"Elements of Magic" and other systems

[Verequus]

I forgot these points:

-Where landed Alter Reality? Is it now only a combination effect?
-Do the magical skills provoke attacks of opportunities?
-How about this feat? Too powerful? The Dispel Magic rank too low?

Quick Counterspelling [General]

You are trained at using your casting skill for defense as well as offense.
Prerequisite: Int 13, Cha 13, Dispel Magic rank +6, Combat Reflexes
Benefit: When a foe casts a spell and if you haven't used up all attacks of opportunity in the current round, you may make a counterspell instead of an attack of opportunity. You need a line of sight to the foe. The counterspell is resolved as if you had readied an action.
Normal: You can normally only counterspell if you ready an action.

 

[RangerWickett]

My first attempt to quote and answer questions was a failure, but I'll try again, saving every once in a while. I'm going to post what I've typed every few minutes, then edit to add more stuff, because I'm sharing a computer at work and I don't want to lose an hour of typing like I did last time.

Wow! Such a great work! It's even better than I could have imagined. So far I read the sampler I didn't found anything, what I utterly despise , but there are some bits which I don't understand or didn't find explained.

-Why were the intelligence bonus MPs discarded?

Two reasons. First, we wanted to have Intelligence modify signature spells rather than MP. Signature spells represent knowledge, which fits with Intelligence. MP is just power, and if anything it'd fit Charisma, but we already had Charisma affecting DCs, so we decided we'd just make it easy and let everyone have the same number of MP. Second, trying to have the table range in increments of 1/2 a level was really clunky, so we decided against it.

-Is the save DC still dependent from Charisma and not from Intelligence although there is no formula for the basic Save DC for magic items, even if one uses the minimum inteligence rule?

Not quite sure what you mean here. Charisma modifies spell save DCs. The DC is 10 + 1/2 MP cost + Charisma bonus. I don't know what you mean about magic item save DCs, but Intelligence does not limit how 'high-level' (rather, high-MP) your spells can be. If you're a 20th level Mage, you could have an Intelligence of 3 and still be able to cast 20 MP spells.

-There is no mentioning of 20 spell levels in the revised edition instead of 10.

It's sort of implied in the text, but yeah, I forgot to be clear. My bad. But yes, there are actually 21 possible power levels for spells, from 0 MP to 20 MP, in increments of 1 MP.

-Can't Outsiders be charmed, compelled, created or transformed? Why don't Charm [Alignment] lists normally (as it stands in the Faithblade section)?
-Can't Elementals be charmed or compelled?

We switched it so that now to charm outsiders you need a Charm [Creature] spell list, namely Charm Outsider. Ditto for elementals requiring a Charm Elemental spell list. Your target's alignment doesn't matter anymore. We decided against Charm [Alignment] spell lists, because then most people would just grab Charm Lawful, Charm Evil, and Charm Chaos, and they'd be able to handle almost any enemy. It's more balanced if they have to get 5 or 10 different lists for different creature types.

However, for Faithblades, we thought it'd be interesting to give them this little flavorful power of charming people based on their alignment. Since Faithblades generally have weak spellcasting powers compared to their level, it's not overpowering.

-In the section of Spell Enhancements it stands, that the spend MPs for "General enhancements and spell list enhancements cannot be greater than your caster level". For me it looks the text like that the caster level is the caster level of the character, not from the single spell lists as in the example.

-It is unclear, what belongs to the General list and what is an General enhancement. At least it looks to me, that there is a difference, because of "For example, if you cast Compel Humanoid 7/Evoke Fire 3/Gen 2, you can spend no more than 7 MP on Compel enhancements, no more 3 MP on Evoke enhancements, and no more than 2 MP on General enhancements.". Does it also mean that the maximum MPs spent on a spell is twice the (rounded down?) caster level?

Okay, since I don't quite know what you're asking, I'll go over the whole situation and hope I hit the answer you're looking for.

Your caster level is based on class and character level. The Mage has a 1 for 1 caster level advancement, so a 10th level Mage has a caster level of 10. Other classes have slower advancement, so a 10th level Faithblade would have a caster level of 5. A 10th/10th level Mage/Faithblade would have a caster level of 15.

Your caster level determines how much MP you have, how many spell lists you know, and how much MP you can spend on any given spell. You cannot spend more MP than your caster level on a single spell (round down if you have a fractional caster level). Thus a Mage 12 can only cast spells of 12 MP or less. This 12 MP can be spent on any general enhancement, or on any enhancement from a spell list he knows, but regardless of how many different enhancements he picks from however many sources, the total cannot be more than 12 MP.

Your caster level also determines what modifiers you use when trying to beat spell resistance, or when someone tries to counter your spell. Even if you cast a spell that costs less than your MP limit, your caster level remains the same.

-Why isn't there a Duration enhancement beyound Long and a Contingency beyound a Week? Has then the Permanent feat to be used? Why has the Range Long 800 ft. and not 750 ft. (30 * 5 * 5)? Do I have to use the Range Long, before I can buy a Range incremen of +500 ft.?

We decided against having spells last more than a day. You get your MP back each day anyway, so you can just cast the spell again. We will include a note that you can just expend the MP again as soon as the next day starts, if you want to make sure the spell never ends (quite useful for things like Move Earth if you're going to be adventuring in the Elemental Plane of Earth for a while). If you want a truly permanent effect, you'd need to have the right feat and spend XP.

We also didn't want long contingency spells just for ease of bookkeeping. I suppose you might want a villain to have laid a trap that would lie in wait for three gajillion years, but that would be fairly rare. Again, what you'd most likely do would be to get the Craft Charged Item feat and make a trap that could work over and over again with a certain trigger.

As for range, 1000 ft. is about as far away as any encounter reasonably ought to be. You can also use Move Dimension combined with a spell effect to have a longer distance, but this is only really an option at high levels. We generally wanted to keep characters from killing things before they even come into view.

-Is there a description, for which standard classes the magical skills are class skills and which are cross-class ones? Or have we to assume that all unmentioned classes have them as cross-class skills?

By 'standard classes,' do you mean non-EOM classes? Well, since all magical skills require MP, and core D&D classes don't have MP, but rather spell slots, core classes couldn't use magical skill anyway. If you want to play a multiclassed Fighter/Mage, though, you could still spend Fighter skill points on things like Dispel Magic, but it would be a cross-class skill.

Of course, I personally don't use class skills, but if you use them in your game, then EOM magical skills should be cross-class for all non-EOM classes (and even some EOM classes too).

-Does a class have Use Magic Device as class skill?

No, not directly. But the Mage and Taskmage do get to choose several 'tradition skills,' to reflect the specific type of spellcaster you want to play, and Use Magic Device could be one of those skills.

-Can spell lists and magical skills be combined?

-Which type of action are the uses of the magical skills? All standard actions?

Yes, you can combine a skill and a spell. You might combine an Evoke spell and a Dispel check to try to remove your foe's energy resistance before you hit them. Or you could combine an Infuse spell list with a weak Scry for a flavorful spell that gives you mighty senses (infuse to increase wisdom) and allows you to see through walls (scry).

Magical skills are just like spells. Normally, using them takes a full round, but if you make one a signature 'spell,' you can do it as a standard action.

-In the Dispel Magic section: "If you succeeded a Spellcraft check to identify the effect, and you know all of the spell lists your opponent is using, you get a +20 bonus to your Spellcraft check." Shouldn't be the +20 bonus received for the Dispel check?

D'oh. Yep, you're right. Bad typo.

-It isn't clearly mentioned that at an area dispel the subtraction of MPs does increase the DCs of later dispels because of the Low MP-rule.

It will be now. Thanks for pointing this out.

-Are spell action types more explained in the full text?

Yes, quite. I think the raw text is about 90 pages long. Abjure and Evoke have certainly the longest entries, and Heal has the shortest.

-There seems to be an error in the dispel example one: Ursus tries to dispel an armor enchanted with Abjure Nature 10/Illusion Void 2, makes his Spellcraft check and knows the Abjure Spell. The DC is 10 + 9 (caster level) + 0 (he knows Abjure Nature) + 2 (he doesn't know Illusion Void) = 21 and not 28. The penalty of Low MP's is for Ursus roll, not for the DC, and all DC modifiers are already counted in. Worse, in the example Ursus has an effective penalty of -14 and not -7.

-In the dispel example two, Barbara has suddenly only a caster level of 6 and a half, not 9 and a half. Also isn't explained where the caster level of 16 for armor comes from.

In this case, you missed a bit of information at the start of the Dispel skill. Permanent spell effects and permanent magic items have a caster level equal to the MP cost of the spell being used, plus 4. In this case, Barbara did not make her own armor, but rather got it somewhere along adventuring. The spell used on the armor is 12 MP, so the caster level is 16. Thus the DC is 10 + 16 + 2 = 28.

However, yes, I was trying to retype the example last night, because the original version had some extra detail that was extraneous, and I ended up making a few mistakes. I'll fix them ASAP.

-In the section "Dispel Magic and non-EOM magic" there is no MP value for 0-level spells. Also it isn't clear, if divination spells increase the MP value everytime or only, if one doesn't have (enough?) ranks in the Divination skill.

Well, a 0-level spell is a 0 MP spell, but I'll clarify it. I'm not quite sure what you mean about Divination spells, though.

-Illusion spell list: What are the effects of blur on concealment and thus on attack rolls? There is only a skill check bonus. Hide Aura: What does mean "Each type of aura you change must be purchased separately." exactly mean? Have I to cast in the example the Illusion Death spell twice or can I pay only more MPs at once? Distorted Distances: "Also, most attacks through distorted areas should suffer a severe miss chance." needs more explanation. Resisting Illusions: Doesn't turn an invisible attacker automatically visible?

Attacks against a blurred creature have a 20% miss chance. Attacks against an invisible creature have a 50% miss chance, and spells cannot be targeted against invisible creatures.

Auras include things like magic items being detectable to magical Spellcraft checks, or the evil aura around outsiders and undead, which can be detected with Divination. You must pay MP for each aura you affect, but you can affect more than one with a single spell.

As for the distance distortion, I'd intended to putting in exact figures, but I'd lost track of it in the midst of numerous other revisions. I'll have to work on the exact numbers, but I'd say a -5 penalty for minor, and make melee attacks at all other levels of the illusion impossible.

If an invisible creature hits you, you can see it because you pierce the veil of the illusion. But the creature doesn't become visible, so other creatures don't necessarily see it. The text should read:

"Similarly, if an invisible creature deals damage to you, you can automatically disbelieve it. If an invisible creature deals damage to a creature other than you in your line of sight, you are automatically allowed a saving throw with a +4 bonus. Also, if you resist a non-damaging spell cast by an invisible creature, you automatically gets to disbelieve with a +4 bonus."

-Sample Illusion spells: All spell should have a total spell level value for convience. Mask of Nothingness: It should include that even Blindsense and Blindsight are useless (also with a successfully check?). Are all MP costs sums identical to the spell total? If not, there should be at the begin of the list the sum listed.

You're right, we should have a simple entry of total mp cost.

-Faithblade: The table headers aren't all in place.
-At several places are two or more spaces instead only one. Run a search and replace to find all of them.

Thanks for the advice, but it will all be fixed when it goes to layout, so I won't worry about it too much right now. I know plain text isn't very readable, but I hope it helps you get an idea to the rules.

Also I believe that EoM revised is the first magic system (at least in d20), which allows to use magic easily as sword and shield, so magical combats will be truly exciting!

Thank you very much. Our goal is to make a system that's fun to play and that caters to many different tastes. I'm glad you were interested enough to comment on the whole file. Do you own the original EOM, and if so, what do you think about the changes?

 

[RangerWickett]

I forgot these points:

-Where landed Alter Reality? Is it now only a combination effect?

We don't need it anymore. The other spell lists can cover pretty much whatever you want, and since you can combine spell lists, you'll have a lot of flexibility. Of course, GMs will always have Wishes available, but basically a wish is just a really complex spell.

-Do the magical skills provoke attacks of opportunities?

Yes. Any form of spellcasting incurs an attack of opportunity, except casting a quickened spell.

-How about this feat? Too powerful? The Dispel Magic rank too low?

Quick Counterspelling [General]

You are trained at using your casting skill for defense as well as offense.
Prerequisite: Int 13, Cha 13, Dispel Magic rank +6, Combat Reflexes
Benefit: When a foe casts a spell and if you haven't used up all attacks of opportunity in the current round, you may make a counterspell instead of an attack of opportunity. You need a line of sight to the foe. The counterspell is resolved as if you had readied an action.
Normal: You can normally only counterspell if you ready an action.

Actually, we are going to have something similar in the Lyceian Arcana sequel. In addition to metamagic and item creation feats, we also have tradition feats, which provide nifty abilities related to the type of magic you have available in your campaign world. The GM should usually come up with one or two feats for each significant magical tradition in the world. You can only take a Tradition feat if you've studied in the appropriate magical culture.

For example:

Inquisitor Counterspell[Tradition]
Prerequisite: Dispel Magic 8+ ranks, Sense Motive 5+, Combat Reflexes
Benefit: When someone casts a spell within your line of sight, you may choose to make a counterspell attempt as a reaction. If you do, next round you act as if you had already taken a standard action. In effect, you take half your action next round during this round. You can counterspell this way even if you are flat-footed.
Normal: You can normally only counterspell if you ready an action.

They look pretty similar, I guess.

 

[netnomad]

QUOTE=RangerWickett]I've cooked up a small sampler-teaser for the revised version of The Elements of Magic. It's in .doc format because the boards wouldn't let me upload an rtf, but most people ought to be able to read it. Please forgive me if there are a few typos or parts that seem confusing; I tried to fix all problems I saw, but in essence I was just copy-pasting material from the book into a new file, so some bits might not fit together clearly. Feel free to ask questions, give comments, and tell us if we made any mistakes.

I'll also see if I can get Russ or Jason to upload this file and show it on the main page. But I would prefer something slightly prettier. My apologies, again.[/QUOTE]


Wow! This is just what the doctor ordered RW. I though I was being a bit demanding and you came though with flying colors! Thanks for such a great preview!

So far I really like want I say. It seems more eloquent and better balanced. I really like the sample spells. That will make jumping in a lot easier. I also really like how you a making it conceptually backward compatible with d20 (I.E. the faithblade). I look forward to seeing the final product.

Rulemaster: Way to go! Keep RW honest!

-NetNomad

 

[Verequus]

Sorry for the delay, but I wanted to post the reply yesterday. Unfortunately, at first ENWorld wasn't reachable and then I didn't finished my post in time - I wrote several hours for this post... For space reasons I cut text from the quotes, if it isn't necessary for the understanding, and I leaving the clear points out, too. Hopefully my double quotes will be accepted... and triple quoting is sure hell

My first attempt to quote and answer questions was a failure, but I'll try again, saving every once in a while. ... I don't want to lose an hour of typing like I did last time.

I can feel your pain, because I lost an email two times before I used a text file for saving (then, of course, I had no problems...)

Wow! Such a great work! It's even better than I could have imagined. So far I read the sampler I didn't found anything, what I utterly despise , but there are some bits which I don't understand or didn't find explained.

-Why were the intelligence bonus MPs discarded?

Two reasons. First, we wanted to have Intelligence modify signature spells rather than MP. Signature spells represent knowledge, which fits with Intelligence. MP is just power, and if anything it'd fit Charisma, but we already had Charisma affecting DCs, so we decided we'd just make it easy and let everyone have the same number of MP. Second, trying to have the table range in increments of 1/2 a level was really clunky, so we decided against it.

Okay, I can understand that you decided against Intelligence as bonus MP ability but you could have used Charisma instead like at a bard. This is the only decision so far I'm not so happy with it but it is probably because I'm accustomed to a bonus since I started to play AD&D. If you don't like this table, how about a feat like Toughness, just for MPs?

-Is the save DC still dependent from Charisma and not from Intelligence although there is no formula for the basic Save DC for magic items, even if one uses the minimum inteligence rule?

Not quite sure what you mean here. Charisma modifies spell save DCs. The DC is 10 + 1/2 MP cost + Charisma bonus. I don't know what you mean about magic item save DCs, but Intelligence does not limit how 'high-level' (rather, high-MP) your spells can be. If you're a 20th level Mage, you could have an Intelligence of 3 and still be able to cast 20 MP spells.

Yes, I meant the formula 10 + (1/2 MP cost or spell level in the core rules) + Charisma bonus. Have we to substitute spell level to 1/2 MPs if we have to calculate a DC with the core rules? Also, in the core rules the save DC of standard magic item like a wand has the following formula: 10 + rounded down(1.5 * spell level). But because there is now no dependency between the usable MPs and the Charisma score, a spell has now a lower minimum save DC (5 + 1/2 spent MPs) and so a greater range of possible DCs. This means also that there has to be a new standard formula for setting the DC of a rolled standard magic item.

In addition, I'm still one of those who want a minimum intelligence score for being able to cast a spell of a certain level. I can't just understand that someone who barely speaks a language can eventually leveling entire towns - especially that he came up with such a plan. If the good old formula 10 + x = needed score to cast spells of level x (of course converted to MPs) doesn't function anymore, I will use a plain minimum of 10. Or do you have a better idea? Instead a plain minimum or regarding why I should use your system in this point...

-Can't Outsiders be charmed, compelled, created or transformed? Why don't Charm [Alignment] lists normally (as it stands in the Faithblade section)?
-Can't Elementals be charmed or compelled?

We switched it so that now to charm outsiders you need a Charm [Creature] spell list, namely Charm Outsider. Ditto for elementals requiring a Charm Elemental spell list. ...

Ah, that reduces EoM to a total of 268 spell lists. @Kannik, your new spell lists are now obsolete, because EoM can surely handle weather conditions, earthquakes and such catastrophes, can't it?

-In the section of Spell Enhancements it stands, that the spend MPs for "General enhancements and spell list enhancements cannot be greater than your caster level". For me it looks the text like that the caster level is the caster level of the character, not from the single spell lists as in the example.
-It is unclear, what belongs to the General list and what is an General enhancement. At least it looks to me, that there is a difference, because of "For example, if you cast Compel Humanoid 7/Evoke Fire 3/Gen 2, you can spend no more than 7 MP on Compel enhancements, no more 3 MP on Evoke enhancements, and no more than 2 MP on General enhancements.". Does it also mean that the maximum MPs spent on a spell is twice the (rounded down?) caster level?

Okay, since I don't quite know what you're asking, I'll go over the whole situation and hope I hit the answer you're looking for.

...

Oh, there I drew a false conclusion. I thought, if you cast Evoke Fire 3/Gen 0, then you have 3d6 fire damage, which I can enhance further without increasing the "spell level", but I have to pay extra MPs, like the effect of a metamagic feat on a core spell. Please clarify that point.

-Why isn't there a Duration enhancement beyound Long and a Contingency beyound a Week? Has then the Permanent feat to be used? Why has the Range Long 800 ft. and not 750 ft. (30 * 5 * 5)? Do I have to use the Range Long, before I can buy a Range incremen of +500 ft.?

...

As for range, 1000 ft. is about as far away as any encounter reasonably ought to be. You can also use Move Dimension combined with a spell effect to have a longer distance, but this is only really an option at high levels. We generally wanted to keep characters from
killing things before they even come into view.

I just wanted to know, why the number for Range Long is 800 ft., because like I calculated it would be more logical to choose 750 ft. Your general explanation is interesting, though. Unfortunately you missed the last question of this section - if no, I would spent 1 MP for short range and 1 MP for the extra 500 ft. to get a nearly long range for 2 MPs.

-Is there a description, for which standard classes the magical skills are class skills and which are cross-class ones? Or have we to assume that all unmentioned classes have them as cross-class skills?

By 'standard classes,' do you mean non-EOM classes? Well, since all magical skills require MP, and core D&D classes don't have MP, but rather spell slots, core classes couldn't use magical skill anyway. If you want to play a multiclassed Fighter/Mage, though, you could still spend Fighter skill points on things like Dispel Magic, but it would be a cross-class skill.

Of course, I personally don't use class skills, but if you use them in your game, then EOM magical skills should be cross-class for all non-EOM classes (and even some EOM classes too).

Yes, I mean with standard classes core classes. In German, I associate "core" (while I don't watch Star Trek ) more with the seed of a plum , so I use "standard" instead. Now to the extra questions: Survived all magical skills (at least their uses - Intuit Direction was
fusioned with Scry and Sight, for example)? What system of skill point spending do you use personally?

-Can spell lists and magical skills be combined?
-Which type of action are the uses of the magical skills? All standard actions?

Yes, you can combine a skill and a spell. You might combine an Evoke spell and a Dispel check to try to remove your foe's energy resistance before you hit them. Or you could combine an Infuse spell list with a weak Scry for a flavorful spell that gives you mighty senses (infuse to increase wisdom) and allows you to see through walls (scry).Magical skills are just like spells. Normally, using them takes a full round, but if you make one a signature 'spell,' you can do it as a standard action.

I hope, "Magical skills are just like spells." will be clear to everyone in the final product. This also means, you can have scrolls of "Dispel Magic". That inspires me to following idea: Can someone use scrolls of basic spells and combine them or known spell lists at casting? How flexible can be used a scroll? If you have Evoke Fire 5 with 3 MPs for damage and two for another enhancement, but you need only the damage, can you "skip" the enhancement? I think that it shouldn't be possible to replace an enhancement until you know the spell list but in that case you wouldn't need the scroll anyway - until you can so break the "Max spent MPs = current caster level". If you can't combine scroll on the fly shouldn't it be possible to use them at least in item creation processes?

-There seems to be an error in the dispel example one: Ursus tries to dispel an armor enchanted with Abjure Nature 10/Illusion Void 2, makes his Spellcraft check and knows the Abjure Spell. The DC is 10 + 9 (caster level) + 0 (he knows Abjure Nature) + 2 (he doesn't know Illusion Void) = 21 and not 28. The penalty of Low MP's is for Ursus roll, not for the DC, and all DC modifiers are already counted in. Worse, in the example Ursus has an effective penalty of -14 and not -7.
-In the dispel example two, Barbara has suddenly only a caster level of 6 and a half, not 9 and a half. Also isn't explained where the caster level of 16 for armor comes from.

In this case, you missed a bit of information at the start of the Dispel skill. Permanent spell effects and permanent magic items have a caster level equal to the MP cost of the spell being used, plus 4. In this case, Barbara did not make her own armor, but rather got it somewhere along adventuring. The spell used on the armor is 12 MP, so the caster level is 16. Thus the DC is 10 + 16 + 2 = 28.

However, yes, I was trying to retype the example last night, because the original version had some extra detail that was extraneous, and I ended up making a few mistakes. I'll fix them ASAP.

I saw that Barbara has an enchanted armor in the latter example but I didn't conclude that she had the same armor also in the prior example. But that doesn't matter anyways. I discovered that I like antimagic which is similar in functionality to spell resistance because it represents the principle "There is always someone who can beat you" - stolen from DragonBall . Also look out for inconsistencies like that Ursus knows a spell list and then not - or at least of the same spell action types.

-In the section "Dispel Magic and non-EOM magic" there is no MP value for 0-level spells. Also it isn't clear, if divination spells increase the MP value everytime or only, if one doesn't have (enough?) ranks in the Divination skill.

... I'm not quite sure what you mean about Divination spells, though.

If someone casts "Summon Monster V", then you must know the suitable Create [Creature] spell in order to dispel the spell without penalty (assuming succeeded Spellcraft checks). But because there is no Divination Spell but only a skill you can circumvent only a penalty if the Divination skill counts as a spell. In that case it could be relevant how many ranks you have in Divination but I'm unsure in that point.

-Illusion spell list: ... Resisting Illusions: Doesn't turn an invisible attacker automatically visible?

...

If an invisible creature hits you, you can see it because you pierce the veil of the illusion. But the creature doesn't become visible, so other creatures don't necessarily see it. The text should read:

"Similarly, if an invisible creature deals damage to you, you can automatically disbelieve it. If an invisible creature deals damage to a creature other than you in your line of sight, you are automatically allowed a saving throw with a +4 bonus. Also, if you resist a non-damaging spell cast by an invisible creature, you automatically gets to disbelieve with a +4 bonus."

I like the idea of not getting automatically visible - that's something what I wanted the whole time.

-Sample Illusion spells: All spell should have a total spell level value for convience. Mask of Nothingness: It should include that even Blindsense and Blindsight are useless (also with a successfully check?). Are all MP costs sums identical to the spell total? If not, there should be at the begin of the list the sum listed.

You're right, we should have a simple entry of total mp cost.

No comment on the Blindsense and Blindsight statement?

-Where landed Alter Reality? Is it now only a combination effect?

We don't need it anymore. The other spell lists can cover pretty much whatever you want, and since you can combine spell lists, you'll have a lot of flexibility. Of course, GMs will always have Wishes available, but basically a wish is just a really complex spell.

It seems I have to get accustomed first to that flexibility. But I hope one can get still inherent bonis to abilities, probably through a Transform spell, can't I? Oh, how can someone create a ring of three wishes? Is that possible without having to know every 268 spell lists?

-How about this feat? Too powerful? The Dispel Magic rank too low?

Quick Counterspelling [General]

You are trained at using your casting skill for defense as well as offense.
Prerequisite: Int 13, Cha 13, Dispel Magic rank +6, Combat Reflexes
Benefit: When a foe casts a spell and if you haven't used up all attacks of opportunity in the current round, you may make a counterspell instead of an attack of opportunity. You need a line of sight to the foe. The counterspell is resolved as if you had readied an action.
Normal: You can normally only counterspell if you ready an action.

Actually, we are going to have something similar in the Lyceian Arcana sequel. In addition to metamagic and item creation feats, we also have tradition feats, which provide nifty abilities related to the type of magic you have available in your campaign world. The GM should usually come up with one or two feats for each significant magical tradition in the world. You can only take a Tradition feat if you've studied in the appropriate magical culture.

For example:

Inquisitor Counterspell[Tradition]
Prerequisite: Dispel Magic 8+ ranks, Sense Motive 5+, Combat Reflexes
Benefit: When someone casts a spell within your line of sight, you may choose to make a counterspell attempt as a reaction. If you do, next round you act as if you had already taken a standard action. In effect, you take half your action next round during this round. You can counterspell this way even if you are flat-footed.
Normal: You can normally only counterspell if you ready an action.

They look pretty similar, I guess.

They do, but there a three major differences: Firstly, with Quick Counterspelling you can dispel several spells in one round, secondly the dispels are treated as standard actions and thirdly don't use a part of the normal action. Otherwise is Inquisitor Counterspell nearly identical to Reactive Counterspell from Magic of Faerun besides you give up your next action totally. The second point violates the full round-action rule - how about the change of the prerequisites of my feat to "Inquisitor Counterspell, having Dispel Magic skill as signature spell"? If there is no feat like Quick Counterspell available, then magical combat has good use of its sword, but nothing comparable to a shield - or better only half the possibilities of a shield.

Also I believe that EoM revised is the first magic system (at least in d20), which allows to use magic easily as sword and shield, so magical combats will be truly exciting!

Thank you very much. Our goal is to make a system that's fun to play and that caters to many different tastes. I'm glad you were interested enough to comment on the whole file. Do you own the original EOM, and if so, what do you think about the changes?

I bought EoM one week after its release. It isn't surprising that I was interested enough to comment the whole file because I wrote CZ already for the original EoM several very long emails which has been already credited in the erratas (I really didn't expect that great honor ). So if you want me to comment the whole revision before its release - I would do it .

EoM revised seems to be the near perfect implementation of a flexible, yet balanced magic system - you and CZ managed to create a self-contained system which allows every theoritical spell with everytime the same effect (prismatic spells need wild magic, like I told CZ, but that's why Wild Spellcraft is in Lyceian Arcana ). That's all because you separated two extra elements and the parameters like range and duration from the spell lists, you consolidated the spell lists and rearranged the effects - EoM revised is clearly superior to the original EoM and I would recycle my printed exemplar if it wouldn't contain the one chapter which isn't included anymore. Could you please release a separate PDF-file with that chapter, at least to the old customers? So I can print on copy without looking like being separated.

Some new questions:

-Will be a list of converted core spells published?
-In your sampler you wrote in the Summary of Changes, that "a 1 MP Evoke spell will never deal more than 3d6 points of damage". I thought that 1 MP would bring only 1d6 points of damage.
-Is Cursecraft now a use of Transform Spells?
-How is the spell list progression? Do casters get normally 2 spell lists per level but at first (or fourth) level 3 and then every four levels after the first (or fourth) again 3?
-Do you already know a spell which violates Rule 1?
-What happened to Disjunction?
-Is there a possibility to create no save-spells?

Some unrelated questions:

-Is FTCF modern already updated to 3.5? Especially the Damage Reduction power is out-of-date. Has now every ability a boost power?
-How about a book which covers a point-buy system as a replacement for classes? I know of one which uses point-buy with classes but I like to have a system with no classes.

 

[Verequus]

I tried to implement the core spell Animal Messenger with a spell level of 2, which gives 3 MPs for distribution. First a look at its stats:

-Range: Close
-Target: One tiny animal
-Duration: One day/level
-Effect: Allows to use a tiny animal as carrier for a tiny scroll or similar. Directions must be simple or destination must be well-known to the caster. Subject waits until spell expires. Rest falls under minor enhancements.

Implementation: Compel Animal 1???/ Gen 5 (1 MP for close range, 4 MPs for duration one day)

This spell uses the double amount as the core spell and has only a duration of one day at max. This raises the questions: Is the core spell in reality overpowered? Or is in EoM a mitigating factor for MP costs missing? Can spells prolonged, even the caster isn't in range of the original casting (or even on another plane)?

 

[Haganegiri]

I have an interesting question for Illusion spells. Say i use a Complex Force/Space illusion to conjur a giant blue fireball that APPEARS to be 1000 feet away from the target, but really is only 30 feet away, would the target be denied his dex to AC or not get a Ref saving throw if they failed their will save to the fireball (I dunno if attack spells require ranged attack rolls or not. (i mean they think that the harmless ball is hundred and hundreds of feet away, and not be thinking of dodging it when its still so far away.) same goes for an Archery Mage, could i fire an arrow with a space illusion that made them think the arrow was going to their left or something, but really hitting them, therefore they dont dodge the arrow, and no dex to ac. Am i making sense with what im asking?

 

[RangerWickett]

Okay, I can understand that you decided against Intelligence as bonus MP ability but you could have used Charisma instead like at a bard. This is the only decision so far I'm not so happy with it but it is probably because I'm accustomed to a bonus since I started to play AD&D. If you don't like this table, how about a feat like Toughness, just for MPs?

Yeah, there's the Extra MP feat. You get bonus MP equal to your caster level. It's roughly equivalent to the Extra Spell feat from Tome & Blood.

The formula 10 + (1/2 MP cost or spell level in the core rules) + Charisma bonus. Have we to substitute spell level to 1/2 MPs if we have to calculate a DC with the core rules? Also, in the core rules the save DC of standard magic item like a wand has the following formula: 10 + rounded down(1.5 * spell level). But because there is now no dependency between the usable MPs and the Charisma score, a spell has now a lower minimum save DC (5 + 1/2 spent MPs) and so a greater range of possible DCs. This means also that there has to be a new standard formula for setting the DC of a rolled standard magic item.

Well, as far as I understood it, the DC to determine a magic item's save DC was 10 + spell level + the modifier of the ability score necessary to cast a spell of that level, which is, indeed 10 +1.5x spell level. For EoM, first, a negative Charisma won't reduce your save DCs, kinda like how Paladins with low Charismas don't get a penalty to their saving throws. Second, the default DC for an EoM magic item will be 10 + 3/4 spell MP cost.

In addition, I'm still one of those who want a minimum intelligence score for being able to cast a spell of a certain level. I can't just understand that someone who barely speaks a language can eventually leveling entire towns - especially that he came up with such a plan. If the good old formula 10 + x = needed score to cast spells of level x (of course converted to MPs) doesn't function anymore, I will use a plain minimum of 10. Or do you have a better idea? Instead a plain minimum or regarding why I should use your system in this point...

Well, if you want that type of game, with the standard fantasy idea of most magic-users being intelligent, then you certainly can house rule, but there's no balance reason why you can't have a stupid mage. I mean, there are unintelligent monsters that have magical powers, so if your group is okay with dim-witted people able to harness the powers of sorcery, we give you the option.

EoM can surely handle weather conditions, earthquakes and such catastrophes, can't it?

It can . . . now that you've reminded me we need to put in a few of those things. It wasn't one of the options I thought about heavily when I was helping on the revisions, and so there's not really an easy way to create such effects at low level. You could have a centralized earthquake or lightningstorm or somesuch, which is easy with the existing MP costs for area of effect, but if you just want to have a large-scale tremor or storm, we're going to have to add a little more in. Won't be hard, though.

Oh, there I drew a false conclusion. I thought, if you cast Evoke Fire 3/Gen 0, then you have 3d6 fire damage, which I can enhance further without increasing the "spell level", but I have to pay extra MPs, like the effect of a metamagic feat on a core spell. Please clarify that point.

All MP costs paid for the spell, including spell list enhancements, general enhancements, and metamagic effects, count toward its MP total. You cannot spend more MP on a single spell than your caster level.

I just wanted to know, why the number for Range Long is 800 ft., because like I calculated it would be more logical to choose 750 ft. Your general explanation is interesting, though. Unfortunately you missed the last question of this section - if no, I would spent 1 MP for short range and 1 MP for the extra 500 ft. to get a nearly long range for 2 MPs.

It's 800 instead of 750 because of whim. We just wanted a suitably large range, and 800 is more of a round number. And no, you can't just spend 1 MP for 500 ft., you have to get to long range, and then you can increase the range by 500 ft. per MP thereafter. Really, you didn't think that you could do it as you suggested, did you? That'd be silly.

 

[RangerWickett]

I'm having trouble sending long replies. Maybe a short one will get through.

Survived all magical skills (at least their uses - Intuit Direction was fusioned with Scry and Sight, for example)? What system of skill point spending do you use personally?

There are just the four magical skills - Dispel Magic, Divination, Scry, and Spellcraft. We considered a few others, but they're not really necessary, and would end up requiring too many skill points anyway.

In my home game, I just don't have cross-class skills. I'm flexible with character concepts, and so if a fighter wants to tumble and have perform, I don't see any reason why he has a harder time learning it than a rogue would. But because I know a lot of people still use class/cross-class skills, we'll include them in the book.

This also means, you can have scrolls of "Dispel Magic". That inspires me to following idea: Can someone use scrolls of basic spells and combine them or known spell lists at casting? How flexible can be used a scroll? If you have Evoke Fire 5 with 3 MPs for damage and two for another enhancement, but you need only the damage, can you "skip" the enhancement? I think that it shouldn't be possible to replace an enhancement until you know the spell list but in that case you wouldn't need the scroll anyway - until you can so break the "Max spent MPs = current caster level". If you can't combine scroll on the fly shouldn't it be possible to use them at least in item creation processes?

Interesting idea, which helped me clarify a slight dichotomy of types of magic items. Charged Items can usually only create signature spells, which means that when you make a charged item, you give it one and only one version of a spell. In light of what you propose, when we release the magic item creation rules, some powerful items will let their user have access to an entire spell list and possibly bonus MP. We spent a few months revising the magic system, so please realize we'll need some time to balance and revise the magic item creation system.

If someone casts "Summon Monster V", then you must know the suitable Create [Creature] spell in order to dispel the spell without penalty (assuming succeeded Spellcraft checks). But because there is no Divination Spell but only a skill you can circumvent only a penalty if the Divination skill counts as a spell. In that case it could be relevant how many ranks you have in Divination but I'm unsure in that point.

Ah, yes. When countering a magical skill (or a standard D&D spell of the appropriate type), you don't get a penalty if you have at least 1 rank in that skill.

No comment on the Blindsense and Blindsight statement?

I'll have to reread exactly what blindsight and blindsense say, so I can know if you can defeat them.

 

[RangerWickett]

It seems I have to get accustomed first to that flexibility. But I hope one can get still inherent bonis to abilities, probably through a Transform spell, can't I? Oh, how can someone create a ring of three wishes? Is that possible without having to know every 268 spell lists?

Well, no, no wishes. Maybe we'll put some feat in Lyceian Arcana that lets you pay MP to cast spells you don't know. As for inherent bonuses to abilities, no, we don't have that option yet. You can make a permanent enhancement bonus on yourself with the Craft Permanent Spell feat, but we only wanted one system of having permanent magic effects.

They do, but there a three major differences: Firstly, with Quick Counterspelling you can dispel several spells in one round, secondly the dispels are treated as standard actions and thirdly don't use a part of the normal action. Otherwise is Inquisitor Counterspell nearly identical to Reactive Counterspell from Magic of Faerun besides you give up your next action totally. The second point violates the full round-action rule - how about the change of the prerequisites of my feat to "Inquisitor Counterspell, having Dispel Magic skill as signature spell"? If there is no feat like Quick Counterspell available, then magical combat has good use of its sword, but nothing comparable to a shield - or better only half the possibilities of a shield.

The shield is your three saving throws. Dispel Magic is more like tripping your foe; it throws them off for a bit, but it's not a reliable defense unless you're very good at it.