OOC Chicanery Continued

[Bozwevial]

A point on your Discipline roll.

You can bump that up by invoking a relevant aspect (Wizard in Training), soak up the difference as backlash, or let it loose as fallout. The spell only goes off in the first two cases.

[VennDygrem]

Hmm, I'll tag Wizard in Training to make up that one point since it seems appropriate. Being that I'm still a novice, it works out that I only just barely manage to get the spell off, even if it is a rote; After all, I'm casting it under duress, and thus even a well-known, often-practiced spell is harder to get off reliably for someone still in training.

[VennDygrem]

OK, seeing ad I was aware of the attack, would I be able to react/defend with a block spell? I'll check when I get back to the book. I'm thinking a fairly standard one Leo would always have ready (possibly augmented by one of his items) would be a sort of electromagnetic shield to repel attacks made with primarily metal objects/weapons. Wouldn't help against a fist or baseball/cricket bat, but a golf club, gun/bullet, or wrench is certainly repellable.

[Bozwevial]

Normally there's no way to use evocation blocks reactively. What you could do instead is put together an enchanted item that does the same thing, like Phil's whirlwind barrier amulet or Kitty's misdirection belt. Those can be used reactively, and I think Leo has free slots, so if you want to whip that up retroactively, that'd be fine by me. No sense letting that crafting specialization go to waste.

[VennDygrem]

That's what I was thinking. Not quite as universally useful as Harry's shield bracelet (which, of course, is more a focus for a 'shield' spell), but I think definitely useful and definitely appropriate.

[Bozwevial]

Right. Harry's duster is actually one of the example enchanted items they give in the book.

[VennDygrem]

Ah, yes. Probably the item I meant to actually reference. 

[VennDygrem]

Now, technically the rules allow me to be fairly vague on what my item would protect me against, and the duster is listed as being either Armor 1 (Lore 4 halved to 2 for persistence, halved against to grant an armor bonus) or a persistent fair (+2) spirit block vs. physical attacks (Lore 4 halved to 2 for persistence). What if it's for something more specific than just 'physical attacks,' such as how I'm intending this to only affect physical attacks be primarily-metal weapons? Is there any difference in the process, here? I'm limiting it to fit Leo's Wizard in Training (Geomancer) aspect, since an Earth-based effect seems like it would relate to magnetism and thus create a repellent effect on metal.

On the other hand, I could always just make it more of a "tough as granite" effect to protect me, if it's easier to work with.

[Bozwevial]

Would adding that limitation in exchange for a +1 to the block strength (or number of uses) seem reasonable?

Also, where do you see the halving of strength in exchange for persistence? I'm having trouble locating that bit.

[VennDygrem]

That's reasonable. I doubt this sort of thing needs to be persistent, but more uses per session or more strength is good.

As for the rule for persistence, not only is it mentioned in the example of Harry's Duster, but the first mention is right there on pg. 279, third paragraph from the bottom on the right-hand column:

The uses-per-session limitation may be removed by halving the base strength, rounded down; so if you have Good (+3) Lore, you could create a one-use-per-session item with an effect strength of Good (+3), or an always-on item with an effect strength of Average (+1).

[Bozwevial]

Ahh, that's interesting. The copy I have says this:

You may increase the number of uses per session by one by reducing the base strength of the item by one. So if you have Good (+3) Lore, you could create an enchanted item with an effect strength of Good (+3) that you can use once per session, or an item with an effect strength of Average (+1) that you can use three times per session. When doing this, the base strength of the item may not go below 1.

Bear in mind I'm working from a pdf copy, since the hardcopies I bought were lost in the mail at some point.

[VennDygrem]

It's possible that it's changed, and one of our copies incorporates errata. The only thing I can tell is that mine has a copyright of 2010, but has no other date of publication or anything. The rar file it came in says 2.20.2010 however.

We can go with whichever one you want, or try to figure out which one is more recent.
----edit----
According to this: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?557260-DFRPG-Is-there-any-errata&s=a550412686d4bcc7a7ec22733477d8c1
The pdf came out before the book, and some changes from the early release were incorporated into the final version of the pdf and the book.

[Bozwevial]

Mmm...I'm inclined to go with the latter text which doesn't mention persistence. For one, I think it's kind of unlikely they would add the option when making those changes, rather than remove it (although I suppose it's certainly possible). The other thing is that enchanted items are already pretty useful even when they're not always on. Does that sound reasonable?

[VennDygrem]

Sounds absolutely fine to me. I think the copy I have is the "earlybird" copy. I'll have to see if I can get my hands on a more updated copy. Might explain some of my confusion on things.

[Bozwevial]

Cool. So where we're sitting right now: Once Leo finishes building his electromagnet, he can defend against the wrench attack (though it's only at a +1 anyway, so even if you just used Athletics to dodge as per normal, you'd probably be fine). Then he gets an actual turn in, as does Phil.

[VennDygrem]

It's finished. Though with my high Lore rating, and my crafting specialization, and the bonus from having limited applicability, and even using two points to add extra uses per session, it winds up being pretty damn strong. Based on the chart in the book I've got, it could probably deflect heavy artillery (though not for long).

I guess as far as this goes, I may as well roll athletics to dodge, and if I don't, the mag-band should pick up the slack.

[VennDygrem]

I'm sorry it took so long, but I'm pretty disappointed because I've had a tab open with half of my turn finished, including a roll for my dodge, for the past week. I was even going to finish tonight, but the whole time was spent trying to digest all those options you gave me and figure out what to do since it's all very complicated. I had settled on something, but your turn for Leo turned out almost exactly opposite to what was going to go up tonight. :/

Since it's already there, I'll just run with it.

[Bozwevial]

Hey, if you're not happy with that, I'll gladly adjust. We haven't had a post since, and the rolls that happened there were frankly preposterous.

[VennDygrem]

To be honest, they're not that preposterous. I've only got a Average athletics, and rolling 4d3-8+1 isn't likely to result in a favorable outcome even most of the time.

Mostly I'm disappointed in myself for not getting around to posting my outcome sooner. I've been busy and overwhelmed for a little while now, and haven't been posting frequently to any game I'm in. I need to pull things together a bit more, at least.

[Bozwevial]

Well, I'll take the post down for the time being in case you want to resolve things your way when you get a chance. No worries if things are extremely busy.