What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic flame"

R

RuneBrighteyes

Artisan
I want our system to add the damge and effects of a spell to what we say after incants. i.e. "I command you to sleep. Magic Sleep" or "I call forth a Lighting Bolt. 10 magic lighning"

Here is why I think it is a good idea-

It follows what we do in a lot of other cases already so people are used to the idea. "Sleep Gas Poison" "Prepare to Die. 50 magic slay"

It eliminates some of the stuff that players have to remember. You hear a number or effect you take a number or effect.

It opens up design space. Only the player (and the marshalls) need to know why Blasto calls "I call forth a flame bolt. 80 magic flame". With this change we could really have some play for new ideas in the high magic and magic item systems. A Staff of Frost that adds 10 points to ice spells and can 3/day add a web effect to an ice spell (" I call forth an Ice Bolt. 35 magic ice web". Or a crazy high magic effect where you can add "heal 50 body" to all of your Cure Disease, Purify and Life spells.



I realize there would be a period of adjustment as people learn to listen for the end of the incant and not the beginning.


So what is wrong with this idea?
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Absolutely nothing.

I thought it would be awkward until I NPCed a game where that was the rule. It was AMAZING. They useds some whacky incants, but it just didn't matter. I was golden.

I would endorse this system 100%. Might take some time to get used to the new words, but the payoff would be awesome.
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

The most coheent argument I hear against it is the longer incant. However, adding a quick reminder or the altered effect (such as when creature that swing death or massive say, "prepare to die, 50 death slay" or whatever instead or "prepare to die 50 slay"
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Casting speed would be impacted rather severely, I suppose it depends on your point of view on if this is good or bad.

I'm assuming "I call upon the Earth to Cure Light Wounds, 2 Magic Healing" would also be a thing?
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Personally, I would love to see ALL damage spells to do away with pre-written required incantation but the character has to add an incant of some length.

ie: From the volcano, 20 magic flame!
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Robb Graves said:
Better yet.. why not just "20 magic flame".. "magic bind", "20 magic healing"

if you want to argue flavor.. take it from someone whose been playing for a while... My C Caster does not care about his pyramid anymore... I cast straight from Elemental Burst Pool as my primary weapon now.
"40 Elemental Flame" is all I call.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I knew the burst pool was wicked cool. I just didnt realize it would be could enough to devalue your spell column. So you mainly use your column for utility/guild-magy stuff (Wards, etc) now?
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

We should be looking to simplify instead, not keep tacking words on the end of vocal calls.

I realize that I don't see this the same way as some of you considering I am both a new player who doesn't know all of the carriers or incants yet and as a player who has a stutter.
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Thank you for your on topic and constructive replies.

by Durnic » Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:29 am

We should be looking to simplify instead, not keep tacking words on the end of vocal calls.

I realize that I don't see this the same way as some of you considering I am both a new player who doesn't know all of the carriers or incants yet and as a player who has a stutter.We should be looking to simplify instead, not keep tacking words on the end of vocal calls.

I realize that I don't see this the same way as some of you considering I am both a new player who doesn't know all of the carriers or incants yet and as a player who has a stutter.
Click to expand...

I see this as a simplification. If I cannot cast the spell (as a PC or NPC) then hearing what I take in a numerical format is MUCH EASIER than having to remember Flame Bolt = 20 flame. It cuts down on alot of memorization needed, and places it on the shoulders of people who want to do it.

by Robb Graves » Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:07 am

Better yet.. why not just "20 magic flame".. "magic bind", "20 magic healing"

if you want to argue flavor.. take it from someone whose been playing for a while... My C Caster does not care about his pyramid anymore... I cast straight from Elemental Burst Pool as my primary weapon now.
"40 Elemental Flame" is all I call.
Click to expand...

I myself like the flavor of a longer descriptive incant. More evocative- and it slows casting down (which I see as a good thing). That being said...

SkollWolfrun said:
Personally, I would love to see ALL damage spells to do away with pre-written required incantation but the character has to add an incant of some length.

ie: From the volcano, 20 magic flame!
Click to expand...

This is my prefered "tech". In a game I played it led to-

"By the beautiful wickedness of my wings Cause Wounds 20" and "With the destructive power of festering rot and ruin I decay you. Cause wounds 20."

Toddo said:
Casting speed would be impacted rather severely, I suppose it depends on your point of view on if this is good or bad.

I'm assuming "I call upon the Earth to Cure Light Wounds, 2 Magic Healing" would also be a thing?
Click to expand...

That would be the incant for Cure Light Wounds. I myself would love it (even as an old 20+ year veteran) so I can keep track of the high level healing amounts. And then certain characters might be able to say "I call upon the earth to Cure Light Wounds. 10 Magic Healing"
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

I'm a big big big proponent of just calling the effect for casting. Incants make things confusing for both caster and target. Flavor is something that SHOULD be used in things like Rituals, but not in the heat of an already rules heavu combat
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

In Calgary we have our players and our NPCs calling spell damage always. How else is a new player to know what damage an Ice Bolt or Cause Serious Wounds does? :thumbsup:
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Maybe the rule should be that the packet has to be thrown after the initial incant but it can be thrown before the damage call. That way, it doesn't really make the incant any longer.
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

I would be down for that...maybe if it hits...call out the damage which is what I try to do with new players anyways.
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Mike Ventrella said:
Maybe the rule should be that the packet has to be thrown after the initial incant but it can be thrown before the damage call. That way, it doesn't really make the incant any longer.
Click to expand...

That's how we do it. Incant, throw, if hit call the damage.

This also helps the NPCs when things are coming at them from all directions. Hearing "20 Flame Damage" is another signal to me to call a defence or take it.
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

Any of the above would just reinforce my decision to use my wand as my primary offensive weapon.
Usually the posts on this board to do with Evocation talk about how much it sucks and how to improve it, so its weird to read a thread that actually proposes to make it worse by making the incant longer.
To both improve Evocation AND make everyone know how much damage they take from the spell I would go with some more like "I call forth 20 flame". The verbal let's you know its a spell/magic and the verbal isn't made longer.
The problem with the above comes when using items as it could be confused with an Elemental Burst cast from an item (Activate 20 flame vs Activate 20 elemental flame). So maybe "I call forth 20 magic flame"?

-Steve
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

I like that better. It tells you can it can be spell shielded/reflected, because it's magic, and that a cloak/bane flame or resist element can be used on it, because it's flame. And the number is in the damage call.
 
Re: What's wrong with "I call forth a flame bolt.20 magic fl

It would also allow the removal of the "Evocation" effect group.
Another thing that makes Evocation unattractive is that the spells of that group technically fall under both Evocation AND the individual elements (flame, ice, lighning, stone) and therefore multiple types of cloaks and banes stop them. This is the case with no other spells/effects in the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top