# The Elements of Magic - Teaser and Sampler (now with Illusion and Transform)



## RangerWickett (Sep 7, 2003)

The attached file is a small sampler of the new material in the upcoming release of _The Elements of Magic: Revised Knowledge_.  The file is in .doc format, because the boards won't accept rtfs, but most people should be able to read it.  Please, if you have an comments, questions, or complaints, don't hesitate to post them.


----------



## SpuneDagr (Sep 10, 2003)

I LOVE IT!!!

This looks like it's even more inovative and flexible than the original! I love how all the different elements affect the illusion! I love it. I love it. I love it!


----------



## RangerWickett (Sep 14, 2003)

Thanks.  Please remain enthusiastic, and avoid the other thread on this forum, where people are desperately trying to make me snap by coming up with crazy ways to break the system.


----------



## SpuneDagr (Sep 15, 2003)

Now, now. They're only nitpicking so you end up with a great product.


----------



## donm61873 (Sep 20, 2003)

I'm not sure about the revision; seems like fewer spell lists actually means LESS able to duplicate existing PHB effects. Please tell me I'm wrong?

May I recommend that rather than (as the original edition did) rely on the DM for MUCHO work integrating this into the campaign, that an additional chapter (or web enhancement) contain all needed material to drop this into a "core rules" campaign, say a campaign that is identical in every way to a by the books living greyhawk campaign?

Not only does this serve to answer questions about campaign building, but the book is IMMEDIATELY useable in play.


DonM.


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 21, 2003)

donm61873 said:
			
		

> I'm not sure about the revision; seems like fewer spell lists actually means LESS able to duplicate existing PHB effects. Please tell me I'm wrong?




altough was a little worried that the fewer spell list means overly focuses Mages, take the sampler Illusion text. Now take Illusion Fire, Illusion Air, Illusion Earth, and Illusion Water. thats 4 of your 25 total spell list, and you can pretty much do 200% better at any level than a Wizard/Sorceror illusion school specialist. granted not the most cost efficient, but you can alter all five senses of any Illusion you desire, and just spending 1 MP on Air for a +5 to Hide is way better than any 0 or 1st level spell, and at higher levels it can last all day for like what 3-4 MP at most! spend a little more. on top of that, with just one Evoke [Element] list you can still dish damage out without worry, trust me, a mage under revised EoM has more flexibility than a wizard at any level, without being uberpowerful, though they do seem a bit uberpotent now, because all a mage needs is one Evoke [element] list to cover damage dealing, then he can focus on anything else he wants (charming/creating stuff/illusions/buffing).


----------



## Verequus (Sep 21, 2003)

Haganegiri said:
			
		

> trust me, a mage under revised EoM has more flexibility than a wizard at any level, without being uberpowerful, though they do seem a bit uberpotent now, because all a mage needs is one Evoke [element] list to cover damage dealing, then he can focus on anything else he wants (charming/creating stuff/illusions/buffing).



Overpowerful with one Evoke Element list? Because I got the working script (but I'm still reading it), I can say that is so much true like you can say that one needs only the fireball spell for damaging. Unless you meet someone with fire resistance or immunity, you can kill everyone - this is all true for every element.


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 22, 2003)

RuleMaster said:
			
		

> Overpowerful with one Evoke Element list? Because I got the working script (but I'm still reading it), I can say that is so much true like you can say that one needs only the fireball spell for damaging. Unless you meet someone with fire resistance or immunity, you can kill everyone - this is all true for every element.




No i said a bit uberpotent, I stated that i think they are perfectly fine and not overpowered. Potent meaning that with one or two Evoke list it covers being able to give battle support and not suck and be very useful with much flexibility (you can make cones, lines, fans, etc. too), and all other list can be other non combat stuff.


----------



## donm61873 (Sep 22, 2003)

The sad thing is, I really wanted to get across the other part of my posting:



> May I recommend that rather than (as the original edition did) rely on the DM for MUCHO work integrating this into the campaign, that an additional chapter (or web enhancement) contain all needed material to drop this into a "core rules" campaign, say a campaign that is identical in every way to a by the books living greyhawk campaign?
> 
> Not only does this serve to answer questions about campaign building, but the book is IMMEDIATELY useable in play.




Sigh...


----------



## RangerWickett (Sep 22, 2003)

donm61873 said:
			
		

> The sad thing is, I really wanted to get across the other part of my posting:
> 
> Sigh...




One thing we do plan is to include about 10 sample spells for each spell list, as a rough starting point.  Some lists that are pretty straightforward, like compel and charm, will get fewer, while those with lots of options, like Transform and Evoke, will get a little more.

Also, one thing I'd love to do is have fan involvement to create sample spells and post them in a new forum on these boards.  We could sort the spells by type and MP cost, and eventually release a document with all the spells, so GM's wouldn't have to make up every bad guy spell on the fly.

Aside from that, I don't quite know what you mean by advice for running EOM in a standard D&D game.  If you plan to use both clerics and wizards and such, along with the EOM mage, then there really shouldn't be any problem.  What specific issue do you want addressed?


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 22, 2003)

> Also, one thing I'd love to do is have fan involvement to create sample spells and post them in a new forum on these boards. We could sort the spells by type and MP cost, and eventually release a document with all the spells, so GM's wouldn't have to make up every bad guy spell on the fly.




well Im an insomniac with far too much time on my hands, I would be glad to help create sample rotes (i like the term Rote over spell, too much Mage the Acension for me  implies more of a practiced and accomplished feeling to me, but this is a personaly opionion, not an open oil can for a flame war). all i have is the Illusion sampler but I will gladly come up with as many spells/rotes as I can and i'll have them posted by tommorow tonight.

oh yea, i have all the 4 Wizard Compendium books, I'll convert stuff from those while im at it just so i wont feel like i wasted all that money (bought all 4 like a week before 3rd was announced).

Any way i can get my hands on more of the real stuff?


----------



## donm61873 (Sep 23, 2003)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> One thing we do plan is to include about 10 sample spells for each spell list, as a rough starting point.  Some lists that are pretty straightforward, like compel and charm, will get fewer, while those with lots of options, like Transform and Evoke, will get a little more.
> 
> Aside from that, I don't quite know what you mean by advice for running EOM in a standard D&D game.  If you plan to use both clerics and wizards and such, along with the EOM mage, then there really shouldn't be any problem.  What specific issue do you want addressed?




I don't believe that EoM (at least in its current form) is very easy for a group to just "drop in", all other campaign elements remaining *by the book*.

I'm proposing such an appendix/web enhancement: something that does all the work for the PHB classes and spells (a lot of which is there). All too often, a cursory look at the EOM says: "where's mage armor? where's fire shield?" and this would basically say: here's the dropins for the SRD spells, quick subs for stuff like _Rings of Wizardry_, etc...


DonM.


----------



## RangerWickett (Sep 23, 2003)

We'll already be doing that to a small degree.  A lot of the sample spells in the revised version are recreations of D&D classics, but we realize that some things don't convert well, and after a certain point players shouldn't have a hard time making new spells of their own without relying on things they've done before.

The system should be different with EOM, but don't worry, we'll explain how to do some standard things you'd want in any system.


----------



## Verequus (Sep 23, 2003)

Haganegiri said:
			
		

> No i said a bit uberpotent, I stated that i think they are perfectly fine and not overpowered. Potent meaning that with one or two Evoke list it covers being able to give battle support and not suck and be very useful with much flexibility (you can make cones, lines, fans, etc. too), and all other list can be other non combat stuff.



Firstly, the flexibility is included for every spell list, so EoM is potent in every spell list. Secondly, you could use some core spells which allow enough flexibility: Burning Hands, Fireball, Delayed Blast Fireball (for the 3-level gap I recommend an empowered and/or maximized Fireball) and a Wall of Fire for some other situations. I'd like to see a situation which can only overcome by Evoke Fire and not through a core fire spell. Thirdly, I don't believe that there is a difference between a "sorcercer" with some spell lists and a wizard with the matching selection of spells - the flexibility allows just to fill the gaps of the normal gaps. This potency is the same I envision wizards - not that they need to learn "exceptions from rules".

After some experimenting with some spells I discovered, that it is laboriuos to develop spells, because one needs to look at least at two spell lists: the effect spell list and the general list. Switching between the required lists is time-consuming. I think that EoM is the first magic system which needs computer power for easy developing, too - a nice computer program comes into my mind...


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 23, 2003)

RuleMaster said:
			
		

> Firstly, the flexibility is included for every spell list, so EoM is potent in every spell list. Secondly, you could use some core spells which allow enough flexibility: Burning Hands, Fireball, Delayed Blast Fireball (for the 3-level gap I recommend an empowered and/or maximized Fireball) and a Wall of Fire for some other situations. I'd like to see a situation which can only overcome by Evoke Fire and not through a core fire spell. Thirdly, I don't believe that there is a difference between a "sorcercer" with some spell lists and a wizard with the matching selection of spells - the flexibility allows just to fill the gaps of the normal gaps. This potency is the same I envision wizards - not that they need to learn "exceptions from rules".




Yes but as a sorceror those waste VERY precious spells known and you must do it for every spell level to stay up with damage output, whereas one evoke spell list is but a minor fraction and always scales with level. Wizards can learn infinite spells, but with the "fire and forget" system, your forced to waste precious spells per day on attack spells to make yourself useful in a combat, which means less use when you have that cool illusion spell that would of avoided the combat or a charm spell that would of helped dealing witht the haughty noble, but you only learned the combat spell this morning becasue you didnt know about the noble being held by the orcs, so oh well all those spells known wasted.



> After some experimenting with some spells I discovered, that it is laboriuos to develop spells, because one needs to look at least at two spell lists: the effect spell list and the general list. Switching between the required lists is time-consuming. I think that EoM is the first magic system which needs computer power for easy developing, too - a nice computer program comes into my mind...




this just seems like your dead-set against the system and no real amount of discussion is going to change your mind regardless. I made about 8 sample illusions last night that was not difficult at all, and in fact it gave me a thrill finally being able to craft magic to my vision and do effects and rotes/spells >I< want to do, not being railroaded into them.


----------



## mbgrove (Sep 23, 2003)

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After some experimenting with some spells I discovered, that it is laboriuos to develop spells, because one needs to look at least at two spell lists: the effect spell list and the general list. Switching between the required lists is time-consuming. I think that EoM is the first magic system which needs computer power for easy developing, too - a nice computer program comes into my mind...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not a normal poster, just a lurker.    However, I'm going to throw my 2 cents worth in on this one...

I find it quite interesting that you almost need a computer program to help you out with the spell system.  I know what you mean....

About 15 years ago (ack, that's scary to think about ::wry smile:, I worked on developing a new magic system.  I called it the Spell-Weaver magic system.  Why?  Because they "wove" spells as they went along.  They didn't have spells they had to memorize out of a book like Mages (as they were called then) did.  My Spell-Weavers were slightly less powerful (under normal circumstances) than Mages, but MUCH, MUCH more versatile.

Enter EoM...  As soon as I saw the first version, I bought it.  It was somewhat like my original system, but much easier to work with because of the spell lists.

Enter EoM 2...  This is probably what the Spell-Weaver magic system would have turned out like, had I decided to keep going.  I did do some play-testing and such with them, but quite frankly, I got bogged down in all the details of making spells.

Spell-Weavers had Bases and Advantages.  EoM2 has spell lists and the General area.  (My Advantages were pretty much the General area, but broken up.)  I called it mana, EoM2 calls it MPs.  I called mine Book Spells, EoM2 calls them Signature Spells.

One of my failures was that I put some randomness in things.  Every spell you cast required you to roll 2d10 + caster level + Int bonus to determine if you successfully cast the spell.  This meant that you had "safe" spells (or safER spells), but could also throw some bigger stuff that might possibly blow up on you.  I also had penalties for casting non-Book Spells (negatives to your roll).

Between having to roll for every spell, figuring out Book Spells, calculating what you had to roll for every spell, recalcing Book Spells when you went up a level, and coming up with spontaneous spells on the fly, things were just too tedious.  Quite frankly, I decided that, in order to run a Spell-Weaver, I needed a computer program.  At the time, I didn't have a computer, so it wasn't too terribly feasible.

The moral of the story?  Don't try to outsmart yourself like I did.  I had a WONDERFUL, diverse method of casting spells.  I could do tiny effects with no range, tiny effects with a MASSIVE range (or area, etc.).  I could emulate the low-level mage trying to cast a spell a little too powerful for himself, or an arch-mage casting a REALLY big spell as a, "I may be going down, but I can certainly take you and the surrounding area with me." type of thing.  But...  the simple truth of it was, the Spell-Weaver magic system was just too complex.

After buying and reading the first EoM, I had been toying with resurrecting the Spell-Weaver magic system and finishing it up, with a long, hard look at simplifying the system.  But, after reading what RangerWicket had posted about EoM2, I have changed my mind.  

I am very excited about EoM2 and the implications.  I just want to stress that you need to make sure that you keep things playable.  I created a system that was the most diverse system I had ever seen.  It was also unplayable.  Please make sure you don't follow the same path.  ::wry smile::

And here ends my 2 cents.  (With inflation, I think it turned out to be about $100.  ::chuckle:: )

Michael


----------



## Verequus (Sep 24, 2003)

Haganegiri said:
			
		

> Yes but as a sorceror those waste VERY precious spells known and you must do it for every spell level to stay up with damage output, whereas one evoke spell list is but a minor fraction and always scales with level. Wizards can learn infinite spells, but with the "fire and forget" system, your forced to waste precious spells per day on attack spells to make yourself useful in a combat, which means less use when you have that cool illusion spell that would of avoided the combat or a charm spell that would of helped dealing witht the haughty noble, but you only learned the combat spell this morning becasue you didnt know about the noble being held by the orcs, so oh well all those spells known wasted.



That's why the spell effects are very narrow defined - flexibility vs. power.



			
				Haganegiri said:
			
		

> this just seems like your dead-set against the system and no real amount of discussion is going to change your mind regardless. I made about 8 sample illusions last night that was not difficult at all, and in fact it gave me a thrill finally being able to craft magic to my vision and do effects and rotes/spells >I< want to do, not being railroaded into them.



I'm not dead set against the system - I am even one the strongest supporters! Look into the other thread if you want to know my opinion. What I forgot to mention is that I had to scroll the word document (not the teaser) everytime (splitting the screen helped a little bit, but I had then only the half screen for both spell lists...)  and I didn't print it out. So it may be easier to turn the pages than to scroll - at least it would minimize scrolling. Also I never said that EoM doesn't allow the shaping of magic to your vision - which sentence from me gave you that impression?

But it is a fact that for creating a spell you have to find every needed option and add the right amount of MPs - this can be done easily as preparation, but not while the game without computer help, because it is too time-consuming and holds up the game. That's why the signature spells exist - to constrain players and DMs alike to some simple, but easily swappable options.

Your post seems to be only a misunderstanding of my intentions which weren't absolutely clear. Maybe I'm a little worn out, because my comments about the whole file reached 10 pages. ;-)


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 25, 2003)

Yea dude we just started going in two diffrent directions there, its cool. Most of my later comments (about the shaping magic to my vision) was just an off hand compliment to the system, not aimed against you.


----------



## RangerWickett (Sep 26, 2003)

So, which list do you want me to put up a teaser for next?

Abjure
Charm
Compel
Create
Evoke
Heal
Infuse
Move
Summon (actually, the rules for summon and create ended up pretty different, so we split them)
Transform


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 27, 2003)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> So, which list do you want me to put up a teaser for next?




Transform.

"First you crack the shell, then you crack the nut inside" - Transformers the Movie.


----------



## Verequus (Sep 27, 2003)

I'd like to see teasers of Create, Move, Transform, Divination, Scry and Spellcraft, but Transform is my favorite.

Regarding the fan spell compilation: I discovered that not for every effect an enhancement exists (e.g. soul transference of Magic Jar), but I don't know if all effects can be created through the combining of other effects and a slight interpretation. Maybe new enhancements are necessary?


----------



## Haganegiri (Sep 28, 2003)

Actually the Move list i think would be VERY interesting to see. I still wanna know if Move Earth allows for earthquakes....


----------



## LRathbun (Oct 1, 2003)

Add another vote for Move.


----------



## TwoSix (Oct 11, 2003)

Another vote for Move.  2nd place vote is for Summon.


----------



## Kemrain (Oct 16, 2003)

I'd love to see Infuse, myself. Can't wait for EoM2.

- Kemrian the Impatient.


----------



## RandomUsernamehmimo71 (Oct 16, 2003)

mbgrove, your system is very similiar to what I'm doing in my own game, and it's why I really love EoM.. While it does get complex, It gives such flexibility, such ability.. I truely love the way it works..

I'd love to see your system, or know more about why it didn't work. The way we do it has people rolling for spells, so they try a powerful spell, putting themselves at risk, or a lowerlevel spell more easily.

EoM is the best system I have seen for doing Magic for D20, and  from what this thread is showing, V2 looks to be improving on it.. Just so it's known, I want it to be LESS like the Standard D20 game.. I like being able to modify it to run easily in a low magic game. I want there to be fewer spells than in the original EoM, more verastile, with the ability to know certain ones by heart.. Basically, exactly what it looks like EoM2 will be. 


Colin "Flexibility without complexity can happen!"


EDIT- As pointed out below, this post originally referred to the RuleMaster, rather than mbgrove. Please forgive the mistake.


----------



## Verequus (Oct 16, 2003)

My system? I don't know where I ever said anything about an own system. Looking through the thread I see only one post which matches your description - the one from *mbgrove.*


----------



## mbgrove (Oct 20, 2003)

Wow.  I had this really nice reply that I'd worked on over the weekend, and went to post it today.  Unfortunately, it was all lost when it said that it didn't want to post and forced me to log on again.  GRRRR!!!!

It was longish anyway, so I'll shorten it (and copy it before I click on Submit Reply!).  ::wry smile::

The short answer to why my Spell-Weaver magic system failed was because of /too/ much flexibility.  I tried to make the system also have the /feel/ of what you read in fantasy novels.  (In DnD, a spell-caster is always safe casting a spell because it is a spell he can normally cast.  There is no danger of over-casting because it's simply not allowed, unlike what you read in fantasy.)

The combination of extreme flexibilty and the having balance it all just made it all too complex.  Hence, the reason for my original post warning the wonderful writers that gave us EoM and, sometime soon hopefully, EoM2, to keep from having the same problems.  Interestingly enough, being a programmer now, I wouldn't have any problems whipping up a program for it.  

So...  if anyone wants a copy of the Spell-Weaver Magic System for curiosity, ideas or whatever reason, just send me an email at mbgrove@hotmail.com.


----------



## keynup (Nov 15, 2003)

Is the revised EoM finished and out? It sounds very cool   , but if the newer one is almost done, I'd rather wait (but I don't think that I could last very long).


----------



## RangerWickett (Nov 30, 2003)

Just to keep tabs, the revised Elements of Magic is not yet released, though right now it's mostly waiting in a queue to be laid out; we always have one or two books in layout at any given time, and once our layout folks are free, we should be right to work on EOMrevised.  As I mentioned several times before, I have trouble getting online, so I haven't been able to put up too many teasers, but I'll see if I can't show you something more this week.  

Also, if you've commented on this thread with suggestions, or if you've looked over a rough draft and given feedback to me through email, please post on this thread and give your real name, so I can include you in playtest credits.  It'd be easier if I don't have to track people down.


----------



## RangerWickett (Dec 12, 2003)

The people asked to see Transform, and here's a look.  I don't have quite as many examples for this spell list, but if you want some answers, don't hesitate to ask questions.


----------



## RangerWickett (Dec 15, 2003)

No comments?


----------



## Verequus (Dec 16, 2003)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> No comments?



Upps, I forgot to look at it - having much to do. So here my points of criticism:

-Change of Gear and Mind: I think, the default is ok, but there should be enhancements for more control. Maybe there could be some different degrees like "One piece of gear adapts, other still melt." to "You can designate freely, what happens to which piece of gear." or "You receive the raw and wild instincts of an animal. Make an Will save with a DC of 15 to control yourself in threatining and other similar situations." to "You have the mind of an animal."
-Space: You forgot the sentence "Only with a magical weapon..." or so - look in the SRD at incorporeal and you'll see, what I mean.
-"Animate (2 MP).  If the new form is not a creature and the original is an object, you need this.  You can only buy this enhancement using Transform Life." "De-animate (2 MP).  If the new form is not an object and the original is a creature, you need this." I think, the "not" is wrong in both sentences - or I just don't understand this at all.


----------



## Acquana (Dec 17, 2003)

lol


----------



## RangerWickett (Dec 17, 2003)

Oh yeah, editing gaff there.

As for Mind altering . . . ehh, it's one of those things that can really get out of control, ruining a player's day if his character fails a save.  I'll look at it, though.  We're almost ready to show you folks the whole thing.


----------



## Verequus (Dec 17, 2003)

Acquana said:
			
		

> lol



I don't get that...


----------



## RangerWickett (Dec 19, 2003)

Well, on a slightly unrelated note, have you ever noticed how the Green Lantern ring looks kinda like lol?


----------



## Verequus (Dec 19, 2003)

That's slightly unrelated? *shakes head* No, I've only seen a Green Lantern once and I followed more the story than the artwork. BTW, I still miss a answer for my last email - and time to look everything through. *sigh*


----------



## gpetruc (Dec 25, 2003)

Please, tell us ... when will the full product be released ? 
do you have at least a planned release date ?

We're all waiting for what should be (from the previews) "the best free magic system ever"


----------



## Blue mage for hire (Jan 1, 2004)

I can't wait for EoM revised!  ...............I can add something more this; think, think... Oh yeah!  I made another post on the Move Element topic, about Move Time and my own invented spell lists: Evoke [Creature].  Also, in repsonse to many requests you had early: such as opinions, what do we think, comments on Transform [Creature] and [Element], etc:

- I think Move Fire's cool, Possession is a great innovation!
- Transform works great.  Plus, I've always wondered what the stat adjustments would be for infant and child age groups.  I know kids don't usually fight, but in the Book of Vile Darkness, they didn't give the stats for a child that was really an example villian.  I mean, even frog's have stats!  Why make a kid the anatagonist when they have no listed stats!Not a good resource for a DM who might want to run that encounter, just sort of an idea-sparker.  ....Rambling again.
- Why would you use Evoke [Element] for any of the positive or negative elements?  Besides the fact that's all your white mage can cast when not healing.  That's plagued me since the original EoM.  Is anything weak to Mist? (not that Mist itself is useless, I find creating fog clouds and disguising poison with Illusion Mist most intriging.)
- Are Black Elements still stronger than White Elements?


----------



## Verequus (Jan 1, 2004)

Blue mage for hire said:
			
		

> Are Black Elements still stronger than White Elements?



Every type of element does the same amount of damage for the same amount of MPs - only side effects differ in their effect and their cost. BTW, there are no Black or White elements - quoting the text should explain it:



"
*The Cardinal Elements:* Air, Death, Earth, Fire, Life, and Water. These are the primary elements on the equator and the axis of the sphere of elements.
*The Paraelements:* Ice, Lava, Lightning, and Ooze. These elements are derived from the cardinal elements on the equator.
*The Negative Elements:* Acid, Metal, Shadow, and Void. These elements are the combination of Death and one of the equatorial elements.
*The Positive Elements:* Crystal, Light, Mist, and Sound. These elements are the combination of Life and one of the equatorial elements.
*The Unifying Elements:* Force, Nature, Space, and Time. Nature is within the sphere of elements and is a balanced mixture of all the elements. Space, force, and time are all outside the sphere and represent the normally intangible concepts of space, forces, and time."


----------



## RangerWickett (Jan 7, 2004)

The final teaser will be coming out before the week is up.  We'll announce it on the main page when it's ready, but in the meanwhile, any last minute questions?


----------



## Verequus (Jan 7, 2004)

Yes, I have one question.

"Casting a spell takes one full round." "You cannot ready an action to cast a normal spell, because you can only ready standard actions." Magical skills are like spells and need also one full round. But: "To counterspell, you must ready an action and declare an opponent whose spellcasting you want to try to counter." This is a contradiction, because counterspelling is a only a special use of Dispel Magic (regarding the time of use and the +20 bonus).
There are four possible solutions (next to the one, that I'm simply wrong).
 a) Counterspelling uses only standard actions, while normal dispelling uses full-round actions - but there is no logic behind that solution besides saving the full round-casting system.

 b) To say, that counterspelling needs to be a signature spell - but then you have to use counterspelling in one of the precious signature spells (so one extra only for counterspelling?) and then the parameters are already fixed, but counterspelling has to be flexible.

 c) To say, that dispel magic uses are always standard actions - but that breaks the default assumption of a full-round action.

 d) To say, that Simple Spells (combining only enhancements from one list and the general enhancements) can be casted as standard actions.

I would prefer solution d), but looking through the document I find the boon:

"*Improved Signature Spell:*  The Mage chooses one spell list she knows.  She can cast any spell from that list as a standard action as if it were a signature spell."

Has one to be able to counterspell to choose this boon?

BTW, have such spells of such lists to be Simple Spells or only combined with each other to qualify for standard actions, or can someone simply use 0 MPs for a qualifying component and get this benefit?


----------



## RangerWickett (Jan 8, 2004)

We changed dispel around a bit to simplify the math involved in countering a spell, and in the process we made it so, yes, you do have to have a Dispel Magic signature spell if you want to counter anything.  Otherwise, counterspelling was becoming abusive.


----------

