| Author |
Message |
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:40 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Mystic, good analogy. I accept that sometimes a natural "20" is not 'good enough.'
Ceb, thank you for your pointed answer. I think your solution is a logical and fair one.
til next time gents,
Lanthorn
|
|
|
Grandmaster Greytalker
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 1234
From: New Jersey
Send private message
|
Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:32 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
@Mystic Scholar I like the analogy. 
@Cebrion I would rule it in a similar fashion.
@Lanthorn Isn't it time for a new question? 
Later
Argon
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:34 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
@Argon, DONE! Separate thread...check out Planar Shifting! 
|
|
|
Grandmaster Greytalker
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 1234
From: New Jersey
Send private message
|
Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:24 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Damn it!
Now you got us plane shifting. 
Later
Argon
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Tue Aug 14, 2012 9:42 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Added, accessory question pertaining to Dispel Magic:
Maybe this came up in a previous discussion, but how many of you roll for EACH magical item and effect... OR... how many of you make a single roll for ALL effects within the given area and see what magical dweomers are negated?
-Lanthorn
|
|
|
Black Hand of Oblivion
Joined: Feb 16, 2003
Posts: 3835
From: So. Cal
Send private message
|
Wed Aug 15, 2012 12:23 am
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
We roll for each one, because the spell says to check each one, and you check by rolling a dice. If you want to keep things much simpler and check-list like, roll once and then tick away. The downside of the latter method is how many dispel magic spells are going to be cast against that powerful main villain villain when your chance of doing anything to the bazillion spells they have in effect is an all or nothing effect that has only around a 30% success rate when instead there could be an automatic prayer/lightning bolt/fireball success, or an even better chance of getting off a hold person spell on the enemy instead? Likely none. As we like dispel magic to actually have a real combat application and combat effect, we take the extra bit of time to roll for each effect/potion. Without doing so, the spell is pretty much a combat turd...except for the super villain spell caster who has things in their favor and who will successfully dispel the PCs stuff around 60% of the time. One comparatively easy dispel roll from a main spell caster villain and the PCs will be neutered. Better that the super villain dispels most but not all effects/potions rather than usually all of them and only sometimes none of them, and vice verse for the PCs. Makes for better game play balance.
_________________
- Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Last edited by Cebrion on Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:49 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:46 am
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Ceb, thank you for posting your reply.
For the longest time, until 'recently' in fact, I rolled for each and every spell effect, magic item, etc. What finally jolted me into making one single 'blanket' roll was a situation when I was running my (now epic saga) Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth campaign. The party ran afoul a seriously vicious rival faction loyal to Iuz, complete with mages and priests. Dispel Magics were flying left and right, typically cast by the Iuzians in order to nullify the magical Protections cast by the goodly priests, before the more damaging, offensive spells were launched. After rolling for each effect, I had some effects from LOWER lvl casters still working while HIGHER lvl caster effects were neutralized. My scientific, logical mind could not reconcile that. Now, I make one single roll, comparing the levels between casters, and let the chips....errrr, spells...fall, or become Dispelled as they may. I know that some may argue that magic is chaotic and all, but having a 1st lvl effect still 'operational' while a 9th lvl caster's is not after a 5th lvl mage or priest has flung a Dispel Magic just doesn't make any sense to me. This kinda goes back to our earlier discussion about Dispelling certain effects well above and beyond the ken of a spell-caster. Same principle in effect.
thanks for your input,
-Lanthorn
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Jul 26, 2010
Posts: 2701
From: LG Dyvers
Send private message
|
Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:04 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Lanthorn,
I think your method works just fine. As a justification, the roll determines the power of the Dispel attempt. Its power is consistent with all opposing magic it comes into conflict with. Rolling separately for every opposing magical item and spell assumes that the power of the Dispel attempt fluctuates even though it is an instantaneous effect. I think I like that explanation and your method better than following the 'letter of the law' on this one.
SirXaris
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:36 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
|
HUZZAH!!!
|
|
|
Grandmaster Greytalker
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 1234
From: New Jersey
Send private message
|
Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:10 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Lanthorn,
That is the way I always adjudicated l Dispel Magic one roll and dispel the effects that would fail based on the caster's roll. Makes sense and speeds up game play.
Later
Argon
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:42 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Excellent! Glad to know that I am not alone on this one.
-Lanthorn
|
|
|
Journeyman Greytalker
Joined: Mar 05, 2007
Posts: 290
From: The Pomarj
Send private message
|
Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:01 am
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Last edited by BlueWitch on Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Black Hand of Oblivion
Joined: Feb 16, 2003
Posts: 3835
From: So. Cal
Send private message
|
Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:51 am
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
Exactly.
_________________
- Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Thu Aug 16, 2012 6:43 am
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
'Battle lines' are drawn. Ding ding ding!
In one corner, we have a Bright Light (that asks too many questions), a Barbarian Skald, and a Paladin.
In the other corner we have an Azure Sorceror (is that Philidor?!  ) and the dreaded Purple Lightning!
-Lanthorn
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Jul 26, 2010
Posts: 2701
From: LG Dyvers
Send private message
|
Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:55 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
| BlueWitch wrote: |
| SirXaris wrote: |
Lanthorn,
I think your method works just fine. As a justification, the roll determines the power of the Dispel attempt. Its power is consistent with all opposing magic it comes into conflict with. Rolling separately for every opposing magical item and spell assumes that the power of the Dispel attempt fluctuates even though it is an instantaneous effect. I think I like that explanation and your method better than following the 'letter of the law' on this one.
SirXaris |
"Rolling separately for every opposing magical item and spell assumes that the power of the Dispel attempt fluctuates even though it is an instantaneous effect."
Not necessarily true. I think an analogy would be making the PC group roll one save for the whole party against all incoming hostile spells then. How would your players react to the idea of one player rolling a single saving throw, for the whole party, against a fireball? |
First, I object to this analogy for its inaccuracy. The Saving Throw a PC makes vs. a Fireball has everything to do with the PC's skills and reflexes. It has nothing to do with the power of the caster (the save vs. the Fireball of a 15th level Wizard is no more difficult than the save vs. a 5th level one [we're talking 2nd ed here, right?]). One PC generally has a very different Saving Throw than another, not because of the varying effects (power) of the Fireball spell cast at them, but because of the inherent skill of the PC. The Saving Throws enjoyed by magical items and spells are based upon the inherent power if the individual magic item. The power of the spell cast upon them doesn't change any more than it does when cast upon a group of PCs.
So, please allow me to offer what I consider a better analogy. One Fireball from a 5th level Wizard is cast at a flock of sheep. Each ewe is so similar to the others that they all need a 19 on the d20 to save. The single ram is tougher and only needs an 18. The dog will succeed with a 17 or better while the human shepherd, being a retired adventurer, needs only a 15 or better to make his save.
The damage from the Fireball is rolled only once, not once each for every individual caught in its blast. Each victim saves against the static power of the spell, but using the saving throw their skill and abilities entitle them to. So it should be with a group of eclectic magic items upon the person of a victim subject to a Dispel Magic attempt. Every item caught within the area of effect of the Dispel Magic makes its own save, but the power of the Dispel attempt is not rerolled for every victim.
If the description of the spell stated that the casting Wizard had to concentrate upon every item, one at a time, in order to overcome its magical power with his dispelling attempt, then I would be much more inclined to agree that the power of the attempt should fluctuate with each item subject to it. However, that is not the case. The effect is instantaneous. The Wizard casts the spell and a magical (none-physical) blast hits all items in range (much like a Fireball, except the effect is non-physical in nature).
SirXaris
|
|
|
GreySage
Joined: Sep 09, 2009
Posts: 2470
From: SW WA state (Highvale)
Send private message
|
Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:11 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
I am suddenly in the mood for lamb chops served with rosemary, rice, and a fine, red wine.
SX, you'll get no argument from me about your reasoning and analogy (though it made me hungry, though I cannot claim to have eaten dog, or human, for that matter! ) ...and yes, this is the 2e forum!
-Lanthorn
|
|
|
Grandmaster Greytalker
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 1234
From: New Jersey
Send private message
|
Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:27 pm
|
REPLY
QUOTE
TOP
|
|
If you want some pork try reading the Infamous key part eight. It will get your mouth watering. 
Later
Argon
|
|
|
|
