Fireball ala D&D

Me again, beginning to think i should have my own thread like Abe.

Ok, this hours question. How can i create a call of fire with a roughly 30' area.

Base size for CrIg is a campfire or hearth fire. Lets be generous and say thats 2' across.

+1 size makes makes something 10 times bigger, i'm going to assume thats area of the fire in this case since i don't want to make the spell much higher than it is already.

2' camp fire thas an area of 6' (give or take, lets not be fussy)

+1 size makes this a 60' area, or about 3' across.
+2 size makes this a 600' area, or about 10' across
+3 size makes this a 6000' area, or about 31' across

So i'd need a +3 size modifier to get my 30' diameter explosion.

Are my maths correct, more to the point, am i understanding how the size increase rules work in Ars?

(nevermind, I misread)

Yes, that's right.

Edit: Caribet had posted a nice analysis.

caribet had a nice response to such a thing in an earlier thread:

So, for a really DnD like experience :

Inferno of the Mage's Ire
AKA The Devil's Sphere
Level 50

R: Sight, D: Mom, T: Ind

A pellet of flame shoots from your hand to the indicated target, and then explodes into a massive fireball, 30 feet across, doing +25 damage, reducing everying in its way to ash.
(Base: 20, +3 Sight, +3 Size)

Although its a lovely spell that warms my heart (not to mention the 30' area) its also a ritual, since its level 50. Which kind of limits its combat usefulness.

I would have the same reservation. But would certainly be very visual, and the sheer volume of the effect might inspire submission from any witnesses. Other than that it might be better to diminish the magnitude. You could just reduce the damage and get the spell level down to 45.

I'd still say that such a spell would have its challenges. First of you would have to be quite a talented CrIg magus to be able to handle anything near a decent magic resistance. Even a very low resistance might be hard to penetrate. Also with such a large area I would find it reasonable in most circumstances to require a Finesse roll to place it completely where you'd like it to hit as many as possible. Finally - what if you target the point of explosion on someone with resistance, and given you dont penetrate it, would it still cause the area of effect.

An alternative to the level of destruction, and still very impressive, though not as completely engulfing of a whole area, would be to either take time Spell Mastering Ball of Abysmal Ball and getting the Multiple Casting ability, and you could rain death and destruction in a somewhat similar visual display of power. And withe bonus that you would probably get a better penetration. Yet another option would be to develop a CrIg spell with target group and then let individual fire hit several targets.

45? how about 49?

How is that possible? Isn't all magnitudes above 5 calculated in batches of five?

Certainly all of the standard R/D/T's are but I don't see any reason to make this a hard and fast rule. I think that non-standard ranges/durations/targets should probably use jumps of not exactly one magnitude. I also don't see why base levels for things such as fire damage should be restricted to even batches of five.

Spontaineous magic could certainly whip up spells of odd levels.

There isn't any prescription against it that I'm aware of. It seems to me that restricting all spells above level 4 to levels that are multiples of five adds an extra rule to the game while simultaineously reducing flexibility. It's a loose loose proposition.

Note that ritual spells are only needed for levels GREATHER than 50 :wink:

Well, you are right. I have never given the semantics enough thought, but always set it at 50.

Grand Master, you blow my mind.

I have never thought to do otherwise. But taking another look at the rules I see that it states this as a general way to do things. I have never met a situation or had the imagination to think otherwise. I have always calculated our final spell level by starting at the base level and then adding up, and from five on and up adding five. Very forward and easy math. Remaining surplus when doing spon. spells adding to the penetration, or enhancing the effect a little bit, but only done after the roll.

This is getting me curious. As this is not something I have been aware of before. Can you give some examples or how and how often your troupe use it?

What he said.

I lowered the damage from Ball of Abysmall fire a magnitude so it wouldn't require a ritual. Now if you increased the effect by 1 level to 51 it would require a ritual.

Guidelines and magnitudes were additions in fourth edition. In previous editions we never worried about such things. General spells have always been developed in my games so as to get the maximum return per for the amount of time invested. (In the days when penetration was not tied to spell level, a level 23 Demon's Eternal Oblivion was unquestionably somewhat better than a level 20.)

Aside from general level spells I use it for non standard ranges durations and targets. I've head people make up spells to effect a pair of people. I think this target would come in at the same level as part, since it is not a standard target I've priced it three levels higher than part.

Frequently, in order to cut down on the amount of time that players spend calculating spell levels for spontaineous magic while sitting around the table,I tell my players to give me a roll and tell me the level that they get. Then, on the fly, I decide what the effects of a level 17.5 spell are and the game is not bogged down by having people browsing over spell guidelines.

I agree (and always have since earlier editions), and imo so do the rules, but some people vehemently disagree. It all comes down to how one interprets the phrase on page 114, col ii, bottom* :

The categories described here were built into the structure of Hermetic magic by Bonisagus. All spontaneous spells must conform to these requirements (the magus is making the spell up on the fly—he cannot also push the limits of magic theory). Formulaic spells, on the other hand, can be invented with ranges, durations or targets that are not listed here. This is usually slightly more difficult than if the closest category were used, but is largely left to storyguide interpretation.

(* Which is the identical text from 4th ed, page 105, par 3)

Actually, by the RAW, not with regard to R/T/D, no, tho' perhaps re "degree of effect", such as more damage, penetration, form affected, or whatever. See second sentence, above.

House rules are used for a valid reason, however. :wink:

[color=blue](NOTE- The above is not posted to address that topic here. Some agree, some don't, that's a given. If anyone wants to, feel free to start another thread, because it WILL derail this topic! I'd be happy to discuss it, but not here- the above is posted only as it refers to this topic.)

Hmmm. Really wasnt making an argument against it. I had just never, nor with the earlier editions, used, seen or considered the option. Hence the curiosity. The General spells being a exeption - we have had plenty of them in-between magnitudes.

Thanks for your clarifications.

Interesting and a bit mindboogling.

Enchanting items also involve many adjustments that aren't whole magnitudes.

Of course, but the initial effect can derive a non-magnitude value as well from a custom R/T/D if you go with this, that's the point.