whitelaughter

If a Hallucinatory boat can displace water, then the distinction of 'only affecting the caster' is functionally gone. A Hallucinatory bow can fire real arrows; a Hallucinatory warrior pick up a sword and stab someone.

However, the raft isn't an issue. No, it can't displace the water. But the caster will perceive it as having done so, it will sink slightly, and caster can step on it as if it were a real raft.

20 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Child mortality to 15 for poor people going by the table is 96%. This is like nothing in history.

Poverty though is almost impossible. 15L for poor, 60L for Free.

The only professions with a base income below Free below that are:

20L Assistant Shaman,

30L Thief

40L tenant farmer, hunter

Except for tenant farmer, these are going to be single individuals. A special success is enough to push tenant farmers and hunters up to Free. Typically though young tenant farmers will know that they can't afford to get married, so are spending 15L a year for a poor lifestyle, and saving 25L, so for each year they save, can afford 1 year at Free. Without magic, that means marrying at at 30, using up savings to have Free lifestyle to 45, then dropping back to Poor - with the savings going towards helping their children marry earlier.

Magic though will be the norm: Bless Crops can almost ensure a special success.

Something I looked into was whether the Orlanthi could take out the Crimson Empire by simply using Cloud Clear to create a permanent drought. It isn't enough; treating it as either famine or Cursed, you are only forcing the tenant farmers down to failed Farming rolls, so they can still get half their income, which is enough for Poor lifestyle and save a bit (probably loan to siblings with children,to ensure child survival). They need to fumble their risk being destitute - and even then, the fertility Rune can save many children.

Hallucinate copies other illusions, but only for the caster - so unless you can think of a way to teleport using an illusion, I don't see how this can make you teleport.

Fun spell though.

Pointless creating a boat, as the water ignore it, giving you a swamped boat. But a raft, or bridge, or horse, or hippogriff, no problems.

Creating a light pointless, as it will only illuminate you: but because illusions are 'real' you can create a wall of light behind your foes, and they will be visible as shadows, since they are (from your perspective) blocking the light.

Armor normally useless - but will protect you from fumbles (if normal armor will).

Great for bandaging wounds, and thus creeping out opponents who just see you covered in gashes that aren't bleeding.

Excellent for creating clothing - wander through the snow in a real loincloth, and Hallucinatory furs, and you appear immune to cold.

discussed here: https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Half-trolls

though I am sure I crossed them in the histories, will have to re read the books. [shame that!]

22 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

But I also refuse to accept that something should be difficult or nerfed just because it's powerful or good.

From a purely world-building  perspective, there's no good reason that there shouldn't be a mobile version of this spell. Just as there's going to be Enhance POW.

There already is: "if cast on something mobile (for example a ship's deck), the circle moves with it."

A 1-metre circle could be cast on a large shield; 2-metre on a chariot, 3+ on a wagon or carpet.

Thanks for the response, but consider how low you need the options. Intensity of 1 lets you cover a unit of archers with Fanaticism and Speedart, 2 lets you add Strength or Coordination; even low levels of Heal, Mobility and Protection can be devastating. Intensity 2 also allows 1 point Rune spells - and Extension is a separate spell.

Duration can be left at base if you are only using spirit magic, a single additional point allows you Rune spells, another if extended. The only time to go for a really high duration is if you muck around with Bless Champion, with day long spirit spells. (Since the 'POW' of any spell is based on the magic points added to the circle, Reflection can then be made near certain! )

Range is the biggie - with a geometrical increase in size, numbers benefiting climbs rapidly. Note that platforms can be raised to add extra archers, shafts sunk to cover healers etc. This can easily cover hundreds of archers.

The 'default' sorcerer is going to be a Lhankor Mhy cultist, guaranteeing access to Rune magical and magical allies.

I am thinking particularly of the Child Survival roll (p426 base book). On 1-5%, the child dies; this can be modified by Lifestyle and the Fertility Rune. Now, an autofail of 96%+ would make odds of surviving worse as lifestyle improves, so feel safe in ignoring that. If though 1-5% is automatically a fail, then lifestyle is irrelevant, and Fertility Rune cannot help, only make things worse on a failed roll: so am I right in guessing that this is also not the case?

Is there a generic rule here, that if low is bad, the autofail rule doesn't apply?

Thanks.

Re read the Histories last month, and yes, there were references to half-trolls/half-orcs.

On the problem of invincible elves, note that immortal characters cannot use longbows, as they deform you. A man can train with a longbow, and that's fine,because he'll die before the crippling effect of constant use kicks in - an elf cannot.

https://kriii.com/english-bowmen/

Yeah, that makes the spell utterly broken; with no weakness to the spell, possession of it assures victory in every battle.

The only way to block it is by using incompatible 'defensive' spells - take out the Shield spell that is over everyone by using a boosted Spirit Block to override it. And as you've pointed out, need to be in the circle to do that. And getting close when warrior in the circle is under powerful spells? Good luck with that.

On 2/28/2023 at 9:15 PM, PhilHibbs said:

Maybe there should be some way to put a user condition on the spell so only friendlies can cast onto it.

When this edition was launched, Runequest was 40 years old. The window for rules modifications closed a generation ago. "It's not a bug, it's a feature" is the only way to go now.

On 3/1/2023 at 1:34 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Is Fanaticism an attack spell?

If it is not an attack spell, then when you put up your Protective Circle, an enemy can cast it to make you, your allies, their mounts, familiars, and bound spirits all fanatical. That might not be ideal, especially if your healers are all in the circle.

If it is an attack spell, then the enemy can throw it on your Protective Circle so that when they charge in to attack your magical unit, they all get Fanaticism on them. And I think it's widely accepted that you can choose not to resist a spell cast on you.

Or is it conditional? Is it up to the recipient whether they treat it as an attack or not? If so then the people in the circle can treat it as an attack and therefore it doesn't even affect them (as they are not entering the circle from outside), and the casters have to charge in, resist it, and hope it overcomes them. I don't think you can both choose to treat it as an attack spell, and then choose not to resist it! Maybe if you are illuminated...

If you cast fanaticism, everyone will be affected. So yes, very effective response to an enemy circle.

Protective Circle is self balancing because it can be used both to aid and hurt. Use it to aid your friends? Enemies can use it to hurt you. Use it to hurt your enemies? They can use it to boost themselves.

The name of the spell is just carry over from previous editions, when it could only hold one of three specifically named protective sorcery spells. It's like the northern most part of Scotland being called Sutherland (south land) - it's a historical curiosity.

You're certainly quoting the text correctly, but how is an instant spell is meant to wait? Besides, anyone or anything is a valid target for Disruption.

Resurrection is tied to the body. No body, no Resurrection. It's really just a beefed up Create Ghost spell, so there should be no problems.

Don't see how it can override incompatibility. Cast an incompatible spell, it just bounces off everyone, as they are covered by the first spell.

On 2/23/2023 at 9:15 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Disruption isn't a protective spell. Neither is Resurrection.

They don't have to be, quite unlike Bless Champion.

Remember not to cast Disruption in your own Protective Circle. Having all of your own hit locations being valid targets for an attack spell may offend.... 😛

I'm curious about the use of Augments on Augments: thus if my family wants me to be loyal to my clan, and the clan wants me to kill some broos, can I use Love(family) to Augment Loyalty(Clan), with Loyalty(Clan) Augmenting an attack?

On 2/16/2023 at 8:57 AM, Bren said:

I'm still confused. I knew it was Sorcery, but as far as I can tell, Sorcery doesn't have a spell for Resurrection. What sorcery spell is it that the Sorcerer is scaling up to Resurrect the dead?

Oh, I see the problem!

Protective Circle works with any spell cast by any caster. The Sorcerer throws up the Circle, a friendly Rune priest performs the Resurrection.

On the battlefield, Protective Circle 2 is enough to allow you to use Spirit Magic to increase the STR and DEX of everyone inside, and stack Shield and Countermagic to prevent enemies spells slaughtering everybody.

On 2/13/2023 at 7:57 AM, Squaredeal Sten said:

So far among my players, very few conditions.  Enchantments suck up POW, and my players struggle for every point of POW.

I'm hesitant to suggest this, given how easy it should be to gain POW, but if POW is in short supply then other enchanters are going to think that it is more cost effective to put a condition on one of the PC's enchantments than to create their own enchantments.

On 2/12/2023 at 8:09 PM, kr0p0s said:

Could a user condition be: an individual chosen as worthy by the clan/ tribe/temple wyter. Once the current weilder dies the item, if retrieved, returns to the abode of the wyter and another worthy is selected. This could lead to some role-playing completion of tasks or a contest.

The roleplaying potential of this is considerable. I approve.

On 2/10/2023 at 7:11 PM, Shiningbrow said:

I would expect the most obvious would be "Only usable by a member of cult/clan X", or of a particular race (eg, uz, mostali, aldryami).

What does that achieve? Every cult, clan and race have thieves and murderers.

[tribe only] will result in the same problems as [creator only] with users being bound into the item as ghosts. At a more mundane level, enslaved tribes - frex the Orlanthi in the Lunar Empire - would be used as item wielders by the owners.

You could also breed owners; a baby inherits the item from parents, who have been executed; the child is then brought up as a slave warrior, think Mamluk/Jannisary.

4 hours ago, Joerg said:

You forget the Free INT requirement for total manipulation (which can be expanded by using inscriptions, but even so there is a hard limit). MP can be collected, INT is harder, even with insxribed Enhance INT.

 

Not really a problem. Any sorcerer is going to dump their spells into a familiar and use Enhance INT - an inscription for Enhance INT benefits everything the Sorcerer  does, not just just sorcery.

Needs an Intensity of 6 to allow Resurrection.

What's the casting time for Rituals again? Index is useless. Assume an hour and you need a duration of five: 6 or 7 gives you multiple hours.

Any remaining Free INT provides for Range. But even on base range, you can pile a lot of bodies into a 1 metre circle, remembering that only part of the body needs to be inside.

So, assume Free IT 14 for this to be workable, 18 to be easy.

Orlanthi can easily increase the Rune by simply casting Common Rune spells with it; 5% chance of success vs 5% of losing the Rune point is a good deal if nothing else is going on.

Mind you, once the Rune is >80% expect the character to be power mad/control freak/generally authoritarian.

One of the many changes I dislike. I don't see how you would parry a knockback, but it should definitely be something you could dodge.

What sort of conditions do GMs and players put on enchantments?

"Only me" is asking to get bound as a ghost into the item, and spent eternity using for it someone else.

=======================================

My preferred conditions are: "the creator; if you kill someone who stole the item you may use it for a month; use of the item may be negotiated with a valid user of the item, but cannot be for longer than their ability to use the item; if you avenge the death of a valid wielder you gain their remaining time being able to use it."

of course, if the enchantment does harm, then rather than have a user condition, it makes more sense to have a target condition, and if someone doesn't meet the criteria, they become the new target!

=========================================

It would be fun with a new character to say "what do you think of my Enchantment? Got it during the sack of the City of Wonders. A pirate asked me to determined the conditions, and I found that it will work fine for anyone who kills someone who stole it...well, it works fine for me now..."