ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: MegaPuff75 on July 10, 2011, 05:13:00 AM
-
I had an idea for a ward that included a conjuration spell to create a half dozen armed guardians to attack intruders if the ward is breached. I figured the summoning would be a complexity of base 5 for a moving construct+ 1 to make them human size+ 2 for quantity for a total 8 added onto the complexity of the ward. Would this work and how could I stat out the guardians?
-
Actually I was looking at Constructs in OW and I was wondering if it would be possible for me to create True Golems that are activated by the wards?
-
There has been a lot of talk about summoning and construct creation. I think this is the most complete/best thread.
http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,23624.0.html
General consensus is that it's not that simple. Most of the thought is that summoning 1 thing (or a handful of very weak things) should be up in the 40-50 range, but a few of the systems allow for summoning with a complexity of 5-15. It also depends on what you want. If you want a fully functional golem that is capable of doing many different things then you need to flesh it out. If you want one thing done then you're just using the "Solving improbable or impossible tasks" bit of thaumaturgy and flavoring it as a summon or construct.
-
Do note that you can "cheat" and lower complexity;
1) Add the ward you want to your house.
2) Add a landmine summoning (but NOT controlling) the summoned creature in question. Summon without control is cheap and there isn't a limit to how many landmines you can add in a place.
3) Add a second landmine per summoned creature landmine to bind it.
4) Add another landmine that contains a new ward that activates as soon as the original falls.
A 40-shift summon and control spell is actually harder to do than a 20-shift summon spell and a separate 20-shift control spell that are tied to activate together. And a 40-shift attack spell in a landmine is a lot harder than 4 landmines of 10-shift attacks each.
So given enough time, using this technique, you can layer many, many spells and defenses on your stronghold. Wards that pop back up after being brought down (or that blast anyone that brings them down), summoned creatures, and whatever else you want.
-
@Belial: Are you sure that you can cast landmines separately from the base ward?
@MegaPuff75: Summaries of multiple summoning systems can be found here: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,24744.45.html (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,24744.45.html)
I'd be willing to write a spell up for you if you find the above systems hard to grasp.
-
So from what I'm reading, if I want a group of what are essentially guard dogs to be conjured if someone pierces my ward it would have a cost dependent on the stats for the dogs, lets say good endurance and might plus a mild and moderate consequence inhuman toughness, speed, and strength, so that would be 6 for powers 6 for consequences and like 6 for skills plus 2ish to make them combat capable, and like 15 to have six of them for a total of 35, and then simply throw that on the ward as a landmine? If I read the ward section correctly if I apply the conjuration as a part of the ward it should activate any time the requirement is met in this case a breach or maybe an attack of sufficient strength. Also if I put a limit on how far they could move away from the ward would it reduce the complexity because they are not able to act as freely?
-
@Belial: Are you sure that you can cast landmines separately from the base ward?
Landmines are added as part of the same ritual that creates the ward itself.
Landmines—nasty, damaging spells that are
triggered on a breach—add complexity equal to
the power of the evocation spell stored within
the ward."
-
I think that landmines only go off when someone breaches the ward. Other conditions would require homebrewing rules.
It is difficult for me to understand your question about the guard dogs. Which system are you using? And what stats do they have other than those you've mentioned?
Not being able to leave the area could be a defect, I suppose.
-
It would be reasonable to state that non-breach triggers would simply add an additional 2 complexity (or more for more complex triggers)
-
It would seem that all the methods seem to overcharge for extra creatures conjured, the book seems to imply that the added complexity is a factor of size and quantity combined so summoning a dog the size of a bus would cost the same as summoning a dozen dogs that add up to the size of a bus, since all the individual constructs exist under the same rules all you are really doing is using more energy to replicate the exact effect multiple times requiring only more energy not more consideration from the caster. so based on that half a dozen dogs about 4x6x2 at would add up to roughly the size of an SUV which would only be about one step up in size from a normal car would mean a +4 for more than just one, from that creating the guardians as such
High concept: Conjured guardian
Skills: +3 might, endurance
+2 fists, intimidation
+1 Alertness, Athletics
Powers: Claws, Inhuman toughness/speed/strength
1 mild and 1 moderate consequence
using the Fred Hicks method http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,23624.15.html (http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,23624.15.html) the final cost would be 6 for stress+6 for consequences + 10 for powers (not paying for toughness twice) you get 22+4 for quantity with duration already worked into the ward add 2 to have a condition and it would be built in similar to how you could build in any other spell effect (like a divination as is suggested in YS) becomes 28+8 for the basic power of the ward+4 for other conditions+10 shifts to increase duration to a decade makes for a 50 shift ward total.
-
Ask your GM, if they say yes, then yes. <- RPG's simplified :)
-
@Landmines:
That's why you add a second ward of complexity 1-2, as an "alarm" spell and then you add the Landmine to it. ;D
-
I would have fought that you would summon a creature before the wards bind it or make an agreement with it so that it protects your gates and then have a special effect in the subsequent ward that awakes it.
-
I'd recommend not using Hicks' method, because I dislike it.
Also, I disapprove of your method of handling multiple summonings. The complexity is based on the effect that you get out of the spell, and multiple creatures are a significantly better effect than one. So they should require a significantly higher complexity.
Besides, you should take into account the increased complexity (not the game term) of multiple creatures compared to a single one.
-
If an enemy wizard goes ahead and blasts at your wards without thinking a bit, the tentacles will be their problem. If that same wizard uses Lore to realize you have multiple low-power spells defending your place, he goes ahead and casts a disjunction (big area dispel) and takes them all out at once. I.e. five 15-shift spells on the same zone need a 17-shift counterspell to remove. One 25-shift spell needs a 25-shift counterspell to remove.
That's one of the drawbacks of using multiple smaller spells. There are many others. So, those who want to protect their house should look closely at what they're doing; all it takes is one magic-savvy warlock finding a single weakness to unravel carefully-prepared defenses with ease.
-
If that same wizard uses Lore to realize you have multiple low-power spells defending your place, he goes ahead and casts a disjunction (big area dispel) and takes them all out at once. I.e. five 15-shift spells on the same zone need a 17-shift counterspell to remove. One 25-shift spell needs a 25-shift counterspell to remove.
I didn't know you could do that, i thought you could only use counter spell to remove spells.
-
Wards and Landmines are spells - they can be countered like anything else. Also, wards and landmines are Wards. An area attack that is launched at them and with the caster electing to damage the wards specifically (see in the book about attacking wards) is going to do the same thing as a counterspell.
-
There is a trick for someone who uses big disjunctions:
It dispells a stasis spell holding a nasty down. This might not even be a TRAP, just a consequence of the wizard having nasty prisoners. ;)
-
@Sanctaphrax the Hicks method seems to be the most logical, as long as you don't minmax the conjured creature (which would be easily prevented by a GM veto) also I think you are misunderstanding what I am talking about. I am not summoning these creatures (calling up existing entities from the Nevernever) but conjuring them (creating a construct from ectoplasm and in this case providing them some degree of intelligence). In the case of conjuration the method for determining complexity of the spell, because the complexity comes from determining the shape and behavior of the construct/s and then simply handling the volume of ectoplasm, since every copy of the construct will look and act exactly the same the complexity is only added once so it is only more difficult because you are using more volume.
-
@Sanctaphrax the Hicks method seems to be the most logical, as long as you don't minmax the conjured creature (which would be easily prevented by a GM veto) also I think you are misunderstanding what I am talking about. I am not summoning these creatures (calling up existing entities from the Nevernever) but conjuring them (creating a construct from ectoplasm and in this case providing them some degree of intelligence). In the case of conjuration the method for determining complexity of the spell, because the complexity comes from determining the shape and behavior of the construct/s and then simply handling the volume of ectoplasm, since every copy of the construct will look and act exactly the same the complexity is only added once so it is only more difficult because you are using more volume.
At the end of the day, the difference between a Conjured and a Summoned creature is largely story-based, and not mechanical. You are affecting the plot in similar ways whether your army of summoned thugs are Demons in ectoplasm suits, brand-new intellects in ectoplasm suits, Troll bruisers, or golems. We want to handle summoning them different ways because it makes sense to differentiate their origins, but deep down, at a basic level, it comes down to how much you pay for what you get. Making a brand new "intellectus" is basically intended to dodge accusations of demon-summoning, or to avoid having to deal with a demonic agenda.
Which is to say that a demon, fairy or construct with exactly the same game abilities and stats (including agendas or complications) should cost roughly the same, for purposes of game balance.
-
^^Agreed. Fate is primarily a story based game. Whether you are summoning demons or creating golems, as long as the story purpose is the same and you're creating the same effect, it should be the same mechanics.
-
What they said.
Also, I think that the physical mass of the construct shouldn't matter. Making it matter makes the guy animating origami soldiers feels like a munchkin, and it makes the guy making stone gargoyles feel like a chump.
And minmaxing should not have to be vetoed. It causes trouble, especially given the thin line between unwanted minmaxing and normal play.
What if I want to create a monster that relies on high skills rather than powers? That's not unreasonable, but that system makes it overpowered.
Also, I don't like the take-out-based system thematically for things other than the summoning of hostiles.
-
Also, I don't like the take-out-based system thematically for things other than the summoning of hostiles.
I don't mind it for a number of reasons. Firstly because you actually don't have to take it out if you aren't controlling it for all time. All you have to do is inflict a consequence, but it's much less reliable and much shorter term (all they have to do is heal the consequence). Secondly you don't have to make the consequences/take out a part of the spell. Technically you could just summon something friendly and take it out in social conflict (I.E. negotiating services). Or beat it into submission. That fits what harry did with Toot (not the beating, but the social conflict). The using a spell to bind something is just one of the ways to do it.
-
Yeah, but if I'm building a golem, why does how tough it is matter so much?
-
More toughness = greater energy expenditure. At least beyond a certain point.
-
Yeah, but if I'm building a golem, why does how tough it is matter so much?
If it doesn't matter, you can build an arbitrarily tough golem able to take any given hit. If for no other reason, summon / construct via takeout is good for balance.
-
I make my golem out of clay. Then I bind and animate it with an elemental spirit.
I buy tungsten at $30 per kilo, paying $120 thousand for a man-sized statue. I then find a forge that reaches over 5000 degrees to melt and forge the statue. Then I bind and animate it with an identical elemental spirit.
1) Would the two golems differ in ritual complexity to animate?
2) Would the tungsten golem, made with one of the densest, toughest, more heat-resistant materials known to man, have more toughness than the clay golem?
-
I make my golem out of clay. Then I bind and animate it with an elemental spirit.
I buy tungsten at $30 per kilo, paying $120 thousand for a man-sized statue. I then find a forge that reaches over 5000 degrees to melt and forge the statue. Then I bind and animate it with an identical elemental spirit.
1) Would the two golems differ in ritual complexity to animate?
2) Would the tungsten golem, made with one of the densest, toughest, more heat-resistant materials known to man, have more toughness than the clay golem?
Looks like two extra aspects - so it'd be 4 shifts tougher if all else was equal.
Perhaps a bit more since the material is a permanent aspect for the golem. Someone might spray the clay golem with water while invoking it's only clay for a bonus. If it were the tungsten golem, the player could invoke made of tungsten for a bonus to defense. But, barring specific declarations which give each construct character, the rituals should be very similar.
At least that's my two cents worth.
-
Having an equally powered clay golem and tongston golum should cost the same. However, spending all that money and careful prep would help meeting the complexity of doing the creation.
-
I just don't think that toughness should be any more important than, say, fighting skill in determining difficulty.
Also, the take-out system feels like a conflict, which isn't always appropriate. Although this is a minor problem at worst, it bugs me.
-
Also, the take-out system feels like a conflict, which isn't always appropriate. Although this is a minor problem at worst, it bugs me.
It's only a conflict if you frame it as one. Summoning a friendly or mercenary entity might be framed as building up a bribe of items or power. Building a construct is probably best framed as gathering all the items which go into the making of the construct. Either way, the narrative is what matters. The mechanics merely decide how detailed a narrative is needed.