From:	Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject:	Re: [SR3] Drain
Date:	Thu, 3 Jul 1997 18:03:28 -0400

On Thursday, July 03, 1997 15:44, David Buehrer[SMTP:dbuehrer@****.ORG] wrote:
> Jonathan Hurley wrote:
> |
> | > Many people have suggested setting Spell Drain TNs back at Force instead
> |
> | I think it would be a bad idea. If the drain code is the same as the damage
> | code for a manabolt spell (which is what it would be if drain was equal to
> | force) it means that the caster is resisting the same amount of damage as
> | his target. If the spell is physical, he is resisting more damage than his
> | target. If the spell has a elemental effect, he is resisting EVEN MORE
> | DAMAGE than his target.
>
> No he's not. He's resisting stun damage, the target is resisting
> physical damage (assuming the mage isn't casting something higher
> than his magic rating).
>
> | Also, remember, in 1ed, the target resisted vs Sorcery, not spell force.
>
> And that sucked. Make a starting mage and specialize in Sorcery and
> the target is looking at an 8 to resist spells.
>
> IMO, mages should have a base TN of 4 to cast all their spells. For
> resisting spells leave the TN for the target equal to the force of
> the spell. Then it's like ranged combat and you don't have yet
> another set of rules.

Because it makes Damaging Manipulations that much less appealing.

Quicksilver rides again
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers.
-Leonard Brandwein
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)