Author Topic: Additional cost for Spell Mastery  (Read 12883 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Temujin

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #40 on: May 14, 2008, 12:03:01 PM »
The character that has done this is a 20th level Wizard with more or less 150 of Spell Mastery bonus in, let me see... Seven lists. 150-80=70, he just have to roll over 5 not to fail.

Well, what can I say?  A 20th lvl wizard pretty much explains it in my eyes.  You should be able to level a small regiment without too much of a sweat at that level...

Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #41 on: May 14, 2008, 12:05:01 PM »
But this is digressing to 'in the defense of non-spell casting classes' that has been discussed earlier.  In the end mages are definitely more powerful than fighters, spell mastery just makes it much more apparent.

I agree. In a system that is levelled and is based around the concept that players should be of equal power in a party, then it is true that spell casters will, ultimately become the most powerful characters.

However, this problem only really becomes apparent if you short cut the progression and start at higher levels.

At lower levels spell casters suffer heavily from the speed at which they cast thier spells, the amount of spells they can cast without quickly becoming exhausted. The arms characters are able to cause more damage and on a regular basis in low level combats.

It's simply not a level playing field to start with.

Offline Joshua24601

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 85
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #42 on: May 14, 2008, 03:55:32 PM »
What if the difficulty of the spell mastery attempt was modified by the spells level in relationship to the character... with the idea that spells that the character has known for a long time (much lower level then he is) are easier to tweak and spells he's just recently learned are much harder.

Use the spell casting difficulty chart at the column for 0 round prep time.  This would give a spell of the same level as the PC a nasty modifier, and a spell 10 levels lower a small boost.  If you think the negative modifiers are too harsh, move to column 1 or 2.

This will help balance the higher level casters, who won't immediately be able to spell master their new powerful spells, they'll have to take some levels to get completely comfortable with the spell.  (in the same way that they get faster at preparing lower level spells)
While it does make life more difficult for the lower level casters, it also gives a small bonus (or higher at 1 or 2) to master attempts for spells that are many levels below them..

-Josh
The day that our schools are well funded and the Airforce has to hold a bake sale to buy a new bomber, will be a good day!

Offline Marc R

  • Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,392
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • "Don't throw stones, offer alternatives."
    • Looking for Online Roleplay? Try RealRoleplaying
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #43 on: May 14, 2008, 04:21:18 PM »
It's an RM2 book reference, but topical to the discussion:

AC=Alchemy Companion

There's a note in the AC on "Spell Mastery" that states that if the GM charges variable PP to reflect modification of spell effects, that the skill be purchased once, applying to all spellcasting in general. learn something new every day.

I'd have no problem with going that route, and/or dumping the entire spell mastery skill and allowing casters to use their ranks in list based bonus in it's place, with the charge of PP for modifying the spells. In the end, your ranks in a list determine your skill in that list. . .why are you buying a second skill to reflect the same thing anyway?

My other problem with the idea in general is that it brings into question all those meta spells like Ranging etc. It seems odd how many mechanisms reach the same route.

Essentially, at root, if you can stretch a teleport I into a Teleport V (Not if it's a good idea in terms of the penalty to the roll, just possible) then why can't you just cast a Teleport V at Teleport I costs.

i.e. if you're allowed to get more of an effect for less PP cost because you can cast more efficiantly, by exchanging PP cost for a Penalty to the roll, you should allow casters to underpower their spells as they get higher bonuses. . .essentially, the "Cast a 10th level spell for 5 PP". . .and that might work, or it might be madness, but it is essentially the exact same logic as allowing up scaling for no PP charge, done in the opposite direction. Would you be OK allowing that?
« Last Edit: May 14, 2008, 04:39:15 PM by LordMiller »
The Artist Formerly Known As LordMiller

Looking for online Role Play? Try WWW.RealRoleplaying.Com

Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #44 on: May 14, 2008, 05:20:54 PM »
The things that bothers me about this whole discussion is that, to a degree, most lower-level spells are already improving with level in relation to duration and range... but specifically (and notably) not damage.

If the arguement against Spell mastery is that you are getting more for the same PP when using Spell Mastery then could someone please rationalise for me the normal spell improvement with level increases... and where does that additional power come from to achieve this improvement?

If this arguement on getting something more for nothing is logical then ALL the parameters of spells should remain static. I.e. Ranges and durations shouldn't increase etc.

If it is from the ability of the caster through experience (which is what I believe) to more efficently cast the spell (i.e. getting more for less), then isn't using DP to purchase a focused skill (which isn't an automatic success) to further improve the efficency of other parts of the spell exactly the same process since DP represents a learning experience?

Unlike that certain other system that does freely increase damage causing spells with level increases (in addition to most other parameters), Rolemaster is fairly harsh in this respect, especially since the caster is limited to one spell per round.


Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #45 on: May 14, 2008, 10:09:50 PM »
Side Note:
  I can say that in the past I have changed the spell system slightly to allow for a caster to buy ranks in a spell to increase there casting chance. Since in RMSS it is 50+1 per rank in spell list+ other bonuses, I used the same scale of 1 rank=+1 but I gave the PC 4spell ranks = 1DP and limited the amount of ranks you could buy in spells based on spell rank, PC level, list types etc. It did work well and added a lot of flavor to the game.

  But in the end if you like the rule try it out and see how it goes.

MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Dark Schneider

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 694
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • El único, genial e inimitable Dark Schneider.
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #46 on: May 15, 2008, 02:53:28 AM »
I think the problem is only for ATTACK SPELLS (reading your replies), at the end there is no one that is disagree about using SM with other spell types.

Remember that for attack spells there is few things that we can do for enhance with SM, if you can0t increase its radius, range or other params...what can you do?, maybe changing its colour, changing a 'fire bolt' to dragon form...is any of those usefull in any way?.

Well, we can begin from that only improve params is usefull for attack spells, then the solution is very easy, you only need to limit the params mods as you want.

So, I say it again, we remove the damage modifier, so, for area spells you can improve radius, a good change but not unbalanced for amount DPs you need to pay, the problem are 'bolts', removing the damage modifier limits you to use any other one but range, but if you don't need to improve range, you can't use SM with them.

I am searching for a special modifier for 'bolts', that is adding OB to the attack, I think there is no disagreement with this, as 1st try I am thinking about using the same negative modifier used in SM as positive bonus to 'bolt' attack, so if you roll with a -30 and success, you add +30 OB to your 'bolt' attack roll. See that this modifier can't be used in other attack rolls, as 'bolts' (directed spells in general, as launching and others too) are the only 150 points table based as any other attack in RM. If there is too much, then used half (-30 maneuver = +15 OB bonus), but this needs to be tested in game.
Adding this bonus to BAR or 'ball' attacks is not possible obviously.

All the disagreement I see is about attack spells and the reason is that you use written rules as strict law (and the SOHK, because in CL is different), as if you can't do anything about it, but you can, you can modify them as you like.

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #47 on: May 15, 2008, 04:00:23 AM »
I think the problem is only for ATTACK SPELLS (reading your replies), at the end there is no one that is disagree about using SM with other spell types.

No, i don't really care about PCs being able to cast lightningbolts at damage x5, or Fireballs with radius x4. That's the purpose of SM, and they paid a lot of DPs to have this ability.
The problem is that I don't want Spell Mastery to become a way to save power points. I think that's not why the skill was made and that using it to cast the equivalent of high level spells in less time and using less PPs is abusing the skill concept.
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #48 on: May 15, 2008, 04:58:53 AM »
I agree, to a point, that common sence should prevail in cases where this is obviously the intent of the player.

However, why shouldn't it ALSO be a way of getting something for less. Improved and specialised knowledge improves effiecently both in time and energy.

As I mentioned in a previous post, some spells already increase in power with some parameters (like duration and range) at NO additional cost, the energy to power these increases must either come from somewhere (the rules say they don't, since the PP requirement for the spell says the same) OR it is assumed that the expertise of the caster allows extra efficency when casting the spell.

I suppose what you could do, is simply give the caster the choice of whether to pay for the level increases or not, and thus make ALL spells PP variable (Base Cost being Level of the spell on the list), however, if you do that some form of freedom to alter parameters automatically (without the cost or risk of using Spell Mastery) could be introduced to expend the PP that hasn't been used. I.e. a 10th level caster has the option to effectively allocate the optional unused PP to the various parameters of the spell.

Obviously, this doesn't favor the Spell casters using the current rules in ANY way since casting the spell now costs more PP to get the same effect.
 


Offline Marc R

  • Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,392
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • "Don't throw stones, offer alternatives."
    • Looking for Online Roleplay? Try RealRoleplaying
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #49 on: May 15, 2008, 06:14:57 AM »
GB, I utterly agree with your point, which is why I use RMC options 3.1 and 3.2 (which are also in RM2 SL)

Spell Level based on PP used.

So if a 10th level caster casts a 4th level spell, and spends the minimum 4pp on it, then all level based factors are set at 4th level. . .the caster can choose to jack up the spell level up to 10 freely, and beyond 10 if they're willing to overcast.

It makes casting a lot more PP intensive, so I tend to be generous in my rules to allow for more PP for casters. But it means that all power scales are actually tied to a currency that maintains balance. It also covers the problem you raise, so that a 10th level caster's Sleep V is more nasty than a 5th level caster's Sleep V because the 10th level can put twice as much power into it, making you RR vs 10th level.

Like you, I also offer a lot of leeway in terms of letting PC casters play games with spell parameters, as fun is the point after all, but I like for them to keep in mind that there are limits, and if they want to cast firewall as a dome of fire, and walk around with it, they should expect that to be very draining of PP.
The Artist Formerly Known As LordMiller

Looking for online Role Play? Try WWW.RealRoleplaying.Com

Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #50 on: May 15, 2008, 08:31:16 AM »
Like you, I also offer a lot of leeway in terms of letting PC casters play games with spell parameters, as fun is the point after all, but I like for them to keep in mind that there are limits, and if they want to cast firewall as a dome of fire, and walk around with it, they should expect that to be very draining of PP.

But I like the idea that doing something complicated is dangerous and difficult rather than a simple hike in the PP cost.

The point here is, for me, that you either do one thing or the other.. you either don't use Spell Mastery at all and then charge extra PP for making changes to the parameters of the spell... (which for me brings up a whole load of far more serious powergaming abuses...)

or you leave as is.. and let the players struggle with the difficulties. The problem with "getting something for nothing" is a relatively insignificant one compared to the alternatives...

Consider a 20th level Mage with "x" amount of PP. Would he seriously risk even a 1% chance of losing ALL his PP in an effort just to save a small amount casting a single shock bolt? And those with PP multipliers simply wouldn't care about the PP savings...

In addition, the additional PP cost for the suggestion is highly subjective... what would be the cost for increasing the radius of an informational spell, the same as a Ball Spell or less? And who makes that choice the GM, the Rules.. or the player?


Offline Marc R

  • Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,392
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • "Don't throw stones, offer alternatives."
    • Looking for Online Roleplay? Try RealRoleplaying
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #51 on: May 15, 2008, 09:36:28 AM »
The basic rule is directly proportional. . .raising the level of the spell multiplies all spell based factors.

For non level based factors, use the elemental variant.

i.e. if "1 mile" is 5 PP then for 10 PP you get "2 miles" (or for 7 PP you can get 1.4 miles).

It eliminates the need to make a 2nd roll when spellcasting, since in effect if you want to double the range of that 1 mile, 5th level spell, you need 10 PP so you cast it as a 10th level spell. . .the difficulty is built into the fact that the higher the spell level is, the harder it is to cast (or to cast quickly).

If you compare the results to the lists, you find that it's generally cheaper to use a higher level spell than to power surge up a low level spell to duplicate it's effects. . .which is the way it should be, since the repeated version of the spell at the higher level is an established, researched and tested higher power version of the spell.

One of the reasons PP cost bias also works, is that you also don't veer into overcasting for free. . .using the SM method, you can jack up a spell to where it's result is over the caster's level. . .at which point not only are they modifying the effects of the spell, they are also overcasting, but that is not reflected in the casting roll.

i.e. if a 10th level caster with lots of spell mastery in a list, casts the 10th level spell on that list and increases it's power using SM, they are now effectively overcasting on the sly.
The Artist Formerly Known As LordMiller

Looking for online Role Play? Try WWW.RealRoleplaying.Com

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #52 on: May 15, 2008, 10:20:06 AM »
However, why shouldn't it ALSO be a way of getting something for less. Improved and specialised knowledge improves effiecently both in time and energy.

We are entering a "what are spell lists" and "what is experience" argument, so IMHO this is going to be very sbujective...
However: experience and specialised magical knowledge in RM is IMHO handled in several ways.
First you have a spell list, which represent your skill in manipulating magical energies to get certain results. For example, Fire Law is your skill in using the Essence to create and manipulate fire.
Experience in this skill comes in various forms:
- The skill itself: the more ranks you have in the list, the more you're able to "burn" magical power to produce more powerful effects.
- Your level: which basically reduces the cost of spells you cast both in terms of time and in terms of PPs (as for many spells the higher is your level, greater is their effect).
- Spell Mastery: which IMHO is your ability to go over the normal limits imposed by traditional spells, creating new effects (based on the list) on the fly.
So you can use spell mastery to cast more powerful version of normal spells, or to modify their parameters, or even to add new parameters to the spells you cast. This IMHO represent the true mastery in the spell list, as your character is no longer limited by conventional parameters given by it. A character with a high bonus of spell mastery in fire law is a true master of fire, able to produce almost any effect related to fire and heat he wants. This is a great advantage, but IMHO should not diminish the cost of spells, as the caster level is used for that kind of ability.
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #53 on: May 15, 2008, 12:43:46 PM »
I understand all those principles, however Spell Mastery (to me at least, Im sure there others that will agree with me here) is the way that Spell Casters can effectively boost their level with respect to certain spell lists.

I'm sure it's effect is akin to specialising in specific lists akin to actually being a higher level than the caster is (but only in those specific lists) allowing you to modify them, effectively overcast, to replicate higher level spells by economising on PP... all these things. But at a substantial investment AND risk.

It's expensive enough and risky enough as it is without further tinkering. I'm sure we all have house rules, and we are free to implement them. But it's not one I would feel happy about using as a GM.

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #54 on: May 15, 2008, 01:40:35 PM »
As a side note, when I proposed to introduce this HR to my players, they were positive about it. The player of the wizard in my example said that it seemed fair to him and suggested restriction far more severe than mine...  :angel2:
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline mocking bird

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,202
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #55 on: May 15, 2008, 01:43:04 PM »
Thinking about this a little more, what about adding a similar skill for weapons?  Adrenal strength only gives x2 concussion and needs prep.  What about a 'weapon mastery' skill, combat maneuvers catagory, that would add extra damage, crit, possible additional range for thrown, reducing range penalties, etc. for example?  
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.    Buddha

Offline Rasyr-Mjolnir

  • Inactive
  • *
  • Posts: 0
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #56 on: May 15, 2008, 01:51:57 PM »
Thinking about this a little more, what about adding a similar skill for weapons?  Adrenal strength only gives x2 concussion and needs prep.  What about a 'weapon mastery' skill, combat maneuvers catagory, that would add extra damage, crit, possible additional range for thrown, reducing range penalties, etc. for example? 

Check out the Combat Companion -- the rules for Combat Styles -- specifically the Specific Maneuvers....

Offline Marc R

  • Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,392
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • "Don't throw stones, offer alternatives."
    • Looking for Online Roleplay? Try RealRoleplaying
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #57 on: May 15, 2008, 01:52:23 PM »
I suspect the answer would lie in styles, either the MAC or CC versions.
The Artist Formerly Known As LordMiller

Looking for online Role Play? Try WWW.RealRoleplaying.Com

Offline mocking bird

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,202
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #58 on: May 15, 2008, 03:09:40 PM »
Kind of in styles.  However to get all the options it would become advanced meaning it would be a restricted skill you would need to buy in addition to the weapon or MA:St/Sw skill. Haven't looked at the combat companion.

Carrying the analogy back to spell mastery you would separate out the different possibilites into a separate, possibly restricted, skill.
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.    Buddha

Offline Dark Schneider

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 694
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • El único, genial e inimitable Dark Schneider.
Re: Additional cost for Spell Mastery
« Reply #59 on: May 16, 2008, 03:33:59 AM »
Quote
However, why shouldn't it ALSO be a way of getting something for less. Improved and specialised knowledge improves effiecently both in time and energy.

That remembers me I was looking for a rule about SM and automatic use, the original idea was using the SM bonus as % of improvement, so you save rolls and make game faster (charcater with high bonus want ALWAYS to roll SM of course).

Then, you only roll for changing parameters (wall that moves, etc.) but for improve parameters (increase radius, range, damage, etc.) you use the 'automatic use'. So SM is really the
Quote
improves effiecently both in time and energy
I think it represent it in a good way.

Another point is that you can control the power of the skill, my original idea was using the bonus as direct % of improve, so if you have +50 you can improve 50% the params (split), so you can improve +25% range and +25% radius in case of a 'ball'. See that having +100 in skill (I think is a good bonus) you can only double 1 param, and with +150 (near possible maximum bonus) you have a +150% of improvement (a maximum of x2,5 in a single param).

You only require a SCSM when you use it but adding the ranks in SM to the SCSM roll directly.

In any way I think that the damage modifer should not be used, the only one that can increase it is the melee combat (see that in missile is not possible) because the risk (I think it should be a reward).
For 'bolts' you can add the SM ranks to OB, see that the difference is casting bolts without SM doesn't require SCSM, that can delay the casting and in combat can be dangerous.

Then you can adjust as you like, if you want less, then you use half and if you like powerfull magic you use more.

This allows too develop the skill as linear one, so casters begin to use it since low lvls and begin to improve their favorite lists in a continous way, not in a explosive way making rolls with -20 to directly double a param.

For example, a 'lay healer' that develops SM for 'con. ways' (wants to specialize) with a +50 SM bonus, 'heal 1-10' is 'heal 1-15' for it (round bottom).

Somethings like that I think makes interesting develop SM in the way you want for any list (maybe for a list you see +50 is OK and for other you want a +100), and in the other hand you can easy control the power of the skill.

Is not a good way that a character increase its lvl and says 'now I cast a bit better my favorite spells'?.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2008, 03:42:38 AM by Dark Schneider »