Damage of a spell

Post Reply
Björn Ironside
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:08 am

Damage of a spell

Post: # 435Post Björn Ironside
Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:04 am

Hello again, here's my third question.

When a spell deals damage, usually you have the chance to increase the open roll. The last step is something like 1d10 or 8-10 +1. Is this +1 a way to say "As long as you purchase this level of power the spell deals or7, or6 and so on" or it means simply +1 dmg?

User avatar
Råttfångaren
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:41 am
Location: The Ruins of Askornäs

Re: Damage of a spell

Post: # 436Post Råttfångaren
Thu Jan 07, 2021 11:51 am

Hi!
I'm pretty sure it means +1 damage.
There may be misunderstandings and errors in the transcriptions

Björn Ironside
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:08 am

Re: Damage of a spell

Post: # 437Post Björn Ironside
Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:46 pm

Uhm.

I have a vitner weaver in my group. Maybe the player is not too skilled in the game, I don't know, but everytime I see him fighting it's just a bit anticlimatic.

He need to consume a tons of vitner point just to get an open roll of 8 (it depends on the spell, but 15-20 vp are a lot if you have 60vp, which are imho a good amount), just to deal a small amount of damage (because a 30% of an open roll is good, but it's still a 30%).
It's true that spell easily ignore armor, but in game terms it doesn't feel right that a strong Wildbron can easily do more damage going all day long.
I started to think maybe I was misunderstanding the "...+1".
Does anyone else have a similar sensation? Do you have suggestions in terms of house rule?

There is a spell, for example, that's called hand of death, lv.1 under Dimvitner.
You try to stop the heart of your opponent, which is really strong as idea. If you want to get good damage you need to pay 22 vp against one foe 1d10 or8-10 +1.
With 22 vp you can conjure the same spell against 11 foes, dealing 1d10, witch seems to me clearly a better way to invest vp. Well, this example is another way to explain how certain things seems a bit off.

User avatar
Råttfångaren
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:41 am
Location: The Ruins of Askornäs

Re: Damage of a spell

Post: # 438Post Råttfångaren
Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:09 pm

haha, yes I had the same concerns when I first learned the system :) (my first character was a Vitner Weaver who used dimvitner) and felt that vitner weavers were underpowered compared to dimwalkers. I've changed my mind about this as I've grown more comfortable with the system however. My first answer (and my own character's solution) is that spells don't replace a character's normal fighting skill but rather complement them. My character picked up a two handed battle axe (and thus doing OR8-10 regularly) and conserved vitner attacks until those time when it would be most useful - like when we faced several and/or armored opponents. Wielding vitner was not all that defined my character as he was also a warrior and wanted to be seen as one.

Secondly, as you said, spells like death hand are extremely useful when facing armored opponents or when outnumbered - situations when normal fighters will often struggle. Vitner weavers can attack, as in your own example, 11 foes with a single skill roll. I am pretty sure they choose to limit increased open roll to 8-10 because increased open roll makes attacks extremely unpredictable, more so than adding extra dice for example. Personally, I agree that maybe they could have set the bar at OR 7-10 but that just comes down to personal preference and it's a very simple house rule to implement.

Finally, I would actually say that spells that deal damage may seem like the most appealing when first looking through the vitner tablets but in reality they are probably the least useful (IMO). Animating dead, speaking to dead, controlling undead and dismiss undead away, are probably far more useful spells in the Dimvitner tablet. Many spells that seem weak can actually be extremely useful if you use them in smart ways (Vitner Pouch, Bind, Conjure Ravens to name a few).
There may be misunderstandings and errors in the transcriptions

User avatar
Hamurai
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:34 am

Re: Damage of a spell

Post: # 439Post Hamurai
Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:42 pm

Magic in TC isn't made to create battle mages. That's how I see it. You may have a "last resort" damage spell, but magic can create far better effects than damage. You can deal damage with weapons, after all.

Concerning the original question, it's +1 damage in my book, not a better OR range.

Björn Ironside
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:08 am

Re: Damage of a spell

Post: # 441Post Björn Ironside
Sat Jan 09, 2021 8:48 am

Råttfångaren wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:09 pm
haha, yes I had the same concerns when I first learned the system :) (my first character was a Vitner Weaver who used dimvitner) and felt that vitner weavers were underpowered compared to dimwalkers. I've changed my mind about this as I've grown more comfortable with the system however. My first answer (and my own character's solution) is that spells don't replace a character's normal fighting skill but rather complement them. My character picked up a two handed battle axe (and thus doing OR8-10 regularly) and conserved vitner attacks until those time when it would be most useful - like when we faced several and/or armored opponents. Wielding vitner was not all that defined my character as he was also a warrior and wanted to be seen as one.
I think the same about Vitner Weaver and Dimwalker, but that's another chapter :) .
This is a nice solution, but if we consider how many points do you need to use vitner with proficiency it's not - imo - too strange to think about a character that decide to walk the Vitner Path to its fullest. Also, the fact that while casting you can't use Weapon action doesn't fit really well with someone that is in the middle of the fight.
Råttfångaren wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:09 pm
Secondly, as you said, spells like death hand are extremely useful when facing armored opponents or when outnumbered - situations when normal fighters will often struggle. Vitner weavers can attack, as in your own example, 11 foes with a single skill roll. I am pretty sure they choose to limit increased open roll to 8-10 because increased open roll makes attacks extremely unpredictable, more so than adding extra dice for example. Personally, I agree that maybe they could have set the bar at OR 7-10 but that just comes down to personal preference and it's a very simple house rule to implement.
I'm trying to think of an house rule but I'm struggling. If you can damage lightly 11 foes I want you to be able to investe the same amout to damage badly just one, but what's the limit? I thought about working on the open roll: if you spend 22 (let's continue to talk about hand of death) but instead of doing 1d10 or8 +1 you do 1d10 or7 maybe can be better.
I also thought of adding int or psyche to damage to show the power of the vitner weaver in terms of raw talent.
Råttfångaren wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:09 pm
Finally, I would actually say that spells that deal damage may seem like the most appealing when first looking through the vitner tablets but in reality they are probably the least useful (IMO). Animating dead, speaking to dead, controlling undead and dismiss undead away, are probably far more useful spells in the Dimvitner tablet. Many spells that seem weak can actually be extremely useful if you use them in smart ways (Vitner Pouch, Bind, Conjure Ravens to name a few).
One of the thing I love the most in this setting, apart from the setting, is how a mage feels like a mage, in the sense that binds the law of nature in a lot of way, instead of simply throwing stuff bypassing everything more related to role play.
My player's character, the one who use vitner, is appreciated for the things he can do out of combat, because a lot of time saved the situation. It's just that, if you can do a lot of amazing stuff it seems funny that you can barely scratch one foe.
I'll make an example about the spell that seems to me most damaging, even though there is no damage written in it. That's Storm, Wind Craft.
In a way is like Fus Ro Da of Skyrim, but AOE. With a little expense you can just throw trolls all around for a lot of meters. And if you are so powerful to throw someone for meters, I imagine you can deal a lot of damage when he crashs to the ground or against an obstacle. Yes, this is a level 5 spell. You have to roleplay the damage. Ok, it's cool for me. Then, we look at Sea of fire, with a Great name, but only 1d10. It hits harder the Lindwurm illusion, wich is an illusion.
I don't know, I love the game and I don't want to sound boring or irritating, it's just that when I like a thing a lot I tend to notice a lot of detail that make me think.

User avatar
Råttfångaren
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:41 am
Location: The Ruins of Askornäs

Re: Damage of a spell

Post: # 442Post Råttfångaren
Sat Jan 09, 2021 2:23 pm

Don't worry, you're not being irritating or anything :)
Some spells (especially in fire craft) was nerfed in this edition compared to the last Swedish edition (which is almost identical in most ways). In that edition flame burst dealt a raw damage of 1d10(OR9-10) and sea of fire dealt 1d10(OR8-10). Furthermore, the damage of these spells could be increased to 1d10(OR6-10). So both these spells were extremely powerful as they are also AoE. They were probably a bit too powerful and were changed to deal more similar damage to the other spells, but you could of course house rule it to use these old versions of those spells and do similar things with other 'pure damage' spells. You could make these spells more powerful in their basic form from the rule of thumb: level 1 spells =1d10 / 1d10(OR10), level 3 = OR9-10, and level 5 = OR8-10.

I would also point out that I think your thoughts about Storm and damage is entirely correct and how vitner should be played. This is even more true for the spells in flame craft that regularly state that flammable objects risk catching on fire which could cause quite a bit of extra continuous damage, perhaps even fear damage?
There may be misunderstandings and errors in the transcriptions

Post Reply