Article: 117410 of rec.games.frp.dnd Path: news.tuwien.ac.at!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!torn!news.unb.ca!nimble.mta.ca!mailserv.mta.ca!dbjrdn From: dbjrdn@mailserv.mta.ca (Dan B. Jardine) Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Permanency and dispel magic Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 08:53:07 Organization: Mount Allison University Lines: 14 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 138.73.27.131 X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A] What if someone with a protection from evil, protection from normal missiles and a resist cold spell made permanent by the spell happened to be in the area of effect of a dispel magic spell? Would you have to roll for each spell? What is the permanency was lost but not the others? Would they start their normal duration then wear off after the appropriate amount of time? Speaking of permanency spells, do other DMs stick with the spells allowed in that description or can any spell be made permanent. Another question...Spells that age the caster or remove a point of con. If those spells were put on a scroll. Would the reader of the scroll suffer the penalties? Would the mage who created the scrolls suffer them when he penned the scrolls? Thanks for your help. Article: 117470 of rec.games.frp.dnd Path: news.tuwien.ac.at!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.mtu.edu!news.mtu.edu!not-for-mail From: jmhamari@mtu.edu (Fizban the Fabulous) Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Re: Permanency and dispel magic Date: 23 Jan 1996 12:58:23 -0500 Organization: Michigan Technological University Lines: 14 Message-ID: <4e37jv$r55@login.ee> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: login.ee.mtu.edu X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] Dan B. Jardine wrote: >What if someone with a protection from evil, protection from normal missiles >and a resist cold spell made permanent by the spell happened to be in the area >of effect of a dispel magic spell? Would you have to roll for each spell? What >is the permanency was lost but not the others? Would they start their normal >duration then wear off after the appropriate amount of time? >Speaking of permanency spells, do other DMs stick with the spells allowed in >that description or can any spell be made permanent. If the results came up that they were dispelled, it would be temporary. Much like if you had cast Dispel Magic on a magical item. It just ceases functioning for the duration of the spell. Article: 117676 of rec.games.frp.dnd Path: news.tuwien.ac.at!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!peer-news.britain.eu.net!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!warwick!bham!bhamcs!jw11!mlb From: M.L.Barklam-CSAI94@cs.bham.ac.uk (Martin Barklam) Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Re: Permanency and dispel magic Date: 24 Jan 1996 14:05:03 GMT Organization: School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, U.K. Lines: 41 Sender: mlb@jw11 (Martin Barklam) Message-ID: <4e5eaf$squ@percy.cs.bham.ac.uk> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: jw11.cs.bham.ac.uk In article , dbjrdn@mailserv.mta.ca (Dan B. Jardine) writes: |> What if someone with a protection from evil, protection from normal missiles |> and a resist cold spell made permanent by the spell happened to be in the area |> of effect of a dispel magic spell? Would you have to roll for each spell? What |> is the permanency was lost but not the others? Would they start their normal |> duration then wear off after the appropriate amount of time? I have always used the house rule that certain spells are undispellable. In this category I have included permanency, animate dead spells (of all descriptions), enchant an item and a couple of others that escape me. For spells that are dispellable, but have long enough durations for a mage not to want it dispelled, I developed a meta-magic spell called Dispel Ward that is cast after a spell has been cast and any successful attempt to dispel the spell results in the dispel ward being dispelled instead. E-mail me for further details. |> Speaking of permanency spells, do other DMs stick with the spells allowed in |> that description or can any spell be made permanent. I allow apretty much any spell to be made permanent, but this rarely leads to abuse - just remember the con loss.. Obviously, spells that create matter, and spells like stoneskin that would be really silly to make permanent I would disallow, but combinations of protection from normal missiles, protection from magical weapons and protection from normal weapons would be allowable. |> |> Another question...Spells that age the caster or remove a point of con. If |> those spells were put on a scroll. Would the reader of the scroll suffer the |> penalties? Would the mage who created the scrolls suffer them when he penned |> the scrolls? The creator of the scroll suffers all penalties usually associated with casting a spell - NOT the reader |> |> Thanks for your help. Anytime, Martin Article: 117827 of rec.games.frp.dnd Path: news.tuwien.ac.at!newsfeed.ACO.net!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!usenet From: Steven C Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Re: Permanency and dispel magic Date: 25 Jan 1996 00:42:22 GMT Organization: Virginia Tech Lines: 45 Message-ID: <4e6jle$lk8@solaris.cc.vt.edu> References: <4e5eaf$squ@percy.cs.bham.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: as2511-6.sl007.cns.vt.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2N (Windows; I; 32bit) M.L.Barklam-CSAI94@cs.bham.ac.uk (Martin Barklam) wrote: > >I developed a meta-magic spell called Dispel Ward that is cast after a spell has >been cast and any successful attempt to dispel the spell results in the dispel >ward being dispelled instead. E-mail me for further details. Sounds similar to a spell of my own devising. Scorpique's Spell Armorer Level: 5 Abjuration, Alteration Range: 0 (MetaMagic) Duration: special Components: V,S,M Area of Effect: special Casting Time: 1 turn Saving Throw: None Scorpique's Spell Armorer provides two distinct benefits to a spell of level 1-4. The spell to be affected must be cast within 1 turn of the casting of the Armorer. If the casting of this second spell is delayed beyond 1 turn, Armorer is wasted First, the spell cast following the Armorer receive a 25% bonus to duration. This effect cannot be combined with other magical means of extending spell durations. Spells with a duration of "0" or "instantaneous" are not extended, and permanent spells receive no obvious benefit. Second, this spell provides a layer of protection against Dispel Magic. The first successful Dispel Magic cast against the armored spell results in Scorpique's Spell Armorer being dispelled instead. Once dispelled, the armored spell reverts to it's original duration - note that it's possible for the armored spell to expire as a result of the dispel attempt. The material component for this spell is a scale from any fantastical reptilian creature. ** BTW, the wording was heavily borrowed from Mordenkainen's Celerity (ToM). -- Steven C Alas! By what slight means are great affairs brought to destruction. Article: 117895 of rec.games.frp.dnd Path: news.tuwien.ac.at!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!chi-news.cic.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!prodigy.com!usenet From: LBDL12A@prodigy.com (Robert Bryant) Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Re: Permanency and dispel magic Date: 25 Jan 1996 05:52:43 GMT Organization: Prodigy Services Company 1-800-PRODIGY Lines: 60 Distribution: world Message-ID: <4e75rb$2d0q@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: inugap1.news.prodigy.com X-Newsreader: Version 1.2 dbjrdn@mailserv.mta.ca (Dan B. Jardine) wrote: > >What if someone with a protection from evil, protection from normal missiles >and a resist cold spell made permanent by the spell happened to be in the area >of effect of a dispel magic spell? Would you have to roll for each spell? What >is the permanency was lost but not the others? Would they start their normal >duration then wear off after the appropriate amount of time? The way I've always ran this was that the Dispel Magic spell affects the strongest spell in effect when there are more than one spell cast on one being. Thus the spell would attack the Permanency spell. However due to the nature of Permanency and it's binding of the magical weave, I halve the normal chances for Dispel Magic to be successful against this spell. If the Dispel is successful, then I've always ruled that the other spells start their normal duration times as if just cast. >Speaking of permanency spells, do other DMs stick with the spells allowed in >that description or can any spell be made permanent. > While I don't stick to the specific list decscribed in the spell's description, I don't allow just any spell either. The 3 you mentioned I would allow, but I would not allow the Invulnerability to Normal or Magical Weapon spells to be affected as Martin allowed in his post, because I happen to agree with their spell descriptions which state this spells cannot be permanentized. But there are a great many other spells that I do allow. Basically, you have to look at the possible long range effects and see if the a given spell is going to over throw the balance of your game. If you think it might, then don't allow it; otherwise go for it! >Another question...Spells that age the caster or remove a point of con. If >those spells were put on a scroll. Would the reader of the scroll suffer the >penalties? Would the mage who created the scrolls suffer them when he penned >the scrolls? > >Thanks for your help. Simple answer, the reader of the scroll does not lose con or age, since he is just triggering the magic already cast into the scroll in the first place. It's the person who put that magic there that suffers those effects. "Beleghir" LBDL12A@prodigy.com or Beleghir@aol.com "Life is journey, not a destination" Rush Article: 118066 of rec.games.frp.dnd Path: news.tuwien.ac.at!newsfeed.ACO.net!swidir.switch.ch!in2p3.fr!oleane!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!tribune.usask.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!spock!umpascut From: Chaos Incarnate Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Re: Permanency and dispel magic Date: 25 Jan 96 17:29:55 GMT Organization: The University of Manitoba Lines: 48 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: spock.cc.umanitoba.ca X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #2 (NOV) Originator: umpascut@spock In dbjrdn@mailserv.mta.ca (Dan B. Jardine) writes: >What if someone with a protection from evil, protection from normal missiles >and a resist cold spell made permanent by the spell happened to be in the area >of effect of a dispel magic spell? Would you have to roll for each spell? What >is the permanency was lost but not the others? Would they start their normal >duration then wear off after the appropriate amount of time? >Speaking of permanency spells, do other DMs stick with the spells allowed in >that description or can any spell be made permanent. >Another question...Spells that age the caster or remove a point of con. If >those spells were put on a scroll. Would the reader of the scroll suffer the >penalties? Would the mage who created the scrolls suffer them when he penned >the scrolls? >Thanks for your help. To cover your first point, Yes you would have to roll for each permanency spell, since until the permanency spells are gone, the other spells are not affected by Dispels. In the case of the permanencies being affected but not the other spells, I would guess that the spells would begin to count down their duration as though they had been cast one round ago (After all, you would also have to cast the permanency spells). As for other spells which could be made permanent, I personally have done a fair amount of work in the area. The description of the permanency spell indicates that the spell will affect any person-affecting spell. This I have further extrapolated to exclude spells like the stoneskin, which already have a stated fixed duration (i.e., X nuumber of stoneskins), and also spells like the protection from fire, which has an already virtually permanent duration. Basically, use your best judgement. Ask yourself do you really want the characters to be able tyo do this forever? Do you think there should be any penalties to this permanency? (i.e. permanent haste spells) As to your last question, I have always worked under the assumption that if you wrote it, you pay for it. After all, the writer of the scroll must buy the material components, and use those in the scroll's construction. I have always felt that the con loss due to Permanency spells, and the aging due to wish and limited wish are paid for at the time of casting/writing. Hope this helps. DISCLAIMER: All of the above "answers" are only MHO. "From Chaos were all things born!" --