Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:40:20 +0000
Hello everyone!

One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
these?

--
===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net===
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
================================================================
3 kinds of people: those who can count & those who can't.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 2
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:54:47 -0400
Drekhead writes:

>
> One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
> spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
> I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
> campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
> spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
> skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
> these?
>
I always enjoyed those as well. I think I've seen the Spontaneous
Spellcasting mentioned once or twice. I like the rules that
appeared in PaOE (I think). Simple cantrips are only light
drain, (They don't do much), so they are more for effect, while
spontaneously casting HellBlast when you don't know it, is virtual
suicide. After all what is a high sorcery skill for?

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The nice thing about standards,is there are so many to choose from.
Message no. 3
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 18:10:15 -0400
> From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
> Date: Monday, September 22, 1997 11:40 AM

> Hello everyone!

Hoi :)

> One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
> spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
> I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
> campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
> spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
> skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
> these?

Well, IMO, a lot of this is already incorporated into SR magic as it
stands. For example, a Force 1 Ignite spell could be used to light the
cigarette; a Force 1 or 2 Magic Fingers spell could float a drink to his
table; the same spell could be used to lift the skirt of the patron he is
teasing, etc. Just be creative. It's all feasable. That's what low Force
spells are for - minor things. Low Force spells ARE the SR equivalent of
cantrips. Instead of using a seperate spell, just use the spell at low
Force.

> --
> ===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net

Justin :)
Message no. 4
From: "Wendy Wanders, Subject 117" <KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 20:00:58 -0500
You wrote:
> One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
> spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
> I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
> campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
> spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
> skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
> these?
You could easily devote a few Force points to some small, non-useful flash
spells just for the hey of it. "Ignite Cigarette" should be too heavy on the
drain, eh? :) Entertainment already has a low drain code, as do Fashion and
the like.

losthalo
Message no. 5
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 19:42:39 -0500
On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 18:10:15 -0400 Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
writes:

<<Well, IMO, a lot of this is already incorporated into SR magic as it
stands. For example, a Force 1 Ignite spell could be used to light the
cigarette; a Force 1 or 2 Magic Fingers spell could float a drink to his
table; the same spell could be used to lift the skirt of the patron he is
teasing, etc. Just be creative. It's all feasable. That's what low
Force spells are for - minor things. Low Force spells ARE the SR
equivalent of cantrips. Instead of using a seperate spell, just use the
spell at low Force.>>


Perhaps you could use Force 0 spells as cantrips? This would essentially
accomplish what Drekhead was looking for, while providing a rationale for
it ...


Canthros
Message no. 6
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 21:22:31 -0400
> From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
> Date: Monday, September 22, 1997 8:42 PM

> On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 18:10:15 -0400 Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
> writes:

> <<Well, IMO, a lot of this is already incorporated into SR magic as it
> stands. For example, a Force 1 Ignite spell could be used to light the
> cigarette; a Force 1 or 2 Magic Fingers spell could float a drink to his
> table; the same spell could be used to lift the skirt of the patron he is
> teasing, etc. Just be creative. It's all feasable. That's what low
> Force spells are for - minor things. Low Force spells ARE the SR
> equivalent of cantrips. Instead of using a seperate spell, just use the
> spell at low Force.>>

> Perhaps you could use Force 0 spells as cantrips? This would essentially
> accomplish what Drekhead was looking for, while providing a rationale for
> it ...

How would you figure the Drain for a Force 0 spell? 0 multiplies and
divides kinda funny, you know. ;) Anyway, Force 1 spells cover the
concept of cantrips (or whatever you want to call them) just fine and with
minimal Drain. IMO, all this is already incorporated into spells. If you
want a small effect, use a low Force spell.

There's no need for an addition to the system. Unlike lots of folks here,
I think the magic system in SR is great, although it has a few holes that
could be filled. I hope the SR3 rules for magic are the same as they are
now, but with perhaps a few fillers to cover the gaps.

> Canthros

Justin :)
Message no. 7
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:21:35 +0500
On 22 Sep 97 at 19:42, John E Pederson wrote:

> Perhaps you could use Force 0 spells as cantrips? This would
> essentially accomplish what Drekhead was looking for, while
> providing a rationale for it ...

Sounds interesting. Please elaborate. How many Force 0 spells would
you allow a mage to know? How would drain, if any, be handled?

--
===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net====
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
=================================================================
Help Wanted: Telepath. You know where to apply.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 8
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:21:35 +0500
On 22 Sep 97 at 20:00, Wendy Wanders, Subject 117 wrote:

> You could easily devote a few Force points to some small, non-useful
> flash spells just for the hey of it. "Ignite Cigarette" should be
> too heavy on the drain, eh? :) Entertainment already has a low
> drain code, as do Fashion and the like.

I think that Fashion would make a good cantrip. As a spell, it is a
waste, and the drain is too high, IMHO. What GM is going to give a
damn if a player always wants his clothes to look good? At least he
is trying to roleplay. I know, someone will say he will sell his
services, or sell the clothes. Remember, cantrips are weak, non
permanent minor spells, you could say that the alterations are woven
with his aura, so as soon as they leave it, they go away. Ever wonder
where Joe Magi gets all his neon green Tres Chic, when all he has in
his closet is gray polyester suits?

--

===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net====
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
=================================================================
Shell to DOS...Come in DOS, do you copy? Shell to DOS...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 9
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:21:35 +0500
On 22 Sep 97 at 18:10, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> Well, IMO, a lot of this is already incorporated into SR magic as it
> stands. For example, a Force 1 Ignite spell could be used to light
> the cigarette; a Force 1 or 2 Magic Fingers spell could float a
> drink to his table; the same spell could be used to lift the skirt
> of the patron he is teasing, etc. Just be creative. It's all
> feasable. That's what low Force spells are for - minor things. Low
> Force spells ARE the SR equivalent of cantrips. Instead of using a
> seperate spell, just use the spell at low Force.

Oh, of course that would work. But remember, I was just looking for a
simple system that any mage could use for effects to encourage and
enhance roleplaying. To add flavor. As a GM, I'm not going to make a
player use up a Force Point so he can learn Ignite to light a
cigarette. If he wants to Ignite a pile of leaves to create a
distraction for some guards, that would require the spell.
See the difference?

--

===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net====
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
=================================================================
Why doesn't DOS ever say 'EXCELLENT command or filename!'

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 10
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:25:20 -0400
> From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
> Date: Monday, September 22, 1997 1:21 PM

> On 22 Sep 97 at 18:10, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> > Well, IMO, a lot of this is already incorporated into SR magic as it
> > stands. For example, a Force 1 Ignite spell could be used to light
> > the cigarette; a Force 1 or 2 Magic Fingers spell could float a
> > drink to his table; the same spell could be used to lift the skirt
> > of the patron he is teasing, etc. Just be creative. It's all
> > feasable. That's what low Force spells are for - minor things. Low
> > Force spells ARE the SR equivalent of cantrips. Instead of using a
> > seperate spell, just use the spell at low Force.

> Oh, of course that would work. But remember, I was just looking for a
> simple system that any mage could use for effects to encourage and
> enhance roleplaying. To add flavor. As a GM, I'm not going to make a
> player use up a Force Point so he can learn Ignite to light a
> cigarette. If he wants to Ignite a pile of leaves to create a
> distraction for some guards, that would require the spell.
> See the difference?

Yes I see the difference. The problem is, you are determining the
difference outside of the game. Magic doesn't care what you are doing with
it, it still requires a success test and a Drain resistance test. If the
PC wants to do something small with a spell, he should use a low Force
spell. End of story. No extra system required. I think you are trying to
create something that already exists within the system. Don't reinvent the
wheel. Most simple spells when cast at Force 1 won't cause much, if any,
Drain to be taken by the caster, anyway.

Like all other Success Tests, you could as the GM just rule that the test
would not be necessary in any given instance. Then, you could say the
spell just works and no Drain is taken, or whatever. So, if you want the
PC mage to be able to float his drink to his table from the bar without
making any tests, fine. Just be as liberal with the street sams who wish
to hit the bullseye of the dartboard to impress the ladies at the bar, etc.
It's perfectly acceptable to waive the success tests when it's just to add
flavor. No game mechanics are necessary. Don't make it more complicated
than it has to be.

> --
>
> ===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net====

Justin :)
Message no. 11
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:41:17 +0500
On 22 Sep 97 at 22:25, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> > Oh, of course that would work. But remember, I was just looking for a
> > simple system that any mage could use for effects to encourage and
> > enhance roleplaying. To add flavor. As a GM, I'm not going to make a
> > player use up a Force Point so he can learn Ignite to light a
> > cigarette. If he wants to Ignite a pile of leaves to create a
> > distraction for some guards, that would require the spell.
> > See the difference?
>
> Yes I see the difference. The problem is, you are determining the
> difference outside of the game. Magic doesn't care what you are
> doing with it, it still requires a success test and a Drain
> resistance test. If the PC wants to do something small with a
> spell, he should use a low Force spell. End of story. No extra
> system required. I think you are trying to create something that
> already exists within the system. Don't reinvent the wheel. Most
> simple spells when cast at Force 1 won't cause much, if any, Drain
> to be taken by the caster, anyway.

True. But want I meant was, if a player wanted to do something just
to add flavor, I don't want to say "Nope. You can't be creative. You
don't know that spell." With your suggestion, I would have to.

> Like all other Success Tests, you could as the GM just rule that the
> test would not be necessary in any given instance. Then, you could
> say the spell just works and no Drain is taken, or whatever. So, if
> you want the PC mage to be able to float his drink to his table from
> the bar without making any tests, fine. Just be as liberal with the
> street sams who wish to hit the bullseye of the dartboard to impress
> the ladies at the bar, etc.

Of course, if it is only for flavor. And the physad to win the arm
wrestling, the decker to win the video game, etc. etc.

> It's perfectly acceptable to waive the success tests when it's just
> to add flavor. No game mechanics are necessary. Don't make it
> more complicated than it has to be.

Which is what I do now. I just wanted to come up with something I
little less off the cuff. It gives it validity, and consistency, and
keeps the damn rules lawyer in the group quiet. He's a good player,
but hates it when I wing it.

--

===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net====
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
=================================================================
C:\ Bad command or file name! Go stand in the corner.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 12
From: Barbie <barbie@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 09:37:34 -0500
At 22-Sep-97 wrote Justin Pinnow:



>How would you figure the Drain for a Force 0 spell? 0 multiplies and
>divides kinda funny, you know. ;)

Its two(drain level), remember the lowest targetnumber is two.

--

Barbie
---------------------------------------------------------------
Evil Overlord advice #17:

When I employ people as advisors, I will occasionally listen to
their advice.

http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie
FAQ keeper of SR_D, the german Shadowrun mailing list.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 13
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 08:46:53 +0000
> I think that Fashion would make a good cantrip. As a spell, it is a
> waste, and the drain is too high, IMHO. What GM is going to give a

Learn it at force 1 (why do you need it higher?) and there is never
any drain from it. Fashion is hardly a worthless spell. High I've
got a 'raku uniform. I meant S-K. I meant Lone Star. I meant I'm
not the guy you were chasing 'cuz he had a jump suit on and I'm in
business attire.

Makeover is even better for that last one.


Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie
Message no. 14
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:28:34 +0100
Wendy Wanders, Subject 117 said on 20:00/22 Sep 97...

> You could easily devote a few Force points to some small, non-useful flash
> spells just for the hey of it. "Ignite Cigarette" should be too heavy on
the
> drain, eh? :)

BTB, I get a Drain of (F/2)L:

Manipulation Spell, Minor Physical Changes M

Physical Spell +1 DT
Touch Required -1 DT

Elemental Effect (fire) +1 DL
Touch Required -1 DL
Very Restricted Target (cigarettes) -1 DL

If you want a LOS spell, the Drain goes up to [(F/2)+1]M, which is a bit
much just to light a cigarette if you ask me.

BTW, I'd say cigarette tobacco is a manufactured, low-tech object so the
TN for the spell is a 5.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Zijn generatie twijfelt, maar weet niet eens waaraan.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 15
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:28:34 +0100
Drekhead said on 22:21/22 Sep 97...

> Sounds interesting. Please elaborate. How many Force 0 spells would
> you allow a mage to know?

The problem here is that a Force 0 spell would cost no Karma, as Karma
cost is equal to the Force. That also means chargin 1 Karma for the spell
is unlikely to make people take these spells, as they figure they'd be
better off learning the same spell at Force 1. Similarly, the time needed
to learn such a spell would be 0 days.

So, how about a Karma cost of 0.5 per spell and requiring 1 day to learn
it?

Oh yeah, and I'd say NO Force modifiers of any kind -- no fetishes,
exclusivity, or spell foci -- can be applied to these spells.

> How would drain, if any, be handled?

Using the normal formula seems a good idea to me, although since the
minimum TN is 2 this might give too much of a penalty to casting many
spells at Force 0; perhaps spells whose Drain TN is lower than 2 in
this way could get a -1 Drain Level modifier? And, naturally, all Drain is
Stun damage, never Physical.

Casting a Force 0 Hellblast would still give you 5D Stun drain, while
Antidote M Toxin would be 2L, not the 2M it would be for a Force 1 spell.


--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Zijn generatie twijfelt, maar weet niet eens waaraan.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 16
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:31:08 +0100
|I think that Fashion would make a good cantrip. As a spell, it is a
|waste, and the drain is too high, IMHO. What GM is going to give a
|damn if a player always wants his clothes to look good?

That all depends if the Magician is a Cat Shaman....
:)

--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 17
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 09:18:13 +0000
> |I think that Fashion would make a good cantrip. As a spell, it is a
> |waste, and the drain is too high, IMHO. What GM is going to give a
> |damn if a player always wants his clothes to look good?
>
> That all depends if the Magician is a Cat Shaman....

Truth. My Cat shaman has Healthy Glow, Makeover AND Fashion.

"It isn't if you win or lose, or even how you play the game, but how
you LOOK when you play the game."


Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie
Message no. 18
From: Mike Bobroff <AirWisp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 01:46:32 -0400
In a message dated 97-09-22 15:40:25 EDT, you write:

> One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
> spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
> I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
> campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
> spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
> skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
> these?

Yes, we have a spell that does that, it is a manipulation spell and has a
drain of L2 or so.

The spell was used for all sorts of nifty little things, including creating a
sound to distract someone ala Obi Wan Kenobi from Star Wars. Then there was
also the time someone painted one of the pc's in the party entirely in plaid.
Message no. 19
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 07:41:11 -0500
On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 22:21:35 +0500 Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET> writes:
>On 22 Sep 97 at 19:42, John E Pederson wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you could use Force 0 spells as cantrips? This would
>> essentially accomplish what Drekhead was looking for, while
>> providing a rationale for it ...
>
>Sounds interesting. Please elaborate. How many Force 0 spells would
>you allow a mage to know? How would drain, if any, be handled?


Drain is easy: calculate as normal, bearing in mind that the lowest
possible target number is a two. If you really want to make that
extra-low force different from a Force of 1, you could decrease the Drain
level by one, as well.

As for the first question: You've got two ways to go. You can assume that
the character simply knows the right type of spell whenever he does
something that would use it, or you can give him a certain number (as a
starting character) equal to Intelligence or Sorcery or Magical Theory or
something, then allow him to spend a bit of time (but not karma) on
learning new ones later on.

The biggest problem I see with the idea is that you would have to find
some reason that a character couldn't use a Force 0 spell in combat and
pump it up with Magic pool.


Canthros
Message no. 20
From: HAUPT ULRICH FB08 <sandman@****.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 17:15:14 MEZ-1MESZ
On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:40:20 Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET> said:

> One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
> spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
> I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
> campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
> spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
> skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
> these?

The way I manage these effects is to look what similar spells the
mage has. If he has flamethrower oder fireball or flamewall I usually
allow the players to lighten up a cigarette without any diceroll. If
he has any levitation spell he can move small things around.
BUT - THE SPELL MUST NOT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE
GAME ITSELF !

If a character wants to impress a girl because he is a playboy it
will be no problem to push her slightly towards him. It does no
matter what spell he exactly has: levitate person or item or
something similar. He does not need to roll a force one or zero
spell. He could do that even with windrush. May be I would like to
see a magic roll with a TN of 2..4 or higher depending on the
complexity.

But if the player wants to push a glass of acid over someones legs to
get the chance to escape of course the mage has to have the right
spell ! Or if the girl the character wants to impress if a secretary
of the company the runners want to break in the next night I require
a successful spell test.

IMO the mage can also combine spells into one spell.
E.g. a player wants his spell to look very impressive and dangerous.
He only tosses a fireball at level zero but aids it by his
entertainmant spell so the fireball looks as good as a first class
fire spitter (is it the english word ? I hope so!) but does no damage
to anything (maybe except to some flies).

That's the way I handle it !

I hope I could help you :-))

Sandman
Message no. 21
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:44:52 +0000
On 23 Sep 97 at 17:15, HAUPT ULRICH FB08 wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:40:20 Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET> said:
>
> > One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
> > spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
> > I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
> > campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
> > spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
> > skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
> > these?
>
> The way I manage these effects is to look what similar spells the
> mage has. If he has flamethrower oder fireball or flamewall I usually
> allow the players to lighten up a cigarette without any diceroll. If
> he has any levitation spell he can move small things around.
> BUT - THE SPELL MUST NOT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE
> GAME ITSELF !

That is exactly what my bottom line was as well, and people still got
bent out of shape about it. I don't see it as a big deal really. Your
solution is a good one; base the effects on the spells that the mage
already knows. That way there is no need to come up with new spells
at Force 0, learn Force 1 spells, or whatever else we have come up
with. It's simple, and I like it.

Ok, I just got an idea, and would like some help. I want to try and
compile a list of possible non-game effects that each spell grants
the caster. If any of you can think of any, please send them to me at
drekhead@***.net . When it is completed, I can post them, or submit
them for TSS or something.

Look forward to hearing from you.

--

===DREKHEAD==================================drekhead@***.net===
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
================================================================
RAM disk is *not* an installation procedure.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 22
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:52:42 +0000
> Ok, I just got an idea, and would like some help. I want to try and
> compile a list of possible non-game effects that each spell grants
> the caster. If any of you can think of any, please send them to me at
> drekhead@***.net . When it is completed, I can post them, or submit
> them for TSS or something.
>
> Look forward to hearing from you.

While I have to leave my terminal now and can't send you anything, I
think this is a great idea. I look forward to seeing this list.


Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie
Message no. 23
From: Les Ward <lward@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 12:20:42 -0400
Drekhead wrote:
>True. But want I meant was, if a player wanted to do something just
>to add flavor, I don't want to say "Nope. You can't be creative. You
>don't know that spell." With your suggestion, I would have to.

If you didn't have to suffer for it, you can't call it style.

Wordman
Message no. 24
From: Jaymz <justin@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 11:22:02 -0500
At 12:20 PM 9/23/97 -0400, Les Ward wrote:
# Drekhead wrote:
# >True. But want I meant was, if a player wanted to do something just
# >to add flavor, I don't want to say "Nope. You can't be creative. You
# >don't know that spell." With your suggestion, I would have to.

A mage initially learning magic would have to learn all these little things
anyway, I could see a LOT of magical types first realising they had power
when they reached for something and it came flying at them. Unless of
course the Corps caught them first and started training from Magical Maturity.
--
/--justin@****.mcp.com----------------------justin@******.net--\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Simon & Schuster | Attention span is quickening. |
|Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\------------ http://www.mcp.com/people/justin/ ---------------/
Message no. 25
From: "Joshua M. Kanapkey" <Wakabout@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 16:42:47 -0400
In a message dated 97-09-22 15:40:27 EDT, Drekhead wrote:

<< Anybody ever used these? >>


Actually, I've thought about similar things before. the only time I've seen
it done (sort of) however, was an NPC in a game I played in a few years ago.
He was Draggin' Mon and he had a spell named 'Create a Doobie.' }:)

I guess using certain spells at low (and/or lower) force would do the trick,
as well.

Adieu,
Wakabout {{@***.com}}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Is everyone in this town on drugs?"
Sean Penn, 'U-Turn' trailer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Message no. 26
From: Craig J Wilhelm Jr <craigjwjr@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 18:55:52 -0400
Wendy Wanders, Subject 117 wrote:
> You could easily devote a few Force points to some small, non-useful flash
> spells just for the hey of it. "Ignite Cigarette" should be too heavy on
the
> drain, eh? :) Entertainment already has a low drain code, as do Fashion and
> the like.

The cantrip idea is basically what spontaneous magic is used for in my
game, and that mainly what it was intended to be for when I introduced it.
In the 2 years since I introduced it to my game, the highest force
spontaneous spell was 3.
As for devoting a few force points to non-useful spells, I don't think
it's necessary where you could just use spontaneous magic. In my game, if
you want to waste karma on something like this, I allow you to purchace a
Magic Theory concentration in Spontaneous magic, and a Specialization in
the particular type of magic (eg: Manipulation, Illusion, ect...). So far,
only one of the 3 magicians in my group has done this, and that's because
he's almost useless in a fight.

P E A C E !
--
Craig J Wilhelm Jr

Reality is nothing but a refuge for those who can't handle role-playing.

http://home.earthlink.net/~craigjwjr/

I-Chat Username: craigjwjr

-------------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
v3.12
GAT/$ d? s+:+ a-- C++ !U--- !P !L- !E-- W++ N++
o K- w++ O> !M-- !V PS+ PE+++ Y+ PGP- t-
5+++ X-- R++ tv b++ DI-- D+ G e++ h* r+ y++**
--------------END GEEK CODE BLOCK--------------
Message no. 27
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 03:28:32 +0000
> |I think that Fashion would make a good cantrip. As a spell, it is a
> |waste, and the drain is too high, IMHO. What GM is going to give a
> |damn if a player always wants his clothes to look good?

In AD&D, none. In shadowrun... me, for one. The ability to crawl out
of a sewer into a corporate building and look like you stepped out of
a limo is quite nice, to say the least.

I don't like the idea of
'cantrips' - if you want a mage with the ability to fool around with
'minor details', let him design a 'cantrip' spell. It would have some
drain due to its versatility, but since it wouldn't be cast at high
force, he wouldn't take much, or any, drain anyway. No need to go
outside the rules for it.


--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 28
From: Tobias Berghoff <Zixx@*****.TEUTO.DE>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 16:09:00 GMT
on 22.09.97 KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU wrote:

K> > One of the few things I liked about AD&D magic was cantrips, or minor
K> > spell effects. I was wondering if anyone used them in a SR campaign.
K> > I think harmless non-game effect magicks add a nice flavor to a
K> > campaign, like a mage's cigarette suddenly lighting itself by the end
K> > spontaneously combusting, floating a drink to his table, lifting the
K> > skirt of the lovely patron across the bar, etc. Anybody ever used
K> > these?
K> You could easily devote a few Force points to some small, non-useful flash
K> spells just for the hey of it. "Ignite Cigarette" should be too heavy on
K> the drain, eh? :) Entertainment already has a low drain code, as do
K> Fashion and the like.

Brings me to a question: I'm currently designing a shaman and figured,
that he should know a lot of very lowpowered, rather useless spells from
the time he started to learn casting spells. He might have some day
started with a spell that allowed him switch channels on a trideo, or a
spell that made objects pink. Something like that. Did anyone ever try
this?



Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx a.k.a. Charon, your friendly werepanther physad.

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+(+++) o? K?(-)
w---() O- M-- V- PS+ PE- Y+>++ PGP-
t+(++) 5+ X++ R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++
e>+++++(*) h! r-- z?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
Message no. 29
From: Timothy Little <t_little@**********.UTAS.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 14:27:16 +1000
At 04:09 PM 9/23/97 GMT, Tobias wrote:
>
>Brings me to a question: I'm currently designing a shaman and figured,
>that he should know a lot of very lowpowered, rather useless spells from
>the time he started to learn casting spells. He might have some day
>started with a spell that allowed him switch channels on a trideo, or a
>spell that made objects pink. Something like that. Did anyone ever try
>this?

I did. Rather than design each with the full Grimoire procedure, I just
allocated a bunch of Force points (8, IIRC) to 'useless' spells. If the GM
was feeling nice, he'd allow me to bring one up in play in a useful manner
- that would specify what it did.

They were all assumed to be at Force 1, since you wouldn't learn high-force
spells until you were pretty good at spellcasting, and then you'd put the
effort into designing and learning a more useful spell. The target number
for learning a Force 1 spell from formula (self-designed or not) is 4. The
TN# for Force 2 is 6 - a lot harder, with twice the base time.

However, a spell is a mighty difficult thing to do in any circumstances. I
see it as a lot of effort to design, learn, and cast a spell. I wouldn't
learn a spell which changes trideo channels.
I might design it as a training exercise (just as IRL I write silly
computer programs), but not learn it or cast it.
I see it as being a lot easier to pick up the remote, than to do the mental
effort equivalent of inverting a 4x4 matrix in my head each time.

Just because I can do it without drain doesn't make it easy.

--
Tim Little
Message no. 30
From: Timothy Little <t_little@**********.UTAS.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Minor Spell effects - cantrips
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 14:36:39 +1000
At 11:22 AM 9/23/97 -0500, you wrote:
>At 12:20 PM 9/23/97 -0400, Les Ward wrote:
># Drekhead wrote:
># >True. But want I meant was, if a player wanted to do something just
># >to add flavor, I don't want to say "Nope. You can't be creative. You
># >don't know that spell." With your suggestion, I would have to.
>
>A mage initially learning magic would have to learn all these little things
>anyway, I could see a LOT of magical types first realising they had power
>when they reached for something and it came flying at them. Unless of
>course the Corps caught them first and started training from Magical
Maturity.

Strange, I always envisage Astral Projection as being the first ability that
a full mage would discover. eg. In bed, on the edge of sleep, and you
realise you're looking at yourself from the outside.
Shamanic adepts may summon a spirit (default from Will in game rules), or
have their Totem make itself known.
I actually see PhysAds as acquiring their powers without realising they are
magical, except in obvious cases like Astral Perception.
Sorcery Adepts would very rarely self-discover their talent.
Enchanting Adepts would probably never find out by accident.

I just see spells as being too complicated to 'accidentally' happen. That's
why you *need* Magical Theory or a formula (by the rules) to learn them.

--
Tim Little

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Minor Spell effects - cantrips, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!