Bladesharp

[Atgxtg]

BTW, I think the reason why they didn't cancel out originally was because most people who know Bladesharp know more than 1 point, and players would rather not lock up  INT on multiple points of Dullblade,. Especially with Countermagic being more useful and more prevalent. 

[daskindt]

14 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW, I think the reason why they didn't cancel out originally was because most people who know Bladesharp know more than 1 point, and players would rather not lock up  INT on multiple points of Dullblade,. Especially with Countermagic being more useful and more prevalent. 

So because Dullblade is undesirable they made it even worse?

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Anunnaki said:

Hope this helps the discussion.

Kind regards, James

 

It has, is a tangential way. In the Rambling Runequestion box it mentions that a caster doesn't have to overcome the POW of someone to cast a spell on his weapon, but does have to overcome toe POW of any spirit bound into that weapon.  I believe that was something we were wondering about.

AndI didn't remember the bit about breaking the spell up across multiple weapons. 

[Russ Massey]

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

The seems the logical solution. 

I'm starting to think so. As I noted earlier, none of the situational modifiers split. 

Situational modifiers do surely have to be applied to each attack, as they can change during the round. You could make your first attack in total darkness and then a light spell goes off before the second attack. Surely the -75% does not apply at that point. Similary you could make two attacks against an opponent with the first attack crippling him so he falls. The second attack would surely then gain the bonus for a prone opponent even if he was standing at the start of the round.

[Atgxtg]

18 minutes ago, Russ Massey said:

Situational modifiers do surely have to be applied to each attack, as they can change during the round. You could make your first attack in total darkness and then a light spell goes off before the second attack. Surely the -75% does not apply at that point. Similary you could make two attacks against an opponent with the first attack crippling him so he falls. The second attack would surely then gain the bonus for a prone opponent even if he was standing at the start of the round.

Yeah, pretty much.  There might be a case where it doesn't make sense to apply them to each attack but I haven't thought of one yet. 

[soltakss]

1 hour ago, Russ Massey said:

Situational modifiers do surely have to be applied to each attack, as they can change during the round. You could make your first attack in total darkness and then a light spell goes off before the second attack. Surely the -75% does not apply at that point. Similary you could make two attacks against an opponent with the first attack crippling him so he falls. The second attack would surely then gain the bonus for a prone opponent even if he was standing at the start of the round.

That is a complex one.

If the situation changes, then the GM should make a decision based on that change. 

So, in your example, if I have 150% Sword Attack then I can split 75/75, normally, however in total darkness I am at -75% so only have a 75% attack chance and cannot split. If my Sword is 200%, then I have an effective 125% attack chance and can now split 65/60. If a light goes on after my first attack, do I suddenly gain +38 to my sword attack? Probably not, as I would rule that the light appearing is probably confusing, you have committed your attack and now can see, if you want to take advantage of the +38 then delay your attack to see what is happening. I would never apply the -75 to both splits, as that is over-harsh and unplayable.

If I had Sword and attacked with left hand /right hand, then each sword attack should be at the -75 penalty. Again, if a light came on, the second attack would still be at the -75 penalty, unless the PC delayed, in which case the penalty would be nullified and the attack would be at full chance. If the light came on during the first attack, there is a case to argue that the second attack could be at full chance, as the attack has not yet been committed.

Others are more complex. If I have a 98% Sword and am on a horse, I get +20, so can attack on 118%, so I can split at 59/59, but if I jump down off my horse between attacks, I lose the +20 and so cannot split the attack and lose the second attack? As a GM, I would rule that both attacks gain the advantage of the +20, as they were committed at that point.

If I attack from behind, I get +20, so the 98% Sword can attack 2 people from behind. If the second person attacking turns around, I am not attacking from behind and lose the +20 so cannot split? Again, I would rule that the second attack was committed and so takes advantage of the +20.

I am sure there are lots of similar examples.

[Psullie]

48 minutes ago, soltakss said:

if I have 150% Sword Attack then I can split 75/75, normally, however in total darkness I am at -75% so only have a 75% attack chance and cannot split.

If I have a 98% Sword and am on a horse, I get +20, so can attack on 118%, so I can split at 59/59

here's the rub, with 98% sword, even with a boost you still can't split attacks as it's based on the natural ability. But does it work the other way, If I have a 120% sword skill that gets reduced due to whatever by 30%, do I still get the two attacks, but at -30 each? The logic is based on that it requires a natural skill level to make two attacks and that modifiers can not give you that ability?

[PhilHibbs]

1 minute ago, Psullie said:

here's the rub, with 98% sword, even with a boost you still can't split attacks as it's based on the natural ability. But does it work the other way, If I have a 120% sword skill that gets reduced due to whatever by 30%, do I still get the two attacks, but at -30 each? The logic is based on that it requires a natural skill level to make two attacks and that modifiers can not give you that ability?

The official rule seems to be that modifiers are added before the split, but cannot allow a split that could not be done otherwise.

98% +30% gives one attack at 128%.

102% + 30% gives one attack at 132% or two attacks at 66% each or other split that adds up to 132%.

120% - 30% gives one attack at 90% or... hmm, tricky, the rules say that each attack has to be at least 50%, so you can't make two at 45%... so I guess it must prevent splitting.

Officially, Bladesharp adds before the split. Some think it should be after, so maybe the latter case should be possible if Bladesharp brings it back above 50%... but this is getting rather complex. Maybe this is why all adds go on before the split, because it avoids corner cases like this.

[soltakss]

43 minutes ago, Psullie said:

here's the rub, with 98% sword, even with a boost you still can't split attacks as it's based on the natural ability

That is something I would houserule away immediately.

I have Sword 98% and use Bladesharp 6 and Berserker, but I can't split because my base skill is below 100%? No, thank you very much.

[Darius West]

I would love to know if anyone has ever had a character with the spell Dullblade.  Who was the character? How did they get the spell?  Did they use it much?  I have a feeling, that you could make Dullblade -2 Damage and -10% skill per point and most players still won't bother with it.  On the other hand, I might be wrong, so please tell me about your experiences.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Darius West

[PhilHibbs]

47 minutes ago, Darius West said:

I would love to know if anyone has ever had a character with the spell Dullblade.  Who was the character? How did they get the spell?  Did they use it much?  I have a feeling, that you could make Dullblade -2 Damage and -10% skill per point and most players still won't bother with it.  On the other hand, I might be wrong, so please tell me about your experiences.

I think it's entirely reasonable to make it more potent. How does it compare to other spells point for point? Is 2 points of Dullblade comparable to Demoralize or Befuddle? I guess it is better if you have a low POW and don't think you will overcome the enemy. If I was playing a Chalana Arroy healer, I might want to use it as a defensive spell. If another PC is going to attack someone who I don't think deserves to be attacked, I could cast it on the PC's sword as an indication of the strength of my disapproval.

I think a shield with a built in Dullblade matrix, maybe with some linked POW storage and a trigger condition, would make a great loot item.

[soltakss]

I have never had Dullblade, as we played it had to overcome POW to work, as it was cast on an opponent. Why use Dullblade when you can use Dispel Magic instead? If I am overcoming POW anyway, then why not use Demoralise or Befuddle? They are far more effective spells.

Humakti PCs are banned from using Dullblade, I think, but I could well be wrong.

Also, does Dullblade work on any weapon or just on blades? Not much use against crushing weapons, for example.

[PhilHibbs]

5 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Also, does Dullblade work on any weapon or just on blades? Not much use against crushing weapons, for example.

"Despite the spell’s name, this spell reduces the damage
done by any melee weapon, sharp or blunt.

This spell specifically does not work on natural weapons
like claws, teeth, etc."

Edited November 23, 2018 by PhilHibbs

[soltakss]

10 minutes ago, Anunnaki said:

And so on. Key points being, Bladesharp, IMO enhanced the weapon (specifically), so is applied to every attack (only, not parry). Sword Trance enhances the skill and is applied to both attack and parry (ignoring the ambiguity in the wording of "other weapon-enhancing spells" -- IMO, should just read "weapon-enhancing spells". /shrug

Yes, I think there is a distinction to be drawn between spells/effects that affect the person and those that affect the weapon.

Things like Sword Trance, Berserker and Fanaticism affect the person, as do most of the situational modifiers.

Things like Bladesharp, Dullblade, Truesword, Iron and double damage vs certain foes affect the weapon.

There is an argument that double damage vs certain foes affects the person and affects any weapons that person uses, but I think that varies on a case by case basis.

 

For me, if I use Berserker and Axe Trance, I should get a hefty increase in my skill. Adding Bladesharp to the mix and my weapon skill goes up even further. Adding Truesword and it increases the damage, along with the Bladesharp.

Powerful Rune Levels with lots of magic are very, very dangerous, as, indeed, they should be.

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, Darius West said:

I would love to know if anyone has ever had a character with the spell Dullblade.  Who was the character? How did they get the spell?  Did they use it much?  I have a feeling, that you could make Dullblade -2 Damage and -10% skill per point and most players still won't bother with it.  On the other hand, I might be wrong, so please tell me about your experiences.

I think we had a character or two with it back in the 80s. We were using the previous experience rules from the appendix and some players decided to give it a try. But it wasn't considered worth it. For the same amount pf POW you could put up a point of Protection, which worked against everything. Even if you put a lot of points into Dullblade the opponent can just use a Countermagic it on it, or changed weapons. 

The only time the spell was useful was when it could be used to prevent the opponent from putting a better spell on their weapon that was incompatible with it. 

[Joerg]

3 hours ago, Darius West said:

I would love to know if anyone has ever had a character with the spell Dullblade.  Who was the character? How did they get the spell?  Did they use it much?  I have a feeling, that you could make Dullblade -2 Damage and -10% skill per point and most players still won't bother with it.  On the other hand, I might be wrong, so please tell me about your experiences.

Dullblade is a good spell for Chalana Arroy healers wishing to prevent damage but unwilling to defend sleeping opponents from fanaticized party members.

[Russ Massey]

5 hours ago, Darius West said:

I would love to know if anyone has ever had a character with the spell Dullblade.  Who was the character? How did they get the spell?  Did they use it much?  I have a feeling, that you could make Dullblade -2 Damage and -10% skill per point and most players still won't bother with it.  On the other hand, I might be wrong, so please tell me about your experiences.

In 30 years GMing I have yet to see a PC cast Dullblade

[Zozotroll]

I dont think I have ever seen anybody even have it in their inventory.  Much less use it.

[Darius West]

On 11/24/2018 at 1:30 AM, Joerg said:

Dullblade is a good spell for Chalana Arroy healers wishing to prevent damage but unwilling to defend sleeping opponents from fanaticized party members.

Yeah? I suppose... If you cast Dullblade 6 on the Stormbull, and protection 6 on the victim, they might even survive being a prone target for a few rounds, but wouldn't it be easier to sleep or demoralize the fanaticized party member?  They get their wits back, and it costs a lot less MP.  I still think Dullblade might be the most unloved spell in RQ, and probably with good reason.  It's a hard one to sell Joerg.  Tell me the truth, have you ever had a character of your own that had Dullblade?

Edited November 24, 2018 by Darius West

[Joerg]

13 minutes ago, Darius West said:

Yeah? I suppose... If you cast Dullblade 6 on the Stormbull, and protection 6 on the victim, they might even survive being a prone target for a few rounds, but wouldn't it be easier to sleep or demoralize the fanaticized party member?  They get their wits back, and it costs a lot less MP.  I still think Dullblade might be the most unloved spell in RQ, and probably with good reason.  It's a hard one to sell Joerg.  Tell me the truth, have you ever had a character of your own that had Dullblade?

Nope. I had only two or three RQ player characters in my years of playing RQ, other than pre-created ones in convention scenarios. I had legions of NPCs created by me.

I have used Dullblade coming from NPCs. It is targeting those sword-loving Humakti, making them into second rate Death Lord wannabes, or their unsufferable Orlanthi friends. As such, it makes a good spell for Yelmalians who want to cast their opponents in the role of darkness fiends, or from darkness foes wishing to even the field.

Dullblade has one tactical advantage over Demoralize - it works without overcoming the targetted character's POW (may still have to overcome the POW of an allied spirit in the blade, though). You cast Dullblade only once, whereas you will have to cast Demoralize twice or more half the time. Hence a Dullblade 6 may be less magic point intensive than two boosted Demoralize (8 points in total) to overcome that Countermagic effect of the Berserk.

 

[Darius West]

1 minute ago, Joerg said:

Dullblade has one tactical advantage over Demoralize - it works without overcoming the targetted character's POW (may still have to overcome the POW of an allied spirit in the blade, though). You cast Dullblade only once, whereas you will have to cast Demoralize twice or more half the time. Hence a Dullblade 6 may be less magic point intensive than two boosted Demoralize (8 points in total) to overcome that Countermagic effect of the Berserk.

Does Dullblade really not require POW vs POW?  I don't know anyone who plays it that way.  Not that I'm saying you're wrong, it might be the only saving grace for the spell.  Is it even included in the new RQ rules?

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Darius West said:

Does Dullblade really not require POW vs POW?

There is no indication it requires that, and it should specifically state so if it does.  The only note in the spell is "If the weapon has a spirit in it, the spirit’s magic points must be overcome for the spell to work."

1 hour ago, Darius West said:

Is it even included in the new RQ rules?

Yes, it is.  

The cults that have it as common spirit magic are:  Chalana Arroy and Maran Gor.

[PhilHibbs]

4 hours ago, Darius West said:

Does Dullblade really not require POW vs POW?  I don't know anyone who plays it that way.  Not that I'm saying you're wrong, it might be the only saving grace for the spell.  Is it even included in the new RQ rules?

Crack has a rule that the item holder gets a resistance roll. I don't think other item-affecting spells do.

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, Darius West said:

Does Dullblade really not require POW vs POW?  I don't know anyone who plays it that way.  Not that I'm saying you're wrong, it might be the only saving grace for the spell.  Is it even included in the new RQ rules?

It didn't in RQ2. I dn't know about RQG. It's a pretty poor spell to begin with, and would be a waste of MP it if it did. Worse case scenario, the opponent wastes a few SR changing weapons, and to force that, you have to spend a lot of MPs that would habe been better used on some other spell. Protection, perhaps?  

Edited November 25, 2018 by Atgxtg

[Russ Massey]

5 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

It didn't in RQ2. I dn't know about RQG. It's a pretty poor spell to begin with, and would be a waste of MP it if it did. Worse case scenario, the opponent wastes a few SR changing weapons, and to force that, you have to spend a lot of MPs that would habe been better used on some other spell. Protection, perhaps?  

Yeah, the basic problem with DB is that there are much more efficient ways to affect an enemy for the same MP cost. Maybe if it removed the chance for a special damage result it would be more worthwhile.