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

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Plane

Does anyone know how being handcuffed would work in respect to throwing a missile spell, or using Innate Attack in general?

Off the cuff? Treat it like being grappled, so -4 on all DX based skills with those limbs.

Full rules on handcuffs and shackles are in High-Tech, pg 217.

I was probably thinking it was casting due to B241/M13's bit about the effect of using a Blocking Spell:

If you are holding a Missile spell, you cannot enlarge it further but may retain it for later use.

That's an artifact of the enlargement process needing to be non-stop, back to back Concentrate Maneuvers. It's kinda 'quasi' casting, but the casting roll is already done.

Since this works "exactly as if you had failed the Will roll to resist a distraction" I guess that means if you fail your Will roll that similarly can't use Enlarge on a missile spell either?

That's how I've ruled it in the past.

Since the full cost of the spell hasn't been paid...

Actually it has. You can't put any more into the casting of the spell. Enlargement isn't casting.

(since the energy you put in to Enlarge enjoys high-skill cost discounts too)

By RAW it doesn't. It's a good house rule though.

This seems like an actual possibility, depending on how B231/M13's text on Blocking Spells is read?

Kinda... but not by RAW. Enlargement is only 'disrupted' by the caster deciding to stop enlarging in order to cast another spell, and once enlargement has been stopped, it cannot be restarted.

In that case, I'd like to know how using a Blocking Spell while holding a Missile Spell would work if you have the perk Missile Spell Mastery which does allow casting spells (at -3) while maintaining your missile in hand...

That's a separate issue. That's allowing the caster to hold an already cast and done Missile spell while casting another spell, not Concentrate on two separate things at once; Enlarging the Missile and Casting a Different Spell.

Maybe if the "you can't enlarge anymore" limit imposed by a Blocking Spell is a compromise because "normally you couldn't cast another spell without losing your Explosive Fireball altogether!" then if that's no longer the case, perhaps there could be an option like casting a Blocking Spell at -3 to skill (like other spells) where it doesn't prevent using Enlarge?

I'd allow it with the Missile Spell Mastery Perk.

PG would MIGHT be useful if you happened to be using Enchanted Items since those can have very high skills built into them. I don't know if that would be a correct interpretation though... if it's YOUR perk, then would you still be using YOUR skill (which you may not even have) in the spell to target a foe, or could your Perk allow you to use the Enchanted Item's skill for targeting?

I'd use the caster's skill for the throw unless the item was self willed... then the item is using it's own skills anyway. Though I could also see item's specifically enchanted with 'Seeking' or some such that would use the item's skill for the throw.

"Psychic Guidance (Enchantment)" being an Enchantment-college spell that could be cast on items could be one interesting option for helping out those who want to use magic fireball staffs but have horrible (or absent) DX or Innate Attack.

Aye. Or just Accuracy [Missile Spell]. Require the low skilled Wizard to have to Aim for once in his life...

[Plane]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Off the cuff? Treat it like being grappled, so -4 on all DX based skills with those limbs.

Full rules on handcuffs and shackles are in High-Tech, pg 217.

This is helpful, but I think I need to invent a "two handed throw" technique to figure out how awkward this would be. You just couldn't get the proper arc with one hand or the other since the other arm would stop it... it seems like a really unique situation.

I'm actually surprised that 2-handed weapon use wouldn't also suffer that. I think sometimes we ignore that because 2-handed weapons usually have a long reach...

But if you imagine having a 2-hand grip on a gun, you couldn't pistol-whip people far to your left or far to your right by moving just your arm, you'd need to rotate your enter torso in that direction to basically strike forward to get your full reach, if that makes any sense?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

That's an artifact of the enlargement process needing to be non-stop, back to back Concentrate Maneuvers. It's kinda 'quasi' casting, but the casting roll is already done.

Interesting change when you look at the summaries between Basic's Trait List and Magic's Spell Charts...

Consistently in both cases it says that "Time to cast" is "1 to 3 sec" though...

This would seem to imply that if you had skill 9 or lower, it would be 2 to 6 sec?

Also important if using Alternative Magical Rituals (x2 casting time for +1 to skill) or Ceremonial Magic (x10 casting time).

Differences though:

B305 Duration: Special / Initial Cost: Special
M227 Duration: Instant / Energy: 1 to Magery.

The latter part is a weird contrast because if they're listing the casting time as 1-3 then you'd think energy would actually be 1 to Magery*3. Just 1 to Magery (times 1) should only list a casting time of 1, rather than 1-3...

Since the high-skill discount (ie 20 skill fireball with Magery 1 means you can create a 2d fireball for 0 energy after 2 Concentrates) applies to the Enlarge, which treats Enlarge as part of the casting (as both B305/M227 do for Casting Time) then maybe high-skill casting time divisors help 2? Letting you make that free 2d fireball in just 1 second, because you can do 1 Concentrate instead of 2 due to halved casting time?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

You can't put any more into the casting of the spell. Enlargement isn't casting.

So benefitting from the high-skill discount unused in turn 1 is sort of a FAQ-only benefit?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

By RAW it doesn't. It's a good house rule though.

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/faq/FAQ4-4.html#SS4.3.3

you can put up to [Magery * base cost of spell] energy each second in it,
for one to three seconds;
spell effect is multiplied by each multiple of the base cost.
Note that the cost reduction for high skill only applies to the total cost of the spell.
With skill 20, you can't cast a 6d fireball for free by concentrating for 3 seconds.

The way they say "total" cost sounds like they're talking about 6 being the total cost, rather than 2 being the total cost.

It's not the ideal example since skill 20 only affords -2, which results in 0/2/2 payment for the 6d Burning Attack...

We moreso need to know what "total cost" means in respect do trying this with skill 25. At -3 to cost, if it's 0/2/2 still, or 0/1/2

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Kinda... but not by RAW. Enlargement is only 'disrupted' by the caster deciding to stop enlarging in order to cast another spell

in case of Blocking Spell: disruption of enlargement necessary, but not losing the missile
in case of ANY OTHER spell: disruption of entire missile necessary

In case of MSM perk though, since you don't need to disrupt the entire missile to cast spells anymore, should the casting of those other spells be assumed to prevent enlargement too?

For example if you have Missile Spell Mastery, I can't see anything preventing...
1) cast Fireball
2) cast Flamejet
3) Enlarge Fireball

since the 2nd second wasn't used to Enlarge, that was technically wasted though, so you can only use your meant-for-2nd-Enlarge third turn for your 1st.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

once enlargement has been stopped, it cannot be restarted.

Well it seems like you can do CREATE (kind of like "enlarge 1" as in enlarged-from-nothing) then PAUSE (decided to Stamp Kick an approaching Goblin, wasting your opportunity to Concentrate) and then ENLARGE on the 3rd second, which is RAW the 1st enlarge (from initial create) but informally like a 2nd enlarge (from nothing)

Originally Posted by evileeyore

I'd use the caster's skill for the throw unless the item was self willed... then the item is using it's own skills anyway. Though I could also see item's specifically enchanted with 'Seeking' or some such that would use the item's skill for the throw.

Or just Accuracy [Missile Spell]. Require the low skilled Wizard to have to Aim for once in his life...

That helps too, but it's still going to keep the weapon DX-based, and the Power of the item basically having little meaning except for sustaining operation in Very Low Mana.

Maybe something between M63 Dancing Weapon and M64 Weapon Spirit and M65 Accuracy would help?

I don't know if Quick-Aim+Accuracy on a "Staff of Fireball" would actually boost Innate Attack or if it was more intended for stuff like throwing the weapon itself.

If those bonuses did benefit spells then would it even need to cast fireball, or could you just have a "wand of accuracy" which gives bonuses to ALL missiles spells (or melee spells) which you channel through it? That seems super powerful and essential.

Maybe a "Wand of Quick-Aim" would be possible, but I notice Accuracy has pricing at 1/10 for projectiles, and you can't enchant the fireball itself...

Could you normally spend 250 for a "+1 gun of accuracy" and then spend 25 for a "+1 bullet of accuracy" and then use GOA to fire BOA for a total of +2 to hit?

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Plane

Interesting change when you look at the summaries between Basic's Trait List and Magic's Spell Charts...

Consistently in both cases it says that "Time to cast" is "1 to 3 sec" though...

This would seem to imply that if you had skill 9 or lower, it would be 2 to 6 sec?

No. Because that isn't how Missile Spells work. It would be 2 to 4

The latter part is a weird contrast because if they're listing the casting time as 1-3 then you'd think energy would actually be 1 to Magery*3. Just 1 to Magery (times 1) should only list a casting time of 1, rather than 1-3...

It's because you're ignoring how Missile Spells work and getting hung up on the imprecision used in "Casting Time" in the spell's description and the charts (again, for the millionth time, GURPS 4e needs more editing, and no DFRPG didn't fix this ;mistake' either).

Missile spells pg 12:
"To cast a Missile spell, you must concentrate for one second. At the end of your turn, roll against your skill with the spell. There is no modifier for distance – you are creating a magical missile in your hand. On a success, you may invest one or more points of energy in the spell, to a maximum of a number of energy points equal to your Magery level. The missile then appears in your hand, “charged” to the desired level.

On your next turn, you have three options with your missile: make a ranged attack with it, hold it, or enlarge it."

Do you see sentence two? That is the Casting Roll, at this point all your energy and casting time discounts happen.

Any further 'seconds' invested in enlargement are not affected by anything that affects casting. Again, interesting houserules, but not RAW.

Also note that last sentence, it doesn't mention 'continue casting'.

So benefitting from the high-skill discount unused in turn 1 is sort of a FAQ-only benefit?

As you noted, the FAQ is imprecise. That's why I keep beating the drum of "reductions are applied when the skill is rolled", because it, a) it's actually RAW, and b) it makes these imprecisions make sense.

(And c) it's Word of Kromm)

We moreso need to know what "total cost" means in respect do trying this with skill 25. At -3 to cost, if it's 0/2/2 still, or 0/1/2

0/2/2. Enlargement isn't casting.

For example if you have Missile Spell Mastery, I can't see anything preventing...
1) cast Fireball
2) cast Flamejet
3) Enlarge Fireball

Technically correct. I don't allow it, but technically it is RAW (I'm in the "once you stop enlarging for any reason, you are done enlarging" camp).

If those bonuses did benefit spells then would it even need to cast fireball, or could you just have a "wand of accuracy" which gives bonuses to ALL missiles spells (or melee spells) which you channel through it? That seems super powerful and essential.

I wouldn't allow a 'Wand of Accuracy [All Missiles]", but I'm fine with 'Wand of Accuracy [Specific Spell]". Actually, I'm also fine with the first one but it will be hella expensive.

Could you normally spend 250 for a "+1 gun of accuracy" and then spend 25 for a "+1 bullet of accuracy" and then use GOA to fire BOA for a total of +2 to hit?

Different subjects, so yeah, they stack.

[Plane]

One question this does raise is how Very High Mana would affect using Missile Spells... M6:

A mage who spends FP to cast a spell on his turn gets those FP back at the start of his next turn.

If we don't consider FP spent to "enlarge" to be "FP to cast the spell" then would that mean you don't get FP back that you spend on enlarging?

This would also affect what Power (M57) could do in terms of powering fireball wands, if it could only create free-initial fireballs but not allow carryover to mitigate the higher total cost created by using the Enlarge option.

Powerstone (M69) too:

Any wizard touching a Powerstone may take any or all of the energy it contains, using it instead of his body’s own energy to cast a spell.

If "to cast a spell" is only that 1st turn's investment, then wouldn't that mean you couldn't use a Powerstone to pay for the energy cost to Enlarge on turns 2+3?

That would be allowed if we considered enlarging "still casting". Sort of like how you can completely build a house and live in it, but then decide to add additions to that house. The only difference might be that you always have to roll once per spell regardless of variable casting times, and missiles just always roll at the start instead of the end.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

No. Because that isn't how Missile Spells work. It would be 2 to 4

It's because you're ignoring how Missile Spells work and getting hung up on the imprecision used in "Casting Time" in the spell's description and the charts (again, for the millionth time, GURPS 4e needs more editing, and no DFRPG didn't fix this ;mistake' either).

I'm definitely getting hung up on stated Casting Times in description/chart+description/chart and the implications of that, yes.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Missile spells pg 12:
"To cast a Missile spell, you must concentrate for one second. At the end of your turn, roll against your skill with the spell. There is no modifier for distance – you are creating a magical missile in your hand. On a success, you may invest one or more points of energy in the spell, to a maximum of a number of energy points equal to your Magery level. The missile then appears in your hand, “charged” to the desired level.

So for this first part, you're thinking that "must concentrate for one second" means the "Casting Time" for ALL missile spells should be listed as 1 second, not 1-3 seconds?

I think that M12 is meant to be more of a basic guideline too, because "maximum .. your Magery" isn't for Explosive Fireball since that'd be "twice your Magery".

Originally Posted by evileeyore

On your next turn, you have three options with your missile: make a ranged attack with it, hold it, or enlarge it."

Do you see sentence two? That is the Casting Roll, at this point all your energy and casting time discounts happen.

The one-and-only roll definitely happens at that point, but the way Missile Spells seem to operate in respect to the casting process seems to work unusually anyway (roll-then-energy instead of energy-then-roll) so what's wrong with it being even more unusual and having the roll occur after a first stage of casting, and before an optional 2nd/3rd stage of casting which can pump even more energy into the spell to make it grander?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Any further 'seconds' invested in enlargement are not affected by anything that affects casting. Again, interesting houserules, but not RAW.

Stuff in the FAQ would probably fall somewhere between RAW/Houserules though?

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/faq/FAQ4-4.html#SS4.3.3

Yes. Now you can put up to [Magery * base cost of spell] energy each second in it, for one to three seconds; spell effect is multiplied by each multiple of the base cost. Note that the cost reduction for high skill only applies to the total cost of the spell. With skill 20, you can't cast a 6d fireball for free by concentrating for 3 seconds.

For example, say you have Fireball-15 (basic cost 1) and Magery 4. If you put four points of energy for three consecutive rounds, you would cast a 12d fireball at a cost of (12-1) = 11 energy points.

EE could you explain what "total cost of the spell" is referring to here?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Also note that last sentence, it doesn't mention 'continue casting'.

True, but it doesn't seem to say that Enlarging isn't explicitly considered a kind of Casting either.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

As you noted, the FAQ is imprecise. That's why I keep beating the drum of "reductions are applied when the skill is rolled", because it, a) it's actually RAW, and b) it makes these imprecisions make sense.

(And c) it's Word of Kromm)

Kromm affirmed with Kazander's "apply the cost reduction on the first turn" but if read in the context of umbros' entired thread we can see that before Kazander said that, umbros had asked "Subtract one from the first turn? the last?"

"Subtract one" being applied on the 1st turn means you will always use up your discount on that first turn, assuming you must create a minimum of 1 energy investment on that turn (as the charts say 1→Magery not 0→Magery)

So it was only dealing with that rather narrow situation, which doesn't create the dilemma of what to do when you have a discount of 2 and Magery 1 limits you to only using HALF of that in the 1st turn.

Unless... would that let you create a 3d burning Fireball in the 1st turn, because you invest 1 energy (max: your magery) and your skill allows you to invest 2 more energy from the surrounding mana?

Kazander's full reply actually added:

the caster should still get the full benefit of reduced casting cast no matter what he does with the spell

Kromm's reply omitted that part (so did not directly affirm) but he didn't appear to explicitly contradict it either...

If you build to 1d burning on turn 1, 2d burning on turn 2, 3d burning on turn 3, but still need to pay 2 energy then you're not getting the full benefit of your -2 to cost from skill 20, as an example.

I suppose if high skill allowed you to eclipse your Magery's normal limitations to damage (thus getting entire benefit by 1st turn) that would be okay though....

say you have a guy with Fireball 15, Magery 1
Option A) invest 0 of personal energy, due to -1 cost by surrounding mana: 1d burning
Option B) invest 1 of personal energy, due to -1 cost by surrounding mana: 2d burning

The question of whether or not (B) is possible I think depends on whether or not the magery cap refers to the total investiture in the spell, or just the aspect of your personal investment.

in 2008 "+5 being enough to get a -1 FP cost reduction and add a die" felt like possibly giving that impression but I'm not sure.

If it didn't refer to increasing the Magery-capped damage potential then all I can figure is he assumes that wizards were choosing to cast the spell at lower-than-max amounts to begin with.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

0/2/2. Enlargement isn't casting.

The way casting Missile Spells is described, the 1st turn's energy investment doesn't seem like "casting" either, more like a free action you get after casting the spell for 0 energy, since you roll for the skill before you choose the damage.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Technically correct. I don't allow it, but technically it is RAW (I'm in the "once you stop enlarging for any reason, you are done enlarging" camp).

Hm... how do you think this would work with mages who have Decreased Time Rate? Do they still get 2 enlarges but spaced over 4 more seconds instead of 2? They make less frequent Concentrate maneuvers after all...

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Plane

One question this does raise is how Very High Mana would affect using Missile Spells... M6:

A mage who spends FP to cast a spell on his turn gets those FP back at the start of his next turn.

If we don't consider FP spent to "enlarge" to be "FP to cast the spell" then would that mean you don't get FP back that you spend on enlarging?

Depends on how you want to run. This isn't D&D 3e where everything has a rule...

In this case... I'd count Enlargement to be 'casting'. But I don't use the standard Mana setup, so each GM needs to assess this for their game.

This would also affect what Power (M57) could do in terms of powering fireball wands, if it could only create free-initial fireballs but not allow carryover to mitigate the higher total cost created by using the Enlarge option.

This is another reason why I count Casting to be "when the skill is rolled", it cleanly deals with this as well.

Powerstone (M69) too:

Any wizard touching a Powerstone may take any or all of the energy it contains, using it instead of his body’s own energy to cast a spell.

Note: Powerstone and the Power Enchantment are not the same and do not work the same. Unless you want them to.

If "to cast a spell" is only that 1st turn's investment, then wouldn't that mean you couldn't use a Powerstone to pay for the energy cost to Enlarge on turns 2+3?

This is one of those times where I ignore how Powerstone is worded and allow it... but that's because I'm treating Powerstone's "to cast a spell" as being loosely worded and imply it to mean to all FP expenditures to power a spell. So a mage can use a Power Item to pay all* FP costs for spells.


* Yes, I even allow this to cover the spell's ending cost of Great Haste in the case of one mage Great Hasting another.

That would be allowed if we considered enlarging "still casting". Sort of like how you can completely build a house and live in it, but then decide to add additions to that house. The only difference might be that you always have to roll once per spell regardless of variable casting times, and missiles just always roll at the start instead of the end.

I'll note... nothing breaks if you change Missile Spells to rolling to cast at the end of Enlargement. It just means that you'll get slightly cheaper missile spells and occasionally the PC will 'waste' several turns building up a big missile only to fizzle it at the end by blowing the roll.

That's actually how I run my games... and in the next campaign they'll get the cost reduction for every turn of enlargement too...

But then in my next campaign I'm encouraging "big honking missile spells" over 'save or die' spells.

So for this first part, you're thinking that "must concentrate for one second" means the "Casting Time" for ALL missile spells should be listed as 1 second, not 1-3 seconds?

Exactly.


Though... I'm now thinking about this in terms of my house rules... I like the idea of decreasing the time on "big honking fireballs"... hmmm.

The one-and-only roll definitely happens at that point, but the way Missile Spells seem to operate in respect to the casting process seems to work unusually anyway (roll-then-energy instead of energy-then-roll) so what's wrong with it being even more unusual and having the roll occur after a first stage of casting, and before an optional 2nd/3rd stage of casting which can pump even more energy into the spell to make it grander?

Nothing. Like I said, I'm even going a step further to encourage big missiles.

Note however, that if you allow the final cost reduction later, you are definitely encouraging bigger missile spells when the PC has higher skills (30+, so this might not be as big an encouragement as I make it out to be).

Stuff in the FAQ would probably fall somewhere between RAW/Houserules though?

The FAQ is kinda RAW+. It's RAW, but not everyone has access to it...

EE could you explain what "total cost of the spell" is referring to here?

I've always taken 'total cost' to be 'when the dice are rolled'. However I can see an argument being made for 'when done paying for the spell'. Or even 'apply cost reduction along the way', thus allowing for your Fireball costing 0/1/2 at skill 25.

I disagree with this, as it weakens the "apply cost reduction at skill roll" and may affect other spells and situations we aren't even talking about...

True, but it doesn't seem to say that Enlarging isn't explicitly considered a kind of Casting either.

Yeah, the FAQ is less precise than I'd prefer in this case. And so was Kromm (or maybe Kromm was being specifically imprecise to allow GMs wiggle room?)

If you build to 1d burning on turn 1, 2d burning on turn 2, 3d burning on turn 3, but still need to pay 2 energy then you're not getting the full benefit of your -2 to cost from skill 20, as an example.

So? If you have Skill 25 in say Purify Air and you chose to only purify your hex you aren't "getting the full benefit" of your skill 25. That's a choice the PC makes when they decide to cast a spell and use less FP than 'max' for whatever reasons (when casting spells with variable costs).

I suppose if high skill allowed you to eclipse your Magery's normal limitations to damage (thus getting entire benefit by 1st turn) that would be okay though....

Hang on. You'ld need a skill of 35 to be 'forced' to 'not get the full benefit' on Missile spells. Cost 1-3 (2-6 for Explosive) is for everyone regardless of Magery, higher Magery than 3* simply allows you to exceed that maximum per turn of casting or enlarging.

* As per pg 12 Magic, spells with 'levels' of effect can be exceeded by having Magery levels above the 'maximum' level of the spell. 3 levels for Missile spells, 3 for Minor Healing, 4 for Major Healing, etc. Having Magery below the spell's 'maximum' level is not penalized.

in 2008 "+5 being enough to get a -1 FP cost reduction and add a die" felt like possibly giving that impression but I'm not sure.

That's an entirely different discussion and one I don't have time to wade into right now (as I'm getting ready for work)... but I'll tackle that one when I get home. It's about Enchantment and how Enchanted Items and Wizard's skill should overlap (I think)...

The way casting Missile Spells is described, the 1st turn's energy investment doesn't seem like "casting" either, more like a free action you get after casting the spell for 0 energy, since you roll for the skill before you choose the damage.

That's... off.

Missiles Spells:

Turn 1: Decide on initial size, roll dice, spend casting cost* FP.
Turn 2: Enlarge†, hold, or throw.
Turn 3: Enlarge†, hold, or throw.
Turn 4: Hold or throw.


* 1-3 or 2-6 depending on the Missile spell. This may be exceeded with Magery of 4 or higher.

† Enlargement is not casting, no cost reductions. Enlargement amounts may not exceed your Magery level.‡

‡ Technically... Explosive Missile spells cannot be enlarged if your Magery is only 1... however... I've never seen this enforced. In fact most GMs I've rolled with (and myself) ignore this limitation of enlargement and treat is as "may enlarge up to the amount you could spend on the casting" (some only allow up to Magery in levels), or in my house "may spend up to as much as you spent on the casting".

Hm... how do you think this would work with mages who have Decreased Time Rate? Do they still get 2 enlarges but spaced over 4 more seconds instead of 2? They make less frequent Concentrate maneuvers after all...

They make the same number. They simply only get to take maneuvers every other turn. Depending on how you're running Decreased Time Rate... they even only age 1 second for everyone else's 2. But that's a whole separate kettle of fish.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

That's an entirely different discussion and one I don't have time to wade into right now (as I'm getting ready for work)... but I'll tackle that one when I get home. It's about Enchantment and how Enchanted Items and Wizard's skill should overlap (I think)...

Okay... decided to skip work* and dig in and... it's not even talking about that.

This is Kromm commenting specifically on how "caster only items" should work in a genre that is emulating a Diabloesque setting, one where "Class Only" items reduce the cost to use your regular abilities. In this case Kromm is saying in effect "give them a +5 to skill which is effectively a -1 to cost".


* Hahaha suckers! /laughs in lower paycheck in two weeks. Sigh.

Though... I'm now thinking about this in terms of my house rules... I like the idea of decreasing the time on "big honking fireballs"... hmmm.

Hmmm. This would get too weird I think. I might do something like "Take a -5 to skill to double enlargement turns" or something and then have them roll for each enlargement. On a failure they get no enlargement, on a critical failure they get !!FUN!! results and on a critical success...

Nope. I've got it. Roll each enlargement turn, on a success enlarge as per normal (and get cost reductions), on a critical success double the enlargement for no extra cost, on a failure get no enlargement, and on a critical failure have !!FUN!!.

[Plane]

One other reason I just thought of why it might make sense to have a skill roll for enlarging .. powering spells with HP! That normally creates a skill penalty, but unless that can go back and retroactively make you fail your previous roll, enlarging using HP seems like it would avoid that problem!

Of course, if you had the time... powering Lend Energy w/ HP to restore your own FP (or Energy Reserve) allow you to avoid that penalty on future spells too, so long as it doesn't cause your Lend Energy roll to fail.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Depends on how you want to run. This isn't D&D 3e where everything has a rule...

In this case... I'd count Enlargement to be 'casting'. But I don't use the standard Mana setup, so each GM needs to assess this for their game.

This is another reason why I count Casting to be "when the skill is rolled", it cleanly deals with this as well.

Well, casting is also variable time period BEFORE the skill is rolled, but you mean terminating at that point?

Are any problems created through acknowledging post-roll casting times though?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

This is one of those times where I ignore how Powerstone is worded and allow it... but that's because I'm treating Powerstone's "to cast a spell" as being loosely worded and imply it to mean to all FP expenditures to power a spell. So a mage can use a Power Item to pay all* FP costs for spells.

Yeah, especially as I am sure I have seen inference in the forums that Powerstones can pay Maintenance costs for spells in addition to casting costs.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

nothing breaks if you change Missile Spells to rolling to cast at the end of Enlargement. It just means that you'll get slightly cheaper missile spells and occasionally the PC will 'waste' several turns building up a big missile only to fizzle it at the end by blowing the roll.

It seems like the roll is what determines whether or not a fireball appears at all (providing light for example, or showing you are building an attack) so a first-turn roll seems important for that part.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Though... I'm now thinking about this in terms of my house rules... I like the idea of decreasing the time on "big honking fireballs"... hmmm.

The idea doesn't seem that frightening, at best due to up-rounding with half time we're talking 2-second fireballs in 1-second and 3-second fireballs in 2 seconds.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

If you have Skill 25 in say Purify Air and you chose to only purify your hex you aren't "getting the full benefit" of your skill 25. That's a choice the PC makes when they decide to cast a spell and use less FP than 'max' for whatever reasons (when casting spells with variable costs).

Well yeah, but they COULD get the full benefit by purifying a larger area. There's no upper limit on affect (based on Magery) like other spells.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Hang on. You'ld need a skill of 35 to be 'forced' to 'not get the full benefit' on Missile spells. Cost 1-3 (2-6 for Explosive) is for everyone regardless of Magery, higher Magery than 3* simply allows you to exceed that maximum per turn of casting or enlarging.

Not getting the -2 cost from skill 20 is in reference to the approach of only being able to apply the discount to the fireball created in the first turn, if overflow discounts from that turn couldn't be applied to the enlarges.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

* As per pg 12 Magic, spells with 'levels' of effect can be exceeded by having Magery levels above the 'maximum' level of the spell. 3 levels for Missile spells, 3 for Minor Healing, 4 for Major Healing, etc. Having Magery below the spell's 'maximum' level is not penalized.

Er, I'm pretty sure the Magery-cap on missile spells is the per-turn cap. So with Mag 1 you may build a 1d/2d/3d and with Mag 2 you build a 2d/4d/6d so so on.

That's an entirely different discussion and one I don't have time to wade into right now (as I'm getting ready for work)... but I'll tackle that one when I get home. It's about Enchantment and how Enchanted Items and Wizard's skill should overlap (I think)...

Originally Posted by evileeyore

That's... off.

Missiles Spells:

Turn 1: Decide on initial size, roll dice, spend casting cost* FP.
Turn 2: Enlarge†, hold, or throw.
Turn 3: Enlarge†, hold, or throw.
Turn 4: Hold or throw.

Found something which may be pertinent...

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/faq/FAQ4-4.html#SS4.1.6

the only thing you have to declare when you first start to concentrate is what spell you're concentrating on
..
In general, the following things can be left up until the instant the dice are rolled:

Area affected (Area spells)
Content (spells like illusions, Voice or Delayed Message)
Energy source (i.e., ST, HT or Powerstones)
Level of effect (spells like Shield or Teleport Shield)
Destination (Gate magic and Teleport spells)
Dice of damage (spells like Deathtouch or Flame Jet, but not Missile spells, which have their own special rules)
Hit location (spells like Paralyze Limb and Wither Limb)
Subject (most spells)

The question is why this parenthesis exists. Is it:
a) because the dice of damage a missile spell finally does can be built in subsequent turns
b) because you must decide the initial (turn 1) dice you intend before rolling?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

* 1-3 or 2-6 depending on the Missile spell. This may be exceeded with Magery of 4 or higher.

Er, getting more than Magery 1 doesn't give you more turns of enlargement, it raises the energy-per-second limits AFAIK.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

† Enlargement is not casting, no cost reductions. Enlargement amounts may not exceed your Magery level.‡

Are you proposing this as a house rule in a world where all mages can only pump in 1 per second?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

‡ Technically... Explosive Missile spells cannot be enlarged if your Magery is only 1... however... I've never seen this enforced.

I thought Explosive Fireball locally specified you can pump in Magery*2 on subsequent turns?

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Plane

One other reason I just thought of why it might make sense to have a skill roll for enlarging .. powering spells with HP! That normally creates a skill penalty, but unless that can go back and retroactively make you fail your previous roll, enlarging using HP seems like it would avoid that problem!

By RAW that's an advantage of Missile Spells, they can be enlarged using HP without skill penalties.

Well, casting is also variable time period BEFORE the skill is rolled, but you mean terminating at that point?

Yes.

Are any problems created through acknowledging post-roll casting times though?

Unknown.

It seems like the roll is what determines whether or not a fireball appears at all (providing light for example, or showing you are building an attack) so a first-turn roll seems important for that part.

Depends on how you run the magic casting. I've done long castings as having having the magical effects begin appearing as the spell 'comes together' and only finalizing or 'becoming solid' when the roll is successful.

The idea doesn't seem that frightening, at best due to up-rounding with half time we're talking 2-second fireballs in 1-second and 3-second fireballs in 2 seconds.

Depends on the group and what they want out of their fantasy magic. Long missile casting times or 1 round 18d fireballs?

Well yeah, but they COULD get the full benefit by purifying a larger area.

Just like the mage casting the Missile Spell could get the full benefit buy 'spending' their full amount in the first turn. That's why I said "You'ld need a skill of 35 30 to be 'forced' to 'not get the full benefit' on Missile spells."

With skill 30 they get -4 to costs and can only put 1 to 3 into a Fireball, so only at skill 30+ are they 'forced' to waste cost reduction. And yes, anyone with Magery 1 can put 1-3 into a Fireball, because that is the 'base' casting cost. With 'leveled' spells (Fireball, Minor Healing, etc) you can always cast the levels given, to exceed the 'base' levels you have to have Magery in excess of those levels. So missile spells all have 3 levels, to exceed those 3 levels you need Magery 4 (or better). Major Healing has 4 levels, to cast it at 1, 2, 3 or 4 FP you need Magery 1 (because prereq) or better, to cast it at 5 FP you need Magery 5 or better.

Now... in order to Enlarge, you can only invest as many FP per turn as you have Magery, but again, I've rarely seen this enforced.

Er, I'm pretty sure the Magery-cap on missile spells is the per-turn cap. So with Mag 1 you may build a 1d/2d/3d and with Mag 2 you build a 2d/4d/6d so so on.

No, this is false.

The question is why this parenthesis exists. Is it:
a) because the dice of damage a missile spell finally does can be built in subsequent turns
b) because you must decide the initial (turn 1) dice you intend before rolling?

A) is correct.

Er, getting more than Magery 1 doesn't give you more turns of enlargement, it raises the energy-per-second limits AFAIK.

That's what I said.

Are you proposing this as a house rule in a world where all mages can only pump in 1 per second?

No, that's how enlargement works. I basically quoted the relevant rule from Magic pg 12...

"At the end of your turn, you may invest more energy in the spell – anything from one point to points equal to your Magery level."

Emphasis mine. This means if you have Magery 1, you can only add 1 FP per turn during the enlargement turns.

I thought Explosive Fireball locally specified you can pump in Magery*2 on subsequent turns?

Dang it. My bad. Hidden in the 'casting cost' again. I really hate that this was done with Missile spells. Yes, a Magery 1 mage can enlarge Explosive Missiles by 1d per round (2FP).

[Plane]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

With skill 30 they get -4 to costs and can only put 1 to 3 into a Fireball, so only at skill 30+ are they 'forced' to waste cost reduction.

You mean if entertaining my idea of applying the leftover discount (minus what you subtracted on turn 1) to turns 2 and 3?

I see your point then: either way we would have to accept a situation of lost discount with missiles...

Unless of course the discount actually upped the maximum damage you could do (ie 4d instead of 3d at skill 15) which I'm still wondering about with "+5 being enough to get a -1 FP cost reduction and add a die"

Originally Posted by evileeyore

And yes, anyone with Magery 1 can put 1-3 into a Fireball, because that is the 'base' casting cost. With 'leveled' spells (Fireball, Minor Healing, etc) you can always cast the levels given, to exceed the 'base' levels you have to have Magery in excess of those levels. So missile spells all have 3 levels, to exceed those 3 levels you need Magery 4 (or better).

M75 says the "Cost" for "Fireball" is:

Any amount up to your Magery level per second, for three seconds.

That sounds to me like the first improvement on maximum damage occurs at Magery 1→2 not Magery 3→4.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Now... in order to Enlarge, you can only invest as many FP per turn as you have Magery, but again, I've rarely seen this enforced.

What else would you enforce?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

No, this is false.

That's what I said.

I'm confused with how you disagree with 1st part and disagree with 2nd part, wasn't I saying the same thing twice? Maybe I phrased something wrong?

Originally Posted by evileeyore

No, that's how enlargement works. I basically quoted the relevant rule from Magic pg 12...

"At the end of your turn, you may invest more energy in the spell – anything from one point to points equal to your Magery level."

Emphasis mine. This means if you have Magery 1, you can only add 1 FP per turn during the enlargement turns.

Right (for fireball anyway, explosive excepted) but if you had Magery 2 you can add 2 FP per turn, so that wouldn't only be 1 per second for "all mages" unless "mages" only means those with Magery 0/1 and Magery 2+ is like "sages" or something.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Dang it. My bad. Hidden in the 'casting cost' again. I really hate that this was done with Missile spells. Yes, a Magery 1 mage can enlarge Explosive Missiles by 1d per round (2FP).

M75 does seem to consider all the energy spent over 3 seconds to be the "cost" of the spell though... so if someone with Magery 0 or Magery 1 can spent up to a base cost of 6 energy over those 3 seconds, it seems like there are 2 perspectives to take:

1) only up to skill 20 matters, the reduction of -2 being applied to that first second, no reductions applied to the 2nd/3rd seconds (enlargement)
2) up to skill 40 matters, the reduction of -6 also reducing the collective cost of the enlargements

In the case of skill 25 (-3 cost) I think Kromm's comment means 1st second would cost 0 (using up 2/3 of the discount) and then you would probably apply the remainder to the 2nd turn, reducing it from 2 to 1, and then have no discount left over on the 3rd?

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Plane

You mean if entertaining my idea of applying the leftover discount (minus what you subtracted on turn 1) to turns 2 and 3?

No, I'm answering your earlier claim that a mage would be 'wasting' their cost reduction if they had a skill of 20 in Fireball.

I think there is a miscommunication going on, it keeps seeming to me that you don't understand how cost reduction, Magery limits, 'leveled' cost spells, and enlargement work in one sentence, only to turn around and speak perfectly clearly on those same rules in the next sentence.

So how about some examples? By RAW:

[EDIT]
These examples are terrible wrong, ignore this post...
[/EDIT]

Wizard with Magery 1 and Fireball at skills 15, 25, and 35.

Fireball 15. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 3 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 1). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 2 FP, but is cast at 3d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 1 FP per turn to a maximum of 5d damage, maximum cost of 4 FP. Minimum cost 0FP for a 1d Fireball.

Fireball 25. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 3 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 3). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 0 FP, but is cast at 3d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 1 FP per turn to a maximum of 5d damage, maximum cost of 2 FP. Minimum cost 0FP for a 3d Fireball.

Fireball 35. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 3 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 5). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 0 FP, but is cast at 3d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 1 FP per turn to a maximum of 5d damage, maximum cost of 2 FP. Minimum cost 0FP for a 3d Fireball.


Wizard with Magery 3 and Fireball at skills 15, 25, and 35.

Fireball 15. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 3 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 1). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 2 FP, but is cast at 3d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 3 FP per turn to a maximum of 9d damage, maximum cost of 8 FP.

Fireball 25. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 3 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 3). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 0 FP, but is cast at 3d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 3 FP per turn to a maximum of 9d damage, maximum cost of 6 FP.

Fireball 35. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 3 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 5). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 0 FP, but is cast at 3d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 3 FP per turn to a maximum of 9d damage, maximum cost of 6 FP.


Wizard with Magery 6 and Fireball at skills 15, 25, and 35.

Fireball 15. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 6 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 1). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 5 FP, but is cast at 6d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 6 FP per turn to a maximum of 18d damage, maximum cost of 17 FP. Minimum cost 0FP for a 1d Fireball.

Fireball 25. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 6 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 3). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 3 FP, but is cast at 6d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 6 FP per turn to a maximum of 18d damage, maximum cost of 15 FP.

Fireball 35. On turn one of casting he can 'invest' up to 6 FP into the spell (and get a cost reduction of 5). So, when he successfully casts it, Fireball costs him 1 FP, but is cast at 6d damage. He can then continue to enlarge it for two more turns at a maximum of 6 FP per turn to a maximum of 18d damage, maximum cost of 13 FP. Minimum cost 0FP for a 5d Fireball.

I see your point then: either way we would have to accept a situation of lost discount with missiles...

By RAW you only going to get a 'lost discount' is if your spell skill so far outstrips your Magery that one has to ask, why?

M75 says the "Cost" for "Fireball" is:

Any amount up to your Magery level per second, for three seconds.

That sounds to me like the first improvement on maximum damage occurs at Magery 1→2 not Magery 3→4.

Repeat after me: GURPS Magic 4e needs proper editing.

In previous editions missile spells literally cost 1 FP per turn that you built them and you rolled the skill at the end. So a Fireball at most was 3d and cost 3 FP (minus reductions).

This was changed... but so was Magery affecting how much FP could be spent into "leveled" spells.

So pg 9 says: "Talented mages may exceed the usual limits for spells that allow a finite number of “levels of effect” (dice of damage, bonuses to skill, etc.). The upper limit is the higher of the standard number of levels or the caster’s Magery level."

While pg 12 says: "On a success, you may invest one or more points of energy in the spell, to a maximum of a number of energy points equal to your Magery level."

Most of us resolve this conflict as pg 9 taking precedence and pg 12 just being a poorly worded reinforcement of it, kinda like so: You can spend the leveled spells normal casting cost or up to your Magery, whichever is higher; and note, missile spells are all leveled spells.

What else would you enforce?

Usually I see GMs allowing enlargement up to casting cost or Magery per turn whichever is higher.

M75 does seem to consider all the energy spent over 3 seconds to be the "cost" of the spell though... so if someone with Magery 0 or Magery 1 can spent up to a base cost of 6 energy over those 3 seconds, it seems like there are 2 perspectives to take:

5 energy, not counting reductions. 3 during the casting round, then 2 turns of enlargement.

1) only up to skill 20 matters, the reduction of -2 being applied to that first second, no reductions applied to the 2nd/3rd seconds (enlargement)
2) up to skill 40 matters, the reduction of -6 also reducing the collective cost of the enlargements

In the case of skill 25 (-3 cost) I think Kromm's comment means 1st second would cost 0 (using up 2/3 of the discount) and then you would probably apply the remainder to the 2nd turn, reducing it from 2 to 1, and then have no discount left over on the 3rd?

I hope my examples above answered this?