About spells

[freid78]

[Razan_GM]

Its not only flavor text. You need to do what is in spell description to cast it, in ED spells a very restricted to what is needed because you cast every spell from its Pattern. Someone created that spell that way and if you want to cast it, the only way is the makers way.

1. Do really little circles, spin around. Come on its RPG, use imagination to make it as funny as possible

If mage doesnt know his spells, he should be going back to his master to study more
Player should describe how he is casting the spell(using description of the spell), its what makes Rpg really fun, maybe he always walk backwards? Maybe he doesnt point with his arm straight, but more like keeping hand close and just use finger?

2. All text in spell description is its details.

Many requirements of spells are there so GM can make them harder to cast in some situations, so players can get bright ideas and have fun from casting the spell in hard conditions.

[Telarus_KSC]

fried, have you come across any of the Earthdawn novels? If not, I seriously recommend checking out The Longing Ring (it follows two of the core setting NPCs and their adventures). One of them meets a trapped human Elementalist apprentice in the Blood Wood, and the descriptions of her spellcasting are really good.

More on-topic, yes the spell descriptions serve as casting restrictions. For (1), walking around in a circle sets up a set of geometric relationships, and then stepping into the center-point allows himself to be the target. It's the geometric/abstract shape that he holds in his mind and that he also physically crossed that space and knows precisely it's dimensions that is important to the Wizard's magic. Tie his legs up, and he won't be able to cast the spell (see here the 'sympathetic magic' concept in action, which runs through the setting from airships to Ghost Master Pledge Coins). Another good example is Earth Darts. Better have some earth/soil/dirt around if you want to cast it. Nope, other powders won't work. Can't cast Flight with your hands tied (but you can TOTALLY cast Mystic Shock blindfolded, gagged, and with your hands tied, muahahah - well, you'd need to be sure of your target's location per the casting rules, but there are ways to do that).

I'd encourage re-reading some of the spells with this in mind, and imagine a few scenarios like: bound and gagged in a closet, climbing the rigging of an airship, swimming underwater, crawling through a low tunnel, etc. See how each spell could or could not be used in that situation. All you need to do to cast Suffocation, for example, is hold your breath and then exhale. (Earthdawn Illusionsists are my favorite expression of that class in pretty much any game).

[freid78]

@ Telarus, i didn't read The Longing Ring, but i'm actually writing a trilogy in earthdawn settings (have like 400pages done already) and i do enjoy writing about spells that are being cast. The problem is not there.

The huge trouble in my games are the bog down.

With all the talents, skills, spells and such, it's hard to keep in mind everything. More than once, i had to ask "are you sure that's how this spell works?" It's not the spell restriction the problem, it's remembering all the spells and all the restrictions without going back systematically into the book. If the player had to choose his own restriction, it would be far more easier to remember. Of course, i could put it all on the player shoulder, saying it's is fault if he doesn't remember and even make a hard call like "well you can't cast that spell, you don't remember how" but that would go against one of the basic rule of any game which is, we are suppose to have fun. It's a game, not a homework! I would also add that having a game per 2 weeks tends to make players and GM forget some stuff, but even if we would be playing more often, the heavy rules would bite us back at some point. How many times have I read on this very forum that even the guys behind the creation of the game made mistakes because they didn't read the rule/flavor text before answering, i've stop counting (but i'm pretty sure Baravakar knows).

I'm not saying you are wrong Telarus, i'm just saying that trying to keep it exactly as it is, with all the details, you'll end up having an open book session with alot of re-reading of rules.

I'm completly ok with spell restrictions, but i think it would greatly enhance game experience if the spell restrictions weren't so much static. If you put a Restriction entry with "Gestual" for example, you would push a player not to remember a homework, but ask him to use his imagination to be able to actually perform the spell. That would even make him own his spells, make the spellcaster responsible for his own spells. Just specify, as a GM or just in the rules, that the restriction should be as such, meaning that waving a finger wouldn't count. You need to perform somekind of a task that anybody could recognize as a spell restriction. The overall purpose would be simple, allow players to enjoy spellcasting and give the GM a break from the book.

Don't you think so??

[Telarus_KSC]

I used to GM a long running Mage: the Ascension game (free form magic with heavy Earthdawn metaphysics overtones - Patterns and Threads, etc) and used a very similar system to handle the "rote" spell-components/restrictions. The players would choose a "rote" method of casting, say, a Fireball that was specific to them and thematic of their Tradition and would get a roll-bonus when employing that method to cast the spell, instead of just willing it to happen and tempting more Paradox backlash.

I don't have a problem with the way the restrictions read currently, but it sounds like a fine way to run a game. For that purpose, I'd encourage making small note-cards (half of a 3x5 card) for each spell the PC/NPC knows (esp for important caster NPCs) with those sort of notes for each player. This makes looking that up quick and you can note on each if it's in a matrix, then just leave those ones face up during play. May also make "looting" an enemy caster or old Grimoire pretty satisfying ("Hey look, this guy casts Earth Darts by drawing a rune in the earth in his hand."), or serve to add story elements to the game-world for unique one-off spells ("This spell can only be cast by consuming fresh flowers picked at Midnight under a full moon").

I fold, spindle, and mutilate the Earthdawn (whatever edition I'm using) rules all the time. Right now, I'm actually trying to "align" all of the map scales so that no matter what map I present to the players in whatever scale, they always have the Move points listed on their Character sheet, and a "clear" Hex will always cost 2 Mp. I'll probably post that in another thread when I've got it together enough to share.

::Edit:: I also think that Earthdawn in the 90's made a distinct decision to emulate certain things, but not rules, from AD&D - in response to AD&D 2nd edition. So the spell descriptions were written in a way that specified what you needed to do without the Verbal, Somatic, Material rules copied or emulated. Legal stuff probably influenced that decision.

[freid78]

Small note-cards... seems like the only way to patch up for some flaw in design. But as you said, perhaps there's legal stuff that explain some of the mess. All the joy of emulation! So i guess we are back to "it's your game" type of answer.

But you didn't quite answer from my previous question. Is following to the letter a complexe procedure that was forced upon, fun ? Because "being fine" with theran slavers doesn't mean it's a good thing.

I'll go "mutilate" my Earthdawn, as usual

Edit : Supernatural (tv serie) is a good representation of nethermancy. You have drawn runic circles, latin spoken spells and rock salt!

[Slimcreeper]

The ability to customize the game is a big part of why table-top rpgs are so awesome.