Today I was chatting with Nathan about magic fights. It's something I've vaguely thought about for a while - in RPGs (at least the ones I'm familiar with) fights between wizards tend to manifest as one of the following:
- Casting the most deadly spells every round you have until one of you fails a crucial saving throw. Essentially a brute-force slugfest.
- Casting an assortment of powerful buffs before an anticipated fight, then sneaking up and casting that Most Powerful Spell with every possible bonus while the enemy is unaware.
Now to be fair, this is partly an artefact of how RPG fights tend to go; everything's over in a few rounds, if not before a fight even starts. In some cases it's because combat is lethal and players who want their characters to survive long-term have to play tactically, minimizing the risk of an actual fight. In other cases, it's because PCs can unleash appalling devastation in mere seconds. Earlier today, Iris (see Necropolitans posts) inflicted well over 100 damage to one of my NPCs in a single round of combat where several of her attacks missed. There's also received wisdom, perhaps true, that damaging the opposition trumps just about anything else. Certainly in D&D-type games, there's a widespread perception that healing during combat is a terrible waste of time, for example. People rarely seem to duck behind barriers to reload or neck a potion, perhaps worried about what the opposition will do with that time.
That being said, it doesn't particularly feel like a great fit for how fiction portrays magical duels. There's very little interaction. No wrestling for control of a spell, or maintaining a barrier with gritted teeth in the face of an enemy wizard's barrage of spells. Countering spells is rare in my experience, and many systems don't really involve any exertion on the wizard's part - GURPS fatigue-based magic being an honourable exception.*
*Tunnels & Trolls, for one, also has fatigue-based magic, but I don't recall any magical duels so not sure how they would work.
Part of this is that defensive magic tends to be tricky, relying on gambles and predictions about enemy actions. It's also quite reactive, and that's not usually what players want to do. And if the NPCs are using defensive magic and countering PCs' abilities, that can often feel like you're being cheated of success - even if you theoretically have the option to do the same thing.
So Nathan pointed me in the direction of Pathfinder 1e's Spell Duels, which feels like a pretty good start to me honestly. Casters can attempt to counter one spell per round as an immediate action, which immediately overcomes one of the big challenges.
I'm going to propose a couple of quick and dirty ideas to expand this into a broader system for allowing duel-type magical combat in Pathfinder. I make no claims as to its effectiveness, and I haven't gone and looked at what other systems do - this is entirely off the top of my head shortly before bedtime. You Have Been Warned. So please do feel free to comment and suggest how to do this better. I just wanted to put some thoughts down while they were fresh, and also I haven't posted much for absolutely ages.
Duelling Magic
The "spell parry" rules below are mildly adapted from the Dueling Counter rules from Ultimate Magic, which are under the OGL.
Spell Parry
Any creature of Intelligence 3 or more can attempt a spell parry when targeted by a spell or included in its area as it is cast. A spell parry is similar to a counterspell, but is easier to use and less reliable. A spell parry uses up an attack of opportunity. To attempt a spell parry, a creature must expend a spell or a spell slot. Note that characters who cast spells spontaneously (such as bards and sorcerers) must choose what exact spell they are using to parry, in addition to the slot being used. The creature must then make a caster level check against a DC of 15 + the spell’s caster level.
When the spell is cast (or at any point during casting, for spells with a long casting time), the defender can attempt a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) as a free action. If the check succeeds, she identifies her opponent’s spell. If she fails, she can still attempt a spell parry, either by guesswork or by using some version of dispel magic.
Unlike a true counterspell action (which requires a readied action), even expending an exact copy of the spell being cast does not guarantee success. The caster attempting the counterspell receives a bonus or penalty on her check depending upon the level of the spell slot expended and the exact spell used, as noted in Table: Spell Parry Modifiers. If the check is successful, the spell is parried and becomes stayed (see below). A natural 20 is always a successful parry and causes the spell to fail entirely, rather then becoming stayed. If the parry fails, the spell happens as normal and the defender takes a –2 penalty on any saving throws made against the spell’s effect.
When expending a dispel magic ability as a spell parry, the defender does not need to identify the spell being cast, can counter a spell of any level, and must succeed at a caster level check against a DC of 11 + the spell’s caster level. Any modifiers to dispel magic (such as the +4 for using greater dispel magic) apply as normal. In this case, the modifiers in Table: Dueling Counter Modifiers do not apply.
Because readying to counterspell is its own action, a defender can choose to ready to counterspell and make spell parries in the same round. This is mainly useful if the defender is facing multiple opponents or someone with access to Quickened Spell or other abilities that allow casting two spells in the same round.
| Circumstance | Check Modifier |
|---|---|
| Spell is of a different school | –2 |
| Spell is of the same school, but not the same spell | +2 |
| Spell is a variant of the attacking spell* | +4 |
| Spell is the same as the spell being countered | +10 |
| Spell is of a different level than the spell being countered | +1 per level higher, -3 per level lower |
| Magic is of a different type (arcane, divine, psionic) | –2 |
*Some spells are only slight variations of others. This category includes anything with lesser, greater, mass, or communal variants, as well as all the spin-offs of summon monster; the protection from [alignment] spells; the magic circle against [alignment] spells; and the alignment-specific variations of holy word, holy smite, holy aura. Others include detect aberration, solid fog, and most other spells that state they "function like" another spell and only vary in scope, alignment, element, or the type of creature or ability they affect. For example, versatile weapon should not be considerd a variant of magic weapon (it grants alchemical change rather than a magical enhancement), but undeath to death is a straightforward variant of circle of death that simply affects undead creatures rather than the living.
A stayed spell has lost its momentum. If nothing else occurs to change the situation, the spell dissipates at the end of the caster's next turn and is lost entirely.
Redoubling Efforts
When a spellcaster's spell is parried, he need not simply yield. Much as a duellist can lock blades and force his opponent on the back foot, the mage can concentrate to reinforce his spell and try to brute-force past his target's defences. Doing so is not without risk, however.
As a move action, a spellcaster may concentrate on one of his spells that has been stayed. This requires a concentration check as though affected by a spell while casting: the DC is the stayed spell’s saving throw DC. For a spell with no saving throw, it’s the DC that the spell’s saving throw would have if a save were allowed (10 + spell level + his ability score). For every 5 points by which the spell parry was successful, the DC of this concentration check increases by 1.
On a success, the spell reactivates with its original targets and parameters. A spell that targets a point does not move, but one that targets a creature will do so, providing it still meets any requirements for range, line of sight and effect, and so on. Any target that is no longer eligible is "lost" as a target of the spell, and can't be replaced.
Of course, any creature potentially affected by the spell can attempt a further spell parry against it. The successful defender can make additional parries against the spell without expending additional spell slots.
While concentrating on a stayed spell, a spellcaster adds the stayed spell's level to the DC of any other concentration checks he must make. Casting any spell while redoubling effort requires a concentration check as though affected by a spell while casting: the DC is the stayed spell’s saving throw DC + the level of the new spell he's casting. On a failure, one of the spells is lost, but the caster may choose which to relinquish.
Maintaining Defence
As a move action, the successful defender can choose to maintain concentration on a spell she has parried. If she does so, when the attacker redoubles effort, a successful check prevents the stayed spell from dissipating for another turn, but it remains stayed. To reactivate the spell, he must beat the DC by 5 or roll a natural 20.
While maintaining a parry, the defender suffers adds the stayed spell's level to the DC of any other concentration checks she must make. Casting any spell while maintaining a parry requires a concentration check as though affected by a spell while casting: the DC is the stayed spell’s saving throw DC + the level of the spell she's casting. On a failure, she loses the spell she is casting.
A defender may maintain concentration on any number of spell parries as part of the same action. Each requires a separate concentration check, and the concentration penalties are cumulative.
What does this mean?
So what this is meant to do is create a slightly more interactive, tactical element to magical combat. Spellcasters (which includes most PCs) can choose to try and halt an incoming spell at the cost of a spell slot, and the risk of just making things worse for themselves. If a spell is parried, the original caster has the choice to let it fail, or double down on that particular spell while weakening their ability to cast others. The defender can choose to spend a move action bolstering their parry, gambling on whether the attacker will double down, which reduces the defender's own options and hampers their own spellcasting.
In addition, higher-level or confident defenders can hold off multiple spells at once if they can absorb the concentration penalties. This makes 1-vs.-many fights less reliant on the action economy, as it's less likely a single evil archmage will be outmatched by half-a-dozen less experienced adventuring wizards with nasty save-or-suck spells.
This might also slightly slow down the murder-by-spell rate. Staying a spell gives respite for you to duck into cover, turn invisible, or for allies to scatter from a stayed fireball.
Rather than immediately hurling the best spells at enemies, mages will have the option to soften them up with less potent spells in the hope of making the target burn spell slots and hampering their concentration.
Selective Spell and similar abilities have new tactical value: you can deliberately exclude a spellcaster from a spell's area to prevent them from parrying.
Combat Reflexes will gain new value for spellcasters, which also makes it less of a poor investment for those who don't want to be in combat and expect to miss all their attacks anyway. This makes it more likely that feats like Reflexive Caster will be used, or that mages will take defensive abilities like Shrewd Tactician (and note that a familiar already grants Alertness, so several caster classes get a headstart).
Does it actually mean those things? Not sure yet. Let me know what you think.
No comments:
Post a Comment