Author Topic: Counter magic strategies  (Read 6237 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Doridian

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 161
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Counter magic strategies
« on: March 27, 2017, 03:19:42 AM »
Hi all.
Just two brief forewords.

First one. I've managed to play a campaign only once with MERP in my youth. After my group of friends dissolved for reasons that are not of interest here, I managed to play RM with 1st Ed. rules, 2nd Ed. rules, RMSS, always as the GM and more often than not starting over with new characters and new players. So, even after all of these years, I've not accrued any true confidence with high level characters in general and magic users in particular. My question then is really as by a newbie of the game.

Second one. I consider Mentalism Companion one of the best books I've ever read (I mean book in the broadest meaning). Indeed it contains rules for playing travels in the dream world but just reading it it's a travel in the dream world by itself. Everything in that book in my opinion is great to be inspired by. But all of the pages regarding the use of divination spells and skills and the ways to oppose to those spells and skills have completely changed the way I consider a world of fantasy. After reading those pages I've not been able anymore to consider any setting without a concern for the presence of Seers and their abilities and for the ways the world around them has developed to balance their abilities (just to name one trivial thing: talismans to be used to "cover" meetings that have to be kept reserved).

Ok, now the question.

I feel I'm missing something in the way RM (at least before RMU) seems to work regarding countering magic. The main point is that everything seems to me intimately based on declaring actions and things beforehand. Just to give one example, the various Cancel spells are not instants and work by concentrating: the spell user is waiting for something to happen. Even an instantaneous spell has to be declared at the beginning of a round (at least in RMSS). And casting a spell after canceling your actions (in RMSS) is not among the allowed alternatives. Often you need to know the realm of the incoming target spell. But, again, the rules do not allow to cast more than one spell in a round, even if instant: so, if you need to cast a spell to identify an incoming spell, you cannot cast a subsequent spell to protect you from it.

So my question is: in your campaigns and adventures, with the old Spell Law and companions (in Essence Companion there are other spells aimed to defend against spells), how do you handle protecting from magic? Why (by which means - spells, items, skills) a powerful spell user is truly "powerful"? How a "powerful" spell user can have an edge above less powered magic using adversaries? Is it just a matter of higher level (RR's)? Is it a matter of putting up beforehand well prepared defenses? If it's the case, which ones?

I do not expect a companion-long answer (as the wonderful treaty is in the Mentalism Companion, I mean) just some hints: we use the spells X and Y this way, that way. If anyone would like to share with me his/her ideas, maybe I could work on it and give back some results.
Any ideas?
Thank you anyway for having read these lines.

Ciao
Alessandro

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2017, 10:52:20 AM »
I think you are right in the sense that one of the main benefits of being a higher level caster is the RR benefit. Those base spell casting bonuses do become significant at higher levels. Against non-spell users, who don't tend to have high stats, your spells are very likely to succeed; and in the old Rolemaster phased system (at least the RM2 one, though I believe not the RMSS one), spells always go first. This means essentially that the Spell user always wins initiative and usually has his spell take effect.

Higher level spells also have benefits such as longer range, or multiple effects. A Bladeturn III spell for example can turn three attacks, whereas Bladeturn I can only turn one.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline Doridian

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 161
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2017, 12:37:26 PM »
Thank you Hurin. I think I should try to be more precise.
Two spells that are in the direction I'm trying to investigate are Unessence and its versions (from the Dispelling Ways list) and the various Spell Hold (from Spell Reins).

If an Essence Spell User learns the 18th level Unessence, in case of perceived danger coming from another spell user, he/she could (try to) overcome the opponent by brute force casting first Unessence against the other Spell User. Obviously it could be resisted. And obviously the other spell user could possibly be from a different magic realm (say Mentalism). And obviously it's not properly a reaction: it's a preemption.
All of these "obviously" caveats make me think that being able to cast Unessence by itself it's not enough to make me a hard nut to crack.

Spell Hold seems more promising, for two reasons: it's realm independent and it's instantaneous. Even if a spell user is catched flat footed by a spell using adversary, he/she should be able to cast it anyway (in RMSS it would cost only 10% of activity).
Yet, putting a spell on hold by itself would not be a great deal: it should be briefly (the round after) followed by a proper spell to get rid of the problem before the original attack eventually resolves its effects. The safest maneuver would be to blink away, out of range of the original incoming spell (using some of the Lofty Bridge spells), maybe casting the proper Unessence (Unmentalism or Unchanneling) on the enemy spell user before leaving. Or the spell user could then cast on him/herself some protection spells to improve the RR chances.

Is this the usual way you have enemy magic users deal with each other?
Maybe my question could be rephrased this way: in your games how spell users are used to defend themselves from other spell users?

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2017, 01:31:33 PM »
Perhaps the greatest advantage would be to know the class of your opponent; then he could cast the spell without worrying the caster was of another realm. Yes, it is pre-emption, as you say; but I think that is the way it can best be done. Many casters have spells that can help them figure out details about their opponents; and in lack of them, you could always try to hire spies (Magents would be particularly good at this) or pay for information. So yes, I think you are right in that some strategies will depend heavily on information and pre-emption.

Protection spells would work in a similar way, yes, though again, knowing the realm of the opponent would make your own spells more effective.

In sum, I would say yes, counter-spells are better done in a pre-emptive fashion, or with general protective spells.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline Ynglaur

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 532
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2017, 08:12:07 PM »
What about wards and other forms of stored magic?  I seem to recall a list that allowed spells to be fired based on certain conditions, which I had interpreted includes things such as, "Targeted by a spell."

Offline Tywyll

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #5 on: March 28, 2017, 03:33:36 AM »
Probably the best defense is a good offence. Kill them first, don't worry about blocking their spell.

Also, higher levels probably means more magic items with bonuses to RR.

What about power perception? I don't think that takes any activity besides whatever a general perception check requires, but if not you should be able to see their colors.

Sent from my E6533 using Tapatalk


Offline juza

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 59
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2017, 05:23:30 AM »
Ciao Alessandro,
your question is one of the reasons why, as GM, I prefer to run low magic adventures.
First remember that preparing and casting spell are visible actions so you know if a magic users is preparing a spell to cast. Spell Hold and Cancel spells are usuful as long as you have win initiative. As player I used to cast Dispel spells just because are rage spell, so I was able to get closer to the rival mage and attack him with a no magical attack (because I cannot cast other spell in the same round) or protect another player and let him to get close and attack the rival spell user.
For knowing which realm is using the rival spells are not so usefull just because the "no 2 spell in the same round" rule, but remember that there are also skills that can help you to find out the realm so not always you have to use magic.

Offline Doridian

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 161
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2017, 11:02:31 AM »
Ah, thank you all!
From your suggestions I understand that I should first consider "passive" elements, as magic items and their bonuses. And then I should also consider all of the spells that can be stacked beforehand one upon the other. The suggestion for Wards (and maybe Glyphs) is good. I'll consider the skills too. The idea is to build up a powerful NPC that turns to be a real challenge to players and not only a void promise: say I would like to have him/her smartly escape a trap by proper play and not simply by GM rulings...!
Honestly I confess I hoped to discover that the magic system provides some ways to portray magic battles with a comparable degree of choices and "maneuvering" as it happens with melee. But I suppose it's fun anyway.
Thank you again.

Offline Tywyll

  • Seeker of Wisdom
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2017, 03:21:47 PM »
Actually, I find the magic system involves more 'maneuvering' than melee. In magical battles, there is the prefight phase...you research your enemy, spy on them, scry them, etc.

Then the preparation phase...creating traps or preparing to confront them with prep spells.

Then the actual fight.

Comparing that to melee, you see a guy, split your OB/DB and then roll to hit/crit.

You also have lists like Spell Defense (Chan), Protections (Cleric), Spell Wall (Ess), Spell Reins (Ess), Spell Resistance (Men) that all have general resistance spells as well. 

Offline Jengada

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 409
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2017, 03:32:09 PM »
I made a monster that's basically a magic-using golem, and I remember it was primarily attack-oriented. I'm going to have to go back and look at that, see what I can do as a counter-magic version. They were originally designed to work with golems and constructs, filling out the missile-melee-magic triad.
We ask the hard questions here, because they keep us too busy to worry about the hard questions in the real world, and we can go with the answers we like the best.

Offline RandalThor

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,116
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2017, 04:00:27 PM »
If you want to be really evil, you could convert the D&D Spell Weaver (in Monster Manual II, pg. 187), an insect-humanoid with 6 arms and the ability to cast more than one spell per round! Dum-dum-DUMMMM!!!!! (And, yes, you are totally able to think it is more "dumb" than, dum-dum-dum. *smiley-face emoji* )
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Scratch that. Power attracts the corruptible.

Rules should not replace the brain and thinking.

Offline Pazuzu

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2017, 05:00:22 PM »
I've always found that an arrow to the knee, or a knife to the gut tends to have a dampening effect on spellcasting.

But all in all, RM (at least in my eyes) tends to take a more prophylactic approach to dealing with things, either magical or otherwise, as opposed to countering what has already been let loose.

The key to any sort of success is preparation. Just ask any great villain.

Offline RandalThor

  • Sage
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,116
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2017, 02:21:40 PM »
The key to any sort of success is preparation. Just ask any great villain.
While I agree with that, I have yet to see a group of player characters really go proactive like that. For the most part, adventures are a reactionary set of events: something happens and the PCs react to it, they go into a place that is all mysterious with little-to-no knowledge and react to what they come across. (I am not saying I like that to be the basic model, but it is just how 90%+ of the games play in practice.)

For it to be the other way, they would have to take time and effort to seek out information. In other words: you need to do what the vast majority of players considers to be boring. To this end, I think it might be good for the RM game to come up with an in-action counter-spelling technique or spell, such as the spell Counterspell in D&D 5E, where it is cast as a reaction to another spell being cast and if done right - spell level vs spell level, basically - it works. (But that might be a topic for another thread.)
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Scratch that. Power attracts the corruptible.

Rules should not replace the brain and thinking.

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2017, 04:05:53 PM »
That's one of the reasons I was suggesting allowing instantaneous actions (0 AP ones) in RMU be castable during an opponent's turn. Then they could be used like 'Reactions' in DnD. In Magic: the Gathering, these are actually literally called 'instant' actions.

That's also why I think calling these sorts of actions 'instantaneous' in RMU but not actually making them 'instant' in the way these terms have been used in Magic or DnD might be confusing to players. If an action is 'instant', I think players might wonder, why does it have to be declared at the start of the round or action phase, and why does it sometimes cost AP? That doesn't really seem to match the definition of 'instant'.

So I think you could either have a category of actions that are truly 'instant', cost 0 AP, and can be taken as an interrupt of an enemy's action (real counters); or you don't and you rename 'instantaneous' actions 'minor' actions or 'quick' actions or something like that, because they're not truly 'instant' if they cost AP.

'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline Pazuzu

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2017, 09:05:54 PM »
The way the current RMFRP initiative is set up, you can still declare your action to be to "ready" your spell shield, spell wall, spell turn, or other anti-magic spell you like, and declare you hold your action until the opponent casts their spell.

Works in practice much like a counterspell, except you had it ready in advance. But it is really hard to counter something until you actually know what you are countering. This is why RM spells are somewhat generic in the form of spell walls, turns, or shields.

In my opinion, this is a feature, and not a bug.

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #15 on: April 03, 2017, 11:21:29 AM »
I guess what I'm saying is that DnD and Pathfinder have a category of 'reaction' abilities that allow characters a chance to react to enemy actions. I think this is tactically interesting, and almost essential in turn-based games, because in reality people can react to others' actions faster than once every 5 seconds. This was part of the problem with the Zone of Control rules presented in the beta of RMU: characters could run past each other without any chance of stopping or attacking the person running by. Turn-based round structures don't very accurately model real-time environments unless you give characters some chance or ability to react more often than once every 5 or 10 seconds.

Opportunity actions can help, but they're not a full substitute, because they require the action to be declared and readied. In reality, a guard standing at the castle gate could choose to either step in front of the thief trying to run past him or he could take a swing at him. He shouldn't have to have declared one readied and forfeit the other. This was why of course DnD had the category of interrupts (which characters can take before the triggering action, like Counterspell) and reactions (which characters can take immediately after the triggering action). Similarly, depending on which edition you are playing, DnD characters also have a version of a 'bonus' action that you can take once per turn. All of this gives characters in a turn-based environment a chance to react as they would in a real time environment.

Extending this then to RM, we see that RM really doesn't have a fully developed concept of an interrupt or reaction. RM spells are really only proactive, and not reactive. There is nothing quite like DnD's Counterspell in Rolemaster.

RMU's new category of 'instantaneous' actions then seem to me to be the best opportunity for filling that gap. All one would have to do would be to say that actions that cost 0 AP can be taken as interrupts (i.e. on an enemy's turn).
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline Malim

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 424
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #16 on: April 04, 2017, 04:22:58 AM »
Bring a wizard on board! :)
Sir Elor Blacke knight of Helyssa, Kytari Fighter lvl 25 (RM2)
Malim Naruum, Yinka Lord Bashkor lvl 27  (RM2)

Offline Doridian

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 161
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #17 on: April 04, 2017, 07:14:49 AM »
That's one of the reasons I was suggesting allowing instantaneous actions (0 AP ones) in RMU be castable during an opponent's turn. Then they could be used like 'Reactions' in DnD. In Magic: the Gathering, these are actually literally called 'instant' actions.
In my gaming sessions (RMSS) I've house ruled that instantaneous spells can always be cast in reaction to an opponent's action: they do cost 10% activity and they do need a successful SCR maneuver (SCR in RMSS is much the same as ESF in RM2) to go to effect. If no % activity is left for the current round, the 10% is borrowed from the following round. If the one per round allowed spell has already been cast and the caster still likes to cast it, the instantaneous spell counts for the following round limit.

Is in RMU still ruled that no more than one spell per round can be cast?

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #18 on: April 04, 2017, 10:37:54 AM »
That's one of the reasons I was suggesting allowing instantaneous actions (0 AP ones) in RMU be castable during an opponent's turn. Then they could be used like 'Reactions' in DnD. In Magic: the Gathering, these are actually literally called 'instant' actions.
In my gaming sessions (RMSS) I've house ruled that instantaneous spells can always be cast in reaction to an opponent's action: they do cost 10% activity and they do need a successful SCR maneuver (SCR in RMSS is much the same as ESF in RM2) to go to effect. If no % activity is left for the current round, the 10% is borrowed from the following round. If the one per round allowed spell has already been cast and the caster still likes to cast it, the instantaneous spell counts for the following round limit.

Sounds like we are thinking along the same lines. I haven't done this in RM2, but we are doing trying it in RMU.

Quote
Is in RMU still ruled that no more than one spell per round can be cast?

I believe the core rule is only one spell per round, yes, though I think there is also the option to allow more. I can't remember where exactly I saw that though; perhaps someone can correct me if I am wrong.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,101
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: Counter magic strategies
« Reply #19 on: April 04, 2017, 11:34:28 AM »
The optional rule for multiple spells per round is on page 85 of A&CL.

In general, you don't need an interrupt type action to cast an instant spell as a defense vs a spell or attack, because the spell or attack will take multiple AP. So the attacker begins their attack/spell and if you use your own next AP to cast your instant spell, it will take effect before the attack/spell is completed.

The two exceptions would be 1) the offensive spell itself was an instant spell, or 2) you don't have any time to respond, e.g. because you were surprised or otherwise unaware of the attacker. I think it's appropriate that in those circumstances you wouldn't be able to launch your defense (unless you had already cast it and were holding it ready because you anticipated ambush etc).

This assumes you are going 1 AP at a time through the round. If you are using the optional rule to resolve multiple AP at once, it makes sense to allow instant spells basically as interrupts when you would have the time and forewarning to do so.

System and Line Editor for Rolemaster