Spellcasting tactics

[Kloster]

...

Small healing spells are quick enough few melee attacks can land before they're off. You just don't try and to the big ones (at least on yourself) while in melee.

...

Even a single melee attack is sufficient to disrupt the spell, and the result is that you're not healed. I'm not saying that it should not be tempted, nor that it never works. I'm just saying that it is easy (very easy in fact) to disrupt and that you can't count on being healed.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Atgxtg]

Even a single melee attack is sufficient to disrupt the spell, and the result is that you're not healed. I'm not saying that it should not be tempted, nor that it never works. I'm just saying that it is easy (very easy in fact) to disrupt and that you can't count on being healed.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

One nasty tactic liked to use was having one of the supporting characters sit back with a bow and purposely go for foes who are trying to cast. Since the first shot goes off a DEX SR it would beast just about any spell, and certainly anything with any real POW in it.

[Rurik]

One nasty tactic liked to use was having one of the supporting characters sit back with a bow and purposely go for foes who are trying to cast. Since the first shot goes off a DEX SR it would beast just about any spell, and certainly anything with any real POW in it.

That was considered pretty standard operating procedure for both PC's and NPC's in most RQ games I've played in. Knock that spellcaster off his spell only makes sense.

A favorite tactic of mine is to buff up with defensive magic and then stand there pretending to cast spells just to draw missle fire away from the guys doing the real work.

[Atgxtg]

That was considered pretty standard operating procedure for both PC's and NPC's in most RQ games I've played in. Knock that spellcaster off his spell only makes sense.

A favorite tactic of mine is to buff up with defensive magic and then stand there pretending to cast spells just to draw missle fire away from the guys doing the real work.

That's one of the unspoken perks of Disurpt, too. You can usually get one off faster than someone can cast a powerful spell, and make them wast MP's too. Some of my RQers could really screw up GMs in d20 games with RQ tactics. I shut down the big bad NPC wizard, with a 2nd level elf wizard armed with bow and magic missile (the ultimate disrupt). It isn't what magic you know, but what magic you can manage to cast under combat conditions!

But cler RQers can be nasty. In RQ2 a lost limb was worth a point or two of Countermagic or Invisiblity. Once I saw a Storm Bull chop the weapon arm off of a big bad Broo that was loaded with chaoitc features, then cast Beserker on it so it couldn't heal itself. >:->

[Enpeze]

That's one of the unspoken perks of Disurpt, too. You can usually get one off faster than someone can cast a powerful spell, and make them wast MP's too. Some of my RQers could really screw up GMs in d20 games with RQ tactics. I shut down the big bad NPC wizard, with a 2nd level elf wizard armed with bow and magic missile (the ultimate disrupt). It isn't what magic you know, but what magic you can manage to cast under combat conditions!

But cler RQers can be nasty. In RQ2 a lost limb was worth a point or two of Countermagic or Invisiblity. Once I saw a Storm Bull chop the weapon arm off of a big bad Broo that was loaded with chaoitc features, then cast Beserker on it so it couldn't heal itself. >:->

Thats the reason why I dont like the magic system of RQ anymore. It feels too technical and thus can be easily exploited by rule mongers. Nowadays I prefer much more the magic systems of SB1 or SB5.

[Atgxtg]

Well, SB5 has essentially the same stuff as battle magic. As long as countermagic exists it can be used offensively.

Personally, I liked the ability to use spells tactically, and creatively. I don't have a problem with sniping the mage while he is casting too.

[Enpeze]

Well, SB5 has essentially the same stuff as battle magic. As long as countermagic exists it can be used offensively.

Personally, I liked the ability to use spells tactically, and creatively. I don't have a problem with sniping the mage while he is casting too.

There are fundamental differences in SB magic and RQ magic. Most magic is built on elemental/demon summoning. And the other magic system (if you like to use it at all) which relies on spells is also different. Spellcasting lasts always 1 turn and is conducted in a special magic subphase before the action subphase, with highest INT begins. Using the rules to snipe around because of rule knowledge is nearly impossible. The only you can do magically against an enemy sorcerer is to have a higher INT attribute or cast the spell a turn before. There are 2 counterspells in the system but the sorcerer has to plan in advance before casting them. They are not metagaming informations like "I cast disruption because I - the player behind the PC not the character himself - know that its just a fast 1 point spell which can interrupt the 5 points heal spell of this mage over there".

If you like to play the game more tactical thats ok for me. I am just wondering if you see magic just as another gadget to reach your PCs goals similar to a pocket calculator.

[RMS]

If you like to play the game more tactical thats ok for me. I am just wondering if you see magic just as another gadget to reach your PCs goals similar to a pocket calculator.

I'm in the middle here. I don't mind tactical options at all, so long as they're tactical options that make sense in the world for the characters to be aware of and take advantage of. For example, the idea of getting off a quick Disrupt to mess up someone else's magic makes perfect sense to me. That's a valid tactical choice: toss at the spell caster who is most likely to resist it and ignore it completely, with a payoff of fouling his spell; or, toss at the big baddie charging you who is more likely not to resist it and is quickly closing to melee range. I probably would have issues with a Storm Bull using a sacred spell, like Fanaticism/Beserk, on a chaos creature. At the very least, that decision would lead to some interesting religious consequences for the character, including some sort of heavy duty penance.

FWIW, I allow spell casters to restart their spell midround if it's interrupted, with a small SR penalty. I don't recall if that's "as written" or a houserule. If the latter, it's another chance for Nightshade to be flabbergasted by my not playing be the rules-as-written!

[Atgxtg]

FWIW, I allow spell casters to restart their spell midround if it's interrupted, with a small SR penalty. I don't recall if that's "as written" or a houserule. If the latter, it's another chance for Nightshade to be flabbergasted by my not playing be the rules-as-written!

Usually that was a 3 SR penalty in RQ3. Personally, I thingk I would modify that and jut use DEX SR, or if I wanted to get technical maybe give an INT SR that is used to "think fast".

[Atgxtg]

There are fundamental differences in SB magic and RQ magic. Most magic is built on elemental/demon summoning. And the other magic system (if you like to use it at all) which relies on spells is also different. Spellcasting lasts always 1 turn and is conducted in a special magic subphase before the action subphase, with highest INT begins. Using the rules to snipe around because of rule knowledge is nearly impossible. The only you can do magically against an enemy sorcerer is to have a higher INT attribute or cast the spell a turn before. There are 2 counterspells in the system but the sorcerer has to plan in advance before casting them. They are not metagaming informations like "I cast disruption because I - the player behind the PC not the character himself - know that its just a fast 1 point spell which can interrupt the 5 points heal spell of this mage over there". [qoute]

I was specifally thinking of SB5, RQ inspired spells. I am famialr with the summoning system. But it has been awhile since I pulled out SB5/Elric! and I thought that you did subtract POW spent from your DEX to see when a spell went off. But, like I said, it's been awhile.

No, I just like the idea of being able to do something to stop someone from casting a spell. It is part of the genre. Plus I also think that is makes a lot of sense that a guy who is getting feathered with arrows isn't going to be able to get a spell off, unless it is quick. Plus, I like the idea of more powerful spells taking longer to work. It can add some drama too, as the other characters have to protect the caster so they can complete the spell.

But thats RQ battle magic. For another setting, I might favor something else. I'm rather fond of Ars Magica for the flavor and feel of magic. At one time I adapted parts of it to replace the RQ3 Sorcery system. O like the idea of learning types of magic and getting better spells in that type as you skill improves.

Wish I had a copy of Authentic Thaumaturgy. I'd like to see it. I'm just dying to throw together a more mystical/arcane magic system for BRP. Strombringer's magic system is just too overpowering. Guy with demon beats guy without demon. Not a fun situation to role-play.

One thing about me though is that my "style" of play varies depending on what sort of game/setting I'm trying to run.

[Kloster]

That was considered pretty standard operating procedure for both PC's and NPC's in most RQ games I've played in. Knock that spellcaster off his spell only makes sense.

A favorite tactic of mine is to buff up with defensive magic and then stand there pretending to cast spells just to draw missle fire away from the guys doing the real work.

Fun idea. Nobody ever tried that here.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Thats the reason why I dont like the magic system of RQ anymore. It feels too technical and thus can be easily exploited by rule mongers. Nowadays I prefer much more the magic systems of SB1 or SB5.

I don't think it is rulemongering, not too technical. If it is coherent with the background to have characters proficient with magic (and in Glorantha, they are supposed to be), I find logical to use it everytime it is convenient.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Well, SB5 has essentially the same stuff as battle magic. As long as countermagic exists it can be used offensively.

Personally, I liked the ability to use spells tactically, and creatively. I don't have a problem with sniping the mage while he is casting too.

To quote a favorite Shadowrun quote: "Geek the mage".

And I agree with the comments. I think every tactical opportunity is a benediction because it furthers the removal of the basic attack/parry/attack/parry routine and adds flavor to the game.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

I'm in the middle here. I don't mind tactical options at all, so long as they're tactical options that make sense in the world for the characters to be aware of and take advantage of. For example, the idea of getting off a quick Disrupt to mess up someone else's magic makes perfect sense to me. That's a valid tactical choice: toss at the spell caster who is most likely to resist it and ignore it completely, with a payoff of fouling his spell; or, toss at the big baddie charging you who is more likely not to resist it and is quickly closing to melee range. I probably would have issues with a Storm Bull using a sacred spell, like Fanaticism/Beserk, on a chaos creature. At the very least, that decision would lead to some interesting religious consequences for the character, including some sort of heavy duty penance.

...

I completely agree here (on both points).

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

One nasty tactic liked to use was having one of the supporting characters sit back with a bow and purposely go for foes who are trying to cast. Since the first shot goes off a DEX SR it would beast just about any spell, and certainly anything with any real POW in it.

Yes, true. This is a nice and viable tactic, if the attack is able to distract (=does damage).

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Nightshade]

Even a single melee attack is sufficient to disrupt the spell, and the result is that you're not healed. I'm not saying that it should not be tempted, nor that it never works. I'm just saying that it is easy (very easy in fact) to disrupt and that you can't count on being healed.

But almost no melee attack will get off before a small healing spell does in many cases. You have to prep the spell, of course, but its easy to do that at the end of the round after you've taken damage but before your opponent can start his next hit (because of the rules limiting attacks). At that point, a healing 2 (usually enough to get something working again unless you took a fairly massive hit past armor) takes Dex SR +1 to get off; given the melee attack will be Dex SR + SIZ SR + Weapon SR, almost no melee attack will land before its done.

[Nightshade]

One nasty tactic liked to use was having one of the supporting characters sit back with a bow and purposely go for foes who are trying to cast. Since the first shot goes off a DEX SR it would beast just about any spell, and certainly anything with any real POW in it.

Sure, that works, but it has two problems:

1. If the target is in melee with one of your own side, which is often the case with the healing spell, you either have a relatively low chance to hit, fire late, or have a good chance of hitting the wrong person;

2. It requires you to either outnumber the opponents or have good control of the battlefield, since archers are, themselves, good targets because they don't have a shield prepped and don't even really have a decent parrying weapon. They can still dodge, but RQ3 Dodge tended to be a specialists art because of how quickly any encumberance at all chewed it up.

So, yes, it did happen, but not enough to really impact the field utility of things like Heal 2.

[Nightshade]

That's one of the unspoken perks of Disurpt, too. You can usually get one off faster than someone can cast a powerful spell, and make them wast MP's too. Some of my RQers could really screw up GMs in d20 games with RQ tactics. I shut down the big bad NPC wizard, with a 2nd level elf wizard armed with bow and magic missile (the ultimate disrupt). It isn't what magic you know, but what magic you can manage to cast under combat conditions!

Sure. Its actually more workable than the archery method since it doesn't necessarily require someone to be out of melee, either. But the question was, was spending an action and a magic point, on an effect that _might_ work, worth it just to do two damage points and _possibly_ stop someone casting a Heal 2? With bigger spells it could be more attractive, since someone casting a long time was bound to be doing something you didn't want, but then, those people were more likely to have a high Power, Countermagic, or both, too.

[Kloster]

But almost no melee attack will get off before a small healing spell does in many cases. You have to prep the spell, of course, but its easy to do that at the end of the round after you've taken damage but before your opponent can start his next hit (because of the rules limiting attacks). At that point, a healing 2 (usually enough to get something working again unless you took a fairly massive hit past armor) takes Dex SR +1 to get off; given the melee attack will be Dex SR + SIZ SR + Weapon SR, almost no melee attack will land before its done.

Easy to do (or not too difficult with a higher DEX), quite impossible in the other case.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Sure, that works, but it has two problems:

1. If the target is in melee with one of your own side, which is often the case with the healing spell, you either have a relatively low chance to hit, fire late, or have a good chance of hitting the wrong person;

2. It requires you to either outnumber the opponents or have good control of the battlefield, since archers are, themselves, good targets because they don't have a shield prepped and don't even really have a decent parrying weapon. They can still dodge, but RQ3 Dodge tended to be a specialists art because of how quickly any encumberance at all chewed it up.

So, yes, it did happen, but not enough to really impact the field utility of things like Heal 2.

On this one, I side with you.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

Sure. Its actually more workable than the archery method since it doesn't necessarily require someone to be out of melee, either. But the question was, was spending an action and a magic point, on an effect that _might_ work, worth it just to do two damage points and _possibly_ stop someone casting a Heal 2? With bigger spells it could be more attractive, since someone casting a long time was bound to be doing something you didn't want, but then, those people were more likely to have a high Power, Countermagic, or both, too.

Yes, agreed. But I think it is worth it, or at least as worth as disrupting somebody and doing 2 points WITHOUT disrupting a healing 2.

And with the larger spells, the melee attack has enough time to land.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Nightshade]

Easy to do (or not too difficult with a higher DEX), quite impossible in the other case.

Unless you both have a _much_ higher Dex than the other, its _very_ hard, and you need a pretty large weapon to boot. After all, other than (as I recall) the lance, all other weapons add at least 1 SR, so even if you're huge, you're at worst going to tie them, which will not interrupt the spell.

[Nightshade]

Yes, agreed. But I think it is worth it, or at least as worth as disrupting somebody and doing 2 points WITHOUT disrupting a healing 2.

And with the larger spells, the melee attack has enough time to land.

Well, to be honest, I'm not particularly convinced time taken doing Disruption _was_ usually useful. It could be good against heavily armored opponents (because it blew by), but at the lower end where you were facing people most likely to care, not have a high power, and not have countermagic up, it was also pretty likely to fail, and at least in some versions of RQ, typically made you more vulnerable to enemy spell attack yourself. And it wasn't like the typical character had a lot of magic points/Power to burn at that range. One the whole, I have to wonder if your time wasn't better spent usually just trying to hit him; you weren't necessarily much less likely to hit, and you at least had a chance of doing more than the net 4 points of damage you were dealing with the Disrupt (since you were stopping a small healing and doing a bit more).

Longer spells are a different story, but by the time you were hitting people doing much longer ones, the chance of success with a quickly case Disrupt wasn't all that exciting in the first place.

[Kloster]

Unless you both have a _much_ higher Dex than the other, its _very_ hard, and you need a pretty large weapon to boot. After all, other than (as I recall) the lance, all other weapons add at least 1 SR, so even if you're huge, you're at worst going to tie them, which will not interrupt the spell.

You told to put the haling 2 at the end of the round, after you took damage.

What I'm telling is that if you wait for the end of the MR, somebody that declares his action after you (=that has a higher DEX) cal land his attack right in the middle of your preparation and disrupt it.

But if you put the healing 2 at the start of the MR, I agree with you, almost no melee attack can disrupt it.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster

[Kloster]

...

Longer spells are a different story, but by the time you were hitting people doing much longer ones, the chance of success with a quickly case Disrupt wasn't all that exciting in the first place.

It seems to me that on this one, we agree. For large healing spells, disruption is useless compared to a simple melee attack, that is more likely to land and to interupt the casting.

Runequestement votre,

Kloster