Tag Archives: magic-user

Counterspells Draft

8 Replies

Rather than take a standard action, a magic-user may ready a counterspell. When deciding to ready a counterspell, the magic-user must select a target caster and must be aware of the target (this awareness can either be via direct physical perception, or can use an intermediate medium such as a scrying spell). From now on, the target will be referred to as the caster. As when casting a spell, no movement is permitted. A magic-user may not use a counterspell when surprised. Only magic-user spells (that is, not cleric spells) may be countered. Countering spells may result in gridlock while both magic-users wait for their counterparty to take the first action. This is intended.

There are two kinds of counterspells, temporary and permanent. A temporary counterspell prevents the casting of a spell, but does not wipe it from the target’s mind (or consume the scroll if they were casting from a scroll). Any magic user may always attempt a temporary counterspell. A permanent counterspell wipes the spell from the caster’s mind as if it had been cast or consumes the scroll. A permanent counterspell costs a spell slot of equivalent level from the countering magic-user. For example, if the target is casting levitate (a second level spell) and the countering magic-user wishes to attempt a permanent counterspell, the countering magic-user must also have a second level spell prepared, though it need not be the same spell. That spell is expended during the countering attempt (whether the counter is successful or not). If the countering magic-user does not have such a spell prepared, treat the countering attempt as temporary.

If the target casts a spell while the magic-user is in countering mode, a counter attempt may be made. If the spell being cast is one that the countering magic-user has in a spell book, the countering magic-user will be aware of which spell is being cast before they must decide whether or not to attempt a counter (though they will still be unaware of details such as the spell target). The caster must make a saving throw versus spells, with penalty equal to the highest level spell the countering magic-user can prepare. If the save is successful, the spell goes off as normal (i.e., the countering attempt has failed). If the caster fails the counterspell save, the spell is countered.

If a 1 is rolled on the counterspell saving throw, the caster must roll on the counterspell catastrophe table (see below). If a 20 is rolled on the counterspell saving throw, the countering magic-user must roll on the counterspell catastrophe table. Engaging in sorcerous combat is always dangerous, and opens a countering magic-user to a magical counterattack. Rather than rolling on the catastrophe table, referees may also make something up that is suitably nasty.

New Magic Item: Counterspell Scroll

A counterspell scroll is a “bottled” version of a permanent counterspell. A counterspell scroll has a level, determined by the scribe. Costs are as per Holmes scroll creation rules (page 13): 100 GP and 1 week of time per scroll level. A higher level magic-user may produces a lower level counterspell scroll at correspondingly lower cost. Thus, a seventh level magic-user may produce up to fourth level counterspell scrolls. Such a fourth level counterspell scroll would cost 400 GP and take four weeks to produce. Counterspell scrolls are consumed when used even if the target caster makes the counterspell saving throw.

Counterspell Catastrophe Table

  1. 1d6 psychic damage
  2. Lose another prepared spell (determined randomly)
  3. Thrown 2d6 feet in a randomly determined direction
  4. Struck blind for 1d4 turns
  5. Screams due to severe pain (wandering monster check)
  6. Age 1 year (may include hair and fingernail growth)
  7. Knocked unconscious (as per sleep spell)
  8. Mind violation (as per ESP spell); duration 12 turns
  9. Develop spell allergy: future casting of countered spell always requires save
  10. Polluted luck: penalty of 1 or 2 (depending on die) to all rolls for 12 turns
  11. Weakness: movement and all physical ability scores halved for 12 turns
  12. Warped reality: all missiles within 50′ arc to target the subject for next turn
  13. Feeblemind (as per spell) for remainder of encounter
  14. Hostile 1 hit die elemental summoned (determine element randomly)
  15. Strange gravity: as if in 0 G environment for 1 turn
  16. Riposte: other magic user gets free spell or attack against subject
  17. Entrancement (as charm person, another save applies)
  18. Moon curse: exposure to moonlight causes 1d4 damage (remove curse ends)
  19. Sun curse: exposure to sunlight causes 1d4 damage (remove curse ends)
  20. Hostile 1 hit die demon summoned

Two Vancian Magic Variants

14 Replies

Prompted by this discussion over at Jeff’s place, I had some ideas for Vancian magic house rules. Here they are again, cleaned up somewhat.

Variant 1: Spell Retention

Prepare spells as normal, standard charts. However, when a spell is cast it is not automatically wiped from the magic-user’s mind. The magic-user gets a save vs. spells (penalized by spell level) to retain it. At low levels this means that about 30% of the time spells will not be expended the first time they are cast. For powerful magic-users, it makes low level spells closer to at-will powers (but not actually unlimited). Thus, the resource management aspect of the class is not destroyed.

What’s the downside? If the magic-user rolls a 1 on the saving throw, that is considered a spell fumble and they lose the spell and must roll on a magical mishaps table (or suffer some other campaign-specific penalty). Fumbles can only occur when casting spells of the highest two or three levels that can be prepared. That is, by the time a magic-user can cast fourth level spells they have completely mastered first level spells and can no longer fumble their spell retention save. The highest level spells, however, always carry some level of risk.

Variant 2: Improv Casting

Prepare spells reliably as per the traditional rules. Any unprepared spell that the magic-user is familiar with (i.e., has in their spell book) may be cast but requires an action and a successful save vs. spells (penalty equal to spell level as above). Failure and the action is wasted, fumble and bad stuff happens. Further, a fumble occurs on any die roll equal to or less than the spell level. Thus, casting an unprepared third level spell would fumble on a roll of 1, 2, or 3. Improv fumbles should always at least prevent the magic-user from trying the same spell again until they can return to their spell books and puzzle out what went wrong.

“I saw this one thing this one time and it kinda went like this…”

Any spell that the magic-user has witnessed may also be attempted (for example, if the magic-user has seen another magic-user cast fireball). This uses the same rules as casting unprepared spells, but the save penalty and fumble threat range are doubled.

Both of these variants increase the magic-user’s power or versatility, but also expose them to fumbles. Many people prefer magic to include an element of danger, so that may be a feature rather than a bug. I like this mechanic because it is thematically coherent, is simple (no bookkeeping), and uses saving throws (which are like my favorite thing ever).

This does probably make magic-users more powerful, so if that is a problem you should control spell acquisition carefully (for example, no free new spells on level up). If one was so inclined, one could use both variants together, as they cover different aspects of casting, but that would result in a larger divergence from the traditional game.

I gather that there is a mechanic in the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG which has a separate fumble table for each spell, so that might provide some inspiration, though a fumble table per spell seems like overkill to me.

Against Armor Restrictions

7 Replies

In my B/X house rules, any class can wear any kind of armor.

There are, of course, trade-offs though.

Encumbrance is the primary penalty from wearing armor, and this applies to all classes. I use the LotFP encumbrance rules, modified slightly to allow characters with exceptional strength to carry more. Fighters are, practically speaking, likely to have higher strength than other classes, so this also in effect makes them less likely to be penalized for wearing armor (though clearly this will vary on an individual basis). To maximize mobility, a prudent fighter will not carry much other than armor and primary weapons. Squires or porters can be hired to carry extra weapons and other equipment.

Wearing any kind of armor interferes with the delicate gestures required for a magic-user’s spell casting. The following chance of spell failure applies: leather 1 in 6, chain 2 in 6, plate 3 in 6. If a prepared spell fails, it is not lost, but the round is wasted. The same goes for casting from a scroll; the scroll is not consumed.

Armor heavier than leather also interferes with the following thief skills: move silently, hide in shadows, climb walls, and legerdemain. Wearing heavier armor introduces a chance of failure: chain 1 in 6, plate 2 in 6.

Elves (or their human class variants, fighting magic-users) are not subject to spell failure when wearing armor. Faerie creatures such as elves are, however, not able to use mundane metal armor (such as armor of iron or steel) because close proximity of metal pains them greatly. They may use specially forged faerie-metal armor, which can only be procured in faerie realms. Elf armor tends to degrade if it spends too much time outside of elf lands, however. Dwarves are known for crafting durable faerie armor, but their prices tend to be steep and not just in terms of money. Dwarf-made armor is thus highly prized by elves that must journey in the sunlit realms.

Spells by Reverse Engineering & Dissection

Leave a reply

In a comment over at Gothridge Manor on a post about spells as treasure, Zzarchov mentioned that in his game (Neoclassical Geek Revival, or NGR) wizards can “learn” spells by reverse engineering magic items (destroying them in the process) or dissecting creatures with magic abilities. This mechanic could be thought of as a generalization of the rules for learning spells from scrolls (as the scroll is consumed). Reverse engineering is covered in NGR on page 12 (“Translate Magic”), though I don’t see any mention of dissection (I think it might have been a player innovation in one of his games).

NGR clearly owes a debt to D&D, but is not even close to compatible. Here is my D&D version of these ideas. Normally (Cook/Marsh Expert Rules page X51), spell research requires 1000 gp and 2 weeks of time per spell level. If you have a magic item that you are willing to destroy through reverse engineering, you can research a spell with effects similar to the item’s power. Instead of the normal costs, pay 100 gp and 1 day of time per spell level. Depending on the complexity of the spell, an intelligence check or 5 in 6 success situation roll may be required for complete (or even partial) success. Reverse engineering some magic items may be dangerous (save vs. spells to avoid or lessen the danger). Normal domain rules for spell research still apply, however. A magic-user cannot research a spell like cure light wounds, for example.

A newly dead creature with magic powers may also yield insight to spell research. The rules are similar to reverse engineering, but the corpse must be either newly dead or preserved in some way, and a lab (perhaps improvised) must be available. Costs are 500 gp and 1 day of time per spell level. Vivisection will increase chances, but may result in vengeful spirits. (I’m not sure if 500 gp is the right cost level for spell research through dissection; perhaps it should be lower.)

The discussion of counterspells in NGR also gave me an idea for why magic-users might be hesitant to share their knowledge like modern scientists: a magic-user who has been taught a spell by another magic-user (or copied it from their spell book) has insight into that particular method of casting, and can counter it in some way. Thus, if you teach someone your spell, you are also exposing your weaknesses. I’m not sure about game mechanics that might work well with B/X D&D for this yet, but I like the idea and will try to run with it at some point.

(Note: page references are to the “lion” printing of NGR.)