New 44-Page Elements of Magic (Revised) Preview!

So WHEN THE FRACK is either the revised Elements of Magic or the other book due out for release?????????? Perhaps Guido the Ogre of persuasion needs to drop by and convince the right people to hurry up? Nothing says hurry up like Ogre karioke!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

That's a rude and impolite way of asking. *doesn't know what emotion to express*


Anyway, according to RangerWickett, EoM will be out in this month - in his sig EoM is already marked for layout, too.
 

RuleMaster said:
That's a rude and impolite way of asking. *doesn't know what emotion to express*


Well, people have been posting in at least neutral- and curious-mannered questions at least 3 times.

Anyway, according to RangerWickett, EoM will be out in this month - in his sig EoM is already marked for layout, too.

Yayness!
 



towerwarlock said:
That was not a rude post, I used no profanity. Besides now Guido can go anoy his favorite victims: the IRS.
Being German, I simply don't know what is hidden profanity or accepted colloquial language. Yet it looks to me like the use of the f-word. But I leave it to RW, what he thinks about this post. And regarding the joke about Guido: Can you explain it to me?


So, a question to RangerWickett: I thought recently about the extra damage, which a creature receives, if the type of damage is from the opposing element of creature, 1.5 times of normal, isn't it? Does this function like the SRD?

"Vulnerability to Energy: Some creatures have vulnerability to a certain kind of energy effect (typically either cold or fire). Such a creature takes half again as much (+50%) damage as normal from the effect, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed, or if the save is a success or failure."


Regarding the spell database: The spells taken from the SRD won't probably match in all there parameters their core images. So every spell could be translated to one of two versions - the first one is the 1:1-translation, as much as possible and could have a higher MP-cost than the core spell level allows, and the second one is a spell with the same power level as the core spell, with the damage/effect closely followed as possible. I believe, people looking for a replacement want it identical in power level and in damage, so area, range and duration have to suffer. But the superficial similarity could possibly delude players for taking them identical, what is never true alone for the fact, that the caster level doesn't improve damage dice.

Hmm, that inspires me: The conversion (or other invented spells) should have a kind of template or base version - simply the minimum version for having the wanted effect, which needs only to be adapted for better versions by spending a higher amount of MP - and a sample, which could be the same power level-variant.

One example:

[Element/Alignment]ball
Base version:
Evoke [Element/Aligment] 1/Gen 1
Minimum MP: 2
Range: Short (30 ft.)
Duration: One round

This spell surrounds the target shortly with a ball of [Element/Alignment] and does 1d6 damage. Costs: 1 MP damage, 1 MP range.

Improvements: Increased damage (1 MP for 1d6, can be from other element/alignment), increased range (up to 2 MPs for long range), contingency (up to 8(?) MPs, used for delay or as trap trigger).

Sample:
Fireball
Evoke Fire 3/Gen 2
Total MP: 5
Range: Medium (150 ft.)
Duration: One round

This spell surrounds the target shortly with a ball of fire and does 3d6 damage. Costs: 3 MP damage, 2 MP range.

The improvement entries are the most likely used enhancements with included values, what will be changed, and if applicable, the upper range of the enhancement (there could be used more MPs on such an enhancement, but such situations would be rare) and specific use. This example defines not only a Fireball, but also a Delayed Blast Fireball and a Fire Trap in all varieties, including other elements and aligments. Cool, isn't it?

I don't know, for how many spells this schema is applicable, but at least the most basic spells would profit from it. In the end, the base/sample schema follows more the modularity of EoM, allows still a swift adaption in the midst of combat (as long other players distract the GM ) and reduces the variants of the same theme (e.g. iceball), while unique spells remain valid entries. Oh, suggestions for a better schema are welcome!
 
Last edited:

I'm sorry that I haven't done much replying this weekend. I've had a nasty cold, and really couldn't keep a logical thought in my head if I'd wanted to. I'm still a bit sick, but I should finagle a way to answer these questions soon.
 

Arrg, I forgot to ask that again: Are the only spell components verbal and somatic componts? No material components, no foci and no XP-costs? Count the extra MPs of Metamagic feats towards the spell DC (they shouldn't except Heighten Spell)?

And because I read the generic classes thread and the discussion, if spellcasters should have a spell failure chance while casting in armor: IIRC, the spell failure chance for wizards has been introduced in former editions as a method of balancing the power of high level-wizards. Now with 3.5 edition, the power of magic users has been reduced and especially with EoM, there is no more a difference between a cleric- and wizard-charactertype. So would it be unbalancing, if there would be no spell failure or a least no spell failure with light armor? And what about changing the d4 to a d6? The d4 is simply to small for this game (unless it is a prestige class).
 

Some questions which accumulated themselves:
-Using temporary Transform spells: What happens to severed limbs and killed people? Will they change back? Immediately or after the end of the spell? If permanent, can be changed materials used as components? What, if only temporary?
-It should exist an enhancement for transform which allows to bring Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma to usual values for a member of the chosen race. Maybe 1 MP for two points of one score?
-Are spells with 0 MP for one or more lists allowed (except Gen 0)? Can someone get cantrip-effects for free, if spells with normal MP-costs are used like Evoke Fire 5/Evoke Death 0/Evoke Lava 0/Gen 2?
-Is Read Magic still necessary? If yes, how is it simulated?
-Are [Element]-creatures immun to the friendly elements?
 

Yes, theres's spell failure, but it's rather easy to get around.

There are only verbal and somatic components required. Anything else is just for flavor.

Severed parts. . . . Not a big issue. No, you can't use them as components for anything, even though EOM doesn't have components anyway. They definitely revert to the normal form at the end of the spell.

There is a way to alter critters' intelligences and so on.

No, you cannot combine 0-Mp effects.

Read Magic? Whatever could you be talking about? Nope, it's gone, sorta. Now if you want to read a spellbook or scroll, you just have to be able to read the right language.

Yep, a fire creature is immune to fire damage, and so on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Remove ads

Top