We recently had a situation where an area of effect manipulation spell was cast at the team. The teams mage assigned spell defence to himself and got more successes than the caster of the spell. What happens?
1) The whole spell is blocked (this is what SRIII's section on spell defense seems to imply
2) The mage is the only one protected?
I can't seem to find any references in SRIII or MITS to say what happened with spell defence/Shielding with area of effect spells.
Full Version: Spell defense
Only the mage. Area effect is targeting everyone/thing in the blast radius. The mage protects himself, but his companions, who may also be in the radius, still have to deal with the enemy's successes.
Don
Don
We play that Spell Defense removes successes of the caster, starting with the caster's highest die rolls. With our interpretation, this removes successes from all targets. Our team would use your interpretation #1.
The example in the book, on page 183, indicates that interpretation #1 is correct when all the targets of the spell have been selected by the magician to receive Spell Defense. Many might argue that if there are also targets of the spell that the magician has not allocated to, or can not see, that they don't get the benefit, but we don't see it that way.
The example in the book, on page 183, indicates that interpretation #1 is correct when all the targets of the spell have been selected by the magician to receive Spell Defense. Many might argue that if there are also targets of the spell that the magician has not allocated to, or can not see, that they don't get the benefit, but we don't see it that way.
I play that the successes are generated for all; following this line of reasoning, the mage could protect himself, but his allies are screwed. That's a more 2nd ed interpretation; I could be wrong.
Don
Don
The texts seem to say that situation 1 is correct. Might be one of those things lost from 2nd edition to 3rd
hmm. good question. i guess i'd go with number one as well.
If the mage didn't specify what targets he was providing with spell defense, then unprotected targets are still going to get hit. He can protect a number of targets up to his sorcery skill.
1) Just because he had more successes against the manipulation spell doesn't mean it doesn't go off, it only gets staged down - maybe to nothing for protected targets.
2) If he was the only person he was protecting. (Silly, unless he has a sorcery skill of 1 or doesn't like anyone else.)
1) Just because he had more successes against the manipulation spell doesn't mean it doesn't go off, it only gets staged down - maybe to nothing for protected targets.
2) If he was the only person he was protecting. (Silly, unless he has a sorcery skill of 1 or doesn't like anyone else.)
i dunno. it says in the text that if you get more succs, the spell fails.
I see it does.
I'll have to point that out next time the mage provides spell defense for his buddies in melee when he throws that fireball in amongst them. "Sorry, your spell defense erased your spell. Please roll drain. And are you out of spell pool now?"
I'll have to point that out next time the mage provides spell defense for his buddies in melee when he throws that fireball in amongst them. "Sorry, your spell defense erased your spell. Please roll drain. And are you out of spell pool now?"
heh. sounds about right to me.
While it is true that "Any successes subtract directly from the successes the spell's caster achieves on the Sorcery test", the chapter Sorcery Test says "When resolving the Sorcery Test for an area spell, roll the dice once. Compare the results against the target number for each valid target within the spell's radius. Successes are counted separately for each target, and a separate Resistance Test is made for each target." - that means 'successes' of an area spell are not a single stack; each target receives its own stack of *dice rolls*, and all these stacks of dice rolls are the same. Comparing one such set of dice rolls against the TN for a specific target determines the number of successes against this specific target.
There is no 'caster's successes pool' (or maybe I could name it 'spell's successes pool') the spell defense could subtract from - each target suffers its own pool of spell's successes to deal with. Use a simple logic - the mage can either give the best protection to one subject, or 'spread' his powers to protect more subjects.
The logic behind case 1) would also lead to a fact that casting manaball on a group with high-willpower mage rarely affects anyone - the spell will rarely gain enough successes to affect that mage, and because combat spells that don't score any net successes are completely negated, just having a high-willpower mage (who allocated all available dice to his own protection) in the spell's radius would protect everybody. Not just those protected - everybody.
There is no 'caster's successes pool' (or maybe I could name it 'spell's successes pool') the spell defense could subtract from - each target suffers its own pool of spell's successes to deal with. Use a simple logic - the mage can either give the best protection to one subject, or 'spread' his powers to protect more subjects.
The logic behind case 1) would also lead to a fact that casting manaball on a group with high-willpower mage rarely affects anyone - the spell will rarely gain enough successes to affect that mage, and because combat spells that don't score any net successes are completely negated, just having a high-willpower mage (who allocated all available dice to his own protection) in the spell's radius would protect everybody. Not just those protected - everybody.
Just to mix things up. There is one form of spell defense that can stop an area effect elemental manipulation while only protecting one of the potential targets. That is the metamagic of absorbtion. It specifically states that (if fully successful) it causes the elemental effects to swirl into the mage in a visually impressive manner preventing them from harming anyone else in the area of effect.
Note that absorption only has that bonus for elemental manipulations, area effect combat spells still effect everyone not under sufficient spell defense.
Note that absorption only has that bonus for elemental manipulations, area effect combat spells still effect everyone not under sufficient spell defense.
| QUOTE (noname_hero) |
| The logic behind case 1) would also lead to a fact that casting manaball on a group with high-willpower mage rarely affects anyone - the spell will rarely gain enough successes to affect that mage, and because combat spells that don't score any net successes are completely negated, just having a high-willpower mage (who allocated all available dice to his own protection) in the spell's radius would protect everybody. Not just those protected - everybody. |
Yep, but is that a problem or a benefit?
I'm confused by what a couple of you are saying. Are you trying to imply that just because one person resists a spell, that negates the entire spell? That's like saying that because the troll didn't get hurt by the grenade you threw, no one else in the area gets hurt either.
I've never even seen anything to hint that magic worked that way in most cases. Herald pointed out one of the precious few exceptions.
Sorcerer casts Manaball. GM compares his roll to everyone's Willpower score to determine how many successes each of the targets have to independantly resist. Any dice from Spell Defense can be rolled for each of those tests, depending on how the protecting mage distributed them. Those that resist all of them are unaffected, those who don't are. Where's the confusion?
I've never even seen anything to hint that magic worked that way in most cases. Herald pointed out one of the precious few exceptions.
Sorcerer casts Manaball. GM compares his roll to everyone's Willpower score to determine how many successes each of the targets have to independantly resist. Any dice from Spell Defense can be rolled for each of those tests, depending on how the protecting mage distributed them. Those that resist all of them are unaffected, those who don't are. Where's the confusion?
Resisting is a separate and different thing from Spell Defense.
Duh. But what's your point?
When using Spell Defense, the mage throws out extra dice for anyone under his protection. Those dice are used against the Force of the spell, lowering the number of successes the original caster makes. Thus, the defending mage will need to roll enough successes to counter *all* possible successes on an area effect spell.
So let's say the defending mage has 6 dice allocated to Spell Defense. He's covering himself (Willpower 6) and a thick-headed troll (Willpower 2).
The hostile mage casts Manaball 6 on both of them and scores 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 3 3 1 1 1 on his Spellcasting Test. The defending mage rolls his Spell Defense dice and scores 6 6 6 1 1 1 for three successes.
Now both of the targets still have to make their Spell Resistance Test. Against the protecting mage, the hostile mage only scored a total of 3 successes, so the protecting mage's Spell Defense completely negated it for him -- no Willpower roll required. Against the troll, however, the hostile mage scored 9 successes, lowered to 6 due to the 3 successes on the Spell Defense test. The troll now has to roll his piddly Willpower 2 to try and resist the spell, which he obviously can't. He just went down. Boom.
If the protecting mage were using Absorption and the hostile mage was casting an Elemental Manipulation spell with the same end results, then the protecting mage would have completely absorbed the spell and the troll would have been saved. It's one of the few exceptions in the game.
When using Spell Defense, the mage throws out extra dice for anyone under his protection. Those dice are used against the Force of the spell, lowering the number of successes the original caster makes. Thus, the defending mage will need to roll enough successes to counter *all* possible successes on an area effect spell.
So let's say the defending mage has 6 dice allocated to Spell Defense. He's covering himself (Willpower 6) and a thick-headed troll (Willpower 2).
The hostile mage casts Manaball 6 on both of them and scores 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 3 3 1 1 1 on his Spellcasting Test. The defending mage rolls his Spell Defense dice and scores 6 6 6 1 1 1 for three successes.
Now both of the targets still have to make their Spell Resistance Test. Against the protecting mage, the hostile mage only scored a total of 3 successes, so the protecting mage's Spell Defense completely negated it for him -- no Willpower roll required. Against the troll, however, the hostile mage scored 9 successes, lowered to 6 due to the 3 successes on the Spell Defense test. The troll now has to roll his piddly Willpower 2 to try and resist the spell, which he obviously can't. He just went down. Boom.
If the protecting mage were using Absorption and the hostile mage was casting an Elemental Manipulation spell with the same end results, then the protecting mage would have completely absorbed the spell and the troll would have been saved. It's one of the few exceptions in the game.
| QUOTE (What you said) |
| Are you trying to imply that just because one person resists a spell, that negates the entire spell? |
At no time in this thread did anyone suggest that a target -resisting- a spell in anyway negated the spell.
The Spell Defence mage does NOT add their dice into the resistance. Ironically in your example you basically show this, that Spell Defense occurs before the resistance phase of handling the spell. Spell Defense works directly on the casting of the spell, countering the mana manipulation. If it didn't you'd have to perform a physical manipulation to stop an oncoming Acid Stream, for example.
Given that it would seem feasible that an AOE -may- be negated by Spell Defense. Personally i likely would leave it up as an option that the Spell Defense mage chooses yes or no on prior, when allocating the dice, for any mana spells. However i doubt i'd allow the option for the elemental manipulation spell, a wave of acid is all or not.
EDIT: Indirect spells where the Spell Defense comes into effect an indefinate time after the initial casting, such as Clarivoyance, would not have the option of nulifying the spell.
No, Spell Defense is exactly what it says it is; Spell Defense. It in no way "attacks" the casting magician's manipulation of mana, it defends against the effects of their spells. Just like a Resistance Test, albeit with its own rules.
Nothing in the Spell Defense section hints that a spell is "negated" by Spell Defense, let alone an area effect spell. At least not the weird way you're trying to say it does.
Nothing in the Spell Defense section hints that a spell is "negated" by Spell Defense, let alone an area effect spell. At least not the weird way you're trying to say it does.
| QUOTE (A Clockwork Lime) |
| No, Spell Defense is exactly what it says it is; Spell Defense. It in no way "attacks" the casting magician's manipulation of mana, it defends against the effects of their spells. Just like a Resistance Test, albeit with its own rules. Nothing in the Spell Defense section hints that a spell is "negated" by Spell Defense, let alone an area effect spell. At least not the weird way you're trying to say it does. |
So how does Spell Defense stop waves of acid? Or that mailbox sent by a Fling spell?
Simple. It disrupts the magical control when they attack the protected target. Left to themselves, waves of acid aren't known for materializing and throwing themselves at people. Mailboxes, on their own, tend to stay where they are put, and tend to kind of suck as a ranged weapon.
If magic made it happen, magic can disrupt the effect. That portion of the acid wave collapses, or the mailbox gets aimed wrong, or falls out of the air in front of you.
Come one folks, when they say that spell defense dice need to be allocated to specific targets, it seems to me that they don't expect one protected person to negate an area effect spell on a whole group. You want to protect more people? Allocate dice to more people. Don't have enough dice for the mob you travel with? Then spread out so the whole group can't be taken out with one spell.
Otherwise only the spell-defended people are spell-defended.
If magic made it happen, magic can disrupt the effect. That portion of the acid wave collapses, or the mailbox gets aimed wrong, or falls out of the air in front of you.
Come one folks, when they say that spell defense dice need to be allocated to specific targets, it seems to me that they don't expect one protected person to negate an area effect spell on a whole group. You want to protect more people? Allocate dice to more people. Don't have enough dice for the mob you travel with? Then spread out so the whole group can't be taken out with one spell.
Otherwise only the spell-defended people are spell-defended.
| QUOTE (Lantzer @ Apr 22 2004, 08:18 PM) |
| Simple. It disrupts the magical control when they attack the protected target. Left to themselves, waves of acid aren't known for materializing and throwing themselves at people. Mailboxes, on their own, tend to stay where they are put, and tend to kind of suck as a ranged weapon. If magic made it happen, magic can disrupt the effect. That portion of the acid wave collapses, or the mailbox gets aimed wrong, or falls out of the air in front of you. |
Exactly, it screws with the attacking mage's routing of the mana. Otherwise if it required a physical manipulation spell to push back on the mailbox:
1) Spell Defense should cause drain in the defender.
2) Shaman totems should add/subtract dice as appropriate.
3) Elemental mages would not be allowed to Spell Defense if they couldn't do manipulations.
Actually the 3rd might be true (it's never really come up for me), but the first 2 aren't to my knowledge.
| QUOTE |
| Come one folks, when they say that spell defense dice need to be allocated to specific targets, it seems to me that they don't expect one protected person to negate an area effect spell on a whole group. You want to protect more people? Allocate dice to more people. Don't have enough dice for the mob you travel with? Then spread out so the whole group can't be taken out with one spell. Otherwise only the spell-defended people are spell-defended. |
Er, there is a very good reason for specifying more than one recipent of the mage's Spell Defense, which you mention later in the quote. You aren't all always in the same area of effect.
EDIT: ...and not all attacks will be AOE.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.