Magic Issues

[Grimolde]

Page 107
Distractions or signifi cant injuries infl icted on a spellcaster as he casts (such as a Serious Wound) require unopposed Persistence tests to maintain concentration on the spell

This is interesting. So a caster of magic could sustain (non serious wound) damage and not have to make any checks to continue casting?

 

[Dan True]

Page 107
Distractions or signifi cant injuries infl icted on a spellcaster as he casts (such as a Serious Wound) require unopposed Persistence tests to maintain concentration on the spell

This is interesting. So a caster of magic could sustain (non serious wound) damage and not have to make any checks to continue casting?

It's an example, not a limit for when he needs to take. I would call for tests as soon as he took over 1 HP of damage, perhaps even when only taking 1 HP.
Magic users have plenty of ways to horrible stuff to other people, so it's only fair they can be distracted while doing it.

- Dan

 

[Loz]

Also take into account any combat manoeuvres a successful attack might inflict, irrespective of the damage caused. Stun Location, for example, should certainly disrupt a spell caster's preparations; if the Stun Location is the head, I'd rule that the spell caster's Persistence roll should be opposed by the attack roll.

 

[Grimolde]

Good points.

I'm finding MRQ2 a very awesome game, but I am having a little difficulty trying to understand its rules philosophy. On one hand you have a detailed rule set, on the other it seems to be left to GM discretion.

I actually like this, it gives you the rules you need, and also the flexibility to do pretty much as you please. The difficulty is that this isn't mentioned up front.

 

[Dan True]

if the Stun Location is the head, I'd rule that the spell caster's Persistence roll should be opposed by the attack roll.

If the stun location is the head, then the target feints - doesn't it?

 

[PhilHibbs]

Stun Location, for example, should certainly disrupt a spell caster's preparations; if the Stun Location is the head, I'd rule that the spell caster's Persistence roll should be opposed by the attack roll.

You'd allow a caster with a stunned head a roll to continue? That's damn generous, considering he's unconscious! Or, do you mean if he makes the Resilience roll then he still has to make a Persistence as well? I'd rule that any damage requires Persistence anyway, so I don't think the failed stun is relevant.

 

[Loz]

I'm glad you're getting to grips with things Grimolde.

I actually like this, it gives you the rules you need, and also the flexibility to do pretty much as you please. The difficulty is that this isn't mentioned up front.

But I suggest you re-read the introduction chapter; we tried to make this philosophy loud and clear in the first few pages of the book!

 

[Grimolde]

I'm glad you're getting to grips with things Grimolde.

I actually like this, it gives you the rules you need, and also the flexibility to do pretty much as you please. The difficulty is that this isn't mentioned up front.

But I suggest you re-read the introduction chapter; we tried to make this philosophy loud and clear in the first few pages of the book!

Doh! Yeah that's me for you. I usually skip the intros and the 'what is a rpg' spiel.

What's important is that I know it now, that we're that close to using it to run Harn, and as far as I'm concerned, it is one of best systems I'ev ever played.

It ticks all of my boxes for sure

 

[DamonJynx]

I'm glad you're getting to grips with things Grimolde.

I actually like this, it gives you the rules you need, and also the flexibility to do pretty much as you please. The difficulty is that this isn't mentioned up front.

But I suggest you re-read the introduction chapter; we tried to make this philosophy loud and clear in the first few pages of the book!

Doh! Yeah that's me for you. I usually skip the intros and the 'what is a rpg' spiel.

What's important is that I know it now, that we're that close to using it to run Harn, and as far as I'm concerned, it is one of best systems I'ev ever played.

It ticks all of my boxes for sure

Glad you feel that way. I understand your...questions? our group was the same coming as we did from a D&D background. We've played 7 or 8 sessions now and while there are things that make our head spin, because there isn't an exact "refer page ##, Section #, sub-section ## of the core rulebook and page #, of XXXX book" for a lot of stuff that happens in the game, it's a bloody great system. We just talk through stuff and if we seem to be going nowhere I make a ruling and move on, then seek clarification later. And, as you've no doubt noticed, there are a lot of very knowledgeable people on the forums who can offer sage advice, including the authors.

Remember - Your Runequest will vary!

Regarding the magic:
Failed attack, sorcerer rolls an unopposed persistence test.
Successful attack; resolve attack and subsequent (CM and damage) rolls as normal, the persistence roll (if required, probably not if you're unconscious or stunned) is opposed and perhaps made more difficult dependent on circumstance.

 

[PhilHibbs]

Regarding the magic:
Failed attack, sorcerer rolls an unopposed persistence test.

I wouldn't ask for a persistence test against a failed attack. A simple test for a small wound with no CM, an opposed test if a Serious Wound or a distracting CM is inflicted (i.e. not if the opponent picks Change Range or Regain Footing) sounds reasonable to me.

 

[DamonJynx]

Regarding the magic:
Failed attack, sorcerer rolls an unopposed persistence test.

I wouldn't ask for a persistence test against a failed attack. A simple test for a small wound with no CM, an opposed test if a Serious Wound or a distracting CM is inflicted (i.e. not if the opponent picks Change Range or Regain Footing) sounds reasonable to me.

Not sure about how casting magic works in the core rules, but in the Elric game, if you're casting a Rune, that's all you can do for that (those) CA(s). Therefore if someone attacks you, in my opinion you should make a check - I would find someone trying to beat my brains in, separate my head from my neck, or attempting to use me for a pin cushion fairly distracting regardless of whether or not they succeeded, hence my post. But, I understand where you're coming from and what you say is valid - just another example of how peoples games vary, which is a good thing.

 

[PhilHibbs]

Not sure about how casting magic works in the core rules, but in the Elric game, if you're casting a Rune, that's all you can do for that (those) CA(s). Therefore if someone attacks you, in my opinion you should make a check...

It's a matter of style - if your setting's magic has a very theatrical and dramatic form of magic, then you're right. If magic is more mundane and integral to the nature of reality, then maybe casting a spell is as natural as riding a bike. Then again, if I was riding a bike and someone swung a sword at me, maybe I should have to make a Ride roll to not fall off, even if they missed...

 

[simonh]

It's a matter of style - if your setting's magic has a very theatrical and dramatic form of magic, then you're right. If magic is more mundane and integral to the nature of reality, then maybe casting a spell is as natural as riding a bike. Then again, if I was riding a bike and someone swung a sword at me, maybe I should have to make a Ride roll to not fall off, even if they missed...

Maybe if you normally have to make a skill check to cast a type of magic then it's complex enough to require concentration and you might suffer a skill penalty when in combat. However if the magical effect is usually automatic and doesn't require a roll, then it doesn't require much concentration and can be cast even under stress.

I've not really thought that out in terms of the actual rules though. Just throwing it out there.

Simon Hibbs

 

[DamonJynx]

However if the magical effect is usually automatic and doesn't require a roll, then it doesn't require much concentration and can be cast even under stress.

I've not really thought that out in terms of the actual rules though. Just throwing it out there.

Simon Hibbs

I agree with what you're saying Simon.

In D&D V3.x there were "can-trips" which were 0 level spells, the 4E version of the game had "at-will" spells - basically spells that the caster was so familiar with they took little resources to cast them. If such a thing existed in RQ I would suggest that the only time you would need to make a concentration check was if you took a significant amount of damage, and by that I mean a minimum of half a locations hit points.