Topic: Language

[GrumpyOldFart]

Personally I feel like this badly needs to be addressed in both RM and HARP. Especially in HARP, since CoM uses "Verbal Focus" as part of spellcasting.

The problem I see here is that languages don't progress the same way as any other skill in the game. Nor have they since RM1. It's been 30 years already guys, this is long overdue to be resolved.

More specifically, the concept that I'm having a problem with is the idea that in order to use Musical/Song Focus, you have to make a successful Singing/Play Instrument roll, and yet for Verbal Focus you don't have to make a successful language skill roll, for Somatic or Gestural Focus you don't have to make a successful Dancing roll, etc.

There's bound to be a way to clean this up and even it out, because as it stands users of Musical or Song Focus have to spend DPs on incidental skills, and really no one else has to. That and of course, the GM has one little area of skill that he has to explain to new players that no, that one doesn't work quite the same as every other skill in the game.

 

[Thom @ ICE]

In HARP SF the way language skills has been modified to be more like a skill with standard skill checks and use a maneuver roll with applicable skill, stat and talent bonuses applied - compared to a degree of difficulty determined on the differential between # of ranks in the language and the level that the individual is trying to achieve.  (pages 217-218)

[Mando]

Maybe replace the whole language skill concept with a simple (and cheap, 3 to 5 DPs) Polyglot Talent: After a few months of training, you are now able to fluently speak and write an additional language...

And a second one: Linguist (5 DPs). You are an expert linguist (able to speak and decipher old or archaic versions or regional dialects) in your native language or in one language for which you have taken the "Polyglot" Talent.

[Viktyr Gehrig]

The way Musical/Song Focus and Trance Focus are balanced is that they require ranks in incidental skills to be applied but also allow bonuses to the spellcasting roll. Verbal, Gestural, and Somatic-- the "default" focuses-- do not.

[Maelstrom]

But if you don't devote additional DPs to develop the related skill you suffer a very significant penalty or attempt to make the accompanying roll at a significant penalty.  I would certainly say the balance on this issue is tenuous at best.

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

But if you don't devote additional DPs to develop the related skill you suffer a very significant penalty or attempt to make the accompanying roll at a significant penalty.  I would certainly say the balance on this issue is tenuous at best.

It's a case of the character gets what they pay for, and anyone using the song/music foci for instance is likely to be spending the DPs on the relevant skills anyway.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[GrumpyOldFart]

...anyone using the song/music foci for instance is likely to be spending the DPs on the relevant skills anyway.

True enough, but it seems to me that this would weight the system fairly heavily toward Verbal, Gestural and Somatic foci, since they don't require any additional skills in order to use them effectively.

[NicholasHMCaldwell]

...anyone using the song/music foci for instance is likely to be spending the DPs on the relevant skills anyway.

True enough, but it seems to me that this would weight the system fairly heavily toward Verbal, Gestural and Somatic foci, since they don't require any additional skills in order to use them effectively.

They are the defaults and the simplest to use.

Best wishes,
Nicholas

[GrumpyOldFart]

Well I dunno, maybe it's just a pet peeve, but I don't see any reason to have defaults that are easier than any of the other methods. I feel like if you're going to require a supporting skill for any of them, you may as well treat them all that way.

Trance  - Mental Focus
Musical  - Play Instrument
Verbal   - Public Speaking
Somatic - Dancing
Song     - Singing

In fairness, I have to admit I can't think of a good match for Gestural.

[jasonbrisbane]

You don't need to understand italian to appreciate opera... Actors don't understand russian to play russian spies - they just learn the lines from someone who might... Same goes for casting styles/ etc


Sorry but I disagree with requiring ranks in languages, but to play an imstrument casting style you need play instrument and singing for that style...

You might house rule it to have same rules for magical language (razhus in cyradon)
Regards
Jaso
n

[GrumpyOldFart]

Yes, but "You don't have to understand Italian to appreciate opera" is not quite the same as "Understanding Italian makes no difference in your ability to do justice to your role when doing, say, Pagliacci". You aren't the person watching the spell, you're the person casting it. The very best actors tend to immerse themselves in backgrounds for roles with a historical context. I can't see how that type of background knowledge would be less important to someone where sloppiness could result in casting the wrong spell, or madness, or burning out his brain, as opposed to the film (or play, or opera, or etc.) being panned by the critics.

And after some thought, I can think of a supplemental skill for Gestural focus: Signaling (Sign Language).

[GMLovlie]

I think those skills would supplement spell casting well. If one is to require extra skills for spell casting.

The argument that because its "default" makes it easier or simpler, and cheaper to be that sort of spell caster I find strange. Well, I can see the point, but it makes the system inconsistent and throws a tad bit of the balance issue out the window, not overly much, but its still a hole in the system, even if its minute. There should be some interest in making the game void of such irritating small inconsistencies and flaws I would think.

Also, I have to agree with Grumpy’s last post. Just by imitating language doesn’t in the case of the actor enable him to communicate with Russians, unless he knows the language, understands it. Of course one could just, as a magician, blurt of the sounds and syllables of the word, and hopefully get some effect (like an actor taught Russian lines, perhaps with a vague idea of what it means), but at least the way I understand how these sort of arcane languages usually work in fiction (and games), tied to this kind of casting idea with symbols and incantations, the exact wording and the understanding of the words and incantation can improve or at least affect the casting of the spell…

[GrumpyOldFart]

Having done some acting myself, my take on it is that no, appreciating Shakespeare does not require an understanding of Middle English and Iambic Pentameter... but being a decent Shakespearean actor does.

You can get all the words right, the moves right, the facial expressions right.... and the director will still tell you that you're "wooden" and "stilted"... and he'll be right. So the question becomes whether "wooden" and "stilted" is a dealbreaker when using speech to construct a spell. For an example of "wooden" and "stilted" when casting a spell, look for a clip of Galen's first interview with the king in the 1981 movie, Dragonslayer.

[GMLovlie]

I actually like the idea of making spell casting slightly more complex and demanding. Of course this should perhaps come with a slightly better pay off from basic spells, at least in some cases, but yes I like it. Perhaps not for all kinds of campaigns, but it is a good idea, thanks Grumpy.

[Thom @ ICE]

I am not a fan of the default is easier answer either, but I'm also not up for adding even more rolls to the process. What if there was simply a requirement for the appropriate related skills to have equal or greater ranks to what is being used in the casting. For verbal go with spoken language in the "magic" language.  For gestural go with a Craft skill?

Now if the number of PP cast exceeds their # of ranks in the casting related skill, then use the rules that appear in HARP SF for languages.

[uberyoung]

Why not give the caster a choice?
They can have an (applicable) skill roll on the Bonus column (and maybe get a small + to their casting skill roll).
Or they can just cast using the spell skill they have?

As for the languages, just develop like other skills.
Each time you buy a rank, allocate it to Spoken or Read/Write.
Use this for everyday use, just roll % (and add total skill) for complex stuff / special occasions.
You may want to impose (when allocating ranks) that you always have Spoken >= Read / Write or similar...

[Maelstrom]

That's how I approach my more complex spellcasting rules.  The base is one roll for success.  If you want to draw more power, roll for the increase.  You might get what you're looking for or you might screw it up and get less than if you'd played it safe.  Neither is required and the player makes the choice.

[GMLovlie]

Combining this idea with the more spill-list type of casting – spell-chains I think it was called or something – that was presented on the Guild Companion, could make up for some balance issues on spending DPs on other skills, like Signaling (sign language) for gestural and public speaking or language for verbal (depending on flavour). This way casting becomes stylish at least in my mind. And the styles of casting can (optionally) then also benefit the caster through good rolls, and potentially help when spells are scaled.

[GrumpyOldFart]

I've been dealing with an injury lately, so I've been having to choose between being stupid from pain or being stupid from painkillers. As such, I haven't been able to solve this one. However, I have come up with a solution that doesn't work, and I'll post it here in hopes that it will spark ideas for a solution that does. Keep in mind, the goal here is still to be able to resolve spellcasting in a single roll.

For a long time ICE products have had a convention that, in a practical sense, there is no such thing as "You can't do _____". In RM, "You can't _____" actually means "You're at a -100 to any attempt to _____." An easy example of this is invisibility giving a -100 to opponents' Perception rolls.

Combine this with what is written about focus styles in CoM:

When a character cannot use one of their styles at all (i.e. a Verbal user who is unable to speak, a Somaticist who is in a straitjacket), then the caster suffers a -50 penalty to spell casting for being unable to utilize their normal shortcut. If the character cannot use either style at all, the Mage will be unable to cast any spells.

And the above notion:

Trance = Mental Focus
Musical = Play Instrument
Song = Singing
Verbal = Public Speaking
Gestural = Signaling (Sign Language)
Somatic = Dancing

and the idea I came up with was that spellcasting total bonus = skill total from focus #1 + skill total from focus #2 + skill total for the spell being cast - 100.

The problem with this as a solution is that it broadens the range of results too much for a 1-100 based system.

At 1st level (6 ranks),

{30 (skill) + 20 (stat) focus #1} + {30 (skill) + 20 (stat) focus #2} + {30 (skill) + 20 (stat) spell} - 100 = + 50

to the spell roll. However, this assumes +10 stat bonuses throughout, which to be honest is fairly unlikely. More likely is somewhere around +25 - +40. But comparing this to standard HARP rules, where 30 (skill) + 20 (stat) = +50 total bonus to the spell roll, that's not all that bad.

However, by the time you get to 20 ranks in all relevant skills, things have gone crazy:

{70 (skill) + 20 (stat) focus #1) + {70 (skill) + 20 (stat) focus #2) + {70 (skill) + 20 (stat) spell) - 100  = + 170 total.

Compared to standard HARP rules, where 70 (skill) + 20 (stat) = +90 total bonus. That's nearly double. And that's at least theoretically possible for a 6th level caster. If the player keeps putting points into the focus skills and the spells both after he's reached the diminishing return of +1/rank, it gets even worse, a 20th level caster can expect to have a 250+ total bonus to his casting on nearly everything. In other words, there is basically nothing between fumbling and the spell getting the max possible result, unless you are casting under absurdly bad conditions. Even if the mage in question is bound, gagged and blindfolded, so that Trance focus is the only form available to him,

{70 (skill) + 20 (stat) focus #1} + (0 focus #2) + {70 (skill) + 20 (stat) spell) - 100 = + 80 total.

which is nearly as good as standard HARP rules using both foci.

Now I'll admit, I always liked the idea back in the day that an RM Mentalist could be paralyzed from the neck down and blind in both eyes, and if he could locate his targets could still be an extreme hazard to his enemies. But sheesh...

 

Then again, you could apply the number of ranks in the required skill, rather than the total bonus, too. But that would require a "no focus" penalty of a lot less than -100 if your low level spellcasters aren't going to be nearly helpless.

Opinions, suggestions? Cos I'll freely admit, I'm stuck.

[Maelstrom]

The underlying logic I think you're getting at is for the danger to be high at low levels and steadily decrease as the character advances.  Using the total skill bonus is going to make the danger decrease much quicker than if you use the skill rank as a bonus.  Another convention used by ICE is that if multiple skills are required for a roll the skill bonus is from one skill and other skills add a maximum of the skill rank as bonus to the primary skill.  HARP introduced a secondary skill roll to add a small bonus to the primary skill roll that could be used as an alternate.

In your proposal you've broken the second convention by adding the skill bonus for three different skills in a single roll.  I think you're on the right track to getting what you want but it's not right yet (i.e. lets us hexagonal wheels instead of triangular ones.  Hmmm, rolls better but still real bumpy.)

I propose using just the ranks as bonus to the spell casting manuever and maybe change the modifier from a flat -100 to a per focus used or missing; -50 to -100 per focus.