Full Version: Summoning multiple spirits in one scene
| QUOTE (Thanee) | ||
Do you mean the listup with the '...is destroyed, or its time of service ends...' ? |
I assume he means "remote services forfeit any other services the spirit might owe." If this meant they go "poof" there would be no services to banish away. But I read "forfeit" as "you can't call on them anymore," not to mean they go to some metaphysical purgatory beyond the reach of a wouldbe banisher.
Either way, there would still be the one (or multiple ones) they are tasked with, you need to banish those, too.
Bye
Thanee
Bye
Thanee
I missed where you decided that was an ok remote service. The abuse I was thinking of is that you could send them on remote services that weren't really remote services because they didn't occur completely outside your control radius.
But as others have said, you don't really stop the summoned spirit on remote services swarm, you only limit it to your charisma. So your attempt to fix a problem doesn't actually fix it and you're still stuck falling back on removing pg. 178's abusive rule or having the GM just say no.
Since the abusive rule is being removed, I'm not sure why you're so adamant to keep it around unless you play character(s) that abuse it. Unless you think that a rule brought to us by developers that is promised in a future FAQ, and fixes a horrible abuse should be ignored simply because it isn't 100% official yet. But that belief falls apart when you happily espouse your own house rule, which is 0% official.
But as others have said, you don't really stop the summoned spirit on remote services swarm, you only limit it to your charisma. So your attempt to fix a problem doesn't actually fix it and you're still stuck falling back on removing pg. 178's abusive rule or having the GM just say no.
Since the abusive rule is being removed, I'm not sure why you're so adamant to keep it around unless you play character(s) that abuse it. Unless you think that a rule brought to us by developers that is promised in a future FAQ, and fixes a horrible abuse should be ignored simply because it isn't 100% official yet. But that belief falls apart when you happily espouse your own house rule, which is 0% official.
| QUOTE (Wanderer) | ||
Well, I do not expect binding skill saving to be a significant issue since I expect the typical magician to have both the Sorcery and Conjuring skill groups anyway, not separate skills, in all but the extreme specialist's case. IMO it would be extremely stupid not to have both Spellcasting and Counterspelling, Summoning and Banishing at the same level, and then you might do the wise thing and buy the whole useful package anyway. Never call up anything you can't dismiss anytime. |
You're the guy who uses Banishing and Ritual Spellcasting! Wow, it's a real honor to meet you, I'd always thought you were a myth. My profs at MIT&T always claimed there was some guy who preferred the wasted time and random, sometimes punishing drain of banishing a bound spirit with several services to just killing/disrupting it with a pair of lower and safer drain stun/manabolts, but I didn't believe it until now.
To be fair, I always did believe there were a few people who found it useful to spend several hours with a traceable astral link active so they could hit someone distant with a spell if he didn't the astral observer and go inside a ward to escape it (and get extra resistance dice) if the spirit somehow followed and survived the active response to it's breaking the ward.
Truly, an honor. I always felt there was something odd about focusing on skills I use in 98% of all situations; perhaps now I'll rethink.
My prefered solution would be an additional limit of one unbound spirit sent on remote at a time.
So you could have one unbound spirit on remote, one unbound spirit nearby, and up to Cha bound spirits (doing whatever, remote or otherwise).
All that has nothing to do with my house rule for remote services, though, which is completely seperate from the multiple remote services issue, as explained somewhere above already (posts are easy to miss in this mess for sure, though
). I would use that in addition, simply because it makes no sense to me, that it is a remote service, if it doesn't happen in a remote location (at least remote at the time you gave the order, that is).
Bye
Thanee
So you could have one unbound spirit on remote, one unbound spirit nearby, and up to Cha bound spirits (doing whatever, remote or otherwise).
All that has nothing to do with my house rule for remote services, though, which is completely seperate from the multiple remote services issue, as explained somewhere above already (posts are easy to miss in this mess for sure, though
). I would use that in addition, simply because it makes no sense to me, that it is a remote service, if it doesn't happen in a remote location (at least remote at the time you gave the order, that is).Bye
Thanee
Hey, Binding is good. Expensive and somewhat risky, but good.
Bye
Thanee
Bye
Thanee
I mean't Banishing; I edited the post.
Ah, that makes more sense now.
Bye
Thanee
Bye
Thanee
| QUOTE (Eryk the Red) |
| Lantzer, you are a madman. Are you suggesting that it's ok for the rules not to have airtight protections against all twinkery? That, in fact, the solution is "Don't be a dumbass."? Crazy. |
I know, its a failing of mine. I keep rules lawyers around for entertainment value, mostly. When rules appear to make no sense, I look at the context.
"That is simply amazing! Very clever, and quite imaginative... The answer is still No."
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.