Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-20-2018, 04:57 AM   #11
Chris Rice
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
Default Re: Missile Spells

Hmmmmm. Do any of you allow a Missile Spell to be Dodged? That would lessen its power.
Chris Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 07:25 AM   #12
Tolenkar
 
Tolenkar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Cidri
Default Re: Missile Spells

I think we did. It makes total sense as the casting of the spell is affected by MH distance and other things, such as line of sight. I have to check whether "rolling to miss" was used as well.

Respectfully,
Tolenkar
__________________
Yes, I know Tollenkar is misspelled. I did it on purpose. Apparently, I purposefully misspell words all the time...
Tolenkar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 01:41 PM   #13
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: Missile Spells

DEFEND was for in close, when you were engaged or about to be, and DODGE was for when you were attacked from afar. At least that's generally the way we played it -- and really, if there isn't any difference between the two, why have both in the first place?

(But we assumed that you weren't really "dodging" the weapon so much as you were screwing up the attacker's targeting and making yourself harder to hit by moving instead of just standing there.)
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 01:57 PM   #14
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: Missile Spells

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rice View Post
Hmmmmm. Do any of you allow a Missile Spell to be Dodged? That would lessen its power.
If you mean the Dodge option, hopefully everyone does. Missile spells have always been explicitly affected by the Dodge option (in my Wizard 2nd edition Dodge vs. Missile Spells is on page 18 - also on Advanced Melee page 18).

(It's a case where my/Rick's interpretations of the Changing Options rules lead to a different situation from Kirk's interpretation. That is, to me, being attacked by a missile spell is a a "changing condition" meaning you can react to an incoming fireball by saying you will Dodge this turn unless you've already done something else. Kirk would say you need to have declared a Dodge in advance of the fireball, meaning everyone who might suffer a ranged attack needs to pre-declare a Dodge, unless they think they might get engaged and attacked with an axe and higher DX than them, in which case they want to pre-declare Defend if they want that option.)

(In GURPS, you can even dodge them as an active defense... In TFT, that would be like a saving throw to being attacked, which since I like GURPS, I am always feeling such things are missing in TFT - parrying, blocking, dodging, resisting spells.)
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 04:34 PM   #15
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: Missile Spells

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
... (But we assumed that you weren't really "dodging" the weapon so much as you were screwing up the attacker's targeting and making yourself harder to hit by moving instead of just standing there.)
Hi JLV, everyone.
I agree. Compare two people, one is standing up tall. The other is crouched, with a low centre of gravity ready to spring in any direction when he sees a fireball coming.

To me the essence of the Dodge action was that you were ready to move quickly when a bowman aimed at you or you saw something coming at you.

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 12:48 PM   #16
Axly Suregrip
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Durham, NC
Default Re: Missile Spells

A GOOD FIX FOR MISSILE SPELLS:

I agree with your assessment. Missile spells were over utilized and nearly all other spells were ignored. So the problem is not just that missile spells are cheap for the results, but also the rest of the spells were too draining.

This is what I changed:
- Double the cost of missile spells.
- Made all staffs a ST battery equal to the Wizards ST. All Staffs of Power were a ST battery with capacity of 2 x Wizard ST. Now Wizards have a lot more ST room to play with.

This does in fact limit Missile spells by making the other spells a better bargain but also by capping the maximum missile spell by half your ST. For example, a ST 10 Wizard could cast an 8 die lightning bolt and remain conscious. With this change, the best the Wizard could do is a 4 die lightning, then spend a turn restoring 8 ST from his Staff, then do it again.

The missile spell is still there for when it is called for. The wizard can now cast a lot more of the other spells, so those come into play more often and the wizard is not out of play after a couple spells.

This also alleviates the need for very beefy wizards. With this change, a lot of start Wizards have ST 8 or 9 and thus just look like they rely on magic and not brawn.


As far as Dodging goes, wait for foe to be engaged then he may not dodge.


PS. only allow one staff.

Last edited by Axly Suregrip; 06-22-2018 at 01:03 PM.
Axly Suregrip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:02 PM   #17
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: Missile Spells

Though, of course, if he's engaged, you have an excellent chance of killing your friend who's engaging him...
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 03:12 PM   #18
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: Missile Spells

If Magic Fist took 2 fatigue to cast, it would average less damage than fatigue used to cast it, even when it hit. In our games, Magic Fist wasn't very popular even at 1:1d-2 and even when it was learned for no extra effort with the stronger missile spells (unless you needed to physically hit something, like to knock someone into a pit).

I think Missile Spells might seem less great if they were a little less reliable.

For example, if you added a rule that they are visually conspicuous/slow enough that you can always try to Dodge them (even if Engaged or lying down)... And even if you've acted already that turn, the penalty being you'd still be dodging next turn. (It'd also help if shields had a chance to actually block incoming attacks instead of always just providing a mysteriously low bit of damage reduction to every attack.) I imagine that may be too much different/complex for many TFT players, though.

The new staff ST idea SJ introduced does add a new element to thinking about wizard power. It's temping to think of it as "Wizards now have more ST equal to their IQ or IQ x 2"... but that's sort of not true because they have to pay EP for it and the cost might (?) end up being comparable to attributes. Even as written so far, a beginning character starts with 0 Staff ST till they add EP, and to add 10 Staff ST is 1000 EP, which on average is about like +2 attributes (cheap, but not a clear choice over your first few increased attribute points). It's also hard to weigh the value of Staff ST because of the recharge method - it's a lot slower than actual ST can recover, which adds even more of a difference between the power level of a wizard considered when fully-charged for a duel, versus a wizard who has an ongoing adventure situation to be concerned with over several encounters and situations spread over days. That was always an apples/oranges consideration between wizards and fighters, and the staff ST both gives the wizard a way to get more of both, but also extends the distance of that comparison. i.e. Now a wizard may be even more powerful than a fighter in fully-charged single situations, and yet also more in need of rest and energy management in a prolonged situation (and a tad weaker in situations where they've used all their Staff ST, since that's EP that could have gone elsewhere and is useless when the Staff is out of ST).
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 03:23 PM   #19
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: Missile Spells

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
The new staff ST idea SJ introduced does add a new element to thinking about wizard power. It's temping to think of it as "Wizards now have more ST equal to their IQ or IQ x 2"... but that's sort of not true because they have to pay EP for it and the cost might (?) end up being comparable to attributes. Even as written so far, a beginning character starts with 0 Staff ST till they add EP, and to add 10 Staff ST is 1000 EP, which on average is about like +2 attributes (cheap, but not a clear choice over your first few increased attribute points). It's also hard to weigh the value of Staff ST because of the recharge method - it's a lot slower than actual ST can recover, which adds even more of a difference between the power level of a wizard considered when fully-charged for a duel, versus a wizard who has an ongoing adventure situation to be concerned with over several encounters and situations spread over days. That was always an apples/oranges consideration between wizards and fighters, and the staff ST both gives the wizard a way to get more of both, but also extends the distance of that comparison. i.e. Now a wizard may be even more powerful than a fighter in fully-charged single situations, and yet also more in need of rest and energy management in a prolonged situation (and a tad weaker in situations where they've used all their Staff ST, since that's EP that could have gone elsewhere and is useless when the Staff is out of ST).
I think the new staff-mana will also lead to wizards with lower ST. Once a wizard's staff is exhausted, they're going to be very vulnerable and close to powerless. Taking down a powerful wizard may be easier than ever before for someone clever enough to get the wizard to drain their staff and wait for just the right time to strike...
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 04:13 PM   #20
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: Missile Spells

I'd say zot has that one right. I noticed when I added the "Staff stores Mana" option to my games decades ago, the Wizard players (at least those who took the Staff Spell) were a bit less concerned about plussing up their ST as much as had been the norm previously.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.