Abjure elements

[Sniperfox47]

Other than its newfound ability to counterspell, and abjure nature for hedging, isn't the abjure spell list kind of... Underpowered?

It seems as though abjure spells are designed to provide protection, but consider this:

For 5mp you can create a set of full plate made of elemental force with create force, granting you soak 12.

For the same 5mp abjure force would give you soak 10, and even then only against force attacks...

I don't understand the point of taking abjure at the moment other than for use in binding/hedging...

Additionally, does the abjure spell's target even have any influence on its counter spelling? I didn't see any but I may have missed it.

If that is the case then wouldn't the only abjure spell that would be worth taking be nature...? Even though it costs 2 more mp for hedging(1+1 for hedging and +1 for discerning), but it affects all creature types making it orders of magnitude more useful...

 

[Khaalis]

For your example of Force, I think there is some confusion that needs to be cleared up.

* SOAK & TOUGHNESS =
"If you create an object of its normal appropriate element, it has its normal SOAK, TOUGHNESS, SIZE, and derived STRUCTURE"
If you create an object out of an element other than its usual type, if the object is solid, it will have at least 1 TOUGHNESS and 1 STRUCTURE for each MP spent on the Create spell."

What about SOAK? If toughness and Structure are different for other elements, what about SOAK?

To me this says that only Create Metal would be able to actually make a flat out suit of Full Plate armor for 5MP. Especially when you look at this:
Elemental Object enhancement (2+MP): "You can create an object out of elemental force rather than actual matter. The cost of this enhancement is 2 MP, plus an amount of MP equal to the MP spent on the spell’s area of effect." "Elemental objects of this sort are about as strong as steel, with TOUGHNESS 12 and 48 hit points for every 5-ft. Area (medium size x 12), regardless of thickness."

Again, what about SOAK?


OR does this trump everything else?
* The example under Monetary Guidelines contradicts the above enhancement saying that "For example, full plate costs 2,000 GC normally, so if you wanted to create an item with the same defensive qualities as plate using Create Force, you would need to spend at least 5 MP, even though force itself has no material cost."


Some thoughts on Abjure:

There are more uses for Abjure than Disenchant and Hedge Nature.
* Any version of Abjure can grant flat bonuses to MENTAL DEFENSE, which I don't remember seeing in any other spell.
* Any version of Abjure can grant flat bonuses to PHYSICAL DEFENSE.
* An Abjure +2 bonus to MENTAL or PHYSICAL DEFENSE or SOAK (Abjure Focus) can be maintained for 1 Hour for only 1MP & 1 Day for 2 MP, whereas Create Element (armor) would cost an additional 3MP to last an hour or 8MP for a day.
* Abjure also includes HEX, which is an offensive debuff, making the spell list quite versatile.
* Abjure includes Breaching (so the ability to resist or break through spell effects). In the case of Abjure Force, you could break through effects like Force Shields, Wall of Force, etc.


On the point of only "Hedging, Nature" - I think this needs to be an Errata. Currently Hedging 1 creature type costs 1MP, but Hedging 7 creature types costs 2MP? As mentioned even having to pay the extra 1MP for Discerning that's only 3MP to Hedge 7 creature types - some of which Shouldn't be covered under Nature.

I'd rather see it be (these still gives a discount, but not so sever):
"Hedging, Nature (3 MP). As above, but it applies to all Person, Beast, Plant and Fey creatures."
"Hedging, Unnatural (2 MP). As above, but it applies to all Undead, Mechanical and Abomination creatures."

 

[Sniperfox47]

Toughness and structure influence Item SOAK (the soak for destroying the item), but not the SOAK value of the armor (how much defense it gives you). Look at the mage armor sample spell for examples. Item SOAK and armor SOAK are different.

Second, while yes it can grant mental defense that has the same issue as SOAK... It only takes affect against sources of that element, and since most mental-defense spells are non-elemental abjure [element] doesn't help with that anyways.

Yes, they do include HEX so I guess they can be added to an evoke spell for extra damage... But unless you're using evoke/hex metal or nature (for swords and bows respectively) it won't help your allies at all...

Finally with regards to your breaching suggestion, unnatural isn't an element.

 

[Morrus]

Other than its newfound ability to counterspell, and abjure nature for hedging, isn't the abjure spell list kind of... Underpowered?

It seems as though abjure spells are designed to provide protection, but consider this:

For 5mp you can create a set of full plate made of elemental force with create force, granting you soak 12.

For the same 5mp abjure force would give you soak 10, and even then only against force attacks...

Possibly some tweaking is on order; bear in mind that duration is much cheaper for abjure spells.

Item SOAK and armor SOAK are different.

That's correct, and an important semantic difference. Armor gives YOU a SOAK score. It's own SOAK score is just for when it's treated as an object you're trying to break. Not a particularly common scenario - doors and the like are more often the target of such things.

 

[Sniperfox47]

I don't know how balanced it would be but could try this: keep the different creatures and virtues for hedging, but change the protection effects. The spells element grants you protection equal to the mp cost against all attacks except from that element (apply double the defense bonus, as the spell currently is) and its opposing element (apply no defense bonus).

Then basically you'd be adding half the current protection to everything else.

I'll try it with my playgroup tonight.

 

[Khaalis]

Look at the mage armor sample spell for examples. Item SOAK and armor SOAK are different.

Looking at the Mage Armor spell just confuses things more, not to mention supports my theory as it specifically states that as a Create Force spell under cost = "2 MP elemental object, 1 MP duration" for a total cost of 3MP, which gets you 250gc worth of material. Now looking at Armor, 250gc gets you Chainmail which is SOAK 8. However, the spell only gives "Chain Shirt SOAK 4" which is the equivalent of Hide Armor. Even if you only used 2MP to cast the spell, you'd have 50gc worth of material or Studded Leather SOAK 6.

Second, while yes it can grant mental defense that has the same issue as SOAK... It only takes affect against sources of that element, and since most mental-defense spells are non-elemental abjure [element] doesn't help with that anyways.

See, now this is not how I read it.
"A 0 MP Abjure spell grants one of the following: +2 DEFENSE or MENTAL DEFENSE; or 2 SOAK against a specific damage type."

So breaking it out by the structure of the entry it is saying...
"A 0 MP Abjure spell grants one of the following:
* +2 DEFENSE or MENTAL DEFENSE
* 2 SOAK against a specific damage type"

Not...
"A 0 MP Abjure spell grants one of the following:
* +2 DEFENSE or MENTAL DEFENSE against a specific damage type
* 2 SOAK against a specific damage type"

So they way I read it is that say Abjure Fire and Abjure Force both grant a +2 Defense bonus, but Abjure Fire can also grants SOAK FIRE 2 and Abjure Force can also grants SOAK FORCE 2.

Yes, they do include HEX so I guess they can be added to an evoke spell for extra damage... But unless you're using evoke/hex metal or nature (for swords and bows respectively) it won't help your allies at all...

If my above interpretation of the grammar is correct, this isn't true. SHIELDING and WITHSTANDING can be significant bonuses as well as significant Hexes.

BREACHING is much more limited but it's a nice "extra" for whatever element you choose.

Finally with regards to your breaching suggestion, unnatural isn't an element.

Again, this is an interpretation issue. I don't read HEDGING, NATURE as a specification of the spell list Abjure Nature but as a "Category Heading" in the same way HEDGING, GREATER isn't a spell list either. To my reading, HEDGING, NATURE could or should have been stated as HEDGING, LIVING or HEDGING, MORTAL. It was meant to be a simplification grouping of "Creatures" rather than the singular entry HEDGING, [Creature].

Personally on looking at it further, I'd make this:
"Hedging, Mortal (2 MP). As above, but it applies to all Person, Beast, and Plant."
"Hedging, Immortal (3 MP). As above, but it applies to all Undead, Fey, Mechanical and Abomination creatures."


JMHO.

 

[Sniperfox47]

Looking at the Mage Armor spell just confuses things more, not to mention supports my theory as it specifically states that as a Create Force spell under cost = "2 MP elemental object, 1 MP duration" for a total cost of 3MP, which gets you 250gc worth of material. Now looking at Armor, 250gc gets you Chainmail which is SOAK 8. However, the spell only gives "Chain Shirt SOAK 4" which is the equivalent of Hide Armor. Even if you only used 2MP to cast the spell, you'd have 50gc worth of material or Studded Leather SOAK 6.

First of all you misread create. Only the mp in that specific create spell list adds to the cost, so that 3mp spell with 2mp in create force only has 50gc.

Also, just because you *can* create 250gc doesn't mean you have to. That's an important distinction for spellbook pages you find (since they're signiture spells).

See, now this is not how I read it.
"A 0 MP Abjure spell grants one of the following: +2 DEFENSE or MENTAL DEFENSE; or 2 SOAK against a specific damage type."

So breaking it out by the structure of the entry it is saying...
"A 0 MP Abjure spell grants one of the following:
* +2 DEFENSE or MENTAL DEFENSE
* 2 SOAK against a specific damage type"

Not...
"A 0 MP Abjure spell grants one of the following:
* +2 DEFENSE or MENTAL DEFENSE against a specific damage type
* 2 SOAK against a specific damage type"

So they way I read it is that say Abjure Fire and Abjure Force both grant a +2 Defense bonus, but Abjure Fire can also grants SOAK FIRE 2 and Abjure Force can also grants SOAK FORCE 2.

http://www.enworld.org.

SHIELDING (varies): This a a deflection ability; attacks are diverted away from the target. Affected creatures gain a bonus to their DEFENSE equal to twice the MP cost against the specified effect type.
WITHSTANDING (varies): This enables the target to withstand the damage type; it does not deflect it away. Affected creatures gain SOAK equal to twice the MP cost against the specified effect type.
BREACHING (varies): This gives the target a +1 die bonus per MP to attribute checks made to resist or breach a spell effect of the specified type.

Emphasis mine.

The info on the specific enchantments specifically says that any of the three is against only that specific type. The basic rule of RPGs is that while fluff text may or may not reflect the authors intention, only mechanics text represents the actual rules. It should really be a comma there rather than a semicolon but that doesn't change the mechanics below.

If my above interpretation of the grammar is correct, this isn't true. SHIELDING and WITHSTANDING can be significant bonuses as well as significant Hexes.

BREACHING is much more limited but it's a nice "extra" for whatever element you choose.

+40 defence may be quite a significant amount but against only a certain element, metal and nature are the only two that aren't too limited to be worth the mp.

Again, this is an interpretation issue. I don't read HEDGING, NATURE as a specification of the spell list Abjure Nature but as a "Category Heading" in the same way HEDGING, GREATER isn't a spell list either. To my reading, HEDGING, NATURE could or should have been stated as HEDGING, LIVING or HEDGING, MORTAL. It was meant to be a simplification grouping of "Creatures" rather than the singular entry HEDGING, [Creature].

Its listed right under the heading of creatures and virtues and uses not only the same format as them, but also the name of an element rather than a generic titles like "Hedging, All"... It seems pretty clear its refering to a specific spell list of abjure in the same way "hedging, [virtue]" refers to a subset of spell lists. That being said, its not explicitly stated so it is a matter of interpretation, youre right, but intent seems pretty clear...

P.S. how do I put a URL in a quote line without it wrapping URL bbtags around it...?

 

[Morrus]

"Hedging, Nature" refers to the element.

 

[Sniperfox47]

"Hedging, Nature" refers to the element.

Kinda figured as much, but Khaalis did bring up a good point. Might want to drop a "this enhancement only applies to abjure spells with the nature element" the same way you did for illusions and create death/life. As it is its a bit ambiguous, and some people might misinterpret it.

 

[Khaalis]

First of all you misread create. Only the mp in that specific create spell list adds to the cost, so that 3mp spell with 2mp in create force only has 50gc.
Also, just because you *can* create 250gc doesn't mean you have to. That's an important distinction for spellbook pages you find (since they're signiture spells).

Ok, so I get the clarification on MP, but I included this as an option in my statement.
“Even if you only used 2MP to cast the spell, you'd have 50gc worth of material or Studded Leather SOAK 6.“
So why does the spell give a “Chain Shirt SOAK 4?” Was the mage who wrote the spell just lazy? You say “just because you *can* create 250gc” [actually 50gc in this instance] ”doesn't mean you have to.” Why on earth would anyone bothering to spend the MP for the spell effect and then NOT take maximum effect. If I spend 2 MP and that means I can get armor that grants SOAK 6, why on earth would I only choose SOAK 4?

The info on the specific enchantments specifically says that any of the three is against only that specific type. The basic rule of RPGs is that while fluff text may or may not reflect the authors intention, only mechanics text represents the actual rules. It should really be a comma there rather than a semicolon but that doesn't change the mechanics below.

Morrus needs to clarify this then and the cantrip needs to be reworded. If that is so, then the spell is actually pretty useless. Not to mention it means the Mage Armor spell either seems to contradict this, OR as I stated earlier the ELEMENTAL OBJECT enhancement overrides the “specified effect type” rider which means ANY element could make “armor”. Otherwise, by you statement that ALL effects from this spell affect ONLY the element used in the spell (Create Force in this case), Mage Armor would only create an armor made of force that provides SOAK against Force Damage.

"Hedging, Nature" refers to the element.

Then ABJURE, NATURE is far too powerful as its currently written, especially if Nature and Metal are the only two Abjure spells that are useful foe Defense and Shielding as SniperFox47 implies.

Again, JMHO.