Damage from magic lightning scaling

[foxanik]

Hello!

Let's just go straight to the topic:
I'm using GURPS Magic and there I have Lightning spell which at cost paragraph states: "Any amount up to your Magery level per second, for three seconds. The bolt does 1d-1 burning damage per energy point."

Now I have Magery 6, so I can (assuming I have so many FP) cast a Lightning spell which will do damage equal to 18d-18?

Is it possible to count it in the other way?
I mean -18 sounds just strange to me.
Is it possible to change it like in the "Optional Rule: Modifying Dice + Adds"?

Is it something like "Every 4 changes to 1 dice and every 7 changes to 2 dices"?

And would it mean that 18d-18 would change into 13d? (18 is 7+7+4 which changes to 2d+2d+1d).

Is it OK to count it like that?

[Gold & Appel Inc]

Originally Posted by foxanik

Hello!

Hey.

Originally Posted by foxanik

Let's just go straight to the topic:

Let's.

Originally Posted by foxanik

I'm using GURPS Magic and there I have Lightning spell which at cost paragraph states: "Any amount up to your Magery level per second, for three seconds. The bolt does 1d-1 burning damage per energy point."

Now I have Magery 6, so I can (assuming I have so many FP) cast a Lightning spell which will do damage equal to 18d-18?

Yep. Be sure to Aim that beast; I saw it miss in the last DF game I ran.

Originally Posted by foxanik

Is it possible to count it in the other way?
I mean -18 sounds just strange to me.
Is it possible to change it like in the "Optional Rule: Modifying Dice + Adds"?

Is it something like "Every 4 changes to 1 dice and every 7 changes to 2 dices"?

And would it mean that 18d-18 would change into 13d? (18 is 7+7+4 which changes to 2d+2d+1d).

Is it OK to count it like that?

I personally think it's cool for both plusses and minuses as long as you apply it to both and consistently.

[gilbertocarlos]

18d-18 can be simplified to 14d-4 or even 10d+10. This should probably be simplified to (7d-2)*2 or (5d+5)*2

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by gilbertocarlos

18d-18 can be simplified to 14d-4 or even 10d+10. This should probably be simplified to (7d-2)*2 or (5d+5)*2

The simple way I'd do it is 12+3.

The core is to get something that averages 63(18D) -18 or 45. Modify the dice to come up with the approximately the same total.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by foxanik

Now I have Magery 6, so I can (assuming I have so many FP) cast a Lightning spell which will do damage equal to 18d-18?

Correct, and others have answered your others questions as well.

However, I just want to add a reminder while we're on the topic of how many dice missile spells and Magery create.

Note that the mage's proficiency with the spell skill can give dice of damage for "free" at level 15 and above.

Remember, at level 15, the very first dice of damage on the very first turn is invested at a cost of 0 FP to the caster. It comes from the surrounding mana (Magic, p. 8).

However, that does not raise the maximum dice of damage. It just means the first dice on the first turn comes from the surrounding mana rather than the mage.

So, on the first turn, after successfully casting the spell at level 15, the mage can invest 1-6 energy—at a cost of 0-5 FP from the mage—giving the lightning bolt 1d-1 to 6d-6 damage. On the next (second) turn, the mage can charge it for 1-6 FP giving it a total damage of 2d-2 to 12d-12. On the next (third) turn, it can be charged to a maximum 18d-18 for a total cost to the caster of 17 FP.

Just a reminder for everyone reading this thread who may be new or confused about the issue. :)

[whswhs]

If I were doing this, I would probably say, "roll 3d-3 and multiply by 6." That way you reduce the effects of getting a narrower distribution for more dice. You don't have to add up so many dice, either.

Bill Stoddard

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by whswhs

If I were doing this, I would probably say, "roll 3d-3 and multiply by 6." That way you reduce the effects of getting a narrower distribution for more dice. You don't have to add up so many dice, either.

Bill Stoddard

I always thought players enjoyed rolling buckets full of dice worth of damage. I mean, you go three turns without rolling any dice, then you get to roll freaking 18 dice! Earthquake! Look at that mountain of death! Ha, ha, stupid GM! Your goblins all burn!

Heck, on Peter V. Dell'Orto's blog, he even took a picture of a big pile of damage dice once. I thought it was cool. XD

[Kromm]

I've yet to meet the gamer who didn't like rolling lots of dice for damage. I keep dozens upon dozens of d6 around specifically for this purpose.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I've yet to meet the gamer who didn't like rolling lots of dice for damage. I keep dozens upon dozens of d6 around specifically for this purpose.

It slows down play something awful if you do it a lot.

Bill Stoddard

[gilbertocarlos]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

The simple way I'd do it is 12+3.

That's one good idea, You can simplify it to (4d+1)*3

Originally Posted by Kromm

I've yet to meet the gamer who didn't like rolling lots of dice for damage. I keep dozens upon dozens of d6 around specifically for this purpose.

The problem isn't with rolling many dice, it's with the minus after it. Most people tend to dislike it. One of my players had 3d-1 of damage, he asked if he could trade for 2d+2 so he would have a bonus instead of a penalty. It doesn't make sense logically, but we humans tend to overestimate losses, so, rolling 3, 4, 2 means 9 damage, doing only 8 means he is losing 1 point of the damage he should've have, because he rolled it.