one small spell from each school so as to get immunity to the lot...

 

 

Hm, come to think of it, maybe making them pay for the advantage is the way to go.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary observes that one thing Lucius seems sure of is that it's not a legitimate Limitation - but give him time, he'll probably talk himself around to that too...

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

Its a bad idea for most Magic Systems. Because one wizard can launch a magic missle is not a good justification for that wizard to be immune to other wizards magic missiles, for instance.

 

Generally speaking having spellcasters pay for (either in points or other resources such as VPP allocation) Dispel, Suppress, and tailored defenses (like a "shield" spell) are the way to go.

 

I also recommend that if you want to have "dueling wizards" moments you should allow Dispel to be Aborted to as a Defensive Action if it is used to "counter" an incoming spell.

 

If you _really_ want to encourage Counterspells, you can also waive the requirement for the Expanded Effect Advantage to allow a Dispel to work vs different sorts of Magic Spells one at a time so that the 3 pts / d6 keeps pace with the AP of most base powers allowing an equal AP Dispel to succeed on average.

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

Just realize that if there are no restrictions on learning magic' date=' lots of characters will want to learn one small spell from each school so as to get immunity to the lot...[/quote']

 

I was thinking a patron-type system, possibly with the "choose which dark lord to sell your soul to" restrictions on being chosen by more than one.

 

Its a bad idea for most Magic Systems. Because one wizard can launch a magic missle is not a good justification for that wizard to be immune to other wizards magic missiles' date=' for instance.[/quote']

 

Lucius is correct in his interpretation, immunity is not just to the exact same spells but all spells of the same "source of magic" SFX. Not "type", which would classify spells by what they did, but "source", which classifies magic by where it comes from. The problem is that I can't value those SFX, much less cost out Personal Immunity for them. The HERO system specifically separates SFX from mechanics, which means there are not only no rules for building SFX with mechanics, but no guidelines either. (I can build the Visible effects of a power, using Linked Images, but while the exact nature of these Images is appropriate to the SFX, the SFX is more than that.) This is why I was thinking of mandatory Limitations on each spell; the source of a wizard's magic won't permit them to cast spells on any other wizard chosen by the same source (actually, that's not entirely correct; the spells will be cast just fine, but the source won't feed enough power to that spell to do anything).

 

I've learned that the mechanics do not need to fully reflect the "how this works" story/SFX of a power, so I'm considering a Personal Immunity as well. But if anyone has a way to cost out the SFX, please share

[ghost-angel]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

If you go with this trope, Personal Immunity is generally used. It is what I would use.

 

I would also make it a campaign rule that you cannot, under any circumstances, have magic from more than one source. You may switch sources (if it makes sense for the game), but nothing more than that.

[The Mad GM]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

Reasoning from effect: If a bad guy cast a fireball at a group containing a fire mage (let's call him Skippy), does it fizzle (dispel/suppress)? or does the fire mage and any equipment he's carrying simply not get effected while his compatriots burn?

 

Alternately: Skippy throws himself in front of a flame arrow to save a companion. Does it fizzle on his chest or zip through as if he wasn't there?

 

Or: Skippy's group is entangled in a cage of solid flame (work with me here), Skippy can just walk out and leave his friends behind?

 

In other words, can Green Lantern walk through yellow walls?

 

Or: Skippy accidentally starts a forest fire. Will the normal fire affect him? If I was Skippy, I'd have some sort of fire defense, above and beyond anything campaign specific.

 

If an intelligent being is granting the powers, he might simply not allow a spell to go off that would hurt a follower. That would be a limitation on the spell. Almost everything else feels like a defense power.

 

Personally I'd make it some sort of defense power, possibly Damage Reduction, only versus "college of magic"

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

Reasoning from effect: If a bad guy cast a fireball at a group containing a fire mage (let's call him Skippy), does it fizzle (dispel/suppress)? or does the fire mage and any equipment he's carrying simply not get effected while his compatriots burn?

 

Alternately: Skippy throws himself in front of a flame arrow to save a companion. Does it fizzle on his chest or zip through as if he wasn't there?

 

Or: Skippy's group is entangled in a cage of solid flame (work with me here), Skippy can just walk out and leave his friends behind?

 

In other words, can Green Lantern walk through yellow walls?

 

Or: Skippy accidentally starts a forest fire. Will the normal fire affect him? If I was Skippy, I'd have some sort of fire defense, above and beyond anything campaign specific.

 

If an intelligent being is granting the powers, he might simply not allow a spell to go off that would hurt a follower. That would be a limitation on the spell. Almost everything else feels like a defense power.

 

Personally I'd make it some sort of defense power, possibly Damage Reduction, only versus "college of magic"

Which is what I do in many cases. Limited Armor is also a favorite, and Absorption as a Defense can work too.

 

I also have some custom rules for "Spell Resistance" for those that like the idea, but Ive been moving away from it.

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

Reasoning from effect: If a bad guy cast a fireball at a group containing a fire mage (let's call him Skippy)' date=' does it fizzle (dispel/suppress)? or does the fire mage and any equipment he's carrying simply not get effected while his compatriots burn? [/quote']

 

I hadn't thought that far. To go with the single (if still rather vague ) character idea I had in mind, though, the magic either envelops or is just inside a wizard; it's with him at all times, and any effects that make contact are absorbed/dispersed and drawn back into the source by that same connection which allows the wizard to cast spells in the first place. Assuming they share that source, of course. Equipment might be affected.

 

On the bright side, if multiple fire mages were on the same team, one of them could lure the opponents into combat and then another could center a fireball on the melee

 

Alternately: Skippy throws himself in front of a flame arrow to save a companion. Does it fizzle on his chest or zip through as if he wasn't there?

 

I think it would get swallowed up, though AOE spells (such as fireball) would not be entirely cancelled (a single fire mage standing with arms akimbo against an onrushing wall of flame would leave a mage-sized hole in the wall as it rushed onward, perhaps leaving room for others to dash through).

 

Or: Skippy's group is entangled in a cage of solid flame (work with me here)' date=' Skippy can just walk out and leave his friends behind?[/quote']

 

For continuous effects, the GM might rule that the flame was constantly renewing (how else does it avoid flickering and going out?), and therefore heals up "holes" made in it as the mage passes through, so the mage's body can't be used like an extinguisher/eraser

 

In other words' date=' can Green Lantern walk through yellow walls?[/quote']

 

Not to be picky about details, but Parallax wasn't part of the Central Battery; he just lived there. To answer your question in the spirit with which (I think) it was intended, contradicting limitations and immunities are resolved in accordance with the will of any entity responsible for all of them.

 

Or: Skippy accidentally starts a forest fire. Will the normal fire affect him?

 

If the spell has worn off (so the forest fire is only raging because his magic is still keeping it that way), I could look to SFX for whether the spell was just keeping conditions hot and dry (fanning the flames), or actually making things burn. Of course, since Skippy cast the spell himself, I might disallow immunity anyway (he only gets immunity to the spells of other fire magi, his own have to be let through or he would never be able to use beneficial spells on himself).

 

Secondary consequences of spells aren't blocked. You can use Levitate to lift something heavy, move it over the target's head, and let go; you can't slam it directly into them, because your magic is the only thing making it move, and it harmlessly comes to a stop when it gets near the target's body.

 

There are, of course, other uses here that a clever player may try. My intent is not to lay out exact rules for them to try finding loopholes in; most of these questions will be up to the GM running a game, possibly decided at the moment such a situation arises.

 

Personally I'd make it some sort of defense power' date=' possibly Damage Reduction, only versus "college of magic"[/quote']

 

The problem with doing this as a defensive power was that they're linear; the cost varies depending on how much you put into it, meaning that more powerful magi (with more points to spend) will be "absolutely defended" and their magical strength can easily overwhelm the defenses of weaker magi. Even the highest level of Damage Reduction doesn't provide 100% resistance.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

My interpretation of this is: how would you build a magic user, or group of magic users, who have a specific immunity to the SFX of their own magic, based on source?

 

My question is: What are your 'sources' and how do they work? Ley Line magic? Air magic? Chakra magic? Geomancy? What are the sources, what SFX do those specific sources provide, and how does the actual immunity work?

 

Me, I wouldn't allow it, BUT, if that's what you're doing, I'm happy to help: need more information first.

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

My question is: What are your 'sources' and how do they work? Ley Line magic? Air magic? Chakra magic? Geomancy? What are the sources' date=' what SFX do those specific sources provide, and how does the actual immunity work?[/quote']

 

You can read through my replies in this thread to see other answers to the question

 

However, a direct summation is that the "sources" are "patrons" (such as demon lords) who directly fuel each spell a wizard casts by means of a conduit which can convey magical energy. SFX of the spells may have no restrictions (i.e., spells need not share any SFX, and all wizards may have equal access to SFX regardless of who/what the source of their magic is), with those who have the ability to Detect Magic and discern the source as well (Discriminatory/Analyze?) sensing "different flavors" to the magic. Or, the GM might rule that some to all of a spell's SFX would be dictated by the source.

 

Immunity works by the source drawing back through the conduit any magical energy that originally came from it.

[The Mad GM]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

I hadn't thought that far. To go with the single (if still rather vague ) character idea I had in mind, though, the magic either envelops or is just inside a wizard; it's with him at all times, and any effects that make contact are absorbed/dispersed and drawn back into the source by that same connection which allows the wizard to cast spells in the first place. Assuming they share that source, of course. Equipment might be affected.

 

On the bright side, if multiple fire mages were on the same team, one of them could lure the opponents into combat and then another could center a fireball on the melee

 

A little off topic, but is this ability one the character has to turn on, or is it just something he has? Can he pump up that ability to protect others, etc? Just thinking out loud.

 

I think it would get swallowed up, though AOE spells (such as fireball) would not be entirely cancelled (a single fire mage standing with arms akimbo against an onrushing wall of flame would leave a mage-sized hole in the wall as it rushed onward, perhaps leaving room for others to dash through).

 

For continuous effects, the GM might rule that the flame was constantly renewing (how else does it avoid flickering and going out?), and therefore heals up "holes" made in it as the mage passes through, so the mage's body can't be used like an extinguisher/eraser

 

Skippy's brother Pinky Pearl, otoh...

 

Not to be picky about details, but Parallax wasn't part of the Central Battery; he just lived there. To answer your question in the spirit with which (I think) it was intended, contradicting limitations and immunities are resolved in accordance with the will of any entity responsible for all of them.

 

I withdraw the question.

 

If the spell has worn off (so the forest fire is only raging because his magic is still keeping it that way), I could look to SFX for whether the spell was just keeping conditions hot and dry (fanning the flames), or actually making things burn. Of course, since Skippy cast the spell himself, I might disallow immunity anyway (he only gets immunity to the spells of other fire magi, his own have to be let through or he would never be able to use beneficial spells on himself).

 

Secondary consequences of spells aren't blocked. You can use Levitate to lift something heavy, move it over the target's head, and let go; you can't slam it directly into them, because your magic is the only thing making it move, and it harmlessly comes to a stop when it gets near the target's body.

 

There are, of course, other uses here that a clever player may try. My intent is not to lay out exact rules for them to try finding loopholes in; most of these questions will be up to the GM running a game, possibly decided at the moment such a situation arises.

 

I was just trying to get a sense of the effects.

 

The problem with doing this as a defensive power was that they're linear; the cost varies depending on how much you put into it, meaning that more powerful magi (with more points to spend) will be "absolutely defended" and their magical strength can easily overwhelm the defenses of weaker magi. Even the highest level of Damage Reduction doesn't provide 100% resistance.

 

Personally I'm a more dramatic storyteller than a rules person. But I prefer to have a consistent view of something so others can work out unusual uses I hadn't thought of, and still be in line with me initial intention. One of the ways I do this is try to think of what-if scenarios. I'm not trying to find loopholes, I'm trying to refine a concept.

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

A little off topic' date=' but is this ability one the character has to turn on, or is it just something he has?[/quote']

 

Doesn't have to turn on, and can't turn off, either. Not really a choice.

[CraterMaker]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

I was thinking a patron-type system, possibly with the "choose which dark lord to sell your soul to" restrictions on being chosen by more than one.

 

 

OOOOh! OOOOh! I pick Steve Long!!

 

-CraterMaker

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

OOOOh! OOOOh! I pick Steve Long!!

 

Remember, your willingness is only the first part of the bargain.

 

Access to magic is restricted in that the dark lord must also choose you

[Markdoc]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

From the descriptions you give - a mage could walk through a magical barrier he was attuned to, a fireball would burn the people around him, but not him, I'd suggest desolid.

 

Make it a perk: "Attuned to source X" Desolid, Persistent, always on, only vs magic of same source, -2. 24 points doesn't seem too much to pay for total immunity to some magic - and it also serves as a gatekeeper - only dedicated mages would spend so much for access to magic.

 

That requires some handwavium as a power source - technically, since he's desolid, he should have to buy all his stuff with "affects real world" but since the real world affects him normally, I'd be inclined to let that slide.

 

You could also use handwavium to allow his own magic to affect him, but there's two other options I'd prefer.

 

1. Be internally consistent. If he acts as a magical conductor, soaking up attuned magic, then the same applies to his own magic. In other words, he *can't* affect himself. That could lead to some cool in-game logic: you can make other people invisible, but you can't make yourself invisible. You need somone else - with a different attunement - to heal you, etc. It'd give a nice, unique flavour.

 

2. Just make him pay an extra +1/2 for affects desolid on spells he applies to himself.

 

cheers, Mark

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

From the descriptions you give - a mage could walk through a magical barrier he was attuned to' date=' a fireball would burn the people around him, but not him, I'd suggest desolid.[/quote']

 

Missiles passing through him wouldn't emerge on the other side. But the idea definitely has potential

 

Make it a perk: "Attuned to source X" Desolid

 

One question: would this require more handwavium to say that the mage was unaffected by Mental effects, etcetera (that usually affect Desolid characters) of the same source, or is this part of the use of Desolid "as Invulnerability"?

 

Requiring a Limitation, even a small (but still non-zero) one, on such powers would effectively grant bonus points to mages who took lots of such spells.

[Markdoc]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

One question: would this require more handwavium to say that the mage was unaffected by Mental effects' date=' etcetera (that usually affect Desolid characters) of the same source, or is this part of the use of Desolid "as Invulnerability"?[/quote']

 

No, in this case, since the only mental effects he would be immune to are those with the special effect which is he is specifically desolid to, that should cover things. Essentially all magical powers share a 0 point limit as part oft heir SFX - I assume you would not permit people - if you used this system - to get around it by adding "affects desolid" onto their spells - but that they could use "affects desolid" to build a ghost-killing spell.

 

Of course (now that I think about it) if you are going to make that assumption, you could just require all magic to take a -0 limitation that it cannot affect a caster drawing on the same source. It's +0 since it is both an advantage (when you are being attacked) and a disadvantage - when attacking others. That would be the simplest way to handle it.

 

cheers, Mark

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

Of course (now that I think about it) if you are going to make that assumption' date=' you could just require all magic to take a -0 limitation that it cannot affect a caster drawing on the same source. It's +0 since it is both an advantage (when you are being attacked) and a disadvantage - when attacking others. That would be the simplest way to handle it.[/quote']

 

A no-value modifier? That would neatly avoid criticisms of either approach, though it does raise once more the questions of whether mandatory -0 Limitations / +0 Advantages need to be present on the character sheet at all, or can just be "campaign rules".

[The Mad GM]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

A no-value modifier? That would neatly avoid criticisms of either approach' date=' though it does raise once more the questions of whether mandatory -0 Limitations / +0 Advantages need to be present on the character sheet at all, or can just be "campaign rules".[/quote']

 

It helps to have it explicit in the power, especially if they ever want to port the character to a different game three years later, and seemed to remember being immune to fireballs for some reason.

[Markdoc]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

A no-value modifier? That would neatly avoid criticisms of either approach' date=' though it does raise once more the questions of whether mandatory -0 Limitations / +0 Advantages need to be present on the character sheet at all, or can just be "campaign rules".[/quote']

 

Either/or - as long as the players know, it doesn't matter since it doesn't change any costs. In my game, I have mandatory limitations on *all* magic but those go on the player's sheets since they affect the cost.

 

cheers, Mark

[Robyn]

Re: Wizard's immunity to the magical SFX they use

 

It helps to have it explicit in the power' date=' especially if they ever want to port the character to a different game three years later, and seemed to remember being immune to fireballs for some reason.[/quote']

 

I can list it just once on the character sheet, and note "for all spells". It's not as bad as the "account for every possible contingency, even those that aren't readily conceivable" list which would be different for each power depending on SFX.