Fast Casting

Games Discussion Ars Magica
41

If "the attack" is moving the sword, I agree. But if it is stepping forward to engage the grog it's another story.

I see the same steps in a spell as a sword move: get into position, go through the motion, return to en garde. A fast-cast skips the getting into position which can give you enough lead to complete first and block the other action.

Now the rolls are post ipso facto the result, but you might have seen your grog step on the rolling stone that explains the (immediate future) defense botch and have more than a second to react in character because you did not (actually) react to him getting hit but tripping. And that's where the story goes, where the cinematic is.

I think the system is loose enough that saying CANNOT is too restrictive. That's double-dipping against the goal of the fast-cast roll.

42

And i see your description as more of a delay action. The rules says "in reaction to an attack or another surprise event". Fast cast is not meant to be an extra attack. It should not trump initiative.

43

Oh I see, you're saying that in consecutive rounds you cannot react to something that is expected. Certainly not in a cheesy way to give you extra free actions. I can understand that.

Yeah, the rest can be considered delayed actions. I'm not sure I like it though.

44

But if a Fast-Cast spell can't actually Interrupt, what's the point?
The magus loses Initiative, and sees an enemy attacking his Grog. If he Fast-Casts to help, but his effect still only happens after the attack, why not just forego Fast-Casting and simply wait until his Initiative count comes up? Why risk Botching the FInesse roll? Why risk -10 Casting modifier and extra Botch dice?

Dimicatio is described as casting spells and Fast-Casting counter spells. The first magus to actually have a spel hit the enemy uncontested wins. If the counter happens after the spell hits, the magus going first always wins. This sould not be different from using Fast Casting in non-duelling situations.

So is Dimicatio simply a contest as to who is the fastest? Or a mere coin toss as the Stress Die is often the major part of the Initiative Total, by being simply Qik+Stress Die.

Also, it seemed a prior situation descrbed allowed player magi to decide to have intervened after the facts are known. I don't like that, you decide whether or not to Fast-Cast as the oposition declares actions - as they start their actions - not once it is known that some grog gets torn to ribbons. THis isn't GURPS ultra-fast 1 second rounds, ArM rounds are much longer, and most actions are a summed up result of several individual sword blows aor whatever. So the magus starts to Fast-Cast as the enemy faces off with the grog he wants to protect, and the roll is to see whether he is fast enough to interrupt before the enemey comcludes his action (i.e. lands the fatal blow). Oh, and if the FInesse+Qik roll isn't hight enough does the spell still go off but too late?

45

Quoted for Truth :exclamation:
:smiley:

46

In my point of view you can't interrupt the action itself but you still can "interrupt" the effect. (dependent on how long the action itself takes ... but that's a different point). I know that's a narrow distinction, but I think that is what the game designers intended.
Example:

  • A cast PoF on B. B cannot avoid the spell to be cast. But he can fastcast a Perdo Ignem on himself. -> both spell effects cancel each other. PoF is heating him up and the PI spell cools him down. But still both spells were effective.
  • A attacks B with a sword. There is no way B can stop A from swinging the sword. But B can fast cast a Muto Corporem spell on himself to harden his body so he takes no harm.

If I compare it with boxing. Both people try to hit each other, the first is faster and swings, the second cannot stop this blow but he can make e.g. a pendular movement so the blow does not connect with full power ...
Does that make sense?

Salvete Widewitt

47

Try,

A magus can fast cast many times per round, limited only by his skill (and not botching.)

Every spell that is fast cast has a -10 penalty to its Casting Score, and imposes a cumulative -10 penalty to the Casting Score of any spell cast subsequently during that round. (For example, an archmagus fast casts his fourth spell during a round at -40, and then casts his in-turn spell also at -40.)

Any fast cast spell whose Casting Total is less than zero must check for botches as though a 0 was rolled on the stress die.

Every spell that is fast cast has one extra botch die, and imposes a cumulative extra botch die to any spell cast subsequently during that round. These botch dice cannot be removed by Mastery, Cautious Sorcerer or similar benefits. (The archmagus above casts with 4 extra unremovable botch dice.)

A magus can fast cast for any in-game reason at all. A magus cannot fast cast in response to the declaration of an action, since that is not occurring in-game; the fast cast is in response to an observable action within the game world. If a fast cast occurs in response to some action being initiated, the fast cast is always resolved first, even if dice have already been rolled for the action; it is possible for the fast cast to void, ruin, negate or reverse an action that otherwise would have succeeded--a typical use of a fast cast. A declaration of a fast cast is normally done after dice are rolled for any action being reacted to. If a fast cast occurs in response to another fast cast, the most recent fast cast is resolved first.

There is no Quickness roll needed to fast cast. Fast casting does not affect initiative or non-magical actions performed in the same round.

Fast Cast Mastery: This allows a spell to be fast cast as many time during a round as a character wants to handle.

Spontaneous magic can always be fast cast. Spontaneous magics that do not include a die roll still do not include a die roll, but botch dice can still be rolled when associated Casting Totals are less than 0.

Note that multi-casting can be gotten rid of as a separate set of rules. Instead, just cast your favorite spell when your turn comes around and then fast cast it a few more times in rapid succession.

Anyway,

Ken

48

it sorts of makes sense. But:
If A attacks B with a sword, can't B destry the sword, or transmute it into a banana? If he can time becoming damage resistant before the blow hits, he should also be able to affect the sword rather than himself. Which means he starts just before the sword hits (yes, I know combat is an abstraction of several seconds worth of fighting).
But is the point of disagreement that B can't be fast enough to hit A with a pre-emptive PoF potentially killing or at least hampering with Wound Penalties this sword blow?. IMHO becase combat is an abstraction of several seconds worth of fighting this can happen. But I want A to be Incapacitated or Dead before I completely disregard his attack. Or moved away. Or blinded. Etc.

49

In my understanding destroying the sword etc. is complete valid. My point is that you cannot prevent the swinging action or a spell to be cast. In my point of view the action and the counter action take effect at the same time. But that also means if you try a pre-emptive PoF A is hit but B still get's the blow from the sword (without panelty).

Again the comparison with boxing:

  • A tries to hit B.

  1. B moves out of the way and hits A first (that is for me: B has won the initative and thus is faster, maybe he has delayed his effect)

  2. B makes a hasty movement out of reflex and does not get hit (or not hit as hard)

  3. B uses the opening caused by A's attack to counterattack and both get hit)

  4. and 3) is for me fastcasting. Of course that can go on as A can try to (in case of 2) to alter his attack in a fastcast manner ... and so on.

Yes I think I disagree here :slight_smile:. In my opinion the fastcast spell and the original spell take effect at the same time.

regards
Widewitt

50

Assuming this is true than it could easily not happen. Casting a spell takes time. Even a fast cast spell. you always cast in a firm voice with bold gestures. No other spell casting options may be used [u]because there is not time./u.

It sounds cute vs grogs but try the rules by adding wizards to both sides.

Grog A attacks grog Z
Wizard Y fast cast PoF on Grog A
Wizard B fast cast Pof Wizard Y
Wizard Y fast cast PoF on Wizard B
Wizard B fast cast Winds of Mundane Silence

All rolls are successful. what happens?

51

In my understanding the result is:

  • A hits Z
  • Y and B are hit by PoFs which are canceled by the WoMS and take no harm. i.e. all spells succeed but don't have an effect.
    BTW. If I recall correctly the description of WoMS states that the spell effects are canceled and not the spells ...

For game flavor I would tell Y and B you are engulfed shortly by very strong heat but WoMS saved your lifes.

Salvete Widewitt

52

Your age is showing a bit here. :smiley:

53

I think this is the crux of the issue, is determining when the action being responded to takes place. My suggestion, my method, is taking the RAW at face value (response to an event, and the event, in my interpretation is the end result, more or less[1]), and it is that the observation is (by SG fiat) just too late to be able to do something that allows a preemptive offensive strike to resolve the issue. It's SG fiat, because I don't then have to determine awareness difficulty roles, and I don't get into situations like jebrick posted. The last thing I want to see is escalating die rolls for determining who ultimately goes first in combat. It's silly. And if PCs can roll to see if they can fast cast an offensive spell, then NPC magi they are opposing should darn well be able to do that, too. All I'm really saying is that by the time you notice, some of your choices are eliminated. There are optimal solutions and sub-optimal solutions, and it is very possible, depending on how you built your character, that you can't easily perform the optimal solution, that you rely upon a bit of luck. And if the grog dies or something else that is bad happens, it's a lesson for you to apply to your future [strike]lessons[/strike] development*. Yes, yes, a good offense is a good defense. And sometimes, that fast cast Pilum of Fire makes sense, because your shield grog is getting sliced and diced this round, but he might survive the attack, and at least he won't be facing off against an unwounded opponent. I'm not saying a PC can't cast Pilum of Fire, I'm saying it won't negate or otherwise affect the opposing grog's attack. There will be consequences for that opposing grog in subsequent rounds, depending on the results of the fast cast Pilum of Fire.

[1] Nowhere in the RAW does it state that you can get your spell off, first and prevent the opposing magus from casting his spell at you. The entire description is that the spell is either being cast, and will be cast, and if you don't get something up and in the way of the incoming spell to stop it, you're either going to have to trust your Parma, or be toast. It's not an opportunity for exercising a good offense is a good defense.

54

By your system, yes. By ones that the actions are not simultaneous... What would happen if we add some more PoF after the WoMS? Do they work? or is all of this in a moment duration?

and I agree with JL. this example is posted to show the craziness that could occur.

55

Dam it :slight_smile:
My Latin was never good and also a lot of water was carried down the river since my last Latin class :smiley:

So reminder to myself: it's Corpus, corporis

56

The PoFs would be also canceled in my system, unless they are not fastcast. Normal cast PoF take effect later ...

And exactly because of this craziness I rule that all fastcast spell take effect at the same time. It takes out a lot of this craziness :slight_smile:

Widewitt

57

Forgetting the rules for a moment, here's what I seen in reality:

  1. Action from Grog A
  2. Wizard Y reacts to Grog A's action, which means Grog A's action has already begun.
  3. Wizard B reacts to Wizard Y's action, which means both other actions have already begun.
  4. Wizard Y reacts to Wizard B's action, which means this is after Wizard Y began the other spell. Since they both happen, Wizard Y must be done casting the other spell and not be beginning a new one. This means Wizard Y's first spell must be done being cast prior to Wizard B's second spell.
  5. The same thing with Wizard B as #4 for Wizard Y.

To allow for such a sequence and other similar ones, it seems the only logically consistent thing is that the "interrupt" cannot stop the action itself, only the results of the action. Even MtG's FILO stack with all its craziness handles things this way to try to maintain logical consistency.

Turning this back toward the rules, this indicates to me that blasting a wizard casting a spell with PoF does not stop that wizard's spell from being cast. If you want to stop that spell from getting to its target, deal with the spell as it's leaving the wizard or deal with the target.

Some possibilities: Now, if you do disintegrate a grog swinging a sword, the sword won't hit as hard (I did a big analysis on this a while back and dealing with ReTe up to but not through Parma Magica.), but it will still hit. If you include the sword, who cares about the grog because you've dealt with the sword. If you teleport the grog, it's basically the same two options. If you turn the sword into a big feather, the big feather will still hit but it won't hurt much. If you PoF the grog, dying is not usually instantaneous even when reported as such, so the grog should hit full force I would say (which is not atypical with real-world counterattacks).

Essentially I'm saying I think the way this works best in-game and stands up to reality best at the same time is that fast casting is after the action it reacts to but before the results of the action happen. Sure, we still have issues of time when we relate to reality, but at least separating the action and the results into two instantaneous events separated by some finite time matches up more closely than having them be combined as a single instantaneous event.

Now, this does not mean other methods cannot also be internally consistent. I just find I look too carefully at the implications (usually seeing into the future or two different actions at once with the same body parts) and am bothered by them. So I tend to favor at least roughly what Widewitt likes.

Chris

58

For what it is worth, my opinion is that it is crazy if Fast Casts cannot interupt.

However, whether a particular Fast Cast effect mitigates, or totally avoids, or otherwise "changes" the affect of the event being reacted to is too dependent on the actual context to be making hard and fast rules about it. The troupe just needs to judge the outcome during play. Perhaps, a Fast Cast effect that slays an attacker might not have much impact on the damage that his final blow inflicts. But a Fast Cast effect that teleports an attacker 3 paces to the left and over a cliff seems to be a reasonable way of, usually, totally avoiding the damage from an incoming blow.

I have no problem with "offensive" spells being used as Fast Cast defences. I don't see that there are really any in-play problems with resolving these. The problems only seem to arise when one tries to conceive of generic rules to handle all situations. The solution is don't do this. The beauty of a tabletop RPG, as opposed to a computer moderated one, is that you have real people available in the room to make these sorts of judgement calls when needed. Collectively making such judgement calls to their own satisfaction is what the players are for.

59

Then it works that way for NPCs, too. Sometimes that's not desirable. PCs aren't always the best, in fact, NPCs can often be significant obstacles. A system which allows interrupting actions will often give the advantage to the NPCs.

Troupe agreement is important, but in the middle of combat, and having it open to discussion should a player have a moment of pique, just seems fraught with creating conflict within the troupe. It is so much simpler if the troupe can agree (or at least agree to disagree), than to have a discussion about how something should resolve at an individual player's whim. I'm the SG, perhaps I want my NPC magus to be able to out fast cast a PC magus? Does that work? Are the players not going to like it? Wouldn't they over-rule that most of the time, even though it's well within the capability of the NPC magus? Sometimes it's best to figure out what RAW is, and stick close to that. RAW in this, IMO is pretty clear. If it was meant to be that an action could be interrupted, it would be spelled out in the description of fast casting, and the need to do counter spells of an appropriate TeFo combination would be moot.

I have no problem with offensive spells being used. I just want players to understand that they won't have an effect on whatever action they're reacting to. That's not a bad thing per se, and it may be desirable when taken in the context of subsequent actions.

60

Sure. Afterall, NPCs are PCs ... as the storyguide is a player too. Why is that a problem?

Either the NPCs are better than the PCs or they aren't. The game mechanic specifics of how the NPCs are better (or not) than the PCs doesn't really matter that much does it?

"Troupe agreement" doesn't necessarially mean stopping for a vote and a legal argument. The troupe can agree to let, say, the (current) storyguide "fairly" adjudicate the rules as needed.

Well, the RAW does talk about Fast Cast Defenses of sufficient level (against both spells and mundane threats) "neutraliz[ing] the threat". While kind of imples that the threat can be completed avoided.