Tag Archives: magic-user

Magic save as magic defense

7 Replies
The Enchantress (source)

The Enchantress (source)

Many spells allow a saving throw to avoid or mitigate spell effects. This saving throw is a property of the spell target that represents how good they are at throwing off the effect of magic. Thus, it is in effect a magic defense stat (much like the “will” defense in 4E).

Now, I already have magic-users roll a saving throw when they cast a spell to see if the spell is retained. Why not roll the retention save and the monster save together? One minor problem is that the player wants to roll high on the retention save, but wants the monster to roll low on the defense save. However, this is easy to address; just subtract the monster save from 20 to get a new target number.

For example, say the target of a spell has a saving throw versus magic of 15. That means they have a 30% defense against magic. Also assume that the caster has a save versus magic of 15 (and thus a 30% chance to retain the spell). The player rolls 1d20. Above 5 and the monster is affected (30% chance preserved). 15 or higher and the spell is also retained. This is a quick and easy single roll spectrum system that uses all the default game numbers.

The one minor hack that I would add is to have the magic-user apply spell competency* as a bonus to the roll and spell level as a penalty to represent spell difficulty (at first and second class level these modifiers balance out, so no math is required until a magic-user reaches third level). This makes the all-in-one saving throw more like a direct “spell roll.”

* Spell competency = the highest level of spell that the magic-user can prepare. This is usually equivalent to experience level divided by 2 (round up). For example, a fifth level magic-user has a spell competency of 3.

Basic wands

12 Replies
Image from Dark Classics

Image from Dark Classics

There are three main types of elemental wands: flame, cold, and lightning. Magic-users may craft any of these wands beginning at first level. Crafting requires a sympathetic component, which is not necessarily required to be valuable. Some examples: a bonfire, the remains of a monster with an elemental affinity, a hand lost to frostbite, a branch struck by lightning. In addition to the sympathetic component, 100 GP worth of components are required per wand level, along with one week of work. Thus, a third level wand costs 300 GP and takes one week to create.

Along with the sympathetic component and ritual materials, an object for the wand itself must be procured. Simple objects may be used for the wand (such as a yew rod or a bone), though wands made from such mundane materials crumble to dust, shatter, or otherwise fall apart when exhausted. More finely crafted wands will simply cease to function when used up and can be enchanted again in another wand creation ritual. Traditionally, wands are batons, though this is not required. For example, consider the famous jewelled storm gauntlet of Hyssiasto of Urtar.

The use of a wand does not require an attack roll. Instead, enemies must make a saving throw versus wands and then take 1d6 damage upon failure. Damage from wands is considered magical. Range is as thrown weapon. Especially vulnerable targets may take extra damage (for example, a creature of fire might be vulnerable to a cold wand, and soldiers in metal armor are vulnerable to lightning). In general, this is operationalized as penalty of 1 to the wand saving throw and +1 damage per die. A natural saving throw of 1 results in two dice of damage.

The destructive potential of any given wand is not unlimited. At the end of any combat during which a wand is used, 1d6 is rolled for exhaustion. On a roll of 1 or less, the wand has lost its enchantment. If wands are used outside of combat, exhaustion is checked for at the end of an exploration turn.

The three types of wands also have the following additional effects:

  • Flame: ignite oil or flammable materials such as paper
  • Cold: slowing and penalty to actions requiring fine motor control
  • Lightning: also damages those touching target (or in water with, etc)

Wand level has several different effects. A higher level wand in the hands of a more experienced magic-user is more difficult to resist. Enemies take a save penalty equal to the lesser of wand level and wand user spell capability. Spell capability is the highest level of spell that can be prepared (which is pretty much magic-user level / 2). That is, higher level wands must be crafted to take advantage of a higher level magic-user’s power. For example, the targets of a fifth level magic-user’s third level wand make saves at -3 (because the highest level of spell that a fifth level magic-user can cast is 3). The same magic-user would have the same effectiveness with a fifth level wand, because of being unable to fully take advantage of the wand’s power. Additionally, the wand level is used as a bonus to item saving throws that the wand needs to make.

In addition to the standard attack, there are two alternate ways that wands may be used: surge and final strike. Surges do one extra point of damage per wand level (assuming the target fails the save) but require an immediate check for wand exhaustion. Final strikes do one extra full die of damage per wand level (assuming the target fails the save), but also automatically exhaust the wand.

Having two or more wands of different elemental affinities in close proximity can be dangerous. If either of the wands are subject to an event that would require a saving throw (such as being blasted by dragon fire), both must succeed at an item saving throw. If either wand fails the save, the wands rip apart in a vortex of unleashed magic power. The detonation causes 1d6 damage per wand level to any spiritually attuned (that is, spell casting) creature within five feet. Additionally, a wild surge or magical mishap occurs (roll on any such table, maybe this one or this one). Thus, most sane magic-users carry only one type of wand. Note that this risk of meltdown is only present due to miscibility; having a single type of wand does not carry the same risk, even if the wand is destroyed.

There are legends of many other kinds of wands, but the methods needed for their creation are more obscure. Magical research or the discovery of ancient manuals is required.

Simplified spell progression

16 Replies

The rule:

  • 1 spell per magic-user level
  • No more than 2 spells per spell level
  • Spell competency = level / 2 round up
  • Progression stops once there are 2 slots per spell level
Thus you get a progression that looks like this:
Adjusted Magic-User Spell Progression
Class level 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
1
 1 – – – – –
2
 2 – – – – –
3
 2 1 – – – –
4
 2 2 – – – –
5
 2 2 1 – – –
6
 2 2 2 – – –
7
 2 2 2 1 – –
8
 2 2 2 2 – –
9
 2 2 2 2 1 –
10
 2 2 2 2 2 –
11
 2 2 2 2 2 1
12+
 2 2 2 2 2 2

Pros:

  1. Easy to remember
  2. Compatible with the standard magic-user class
  3. Approximates traditional gameplay at low levels
  4. Only starts to diverge at 4th level
  5. Scales back at high levels
  6. Never more than 12 prepared spells assuming B/X
  7. Exactly one new spell slot gained per level
Cons:
  1. ?

Unless you already hate the traditional Vancian spell system, I don’t see how this isn’t an improvement.

This would also work for spells of up to 9th level (Supplement I: Greyhawk/AD&D style), if that’s the way you roll (just add three columns, and extrapolate to 18th level).

Addendum: this actually works reasonably well for clerics, too. Just round down rather than up for spell competency, and stop at the highest leve of cleric spells. So first level clerics still wouldn’t get a spell. Access to the highest level cleric spells would be pushed back slightly.

2d6 Vancian Variant

9 Replies

That 2d6 fantasy game began as a variant spell casting system for plain old D&D. As much as I like that complete system, I still think a 2d6 variant for the standard magic-user would be useful. Jeff has already done the heavy lifting, but here is some further discussion and systematization.

The traditional game differentiates between magic-user class level and spell level (to the consternation of many a beginning player). For example, magic-users can’t cast second level spells until they are third level. The highest level spell is almost generalizable to magic-user class level divided by two and rounded up (but not quite, because sixth level spells can’t be prepared until twelfth level). For the purposes of this post though, we can rationalize this to make up a new stat “magic bonus” which is magic-user class level / 2, rounded up. Call it M.

The rules:

  • Magic-users can prepare up to M spells (doesn’t matter the spell level)
  • Casting a spell of level L in armor A: 2d6 +M -L -A
  • Spell is lost (must be re-prepared in controlled circumstances) on 5-
  • Spell is retained after being cast on 6+

For adjudicating the various levels of success, consider the following guidelines. For catastrophe (2 or less), some effect should occur that is approximately as negative to the caster (or positive to the caster’s enemies) as would have occurred had the spell gone off as expected. A backfire (doing full damage to the caster) or the summoning of a hostile creature rather than an ally are classic examples. Miscasts (3-5) should lead to some minor inconvenience that is thematically consistent while achieving none of the intended goal. Delayed success (6-8) may also be interpreted as immediate but reduced. Immediate success (9-11) is casting as normal, with no adjustments. And finally, puissant success (12 or higher) could have extra duration or maximum damage. I don’t think tables of exact results are needed for impartiality; a player should know the level of danger by inverting the potential benefit.

The following is a table showing the chance of 6+ (delayed success or higher), by magic bonus (which is a proxy for class level) and spell level (which is a proxy for magic difficulty). The first column (with the plusses) is the bonus, the first row (with the minuses) is attempted spell level. Thus, for example, a character with a +4 magic bonus (magic-users of level 7 or higher), has a 58% chance (6+ on 2d6, +4 from the magic bonus and -5 from the spell level) to be able to cast a fifth level spell with partial success (full success, consulting the magic table above, requires a 9+). All percentages are rounded, and taken from anydice.com (click on the “at least” button).

Chance of 6+ (required for partial success)
Magic Bonus -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6
+1
72
58
42
28
17
8
+2
83
72
58
42
28
17
+3
92
83
72
58
42
28
+4
97
92
83
72
58
42
+5
100
97
92
83
72
58
+6
100
100
97
92
83
72


This system has the following benefits, in my opinion. No stupidly large number of spell slots to fill for higher level magic-users. Vance’s spell casters were not able to cram more than a few spells into their consciousnesses. Also, it allows lower level magic-users to cast higher level spells with a decreased chance of success even more elegantly than some previous Vancian variants I’ve experimented with. The magic bonus M along with the fivefold casting result chart replaces the original spell slot chart. The armor penalty to casting obviates the need for armor restriction in a finer grained way that other “arcane failure” systems I have seen (light armor makes a character function as if she were 2 levels lower, medium armor 4 levels lower, and heavy armor 6 levels lower).

Those who have been paying attention may notice some similarities with the DCC RPG wizard system. That also uses a relatively smaller number of spells, though more than I have here (up to 16 at level 10). It uses a d20 roll to cast, with caster level as bonus, and a difficulty class of 10 + (2 * spell level). This is nice, but I prefer 2d6 because it makes (for example) the difference in difficulty between a second and third level spell greater than the difference between a first and second level spell. Also, the crit and fumble chances with 2d6 are 1 in 36 (about 3%, assuming balanced modifiers), and they scale up nonlinearly with difficulty.

A minor point: that multiplier of 2 in the casting difficulty class formula for DCC RPG is an indicator of a system kluge. The two parts of the system (class level and spell level) don’t really fit together. The same thing is true of my 2d6 formulation as well, but at least you only see it once per level up (when you potentially recalculate the magic bonus), rather than on every casting check. Further, as casting spells is really all the magic-user gets better at, there’s no real reason not to just change the experience progression so that level 6 is equivalent to the old level 11 or 12. Thus, one might have an experience progression of 0, 5k, 20k, 50k, 100k, 300k. Then magic bonus, class level, and spell level are all on the same scale.

If you’re playing B/X (or a system with comparable intelligence modifiers) feel free to add the intelligence bonus to the magic bonus for purposes of the number of spells that can be prepared (but probably not to the actual casting check, as that would be very powerful). If you want magic to be a bit harder, have the magic bonus increase in steps of 3 levels rather than 2 (that is, level / 3 round up). For extra fortifying play, consider letting starting magic users randomly determine the level of starting spells in addition to the spells themselves (probably good to let them start with at least a few first level spells though). Or might I suggest a grimoire system?

Here are a few more charts of probabilities, to illustrate the dynamics of the system.

Chance of 9+ (required for standard success)
Magic Bonus -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6
+1
28
17
8
3
0
0
+2
42
28
17
8
3
0
+3
58
42
28
17
8
3
+4
72
58
42
28
17
8
+5
83
72
58
42
28
17
+6
92
83
72
58
42
28


Chance of 2- (catastrophe)
Magic Bonus -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6
+1
3
8
17
28
42
58
+2
0
3
8
17
28
42
+3
0
0
3
8
17
28
+4
0
0
0
3
8
17
+5
0
0
0
0
3
8
+6
0
0
0
0
0
3

Magic, Evil, and Chaos

14 Replies
Image derived from Wikipedia

I greatly favor the treatment of magic, chaos, and evil as all being different words for the same thing. Thus, protection from evil works on demons, elves, undead, and… sufficiently high level magic-users. Magic-users should become more inherently chaotic as they gain levels, until a sufficiently high level magic-user is essentially an alien being (despite having human form).

Previously, I came up with magical affinity, which is good but insufficiently compatible with the traditional game (and maybe too complicated anyways). So here is another way to do it. The chance that a magic-user is chaotic for the purposes of a given situation is N in 6, where N is the magic-users spell competency (that is, the highest level of spells that the magic-user can prepare). I like this because the chance goes from minimal for low-level magic-users to certain for high level magic-users. Level / 2 round up would also work (or level / 2 round down, if you don’t want first level magic-users to have any chance of registering on the chaos meter).
This is better than an inverse saving throw versus magic (success = treat as chaotic), which is something I also considered, because it never gets to 100%. Further, an inverse saving throw is not straightforward to explain.

This is also the chance that a given magic-user will turn as a demon (of hit dice equivalent to the magic-user’s level) for clerics that have the power to turn demons.

Brewing Potions

Leave a reply
The Love Potion (from Wikipedia)

Magic-users (and, to a limited extent, clerics) can brew potions. The same game systems also apply to creating poison (for thieves) and incendiaries (for fighters). These items have no special use requirements, though some classes are better at creating them than others. For example, anyone can imbibe a potion of gaseous form brewed by a magic-user or coat a weapon with poison created by a thief.

To brew a potion, a recipe is required. Every recipe specifies one or more special components that are required, in addition to mundane ingredients and procedures. There may be more than one recipe for the same potion (each making use of different special components). Recipes can be discovered in play much like scrolls or purchased from specialists such as apothecaries (who tend not to share the secrets of their livelihood) or sages (who often charge ungodly prices).

Potion recipes have a level, just like spells. In order to brew a potion from the recipe, the character in question must be able to cast spells of the equivalent level. Potion components cost 500 GP and one week per level (so a second level potion would cost 1000 GP of ingredients and require two weeks of work). Like magic research, brewing potions may be done during downtime punctuated by adventuring, as long as too much time (by referee ruling) does not pass. Characters do not need to spend money separately to establish a laboratory. It is assumed that as items are created, the character naturally accumulates the paraphernalia required, and this is abstracted into the cost of ingredients.

Fighters and thieves should use the magic-user spell progression to determine if a given character is skilled and knowledgeable enough to create a particular item. Costs are identical (500 GP for level 1 poison, etc). The only significant difference is that each “brew” of poison results in 1d6 doses (unless otherwise specified in the recipe). Different poisons may also have different application methods (also by recipe), so one poison may be contact, one poison may be injected (i.e., for coating a weapon), another poison may end up being a beaker full of gas that may be hurled like a grenade. Mutatis mutandis for fighters. In addition to incendiaries, fighters can create (or oversee the creation of) siege engines and siege works. Schematics for these work exactly as other recipes, and are rated similarly by level.

Note that though the ability to brew potions is available to characters of any level (given appropriate class), the costs involved (along with the fact that spending GP results in XP) means that characters that craft several items (be they scrolls, potions, or something else) will naturally end up becoming higher level, with no other constraints required.

Optional rule: cross-class brewing. One kind of class may create the type of recipe items appropriate to another class (assuming a recipe and special components are available), but the the costs are doubled due to unfamiliarity and the crafting is only successful on a d20 roll less than or equal to the intelligence score. Upon failure, the components are not wasted, but another week must be spent (and another check made) until either the brewing is successful or the task is abandoned. In any case, the spent GP results in XP (learning from failure!).

I’m thinking that maybe each class should begin with one basic first level recipe (love potion, healing potion, minor firebomb, and minor poison, perhaps).

(In Hexagram, provisionally, the ability to brew potions comes with the alchemy trait, the ability to brew poison comes from the assassination trait, and the ability to craft incendiaries or do siege-work comes with the ranged combat and melee combat traits, respectively.)

Agency preserving illusions

8 Replies
Image from Wikipedia

What makes a hazard in a tabletop RPG fair? I believe that clues are what make hazards fair. They can be subtle clues, or even indirect clues, but if there are no clues you are playing a game of chance rather than a game of skill. Especially if hazards can kill a character dead with only a saving throw as potential saving grace, clues are critical (the issue is slightly blunted, though not removed, of the lethality rules are more forgiving).

This is relatively straightforward with physical traps, such as darts, daggers, and collapsing ceilings. Just think about the mechanism required for such traps and add description. Scorch marks, dead NPCs, holes in the masonry, dust on the floor in a particular pattern, watermarks on the walls, etc.

But what about illusions? Theoretically, an illusionary floor could cover a pit full of spikes covered in save or die poison. Sure, you would still get a saving throw, but having to roll a saving throw should come after making a mistake. So what is the clue for an illusion?

There has been some discussion of illusions by Courtney over at Hack & Slash. For example, this example of detecting illusionary pit traps suggests using magic saving throws after physical interaction is attempted (such as throwing a coin into an illusionary pit). And in a post about another illusion-powered trap, Courtney writes:

There should be at least a single word in the description of the object to indicate it’s chimerical nature.

For example, describing a rolling boulder as preternaturally silent. This approach is not entirely satisfactory to me, especially the saving throw method, because there are no clues at all prior to interaction. Moving to the second example, this is better (a clue is presented at the outset), but it also seems somehow artificial, and perhaps difficult to apply to non-visual illusions. I don’t think the “one word” rule is bad, exactly, but I think clarifying exactly what kind of clues illusions might create would be useful, especially when moving beyond examples of visual illusions that don’t make noise.

Consider this quite from The Deed of Paksenarrion by Elizabeth Moon (book 2, Divided Allegiances, chapter 13):

Young sir, if you think it is easy to produce even illusory fire, I suggest you try. My old master, who is well-known in the arts, always said that a fine, convincing illusion was far more difficult—because reality carries its own conviction, and saves its own appearances. If you make a flame, it is a real flame, and you don’t have to worry, once you’ve got it. But an illusory flame can go wrong in many subtle ways—even such a thing as forgetting which way the wind is blowing, so that it flickers the wrong direction.

Perhaps this is a potential answer. No illusion is perfect enough to not have any logical inconsistencies. So here is a simple rule of thumb similar to Courtney’s “one word” dictum. Every illusion has at least one inconsistency or “deja vu” moment (like the cat from The Matrix). Maybe something plays in a loop or doesn’t quite react correctly to the environment. I believe this could easily handle illusions involving any of the senses, because the heuristic is something incongruent, rather than something chimerical.

Potential inconsistencies may also, of course, be caused by something else that is not yet understood. For example, a flame flickering the wrong direction might also be an indicator of a draft coming from a secret door. So inconsistencies should not necessarily be seen as a dead giveaway of an illusion, but they are something that needs to be understood before a party can proceed without potentially subjecting themselves to the mercy of the saving throw dice.

Theorems & Thaumaturgy

4 Replies

Theorems & Thaumaturgy necromancer illustration

This Labyrinth Lord supplement bills itself as Advanced Arcana for the Discerning Magic-User. Theorems & Thaumaturgy is available as a free PDF, but there are several Lulu print on demand options as well, for those that like physical books.

It contains three new specialist magic-user classes, the elementalist, necromancer, and vivimancer. There is also a fey elf class, which is presented in both “basic” race-as-class and “advanced” race with class format. In some ways, it feels sort of like an OSR equivalent to the old TSR Tome of Magic, though with fewer system-level changes.

Theorems & Thaumaturgy has what I would consider close to professional grade layout, and excellent, distinctive artwork that fits nicely with the Labyrinth Lord aesthetic without being exactly the same.

In addition to the new classes (which all contain full, custom spell lists), there are also new magic items, new monsters, and a collection themed books of magic. Some of these new spells are very creative, allowing things like detecting which spells another magic-user has prepared (spell reading), and manipulating those spells (for example, there is a charm spell spell). The fey elf presented is distinctive and much more thematic than the standard LL fighter/mage elf.

Gavin also did some great, practical work (like sets of prepared spells for magic-users of any level and an index of all the LL spells). This is the kind of effort that people rarely put into free resources, because despite being very useful it is often not as fun to put together as the parts where you make new stuff up.

There is a chapter on optional magic rules, including an awesome variation on at-will detect magic that functions like the search action (2 in 6 chance, takes one turn). I would be very tempted to use something like that (perhaps X in 6 chance, where is the the highest level spell that a magic-user was able to prepare). The d30 table of magic affinities looks good too. It offers a minor quirk/power for every magic-user, but the random determination makes it much more interesting than all magic-users expecting to be able to use mage hand or whatever.

Sustained Spells

9 Replies
Image from Wikipedia

Because of a comment Gustie left on my Sorcerer Patrol post, I’ve been playing Dragon Age: Origins recently. The magic system in this game uses the “mana” magic point system that has become standard in most computer RPGs. Spells are divided into activated and sustained categories. Activated spells cost a fixed amount of mana and have an immediate effect (which also may sometimes persist for a short period of time, but wears off quickly). Something like paralyze (which affects an enemy) is an activated effect, as is fireball.

Sustained spells, however, are essentially permanent but also reserve a fixed amount of mana which can’t be used for other magic while the sustained ability is maintained. Effects generated by this type of spell are often defensive (arcane shield, rock armor), but also auras which penalize opponents (miasma) or benefit allies (flaming weapons).

It occurs to me that this mechanism could be used for spells in a tabletop game as well, replacing or in addition to the idea of other durations. For example, a spell like shield or armor could be maintained indefinitely, perhaps by occupying two first level spell slots. Personally, I am less likely to modify existing spells in this way than to use this approach as a basis for new custom spells. In most cases infinite duration, even at the cost of extra spell slots being occupied, seems like it might cut into the resource management aspect of the game. However, I still think the idea has legs, especially for effects that are more interesting than a simple bonus.

Robe Wards

4 Replies
Image from Wikipedia

Here are a collection of special wards that may be added to wizard robes. I’m not totally sure about the power levels and costs of some of these, but I don’t think anything is too crazy.

Any ward may be decoded with read magic (though see obscuring ward below) and destroyed with dispel magic (the wearer’s saving throw versus magic applies).

  1. Elemental ward.
    Choose one: fire, cold, lightning. You may re-roll the next failed saving throw of the given type. Doing so exhausts the ward. Minor effects related to the element in question often manifest around the wearer, though generally in subtle ways (a faint aura of cold, sparks when walking on stone, etc). Cost: 500 GP. Components: the remains of an elemental creature of at least 3 HD.
  2. Paralytic curse.
    Anyone other than the attuned magic-user donning the robe must make a save versus paralysis or be frozen in place indefinitely. If the save is successful, paralysis is avoided, but the wearer feels uncomfortable and nauseous (taking a -2 to all rolls). Cost: 500 GP. Components: the spleen of a ghoul.
  3. Obscuring ward.
    This ward disguises the nature of another ward. It either hides a ward completely or makes it appears as a different (non-functional) ward. Useful for disguising wards that may rely on forbidden magic, such as diabolism or necromancy. Cost: 500 GP. Components: blood of an adulterer.
  4. Flaming retribution.
    If the wearer is slain, a fireball detonates with ground zero at the wearer. Cost: 100 GP per die of fireball damage, max = robe level. Components: ash from a home that was burned to the ground.
  5. Protection from evil.
    Choose one: demons, undead, faeries. As per the spell. Any hostile action (referee determination; the player should be given information about what constitutes hostility) grants the creature a saving throw versus magic to destroy the ward. Creatures of this type can also sense the ward and thus have a -2 on any reaction roll. Cost: 1000 GP. Components: captured creature of the appropriate type (minimum 3 HD), sacrificed or ritually destroyed.
  6. Demonic sympathy.
    The true name of a demon is inscribed as a ward. If the attuned wearer dies, the demon is destroyed. If the ward is dispelled, the demon is freed. Cost: 1000 GP. Components: demon’s true name.
  7. Undead retribution.
    If the wearer is slain, she raises as a wraith and inexorably pursues the killer. Cost: 1000 GP. Components: fat rendered from the flesh of a person killed by terror or energy drain.
  8. Precipitative ward.
    Rain, snow, and other natural precipitation falls around rather than on the magic-user. Winds are calmed slightly, but not entirely (gale-force winds remain dangerous). Cost: 50 GP. Components: cloud, bottled and preserved.
  9. Relay ward.
    This ward must be created voluntarily with another magic-user. The other magic-user may cast spells through the wearer, though targeting is still up to the wearer. This also creates some form of unidirectional magical channel between the two, and the remote magic-user will always be able to sense the approximate direction and distance of the wearer (the remote magic-user also gains a +2 to all saves versus spells cast by the wearer). Some masters use this ward in order to control their apprentices. Cost: 1000 GP. Components: blood from both parties, freely shed, mingled.
  10. Sartorial ward.
    Robes may shift in appearance as long as they continue to maintain approximately the same surface area. All wards remain visible unless magically obscured. Robes must continue to appear as some form of clothing. Cost: 100 GP. Components: the ashes from a suit of currently fashionable clothing, burned.
  11. Necropotent ward.
    No life will come into being within 10 feet of the robes. Living plants will also gradually die, and animals will become uncomfortable (-2 reaction roll). Useful as a magical form of contraception. Cost: 100 GP. Components: crops spoiled prior to harvest.
  12. Seelie friendship.
    Must be created jointly with another magic-user of the Seelie court. +2 reaction rolls with members of the Seelie, -2 reaction rolls with members of the Unseelie. Generally awarded as a boon to magic-users that have helped the Seelie court. The reverse, Unseelie friendship, is also possible, but obviously not both at the same time. Cost: 500 GP. Components: blood shed in violence of a member of the opposing court.