DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Aldeon LARP
HTML https://aldeon.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: 2016 Errata Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1134--------------------------------------------------
Change to Ricochet
By: Lothar6669 Date: February 1, 2016, 9:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Right now you must carry a spell packet on you and you have to
throw it back within three seconds to ricochet the spell. I
would like to see a change where you can either throw a spell
packet or be able to use next swing with the weapon you used to
ricochet the spell away. All within three seconds of course, but
I think this would make the skill a little more desirable, and
flow better for users.
Thoughts on this?
#Post#: 1135--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: ZachC Date: February 1, 2016, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Jonathon and I talked about this earlier. I'd rather the spell
automatically was redirected at the caster. The stamina cost
may need to go up 1 or 2 points, but it will remove the need for
a hold.
#Post#: 1137--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: Lothar6669 Date: February 2, 2016, 8:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Being reflected at the caster could work. But it takes the
utility out of it, so honestly I would like to see it go down a
stamina or two with that change. And maybe a bit cheaper Cp wise
too.
#Post#: 1140--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: Zaud Date: February 2, 2016, 4:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Do we have a Reflect Spell, Spell in the game? I was unable to
find it, and if you are telling me that a Fighter should be the
only one capable of automatically reflecting a spell back to hit
another spell caster, well.... seems strange to me.
If we have to wear actual Armor (or a Phys Rep for it) to be
considered to be Wearing Armor I see no reason why a Fighter
who wants to use Ricochet can't be required to carry a spell
packet. I've only NPC'd a character capable of this one time but
it was not that difficult to hold a sword and packet in the same
hand.
From what I can tell the only way to get a 'Smart' defense vs
spells is to be a Fighter. I have not done the cost analysis on
Spell Block, and even less so Ricochet but for those who want to
really argue point that is a good place to start.
The only players who are high enough level to have these skills
are 'NPCs'. Make sure that Richochette costs more then Evade.
Since it turns a Defense into an Offense, even if it does not
work against 'everything' like Evade.
Personally I think it should be more Difficult to Ricochet a
high level spell vs a low level one so 'cost' in an ideal world
Cost should be determined by the spell you are trying to move,
but that goes against my 'basic' rule that the game needs 'less
rules/simplier rules' not more complex ones.
#Post#: 1141--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: Lothar6669 Date: February 2, 2016, 4:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The closest thing to a reflect spell in the game to my knowledge
would be chaos aura. There are also several other aura spells
such as fire aura, lighting barrier and such. But Chaos aura
reads
By the forces of chaos, I create a chaos aura.
This spell creates a chaotic field that will return the first
attack from a game weapon, no matter what damage the weapon
causes. This causes both the target of the attack and the
attacker to take the full effect of the attack. The target must
call Chaos Aura to let their opponent know that they had the
effect to reflect the strike. This spell is not stackable with
Fire Aura, Wind Barrier, or Deflect Weapons.
I do like the Idea of it still being packet based, or travel
through a weapon, kind of like knocking it back.
As for it needing to being more expensive than evade I dont
agree with. I see your point on it turning defense into offense,
but its too situational to be 8 cp or more in my opinion.
#Post#: 1143--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: Zaud Date: February 2, 2016, 4:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
To help your argument regarding 'cost' it does require Spell
Block as a pre-req.
I forgot to mention in my first response, but I am STRONGLY
against allowing the Ricochet to be used via the persons Sword.
(I am against Foci Swords as a rule, but I plan to make use of
one for a while to see if I can get over my reluctance. 'If' the
sword was a Foci for the specific Path that was hitting the
person, I may consider it.)
#Post#: 1164--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: aaronsfrench Date: February 16, 2016, 5:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok, so I considered a scenario that might be awkward when using
Ricochet: In a line fight you as the person have Ricochet and
You are in your line, there is the opposing line in front of you
and on their side behind their line there is a mage. Say the
mage were to throw a spell at You, being directly in front of
the opponents line, and say this spell would kill you or
diminish you heavily. So you call 'Ricochet' to not die, and
while grabbing your packet a fighter in front of you calls Death
Strike and hits you before you throw the packet. Do you get to
throw the spell, do you die an lose the spell, can you deflect
still, or do you default because you are required to toss the
spell somewhere, but can't cause your dead? What could you do in
the scenario? Being able to use the sword in that situation
means you would not be caught in the predicament since you could
swing and hit their weapon causing the spell to take effect and
still stopping the blow that would have killed you. I think this
would be a good option to have.
#Post#: 1191--------------------------------------------------
Re: Change to Ricochet
By: Zaud Date: April 26, 2016, 12:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think that is too specialized a situation to really use as
your base way for Ricochet to work. Keep it simple, keep the
book short. It is already cheaper from a CP point then a Mage
trying to send a spell back at someone and is SMART/not
automaticallu used
You lose players with every page you add to your rule book.
*****************************************************