The Vault: Rare and unusal stuff for the taking

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
But, all this is dangerously close to over-simulation and excessive exposition in a fantasy world.
I would agree with that, but the discussion started over a discussion of whether touch attacks should be treated differently from an ordinary "to hit", either RAW or RAI. And it gets even messier if you are interpreting the AC for touch attacks of humanoid monsters (does the hobgoblin's AC come from wearing armor (metal, possibly conductive), or in part from using a shield (wood barrier), or from dex score, or is it just intrinsic to the magical nature of the creature?).

I think it all underlines why you should be certain you are on really solid ground before you deviate from core rules.
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
I think it all underlines why you should be certain you are on really solid ground before you deviate from core rules.
I agree. It's perhaps best then just to leave it as "touch attack", and let the DM resolve that as he or she see fit.
 

Two orcs

Officially better than you, according to PoN
I would agree with that, but the discussion started over a discussion of whether touch attacks should be treated differently from an ordinary "to hit", either RAW or RAI. And it gets even messier if you are interpreting the AC for touch attacks of humanoid monsters (does the hobgoblin's AC come from wearing armor (metal, possibly conductive), or in part from using a shield (wood barrier), or from dex score, or is it just intrinsic to the magical nature of the creature?).
ACKS of course address this in a supplement (and Domains@War which lists equipment for beastmen warriors - lizardmen, bugbears and ogres have thick hides and shields/hide armor while the rest simply have armor). I would resist differentiating touch AC and other AC because I believe an attack on this abstraction actually makes the game less believable. In case of a completely armor-bypassing or undodgeable attack that still requires aiming (like a musket at close range or a high powered laser) I'd have it bypass all AC both natural and from dexterity.

In my mind, shocking grasp requires touching flesh (because metal armor rerouts and other armor insulate

Two new magic-user spells to be discovered out in the wilds of your campaign---preferably being cast against your players!


Let me know if you think they need some level-appropriate adjustments.
I have a hard time judging the 5th level spell since I've not yet DM'd at that tier. The second level spells seems difficult to pull off and very situational. I'd either make it a very mean and useful spell - allowing you to steal any memorized spell out of a mage's mind (perfect for sneaking up on a sleeping mage or extracting power from a captured mage) with a touch attack OR make it more useful in combat allowing you to steal the spell out of their mouth at some range without subjecting the caster to melee and an attack throw. Whiffing is for fighters and clerics! Right now it seems too hard to pull off to sacrifice a memory slot for - just blasting the bugger with magic missile seems like a safer choice.
 

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
I know there is a 3e prestige class that does something like this - spell thief? Maybe someone who knows that edition can tell you what level that ability kicks in and what the limits are on it. Doesn't @The1True play 3.5/PF?
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
I know there is a 3e prestige class that does something like this - spell thief? Maybe someone who knows that edition can tell you what level that ability kicks in and what the limits are on it. Doesn't @The1True play 3.5/PF?
The second this conversation started, I looked it up, lol. The Spellthief comes from a similar base idea but, since it's a prestige class rather than a simple spell, there's obviously a whole host of added benefits/complications. I didn't think it was worth the comparison (or the resulting scorn). I'm almost certain that I've seen a non-3rd-party, 3e spell that matches the 'Steal Spell' description though, but I havn't been able to find it (with a quick, lazy search).

Hating later editions is fun, but occasionally, they clear up earlier issues. 3e's combat/move actions and conditions being an excellent example. Touch Attack and Ranged Touch are pretty damn clear in this version:

from the SRD:

"
Touch Spells in Combat
Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject, either in the same round or any time later. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) the target. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

Touch Attacks
Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. However, the act of casting a spell does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack. Your opponent’s AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.

Holding the Charge
If you don’t discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren’t considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. (If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack.) If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.
"
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
Thanks for the info. Here's my reply over at K&KA to EOTB's and Grogdog's questions/suggestions.
Allan, pointed out an Ed Greenwood Stealspell from Dragon #90. EOTB asked the following:

EOTB said:
1) How long after casting the spell does the "stealer" have to touch/steal a spell with a melee attack - same round? Next round? Other?
2) Is the intent of the spell that the stealer could cast a spell they don't Know by using the spell? What if it were a spell they'd tried to Know but failed the roll to-know? Does that make any difference?
3) The idea that it is used on higher level casters is presumed in the saving throw bonus; however, is the intent that through use of this 2nd level spell, that a 3rd level MU-stealer could cast a 5th level spell they otherwise have no access to due to insufficient class levels?
4) can a F/MU use their fighter to-hit matrix to steal a spell?
and my reply

me said:
Steal Spell
Greenwoods' spelling (as one word) is an improvement --- but both his interpretation and Huso's Incantrix (?) class ability is of a very different nature. I agree, it's a more standard notion, i.e. to steal a spell from another MU's memory...but that's not really what I was going after.

The notion of "dueling magicians" has probably entered your mind at one time or another. The iconic example that I recall is Vincent Price vs. Boris Karloff in The Raven, although it's a common trope these days in an overly abundantly magical cinema.

I've heard that some late editions introduced rules for "counter-spelling", but I am loath to tinker with AD&D in any significant manner anymore. New spells, to my mind, fall under the category of interesting "treasure" since, for my campaigns they are rare and need to be found in-world.

The intent of this spell was to get a bit of the dueling-magicians element into the game in a non-intrusive manner. I don't feel that stealing spells from memory does that (although that's a perfectly interesting mechanic in it's own right), because it's not really a combat action.

Also, by making it such a low-level spell (2nd), it almost becomes a pseudo-ability for higher level MUs who have lots of spare slots.

So, on to EOTB's concerns:
  • How long to steal? --- I had originally thought that it would be a same-round action, i.e. if you won initiative and had this spell memorized you could redirect the spell on the other mage. That's probably cutting the spam a bit too thin. I think you are right, it should have a window. I don't know if it would be better if it was just the same round (if initiative is won) + the next round...or perhaps something like within the same + 1 round/level. I'm probably leaning towards the former. Your thoughts?
  • Known spells only? --- No. That was not my intent. I sort of imagined the typical dramatic scene in which the lowly protagonist spell-caster manages to wrestle the doomsday incantation of a big-baddie away from them at the last minute. I had always thought of trying to get a hold of a higher level (or unknown) spell you normally can't cast and turning it against the caster---much to their surprise. You suggestion that % chance to know the spell (i.e. intelligence) should come into play is an interesting wrinkle. I do kind of like that. Perhaps I can add it. A high-intelligence MU, could get to be particularly good at doing this. I also like the aesthetic of a low-level magic-user coming up against a true master, and finding all their spells neutralized or used against them (without save!). Totally p'oned.
  • Fighter/Magic-user to-hit? --- Sure! A great point. I don't normal think in terms of multi-class, but I left "touch attack" vague so the DM can arbitrate. I think that's perfectly legitimate. Perhaps the bigger question is: does requiring a touch (to-hit) make this spell too difficult to use? Would a (short) range be better. I am on the fence about that.
Last thought. Imagine a high level wizard with a Ring of Wizardry that doubles second-level spells. They could "fill up" on stealspell and neutralize rivals in combat....round after round. And when the low-level had exhausted their bag-o-tricks --- pound them into the ground at his or her leisure. What that does for the big "showdown" encounter is prolong it --- maybe inducing some more parley at the end...where the Dark Lord gets to toy with his prey a bit and go into that classic trope of explaining all his clever plans that will shortly doom our heroes and all their friends.

OK. Last notion. If "stealspell" is already taken (stealing from memory), what's a more appropriate title? : "Redirect", "Grab Dweomer", "Incantation Override ", "Negatespell", "Commandeer Magic", "Pre-empt (off icium in Latin)", "Bend Magic", "Shunt", "Divert Spell", "Arrogate" (my new favorite), or simply "Counterspell"?
 

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
Hmm, if "wizard duels" is the intention, I would think spells that have a greater impact on casters would fit the bill. Like maybe a selective silence spell that silences everyone but the caster. Or a spell that prevents the use of somatic components.

But really, in AD&D, with segments based initiative, isn't this superfluous? Wouldn't a wizard duel be determined by action denial, i.e. by getting your spells off before the other MU, so you can spoil their spells? I would think that in 1e magic missile would be the ultimate counterspell.
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
Hmm, if "wizard duels" is the intention, I would think spells that have a greater impact on casters would fit the bill. Like maybe a selective silence spell that silences everyone but the caster. Or a spell that prevents the use of somatic components.

But really, in AD&D, with segments based initiative, isn't this superfluous? Wouldn't a wizard duel be determined by action denial, i.e. by getting your spells off before the other MU, so you can spoil their spells? I would think that in 1e magic missile would be the ultimate counterspell.
All those things you mention are good, and do serve that purpose.

A hole this might fill though, is provide a mechanism to let a lower-level caster wrestle control of a big-moment spell from an opponent. Allow them to reverse a ceremonial summons, or redirect a mass-kill spell and thereby induce a reverse of fortunes between two unmatched sides.

That's what I was thinking anyway. Also, when it comes to magic, I like variety. Classes, not so much...but weird-magics-as-treasure definitely! Honing the edge on a good and useful new spell that fits within the AD&D boundaries is time well spent to me, because it's a reward that can potentially appear many places.
 

Beoric

8, 8, I forget what is for
I think I see. You want to be able to give a low level caster a Hail Mary shot to take control of an archmage's spell and use it against him? I am assuming that when you refer to "releasing" the spell, it means you are casting the original spell and not using the energy to cast some other sort of spell.

That makes it a bit of a corner case, since the low level caster with few slots is only likely to memorize it if he expects to be fighting a higher level MU - and isn't planning to avoid the fight instead. And then he has to be adjacent the other MU, and has to make a touch attack, and the other MU has to fail his save.

If he is adjacent to the MU he might be better off to just try to stab him with a dagger, since he is already having to roll to hit. That at least avoids the saving throw (IIRC MUs have good saves vs spell), disrupts the MU's spell, does a little damage, and doesn't cast a spell slot. I haven't played 1e recently enough to have a good sense of relative risk, but it just doesn't seem like the spell is doing enough to be worth memorizing.

Maybe if it was ranged, and the caster was able to ID his opponent's spell before attempting to seize it? Or if it was paired with a divination spell that allowed you to identify your opponent's spells before you declared an action? Stealing a higher level caster's defensive spell could have a much larger impact on the duel than stealing an offensive spell.
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
Yes. I think I've gone entirely over to "ranged" as an improvement. I thought I needed to include a touch attack obsticle because it was such a low-level spell with potentially powerful repercussions.

I just need to think through the time-mechanics a bit more and then I'll recast it.
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Math question.
This relates to DC's which many of you hate, but I could really use the help. PC's can find a rudimentary hang-glider in this scenario:

Glider: Allows a Sz Small or Med creature to glide for long distances. Fly skill required.

It has been suggested to me that I include some loose rules for how far a PC drops for every 50 or 100' traveled. I'd like to relate that to some kind of Fly skill or application of Dex+Wis so a d20 roll + some ability/experience leads to longer flights.

We can get all wrapped up in the vagaries of air currents and the physics of flight here, but I'd rather not...

I'm looking at slopes i.e. Rise:Run with -1:0 being a plummet, 0:1 being an improbable infinite glide and -1:1 being a fairly dangerous 45 degree dive.
I would peg -1:0 at a roll of Nat 1, -1:1 at 10 and a leisurely -10':100' to happen on a modified roll of 20 with an asymptotic curve thereafter so we never really hit that 0:1 plane.

I need a VERY simple function that will approximate that. Any help would be greatly appreciated. My basic algebra just isn't cutting it...
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
Here's one --- but it needs a calculator for the arctangent
descent.png

If you wanted to approximate the arctan by it's series expansion (no calculator required) use

arctan(x) = x - x^3/3

or just the first term (arctan(x) ~= x)

Converting from radians to degrees and shifting the multiplier to prevent lift, you get something like

theta = 4.5*(d20-1)

which looks like the dotted red line
descent2.png

EDIT: You probably want distance traveled based on initial height. That's

dist = ht * tan( 4.5 * (d20-1) )

starting at 100-ft height here's how far you'd get
descent3.png

Simpliest would be you just tabulate it. It would be a small table. Make sure your calculator is using degrees for the tangent (not radians).
 
Last edited:

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
You also probably know that someone really good at gliding can catch thermal updrafts and stay aloft for hours.
 

The1True

My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
You also probably know that someone really good at gliding can catch thermal updrafts and stay aloft for hours.
Yeah, which is why I'm trying to make it a Skill roll so results over 20 bring meaningful gains.
Thanks for the help. I guess this one is headed for house rule territory. It's fine to print a table of results or demand the user break out the scientific calculator in the comfort of your own game but it's a little too messy for print.

theta = 4.5*(d20-1) is probably the most elegant function of the lot, but it tops out at 21.

Taking from the handy graphs above, what I might do is something quick and dirty like:
<10: fail (fall).
10-20: drop/100' of flight = 100'-4*dice roll.
>20: drop/100' of flight = 40'-dice roll.
I feel like there's comparably clunky crunch in all iterations of the DMG :p
 

squeen

8, 8, I forget what is for
I misunderstood. If you want roles over 20, just change the divisor to something like your new max.
A small table would not be cumbersome IMO. You can make it 2-4 column to compact it further.
 

Two orcs

Officially better than you, according to PoN
Billowing cloak
Red as fresh blood and excessively voluminous, it needs to be tied up to the waist or feet to not be dirtied when walking. Releasing the cloak it billows as if by a strong wind from below and the wearer is completely hidden within the writhing folds and counts as invisibile as regards spells, missiles and melee attacks. The wearer can barely see out of the cloak, only that which is directly adjacent is clearly seen. Adjacent allies have their vision obstructed by the cloak in the same manner and are partially covered from missiles (-2 to hit). The billowing cloak also breaks falls, acting as a parachute that ignores the first 3d6 points of falling damage.
 
Top