Powerstones

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Witchking

Well I did not see the words of Kromm myself...however post #149 in this thread Fred B. said that Kromm had ruled it that way.

I have found Fred to be reliable ergo...

I am not sure if he can help you track it down...if he does I would be interested in knowing the location of the original my own self.

I was suspicious that it might have been the Thaumatology playtest but using Google to search my Gmail of that didn't turn it up.

Anyway, M.A Lloyds detailed reading oif Remove Enchantment makes the possibility almost totally moot. You could take an individual Powerstone enchant off if it was one of the very first but at -3 per it rapidly becomes unfeasable.

[hal]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

I was suspicious that it might have been the Thaumatology playtest but using Google to search my Gmail of that didn't turn it up.

Anyway, M.A Lloyds detailed reading oif Remove Enchantment makes the possibility almost totally moot. You could take an individual Powerstone enchant off if it was one of the very first but at -3 per it rapidly becomes unfeasable.

Thanks for trying to find the reference at least :)

[CraigR]

Searching through my copy of the GURPSnet archives (yes, I have HONKIN' BIG mailboxes in my Eudora, why do you ask?), the earliest instance of someone asking to use Remove Enchantment to remove a quirk that I found was Wim ten Brink on July 12, 1996. M A Lloyd responded with the same "-3 for an unknown spell and another -3 per each level of power enchanted" the following day.

From my search of the Pyramid GURPS board (thank you, Free Agent), I found this in a post by Jeff Wilson on Feb 7, 2003, in which he reported asking Kromm about this, in a thread called "The Incompleat Powerstone: Labor Costs":

Kromm sez:

>> Can you supply us with the official party line wrt what (if anything)
>> will remove powerstone quirks
> To get rid of a Powerstone quirk, you must use Remove Enchantment to
> remove the quirked casting. Given the -3 per other spell modifier,
> this might be a tricky procedure for a large Powerstone . . . and
> given the minimum cost of 100 energy for Remove Enchantment, it might
> be easier to start over, unless you are short on gems or have invested
> a lot in the Powerstone already.
>
>
>> what (if anything) besides previously successful enchantments Remove
>> Enchantment will remove?
>
>
> Remove Enchantment does only one thing: it removes enchantments. It it
> does not matter whether they were successful, whether they were
> deliberate or a kind of natural accident, etc., but they must be
> enchantments.
>
> SP.

This would seem to back up M A's ruling.

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by CraigR

Searching through my copy of the GURPSnet archives (yes, I have HONKIN' BIG mailboxes in my Eudora, why do you ask?), the earliest instance of someone asking to use Remove Enchantment to remove a quirk that I found was Wim ten Brink on July 12, 1996. M A Lloyd responded with the same "-3 for an unknown spell and another -3 per each level of power enchanted" the following day.

From my search of the Pyramid GURPS board (thank you, Free Agent), I found this in a post by Jeff Wilson on Feb 7, 2003, in which he reported asking Kromm about this, in a thread called "The Incompleat Powerstone: Labor Costs":

This would seem to back up M A's ruling.

Interesting...of course this means the only Powerstones worth enough to look at casting Remove Enchantment upon are the ones you cant possibily successfully cast the spell on.

Hmm not GMing at the moment but I will have to think...most likely to get hit with a house ruling of some sort....

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Witchking

Interesting...of course this means the only Powerstones worth enough to look at casting Remove Enchantment upon are the ones you cant possibily successfully cast the spell on.

Not true. If you buy $1,400 stone (sufficient for a 10 pt stone) and it quirks on the first try, you might as well remove that enchantment and start over.

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Anyway, M.A Lloyds detailed reading oif Remove Enchantment makes the possibility almost totally moot. You could take an individual Powerstone enchant off if it was one of the very first but at -3 per it rapidly becomes unfeasable.

I claim ignorance...where can I find MA Lloyds article (?). I would like to read myself as I am curious if "first" means "first" (ie originial casting #1).

Because that does not make sense to me. To me Remove Enchantment would remove the last casting of Powerstone (last in, first out). I would certainly be interested in reading tho.

And Thanks a lot for the Prompt Information Fred...I stand in humility and awe...(and a little fear).

[hal]

Originally Posted by Witchking

I claim ignorance...where can I find MA Lloyds article (?). I would like to read myself as I am curious if "first" means "first" (ie originial casting #1).

Because that does not make sense to me. To me Remove Enchantment would remove the last casting of Powerstone (last in, first out). I would certainly be interested in reading tho.

And Thanks a lot for the Prompt Information Fred...I stand in humility and awe...(and a little fear).

It isn't MA Lloyds article per se, just that MA Lloyd brought up the saliant point that you are at -3 per previous enchantment already on the item as you attempt to remove a specific enchantment via the spell description given in GURPS MAGIC. Specifically, if there are 5 prior enchantments you wish to remove (ie you're working on the 6th one you just put on), you are at -3 per previous enchantment, or a whopping total of -15 just to remove the 6th enchantment you no longer desire.

Any time you wish to make it so that certain items can not have enchantments removed easily, one need only use the Powerstone Enchantment in say, a grouping of 5, and that works out to -15 right there. Let alone all the other enchantments you might wish to place on it in addition. ;)