|
Post by logan9a on Jun 1, 2018 12:03:03 GMT
Ritual Spell Casting time: Free action (only as part of casting another spell) Range: Self Duration: Instant MP cost: 0 You lead a group spell. The group pools their MP for this spell, each participant must pool at least 1 MP. Each participant that knows the target spell may also roll to support you casting it.
Casting time: ONE HOUR plus the casting time of the spell that is to be ritualized. Range: Self Duration: Instant MP cost: 4
You lead a group spell. Everyone in the group specifies an even number of MP they will be attempting to put into this spell. If they succeed in their Ritual Spell roll (everyone needs to know this) then those MP go temporarily to the leader of the ritual to power the spell that is the focus of the ritual. Should the ritual roll of the supporter fail, they lose half the MP invested. Should either the leader fail either the Ritual Spell roll or the roll of the spell being attempted via the ritual, ALL of the MP are lost and the GM may choose to assign heavy backlash (possibly including damage, being whisked away to different realities, etc) depending on what spell was attempted.
|
|
Scott
DORA
(Scott)
*Sigh*
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Scott on Jun 4, 2018 23:02:20 GMT
Well, that's never going to get used. I should have thought to include an increased casting time, though.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Jun 5, 2018 12:07:32 GMT
Well, that's never going to get used. It will if there are some spells and such which take 100MP to cast. Or special items to be made. To be fair, that stuff hasn't yet come into the campaign but it will eventually. Will the PC's use this? I think it will be like the 'teach' skill. Everyone knows that it is useful, valuable. Everyone forgets to take it when they make a character.
|
|
Scott
DORA
(Scott)
*Sigh*
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Scott on Jun 9, 2018 18:08:21 GMT
I mean, we can only have 3 PCs at a time. If you intend us to farm up NPCs as MP batteries, then they need to not have to succeed at a roll. Because you're going to fail their roll. If instead it can be just "join hands to contribute MP" and then people can roll to support if they know Ritual Spell or the target spell I could get behind it.
I would also change the MP contribution to be any number (even or odd), but you lose that full amount whether the spell succeeds or fails.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Jun 9, 2018 18:35:04 GMT
If you intend us to farm up NPCs as MP batteries, then they need to not have to succeed at a roll. Because you're going to fail their roll. If you get professional ritual grade casters (60%) and twice as many as you need, I'm not seeing a problem here.
|
|
Scott
DORA
(Scott)
*Sigh*
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Scott on Jun 9, 2018 21:11:17 GMT
I really think the lackeys should get to do supporter rolls for the leader's target/focus spell roll if they know that spell too.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Jun 9, 2018 22:22:32 GMT
Possible - I'd say that if the ritual leader can find a way to get them involved (because ritual magic will also draw on additional skills other than ritual - singing, dancing, etc) that could be possible.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Jul 12, 2018 17:04:06 GMT
If we ever make longer duration spells (month, whatever) it may take crazy amounts of MP - like hundred or more. Hence, this might be useful but you'd need to get a bunch of people together to do it.
Which would keep us from the old problem of 'what happens when one person is able to churn out some magic items'. The answer is 'nothing fucking good for campaign balance'.
But if you need ten or twenty or fifty people - with a specific skill then that changes. You now get to do competitive wages, maybe house and feed them, etc. It becomes a type of factory job. It's the difference between one guy being able to make a car vs 'you need a factory'. Plus, of course, the factory floor etc.
I'm thinking of magic item creation more of a 'large team' effort than 'one guy can do it'.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Jul 16, 2018 10:23:49 GMT
Ritual
Casting time: ONE HOUR plus the casting time of the spell that is to be ritualized. Range: Self Duration: Instant MP cost: 4 +cost of spell that is being ritualized.
Although people may participate as batteries in as many rituals as they wish, a person may only lead a ritual once every three days.
This is a complex spell which requires several different rolls.
First, all people willing to donate MP to the ritual leader specify an even number of MP they'd like to donate. They must then make their 'ritual magic' roll. Critical: Ignore one donor fumble. Success: Ritual leader receives a percentage of the MP - depending on the ritual, leader's rolls, etc. Failure: Donor loses half their MP. Fumble: Donor loses all MP. The head of the ritual receives a negative to their casting roll (-10%) and/or the GM may give negative flaws etc into the magical effect.
Then, the leader of the ritual specifies how many of their own MP they are putting in to the ritual. rolls their ritual skill: Critical: 100% of the MP (minus any for other factors, see ritual, see GM) donated. Success: Ritual leader receives around 80% of the MP donated. (They still get 100% of their own used MP). Failure: All of the MP donated are wasted. Fumble: All of the MP go in to creating some sort of horrible effect. It could be any thing the GM wants. Everyone could end up having their life forces ripped out of their body, they could be transported to a horrible place, they could all suddenly become ravenous for the sweet taste of human flesh. Any horrible shit the GM wants. Also, the caster may not attempt this ritual again for a year and a day.
That is just the ritual roll. After that, the actual spell roll is made.
Anyone who has successfully donated MP (ie batteries) may attempt to support the ritual if they know the spell. If they do not but the ritual calls for other things (chanting, dancing, etc) they may try to do their roll (as set out by the primary caster) in order to support the primary caster's spell roll. If the ritual doesn't call for chanting, dancing, etc then they can only support if they actually know the spell.
As usual, each successful support gives +5%, each fumble gives a -10%.
After these things are all tallied up, the primary caster must roll. Their spell (depending on what they are attempting to do) may be at full percentage or severe negatives or in between.
Critical: GM may slip something else good - or 'kinda good' into the effect. Success: It works. Failure: Effort wasted. Come back in a few days. Fumble: All of the MP go in to creating some sort of horrible effect. It could be any thing the GM wants. Everyone could end up having their life forces ripped out of their body, they could be transported to a horrible place, they could all suddenly become ravenous for the sweet taste of human flesh. Any horrible shit the GM wants. Also, the caster may not attempt this ritual again for a year and a day.
Note - these fumbles may be seen as 'harsher than spell fumbles' but technically, they are the same as spell fumbles. The GM just doesn't bother to use them (instead saying the MP are gone and spell can't be cast again for the day) because spells are cast all the time - several times in a day.
Rituals are not. Rituals are large productions that will involve a lot of NPC's and are freakishly dangerous.
|
|
Scott
DORA
(Scott)
*Sigh*
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Scott on Jul 30, 2018 17:40:36 GMT
A lot of text, but I think it works.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Jul 30, 2018 18:53:16 GMT
I agree that it is a boatload of text. I'm really not seeing PC's doing a whole lot of ritual magic and honestly, they could be doing something else that is more interesting than spending a boatload of time trying to set up a spell ("Should we get in catering for the other casters?") and such but I'm still wanting to get some rules down for it.
Does anyone else have any additional thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Aug 14, 2018 10:53:42 GMT
We don't seem to need any more spells for the meta tree right now. I'm wondering if ritual magic should be on the meta tree or a totally different skill?
|
|
Scott
DORA
(Scott)
*Sigh*
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by Scott on Aug 14, 2018 13:35:55 GMT
It could probably be it's own tree.
|
|
|
Post by logan9a on Aug 14, 2018 13:38:00 GMT
An interesting idea.
|
|