From:	Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject:	Re: questions?
Date:	Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:34:03 +1000

Robert Watkins writes:

> You could extend Exclusivity to include no other magical activity (ie, no
> conjuring, spell defence, _OR_ enchanting. :) )

It actually specifies that no other magical skill can be used while
performing an exclusive activity (such as maintaining an exclusive spell, or
calling an elemental etc). Thus you can't sustain or cast pells, enchant,
learn new spells etc. And since the Magic Pool is derived from the Sorcery
skill, one could probably easily enough rule that Spell Defence was out too.

---------------------
Jani Fikouras writes:

> > Can you use exclusivity on a spell when casting it in a spell
> > lock then then have the lock active while you cast other spells?
>
> No

Why not?

--------------
P Ward writes:

> I still say if those are magic pool, then you can use them for spell
> defence against that type of spell though, as per the NAGA (whatever).

No, you can't, because they only add to the shaman's Magic Pool "/at the
moment the spell is cast/." So, unless both you and your opponent are
casting a spell from the same category, at exactly the same time (ie, you
rolled identical initiative, and have the same Reaction stat, and are both
casting the spell in the same phase), then you cannot use the totem dice for
anything except the Spell Success Test, or the Drain Resistance Test.

---------------------
Mark Steedman writes:

> > [Method of stopping people using Increase Attribute spells, then
> > increasing the attribute with karma.]
>
> thats very nasty, understandable but. And didn't you say your player
> rolled an 11 then say the max is 9? Could you reword this a bit as
> the above first suggests if you later raise the attribute the limit
> to value is the highest dice roll and the later part that the limit
> is attribute at the time you 'locked' (by any means) the spell plus
> the spell effect. I know FASA do it all the time but.

I think it'd be simpler to just note down the highest roll of the spell when
it was locked (like, say you cast a +4 Willpower spell, and the best you
rolled was an 8, then you'd note down the 8). Then, if the person who the
lock is on has a natural Willpower of 4 or less (remember, the TN for an
Increase Attribute spell is twice the affected Attribute), everything is
doozy. But if they increase their natural Willpower (or even put on
cybernetic or bioware modifers), then the moment their Willpower Attribute
reaches 5, the spell cannot keep itself together any longer (since to cast a
spell on someone with a Willpower of 5 requires a 10 to be rolled for
success, so if a spell already operating on somebody is only "successful" up
to a Willpower of 8, then it will run out of "oomph" if the up their
Willpower to a level to which it would not have succeeded if it were cast
on them.). Err, horribly long sentance - hope it makes sense.

> > By the way, has any player ever used Increase Attribute that *isn't* +4?
>
> [No, then reasons why]

Exactly what I find.

> Has anyone ever bothered to learn these things at over force 1? on the oh
> 1 dice + whole magic pool, bed will solve drain method? it will have been
> done but is it common?

It is for the magicians in my games. The only use of these spells is to
Quicken or lock them, so why do you need them with good Force's? You're
never going to cast it when you don't have ages of spare time to rest off
the drain, and ages of spare time to retry when you fail. Casting such
spells in the middle of runs is not economical, both on drain, and success
level, not to mention the +2 modifer for sustaining the spell.

> [+6 Attributes]

Just out-right rule that it can't be done.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+