spell interupts when in melee range, can my kungfu stop her voodoo? Options Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic Download this topic Subscribe to this forum Display Modes Switch to: Outline Standard Switch to: Linear+

[cutter07]

Person A is big nasty mean melee guy, hes 1 meter away, just did serious damage with melee to Person B whos a mage. Person B now wants to cook Person A to medium rare.
Does Person A get anyway of interupting Person B, either by an "attack of opportunity" (yes D&D talk, save the flames) or does the damage he just did help interupt (besides the -3 for being at serious).

Also is said Person B is already at serious wouldn't casting a spell being pretty dumb due to drain and the fact the -3 from her current wounds (assuming she isn't casting a low force spell like improved invis).

Lastly could I ready a quickdraw action with the condition that I act if said mage casts a spell (assuming I notice the casting).

[gfen]

No, because this isn't AD&D.

There's no assumption the caster is doing anything that would allow you to cancel out the spell, by default there's no material, somantic, or audible components to a spell in SR, unless there's geasa involved.

If there's a geas involved, perhaps you could disrupt that.

[booklord]

If the spell has a fetish component she needs to pull out of her pocket the I might allow you to quick draw her. ( Since casting the spell now involves a physical movement ) Likewise if she attempted to center herself or had a geas that required a physical activity while casting.

I also as a GM might be tempted to put an additional +2 target modifier on her if the spell she was casting was exclusive. ( since she's in the middle of a melee fight ) But more than likely since she's already getting her butt kicked..... I might overlook it.

Barring any of those factors however. No she can cast a spell just by thinking about it. But take heart. Unless she is some ultra powerful magi with karma to burn it's unlikely she'll be able to cast anything that can overcome her +3 Target Modifier.

[Erebus]

I would think a delayed action would count fine. I'd allow a perception test to let him determine whether the mage is casting or not, and then they could take their attack once the mage casts, though if they don't drop the mage, the mage can still cast the spell (with some new injury mods perhaps).

Don't have my books with me, but I think it sounds reasonable.

[Lantzer]

Of course, it brings up the question of why wait for the mage to cast?

[ShadowGhost]

You can't interrupt their spell any more than you can stop someone from drawing an gun and shooting you.... unless you have a delayed action, and declare that you're going to go before the other person takes their action.

If you've delayed action, telling the GM "I'm going to hit/shoot the mage if he tries to cast a spell," then the GM can have you roll a perception test to Notice Spellcasting (pg 162 SR3) + situation modifiers (i.e. lighting, smoke, etc) to use your delayed action to stop the mage.

[Kanada Ten]

You could use Subduing (a subset of Unarmed Combat) to hold her face away from any target. If a magician can't see you, she can't target you. In theory, this opens you up to touch range spells - meaning you may be better off doing the Serious damage.

[BitBasher]

Yeah, assuming you even had a way to know spellcasting was happening, and you were holding an action then sure. But even if you beat them down but still they remain conscious, they can cast. Spellcasting is really for all intents and purposes instentaneous. You could stop them from fulfilling a gaesa, but no mage has to "pull out" a focus, all they have to do is touch it, IE stick their hand in their pocket. They dont have to whip it out and wave it around, unless they have a separate gaesa to do so.

[RedmondLarry]

[Cain]

[John Campbell]

See, this is why you don't give your big mean nasty troll a 1 Willpower.

[Nikoli]

Just call shot a two-fingered poke to the eyes of the mage. no eyes, no line of sight...

[cutter07]

[Kanada Ten]

If they are sustaing a spell at the time of attack there is a chance they will drop it, but that's not the question you asked. Nothing prevents one from casting a spell after the attack if they can overcome the target modifier.

[cutter07]

Kanada thats a very good point and what I most needed to know.

Since movement isn't action consuming would a hit and run work as long as by that mages turn I'm out of line of sight (such as cover)? This is of course assuming its not an area effect spell.

[Kanada Ten]

It depends on how the GM views the action sequence. First, remember that your movement points are divided by the number of actions you have. Second, the rules imply that actions and movement are happening near simultaneously - though this is hard to play. If you run (and take that modifier to you attack), attack, and then take cover I would give you partial cover (+4) and target running (+2) modifiers to the casters attack (a total of +9 to the TN).

[Glyph]

Actually, the only modifiers to a mage's targetting would be cover and visibility. But still, that's a +7 TN - even dumping his entire Spell Pool and doing as many Karma rerolls as possible, I don't see that mage's spell as working that well.

A hit and run would work if you could reach cover between your action and the mage's action (for example, turning a corner, hitting the mage, and zipping back around the corner). The only exception would be elemental manipulations, which, if they are area spells, can expand into areas that are not in the mage's line of sight. But if the mage is badly stunned, I don't see any spell as being too effective.

[RedmondLarry]

[cutter07]

This is what I mean. Say I'm 1 meter from the mage, and have half a dozen meters of run I can use this pass. I melee the mage (complex action) then run around a corner, fully out of view. Now she doesn't have LOS on me. She couldn't manabolt me, but could manaball near me, hitting me with the radius, Correct?

[Cain]

[Namergon]

The magician can also opt for an area of effect manipulation spell, and place the area so that you're still in the area. He suffers a +8 TN modifier agaisnt you, though.

[A Clockwork Lime]

All right, I didn't want to say much in this thread 'cause I know my view is unpopular, but here it goes anyway.

Melee combat isn't a I-hit-you-you-hit-me scenario. It lasts the entire phase and is full of attacks, counters, dodges, blocks, and feints (and it's amazing how many of the people who clutch to this when defending the use of reflexes in melee abandon it when it suits their needs such as in this thread). Unless a character spends the effort and risk of disengaging from that melee, they're going to suffer modifiers to anything they try to do while in that situation.

For Sorcery, I would apply the following modifiers at the very least on top of the ones used for Ranged Combat as per the normal rules: Friends in Melee, Reach (if it would affect the magician instead of the one with the Reach weapon) with Sorcery having no Reach, Opponent Prone, and Character Has Superior Position. The Using a Firearm in Melee would also apply... and don't clutch on to the use of "Firearm" there; it should apply to any ranged attack you make, including non-firearms like bows and crossbows.

The reason for this is because your concentration is going to be wracked to Hell as you're doing your best to block or dodge multiple swings while trying to get your spell off. If you're not up for it, disengage before you try and hurl a spell. If you can't disengage, you deserve the difficulties in casting the spell. At no point is the spell truly "interupted," however... the magician's opponent(s) are simply making it significantly more difficult to get a spell off successfully.

It should also be noted that in our house rules, Martial Arts have been obliterated from the rules and replaced with the old Unarmed Combat skill. Maneuvers, on the other hand, can be purchased for any combat skill as appropriate as long as they can logically be used with that skill (and only when they can be logically used with that skill). This includes Sorcery, even if it usually only applies to the Astral Combat specialization. But if you have Close Combat or Whirling, it would work well if trying to get a spell off while in the middle of a melee situation.

[TinkerGnome]

That's a little harsh. There's no reason reach should apply since you don't need to be close to your foe at all (reach is in play because your foe only needs to be within x meters to hit you while you have to be in y meters to hit him... in this case, you'd simply stay at x meters or farther). I will agree that friends in melee should apply. I really don't think any firearm-in-melee rules (are you talking about the +2 mod which doesn't actually seem to apply to someone you're actively fighting?) should apply. There's no weapon barrel to dodge or trap, you'd literally have to avoid the mage's eyes.

Unless you're planning to rewrite melee rules, there is also nothing that stops you from moving back out of melee range before launching a spell at someone.

[ShadowGhost]

[A Clockwork Lime]

Reach should definitely apply. If your opponent is using a spear to smack you around, he's not just going to toss it aside and wait for you to get your spell off.

And immobility or forgoing any movement that phase (such as not saying you're moving at the beginning of the Turn in order to avoid other target modifiers) certainly does stop you from being able to disengage.

If it were in my game, I'd also allow the magician to ignore all of those modifiers by dropping his guard. However, he'd be considered "passing by" his opponents, and each and every one of them within melee range would get a free attack as per the rules for Interception.