Full Version: counterspelling
Are there any limits to the number of people you can provide spell defense to? It suggests that you can provide spell defense to several people at once with the only limitation is that they are within line of sight. Do they even have to be on the same plane? If there is not even this limitation, I foresee using this often against my players in the form of astral backup either from Lonestar or whoever they might be running against. Also do you have to continually declare you are providing spell defense? Do you have to give up your free action every initiative pass, or if you don't change who you are providing spell defense for, can you just declare once? It also describes the effect as if it's an area effect type ability, when it talks about the "jamming" of illusion or detection spells. How has everyone been dealing with this so far? Or am I simply overlooking something obvious?
| QUOTE (6thDragon) |
| Are there any limits to the number of people you can provide spell defense to? |
Visual range.
-Frank
i would argue you must be on the same plane, at least. although the rules probably both support and refute that ruling 
The wording is somewhat vague, but I'd say stick with the one-by-one interpretation for illusion and detection spells. If you've designated someone, they get the bonus dice as long as you can see them. Be aware, of course, that 'line of sight' doesn't just mean you *can* see them, but you *do*... and most mages don't have more than a 95-degree or so cone of vision. So if you want to protect your whole group, you need to keep a line of sight to each of them open... which means sticking the mage in the back of the group, exposed to a rearguard attack... *evil GM cackle*
| QUOTE (TheScrivener) |
| The wording is somewhat vague, but I'd say stick with the one-by-one interpretation for illusion and detection spells. If you've designated someone, they get the bonus dice as long as you can see them. Be aware, of course, that 'line of sight' doesn't just mean you *can* see them, but you *do*... and most mages don't have more than a 95-degree or so cone of vision. So if you want to protect your whole group, you need to keep a line of sight to each of them open... which means sticking the mage in the back of the group, exposed to a rearguard attack... *evil GM cackle* |
Your mages don't wear mirrored sunglasses? That is... glasses with small mirrors on the sides? They haven't been attacked from behind nearly often enough then.
I think I actually had a mage that had bought some glasses like that, after a string of ambushes from behind. LOS directly behind you is a good, good thing for mages...
| QUOTE (TheScrivener) |
| The wording is somewhat vague, but I'd say stick with the one-by-one interpretation for illusion and detection spells. If you've designated someone, they get the bonus dice as long as you can see them. Be aware, of course, that 'line of sight' doesn't just mean you *can* see them, but you *do*... and most mages don't have more than a 95-degree or so cone of vision. So if you want to protect your whole group, you need to keep a line of sight to each of them open... which means sticking the mage in the back of the group, exposed to a rearguard attack... *evil GM cackle* |
Or, keeping the mage in the side, and have him walk sideways.
Seriously. No one will think the crab walking guy is a mage, because he's so stupid.
I bet crab shamans clean up in Cactar Racing.
-Frank
-Frank
| QUOTE (TheScrivener) |
| The wording is somewhat vague, but I'd say stick with the one-by-one interpretation for illusion and detection spells. If you've designated someone, they get the bonus dice as long as you can see them. Be aware, of course, that 'line of sight' doesn't just mean you *can* see them, but you *do*... and most mages don't have more than a 95-degree or so cone of vision. So if you want to protect your whole group, you need to keep a line of sight to each of them open... which means sticking the mage in the back of the group, exposed to a rearguard attack... *evil GM cackle* |
Down that path lies facing rules, and they are wicked. But, lo, they do pale in comparison to the wrath of "head facing" rules.
Fortunately the rules are written in that special vague way that provides wiggle room to avoid such monstrosities.
While avoiding BattleTech style head/torso/body splits, it still should be taken into consideration that you can't have the mage just hangin' out, mentally covering the area around him. This isn't psychic, all-round sight bullshit - the mage requires at least as much situational awareness as anyone, ducking, bobbing weaving... the look-back glasses are a great idea though.
Oddly enough:
| QUOTE (p176) |
| A magician who is actively Counterspelling can even defend against spells she is unaware of—specifically, Detection spells and Illusion spells—as the magician is actively “jamming” the mana around him. This does not mean, however, that the magician is aware such spells are being used. The gamemaster should make a secret Magic + Intuition (3) Test to determine if (and to what extent) the magician noticed the defense. |
Oh, I was never disputing defense against SPELLS the mage couldn't see, just defending FRIENDS the mage couldn't see.
I gotcha.
Magical targeting is indeed an odd bird.
Magical targeting is indeed an odd bird.
It just seems odd that a mage could pop into the astral on gameday and go to Beaver Stadium and provide spell defense to over 100,000 people. I see nothing in the rules that would prevent that. The mage would give up his free action every turn, but worse things could happen.
| QUOTE |
| The mage would give up his free action every turn... |
?
He wouldn't need to take a free action every turn, just once to change the affected group.
Line of sight is what is needed, not being in the mages FoV. A non-percieving mage could thus provide spell defense for an invisible character as long as they were within LoS. Wouldn't it be disasterous if you blinked as the spell hit?
If the potential insanity of protecting a stadium full of people is what you want to avoid then I'd personally start calling for perception tests at the time that the spell defense was allocated to see if the magician can tell who he needs to defend.
Line of sight is what is needed, not being in the mages FoV. A non-percieving mage could thus provide spell defense for an invisible character as long as they were within LoS. Wouldn't it be disasterous if you blinked as the spell hit?
If the potential insanity of protecting a stadium full of people is what you want to avoid then I'd personally start calling for perception tests at the time that the spell defense was allocated to see if the magician can tell who he needs to defend.
| QUOTE (Lilt) |
| Wouldn't it be disasterous if you blinked as the spell hit? |
| QUOTE (blakkie) | ||
|
Just in case I didn't make it clear: That was supposed to be an example of how you don't actually need to see the protected character ast the time.
Line of Sight from you to them implies no opaque barriers between you and them, not that you're actually looking at them. Sure, actually looking at something is a good way to check that you have LOS but not being able to see something (blinking at exactly the wrong time) doesn't mean that they're out of line of sight for that period of time.
I can see something -> I have LOS
But
I can't see something -/> I don't have LOS
For any mage who's GM interprets it in the "You must be able to see them" way: Get cybereyes installed, and a second set rear-facing. That way you can protect everyone around you and don't need to blink.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.