[Torg] Announcement: Compleat Magick

[Dominick Riesland]

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Phil Dack <philipdack at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Is it 8+ adds in AK, or is 8+ Divination Modifier of the ward, which can be upto the adds in AK? And is it 8 plus the MoO cost of controlling the Ward aspect (this is how my sheet calculates it, which is why I called the cost 10, but the 8 might be inclusive of that MoO cost)

>From Pixaud's Practical Grimoire (p.90):
  "These Aspects are variable, and are not part of the One-on-Many cost:
  "o Accuracy -- Accuracy is a bonus to hit the target. The to-hit
increase it the accuracy cost (i.e, a +3 bonus to hit costs 3)
  "o Wards -- Wards use the caster's divination skill plus knowledge
adds for whatever is detected to see if they are activated. The ward
costs 8 plus the knowledge adds."

> I disagree with your rewrite, because there's a difference imho between affinity and technical knowledge. High perception might be able to create what is, ultimately, a better spell, but the higher AK allows more technical detail - such as enhanced Divination Modifier - into the structure of the tool.

As written above, a control cost of 9 (8 plus 1 add) can create a
spell with a divination skill from 8 to 15, depending on the
Perception of the caster (assuming normal ranges of 7-14 for
Perception). To avoid this, there are a few options. One would be to
allow the caster to put in as many adds as he has available, but only
let the ward detect at a value of 8 plus the adds. This makes arcane
knowledge adds essential for designing wards, but not for bypassing
them, as the resisting magician can resist using full value for
divination. Another possibility is to cap both the design and the
resistance at 8 plus arcane knowledge adds, but that seems too
artificial and clunky. Instead, I chose to allow the caster to put in
as much skill as he thinks will be necessary, up to the his full
score, and let the spell fight it out based on the value it was given.

>> There is no process theorem of apportation. It's a throwback to
>> Pre-Aysle spell design. However, since Worldbook spells do this as
>> well, I allowed for spells to use magic skills other than the pattern
>> skill as process theorems if they show significant affinity for the
>> alternate skill. In this case, the spell shows great affinity for
>> apportation, and hence that skill could be used as a process theorem.
>> I would also allow, in light of the increased complexity of impressing
>> the spell into an object, for range and speed to be usable as process
>> theorems, which would more than handle the increase.
> Simpler just to apply Range and Speed, which are the two process theorems relating to Apportation, and drop the Apportation bit, but your call.

Part of the reason I did so was to because of another spell in the
Torg Worldbook (Stay Voice) that lists apportation and conjuration on
the "Manipulation" line, as well as other spells that use apportation
there.

Dominick Riesland, aka Rabbitball
Speaker, 5-Color Rules Committee
Creator of the Cosmversal Grimoire
"There are always possibilities, my sergeant told me. But he never had
his possibilities torn away like wings from a fly."