• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

OOC Supernatural Law (Wicked Pacts)

Ilya

No creativity for titles
Validated User
I feel so bad for this bear. I know I should feel a bit worried for the guy, but the look on his face! D:

And that thing with trash reminded me of the local opossums. Once upon a time there was one smart enough to open a big outdoors trashcan, yet dumb enough to climb into it then get stuck. It’s 3AM and I’m woken up by ruckus of the trashcan being overturned and bouncing down a flight of steps when it finally escapes; when it was not just repeatedly banging against the wall because it was too full and heavy to get overturned.

Now I’m picturing the scene with a hell’s creature instead. :whistle:

*opens the lid, sees demon*
Nope.
*closes the lid and walks away*
 

Potted Plant

Power Flower
RPGnet Member
Validated User
You are free to go wild. :) Everyone is. Why give the group a squirrel Pokemon and not allow to use it. :)
 

Cerulean Lion

Social Justice Christian
Validated User
Advisory. Possible computer malfunction. Maybe nothing serious, maybe several days offline.
If I disappear suddenly that's why.
 

Ilya

No creativity for titles
Validated User
Good luck with your computer troubles. Luckily Ben is such a discreet fella he can drop unannounced into any forthcoming scene—almost as if he were a shadow! *wagging eyebrows*
 

Ilya

No creativity for titles
Validated User
I was trying to come up with fun ways to combine my spells, and noticed something odd in Dragon’s Flame description that raises a couple of questions: What casting means, if rules for skills also apply to spells, and consequently how Multiple Action Penalties affect spellcasting.

Sorry about the long post, the rules are unclear enough you're forced to read a couple of spells and talents descriptions to make sense of them, so I had to elaborate. :cautious:

My TL;DR conclusion is that:
- Casting refers to (activating + landing a spell on a target). Any rule referring to casting applies to the activation roll, then again to the throwing/HtH roll unless stated otherwise.
- Spells are subject to skill rules. Therefore, Multiple Action Penalties don’t apply to landing a spell alone, they also affect spells activation. Otherwise there would be nothing keeping you from casting 4 opposition-less spells like buffs in a single turn, or attacking and teleporting, etc.

Did I get it right?
_______________
Casting Spells
To attack with a spell you roll twice: First you activate it, then you do an opposition roll to land the attack (melee or ranged). Activation + landing the attack are considered part of the same single action.

What the game doesn’t make clear is whether casting refers to just activating spells or, the complete act of activating and landing the spell. The distinction is important later, and the Spellcasting section doesn’t help, just barely implying it refers to activation alone.

Meanwhile, the Actions section states that multiple action penalties apply to Skill tests and Opposition Rolls. Throwing spells/doing HtH are Opposition Rolls, so it’s clear penalties apply to throwing multiple spells on an unwilling target. But there’s nothing about activating spells, not even casting spells. Even the examples list doesn’t mention spells. Is activating a spell considered a skill test, thus also subject to multiple action penalty?

If spells are not considered skills for rules purposes, then activating spells doesn’t incur penalties, but landing multiple spells does.


Looking at Jin’s Pure Blood bonus...

1. Pure Blood Offspring Benefit:
Pick a spell. You can always cast that spell at -1 TN.

- I told you casting was important. That’s -1 TN applied only to activation if "casting" doesn’t include landing the spell, or -1 TN to also land the spell if "casting" refers to both.


What about Jin’s Archetype Talent? Well...

2. Spellslinger:
Once per session, you can cast two Spells at the same time without a Multiple Action Penalty.

- Aha. Again nothing about landing the attack, but it implies that spells = skills, or casting = activation + landing; or both, because the options are:

(a) no, spells aren’t affected by skill rules, but casting = activation + landing the spell. Thus, you usually get no penalties to activate multiple spells, but there are penalties to land 2+ spells, and that’s what spellslinger removes.

Sounds off, due making it possible to cast up to 4 buffs/etc spells without penalties, besides making spellslinger rather weak.

(b) or spells aren’t affected by skill rules, and casting means just activating. Then spellslinger does nothing at all, because activating multiple spells doesn’t incur penalties, so no need to remove them with a talent; and since casting means activating, not landing, it doesn’t help there either. Obviously, it can’t be (b) since it completely breaks the talent!

(c) yes, spells obey the same rules applied to skills, and casting = activation + landing the spell. I’d suffer penalties for both activating 2+ spells and landing them, and spellslinger completely removes them from 2 spells. I'd only start racking up any +3 TN penalties on the third spell.

And in that case I also apply the offspring bonus to both rolls, what makes sense—otherwise it’s really crappy bonus when compared to any other bloodline bonus.

(d) yes, spells obey the same rules applied to skills, and casting means just activating. Spellslinger removes the activation penalty and does nothing about the ones to land the spell, because casting doesn’t cover that.

Err... It manages to sound worse than (a), and would make things weird on the third spell: +3 TN to activate, +9 TN to land.


But wait, there’s more! Let’s look at Dragon’s Flame. o_O

3. Dragon’s Flame:
Once cast, the spell doesn’t need to be reactivated until the next turn, but you’ll still need to pay the MP cost for extra attacks...

... and zero information on how multiple action penalties affect it at all.

It seems to want to say your hands are still on fire and you’ll be using that fire for extra attacks, hence no need to reactivate the spell; but it stops short from actually saying that.

Am I correct to assume that what they’re trying to say from a mechanical point of view is:
"After casting Dragon's Flame, you can perform additional Dragon's Flame attacks in the same turn without the need to reactivate the spell, but you still need to pay MP cost for it, and penalties for multiple actions still incur (only when rolling to land the spell, maybe also activating? See below)"
?

I created two tables to visualize what would happen in every situation.

If Spells == Skills, then Multiple Action Penalty affects activation and opposition:


b) casting option seems about right, including the activation penalty for casting 2+ Dragon’s Flame spells (without spellslinger) despite activating it only once, since you’re still busy throwing them. Even if throwing the second one is only half-action, 1+half is still more than one action per turn.

If Spells!= Skills, then Multiple Action Penalty doesn’t affect activation, only opposition:


Err, when you look at buffs it’s clear something is seriously wrong, so I think table 1, aka spells == skills is the correct way to interpret Multiple Actions rule.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom