Active Points For Spell Builds

[CTaylor]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Dude, Shrike, he just doesn't know the buzz words and the terms, don't be like that.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Well, saying "your whole site is just confusing" could be taken as a bit of insult don't you think?

 

KS has put a great deal of effort into his site.

I don't blame him one bit for not wanting to deal with someone who takes that attitude from the get go.

[JmOz]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

the problem, and this is how I view it, is that Gregg was confused by the sight, he expressed his problem in a manner than while I would not call it polite I would also not call it rude per say. KS then over reacted some, taking it more personaly than it probably deserved to be. In the end I think that both should just take a deep breath, have a cool drink, and laugh at what is probably just a stupid misunderstanding.

[JmOz]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Well, saying "your whole site is just confusing" could be taken as a bit of insult don't you think?

 

KS has put a great deal of effort into his site.

I don't blame him one bit for not wanting to deal with someone who takes that attitude from the get go.

 

It can just as easily be taken as "I find your site confusing, I don't understand what you are talking about". I am not saying that it is not reasonable to be insulted by it, but it is equaly possible that the insult was unintentional

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Well, saying "your whole site is just confusing" could be taken as a bit of insult don't you think?

 

KS has put a great deal of effort into his site.

I don't blame him one bit for not wanting to deal with someone who takes that attitude from the get go.

 

I certainly didn't mean it that way. But if he wants to find it insulting, I can't stop that and I'm not going to get into a scuffle over it. It's just a game, and all that. Nothing to get hung up about.

 

 

 

 

Gregg' date=' can you give a sample of a spell that a character might use. How many spells can a caster have in their VPP?[/quote']

 

The house rule is that a character can have up to their INT x 4 in total number of spells in their list.

 

 

Here's the first spell on the list from Kevin Tucker's mage, Wyntagh the Blue.

 

Cosian's Sparkle Beam: Sight Group Flash 4d6 (20 Active Points); Requires a PwS: Evocation Magic Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4) AND RKA 1d6+1 (20 Active Points); Only vs. Undead or Demonic Creatures (-1), Linked to Flash (-1/2), Requires a PwS: Evocation Magic Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4). Active Cost: 40 Points. Real Cost: 12 Points.

 

 

 

 

In your system, the character buys skill in casting in each specific school - correct? If so, then a character might be better at some of their spells then others - correct?

 

 

Right. For instance, to use Kevin's wizard as an example, he has PwS: Conjuration at 11- PwS: Divination at 13- and PwS: Evocation at 16-. As these are the only three schools he knows, these are the only three he can learn spells from.

 

 

 

Do they buy individual spells to put in their spellbook? Do they pay for the spells themselves or buy them as part of a skill (1 point = 1 spell), or do they just get a certain amount for free?

 

 

They start out with a number of spells equal to their INT score. The player chooses a half, I choose a quarter, and the last quarter are determined randomly, with any "fractions" of the character's INT score counting as an extra spell chosen by the player. All spells have to fit inside the active point limit of the VPP, and of course can only be chosen from schools the player possesses a Power Skill for.

 

After the start of the campaign, spells can be added through the expenditure of 2 XP per new spell learned in that fashion, assuming a successful PS: Spell Research roll that is heavily penalized if such research is rushed. (The player doesn't lose the XP if the roll is unsuccessful.)

 

 

 

 

How about posting one spell that your players say is overpowered (maybe that 4d6 RKA lightning bolt?) and one that is underpowered?

 

 

Sure.

 

 

Bolt of Lightning: RKA 4d6 - Requires a PwS: Evocation Magic Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4)

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I certainly didn't mean it that way. But if he wants to find it insulting' date=' I can't stop that and I'm not going to get into a scuffle over it. It's just a game, and all that. Nothing to get hung up about. [/quote']

 

I'm a teacher and I get the "I'm confused" bit often from the kids. It's no biggie, and I tell them to say it. If you don't understand something, I can't know unless you let me know.

 

The house rule is that a character can have up to their INT x 4 in total number of spells in their list.

Ok, that sounds good so far.

 

Here's the first spell on the list from Kevin Tucker's mage, Wyntagh the Blue.

 

Cosian's Sparkle Beam: Sight Group Flash 4d6 (20 Active Points); Requires a PwS: Evocation Magic Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4) AND RKA 1d6+1 (20 Active Points); Only vs. Undead or Demonic Creatures (-1), Linked to Flash (-1/2), Requires a PwS: Evocation Magic Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4). Active Cost: 40 Points. Real Cost: 12 Points.

 

The spell has a -4 to cast, so that has to be considered. A flash of 4d6 is a bit underpowered. At most, this will give you 8 segments to blind someone (it reads normal Body, which is 1=0,2-5=1, 6=2), which is basically one action for a SPD 2 character, or 2-3 for a SPD 3-4 character. I'd up that one to give it more "oomph". The RKA only affects undead or demons, and that's about the same as hitting them with a sword. If demons or undead have a lot of defenses (especially ED), then you might want to raise that as well. The suggested caps are 50-60 active points for powers and 8-9 DC. You have 2 attacks with DCs of 4. They both equal 8, but they are separate attacks, so I wouldn't go that route.

 

Right now, off the top of my head, I'd go with:

Corian's Sparkle: (Total: 60 Active Cost, 19 Real Cost) Sight Group Flash 6d6 (30 Active Points); Spell (-1/2), Requires A PwS: Evocation Skill Roll (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4) (Real Cost: 12) plus RKA 2d6 (30 Active Points); Only vs Undead or Demonic Creatures (-1), Requires A PwS: Evocation Skill Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Linked (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Beam (-1/4) (Real Cost: 7)

 

It pumps it up slightly, but not too much. The average roll of this will be 6 segments flashed, which is 1/2 a turn (max is 12 - a full turn), and the damage is like getting hit by a great axe, but maybe a bit more (if ED is lower than PD). A higher Active Cost will fill up the VPP faster, of course, but there's a price for everything. If the average speed is 2-4, you still lose 1/2 your actions, but this is a bit more regular than 4d6.

 

I'm looking more at the effect then what the point cost is, but you have to consider both.

 

Didn't ask, but if you don't have Hero Designer, I'd suggest getting it - it makes all this a lot easier.

 

Right. For instance, to use Kevin's wizard as an example, he has PwS: Conjuration at 11- PwS: Divination at 13- and PwS: Evocation at 16-. As these are the only three schools he knows, these are the only three he can learn spells from.

 

This is one to watch. I used a similar system but am dumping it - I think. With the spell as written, he has a -4 to his roll for Evocation, so a 12-. Not bad, but not great either. Using my version it would be -6 and a 10-. I allowed my players to get penalty skill levels to reduce the casting penalty, but that can get to where the limitation isn't one. On the other hand, if you have players miscasting their spells a lot, while their fellows are hacking the enemy apart, then you might want to reconsider that system.

 

They start out with a number of spells equal to their INT score. The player chooses a half, I choose a quarter, and the last quarter are determined randomly, with any "fractions" of the character's INT score counting as an extra spell chosen by the player. All spells have to fit inside the active point limit of the VPP, and of course can only be chosen from schools the player possesses a Power Skill for.

 

After the start of the campaign, spells can be added through the expenditure of 2 XP per new spell learned in that fashion, assuming a successful PS: Spell Research roll that is heavily penalized if such research is rushed. (The player doesn't lose the XP if the roll is unsuccessful.)

 

Sounds OK to me. I haven't used it, but I've seen it suggested. It should give them a fair amount of spells to know. Do you design all the spells or do you let the players make up their own (or at least suggest their own)?

 

Sure.

 

 

Bolt of Lightning: RKA 4d6 - Requires a PwS: Evocation Magic Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4)

 

This one I don't see as too bad, but then I used a similar one as well. Didn't I post the one I did? My problem was that the player never made the roll, and blew the spell (and her attack). Very frustrating, especially when the fighters have Deadly Blow. .

 

If this one is (literally) blowing the enemy away, then you might lower it down a d6 or 2. If this spell is cast as often as your fighters swing their swords, then maybe the damage should be the same (or slightly better). Why not start with 2d6 and see how that works. It would be easier to cast, drop the END down.

 

How do they pay for casting the spells? I used to use an END reserve that recovered 1/4 every 6 hours. But that ended up with people running out of power. From the way you described it, are they being powered by personal END?

 

Another way of limiting the spells might be Increased END. Make the big guns cost. Have that 4d6, but if it cost 12 END, it might make it more of a "save the day" kind of spell as opposed to an electric sword. This can make an "overpowered" spell be one that feels like it is just right.

 

Like I said, I go with what feels good for the spell as opposed to what the active points are. You do need to consider that (well, the Real Cost - had to look that up).

 

Any of that help?

 

Edit - I try to look an see what the effect of an average roll would be, and compare that to the appropriate defenses. If you see that it either gets stopped or just ignores the defenses as irrelevant, then you might want to raise or lower the spell's power. Except for the big guns. You got to have them in any spell system.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I'm a teacher and I get the "I'm confused" bit often from the kids. It's no biggie' date=' and I tell them to say it. If you don't understand something, I can't know unless you let me know.[/quote']

 

 

I've never been the brightest bulb in the pack. I mean, I'm not saying I'm stupid, just that I'm usually the last of my friends to get a joke, if you know what I mean.

 

 

 

 

Right now, off the top of my head, I'd go with:

Corian's Sparkle: (Total: 60 Active Cost, 19 Real Cost) Sight Group Flash 6d6 (30 Active Points); Spell (-1/2), Requires A PwS: Evocation Skill Roll (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4) (Real Cost: 12) plus RKA 2d6 (30 Active Points); Only vs Undead or Demonic Creatures (-1), Requires A PwS: Evocation Skill Roll (-1/2), Spell (-1/2), Linked (-1/2), Gestures (-1/4), Beam (-1/4) (Real Cost: 7)

 

It pumps it up slightly, but not too much. The average roll of this will be 6 segments flashed, which is 1/2 a turn (max is 12 - a full turn), and the damage is like getting hit by a great axe, but maybe a bit more (if ED is lower than PD). A higher Active Cost will fill up the VPP faster, of course, but there's a price for everything. If the average speed is 2-4, you still lose 1/2 your actions, but this is a bit more regular than 4d6.

 

I'm looking more at the effect then what the point cost is, but you have to consider both.

 

 

I get it, yeah. And yeah, the group ranges from SPD 2 to 4 (wizard's a 2, burglar's a 4, the two warriors are both 3). I might have to let Kevin put more points in his pool to cover the increases.

 

 

 

 

Didn't ask, but if you don't have Hero Designer, I'd suggest getting it - it makes all this a lot easier.

 

 

I'll have to get it.

 

 

 

This is one to watch. I used a similar system but am dumping it - I think. With the spell as written, he has a -4 to his roll for Evocation, so a 12-. Not bad, but not great either. Using my version it would be -6 and a 10-. I allowed my players to get penalty skill levels to reduce the casting penalty, but that can get to where the limitation isn't one. On the other hand, if you have players miscasting their spells a lot, while their fellows are hacking the enemy apart, then you might want to reconsider that system.

 

 

Would it be easier just to drop penalties to the skill roll?

 

 

 

Sounds OK to me. I haven't used it, but I've seen it suggested. It should give them a fair amount of spells to know. Do you design all the spells or do you let the players make up their own (or at least suggest their own)?

 

 

A bit of both. Some I made up, some the players have suggested. Others I've picked up elsewhere (like here, for example). My local gaming store sucks, to tell you the truth (if you're not into Magic the Gathering, AD&D 4th ED, or Warhammer Fantasy Battles, good luck finding anything), and I am a bit paranoid about using a debt card online, so I don't have the "official" spell books. Mostly I've been using converted D&D spells. Like I said, I'm not the most imaginative person out there.

 

 

 

 

If this one is (literally) blowing the enemy away, then you might lower it down a d6 or 2. If this spell is cast as often as your fighters swing their swords, then maybe the damage should be the same (or slightly better). Why not start with 2d6 and see how that works. It would be easier to cast, drop the END down.

 

 

I'll do that. It'll alter the damage for most combat spells, since I generally used this one as a gauge for how powerful the other spells should be. You know, "is this more powerful than a bolt of lightning" and all that.

 

 

 

How do they pay for casting the spells? I used to use an END reserve that recovered 1/4 every 6 hours. But that ended up with people running out of power. From the way you described it, are they being powered by personal END?

 

 

Wizards can buy END reserves for powering spells, or pay for it with personal END. The player character in question has an END reserve bought through a focus (he wanted a "really nifty wizard's staff that was obviously powerful but didn't seem to do anything" when he started the character), *and* a smaller personal END reserve.

 

 

 

 

Edit - I try to look an see what the effect of an average roll would be, and compare that to the appropriate defenses. If you see that it either gets stopped or just ignores the defenses as irrelevant, then you might want to raise or lower the spell's power. Except for the big guns. You got to have them in any spell system.

 

 

Right. Makes sense.

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

It is easier to drop the skill penalty, but that raises the cost of the power slightly. It does mean that the spell will always be cast in normal conditions, but most games are like that. I had a skill system similar to yours and it wasn't the greatest. I've been tossing around the idea of trying to modify it or dropping it, but I'm not sure. After reading comments here, and doing other reading and thinking, I will probably not be using it, but have the skill as a Knowledge skill (sort of like the spellcraft skill in D&D) - I think you may already have something like that, but I'm not sure.

 

You could also limit the points of spells in a school that can be learned or memorized based on their spell knowledge. For example, let them learn up to (skill rollx5) in active points (if they have a 15-, count that as 15, so they could learn 15x5 = 75 active points in one spell from that school). You could also give them a limit on Real Cost in the same way (say, Rollx2 or 3 in Real Cost, so a 15- could memorize - have in the VPP - no more then 30 or 45 points in that one school at one time).

 

That way, they could still specialize and be better at one particular school, while not having the problems that skill rolls cause.

 

I found one such system on Shrike's site, and it should be easier to understand since you have some of the terminology now. This is the skillx5 system I suggested: http://www.killershrike.com/FantasyHERO/HighFantasyHERO/MagicSystems/magecraftSystem.aspx

 

The only difference is the system described there uses individual spell skills rather than broader categories. Different flavors and different results. Given what you have now, I wouldn't make it an individual spell skill.

 

There are other systems there, but they are a little more complicated to work out, since he breaks spells down into levels based on active point costs and more. (ref: Wizardry System). I'd leave that alone for now until you get some more experience under your belt, but the choice is yours.

 

Just a bit more advice. Hope it helps. IF you don't understand something, let me (and the lurkers) know. If anyone else has advice, jump in.

[DusterBoy]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

(Noob cautiously raises his hand) "Sir," he asks deferentially, "What does PwS mean?"

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

(Noob cautiously raises his hand) "Sir' date='" he asks deferentially, "What does PwS mean?"[/quote']

 

Power Skill. In this case, it is defined as a skill with a particular magical philosophy/school. 5er pg 67, not sure about sidekick. Buying this skill just means you are better at using (whatever it is defined as). A limitation that "requires a skill roll" can use the Power Skill as the needed roll.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

It is easier to drop the skill penalty' date=' but that raises the cost of the power slightly. It does mean that the spell will always be cast in normal conditions, but most games are like that.[/quote']

 

 

I'm wondering, though, if I'm going to use a house rule that negates active point skill penalties, whether I should force the use of the "Does Not Take A Penalty" modifier on the limitation, or just outright say "they don't count" and don't bother with the modifier.

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I'm wondering' date=' though, if I'm going to use a house rule that negates active point skill penalties, whether I should force the use of the "Does Not Take A Penalty" modifier on the limitation, or just outright say "they don't count" and don't bother with the modifier.[/quote']

 

I'm not sure what you mean by this. If there is no penalty, then the spell just doesn't take the limitation.

 

Is it the penalty skill levels? All those are are levels bought for one specific penalty. They are mainly used to limit the PwS from getting into the 20+ range.

 

With no max, you can buy the skill as high as you like, let's say 26-. This makes it almost impossible to fail at casting a spell. The easy ones are no problem, and even a -10 roll is almost certain (16-). This may be the way you want to go.

 

But if you don't want to allow skill levels that high, you limit them and use PSLs. Let's say you max the skill at 18- (real generous). This makes casting low level spells (say, -1 to -3) real easy. Almost certain. However, the higher power spells (let's say -8 for this example), means the player has to roll a 10-. Not as good. But you let the player buy PSLs, only for "school" penalty rolls (or just "only for magic penalty rolls"). So, they buy these and apply them as needed. If you have a 16- skill, and have +8 PSLs, then any spell up to a -8 modifier will be cast at 16-. A -10 modfier will be cast at 16-2= 14-. It is basically the same, but the points are slightly different, and the numbers aren't high. It lets the low power spells have a chance of failure, while letting them cast high power spells easier (in the example, spells of 10-80 active points all are cast at 16-, instead of 25-18- in the 26- skill example). See the difference?

 

Aah - I get it. I'll leave that up there, since I wasted time writing it, but you can make the skill roll worth less or more. An RSR of 1/10 points (the standard) is a -1/2 limitation (80 Active = -8). An RSR of 1/20 is -1/4 limitation (80 active = -4). An RSR of 1/5 is -1 (80 active = -16). By changing the modifier, you can make some spells tougher to cast. Add in such modifiers as "Incantations, Complex" for -1/2 (-1/4 extra for complex) - this makes the RSR an additional -3 (or an INT roll -3 if no RSR, FH p255). Complex Gestures are an extra -1/4 (to -1/2 normally) which is another -3 to the skill roll (or -3 to DEX roll if no RSR).

 

There are other ways to make a spell hard to cast, while still preserving the character's ability to cast easy ones. Here are two examples:

 

Here's an extreme one:

Dragon Lightning: RKA 6d6 (90 Active Points); Requires A Skill Roll (Active Point penalty to Skill Roll is -1 per 5 Active Points; -1), Gestures (Complex; Requires both hands; -3/4), Incantations (Complex; -1/2), Spell (-1/2), Beam (-1/4) Real Cost: 22 END: 9

 

The penalty to the skill roll is (90/5) -18 base + -3 (complex gestures) + -3 (complex incantations) = -24 to the roll. For reference, the both hands on the gestures is another -1/4. This is a bit too extreme for too little, IMO. i think. The -18 was probably more than enough. If the characters get to the point where this roll is not a risk, then you are in a high power game. Without PSLs, you can see that the character will have to pump their skill up so high that other spells would be no challenge to cast (unless an automatic failure on an 18).

 

The other one is:

Lightning: RKA 4d6 (60 Active Points); Spell (-1/2), Requires A Skill Roll (-1/2), Beam (-1/4), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4). Real Cost: 22 END: 9

 

The penalty on this is -6. This is the base that the other one was at. You can mix and match limitations as you will. You can also give other requirements (one of mine was that 3 points in Dragon was needed to cast a particular spell, I forget what the modifier was, although it did have complex incantations on it). You can still make things harder for the more challenging and powerful spells.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Wait, I get it!

 

 

So I could adjust it so that really simple effects (the moral equivalent to the cups and balls trick that has no reall combat effects) could take no penalty at all (and if the player gets his PwS up high enough, might allow the RSR to be removed entirely), while the big, complex heavy-hitters would need more skill and thus would have a higher RSR penalty.

 

Gotcha.

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Wait, I get it!

 

 

So I could adjust it so that really simple effects (the moral equivalent to the cups and balls trick that has no reall combat effects) could take no penalty at all (and if the player gets his PwS up high enough, might allow the RSR to be removed entirely), while the big, complex heavy-hitters would need more skill and thus would have a higher RSR penalty.

 

Gotcha.

[Jkeown]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Caleon places huge meaning on Active Points and Source of the magic in question. Magic is subject to Casting Styles (which KS was a big help with!) that define a minimal set of limitations and advantages, and Source (which is largely dependant on Advantages allowable). Generally, a given caster has one Style and draws on one Source.

 

The most common Sources are:

Holy/Noble Essence: Default Source, no extra required.

Unlight/Dark Essence: Adjustment powers have Delayed Return Rates

Chaos/Deep Essence: AVLD(Power Defense) where applicable

Void: AP, Penetrating on attack powers

 

Channelling: As above, but always at 0 END Cost and the channels are tied to an extradimensional font of the specific source. This font can be an object, being or even a fold in an ambient magic field. The specific limitations of each source are unique to the source.

 

Spells come in distinct power levels:

 

AP Descriptor

1 - 20 Lesser

21-30 Minor

31-40 No Descriptor

41-60 Major

61-100 Exalted

101+ Transcendant

 

So a Deep Essence-Based Fireball-type spell with 62 active points would be an Exalted Fireball of the Deep Essence. Then again, the caster may refer to it as Laarn's Fire Blast so as to keep others clueless as to the source and power level.

 

Each Source is a Multipower and requires a separate Power Skill (-1/10AP) to use. Any adjustment powers can target all spells of a given source by use of a +1/4 Expanded Effect advantage. A +1/2 Expanded Effect advantage allows all magic of any source to be targetted by your Adjustments.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

For spells that have an active cost of 5 or less, is it reasonable to just waiver the skill roll penalty as -0?

[Jkeown]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

For spells that have an active cost of 5 or less' date=' is it reasonable to just waiver the skill roll penalty as -0?[/quote']

 

Yes. Though with all of the modifiers my mages are tossing about, I don't see that happening much. I'm going to try to create one.

[DusterBoy]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Is Power Skill in the regular FRED, or is it new to 5er/Sidekick?

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Yes. Though with all of the modifiers my mages are tossing about' date=' I don't see that happening much. I'm going to try to create one. [/quote']

 

 

Here you go:

 

 

Far Sight: Telescopic (Up To +10 vs. Range Modifiers) With Normal Sight (5 Active Points) - Costs END (+1/2), Requires A Power Skill: Divination Magic Roll (-1/2), Side Effects (Cannot See Things Closer Than 1" Away Clearly While The Spell Is In Effect; Happens Automatically; -1), Gestures (-1/4), Incantations (-1/4).

 

 

Active Cost: 5 Points

Real Cost: 1 Point

RSR Penalty: -0

 

 

 

Is Power Skill in the regular FRED' date=' or is it new to 5er/Sidekick?[/quote']

 

 

Its in the regular rulebook, as far as I know.

[keldrak]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

If a Magic System works via skills then I manufacture the normal -1 per AP/10 model and END costs which forces a kind of parity where more power (AP) is sometimes too much (can't make the roll and or pay the END reliably).

 

Been out of this for too long so I may be off base here. Be gentle please.

 

I've never been happy with any of the mechanics to limit mages to keep the game balanced. I always thought that even a newbie mage who has just walked away from his mentor should be respected. I feel like a spell is always successfully cast unless the mage is distracted/interrupted. So, you tick him off at the tavern one night and he might just skulk in the trees next to your field the next day and cast that polymorph human to frog on you.

 

In combat you don't want some newbie mage tossing big spells right and left; so what really limits him? Subtract 1 per AP/5 from the hit number; make the die roll. If it's equal or less than the hit number, bang it goes off that action phase. Otherwise, subtract the hit number from the die roll and he has to concentrate that many 1/2 action phases to cast the spell.

 

Mana/whatever is expended on the first action phase he starts casting the spell. To be a mage you have to have more ~mana~ available than most people. If you exceed your ~mana~ it goes against your stun then body.

 

This gives the opponents an opportunity to go "Oh, nuts! The mage is casting a spell! Get him!" and attempt to distract the mage. This would seem to allow mages to be nasty at any level yet keep the game in balance.

 

OK, where did I mess up with this?

 

keldrak

[SteveZilla]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Not really a mess up, just an oversight. The "and attempt to distract the mage" usually takes the form of "and kill the mage".

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Not really a mess up' date=' just an oversight. The "and attempt to distract the mage" usually takes the form of "and kill the mage".[/quote']

 

That goes without saying.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I am partial to the thought that the overall power level of a wizard class in a Fantasy Hero game should be equivalent to that of the non-spellcasters (like Fighters & Rogues).

 

Fighters & Rogues don't need to roll a skill in addition to the regular to-hit roll for making attacks -- so if wizards do have an additional roll for their magic, it seems to me that the magic should be a bit "bigger" than the average sword/bow damage (but not double) to compensate for this increased chance of failure (if in a "skill" system). IMO the same reasoning would apply if the spells had no skill roll but were limited to a few times per day.

 

A big challenge IMO is to make a system that is not only balanced between beginning spellcasters & non-spellcasters, but maintains a reasonable balance as they gain experience.

[JmOz]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I am partial to the thought that the overall power level of a wizard class in a Fantasy Hero game should be equivalent to that of the non-spellcasters (like Fighters & Rogues).

 

Fighters & Rogues don't need to roll a skill in addition to the regular to-hit roll for making attacks -- so if wizards do have an additional roll for their magic, it seems to me that the magic should be a bit "bigger" than the average sword/bow damage (but not double) to compensate for this increased chance of failure (if in a "skill" system). IMO the same reasoning would apply if the spells had no skill roll but were limited to a few times per day.

 

A big challenge IMO is to make a system that is not only balanced between beginning spellcasters & non-spellcasters, but maintains a reasonable balance as they gain experience.

 

I think the extra value for a spellcaster is actualy in the variety and lack of equipment. Where the fighter has a torch, the wizard has a little glowing ball of light...

[Markdoc]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I think the extra value for a spellcaster is actualy in the variety and lack of equipment. Where the fighter has a torch' date=' the wizard has a little glowing ball of light...[/quote']

 

Or he has darkvision, letting him see the guy with the torch, while the guy with the torch can't see him until he gets real close. The extra value for spellcasters is definitely the ability to do things no other character type can do in a fantasy setting.

 

In my own game, the only specialist spellcaster has no purely combat spells whatsoever, but the whole party would be dead several times over if not for him.

 

cheers, Mark