Notes from the search for some organizing principles for designing magic Mods - comments welcome.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF MAGIC MOD DESIGN
(A) Supporting Role: Magic should affect the battle in a secondary, ancillary and supporting role rather than a leading role. In many fantasy realms magic plays little or no role in battles for some or all armies. In addition, there is little point playing detailed military combat rules in a magic-oriented game that offers only walk-on parts for normal troops. Therefore the proportion of army power based on magic should be capped, through points and the limitations of the army list, based on the fantasy realm context. In a military game system, magic should overall be less cost-effective than regular troops, evidenced by complaints that magic is ineffective by some players, but situationally valuable when shrewdly used, evidenced by complaints that magic is too effective by some players.
(B) Internal Logic: To be credible a magic system does not need to be externally logical but it does need to stick with its own internal logic as well as represent important interactions and results of magic in its fantasy realm context.
(C) Magic Resource Limitations and Trade-Offs: Magical resources should be limited. , whether as a total pool, a flow per turn, or in other ways. Techniques commonly used are a fixed total pool or a flow of magic power (e.g., “mana”) that can be applied ad hoc to any “spell” that is allowed to the caster, or a limited number of pre-loaded magic casts chosen before the battle that can be unleashed at will or at up to a maximum rate per turn or based on events, or the use of preparation time during the battle to ready and cast a spell. The caution with pre-loading is that it is likely to encourage use of general purpose spells rather than special situational spells that might be worth considering in a mana system. People are likely to gravitate to taking the same safe list of “best” spells. It is more interesting for the players to facilitate access to a variety of spells based on circumstances. Choosing between schools of magic is one way to provide trade-offs. Limiting the range or physical circumstances within which magic casts can be made makes movement and positioning on the battlefield an important tactical decision.
(D) Limit Cumulative Effects: Limit the cumulative effect of multiple spellcasts, both on a single target and the number of effects active on the entire field at one time, to avoid a dominating impact on the battle. Preventing extreme situations eliminates the need to adjust game balance for extreme situations, allowing focus on common uses of magic. It is important that there be no invulnerable battle groups and no impotent battle groups. The proposed rule would be that if multiple compounding effects apply, only the strongest at the time will count, and that magic net effects for a BG never exceed +/-1 die roll modifier, or one armour level or quality level modification – each of these are big changes.
(E) Use Existing Mechanisms: Where possible, magic should be used through conditions, attributes, or modifiers built into existing game mechanisms rather than something novel to the system. This is easier to understand, easier to remember and implement reliably, and easier to playtest in relation to other similar conditions, attributes, or modifiers.
(F) Level of Randomness: The levels and patterns of randomness in magic should relate and scale to those in the existing game mechanisms. Field of Glory mechanisms are designed to not cut off the tails of the probability distributions.
(G) Sequence of Play: Careful thought should be given to the points in the sequence of play when magical actions can be taken. Fewer points are better. It is desirable to have a default magic phase where magical actions are taken unless the specific effect or other rules provide otherwise. Specific prompting events are desirable (such as when a die roll is required or some action or decision must be made), as is piggybacking on die rolls or actions that would occur anyway. My proposed magic subphase for Field of Glory is immediately before Commanders roll to bolster battle groups, the preceding Commander movement serving as a prompt and enabling casters to position themselves with a view to the next turn.
(H) Discrete Targets: The targets of magic and the subjects of magic effects should be discrete and identifiable such as battle groups, bases, characters, an entire terrain feature or an area represented by a template. They should also be those described or plausible in the fantasy realm context.
(I) Some Don’ts:
* Avoid slowing physical movement speed or the movement process on the table as it burns time. A need for speed differentials is better met by increasing speed.
* Try to work with the sequence of play rather than re-ordering it.
* Avoid magic bookkeeping.
* Avoid magic that makes units to harm themselves or other friends, such as mind-control. They are unpopular and can cripple a battle plan in a very unbalancing way.
* Try to avoid terrain changes and instead change terrain effects on a particular BG, such as reducing the level of disorder experienced by a BG.
* Pace is important. Favor magic that aids movement and attack over magic that encourages static defense.
(J) Aggressive Testing: Testing should try to find ways to use and concentrate magic effects to “break” the magic system and the overall play of the rules for the fantasy realm context. The main objectives are to find “killer” magic that is too cost-effective and to find magic that provides the wrong tactical incentives for handling non-magical troops.
More on spells, spell mechanics, and spell families once organized.
Ideas: General Principles of Magic Mod Design
Moderators: terrys, Slitherine Core
(K) Spell Types: The purpose of defining spell types is to promote complete and internally consistent spell definitions and use within (and between) magic mods. There is no hard and fast spell typology, but this is an example:
– Direct Damage results in hits to a target or within an area.
– Indirect Damage affects damage through affecting POAs, combat dice rolls, dice count etc.
– Counterspell or Dispel– blocks a new or removes an existing magic effect.
– Blessing – a bonus attribute change or modifier to target, can serve as Indirect Damage
– Curse – a negative attribute change or modifier to target, can serve as Indirect Damage
– Illusion – a dummy Doppelganger BG, structure or terrain feature that is set up pre-battle. {During or start of battle?} Design Issue: The relative negative impact of an obstacle or something on the battlefield that is not near friendly troops disappearing from its current position is going to be indirect. Splitting troops into a real and dummy unit during the game will be known to the other player but create uncertainty about which is which.
– Movement – this can temporarily affect movement speed, terrain effects on troop movement or order, increase level of drill, reduce CMT requirements, or affect the ability to Evade or Break Off. Be careful since small differences in movement abilities can have major impact.
Spell Types to avoid, or use with caution:
– Restoration – restore lost casualties – if the game design is about FoG is about knocking off enemy bases – selectively reversing or short-circuiting hard-earned damage on the enemy is more unpopular with players than across the board mechanisms such as rerolls or saving throws. If cohesion can be lost but also regained through normal means, spells doing the same are not objectionable but they should not halt or reverse the general deterioration in battle.
– Terrain – add, remove, or change terrain. Can have a major impact, be very annoying, and adding or changing in particular can lead to complex rules regarding placement and effect on nearby BGs. The opponent can feel cheated. Suggest instead the use of movement spells reducing terrain effects.
– Summon – magic reinforcements. This has the same issues as adding terrain, and even a small unit summoned at the right spot can swing the battle. One constraint is to impose a stationary cast-time and to limit where a summon can occur – e.g., at the camp, a certain distance from enemy, a certain type of terrain, or where bases have been lost (creating corpses to raise) but the battle has moved on for a safe distance. This creates a more predictable risk for the other side.
– Scrying – informational magic, including reconnaissance of ambushes or flank marches. In some instances its effect can be unduly potent and leave the opponent feeling cheated.
(L) Schools of Magic: A magic system can optionally organize spells of various types into groups which could be called schools of magic deriving from the same source, spellbooks of related spells, collections of lore based on particular artifacts, etc. This could be purely to conveniently organize a large number of spells available to all casters, but spell families typically relate to specialties of some kind, whether based on a common source of magic power, nature of the spell effects, moral character, racial origin, or some other theme (e.g., Holy, Evil; Death, Life; Fire, Water; Nature, Arcane; Order, Chaos).
(M) Choice Among Schools: A Caster is often limited to particular schools or faces mutually exclusive choices among them. The rationale may be character type (e.g., Sorceror or a Wizard, Druid or Priest, Mage or Shaman) or contextual (e.g., origin, army type, location). This should all be determined by and consistent with the fantasy context and army. The number of schools available should be enough to allow some rock-scissors-paper trade-offs but not so many as to be confusing or dilute the distinctiveness and perceived importance of particular schools (e.g., between 2 or 3 and about 6 or 7 schools), but more or less may be dictated by the context.
In the military rules context, I recommend that schools are either known or not, rather than tracking incremental knowledge of spells or spell levels.
(N) Core Spells: It's easier to balance schools if a set of cost-effective and desirable bread and butter "core" spells is either included in ALL spell families (either identical spells or with different flavor) or are generically available to ALL magic users of appropriate skill level.
(O) Parallel, Opposing or Varied Spells? An initial design decision is whether schools will tend to have parallel spells, opposing spells, and/or spells unique to the school. Parallel and opposing spells are easiest to balance. Names and casting conditions can provide variety for spells with the same effects (e.g., a Nature spell must be cast near trees, an Air spell on a hill etc.). With opposing spells, as with counterspells and dispels, an important design question is whether the offense or defense has the advantage.
(P) Feature Spells: Flavor and balancing are both served if each school has at least one valuable and very resource-efficient spell that is good enough to motivate at least some players to pick that school over others for some circumstances.
(Q) Master Stroke Spells: These should be costly in terms of time, resources, or potential risks, with effective use requiring good tactics and prudent planning as to how and when they are used for them to have a large effect on the flow of battle. They should not be simply fueling up an atomic fireball in a predictable fashion. Elements of uncertainty and drama are appropriate.
(R) Trash Spells: A magic system is diluted and weakened by cluttering it with near-useless spells included merely for variety. This wastes player time and makes it harder on new players, spurring disrespect or resentment toward the designer. These are different from spells that are very useful but only in a limited range of circumstances which often may not apply.
(S) Multi-Use Spells: It is better for backstory rationalization, textual brevity, balancing, ease of play flow, player comprehension and enjoyment to provide a spell with dual or multiple uses some of which are rarely needed than to provide multiple single-use spells some of which are rarely needed.
(T) Caster Risk: Random risk for any spell is not tactically interesting and tends to discourage use of low-value spells and encourage use of exempt spells. Risk associated with powerful spells derived from the context, particularly if in a context-logical way, can substantially increase the credibility of the magic system. This is analogous to commanders who risk death by fighting in the front rank of combat. In a magic-centered game, loss of a caster should be a major event. In a military game with ancillary magic, it should not become a major event so may be best not represented.
(U) Cast Range: Having a limited zone of effect encourages tactical movement of casters on the battlefield relating to the tactical situation, and the location of enemy casters if casters can counter each other.
(V) Duration: Spells can be limited in number or frequency of use and also in duration – instant, ongoing for a phase or turn or until a specific event, or indefinite until dispelled or the battle ends. This is not a magic-centered game – eliminate tracking and bookkeeping where there is a choice. This makes instants preferable. Others need to be tracked, preferably by a suitable effect market that is highly visible on table and distinctive for the effect. Magical effects inherent in or bound to a character, base or unit would normally be declared at deployment but need not be separately marked if the markers serve no other positioning or tracking purpose (unless there are too many effects to be easily remembered by all players).
– Direct Damage results in hits to a target or within an area.
– Indirect Damage affects damage through affecting POAs, combat dice rolls, dice count etc.
– Counterspell or Dispel– blocks a new or removes an existing magic effect.
– Blessing – a bonus attribute change or modifier to target, can serve as Indirect Damage
– Curse – a negative attribute change or modifier to target, can serve as Indirect Damage
– Illusion – a dummy Doppelganger BG, structure or terrain feature that is set up pre-battle. {During or start of battle?} Design Issue: The relative negative impact of an obstacle or something on the battlefield that is not near friendly troops disappearing from its current position is going to be indirect. Splitting troops into a real and dummy unit during the game will be known to the other player but create uncertainty about which is which.
– Movement – this can temporarily affect movement speed, terrain effects on troop movement or order, increase level of drill, reduce CMT requirements, or affect the ability to Evade or Break Off. Be careful since small differences in movement abilities can have major impact.
Spell Types to avoid, or use with caution:
– Restoration – restore lost casualties – if the game design is about FoG is about knocking off enemy bases – selectively reversing or short-circuiting hard-earned damage on the enemy is more unpopular with players than across the board mechanisms such as rerolls or saving throws. If cohesion can be lost but also regained through normal means, spells doing the same are not objectionable but they should not halt or reverse the general deterioration in battle.
– Terrain – add, remove, or change terrain. Can have a major impact, be very annoying, and adding or changing in particular can lead to complex rules regarding placement and effect on nearby BGs. The opponent can feel cheated. Suggest instead the use of movement spells reducing terrain effects.
– Summon – magic reinforcements. This has the same issues as adding terrain, and even a small unit summoned at the right spot can swing the battle. One constraint is to impose a stationary cast-time and to limit where a summon can occur – e.g., at the camp, a certain distance from enemy, a certain type of terrain, or where bases have been lost (creating corpses to raise) but the battle has moved on for a safe distance. This creates a more predictable risk for the other side.
– Scrying – informational magic, including reconnaissance of ambushes or flank marches. In some instances its effect can be unduly potent and leave the opponent feeling cheated.
(L) Schools of Magic: A magic system can optionally organize spells of various types into groups which could be called schools of magic deriving from the same source, spellbooks of related spells, collections of lore based on particular artifacts, etc. This could be purely to conveniently organize a large number of spells available to all casters, but spell families typically relate to specialties of some kind, whether based on a common source of magic power, nature of the spell effects, moral character, racial origin, or some other theme (e.g., Holy, Evil; Death, Life; Fire, Water; Nature, Arcane; Order, Chaos).
(M) Choice Among Schools: A Caster is often limited to particular schools or faces mutually exclusive choices among them. The rationale may be character type (e.g., Sorceror or a Wizard, Druid or Priest, Mage or Shaman) or contextual (e.g., origin, army type, location). This should all be determined by and consistent with the fantasy context and army. The number of schools available should be enough to allow some rock-scissors-paper trade-offs but not so many as to be confusing or dilute the distinctiveness and perceived importance of particular schools (e.g., between 2 or 3 and about 6 or 7 schools), but more or less may be dictated by the context.
In the military rules context, I recommend that schools are either known or not, rather than tracking incremental knowledge of spells or spell levels.
(N) Core Spells: It's easier to balance schools if a set of cost-effective and desirable bread and butter "core" spells is either included in ALL spell families (either identical spells or with different flavor) or are generically available to ALL magic users of appropriate skill level.
(O) Parallel, Opposing or Varied Spells? An initial design decision is whether schools will tend to have parallel spells, opposing spells, and/or spells unique to the school. Parallel and opposing spells are easiest to balance. Names and casting conditions can provide variety for spells with the same effects (e.g., a Nature spell must be cast near trees, an Air spell on a hill etc.). With opposing spells, as with counterspells and dispels, an important design question is whether the offense or defense has the advantage.
(P) Feature Spells: Flavor and balancing are both served if each school has at least one valuable and very resource-efficient spell that is good enough to motivate at least some players to pick that school over others for some circumstances.
(Q) Master Stroke Spells: These should be costly in terms of time, resources, or potential risks, with effective use requiring good tactics and prudent planning as to how and when they are used for them to have a large effect on the flow of battle. They should not be simply fueling up an atomic fireball in a predictable fashion. Elements of uncertainty and drama are appropriate.
(R) Trash Spells: A magic system is diluted and weakened by cluttering it with near-useless spells included merely for variety. This wastes player time and makes it harder on new players, spurring disrespect or resentment toward the designer. These are different from spells that are very useful but only in a limited range of circumstances which often may not apply.
(S) Multi-Use Spells: It is better for backstory rationalization, textual brevity, balancing, ease of play flow, player comprehension and enjoyment to provide a spell with dual or multiple uses some of which are rarely needed than to provide multiple single-use spells some of which are rarely needed.
(T) Caster Risk: Random risk for any spell is not tactically interesting and tends to discourage use of low-value spells and encourage use of exempt spells. Risk associated with powerful spells derived from the context, particularly if in a context-logical way, can substantially increase the credibility of the magic system. This is analogous to commanders who risk death by fighting in the front rank of combat. In a magic-centered game, loss of a caster should be a major event. In a military game with ancillary magic, it should not become a major event so may be best not represented.
(U) Cast Range: Having a limited zone of effect encourages tactical movement of casters on the battlefield relating to the tactical situation, and the location of enemy casters if casters can counter each other.
(V) Duration: Spells can be limited in number or frequency of use and also in duration – instant, ongoing for a phase or turn or until a specific event, or indefinite until dispelled or the battle ends. This is not a magic-centered game – eliminate tracking and bookkeeping where there is a choice. This makes instants preferable. Others need to be tracked, preferably by a suitable effect market that is highly visible on table and distinctive for the effect. Magical effects inherent in or bound to a character, base or unit would normally be declared at deployment but need not be separately marked if the markers serve no other positioning or tracking purpose (unless there are too many effects to be easily remembered by all players).
-
zellak
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:29 pm
- Location: Ayrshire ,Scotland
zellak's quick and dirty D&D magic system.
So here are some ideas for a magic system in line with Dungeons and Dragons.
Wizards cost 10 points + 10 points per spell. Maximum cost 50 points. (level 4 wizard)
Wizards are not bases they are upgrades to a base,when the base is removed then he/she is dead.
Attach a wizard model to the base to show which base is upgraded, he/she cannot leave this base.
Wizards count towards the allocation of generals...if you have 4 generals , then no wizards.
Roll a dice for each spell at the start of the game.
die roll...spell name...when it is used.
6... Scrying (initiative phase at game start)
5... Fireball (shooting phase)
4...Lightning bolt (shooting phase)
3...Conjure Monster (end of JAP)
2...Counterspell (anytime)
1...spell failed,nothing.
Scrying: adds +1 to the initiative roll at the start of the game...can be counterspelled.
Fireball : Single shot , 4 dice at fixed 4+ to hit,counts as Heavy Artillery for CMT, range 12 MU. Any direction.Overhead shooting not impaired.
Lightning Bolt : Single shot at General or Wizard (not Hero). 10+ to kill on 2d6. Range 12 MU. Any direction.
Conjure Monster: Place a 1 base monster within 6 MU of the Wizard.(Counts as Scythed Chariot no matter what it looks like).
Roll for control 1D6 : 2+ Wizard has control, on a 1 the opponent gets control of the monster.
Important note: dont forget this !
Counterspell: Negates enemy spell, must be used to stop the spell being cast. you cannot wait and see the spell effect. Range 12 MU , any direction. No range for countering a Scrying spell. Casting test , fails on a 1 on 1D6.
Note: These ideas have been playtested twice (edit).
As to the exact mechanics of play, i think small tiles with the spells names ,stacked beside the wizard might be the way to go.
Edited 5/5/09
Edited 27/6/09
So here are some ideas for a magic system in line with Dungeons and Dragons.
Wizards cost 10 points + 10 points per spell. Maximum cost 50 points. (level 4 wizard)
Wizards are not bases they are upgrades to a base,when the base is removed then he/she is dead.
Attach a wizard model to the base to show which base is upgraded, he/she cannot leave this base.
Wizards count towards the allocation of generals...if you have 4 generals , then no wizards.
Roll a dice for each spell at the start of the game.
die roll...spell name...when it is used.
6... Scrying (initiative phase at game start)
5... Fireball (shooting phase)
4...Lightning bolt (shooting phase)
3...Conjure Monster (end of JAP)
2...Counterspell (anytime)
1...spell failed,nothing.
Scrying: adds +1 to the initiative roll at the start of the game...can be counterspelled.
Fireball : Single shot , 4 dice at fixed 4+ to hit,counts as Heavy Artillery for CMT, range 12 MU. Any direction.Overhead shooting not impaired.
Lightning Bolt : Single shot at General or Wizard (not Hero). 10+ to kill on 2d6. Range 12 MU. Any direction.
Conjure Monster: Place a 1 base monster within 6 MU of the Wizard.(Counts as Scythed Chariot no matter what it looks like).
Roll for control 1D6 : 2+ Wizard has control, on a 1 the opponent gets control of the monster.
Important note: dont forget this !
Counterspell: Negates enemy spell, must be used to stop the spell being cast. you cannot wait and see the spell effect. Range 12 MU , any direction. No range for countering a Scrying spell. Casting test , fails on a 1 on 1D6.
Note: These ideas have been playtested twice (edit).
As to the exact mechanics of play, i think small tiles with the spells names ,stacked beside the wizard might be the way to go.
Edited 5/5/09
Edited 27/6/09
Last edited by zellak on Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:47 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Come and Trade your D&D miniatures at ukroleplayers.com
-
zellak
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:29 pm
- Location: Ayrshire ,Scotland
Tested this today .
My beastmen against a LotR army, both 700points.
My Yuan Ti Sorceress got, Fireball,Scrying,Conjure monster and Countermagic.
Gandalf got, Lightning Bolt, Conjure monster,countermagic and nothing for his fourth roll.
At game start Gandalf countermagicked her scrying spell.
Then, early on, Gandalf shot a lightning bolt at the Sorceress...and missed
The Sorceress fired her Fireball at a BG of Gondor spearmen along with a volley from her Yuan Ti Longbowmen, and did not a lot.
Then came the turning point; She conjured a monster in the JAP and on the next move it charged into the flank of a BG of Elven HF,Superior ,heavy armoured, skilled swordsmen. Which were giving the beastmen some real problems.
Last of all Gandalf tried the same trick but was countermagicked by the Sorceress.
Conclusions:the magic was fairly ineffective for the most part for, 50 points a piece.
Except for the killer blow with the Conjured monster (Scythed Chariot). Which disappeared in the JAP.
The Fireball was underpowered, as it was only 4 dice at 5+.
I think it would be better to call it 6 dice at 4+ , (rather than 2 Heavy Guns), still range 12, shoot in any direction.
My oppo also came up with an idea; countermagic should roll 1D6 when cast, and should fail on a 1.
Also, i used a flying BG , 4 x Giant Eagles ;average LH unprotected, which i paid triple points for...60 points.
I was using the no 90 or 180 degree turns rule we talked about . So had to wheel in order to turn, and a minimum move of 3 MU. They were rubbish, though my opponent kindly put it down to my tactical inneptitude rather than a flaw in the trooptype.
They got chased around and shot up by some Gondor(?) archers.
Point to note , when a flying BG routs, it heads for home, and cannot be rallied .
Unless i suppose the General can also fly !
One of these things you only really notice by playtesting.
My beastmen against a LotR army, both 700points.
My Yuan Ti Sorceress got, Fireball,Scrying,Conjure monster and Countermagic.
Gandalf got, Lightning Bolt, Conjure monster,countermagic and nothing for his fourth roll.
At game start Gandalf countermagicked her scrying spell.
Then, early on, Gandalf shot a lightning bolt at the Sorceress...and missed
The Sorceress fired her Fireball at a BG of Gondor spearmen along with a volley from her Yuan Ti Longbowmen, and did not a lot.
Then came the turning point; She conjured a monster in the JAP and on the next move it charged into the flank of a BG of Elven HF,Superior ,heavy armoured, skilled swordsmen. Which were giving the beastmen some real problems.
Last of all Gandalf tried the same trick but was countermagicked by the Sorceress.
Conclusions:the magic was fairly ineffective for the most part for, 50 points a piece.
Except for the killer blow with the Conjured monster (Scythed Chariot). Which disappeared in the JAP.
The Fireball was underpowered, as it was only 4 dice at 5+.
I think it would be better to call it 6 dice at 4+ , (rather than 2 Heavy Guns), still range 12, shoot in any direction.
My oppo also came up with an idea; countermagic should roll 1D6 when cast, and should fail on a 1.
Also, i used a flying BG , 4 x Giant Eagles ;average LH unprotected, which i paid triple points for...60 points.
I was using the no 90 or 180 degree turns rule we talked about . So had to wheel in order to turn, and a minimum move of 3 MU. They were rubbish, though my opponent kindly put it down to my tactical inneptitude rather than a flaw in the trooptype.
They got chased around and shot up by some Gondor(?) archers.
Point to note , when a flying BG routs, it heads for home, and cannot be rallied .
Unless i suppose the General can also fly !
One of these things you only really notice by playtesting.
Come and Trade your D&D miniatures at ukroleplayers.com
-
AuldChevalier
- Private First Class - Opel Blitz
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:25 pm
I was zellak's oppo in this game.
Couple of other points to note.
1) Minas Tirith Archers were inspired on the day rolling 2 hits per turn for something like 5 or 6 turns, Whilst zellak managed to fail 3 Cohesion tests on the trot which caused the Eagles to break.
2) Sending the flyers anywhere near archers is not the best idea in the world ( Sorry zellak ) whilst bemoaning their points cost all afternoon. 
3) Personally, I thought the magic worked well. Yes, the turning point was the Monster ( SCH) being conjured , but I thought it fitted well in the game and made me realise that using my counter spell so early in the game was a mistake.
4) In Hindsight, would suggest that the Fireball stays as 4 Dice but becomes 4+ to hit with range and direction still the same. Would rather change it in small increments rather than big amounts which may well overpower the spell in relation to points cost.
What zellak did forget to own up to was that we forgot to roll to see who got control of the conjured monster and when we did remember, about a turn later, It would have been me who would have got blooming control of it
. Them's the breaks
Cheers
AuldChevalier
Couple of other points to note.
1) Minas Tirith Archers were inspired on the day rolling 2 hits per turn for something like 5 or 6 turns, Whilst zellak managed to fail 3 Cohesion tests on the trot which caused the Eagles to break.
2) Sending the flyers anywhere near archers is not the best idea in the world ( Sorry zellak
) whilst bemoaning their points cost all afternoon. 3) Personally, I thought the magic worked well. Yes, the turning point was the Monster ( SCH) being conjured , but I thought it fitted well in the game and made me realise that using my counter spell so early in the game was a mistake.
4) In Hindsight, would suggest that the Fireball stays as 4 Dice but becomes 4+ to hit with range and direction still the same. Would rather change it in small increments rather than big amounts which may well overpower the spell in relation to points cost.
What zellak did forget to own up to was that we forgot to roll to see who got control of the conjured monster and when we did remember, about a turn later, It would have been me who would have got blooming control of it
. Them's the breaksCheers
AuldChevalier
-
zellak
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:29 pm
- Location: Ayrshire ,Scotland
Forgot about the casting roll twice in one day, tricky stuff magic.
I will amend the original post,seeing as we have now tested it.
So Fireball changes to 4 dice at fixed 4+, same range ...12, fire in any direction.
Countermagic now needs a casting roll ...fails on a 1 on 1d6.
added note ; DONT FORGET CASTING ROLL FOR CONJURED MONSTERS.
Might i suggest that Conjured Monsters only be conjured at the end of the JAP of the active player, so that the opponent gets a chance to react to the conjuration. It was pretty devestating that my monster appeared at the end of AC's turn, and could then charge at the start of my next turn.
..................zellak
I will amend the original post,seeing as we have now tested it.
So Fireball changes to 4 dice at fixed 4+, same range ...12, fire in any direction.
Countermagic now needs a casting roll ...fails on a 1 on 1d6.
added note ; DONT FORGET CASTING ROLL FOR CONJURED MONSTERS.
Might i suggest that Conjured Monsters only be conjured at the end of the JAP of the active player, so that the opponent gets a chance to react to the conjuration. It was pretty devestating that my monster appeared at the end of AC's turn, and could then charge at the start of my next turn.
..................zellak
Come and Trade your D&D miniatures at ukroleplayers.com
-
AuldChevalier
- Private First Class - Opel Blitz
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:25 pm
zellak,
Fireball 4 dice at a fixed 4+ to hit
Some sorcerer you are when you keep forgetting bits
AuldChevalier
"Might i suggest that Conjured Monsters only be conjured at the end of the JAP of the active player, so that the opponent gets a chance to react to the conjuration. It was pretty devestating that my monster appeared at the end of AC's turn, and could then charge at the start of my next turn.
..................zellak"
I wouldn't change this at all. That's what magic is about for me in the game, to be used to create a decisive advantage or burst a hole in an opponent's line. I had no gripes about it at all except for cursing myself for using the countermagic spell far too early in the game and therefore had to suffer the consequences
Fireball 4 dice at a fixed 4+ to hit
Some sorcerer you are when you keep forgetting bits
AuldChevalier
"Might i suggest that Conjured Monsters only be conjured at the end of the JAP of the active player, so that the opponent gets a chance to react to the conjuration. It was pretty devestating that my monster appeared at the end of AC's turn, and could then charge at the start of my next turn.
..................zellak"
I wouldn't change this at all. That's what magic is about for me in the game, to be used to create a decisive advantage or burst a hole in an opponent's line. I had no gripes about it at all except for cursing myself for using the countermagic spell far too early in the game and therefore had to suffer the consequences
-
MARVIN_THE_ARVN
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:37 pm
Sounds interesting!!!
I think its best to keep it nice and simple like you have. The idea of making the wizards a generals choice is good.
You could easily come up with 2d6 worth of spells to add abit of variation. I just thought of the spell below....
Fear - The wizard confronts the enemy with their worst fear, at the start of the JAP an enemy unit with 12 MU's takes a cohension test. If the unit succeeds it gains 1 cohension level as it faces it fear and steady's itself. This unit can also be rallied by a general if allowed to in the rules.
I think this spell although useful adds an element of risk to its use and would be interesting to use. Thoughts?
I think its best to keep it nice and simple like you have. The idea of making the wizards a generals choice is good.
You could easily come up with 2d6 worth of spells to add abit of variation. I just thought of the spell below....
Fear - The wizard confronts the enemy with their worst fear, at the start of the JAP an enemy unit with 12 MU's takes a cohension test. If the unit succeeds it gains 1 cohension level as it faces it fear and steady's itself. This unit can also be rallied by a general if allowed to in the rules.
I think this spell although useful adds an element of risk to its use and would be interesting to use. Thoughts?
"I'll gladly trade you some ARVN rifles, never been fired and only dropped once"
-
zellak
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:29 pm
- Location: Ayrshire ,Scotland
A fear spell sounds a good idea.
Though the target going up a cohesion level if they pass is a big sting in the tail for the caster !
Most BGs need a 7+ on 2D6 to pass , with a general in range 6+.
It would be OK to cast it on a BG that was wavering i suppose, perhaps a better mechanism would be to have a casting roll, spell failure on a 1 on 1D6 ?
Though the target going up a cohesion level if they pass is a big sting in the tail for the caster !
Most BGs need a 7+ on 2D6 to pass , with a general in range 6+.
It would be OK to cast it on a BG that was wavering i suppose, perhaps a better mechanism would be to have a casting roll, spell failure on a 1 on 1D6 ?
Come and Trade your D&D miniatures at ukroleplayers.com
-
MARVIN_THE_ARVN
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:37 pm
At first I thought it a bit harsh but then it adds an element of risk to using the spell, its not that useful against steady troops but against say a disrupted unit thats at -1 or -2 without a general. Also dropping a whole level can be bad bad bad for some troop types, spearman and pike so I think an element of risk would be fair. You could also say the general has to be with the unit.
You could also work it as you said by rolling a d6 and it falling to cast on a 1.
Depends on how you want your magic to work. I like the idea of an element of risk added into spells.
You could also work it as you said by rolling a d6 and it falling to cast on a 1.
Depends on how you want your magic to work. I like the idea of an element of risk added into spells.
"I'll gladly trade you some ARVN rifles, never been fired and only dropped once"
-
zellak
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:29 pm
- Location: Ayrshire ,Scotland
Gandalf versus the Yuan Ti Sorceress ...Round 2
The game we played Sunday;
Gandalf got Scrying, Fireball, Conjure Monster and Countermagic.
Sorceress got Scrying, Fireball, Countermagic and nothing.
So the Scryings cancelled each other out.
Gandalf fireballed a BG of Goatfolk cavalry. Disordering them but causing no casualties.
The Sorceress fireballed Gandalf's BG (which would have caused 4 hits, we rolled them for fun) but Gandalf countermagicked it. ....boo.
Then Gandalf conjured an Ent which would have appeared on the flank of my HF axemen BG but was countered by the Sorceress.
This game , all the spellcasting pretty much cancelled each other out, as you can see.
Though it added a bit of drama to the game when rolling for the Countermagic spells chance of failure.
We talked over a few ideas , possibly adding a Fear spell and a Charm Monster spell to the Spell list..
The game we played Sunday;
Gandalf got Scrying, Fireball, Conjure Monster and Countermagic.
Sorceress got Scrying, Fireball, Countermagic and nothing.
So the Scryings cancelled each other out.
Gandalf fireballed a BG of Goatfolk cavalry. Disordering them but causing no casualties.
The Sorceress fireballed Gandalf's BG (which would have caused 4 hits, we rolled them for fun) but Gandalf countermagicked it. ....boo.
Then Gandalf conjured an Ent which would have appeared on the flank of my HF axemen BG but was countered by the Sorceress.
This game , all the spellcasting pretty much cancelled each other out, as you can see.
Though it added a bit of drama to the game when rolling for the Countermagic spells chance of failure.
We talked over a few ideas , possibly adding a Fear spell and a Charm Monster spell to the Spell list..
Come and Trade your D&D miniatures at ukroleplayers.com