Spell: Death Vision [Erratum?]

[Luther]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

However, this is not a problem of the particular Death Vision spell, it was allways meant to work that way, proof of that is the lack of errata.

Actually Death Vision works differently in G4, it was far less powerful in G3. Have you read my post here?

Originally Posted by Luther conclusions

In G4 our warrior, even if he is a powerful hero, with lots of IQ, never get a chance to act, escape, fight the Necro, whatever . . . This is a change from G3. If I'm not wrong, it seems that the original poster's concerns are well founded: even if Death Vision's text is almost identical, the little changes in how GURPS handles stun have a heavy, nasty side effect.

I dunno if this is by design or if it was overlooked.

[Fnord-Fnairlane]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

All the area spells, and especially the Rain of spells.
(I like Devitalize Air.)
Deathtouch and all melee spells.
All the missile and jet spells.
Shatter, Explode and Disintegrate, Contract/Extend/Shrink Object.
Distant Blow, Blink Other, Stop Power, Shape Metal.
I'm sure there's more.

Those are all damaging / incapacitating spells, or spells that target equipment. They do not incapacitate automatically, and for the vast majority there is a defensive spell equivalent, eg: Resist Fire for all the fire combat spells, additionally, for the non-touch ones, DR usually protects as well! Deathtouch has no defensive spell, but requires touch and can't target a location. Many allow an Active Defence as well.

Nice try, but none of those are as crippling as Death Vision. Additionally, many are much slower and more expensive to cast, and are at the end of mid-length pre-req chains, vs zero pre-reqs for Death Vision.

Luther quoted chapter and verse as to what the real problem is - becoming un-stunned was a free action in 3e, and a full round action in 4e, and they didn't change the spell to suit the rules change.

Your list does point out one interesting inconsistency: most spells that target equipment allow the holder to attampt a resistance roll (eg: Transform Object) while your examples don't. Why?

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by Fnord-Fnairlane

Those are all damaging / incapacitating spells, or spells that target equipment.

How's that an issue, Death Vision is an incapacitating spell as well.

If you want abusive, try using Explode on someone's belt buckle, cup, or boot.

Originally Posted by Fnord-Fnairlane

Your list does point out one interesting inconsistency: most spells that target equipment allow the holder to attampt a resistance roll (eg: Transform Object) while your examples don't. Why?

Because Magic is a kludge?

Spells, all spells, in any system are a kludge, and 3e to 4e Magic was not properly updated.

Have you looked at what it takes to use Banish successfully?

[Fnord-Fnairlane]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

How's that an issue, Death Vision is an incapacitating spell as well.

If you want abusive, try using Explode on someone's belt buckle, cup, or boot.

D.V. is instantly, automatically and irresistably incapacitating. None of your examples are. Many spells in Magic instantly incapacitate (Sleep, etc, etc). They (should) all have resistance rolls. Many spells in Magic do not have resistance rolls, they incapacitate slowly, usually via damage, and most allow some other form of Defence (Dodge, DR, Hold you Breath, Have a particular advantage, etc).

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Spells, all spells, in any system are a kludge, and 3e to 4e Magic was not properly updated.

The lack of an update to 4e is the real problem.

There was a fantastic opportunity to do things like:

Resist Fire protects against damage of type [Burn], other than damage that is also [electrical], which requires Resist Electricity

All of the attack spells should have had their damage class specified.

And spells / magic aren't always a kludge - D&D 3.5 is an example of a system where they're a well though out, integral part of the system. The core of D&D magic can be summed up on one page, listing damage types and amounts, the various spell categories, and the other allowable effects. The hundreds of pages of spell descriptions are really just flavour text. WotC are very good at writing consistent sets of rules that don't have fuzzy edge cases or require word by word interperation of every possible spell interaction.

Anyway, at this point, we're arguing for the sake of it, and veering off-topic.

Kromm thinks the spell works as intended, I think it's busted. Various people agree and disagree, with reasonable arguments (from their own perspective).

And most of us would like a Magic 4e, Second Edition that was decent update.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Fnord-Fnairlane

Kromm thinks the spell works as intended

Well, I did suggest that you could make it R-Will if you liked. I'd probably have made it work that way if I had revised Magic (or had even been involved in its playtesting, which I wasn't, because I was finishing the Basic Set and starting Powers).

[Rolando]

Well I think that the thing is that you are asking for some kind of absolute rule on spells...

I also think thats is good to have a more consistent descripcion of the spells (including the "new" burn damage... by the way acid does burn, toxic or corrocive damage in G4e, was terated like a normal burn in G3e, actually Grimoire), that may have a problem... GURPS have no absolute rule for anything!

D&D x.x need absolute rules... GURPS uses the same rules to bring lots diferent things (not a new book for ritual mages or shamans or rune mages, etc).

Then it's your campaign make your homework and "fix" anything you want :)

[Stephane_Theriault]

Originally Posted by Fnord-Fnairlane

However, there are a lot of GMs who for reasons that escape me are uncomfortable doing anything not vetted by the great god Kromm, or his assigned disciple, Ellie - thus the request for a FAQ or Errata.

Yeah, thanks for the compliment. But I think you forgot the 'mindless zombie' between the words 'assigned' and 'disciple'. You have to write what you really think, afterall...

[Stephane_Theriault]

Originally Posted by Fnord-Fnairlane

Here's another one:

They specifically changed the wording of Resist Fire in 4e Magic so that it no longer mentions "Battle Lasers" - does it protect against Lasers now, or not? What about Missile Shield and lasers? Deflect Energy works - but where's the Regular version, instead of the Blocking one?

Kromm's disciple here... again.

In 3ed, lasers were listed as doing impaling damage - not burning. Thus, Resist Fire had to specifically mention that it protects against them. In 4ed, lasers do burning damage, so by definition, Resist Fire protect against it - no need to list it, and a couple words less needed.

There ARE problems with 4ed Magic, but make sure what you are quoting really is a problem.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by Ellie the Technomancer

Yeah, thanks for the compliment. But I think you forgot the 'mindless zombie' between the words 'assigned' and 'disciple'. You have to write what you really think, afterall...

Oooh, I like that visual, though I wouldn't call you a 'mindless zombie', not at all...hmm, how about as a Familiar Disciple to his Zombie raising Necromancer?
You don't even have to be a minion. *bseg*

BTW, I don't think there's anything bad about you being Kromm's Disciple, at the very least it's a significant step up over those plain ol'Krommheads...

BTW, do you get to lead the Krommheads in preforming their secret rituals too? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Cursed_Lich]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Well, I did suggest that you could make it R-Will if you liked. I'd probably have made it work that way if I had revised Magic (or had even been involved in its playtesting, which I wasn't, because I was finishing the Basic Set and starting Powers).

Wouldn't it be a very inferior spell in case of allowing a test since it has a casting of 3s compared to Stun (Body Control) and Mental Stun (Mind Control), both with a 1s casting time?
What's the point of using a spell with a longer casting time in case it does the exact same of the other two? And no, I don't think using the example of someone with Death Vision at SL 25 is justifiable for that, you end up suffering until you reach that point.

What would you suggest? Keep it without resistance or reduce the cast time to 1s and add the resistance making it one more of the same stuff with a different flair?