Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: All-ones rule and spells
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 16:39:09 GMT
Loki writes
>
> We play the "Oops" of "All-ones" rule under the FoF option where
1's
> equal to or greater than the skill rating in dice means an oops. (i.e.
> - A character with Firearms 5 also adds 5 dice from Combat Pool, for a
> total of 10 dice. Should five or more of those ten dice come up as 1's
> some EGM bad thing happens.)
>

Next is from the companion.
> Anyways, how does such a rule apply to spell casting since a skill
> isn't directly involved in the roll? Is it 1's equal to or greater
> than the force of the spell means an oops? This means force 1 spells
> are rather touchy.
correct, i threw this rule straight out of the window, never mind the
fact the companion never bothered to say if you counted the 1's
before or after using karma pool!

> Is it equal to or greater than Sorcery?
Would make a LOT more sense.
As the companion rule stands a magician taking the example in the
Grimoire of throwing loads of dice into a force 2 spell is almost
bound to screw up, grade 3 initiates with power foci and force 1
fashion spells become sweating dynamite with this rule on spell
force, ones > sorcery would be a lot more sensible, and tes even
sorcery 6 characters could screw up, start playing with elementals
and fetish foci and you can roll an awful lot of dice! [the cost and
prep time is prohibitive though, but no more so than the merc getting
that gyromounted GPHMG with APDS set up, results are similar, no
more target :) ]

> This means
> someone with a Sorcery skill of 6 that's rolling five dice or less
> from spell force and pool can never screw it up.
Yes they can, roll few dice and all 1's becomes all too possible!

>
> We finally ruled that 1's equal to or greater than Sorcery -OR- all
> dice coming up 1's, whichever is lower, means the spell caster flubbed
> it.
>
> Ideas, comments or suggestions?
Mark

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.