|
|
Post by mabon5127 on Nov 30, 2014 13:21:23 GMT -5
handle as you wish but i wanted to make sure you are aware that spells are handled like skills. a character can increase their spell skill. an IQ 10 character can learn an IQ 18 spells. however, they suffer a penalty when trying to cast it. casting bonus/penalty = caster IQ + caster skill level with spell - spell IQ level so, IQ 10 character with Shape Shift +1 will roll 3d6 vs. IQ to cast but he will add 7 to his roll. On page 22 1st paragraph it says that Wizards may learn and cast spells above there IQ level but must add an extra d6 as penalty when casting them. You could have a beginning wizard with more balanced stats but many of the spells you would later learn will be harder to cast and you would be able to learn fewer spells. Morgan |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2014 22:50:55 GMT -5
handle as you wish but i wanted to make sure you are aware that spells are handled like skills. a character can increase their spell skill. an IQ 10 character can learn an IQ 18 spells. however, they suffer a penalty when trying to cast it. casting bonus/penalty = caster IQ + caster skill level with spell - spell IQ level so, IQ 10 character with Shape Shift +1 will roll 3d6 vs. IQ to cast but he will add 7 to his roll. On page 22 1st paragraph it says that Wizards may learn and cast spells above there IQ level but must add an extra d6 as penalty when casting them. You could have a beginning wizard with more balanced stats but many of the spells you would later learn will be harder to cast and you would be able to learn fewer spells. Morgan ha! guess i was handling as i wished! my point was that you don't have to have IQ 18 to learn an IQ 18 spell and you can invest in spells for bonuses just like skills. i'm glad you corrected me. now that i think about it, adding an extra die makes it easier than what i was doing. |
|
|
|
Post by reaperwolf on Nov 30, 2014 23:51:58 GMT -5
Actually I prefer it your way even though it's more complicated otherwise the difficulty increase (one die) is the same for a 1 point difference as a 7 point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 13:01:11 GMT -5
Actually I prefer it your way even though it's more complicated otherwise the difficulty increase (one die) is the same for a 1 point difference as a 7 point. there is that. i may be willing to make the trade-off for simplicity. not sure. haven't tested it in practice yet. based on my incorrect? way of doing it, i always wondered if it would be better to group spells by 'Level' instead of IQ. for instance... IQ8+9 = Level 0 (no penalty when casting) IQ10+11 = Level 1 (+1 drm...for anyone casting it, regardless of IQ) IQ12+13 = Level 2 (+2 drm) IQ14+15 = Level 3 (+3 drm) IQ16 = Level 4 (+4 drm) IQ17 = Level 5 (+5 drm) IQ18 = Level 6 (+6 drm) this also addresses something else that sometimes flies and buzzes around my head. IQ18 spell should be difficult to cast/master...even if you are IQ18. as is, if you are IQ18, you will most assuredly be successful casting any IQ18 spell. thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by mabon5127 on Dec 1, 2014 16:23:03 GMT -5
Actually I prefer it your way even though it's more complicated otherwise the difficulty increase (one die) is the same for a 1 point difference as a 7 point. Actually it sorta works out as rolling 4d6 under or equal to the IQ is much harder the lower the IQ. Morgan |
|
|
|
Post by mabon5127 on Dec 1, 2014 16:25:57 GMT -5
It could lend itself to min maxing as the wizard grabs the one high IQ spell he wants and stuffs attribute points in other areas and uses skill points to pump the roll on the one spell.
Morgan
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 18:23:26 GMT -5
It could lend itself to min maxing as the wizard grabs the one high IQ spell he wants and stuffs attribute points in other areas and uses skill points to pump the roll on the one spell. Morgan i don't have a problem with the situation you described. the current situation seems to lend itself to that as well, just not to the same extreme. still with an IQ10 and 6 points invested in an IQ18 spell...even with 4 die, those are pretty good odds. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 20:25:07 GMT -5
It could lend itself to min maxing as the wizard grabs the one high IQ spell he wants and stuffs attribute points in other areas and uses skill points to pump the roll on the one spell. Morgan let's look at this further.... Human 'Wizard' (starting character; using existing rules) ST12 DX12 IQ8 EN10 Sword +1 Lightning(IQ14) +4 this guy has to roll a 12 or less on 4 die to successfully cast Lightning. probability of success: 33.56% is there something wrong with that? why is that Bad(TM)? i don't understand the aversion to min maxing. it seems petty. GM: "No. That character is too good at combat. Create another one that sucks and fits my world-view of all wizards." using the 'for instance' level system above, this guy would have to roll a 9 (8 - 3 + 4 = 9) or less on 3d6. probability of success: 37.5% not a big difference. |
|
|
|
Post by mabon5127 on Dec 1, 2014 20:32:18 GMT -5
I agree. I was actually referring to the current situation. As with most situations the GM has to call shenanigans on blatant min-maxing. I like the idea of higher IQ spells being found in game and unable to be learned off the cuff.
Morgan
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 21:11:36 GMT -5
I agree. I was actually referring to the current situation. As with most situations the GM has to call shenanigans on blatant min-maxing. I like the idea of higher IQ spells being found in game and unable to be learned off the cuff. Morgan i'm still not really sure i understand what 'min maxing' is and why it's bad. i would love some examples. no high level spells for starting characters is cool with me. really, any stipulations or restrictions a GM may impose are cool with me as long as they are given beforehand or i know my GM well enough to know what he'll accept or reject. if i made the previous character and the GM said, "No. Lightning is too high level for a starting character." it wouldn't bother me...unless the guy beside me created a wimpy wizard and some other IQ14 spell was allowed. for starting characters, i'd allow any spell to be known. i'd want the player to create some sort of background reason why they knew those spells. i'd even help them come up with a story. however, after creation time, new spells must be obtained in game in some manner. find a scroll, purchase a scroll, etc. i might even allow learning a new spell off the cuff if the 'wizard' were some kind of priest or worshiper of some deity that could be related to the spell. GM: "Faustus, your peity, prayer, and fasting have been rewarded. In fevered dream and fitful sleep, the devil revealed to you a new spell." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 23:12:59 GMT -5
Actually I prefer it your way even though it's more complicated otherwise the difficulty increase (one die) is the same for a 1 point difference as a 7 point. Actually it sorta works out as rolling 4d6 under or equal to the IQ is much harder the lower the IQ. Morgan it really does work out nicely. let's say your wizard is IQ12. casting IQ12 or below spells has a 83.8% success rate. casting any IQ spell above that (13 or 18) has a 44.37% success rate. (assuming 1 level of skill with all spells) i'm converted! |
|
|
|
Post by buzzclaw on Dec 15, 2014 17:51:10 GMT -5
What about a limit to what a caster can shapeshift into based on IQ? For example, a Wizard can shapeshift into any creature with ST = (Wiz's permanent IQ + 5).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 19:00:11 GMT -5
What about a limit to what a caster can shapeshift into based on IQ? For example, a Wizard can shapeshift into any creature with ST = (Wiz's permanent IQ + 5). i like that a lot. i'm not sure if IQ+5 is enough though. maybe IQ+10? an idea i had was to replace it entirely with 'Mimic' - caster assumes form of any creature he can touch. perhaps that could just be another spell. i really like your idea! |
|
|
|
Post by ewookie_guest on Dec 19, 2014 20:28:01 GMT -5
It could lend itself to min maxing as the wizard grabs the one high IQ spell he wants and stuffs attribute points in other areas and uses skill points to pump the roll on the one spell. Morgan let's look at this further.... Human 'Wizard' (starting character; using existing rules) ST12 DX12 IQ8 EN10 Sword +1 Lightning(IQ14) +4 this guy has to roll a 12 or less on 4 die to successfully cast Lightning. probability of success: 33.56% is there something wrong with that? why is that Bad(TM)? i don't understand the aversion to min maxing. it seems petty. GM: "No. That character is too good at combat. Create another one that sucks and fits my world-view of all wizards." using the 'for instance' level system above, this guy would have to roll a 9 (8 - 3 + 4 = 9) or less on 3d6. probability of success: 37.5% not a big difference. btw, i considered this 'wizard' to actually be a paladin or some sort of former temple or wizard-tower guard. obviously, he is not a typical 'wizard'. the 66% chance of casting failure, 16% chance of fumble, and only knowing one spell preserves the power-balance, in my opinion. he may have a little extra oompf in the beginning but he will pay dearly in XP to gain effectiveness with additional skils/spells over the course of his life. |
|
