Everyone Having Rune Magic

[PhilHibbs]

Just out of interest I took a look at RQ1, and in that, Countermagic will even block Fireblade. Sorry, I should say FIREBLADE. RQ was really shouty back then!

[Atgxtg]

6 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Just out of interest I took a look at RQ1, and in that, Countermagic will even block Fireblade. Sorry, I should say FIREBLADE. RQ was really shouty back then!

Does it prevent the target from casting the fireblade, dispel the fireblade, or just prevent it from working when striking the countermagiced character?

 

Okay, I looked it up, and while it certainly works against Fireblade the whole "any spell the caster doesn't want to work" is very interesting, as it could be used selectively back then. 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Atgxtg

[PhilHibbs]

Just now, Atgxtg said:

Doe sit prevent the target from casting the fireblade, dispel the fireblade, or just prevent it from working when striking the countermagiced character?

Quote

Countermagic is a defensive spell that will attempt to stop any spell that the caster does not wish to take effect, including spells like FIREBLADE.

It then goes on to describe the familiar mechanics. So, I assume it knocks out the Fireblade if it is powerful enough to. Also, note that it does not block healing if the caster doesn't want it to. But this is RQ1, clearly they quickly decided that knocking down already-cast spells was not what they wanted Countermagic to be about.

[Atgxtg]

8 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

It then goes on to describe the familiar mechanics. So, I assume it knocks out the Fireblade if it is powerful enough to.

Yes, but the way it is worded is interesting, since, technically, it is the caster who decides it if works, as opposed to the prescribed limits of later version, or the target. 

So, if I were to cast Countermagic on you, and someone attacked you with magic, I'd be the one to decide if Countermagic worked or not. I wonder how that would work if I got knocked unconscious? And what if I decided to let something through that I suspected would knock down the Countermagic anyway?

And with that wording I could cast Countermagic on an enemy to allow our magic to work against him, but prevent his own or his allies  magic for working on him. 

No wonder they changed it. 

 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Atgxtg

[simonh]

49 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Except in the RQG Countermagic spell description that I quoted a few posts up.

Not in my PDF it doesn't. It says it doesn't have to overcome POW.

Doh, quite right. I didn’t have it available and misremembered.

[PhilHibbs]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

But that by itself would be a game changer. If we were both "average" swordsmen, who did 1D8+1+1D4  (average damage = 8 points) damage, and I could put 4 points of protection on  my sword, then, on average,  your weapon would take twice as much damage as mine and break sooner. 

You think that is a game-changer? Baffled. You might as well say that any spell is a game-changer.

Also, where does the "twice as much" calculation come from? If anything it's way higher than that. Still not game-changing though.

With no Protection, only a maximum damage roll of 8+1+4=13 will do 1 point of damage to the parrying weapon. 1-in-32. 12 of those will break the opponent's sword, so 384 hits. That's a pretty long fight. Meanwhile the other guy with protection 4 on his sword is taking no damage. Game changer still?

Edited September 12, 2018 by PhilHibbs

[womble]

Quote

 

Yes, that's right, why do you think Shield 1 should not do that?

 

We mostly never had enough free INT to be bothering much with Detect spells when I was playing regularly. Nor enough MP to be casting them will-ye nil-ye 'on spec'. It just hadn't crossed my mind that protective magics might protect against something as intuitively indirect as a Detect. But it's evidently the case that it's meant to be this way.

[Atgxtg]

42 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

You think that is a game-changer?

Yes I do. 

42 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Also, where does the "twice as much" calculation come from? If anything it's way higher than that. Still not game-changing though.

From my familiarity with RQ2, not RQG. In RQ2 a parring weapon takes all the damage. Thus a weapon that is taking 8 points of damage with 4 points of armor would only take 4 points or damage, or half damage. 

42 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

With no Protection, only a maximum damage roll of 8+1+4=13 will do 1 point of damage to the parrying weapon. 1-in-32. 12 of those will break the opponent's sword, so 384 hits. That's a pretty long fight. Meanwhile the other guy with protection 4 on his sword is taking no damage. Game changer still?

Sounds like RQG "hit points" work more like RQ3 "armor points", in that they have to be exceeded to be reduced. That does reduce the impact of the rule significantly. Going from 12 to 16 resistance isn't nearly as significant as going from 0 to 4.

[simonh]

I had clearly underestimated how confusing detect, countermagic, etc is.

For example it makes no sense to me that a character can cast Detect Life boosted with  4 magic points, and destroy every defensive countermagic spells of 6 points or less on everyone within 50 metres. However it’s hard to reconcile the description of countermagic without coming to that conclusion.

[PhilHibbs]

25 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Sounds like RQG "hit points" work more like RQ3 "armor points", in that they have to be exceeded to be reduced. That does reduce the impact of the rule significantly. Going from 12 to 16 resistance isn't nearly as significant as going from 0 to 4.

Correct, the mechanics have not changed, it's just AP are now called HP like they were in RQ2. What were you comparing the mechanics to, if not RQ3?

5 minutes ago, simonh said:

I had clearly underestimated how confusing detect, countermagic, etc is.

For example it makes no sense to me that a character can cast Detect Life boosted with  4 magic points, and destroy every defensive countermagic spells of 6 points or less on everyone within 50 metres. However it’s hard to reconcile the description of countermagic without coming to that conclusion.

I think it needs a special case, that Detect spells do not knock down Countermagic.

Edited September 12, 2018 by PhilHibbs

[Atgxtg]

5 minutes ago, simonh said:

I had clearly underestimated how confusing detect, countermagic, etc is.

Yup. I'd like to say that it wouldn't work against detect spells, since they don't target the character with those spells up, but the rules "clearly" state otherwise. 

Quote

For example it makes no sense to me that a character can cast Detect Life boosted with  4 magic points, and destroy every defensive countermagic spells of 6 points or less on everyone within 50 metres. However it’s hard to reconcile the description of countermagic without coming to that conclusion.

Well, possibly. I'd probably assume that detect spells "ping" targets sequentially, closest first, and that the first Countermagic would take down the Detect Life with it. However, there is nothing in the rules to support my assumption. 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Atgxtg

[Psullie]

56 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Well, possibly. I'd probably assume that detect spells "ping" targets sequentially, closest first, and that the first Countermagic would take down the Detect Life with it. However, there is nothing in the rules to support my assumption. 

Due to the fact that unless you have a highly boosted detect, the Detection is also eliminated I'd say that it works with closest first...

[Yelm's Light]

4 hours ago, womble said:

We mostly never had enough free INT to be bothering much with Detect spells when I was playing regularly. Nor enough MP to be casting them will-ye nil-ye 'on spec'. It just hadn't crossed my mind that protective magics might protect against something as intuitively indirect as a Detect. But it's evidently the case that it's meant to be this way.

In my game the characters usually had Detects focused or occasionally known by spirits, which circumvents free INT.

[MOB]

On 8/22/2018 at 4:33 AM, jeffjerwin said:

In a sense, the tyranny of the aristocracy is subverted by the countervailing quasi-Darwinian power struggle.

I can't speak for Loskalm, however.

I think that's *exactly* how things play out in the libertarian paradise of Loskalm.

[Atgxtg]

On 8/21/2018 at 2:33 PM, jeffjerwin said:

 In a sense, the tyranny of the aristocracy is subverted by the countervailing quasi-Darwinian power struggle.

I can't speak for Loskalm, however.

 

42 minutes ago, MOB said:

I think that's *exactly* how things play out in the libertarian paradise of Loskalm.

Do we get college credit for this forum? 

[Atgxtg]

5 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Correct, the mechanics have not changed, it's just AP are now called HP like they were in RQ2. What were you comparing the mechanics to, if not RQ3?

RQ2 hit points. Hence my view that 4 points of Protection would lead to a sword taking half damage.

5 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think it needs a special case, that Detect spells do not knock down Countermagic.

It needs something. Personally I'm okay if it knocks down one Countermagic, but if a single high point detect spell knocks down all Countermagic spells is a biggie. It just that detection spells are one of the rare cases where a spirit magic spell can affect multiple people with being multispelled. It would have been better if detect spells weren't blocked by countermagic, but the rules seem to be clear on this, unfortunately. 

On the plus side, only those enemies who are thinking of harming the specific target the caster chooses would be hit, so in a real fight, that would probably limit the spell to a couple of foes, as the other PCs would be drawing some fire (or  to be more accurate, ire) as well. 

 

 

[Zozotroll]

25 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

 

Do we get college credit for this forum? 

We should.  Some do more research here than they ever did in school

[MOB]

20 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

It needs something. Personally I'm okay if it knocks down one Countermagic, but if a single high point detect spell knocks down all Countermagic spells is a biggie.

I don't think that is the intent, or even an unintended consequence. 

I too am okay with the idea one Detect Spell can potentially knock out one Countermagic - the first it comes across (measured by distance from the caster I suppose). The flip-side is if the countermeasure is strong enough, this could also knock out the Detect spell from detecting any further.

I also propose that any added MPs to a Detect get fully applied to the first countermeasure it comes across, the same way. The added MPs don't carry any further.

15 minutes ago, Zozotroll said:

We should.  Some do more research here than they ever did in school

Off-topic: it's like how my younger son has recently became obsessed with NFL and seems to have absorbed an absurd amount of facts and detail, not just about his favourite team (Seahawks), but seemingly the whole American Football competition. Not a typical interest of an Australian teenager (though he's also very interested in Australian Rules Football and Cricket and seems to have voluminous knowledge about these too).  I said to him see if you can find an NFL site in French, that way at least you can combine your homework with your interests.

[Zozotroll]

Tell your son me to, Go Hawks!

 

 

[Mechashef]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

 

On the plus side, only those enemies who are thinking of harming the specific target the caster chooses would be hit, so in a real fight, that would probably limit the spell to a couple of foes, as the other PCs would be drawing some fire (or  to be more accurate, ire) as well. 

 

 

Why?

Surely the spell would have to check everyone in range to know if they are actually an enemy?

 

it can’t know if someone is an enemy without knowing their intent, thus it needs to check them all.

This would also include checking the other members of the adventurers group so may well take out their countermagic spells if they have any running,

 

If a detect spell can take out countermagic spells from multiple people (a bad idea I believe) it should become part of a standard temple response plan in case of attack: Get a designated person (or guardian spirit) to cast a powerful Detect Enemy. It helps to locate the attackers and to take out their countermagic.

[Atgxtg]

 

Quote

This would also include checking the other members of the adventurers group so may well take out their countermagic spells if they have any running,

Ow! That's nasty. Logical, but nasty. I think the Detect vs. Countermagic thing is actually broken. And I don't mean that in a "I don't like this rule" way, but I think it actually breaks the game.

Edited September 13, 2018 by Atgxtg

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, MOB said:

I don't think that is the intent, or even an unintended consequence. 

I hope not. I suspect this is just a case of someone finally walking across a landmine that's been around since RQ1. It's a really brutal one, too.

1 hour ago, MOB said:

I too am okay with the idea one Detect Spell can potentially knock out one Countermagic - the first it comes across (measured by distance from the caster I suppose). The flip-side is if the countermeasure is strong enough, this could also knock out the Detect spell from detecting any further.

Yeah, but with what Mechashef pointed out, namely that the Detect spell would probably have to check friends too, we've got problems.

 

1 hour ago, MOB said:

I also propose that any added MPs to a Detect get fully applied to the first countermeasure it comes across, the same way. The added MPs don't carry any further.

That means that someone could pretty much short out a powerful Detect just by having someone in front with a 1 point Countermagic.

Maybe the Detect should go up against the Countermagic spells in order of weakest to strongest, and we could keep a running total of Countermagic? When the total magic points of Countermagic get within one point of the total magic points of Detect, the Detect gets blown down.

 

 

[Mechashef]

My feeling is that spells which affect an area and are not cast directly at a target entity should not be cancelled be a countermagic on someone in the area of effect.

 

There are probably (I don’t have the PDF with me) many spells that fall into this category.  Some may be obvious, such as Group Laughter, others more debatable such as perhaps Cloud Call (could a trained hawk with a countermagic cast on it fly high enough to be in the area of effect for a Cloud Call spell?)

 

The effect on the  countermagic if the area spell overcomes it is more problematic. 

Perhaps the most sensible thing is to just House Rule that such spells do not cancel a countermagic. They affect the protected entity but the countermagic remains.

[Atgxtg]

 

3 minutes ago, Mechashef said:

Perhaps the most sensible thing is to just House Rule that such spells do not cancel a countermagic. They affect the protected entity but the countermagic remains.

Or that you match it against the total points of Countermagic. It's kinda funny how something like this never came up in the last 40 years. 

[Joerg]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Quote

I also propose that any added MPs to a Detect get fully applied to the first countermeasure it comes across, the same way. The added MPs don't carry any further.

That means that someone could pretty much short out a powerful Detect just by having someone in front with a 1 point Countermagic.

I would amend that to the boosting MP being used up by each Countermagic effect they encounter (plus one if it is the spirit magic spell). Thus a Detect boosted with 4 MP will shatter two Countermagic 1 or overcome two points of shield or two castings of berserk, and still go on unboosted until encountering the next Countermagic effect of any size, then dissipate.

That does of course mean that your comrades' Countermagic effects will be the first to encounter your Detect... or you send out your familiar to cast it from a more convenient advanced observer position.

Next question about the nature of say Detect Enemies: Is this a spell targeting only enemies, or is this a spell that targets everone in range to decide whether they are enemies or not?

 

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Maybe the Detect should go up against the Countermagic spells in order of weakest to strongest, and we could keep a running total of Countermagic? When the total magic points of Countermagic get within one point of the total magic points of Detect, the Detect gets blown down.

I am in favor of radial distance. Detect as written is not a directional spell.