how does -1/-2 yard range reduction with staff work with missile/jet spells?

[Plane]

http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...07&postcount=9

The rules on p. 13 of GURPS Magic are clear on this matter: "Pointing with a staff reduces the range to a distant subject by the length of the staff." There's no ". . . for certain spells" rider. Thus, a staff's extra length counts for any spell where reducing the effective distance to the target would be of value. Spells that suffer a punishing -1/yard to cast benefit most – that's why Regular spells are called out – but by all means go ahead and take advantage of it with Melee spells and jets (which take no range modifiers because they're melee attacks), Area spells (which also suffer -1/yard), and Missile spells (which use standard speed/range modifiers). Even spells that use long-distance modifiers can benefit, if a yard or two makes the difference.

Less legalistically and more artistically, I think that most fans of spell-slinging fantasy would agree that letting a wizard shoot bolts and beams from the end of her staff is in idiom, and that not allowing this would be jarring.

Since jets (like breathing fire) normally come from the mouth, attacking with this spell type is normally a problem if you're wearing a helmet, or someone is covering your mouth....

Since missile spells (like fireball) normally are held by the hands and thrown by the arms, attacking with this spell type is normally a problem if your hand is already busy holding something else (a sword, a shield) or if someone is grappling that arm, or maybe even if you lack a hand or have a poor grip?

I know explicitly that the way a Staff improves upon a Melee Spell (like where your hand is normally a flame and you set people afire by punching them) is you can actually hit with the staff itself, rather than needing an empty hand. That wield a sword in that hand meaning you can't burn people by punching with it without dropping the sword.

Does this basically mean that staff also subs for the hand for missile spells in terms of gripping it, so you don't need an empty hand anymore, and the tip of the spell functions like an empty hand?

Similarly, that a staff also means you don't need an empty unoccupied mouth? That you you can eat an apple or be biting someone, and fire a flame jet from the end of your staff? That it's grappling penalties against the arm holding your staff that matters instead of grappling penalties against the head as Jet would normally work since you breathe from the mouth?

I especially wasn't sure as missiles, as I was wondering at first if the -1/-2 yard penalties might mean something like you hold the staff in your left hand, cast the missile spell so the fireball appears in your right hand, and then as you throw with your right hand you point with your left arm (holding staff) to direct the spell more accurately.

But if it comes out of your staff, then you would need to be sure not to wield your staff with your off hand to avoid the -4 DX penalty to using Innate Attack to target it?

[naloth]

I don't use G:Magic much if at all, but as far as I know the basic premise hasn't changed. Missile spells are cast to a hand or the end of your staff, then thrown. Spell range is always 0 since it's cast into where ever you are throwing it from.

When you get around to throwing it, it has a ranged profile and suffers normal range penalties just as it if it was a bow, innate attack, or gun. You can also hold it prior to throwing it for a while, but you risk dropping it on yourself if you are distracted or damaged.

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by Plane

Does this basically mean that staff also subs for the hand for missile spells in terms of gripping it, so you don't need an empty hand anymore, and the tip of the [staff] functions like an empty hand.

That's how I would rule it based on your quote from Kromm.

Similarly, that a staff also means you don't need an empty unoccupied mouth? That you you can eat an apple or be biting someone, and fire a flame jet from the end of your staff? That it's grappling penalties against the arm holding your staff that matters instead of grappling penalties against the head as Jet would normally work since you breathe from the mouth?

I would argue that Breathe Fire doesn't make sense to be cast on a staff. It comes from your mouth no matter what. If you want a jet of flame from the staff, cast Flame Jet instead. If you have a jet emanating from your staff, anything that interferes with the staff or the arm/hand that wields it would hamper the jet.

I especially wasn't sure as missiles, as I was wondering at first if the -1/-2 yard penalties might mean something like you hold the staff in your left hand, cast the missile spell so the fireball appears in your right hand, and then as you throw with your right hand you point with your left arm (holding staff) to direct the spell more accurately.

But if it comes out of your staff, then you would need to be sure not to wield your staff with your off hand to avoid the -4 DX penalty to using Innate Attack to target it?

I would say that the missile appears at the end of the staff as soon as you cast the spell. You fire it from there using your standard Innate Attack skill. If it were in the off-hand, I would apply the off-hand penalty. The range to the target would be reduced by the length of the staff. If a wizard had a fireball on her two-yard staff, she could fire it at a target seven yards away at a -2 range penalty (instead of the usual -3).

[Plane]

Originally Posted by naloth

I don't use G:Magic much if at all, but as far as I know the basic premise hasn't changed. Missile spells are cast to a hand or the end of your staff, then thrown.

So are you envisioning rather than a "point and shoot" like with a gun, that a mage is actually doing a throwing motion with the staff, sort of like in Lacross?

More a conceptual concern than a mechanical one, though if there was some crunch to go along with this, I would say that the movement of a whipping lacross stick / staff would be more visible than a non-moving pointed stick/staff/rifle.

If that were the case, then maybe there could be some kind of specialization with missile spells where you don't make a throwing motion (just point) where there is a penalty for people to notice you before you attack?

That would be especially useful if you had the ability to make your attacks invisible using the optional rules for applying enhancements to spells.

Originally Posted by naloth

When you get around to throwing it, it has a ranged profile and suffers normal range penalties just as it if it was a bow, innate attack, or gun. You can also hold it prior to throwing it for a while, but you risk dropping it on yourself if you are distracted or damaged.

That's another safety aspect I hadn't thought of...

Normally with handheld missile spells, If you accidentally drop a missile spell it can go off and hit you... because you were holding it in your own hex...

If you are using a "staffheld" missile spell and accidentally drop it, does it accidentally damage your staff instead?

Then there's the issue of: normally you have a chance of dropping the spell if YOU are hit, but if the staff is the one holding the spell, should there also be an added risk of dropping the missile spell if the STAFF is hit?

I remember seeing in basic set there was actually a shock penalty to the use of a weapon if the weapon was damaged so maybe anything able to damage your weapon should also be a Will roll to avoid losing a "grip" on the fireball?

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by Plane

So are you envisioning rather than a "point and shoot" like with a gun, that a mage is actually doing a throwing motion with the staff, sort of like in Lacross?

For what it's worth, in a discussion about Halfling Marksmanship, Kromm clarified that Innate Attack is not a physical throw:

Originally Posted by Kromm

Innate Attack is the skill of ritually "directing" such effects, not physically projecting them, which is handled by the spells themselves.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Plane

So are you envisioning rather than a "point and shoot" like with a gun, that a mage is actually doing a throwing motion with the staff, sort of like in Lacross?

Honestly, I wasn't visualizing anything. For a given genre either pointing or motions might be more appropriate. The projectile isn't muscle-powered; it's just directed. The theatrics are flavor.

Normally with handheld missile spells, If you accidentally drop a missile spell it can go off and hit you... because you were holding it in your own hex...

In my limited years using magic, no one I gamed with held spells such that they could be dropped. I suspect it's legal but largely ignored.

If you are using a "staffheld" missile spell and accidentally drop it, does it accidentally damage your staff instead?

Seems reasonable. Better cast small fireballs or fireproof that staff.

Then there's the issue of: normally you have a chance of dropping the spell if YOU are hit, but if the staff is the one holding the spell, should there also be an added risk of dropping the missile spell if the STAFF is hit?

I remember seeing in basic set there was actually a shock penalty to the use of a weapon if the weapon was damaged so maybe anything able to damage your weapon should also be a Will roll to avoid losing a "grip" on the fireball?

Seems reasonable.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Dalin

For what it's worth, in a discussion about Halfling Marksmanship, Kromm clarified that Innate Attack is not a physical throw:

Yes. If you were physically throwing fireballs they wouldn't go anywhere. Balls of fire would be less dense than the surrounding air and make incredibly poor missile weapons.

At the other extreme a maxed-out Stone Missile of 9D+9 would be something you couldn't even lift. Looking at the Throwing rules on p.355 of campaigns you'd have to be throwing a 640 lb rock with a ST of 80. Those may not be great rules generally but we're talking about a stone equal to a very significant catapult at a minimum.

So when you learn the Psychic Guidance Perk for a Missile Spell you're overcome your natural habit of trying to guide this completely magical process with your physical reflexes and are using your focussed intellect instead.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Dalin

For what it's worth, in a discussion about Halfling Marksmanship, Kromm clarified that Innate Attack is not a physical throw:

So... should there be some benefit to actually making a big fastball-windup motion when actually doing this, to match the text?

I was thinking maybe you could take the option of using the Throwing skill and if it succeeds, you get a +1 bonus to your Innate Attack Roll? +2 on a critical success.

[Anthony]

Based on the enumerated benefits in the box on Magic 13, using a one hex staff in one hand and a broadsword in the other hand will let you hit them with the broadsword from two hexes away. This may not be the intent.

However, if you assume that enumeration is actually restating the first sentence of the box (A “magic staff” is any wand or staff imbued with the power to extend your reach for the purpose of casting spells), it should have the same effects as increased reach. Which will help with jet spells, but not missile spells, as reach does not normally affect ranged combat (the rules for regular spells do not actually say how range is calculated; if we assume this interpretation, increased reach from long arms, size, stretching, etc, should also affect regular spells).

Plausibly speaking, I would think a staff would help the accuracy of missile spells if they are projected (i.e. you point and they go where you point) as the longer length makes pointing more accurate, but would not help if they are hurled (you wind up using the staff like a staff sling, which really isn't going to help your accuracy). There is no rules support for that concept, however.

[Kale]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Plausibly speaking, I would think a staff would help the accuracy of missile spells if they are projected (i.e. you point and they go where you point) as the longer length makes pointing more accurate,

That is how I always saw it; the 2 yard effective range reduction was basically a nod towards aiming down the length of the staff without providing an actual ACC bonus. Since the spells have their own innate ACC value it wouldn't make sense to apply one for using a staff too.