As previously mentioned time and time again, Arcane Arrester reduces the spells base Force-based effects -- you know, the things the spells actually do to the character -- in half. That overcast Force 12 Stunbolt is only going to do 6S damage at its base, not 12S. If you can't wrap your head around why that's a fantastic benefit all by itself, that's your malfunction, not the rules. Arcane Arrester does not affect the success of a spell. It reduces the effectiveness of it when it does hit. Counterspelling, Spell Resistance, and Astral Hazing are completely different mechanics from Arcane Arrester, and their primary function is to reduce the success of spellcasting. Not Arcane Arrester. Completely. Different. Mechanic. Just as the damn quality states.
I'm done repeating myself. If you're too obtuse to catch on that your "interpretation" of the rules is a house rule, fine. Live in self-inflicted ignorance. But that's exactly what it is: Blatant, unquestionable ignorance. I have no idea why you can't admit that to yourself, but c'est la vie.
Full Version: question about spell resistance
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Nov 13 2009, 06:17 PM) 
Oh yes, so Arcane Arrester does absolutely nothing then, amiright?
Because the only thing it does is reduce a spell's Force for the character, which it clearly states it does not do.
Yessir. Definitely a quandry. Both logically and as the rules clearly state.
Because the only thing it does is reduce a spell's Force for the character, which it clearly states it does not do.
Yessir. Definitely a quandry. Both logically and as the rules clearly state.
No Worries Musplheimr, He ain't gonna get it... apparently His English Skills are WAY more advanced than Ours are... *Whatever*
It really isn't worth the effort anymore...
Keep the Faith
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Nov 13 2009, 05:31 PM)
It is interesting though that the section covering spell effects apparently doesn't really address them. Still, it is the closest thing in the book, & does clearly include the maximum hit allotment based on a spells Force.
Those rules govern how you determine what the spells effects are. They are not effects, and that much should be quite obvious. There is a short pair of sentences in that section that tell you not to apply any effects if the roll fails. Is that an effect?
You've ignored the point I made about part of a spell writeup being actually called "Effect". Do you concede that? That is what implies the need for a greater standard of evidence.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.