Conjoined spells

[BrotherBill]

One way to reduce the problem of IQ bloat would be to conjoin spells, in a way similar to how the 7 hex wall includes the knowledge of the 3 and 1 hex walls. examples:
IQ 12 DARKFIRE (C) This creation combines the effects of the "Fire" and "Shadow" spells. Figures within a darkfire are -2 DX for the fire and an additional -6 if they attempt to attack from within the darkfire. Attacks into a darkfire are at -4 DX. A "Magic Rainstorm" will change a darkfire hex into a normal "Shadow" hex. Figures with "Mage Sight" can see that the hex is a darkfire and not a normal shadow; a figure adjacent to a darkfire may briefly touch it and determine its nature without harm, this counts as an action. This spell includes the knowledge of the "Fire" and "Shadow" spells. Darkfires last for 12 turns and cost 2 ST to cast. May be cast on a hex containing a figure.

IQ 13 SOLID SHADOW (C) A combination of the "Shadow" and "Wall" spells; no figure may move into a solid shadow. Any figure attempting to move into a solid shadow must make a 3d vs DX roll to avoid falling in the hex he attempted to enter from; figures which have moved more than half of their MA must make the roll on 4d. Mage sight will reveal the solidity of the shadow, and adjacent figures may touch them (as an action) to determine their nature. Cost 1 ST, duration 12 turns. Includes the knowledge of the "Shadow" and "Wall" spells.

This could be done with other spells:
IQ 8 FOG (C) This fills a single hex with mist extending 3 meters into the air. Figures may move freely through fog. A figure attacking from or through a fog hex does so at -3 DX; attacks into a fog hex are at -2 DX. Attacks through multiple fog hexes are treated as "Shadow," -6 DX. Cost 1 ST, duration 12 turns. Fog is dispelled by "Fire" and "Magic Rainstorm."

IQ 11 COLD (C) This spell fills one hex area with a mist of extreme cold, causing damage and DX penalties of the same severity as the "Fire" spell. "Cold" and "Fire" are opposites which cancel each other out. Cost 2 ST, Duration 12 turns, includes the knowledge of "Fog."

Another option would be to combine "Slow" and "Speed" into:
IQ 9 ALTER MOVEMENT (T) The target's MA is either doubled or halved (at the caster' choice) for 4 turns. Fortunate rolls or multiple castings to not increase the effect but do increase the effect's duration. Cost 2 ST.

And just because these are mostly creation spell tweaks:
IQ 13 SNARE (C) Creates an entangling wire acting like the "Rope" spell with the additional effect of causing the victim 1 point of damage when cast and at the end of each subsequent combat round (regardless of armor, but armor spells protect). Cost 4 St, duration 12 turns; includes the knowledge of the "Rope" spell.

And just because:
IQ 14 ONE WAY SHADOW (C) This 1 hex creation appears to be a normal shadow to mage or normal sight, and is -6 DX to attack into, but it is only dark on the outside; figures within it suffer no DX penalty. Includes the knowledge of the normal "Shadow" spell. Cost 2 ST to cast and lasts 12 turns.

When a figure knowing one component of a conjoined spell reaches the IQ needed to have the combo, it is granted the spell (and the use of the other component spell). A figure which knew both--say, Fire and Shadow at IQ 11 would would at IQ 12 know Darkfire and have one open IQ slot as the two spells joined.

[JLV]

I've been thinking about this one for a while now.

I guess my major concern is "does it make things worse than they are now" in terms of trying to manage spells for a given spellcaster. More importantly, how difficult would it be for the GM to keep in mind all the nuances of the individual Wizards and their spell lists?

I'm also concerned about someone "automatically" gaining a spell when they reach the requisite IQ, instead of having to learn it. Consequently the "forgetting" of the previous spells becomes an issue too; it seems too easy to regain spell slots this way compared with what the existing rules state need to be done to "forget" spells. Take for example, the seven-hex SHADOW spell; as it stands in the rules, I have to learn that spell, and then it simply replaces whatever lesser SHADOW spell I have in a given spell slot. Conjoining takes two currently unrelated spells and forces them into a single spell, instead of merely expanding the existing spell into a more powerful version of the same exact thing. This causes potential issues in terms of game mechanics in my mind...

I think, in order to really answer those questions, we'd need to see the specific rules you are advocating laid out in detail before we can judge whether the cure is worse than the ill. Would you care to put some detailed rules for something like this on the table?

(Edited to add: I'm not pooh-poohing the idea, nor am I saying it's a bad one per se; all I'm trying to do here is think of how it would impact the game overall and asking for some clarification.)

[Chris Goodwin]

Create the conjoined spell as a new spell that requires the component spells as prerequisites. A caster who knows the prerequisites can learn the conjoined spell when they meet the requirements, but it's not automatic; maybe they have to research it, or otherwise spend IQ/experience points. And they wouldn't automatically forget the previous spells just because they learned the combined versions.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Chris Goodwin

Create the conjoined spell as a new spell that requires the component spells as prerequisites. A caster who knows the prerequisites can learn the conjoined spell when they meet the requirements, but it's not automatic; maybe they have to research it, or otherwise spend IQ/experience points. And they wouldn't automatically forget the previous spells just because they learned the combined versions.

That's kind of how I think it would need to be played, but if that's the way it's done, it doesn't help the IQ attribute bloat at all; in fact, quite the reverse...

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by JLV

That's kind of how I think it would need to be played, but if that's the way it's done, it doesn't help the IQ attribute bloat at all; in fact, quite the reverse...

I suppose another way to do it is to have spells grouped into packets or "colleges" that are bought like a talent. You pay the Talent cost, say 3 or 4 for membership of the College of Summoning magics, and you can then use all the spells in that College or group, subject to IQ and ST requirements.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

I suppose another way to do it is to have spells grouped into packets or "colleges" that are bought like a talent. You pay the Talent cost, say 3 or 4 for membership of the College of Summoning magics, and you can then use all the spells in that College or group, subject to IQ and ST requirements.

I'd prefer to keep spells very simple and avoid colleges. If attribute bloat is a concern and lots of spells are desired, why not just have characters buy skills (and spells) with character points? Yes, that would slightly complicate character creation, though not much. And, IQ bloat goes away completely.

[Chris Rice]

Originally Posted by Shostak

I'd prefer to keep spells very simple and avoid colleges. If attribute bloat is a concern and lots of spells are desired, why not just have characters buy skills (and spells) with character points? Yes, that would slightly complicate character creation, though not much. And, IQ bloat goes away completely.

I agree with you as far as the basic games (Melee/Wizard) are concerned, but I think the RPG can live with a little bit more complexity.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Shostak

I'd prefer to keep spells very simple and avoid colleges. If attribute bloat is a concern and lots of spells are desired, why not just have characters buy skills (and spells) with character points? Yes, that would slightly complicate character creation, though not much. And, IQ bloat goes away completely.

Which is more or less what my original suggestion was, though rather than add an additional type of point to keep track of, I just prefer that players can buy Talents, Spells, Languages and Attributes for varying amounts of experience points directly. It's simpler, and easier to track.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by JLV

Which is more or less what my original suggestion was, though rather than add an additional type of point to keep track of, I just prefer that players can buy Talents, Spells, Languages and Attributes for varying amounts of experience points directly. It's simpler, and easier to track.

Character points could replace experience points, and thus there is nothing extra to track.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Shostak

Character points could replace experience points, and thus there is nothing extra to track.

Why rename something just for the sake of renaming it? Everyone already is familiar with XP...