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 > The Fantasy Trip: House Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-21-2018, 01:26 PM   #261
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: HEAL spell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rice View Post
On your first point, the rules as they stand don't currently contain a Healing Spell. Steve has suggested a Spell which we are discussing here. That's all I'm doing; discussing it and pointing out some potential pitfalls. I'm not telling anyone what to do, just expressing an opinion.

On your second point, my answer is similar to the first; we're discussing whether there should be a Healing Spell in the new edition. To that extent, I want to express my opinion, but only in so far as it relates to the new rules, because my current thinking is that I'd rather they don't change in this respect. What you, or anyone else does with the game after that is entirely up to you.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm trying to tell you what to do. Steve has asked us what we think of including the new spell and we're telling him. Ultimately he will make the decision. We can house rule to our hearts content after that.
Chris, those are fair points and I take them. Second, the part where I was expressing a concern about people telling others about the "one true way" was not directed against you specifically, but in response to all the people saying this is a "bad idea" or leads to "badplay" (whatever their definition of that might be).

What I'm really trying to say (and expressed poorly above) is; "Why not give it a chance and see how it works?" There's a lot of opposition here, and from what I can see it's mostly based on those min/max players that do crop up from time to time, and on a strong feeling that "it isn't TFT the way I remember it!"

Both of those are valid concerns, but remember, we are hopefully getting a game that will appeal to a whole new generation of gamers, who don't have our experience or fond memories of the original system, and many of them will want healing spells of some kind. All I'm saying is that I don't see what the big deal is about putting the spell out there. If I don't like it, I don't have to use it, but a lot of people will want to, and that's okay by me.

(Actually, if I'm going to be completely honest here, depending on how the Spell looks in it's final form, I may nerf it anyway so that it converts "healing wounds" to "changing wounds to fatigue damage" instead. That tracks with most of the Fantasy/Sci Fi books I've ever read that discussed the topic -- most of the energy for healing comes from the patient, and afterwards, he/she needs a heck of a lot of rest (and probably a ton of food and water) to recover fully, so that idea makes a LOT of sense to me.)
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 01:32 PM   #262
Chris Rice
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: London Uk, but originally from Scotland
Default Re: HEAL spell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JLV View Post
Chris, those are fair points and I take them. Second, the part where I was expressing a concern about people telling others about the "one true way" was not directed against you specifically, but in response to all the people saying this is a "bad idea" or leads to "badplay" (whatever their definition of that might be).

What I'm really trying to say (and expressed poorly above) is; "Why not give it a chance and see how it works?" There's a lot of opposition here, and from what I can see it's mostly based on those min/max players that do crop up from time to time, and on a strong feeling that "it isn't TFT the way I remember it!"

Both of those are valid concerns, but remember, we are hopefully getting a game that will appeal to a whole new generation of gamers, who don't have our experience or fond memories of the original system, and many of them will want healing spells of some kind. All I'm saying is that I don't see what the big deal is about putting the spell out there. If I don't like it, I don't have to use it, but a lot of people will want to, and that's okay by me.

(Actually, if I'm going to be completely honest here, depending on how the Spell looks in it's final form, I may nerf it anyway so that it converts "healing wounds" to "changing wounds to fatigue damage" instead. That tracks with most of the Fantasy/Sci Fi books I've ever read that discussed the topic -- most of the energy for healing comes from the patient, and afterwards, he/she needs a heck of a lot of rest (and probably a ton of food and water) to recover fully, so that idea makes a LOT of sense to me.)
JLV, absolutely agree with you. I'm in two minds myself and I'll be happy to go with whatever Steve decides. Having tinkered so much with the rules over the last 35 years, it's refreshing to go back to the source and I've been enjoying my plays with the original 1977 Melee set. I intend to do the same with the new edition and play it RAW. I won't be making any changes till I've given it a very thorough run out, that's for sure. I always appreciate your input as another passionate TFT fan.
Chris Rice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 01:53 PM   #263
KevinJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arizona
Default Re: HEAL spell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
I wouldn't have any issues with making the spell either not castable in combat, or not useful in combat, nor with limiting total daily healing. For example:

Regeneration (T): accelerates the subject's healing. Lasts 1 hour per 3 ST the wizard uses to cast it. Heals the subject by 1 ST per hour. Cannot be stacked.

However, I don't think the spell as proposed would dramatically affect combat, it's mostly what you call category D even if it's castable in combat because you generally won't cast it in combat.
Healing magic is fantasy has been a thing since stories of King Arthur when Vivian takes Arthur to Avalon so his greivous wounds can be heals, but we never see him again. He is magically healed, but it's going to take years and it's that or die.

If healing magic takes significant time to cast that or the effect is outside the scope of combat (1ST/hour or longer) then that's not a game breaker. At least not more than having a Master Physicker in the group.

Even having an in combat touch spell that mearly brings a character to ST1 (and unconsious) and will not die from bloodloss, but still counts as 'treated' in respect to physickering would be OK as it still requires someone to do something other than make an attack for at least 1 turn of combat, maybe more.

What we don't want is some cleric casting Cure Serious Wounds 6 times in combat from as far away as 10 hexes without a roll 'to hit' and basically refiving the super soldier over and over to aid his march of death through the enemy ranks.
__________________
So you've got the tiger by the tail. Now what?
KevinJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 02:01 PM   #264
KevinJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arizona
Default Re: HEAL spell?

Make Well (S) [10]: This ritual must be performed in a sactified area (in a church or holy site at least neutral to the deity providing the spell or an area where Sanctify has been cast), requires $150 ci, and 5 hours. On a successful roll, the subject is completely healed of all wounds as well as curting diseases and and expunging poisons.

The effects of a failed roll may be nothing and a critical might mean character death, depending on the deity.

Definitely not an in combat spell and it requires that the wounded person be moved to a santified location or someone able to sacntify that location for the duration of the casting.
__________________
So you've got the tiger by the tail. Now what?
KevinJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 02:14 PM   #265
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: HEAL spell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rice View Post
JLV, absolutely agree with you. I'm in two minds myself and I'll be happy to go with whatever Steve decides. Having tinkered so much with the rules over the last 35 years, it's refreshing to go back to the source and I've been enjoying my plays with the original 1977 Melee set. I intend to do the same with the new edition and play it RAW. I won't be making any changes till I've given it a very thorough run out, that's for sure. I always appreciate your input as another passionate TFT fan.
"I'm in two minds [about it]" That EXACTLY expresses my own feelings! ;-)

And I have to say "me too!" about both the tinkering and the getting back to my roots (playing the original game) part. It's been an absolute blast playing some good old fashioned Melee and Wizard fights again... (I feel like I'm 18 again, and that was 40 long years ago!)

And, yep, exactly my feeling again about playing the RAW when I finally get the latest version in my hot little hands -- but that doesn't mean I won't start tinkering around again too (because I literally can't stop myself)! Still, I'll want to see how things interact BEFORE I launch any major surgery on anything.

Last edited by JLV; 06-21-2018 at 02:18 PM.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 10:03 PM   #266
David L Pulver
AlienAbductee
 
David L Pulver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In the UFO
Default Re: Anti Magic zones and healing debuffs.

My main issue with Healing spells is that it will strongly encourage players to have a "party healer" who saves up all his ST for healing and doesn't get to have as much fun playing the game as a result.

Healing magic is "in genre" and a spell that costs just a few ST and puts someone into a healing trance where they recover at 2-4x the usual rate would let you create a "cleric" type character who does a bit of between-fights healing in the "downtime" without the D&D flaw of relegating someone to be the no-fun combat medic.

To keep players alive, a "die at negative ST" rule is probably the best solution. If we haven't replaced "die at 0 ST" (if SJ has done so, I missed it), we should!
__________________
Is love like the bittersweet taste of marmalade on burnt toast?
David L Pulver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 11:19 PM   #267
KevinJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arizona
Default Re: Anti Magic zones and healing debuffs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David L Pulver View Post
My main issue with Healing spells is that it will strongly encourage players to have a "party healer" who saves up all his ST for healing and doesn't get to have as much fun playing the game as a result.

Healing magic is "in genre" and a spell that costs just a few ST and puts someone into a healing trance where they recover at 2-4x the usual rate would let you create a "cleric" type character who does a bit of between-fights healing in the "downtime" without the D&D flaw of relegating someone to be the no-fun combat medic.

To keep players alive, a "die at negative ST" rule is probably the best solution. If we haven't replaced "die at 0 ST" (if SJ has done so, I missed it), we should!
In my game, the mage is also the physicer. He has Lightning, which he really worked for, summon Myrmidon, 3-hex Fire, and a few other spells he uses less often. And a Minor Heal spell. After a battle, Etica will physicer those injured, then rest. After abreather, he will then cast the minor heal on anyone injured, but not below 2/3 fST, just in case there is another combat.

Based on the game, every character is a Priest, being the Chosen of the Gods in this epic quest they are currently on and their prayers do have positive results, just not in the form of healing or protection. The Mother of All does not coddle her children...
__________________
So you've got the tiger by the tail. Now what?
KevinJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 12:32 AM   #268
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: Anti Magic zones and healing debuffs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David L Pulver View Post
My main issue with Healing spells is that it will strongly encourage players to have a "party healer" who saves up all his ST for healing and doesn't get to have as much fun playing the game as a result.

Healing magic is "in genre" and a spell that costs just a few ST and puts someone into a healing trance where they recover at 2-4x the usual rate would let you create a "cleric" type character who does a bit of between-fights healing in the "downtime" without the D&D flaw of relegating someone to be the no-fun combat medic.

To keep players alive, a "die at negative ST" rule is probably the best solution. If we haven't replaced "die at 0 ST" (if SJ has done so, I missed it), we should!
This was more or less the starting motivation for my priest system. I wanted
  1. ceremonial magic that takes time and doesn't overlap with wizardly magic OR feel like D&D clerical magic
  2. some small, extraordinary powers during combat
  3. access to regular hero talents
  4. magic and powers with heavy flavor
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:29 AM   #269
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: HEAL spell?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
I wouldn't have any issues with making the spell either not castable in combat, or not useful in combat, nor with limiting total daily healing. For example:

Regeneration (T): accelerates the subject's healing. Lasts 1 hour per 3 ST the wizard uses to cast it. Heals the subject by 1 ST per hour. Cannot be stacked.

However, I don't think the spell as proposed would dramatically affect combat, it's mostly what you call category D even if it's castable in combat because you generally won't cast it in combat.
Mostly the spell as proposed would tend not to be particularly useful in combat... though it could be, if there were enough Aid spells, ST batteries, or Staff ST available. That proposed new Staff ST means possibly more available ST (up to IQ, or IQ x 2 for Staff of Power). It still might not be the best use of power, but it could be used to zap a near-dead person back to full ST in one turn.

I like your Regeneration spell a lot better. It's still unlimited and amounts to up to 24 healing per day per patient, so it's category C.

Even more, I'd like SJ's initial version well enough IF something limited it to at most 4 or 5 points (maybe 3, or 4 if the caster knows Physicker or 5 if Master Physicker) AND that it can only be cast on untreated wounds, and casting it counts as treating the wound, so it can't be stacked with Physicker or other castings, so people can still have lasting wounds when they get hurt badly enough.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 03:52 AM   #270
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Anti Magic zones and healing debuffs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David L Pulver View Post
My main issue with Healing spells is that it will strongly encourage players to have a "party healer" who saves up all his ST for healing and doesn't get to have as much fun playing the game as a result.
That's only really an issue for combat-effective healing; otherwise it's just everyone casts aid and the person who knows heal draws from everyone.

It's worth considering what issue healing is intended to address, though. It could be thought of as tactically interesting (though IME it generally isn't), but I think the usual reason is because it lets you have more challenging fights that don't bring the adventure to a halt. RPG combat tends to follow lanchester's square law, meaning a 4 on 4 fight (with characters on both sides equal) is a coin-flip and likely results in major wounds to the winning side, a 4 on 3 fight averages to the side with 4 taking 2 casualties, 4 on 2 averages 1 casualty, 4 on 1 averages 0.25 casualties.

If your adventure plan is 'fight, fight, fight, boss fight', and we know the boss fight is going to be 3 characters (or the equivalent), absent healing, the first three fights all need to be 1s, because if any of them is a 2 the PCs probably don't reach the boss fight with enough strength to win. With healing, each preliminary fight can be a 2.

However, there are means other than healing spells to allow PCs to make it through multiple moderately challenging fight. For example, you could introduce active defenses (block, dodge, parry) that cost fatigue, meaning the likely outcome of a fight is taking a bunch of fatigue damage but no actual wounds.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   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 11:53 AM.


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