Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: wind_in_the_stones Oct 15 2009, 03:02 AM

In the section on indirect spells...

In the section just below that on indirect elemental spells...


This seems to mean that (1) you don't get to roll Body versus elemental spells, and (2) they're not reduced to stun. Is my interpretation correct?

An additional question... In the combat chapter...

Shall we assume this does not apply to the indirect spells?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Oct 15 2009, 03:10 AM

You do roll body (plus 1/2 Impact Armor) to mitigate damage from Indirect Spells, the section quoted just states that you are only applying 1/2 Impact to the roll, not the whole Armor rating...

Spell Damage is Physical unless it states otherwise, and I do not believe that your armor would change that, but I could be wrong on that...

As far asa I know, the -2 penalty for dodsing explosions does not apply to Spells of an indirect nature... But again, I could indeed be wrong...

Keep the Faith

Posted by: wind_in_the_stones Oct 15 2009, 03:35 AM

So when it says that elemental spells are resisted by only half the Impact armor rating, it's repeating itself about the armor, but doesn't feel the need to repeat itself about rolling the Body stat.

Last sentence of the first quote says that the damage must beat the armor rating or it's stun damage. It doesn't say this for elemental attacks, so do we assume they just decided not to repeat that part, or should we assume that by the nature of most elemental forms, you still take physical damage? For example, four points of fire damage, still burns your skin.

Posted by: Glyph Oct 15 2009, 03:54 AM

No, the modified DV still needs to beat your modified armor rating, or it is stun damage. Note that while normal impact armor is halved, there are options such as insulation, nonconductivity, and so on that can add their full rating to your armor value against specific kinds of attacks.

Posted by: cndblank Oct 15 2009, 02:27 PM

-2 penalty for dodging explosions/Area effect attacks would apply to area effect indirect spells (whither elemental or not).

Posted by: Stahlseele Oct 15 2009, 02:44 PM

You can't dodge non elemental spells at all.
All indircect combat spells are elemental spells right?
so all non elemental combat spells are direct combat spells.
Pure mana. No dodging. Or am i misunderstanding something here?

Posted by: Apathy Oct 15 2009, 03:20 PM

I thought the distinction was direct spells vs indirect spells. Direct spells manifest directly at/in the target, and therefore can't be dodged because you can't see them coming. Indirect spells travel from caster to target, as evidenced by them having to break through intervening glass barriers. Since you can see them coming, you can dodge them.

I think you're right that the book doesn't list any direct elemental spells or indirect non-elemental spells, but they aren't expressly forbidden and you could build them using spell rules. If you did I think the default would be that indirect non-elemental spells would have some sort of visual or aural cue, and could be dodged, while direct elemental spells would manifest at/in the target without warning and couldn't be dodged.

Posted by: Warlordtheft Oct 15 2009, 03:29 PM

On a related note, does counterspelling use up a mage's action?

There seems to be no mention if it does in the rulebook as I recall.

Posted by: Marwynn Oct 15 2009, 03:48 PM

Declaring you're actively counterspelling for one of your friends takes up an action. But you may CS as many times as necessary, the explanation being that you are "jamming the mana" in an area.

Posted by: cndblank Oct 15 2009, 04:22 PM

Yes you can dodge indirect spells but not direct spells. Armor and body resist indirect spells but not direct.

All indirect spells have been elemental spells.

Use 1/2 impact plus body to resist indirect elemental spells.

Once a character has been hit with an elemental spell treat it like any other elemental attack.



Once a mage has started counter spelling it does not take an action to use counter spell. He just has to see those he is trying to protect.

We rule that either the target of the spell must be visible to the counter spelling mage or the spell must pass with in his line of sight (so if a manabolt comes wizzing past the mage from the ambush they just walked in to, directed at the street samurai covering the rear, the mage can still give the street samurai counter magic. If however the mage was facing forward or just rounded a corner and a mana bolt came from the rear to hit the rear guard street samurai then the sammy is out of luck.

A generous GM might allow that the mage was trying to cover the sammy as they left or allow the mage to feel the spell forming and if the mage still had an action left be able to look back to cover the sammy.

A mage can instinctive tell the difference between a companion's magic and a strangers and there for can chose to not use counter magic against the healing spell or another characters stunball.

Posted by: Marwynn Oct 16 2009, 12:03 AM

Well there is Punch, Clout, Blast. It's a Physical spell, as opposed to a mana one, but it does stun damage. It's a non-elemental indirect combat spell. Add +1 for Physical Damage as opposed to Stun to all the Drain values.

There aren't any official Indirect non-elemental physical combat spells that deal physical damage that I know of.

Slap(Indirect, Touch)
Type: P - Range: T) - Damage: P - Duration: I - DV: (F/2) - 1
Smack (Indirect, LOS)
Type: P - Range: LOS - Damage: P - Duration: I - DV: (F/2) + 1
Smash (Indirect, LOS(Area))
Type: P - Range: LOS(A) - Damage: P - Duration: I - DV: (F/2) + 3
These spells attack the target with an invisible kinetic force. The violent nature of the attack inflicts physical harm to the targets, similar to blunt weapon attacks. Unlike the Powerbolt line, these spells channel power towards the target, not into, affecting living and non-living targets alike. Success Test with Spellcasting + Magic test against target's Reaction + Counterspelling (if any). Resist damage with Body + Half Impact Armour, each hit reducing DV: if damage doesn't exceed modified Impact Armour, treat as Stun damage. Can affect targets caster cannot see if within area of effect.


Also... why aren't there any Touch-ranged Elemental Combat Spells? "Indirect" just means it's not channelled into the target, so what's the difference if it establishes a link through physical contact and not LOS?

Posted by: Stahlseele Oct 16 2009, 08:06 AM

elemental aura?

Posted by: Dahrken Oct 16 2009, 10:03 AM

Think for a minute how a Contact Indirect spell would work : by magically create something destructive (fire, electricity, cold...) on the surface of the target which you would be touching...

Area Indirect spells have a similar problem : like grenades, they can (and will !) affect the caster if he is too close of the center of the blast.

With Direct spells, the mojo is channelled into their intended targets, so casting them on touch is safe for the caster.

Posted by: Stahlseele Oct 16 2009, 11:19 AM

Creating things like Fire, Ice, Electricity or something is possible for Adepts.
So why should it NOT work with Spells as well?

Posted by: Dahrken Oct 16 2009, 12:12 PM

Don't get me wrong, I did not say it was impossible, I just said such a spell has an obvious drawback that make it a poor choice in a mage's arsenal.

I think a contact, indirect spell can be modified so that the caster is not affected even if he's in direct contact with the fire/electricity/whatever he unleashes. But such a modification should increase the Drain modifier of the spell above it's expected +1, probably to +2.

Now compare this with the +3 Drain of a Lightning Bolt or a Fire Aura. Is the drain reduction worth it, or would a mage be better learning the ranged, single target version of the spell ?

Also going toe to toe with the opposition is IMHO not exactly the tactic most mages would favor.

Posted by: Apathy Oct 16 2009, 03:21 PM

or even better, overcasted area of effect touch-range indirect spells! (Calling the nuke in on my own location.)