Resisting Magic

[Itto]

I quite like the opposed skill roles and have wondered about how spells are cast and resisted.

It seems odd that casting and resisting a spell is handles in a different way to other opposed tests. Were by one side roles against a spell skill and then the target then roles to resist but it is handled is such a different way. There are also issues with the RAW method, If you have 100% in Persistence, then you will nearly always resist certain types of spell. To overcome that issue the Overcasting rule is there, but it does not flow as nicely as I’d like. Also its something different that players have to be told and remember. Though I do like the idea of being able to ramp up spells. But as a GM I feel like I’m picking on a player if an NPC starts overcasting, guess I’m just too nice.

I’ve started to make it a straight opposed role for casting and defending against spells.

EG
Witchy Woo casts Demoralize (Runecasting Disorder 65%) on Imperious Iain (Persistence 65%).

In the current rules .
Witch Woo rolls 56 (success)
Imperious Iain rolls 34 (success)

So Imperious Iain resists the spell.

Opposed spell resistance.
Witchy Woo rolls 56 (success)
Imperious Iain rolls 34 (success)

Witchy Woos’ success is better than Imperious Iain and so the spell is a success. You can see were this would be useful in higher level games

Also its useful for damage inflicting spells were the resistance type is dodge. So if Witchy Woo was casting Sky Bolt on Iain it would be handled thus.

Witchy Woo rolls 56 (success)
Imperious Iain rolls 34 (success)

Iain dodges for half damage.

Witchy Woo rolls 56 (success)
Imperious Iain rolls 60 (success)

Iain fully dodges and takes no damage.

Witchy Woo rolls 56 (success)
Imperious Iain rolls 69 (Fail)

Iain fails to dodge and suffers a lot.

 

[Rurik]

I've used pretty much the same system you describe and like it.

Halving damage on a dodge never occurred to me though ( :shock: ). Makes good sense.

The only problem I have is overcharging. It is a big advantage to the defender to know the roll he is opposing when it comes to committing MP to boost his relevant save (err... skill I mean). Especially since magic duels among competent spellcasters often come down to he/she/it who uses up his/her/its available MP first loses.

Boy does the Dedicated POW rule stink.

 

[gamesmeister]

Boy does the Dedicated POW rule stink.

Yup, hence the reason why I don't use it as RAW.

As it stands, it is without a doubt the most unbalanced of all the changes made by Mongoose. However, as an additional option to run alongside traditional POW sacrifice, it works well, particularly for inititiates who don't want to lose POW for the single use of a Divine spell.

However, keeping POW sacrifice also means you need to reinstate POW gain rolls. This can be done either by using the original check box experience system, or else by allowing a POW gain roll for the cost of one Improvement roll rather than the standard three for a characteristic roll.

 

[Rurik]

Boy does the Dedicated POW rule stink.

Yup, hence the reason why I don't use it as RAW.

As it stands, it is without a doubt the most unbalanced of all the changes made by Mongoose. However, as an additional option to run alongside traditional POW sacrifice, it works well, particularly for inititiates who don't want to lose POW for the single use of a Divine spell.

However, keeping POW sacrifice also means you need to reinstate POW gain rolls. This can be done either by using the original check box experience system, or else by allowing a POW gain roll for the cost of one Improvement roll rather than the standard three for a characteristic roll.

I actually use a completely different system and base the amount of Divine Magic you can store on your Theology(diety) skill.

Initiates can store 1 point of divine magic per 10 points of theology, acolytes/priests/runelords get 1 point of divine magic per 5 points of theology.

 

[Itto]

Counter and Dispel Magic

Further to using and opposed roll for resisting magic, I think that counter magic and Dispel Magic are pretty clunky too. The Runespell versions work the same as in RQII/III but I never liked them either, far too mechanical. Everyone tried for Counter Magic 4 or Shield 4, and as such where pretty much immune to spells, unless the attacking spells where backed up. At which point Countermagic became more of a speed bump for spells being cast at you, as they had to spend strike ranks beefing up the spell.

But I do like in MRQ that you can cast them as a Reaction.

So how about allowing someone with Countermagic (or its Divine or Sorcery equivalent) to use the spell casting chance (for the counter magic spell) versus the attacking spell roll.

Eg.
Wichy Woo casts Demoralize (Runecasting Disorder 65%) at Imperious Iain. Shaman Sam (Runcasting Magic 80), a companion of Iain decides to try and counter it. In the RAW if he has Countermagic 2 then all he needs to do is get a successful roll to cast the spell. But if you have an opposed roll then you would have:

Wichy Woo rolls 54
Shaman Sam rolls 30.

Shaman Sams’ roll was lower than Wichy Woo so the spell gets through to Imperious Iain who would have to try and resist it.

But if
Wichy Woo rolls 54
Shaman Sam rolls 75.

Shaman Sam gets the better success and so counters the spell.

What about different magnitude of spells etc? If Shaman Sam casts Countermagic 4, 2 points higher than Demoralize then for each point higher 5% is added to the success roll up to his total skill chance eg 10%. In the above example it would cap out at 80%
For a countermagic spells that are less powerful than the spells they are trying to counter than 10% per magnitude point is taken of the countermagic spell skill roll.

Anyway just some thoughts, it just seems a bit more “magical”.

 

[Rurik]

How would you determine if a countermagic stays up or is taken down by the incoming spell? Do you roll for the countermagic seperately every time a spell is cast at it or keep it's original skill roll for the duration of the spell? Still just based on relative spell strength or do we factor in the roll? Say if it wins against the incomming spell by 10% or 20% it remains up otherwise it goes down for example.

I would also consider giving at least 10% per point of difference and not capping it at the casters skill. A countermagic 4 should be very effective against a casting power 2 spell. With 10% per point of difference the active caster would only need a 20% skill advantage to even the odds. I would even consider 20% per point.

 

[Itto]

How would you determine if a countermagic stays up or is taken down by the incoming spell? Do you roll for the countermagic seperately every time a spell is cast at it or keep it's original skill roll for the duration of the spell? Still just based on relative spell strength or do we factor in the roll? Say if it wins against the incomming spell by 10% or 20% it remains up otherwise it goes down for example.

To balance things up I'd say that if the Countermagic won then it stays up and not go into fidly how much by etc. Also just the one roll at the first casting. As it would not make alot of sense if a third person casts Countermagic on someone else for them to have to roll to defend against the person they cast it on (as the caster might of died by then etc).

I would also consider giving at least 10% per point of difference and not capping it at the casters skill. A countermagic 4 should be very effective against a casting power 2 spell. With 10% per point of difference the active caster would only need a 20% skill advantage to even the odds. I would even consider 20% per point.

I think that I'd agree with you with the 10% per point above. But I would still cap it at the casters skill level, I'm really into the onus being on the skill of character rather than the magnitude of the spell the cast. As in RQ you can be a novice casting a spell, but it can be a high level (magnitude). Especially when you bring to bare Enhancer Crystals and the like.