GURPS Dungeon Fantasy 19: Incantation Magic

[starslayer]

Originally Posted by scc

Given that the Rule of 16 boils down to 'Lowest of own skill, defender's Will or 16' the defender suffering a penalty only matter if their will is greater then 16 or your skill is lower then both 16 and their will, I don't see how it's even bending it.

Note quite- because inflicting a -4 to willpower only add a maximum of -2 to your skill (16 SP)

So, for example, if you have final skill 18 and the enemy has will 16 you can turn that to final skill 16 and effective will 12.

It is quite a bit better a return than 'deceptive attack', and has the added advantage of being a quick contest.

With that said- I am just defending my thought about it violating the rule of 16, I am not challenging the ability to inflict the penalty, because Ghostdancer did balancing and play-testing on it and found it to be workable.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by scc

Given that the Rule of 16 boils down to 'Lowest of own skill, defender's Will or 16' the defender suffering a penalty only matter if their will is greater then 16 or your skill is lower then both 16 and their will, I don't see how it's even bending it.

Kind of.

Originally Posted by starslayer

Note quite- because inflicting a -4 to willpower only add a maximum of -2 to your skill (16 SP)


So, for example, if you have final skill 18 and the enemy has will 16 you can turn that to final skill 16 and effective will 12.

It is quite a bit better a return than 'deceptive attack', and has the added advantage of being a quick contest.

I did model it on Deceptive Attack. I don't think it's BETTER - look at how Mighty Spell works (+1/die for 1 FP) ... wait. Darn. That's in the Designer's Notes/Power-Ups. GAH. Ok. So it basically works like the standard perk, but is way more potent in the Incantation system.

Originally Posted by starslayer

With that said- I am just defending my thought about it violating the rule of 16, I am not challenging the ability to inflict the penalty, because Ghostdancer did balancing and play-testing on it and found it to be workable.

I don't know if I'd allow it outside of a very carefully balanced RPM. Afterall, Incantation Gift limits things like damage and that keeps issues like "I hit him with 20d direct damage and he takes a -10 to his roll to resist."

[starslayer]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I don't know if I'd allow it outside of a very carefully balanced RPM. Afterall, Incantation Gift limits things like damage and that keeps issues like "I hit him with 20d direct damage and he takes a -10 to his roll to resist."

I think someone proposed the 'inflicts a penalty' to reduce resistance on a spell for a regular RPM version and PK catagorically turned it down- which may be why I jumped to the 'it does not work that way' mindset.

Again, I trust your balance methodology in incantation to keep things from breaking- and the incantation gift as a limiter on total effect works really well to keep things from getting out of control in edge cases like they do in regular RPM (Like having 150 loyal disciples being willing to sacrifice themselves willingly, allowing the skill 15 caster to erase an entire continent)

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by starslayer

I think someone proposed the 'inflicts a penalty' to reduce resistance on a spell for a regular RPM version and PK catagorically turned it down- which may be why I jumped to the 'it does not work that way' mindset.

I was in this thread and at the time disagreed with it, but came to see PK was probably right. I kept the idea in my pocket because I felt under the right circumstances it would become useful.

Originally Posted by starslayer

Again, I trust your balance methodology in incantation to keep things from breaking- and the incantation gift as a limiter on total effect works really well to keep things from getting out of control in edge cases like they do in regular RPM (Like having 150 loyal disciples being willing to sacrifice themselves willingly, allowing the skill 15 caster to erase an entire continent)

I wish I could share some of the stuff I've done for my Ceteri campaign's RPM, because I balanced a LOT of stuff out. It's also Effect-Shaping, but you could swap it to energy accumulation and it would work just the same.

[PK]

Originally Posted by starslayer

I think someone proposed the 'inflicts a penalty' to reduce resistance on a spell for a regular RPM version and PK catagorically turned it down- which may be why I jumped to the 'it does not work that way' mindset.

Yes, that's correct. But allowing it in Incantation Magic is one of the system changes that I agreed with to make this system better fit DF.

So, to be clear: "Can I use Bestows a Penalty to make my spell harder to resist?"

RPM: No.
IM: Yes.

[Tinman]

In the context of the "two-buff" rule, what is considered a buff? Is a ward a buff? Is a detect magic spell a buff?

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Tinman

In the context of the "two-buff" rule, what is considered a buff? Is a ward a buff? Is a detect magic spell a buff?

Buffs are essentially anything that uses Bestows a Bonus or otherwise enhances the capabilities of the target in some way. For example, increasing the target's ST or adding DR is a buff, detecting magic would just be a normal spell - as would a ward.

[Tinman]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

Buffs are essentially anything that uses Bestows a Bonus or otherwise enhances the capabilities of the target in some way. For example, increasing the target's ST or adding DR is a buff, detecting magic would just be a normal spell - as would a ward.

But a spell that let's the caster detect magic all day by sight or a ward cast on a person to protect them would be a buff, right?

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Tinman

But a spell that let's the caster detect magic all day by sight or a ward cast on a person to protect them would be a buff, right?

For the first, it depends. I'd probably say "Yes." The second, no. Wards are just regular spells even though they protect the way they do.

[Tinman]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

For the first, it depends. I'd probably say "Yes." The second, no. Wards are just regular spells even though they protect the way they do.

Ok. Thanks.