Tournament Spellcasting

[mikestrauss]

For years, the spellcasting tournament had rules that if you were incapacitated via binding and then the person who bound you lost line of sight (say from a sleep spell), you could keep going. It created complicated situations where often the judges lost track of who actually went down it what order. That rule was changed last year to any incapacitation was enough. I am leaning towards a compromise rule this year.

Rule: A spellcaster is knocked out of the competition when they are incapacitated (in any way) and then physically touched (lightly) by any other spellcaster. For this rule, pinned and bound is strong enough binding to count as incapacitated.

Thoughts?

-MS

P.S. - In line with a great suggestion, if someone wants to cast a death spell this year, a life spell is cast instead. If the spell is not prevented or resisted, it counts as a death spell hitting. This rule exists to slightly conserve life spells.

 

[Sym of Moria]

Mike S
I see that you want to improve the tournament. Thats is comendable. My first event was tournament ten years ago and I always enjoy watching / participating. Regarding the Spell Casters Duel want to make it interesting have the casters in an enclosed area (such as under the barn in a maze. Each contestant gets randomly deposited and must search for several items (similar to the race you had) but you are allowed to use your spells to your advantage in your search for your items. you can use the spells against your opponents or what lies in the maze itself.

I have some crazy ideas for this competition.. drop me a pm if you want to talk it over.

Onitt

 

[Gilwing]

For years, the spellcasting tournament had rules that if you were incapacitated via binding and then the person who bound you lost line of sight (say from a sleep spell), you could keep going. It created complicated situations where often the judges lost track of who actually went down it what order. That rule was changed last year to any incapacitation was enough. I am leaning towards a compromise rule this year.

Rule: A spellcaster is knocked out of the competition when they are incapacitated (in any way) and then physically touched (lightly) by any other spellcaster. For this rule, pinned and bound is strong enough binding to count as incapacitated.

Thoughts?

-MS

P.S. - In line with a great suggestion, if someone wants to cast a death spell this year, a life spell is cast instead. If the spell is not prevented or resisted, it counts as a death spell hitting. This rule exists to slightly conserve life spells.

I'm fine with the touching part but not if it is a pin. C'mon, I can still cast in a Pin. Now Pin AND Bind should be fine.

 

[mikestrauss]

For years, the spellcasting tournament had rules that if you were incapacitated via binding and then the person who bound you lost line of sight (say from a sleep spell), you could keep going. It created complicated situations where often the judges lost track of who actually went down it what order. That rule was changed last year to any incapacitation was enough. I am leaning towards a compromise rule this year.

Rule: A spellcaster is knocked out of the competition when they are incapacitated (in any way) and then physically touched (lightly) by any other spellcaster. For this rule, pinned and bound is strong enough binding to count as incapacitated.

Thoughts?

-MS

P.S. - In line with a great suggestion, if someone wants to cast a death spell this year, a life spell is cast instead. If the spell is not prevented or resisted, it counts as a death spell hitting. This rule exists to slightly conserve life spells.

I'm fine with the touching part but not if it is a pin. C'mon, I can still cast in a Pin. Now Pin AND Bind should be fine.

Sorry. My wording wasn't clear. Pinned and bound at the same time would (as you suggested), but neither pinned or bound alone would be enough.

-MS

 

[Dreamingfurther]

Honestly I feel like once someone is incapacitated they should be out. You shouldn't have to "also" touch them. Which just makes a confusing spellcasters mele even more confusing for the participants. Not to mention the fact that often if you get them from a distance you can't/don't want to take all the effort to get close to them.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Robb G]

i don't like the touch concept since it could create charging scenarios.

 

[Gilwing]

I like how the question and answers are a bit bias to changing it..."No. Go back to the original, complex system." Was the system really complex? You know what you were hit by.

 

[mikestrauss]

I like how the question and answers are a bit bias to changing it..."No. Go back to the original, complex system." Was the system really complex? You know what you were hit by.

Complex is not inherently bad in the mindset of many gamers. In fact, gamers have a tendency to prefer complex over simple. I think the word is actually that biased.

-MS

 

[James Trotta]

i don't like the touch concept since it could create charging scenarios.

I agree. Touching probably should not be mixed with combat, casting included.

Honestly I feel like once someone is incapacitated they should be out. You shouldn't have to "also" touch them. Which just makes a confusing spellcasters mele even more confusing for the participants. Not to mention the fact that often if you get them from a distance you can't/don't want to take all the effort to get close to them.

I agree - you should be rewarded for taking someone out from far away not punished by needing to walk or run over to them.