PDA

View Full Version : Alternate spell ideas



Duke_of_Krondor
23-01-2012, 14:29
Right, there are loads of discussions about 'fixing' magic and, after running a search, I can't find anything quite like this. What I'm looking at is other ideas of how spells could work.

My main bugbear is Okkam's. Phantasmal weapons make units believe they are dead. My proposal, to make the spell less of a game changer, would be to make the spell use the models unmodified leadership replace strength and this attack worked against the defending models unmodified leadership. It seems to be more in line with the description of people dying from believing they are dead.

Effectively, if I were to errata it, I'd have the 'to wound' roll be unit ld vs unit ld, ignoring any inspiring presence. Units that are immune to psychology, count as ld 10. No armour saves can be taken against these wounds. I'd be tempted to drop casting value down to 15 but playtesting could prove me wrong.

This hasn't been playtested but mindrazor has always struck me as strange because it attacked toughness. Just a quick idea during a late luncg

Are there any spells out there that you think work in a weird way? (in terms of how the spells are described - not because you hate vortex spells or dwellers). How would you rationalise their fluff descriptions with their game mechanics?

jtrowell
23-01-2012, 14:45
Ld versus Ld would still very often get the very same result for the units that get abused (elves mainly, who already have a great Ld even on their core units).

I think that maybe making the modified strength only used to the wounding roll, and not apply to the armor save, would probably be a better solution. (of course, you would still apply the normal armor save modifier based on your base S and weapon)

In terms of fluff, think of it as the spell making even a small wound cause the target to think that it has been mortally wounded, but your armor and shields can still prevent this wound.

In term of rules, it still let the spell as a very good buff, making almost anything wound on 2+ (and even in the worst cases, like normal infantry against a big monster, you can still expect for 3+ or 4+ roll to wounds at worst), but it means that at least you still get to use your armour, making heavy cavalry and other armored units somewhat more resilient against this spell (but note that being wounded on 2+ can still make you roll for many armor saves, and a few will miss even on 2+)

Hawthorne
23-01-2012, 14:47
That would take the spell from being one of the better ones to being one of the worst ones in some cases.
It would instead of being a great spell it becomes a conditional spell that only really works for certain armies and/or against certain armies.
Especially if immune to psych=ld 10 in this case. That would mean if I cast that spell on elves (which are supposed to be quite resolve and strong minded) against a skeleton which they needed 4s usually to wound before they might need 5s or 6s. In fact against undead/daemons that spell would almost never pay off (the exception being against stuff like a sphinx where you might be wounding on 5s instead of 6s).

The idea isn't a bad start (even though I like Mindrazor and I don't play a single army that can even use Shadow) but it seems like it would really fix much except people complaining as much about that spell.

I'll admit the description doesn't exactly fit the actual effect but I honestly believe I would simply prefer a fix to the description rather than the effect.

Duke_of_Krondor
23-01-2012, 15:00
Apologies, in my quick typing at the end of lunch. ItP was defense only (in my mind)....I blame you all for not being telepathic....

I agree with the retaining armour saves against the current version (I've used this house rule 1/2 times) but I'm not looking at proposing fixes/houserules, I'm just looking at fluff =/= spell effect and how it could be reflected

Hawthorne
23-01-2012, 22:17
Apologies, in my quick typing at the end of lunch. ItP was defense only (in my mind)....I blame you all for not being telepathic....

I agree with the retaining armour saves against the current version (I've used this house rule 1/2 times) but I'm not looking at proposing fixes/houserules, I'm just looking at fluff =/= spell effect and how it could be reflected
Even on defence ItP meaning ld10 for purposes of getting wounded, unless they were before wounding on a 6+ (and assuming a unit such as High Elves is Ld 9 or 10 for example) it is still not much of a gain.
I understand the idea that it should be less effective against undead for example but it kind of sucks if you take lore of shadows and roll a spell that you essentially have to exchange for the sig simply because it won't be helpful (here's looking at you lore of metal...)

I do agree in it's current usage allowing armor is reasonable