Spells of Legend

[Prime_Evil]

And here's a new Common Magic spell that's very useful for craftsmen and burglars...

Disassemble
Touch, Magnitude 1, Progressive, Resist (Special)
This spell disassembles any single contiguous object manufactured from discrete components, even if those components are attached to each other by means of glue, screws, nails, rivets, knots, or other fasteners. The maximum SIZ of the object affected is equal to the spell's Magnitude.
This spell always affects an entire object - it is not possible to disassemble part of an object or to separate it into multiple subassemblies. If the target object is a complex mechanical device, the caster may need to make a Mechanisms roll to dismantle it correctly (GMs discretion). On a failed roll, fragile components may be damaged during disassembly.
Inanimate objects resist disassembly with an opposed roll using their Armour Points x 10. Thus, a wooden chair with AP 2 resists with an effective skill 20% while a padlock with AP 6 resists with an effective skill of 60%. If different sections of the object are assigned different Armour Points, use the AP of the strongest part to calculate its resistance to disassembly.
If the target object fails to resist the spell, the dismantled components fall to the ground. To an observer, it looks as though the target object simply falls apart when the caster touches it. This spell does not stack or sort the individual parts of the target object in any way.
If the target object is held, carried, worn, or in direct physical contact with a sentient creature, the creature can resist the spell using Persistence rather than the inherent strength of the target object (assuming this is better).
If this spell is cast on an object animated by magic such as a golem or similar construct, the target entity is entitled to a Resilience roll to resist the effect. If the animated object fails this roll, it suffers one point of damage to all Hit Locations for each point of Magnitude invested in the spell. This damage ignores any AP that the construct possesses.

 

[alex_greene]

Remember, folks - this should work on locked doors, traps, elaborate walking automata hell-bent on killing your party of Adventurers, strange puzzle boxes, ladies' bodices ...

Just don't throw it about blithely if one of your party is a friendly golem ...

 

[Prime_Evil]

That's the general idea. IMHO, Common Magic spells should rarely inflict damage but may provide alternative methods to bypass challenges if players use them cleverly. Note that objects do get a chance to avoid disassembly and tough devices (or devices held by tough opponents!) can be difficult to dismantle unless you have a high Common Magic skill. This spell is useful against mundane devices, but may have problems taking apart Doctor Dastardly's Patented Deathtrap of DOOM in its shiny metal casing (AP 9)....

 

[Carew]

The Disassembly spell looks awful powerful for common magic to me. You can use it to disarm or disarmour an opponent really really easily. I know that its got the SIZ and magnitude limiter on it, but are you gonna rule that SIZ is per piece of armour or a whole suite? What about a crossbow or a sword with a composite hilt- waht SIZ is that going to be treated as? Does touch mean touching with the hands or can you cast the spell and channel it through a sword say, so that you gain a massive advantage when in combat?

I mean its a good spell, but powerful for common magic I think. Its better than some divine spells.

 

[Prime_Evil]

I did consider some of these points when working on the spell. Note that the caster needs to touch the object that he or she is attempting to dissemble. This tends to limit uses to disarm an opponent. Remember that it takes a combat action to cast the spell and you are standing right next to a hostile guy holding a sharp object when you start chanting. Originally I gave the spell had the ranged descriptor, but that was way too powerful.

Also note that most weapons have a decent AP and attempts to disassemble them will often fail - many weapons resist at 60% so if the caster doesn't have a high Common Magic skill the spell will likely fail. Also note that if the item is worn or held by an opponent, they can substitute their Persistence for the innate toughness of the object.

Armour might look a bit more complicated, but it's not that bad. For starters, I explicitly stated that the spell affects the entire object and you can't target individual parts of an item. This means that if your opponent is wearing a suit of plate armour, you would need to target the entire thing - you can't just make the pauldrons fall off. I also explicitly state that the spell affects a single contiguous object. The keyword here is contiguous - if armour consists of multiple parts connected to each other to create a single garment, it is treated as a contiguous object. If, on the other hand, the armour consists of discrete pieces that could be worn separately then it might be possible to target them separately. For example, if an opponent is wearing a chainmail hauberk and a steel helmet, it might be possible to target either of them individually.

If you would prefer to use Disassemble as a Divine Spell, that's fine too. It might work well as something that Dwarven priests know. I'd probably restrict it to a cult rank of Priest or higher though to preserve the flavour.

I hope that helps!

 

[Carew]

Thanks Prime!

I've been reading Runequest 6 that I got in the sale last week and looking at its common magic which is much more low powered than Legend common magic, and I think I'm gonna use RQ6 common magic instead because there are no variable point spells which I know my minimaxi players will have fun trying to abuse. I know they would abuse a spell like Disassemble too and find all kinds of loopholes in there that would become game breakers and cause all kinds of arguments. "No, you can't effect his entire platemail because you don't have the magnitude!" "Yes I can because there helmet is seperate to the breastplate and the breatsplate is seperate the skirt so I can do it." etc etc yawn yawn. They do this a LOT in Pathfinder and I'm trying to kinda get away from that all of that and reduce the abuse of magic.

Thanks for your reasonings and descriptions! Very useful and helpful.

 

[alex_greene]

Thanks Prime!

I've been reading Runequest 6 that I got in the sale last week and looking at its common magic which is much more low powered than Legend common magic, and I think I'm gonna use RQ6 common magic instead because there are no variable point spells which I know my minimaxi players will have fun trying to abuse. I know they would abuse a spell like Disassemble too and find all kinds of loopholes in there that would become game breakers and cause all kinds of arguments. "No, you can't effect his entire platemail because you don't have the magnitude!" "Yes I can because there helmet is seperate to the breastplate and the breatsplate is seperate the skirt so I can do it." etc etc yawn yawn. They do this a LOT in Pathfinder and I'm trying to kinda get away from that all of that and reduce the abuse of magic.

Thanks for your reasonings and descriptions! Very useful and helpful.

How to abuse the rules lawyers:-

Rules Lawyer: "I'm going to try X on the troll's armour, because I think this spell will work."
GM: "The spell fails."
Rules Lawyer: "But .. but ... the spell description says it should work on the troll!"
GM: "The troll doesn't have access to the rules book. Besides, even if he did, he can't read."

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

So, if I wanted to Disassemble a door lock, would I have to consider the entire door as a continguous object?

Seems to me you would since the lock is integral to the door much the same way that armour is connected.

Makes using it like a lock pick very difficult, which I like.

Interesting Spell with lots of unusual potential!

 

[alex_greene]

If you were aiming to take the door off its hinges, that could work. But you could consider that the lock itself, and the door handle mechanism, is a single object attached to the door and use the higher of either the door's AP or the lock's AP.

A friend of mine once used a Theban Sorcery ritual to destroy a doorlock while playing a Lancea Sanctum ritualist in Vampire: the Requiem.

One Theban Sorcery ritual allowed the vampire to store points of Vitae (vampire blood substitute) in an inanimate object indefinitely - and once the object was emptied, that object would become what was known as an offering (a magical sacrifice) and crumble to ash.

All he needed was to store just a single point. Now he had absolutely no idea how many locks there were on the door. So he used the ritual on the body of the door itself.

 

[soltakss]

I would say you had to use it on the whole door, for several reasons:
1. The door contains the lock as a sub-assembly
2. Doors are bigger than locks, so would be harder to disassemble
3. Losing a lock isn't obvious to passers-by, but a whole door on the floor is sure to be noticed

 

[Prime_Evil]

I've been reading Runequest 6 that I got in the sale last week and looking at its common magic which is much more low powered than Legend common magic, and I think I'm gonna use RQ6 common magic instead because there are no variable point spells which I know my minimaxi players will have fun trying to abuse.

I like some of the changes that RQ 6 makes to the magic systems. For me, the elimination of to skill enhancement spells (+10% per point of Magnitude) was a wise move. These spells cheapen the value of mundane training and make it hard for characters who invest in (non-magical) expertise to compete with spellcasters. With these spells around, there's very little point in making any important skill roll unless you have been buffed first...

I still think there is room for Common Magic spells that helps with skill rolls, but the +10% per Magnitude formula is very problematic. Either

Also, in my own game I limit characters to casting spells with a maximum Magnitude of POW / 4 (rounded down) - this tends to enforce a low-powered feel. However, if you want a different feel, you might change the divisor to POW/3 or POW/2 instead.

I know they would abuse a spell like Disassemble too and find all kinds of loopholes in there that would become game breakers and cause all kinds of arguments. "No, you can't effect his entire platemail because you don't have the magnitude!" "Yes I can because there helmet is seperate to the breastplate and the breatsplate is seperate the skirt so I can do it." etc etc yawn yawn. They do this a LOT in Pathfinder and I'm trying to kinda get away from that all of that and reduce the abuse of magic.

The various d100 games - including Legend and RQ 6 - are rules-light in comparison to Pathfinder and don't really support this style of min / maxing. The GM has much more power to stomp on this kind of thing precisely because the rules don't attempt to cover every possible corner case. To paraphrase Matt Finch's excellent Old School Gaming Primer, most of the time in old-style games (including Legend and RQ) you don’t use a rule; you make a ruling. It’s easy to understand that sentence, but it takes a flash of insight to really “get it.” As Matt Finch explains:

Playing an old-style game is very different from modern games where rules cover many specific situations. Old school rules don’t give you much specific guidance, and that’s not because they left out the answers to save space. The rules give broad guidelines and require the referee to interpret those guidelines on the fly.

Players can attempt any action, without needing to look at a character sheet to see if they “can” do it. The referee, in turn, uses common sense to decide what happens or rolls a die if he thinks there’s some random element involved, and then the game moves on....

Rules are intended as a resource for the referee, not for the players. Players use observation and description as their tools and resources: rules are for the referee only.

This approach requires both the GM and players to adopt a very different style of play than Pathfinder or recent editions of D&D. It also requires a greater level of trust to exist between GM and players, since a GM that makes arbitrary and unfair rulings can ruin a campaign just as fast as players who engage in min / maxing or rules lawyering. But the payoff is that the game is easier to learn, is less complex, flows faster and more smoothly in play, and achieves greater player immersion because things don't grind to a halt for ten minutes while somebody looks up an obscure half-remembered rule in splatbook X. It also means that session prep isn't as much of a chore for the GM. In my opinion, the d100 games hit the sweet spot where there is just enough complexity to allow for interesting tactical choices, but not so much that the game systems threaten to collapse under their own weight. Just compare a Legend character sheet to a Pathfinder one and see how much less is quantified...

However, it does require the GM to take a more proactive "hands-on" approach during play and some players HATE this. IMHO, there was a huge paradigm shift between second-edition AD&D and 3E where authority at the game table shifted away from the DM and to the rulebook. The intention of the designers was to ensure that the rulebooks were as comprehensive as possible and would be the place where the buck stopped. This was great for inexperienced GMs because it gave them something to fall back on when they were unsure what to do, but it also led to an unintentional shift in the way that many players approached the game.

To quote from Matt Finch again:

The role of the GM in an old-style game is a lot different than it is in a modern-style game. The GM's job isn’t to remember and apply rules correctly and consistently, it’s to make up on-the-spot rulings and describe them colorfully. It’s the GM's job to answer questions (some of which will be off-the-wall) and to give the players lots and lots of decisions to make. The referee is the rulebook, and there is no other. Just as the players need to lose the idea that their characters are in a level-appropriate, tournament-like environment, the GM needs to lose the idea that situations are governed by rules. They’re not governed by rules, they’re governed by the GM. Focus on making the situations fun, not on making them properly run.

Also, the GM is an active participant in the game. He's not there to force the characters along a predetermined plot or to interpret the rules – he's there to create stuff up on the fly that keep things interesting for everybody. That's why old school games have a love affair with random tables – the tables are tools to encourage GM creativity in the heat of the moment.

 

[p_Clapham]

Here are a couple of sorcery spells I adapted from the Runequest Spellbook

Flesh Ward
Autonomous

This spell fills the caster with unnatural vitality, enhancing his ability to shrug off damage. For each 10% in the sorcerer's grimore skill add one hit point to all hit locations. These hit points are subtracted first.

Aura of Destruction
Concentration, Resist (Resilience)

This spell turns the sorcerer into a battery of magical destruction. While the sorcerer concentrates on the spell everything in range but the caster is subject to a magical attack, inflicting a random hit location with an amount of damage according to the sorcerer's grimore skill. This spell affects both opponents and allies with the range of the spell.

1-20% 1D2 damage, 21-40% 1D4, 41-60% 1D6, 61-80% 1D8, 81-100% 1D10, 101-120% 2D6, 121-140% 1D6+1D8, 141-160% 2D8 and so on.

Both armor and magical defenses (such as Countermagic Shield or Spell Resistance) provide protection against this spell.

There are many versions of this spell according to the rune from which it was derived. For example a Aura of Destruction (Fire) would burn the target, where as a Aura of Destruction Cold would slowly freeze the target.

 

[Carew]

That Aura of Destruction spell just seems to be a hugely overpumped Wrack spell to me. I would not allow it in my campaign because the way its worded makes it just peachy for abuse. "Everything in range' makes it the equivalent of a tactical nuke. Are you sure thats the intention? I mean the Legend sorcery spells are bad ass enough when manipulated that you sure don't need to go creating something that affects 'everything in range'. Got an army? Even at 5 point of Manipulation that's a range - and everything in it - of 100 meters x POW. Go for an average POW of 10 and that's everything a sorcerer can see within a kilometer that's getting pummelled.

:shock:

 

[p_Clapham]

It is powerful, but it does have limitations. First it doesn't discriminate vs allies and opponents, so you'd better be careful where you cast this spell. Second, not only do magical defenses work against the spell, but so does armor. Thirdly the spell is a Concentration duration, if the sorcerer is engaged in combat or is suddenly shot full of arrows he is going to be hard pressed to maintain the spell. Finally this spell makes the caster a huge target, in a massed battle situation anyone within the spells effect will come gunning for him.

 

[Carew]

Even with those limitations its still so totally overpowered, when compared with other Legend spells, that I don't like it. I mean combine it with Damage Enhancement and you can nullify armour protection then and there. Concentration isn't a problem if a sorcerer is far enough back and out of range of missiles and yeah, even though it might make you a target for enemies you can still do so much damage that them even getting a chance at you could be slim. As for effecting allies and enemies alike so what? An evil sorcerer in his tower ain't gonna care about little things like collateral damage.

Seriously, its a game changer spell. Each to there own of course, but not for me.

 

[p_Clapham]

Another Sorcery spell adapted from MRQ 1

Siphon Life
Concentration, Resist (Resilience)

This spell drains the life force of the target and transfers it to the caster, restoring his health. This spell inflicts its intensity in damage, split evenly between every hit location of the target creature (roll randomly if necessary). This damage cannot be reduced by armor. For every two point of damage an individual sustains, the caster can heal himself of one point of damage to a hit location of his choice.

 

[alex_greene]

This is a bit lengthy, so I'm posting it to Google Docs.

Wards, by Alex Greene

 

[Bifford]

So I just came up with a spell 'on the fly' in my Legend: Ancient Stones game.

One of the bad guys, a member of the "Raven cult" was captured by the good guys. Their priest bared down on him and used Influence to try to get the man to tell him where the entrance to the bolt-hole in the Avebury stone circle is (the group have been led to believe by an Ancestor Spirit that there are underground tunnels in the area). Well the Raven cultist failed his Persistence check and was already frightened.

The Raven Cult rules through fear of their "God" a shapeshifter who shows himself as a giant Raven. In reality he is merely a man with delusions of grandeur who can shapechange.. But that doesn't matter - his followers believe he is a God.

So what would a Raven Cult have in their arsenal of common spells? Well, a spell that means anyone caught by their enemies can't talk/give secrets away would be good.

Yours Not to Command

"The Raven holds me tight; The Raven Binds me. Your gods are weak and shall not command me!"

(Substitute Raven for the god of your choice)

Instant; Magnitude 1; Progressive; Duration Special; Self

This spell only affects the caster. The person's senses are disabled for a duration equal to the magnitude in hours. They are blind; deaf; mute and can no longer feel or taste anything. They are at the mercy of the world around them but are also not susceptible to pain. This spell is the perfect 'up yours' to interrogators.

 

[alex_greene]

And now you have the standard "flat force field" in Legend. And it is totally not prismatic in any way, shape or form.

Protective Wall
Autonomous

This spell requires the use of the Combine manipulation. It must be coupled with at least one other spell such as Damage Resistance, Spell Resistance, Spirit Resistance, Palsy, Torment from Arcania of Legend: Blood Magic or similar. The Protective Wall creates an area of protection of up to three square metres per point of Intensity. The Protective Wall must be inscribed into a solid surface, such as the threshold of a door. Once cast it cannot be moved, although the surface it is inscribed upon can be.

The Protective Wall’s perimeter contains the benefits of its combined Resistance spell(s) or whatever spells the caster sees fit to Combine into it. It only inhibits spells or attacks from the "outside" of the wall facing away from the caster. Thus a Protective Wall against spells would only protect against incoming spells coming towards the caster; anyone on the protected side could cast spells outwards easily.

 

[Lord High Munchkin]

So, could it be cast upon a shield?