Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 0:21:51 GMT -5
my poor old wizard feels like he wasted his time pouring over old books of magic when magic is so fickle.
the 'official' rule (i think) in the HOW core rulebook is that any spell can be disbelieved or resisted on a 3/IQ roll of the dice. this makes some magic seem futile. i'm looking for alternatives. i've seen some on the blog but not happy with them.
disbelieve/resist 4/IQ if caster is present. 3/IQ if caster is not present. no EN costs to d/r (nor ST costs for terrors). however, the disbeliever/resister cannot attack that round. he can move or react but no attack (or anything else that would require that much concentration; kind of the opposite of a reaction - symmetry).
|
|
|
Post by reaperwolf on Dec 3, 2014 0:28:13 GMT -5
The 3/IQ I would use for spells involving compulsions, illusions, etc. but spells involving a physical component such as a bolt, ball, etc. I'd use 3/DEX. Doesn't matter how strong-willed/intelligent you are a fireball has to be dodged.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 13:54:14 GMT -5
The 3/IQ I would use for spells involving compulsions, illusions, etc. but spells involving a physical component such as a bolt, ball, etc. I'd use 3/DEX. Doesn't matter how strong-willed/intelligent you are a fireball has to be dodged. that's exactly what i had in mind for missile spells. dodge. i guess i will stick to 3/IQ to disbelieve/resist - but no attacks on rounds spent disbelieving/resisting.
|
|
|
Post by ewookie_guest on Dec 7, 2014 12:29:20 GMT -5
it has occurred to me that there could be a difference in how people handle disbelieving/resisting, not just in terms of dice tests, but also in the frequency of tests. i have always assumed that an NPC makes a resistance check every turn as a free action, which makes 3/IQ for such a check seem too easy and magic too weak. i am beginning to think this is not what was intended or how others think about it.
|
|
|
Post by reaperwolf on Dec 7, 2014 14:58:33 GMT -5
From my reading of page 46 under Disbelieving and Resisting, it takes your reaction to disbelieve or dodge and both eat up some of your movement (you're limited to 5 or 10 ft. of movement and still disbelieve but you can move 15 ft. up to 1/2 your MV to dodge according to page 43 so it's easier to dodge than disbelieve.
Freebie disbelieves are devastating to game balance, I used to watch in horror as GMs ran AD&D 2e Living City events when players would loudly yell I disbelieve because it was free and carried no consequences. Say the spell turns out to be real, PCs still demanded saving throws even though seconds before their characters were mentally denying the veracity of the spell. Sickened me. In my other rpgs, if you spend the round disbelieving you get the equivalent to full defense bonus to the saving throw vs. the illusion but if it turns out the spell is real, no save whatsoever. Sorry, you too busy trying to convince yourself the spell wasn't real to leap to safety. It's hard to disbelieve while dodging at the same time, i.e. conflicting actions.
So in HOW you only get some movement while still being able to dodge (up to 1/2 MV) or disbelieve (5-10 ft.) and still be able to take action.
This does bring up the question of how to handle full defense and disbelieves/dodges. Usually full defense means attackers suffer a 1D penalty when attacking so most attacks would be at 4D/DEX. I'm guessing this still applies to the spellcasting roll as well?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 20:07:27 GMT -5
no clue. page 43's "actions in combat" - what you can do if you've moved X amount - has always been too complicated and confusing to me. that's why i started doing this:
MV = DX/4 (1/2 official MV) each turn you can: - move up to your MV, attack, and react - move up to your MV twice and react - move up to your MV, all-out-defense
i plan to stick with this because it is super simple for me. when i started this thread (and others) about disbelieving/resisting, my main goal has been to determine how/when NPCs disbelieve/resist. not just what they have to do to succeed, but how to decide when they actually attempt to resist/disbelieve.
i like the idea behind Timed Spells (OPTION) on p.22
blending it all together into a compromise that is super-simple for a scatter-brain like me, i'm leaning toward disbelieve/resist as a 4/IQ free action. so, any being will make a 4/IQ test at the end of each turn if they are under the influence of a 'hostile' spell. if they pass, the influence ends.
|
|
|
Post by reaperwolf on Dec 8, 2014 1:59:21 GMT -5
blending it all together into a compromise that is super-simple for a scatter-brain like me, i'm leaning toward disbelieve/resist as a 4/IQ free action. so, any being will make a 4/IQ test at the end of each turn if they are under the influence of a 'hostile' spell. if they pass, the influence ends. Hrm... I actually like that it takes effort to resist/dodge. D&D and similar games make it very easy to evade without effort, HOW basically says you want to shake off the compulsion or dodge the fireball, that's cool but it'll cost ya. Better to win initiative so you're not faced with having to burn your one reaction per round resisting/dodging which actually makes sense. Which reminds me, I need to start a thread on how people handle stealth actions vs. surprise...
|
|
|
Post by ewookie_guest on Dec 8, 2014 10:43:31 GMT -5
blending it all together into a compromise that is super-simple for a scatter-brain like me, i'm leaning toward disbelieve/resist as a 4/IQ free action. so, any being will make a 4/IQ test at the end of each turn if they are under the influence of a 'hostile' spell. if they pass, the influence ends. Hrm... I actually like that it takes effort to resist/dodge. D&D and similar games make it very easy to evade without effort, HOW basically says you want to shake off the compulsion or dodge the fireball, that's cool but it'll cost ya. Better to win initiative so you're not faced with having to burn your one reaction per round resisting/dodging which actually makes sense. Which reminds me, I need to start a thread on how people handle stealth actions vs. surprise... i agree with your sentiments, especially for D&D. one has very good odds of making a saving throw in D&D. rolling under IQ with 4 die is a bit more difficult, especially for non-wizzes. probability is that you will be under the influence of the spell for several rounds before succeeding if your IQ is under 11. also, this disbelieve/resist discussion is completely separate from dodging magic missiles, at least in my mind. dodge is handled like dodge. no change.
|
|
|
Post by ewookie_guest on Dec 8, 2014 16:23:54 GMT -5
<abbr>to clarify, this free, 4/IQ check at the end of your turn is the only resistance check you get. i don't see the 3/ST check embedded in Enfeeble as a resistance check to the spell. i see it as an attempt to catch yourself from falling. i view other spells with checks embedded in them in a similar manner. rope? the 3/ST is to break the rope, not resist the spell. fireball? if you allow using dodge to avoid being hit by the fireball, you aren't resisting the spell - you are avoiding the ball of fire the spell created. in the case of fireball, you can't really resist the magic of the spell because it is instantaneous. you can try to dodge it (if allowed) or resist the effects of fire (if you have some sort of fire resistance). resist the magic of the spell? nope.
</abbr>
|
|
|
Post by mabon5127 on Dec 8, 2014 19:16:34 GMT -5
Actually I have never understood the RAW for a spell casting from the roll to cast to the roll to resist. Its not clear in the rules and needs to be.
The wizard rolls under IQ to cast Does the wizard need to hit or is this included in the casting roll? To resist what does a person do? Dice under IQ / Dex and when? I know the Games master has the right to do as they would but it would be nice to have a baseline.
My apologies if I have just missed it somehow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2014 20:06:37 GMT -5
Actually I have never understood the RAW for a spell casting from the roll to cast to the roll to resist. Its not clear in the rules and needs to be. The wizard rolls under IQ to cast Does the wizard need to hit or is this included in the casting roll? To resist what does a person do? Dice under IQ / Dex and when? I know the Games master has the right to do as they would but it would be nice to have a baseline. My apologies if I have just missed it somehow. i'm not sure what 'RAW' stands for. neither am i sure what was intended answer to your questions. but the following is how my mind answers those questions... to-hit is included in casting roll. the fireball, lightning bolt, magic fist, etc. has been summoned and commanded where to go. keep in mind, these spells were originally written to target spaces, not beings. resisting/disbelieving is an internal struggle. it is an exercise of will, spirit, or mental ability, therefore, ST and DX are out for resisting/disbelieving candidates. that leaves IQ and EN. EN may seem like a logical choice in a few instances but NPCs usually don't have EN, so it would fall back to ST, which doesn't make sense at all to me to use in a test that resolves an internal struggle. in most cases, IQ should seem logical stat to use when resolving a test of pure will or mental acuity. basically, you resist an enchantment or a charm. an image or illusion is a special type of charm that affects everyone that sees it. obviously, images and illusions are ways that a wizard can trick your mind. i tend to see enchantments (on a sentient being, not object) as a type of charm or mental hack or 'jedi mind trick' if you will. clumsiness? it's all in his head. enfeeble? again, all in the victim's head. either the victim's mind has been tricked into believing these maladies affect him or the victim has it within his power to dispel these magical forces affecting him...but he must _learn_ with each new situation how to cast out that particular demon of affliction. for things like Drop and Trip, the spell is instantaneous. so, there is no chance to resist. by the time you realize you need to resist, it's already happened. for things like Death Spell and Pain Channeling, I'm still undecided. these spells are marked as (P)ermanent which doesn't jive with my logic. seems like they should be (I)nstantaneous. that's just my take.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2014 20:28:37 GMT -5
however, the more i ponder this stuff and re-read, the more i think that only those spells that actually have 'resist' or 'disbelieve' in their descriptions were meant to be disbelieved or resisted. the rest? you have to ride it out until the time expires or a nice wizard comes along and dispels the magic. (unless you use that Timed Spells options from p.22)
|
|
|
Post by mabon5127 on Dec 8, 2014 20:31:42 GMT -5
Actually I have never understood the RAW for a spell casting from the roll to cast to the roll to resist. Its not clear in the rules and needs to be. The wizard rolls under IQ to cast Does the wizard need to hit or is this included in the casting roll? To resist what does a person do? Dice under IQ / Dex and when? I know the Games master has the right to do as they would but it would be nice to have a baseline. My apologies if I have just missed it somehow. i'm not sure what 'RAW' stands for. neither am i sure what was intended answer to your questions. but the following is how my mind answers those questions... to-hit is included in casting roll. the fireball, lightning bolt, magic fist, etc. has been summoned and commanded where to go. keep in mind, these spells were originally written to target spaces, not beings. resisting/disbelieving is an internal struggle. it is an exercise of will, spirit, or mental ability, therefore, ST and DX are out for resisting/disbelieving candidates. that leaves IQ and EN. EN may seem like a logical choice in a few instances but NPCs usually don't have EN, so it would fall back to ST, which doesn't make sense at all to me to use in a test that resolves an internal struggle. in most cases, IQ should seem logical stat to use when resolving a test of pure will or mental acuity. basically, you resist an enchantment or a charm. an image or illusion is a special type of charm that affects everyone that sees it. obviously, images and illusions are ways that a wizard can trick your mind. i tend to see enchantments (on a sentient being, not object) as a type of charm or mental hack or 'jedi mind trick' if you will. clumsiness? it's all in his head. enfeeble? again, all in the victim's head. either the victim's mind has been tricked into believing these maladies affect him or the victim has it within his power to dispel these magical forces affecting him...but he must _learn_ with each new situation how to cast out that particular demon of affliction. for things like Drop and Trip, the spell is instantaneous. so, there is no chance to resist. by the time you realize you need to resist, it's already happened. for things like Death Spell and Pain Channeling, I'm still undecided. these spells are marked as (P)ermanent which doesn't jive with my logic. seems like they should be (I)nstantaneous. that's just my take. I'm sorry, its short for Rules as Written. I agree on the first point that the cast includes the hit roll. I also would agree with your logic on the other circumstances. I just wish there was a set ruling for each spell or for groups / types of spells. Unless I just missed it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2014 20:44:53 GMT -5
I'm sorry, its short for Rules as Written. I agree on the first point that the cast includes the hit roll. I also would agree with your logic on the other circumstances. I just wish there was a set ruling for each spell or for groups / types of spells. Unless I just missed it. i heard that brutha! let us know if you find it!
|
|
|
Post by ewookie_guest on Dec 9, 2014 9:57:35 GMT -5
after looking back at the history/evolution of Drop (Drop Item, Drop Weapon), i would rule that you can't resist Drop because the spell isn't cast on the being, it is cast on the objects in his hands. the 4/ST check (instead of 4/DX) seems to imply that the weight of the affected objects, for a split second, is tremendously increased.
|
|