Fantasy Craft Second Printing Q&A Thread

[Khaalis]

{edit} Ignore this post. I forgot that Miracles was a separate quality.

[The_Grand_User]

I don't know that it'd apply even under RAW, as it's a sub quality/modification of the Sorcery quality, not the Miracles quality.

[Coyote0273]

Hence the question.

In my particular campaign, Sorcery is Difficult, but also Potent. So it's hard to cast, but for those that can cast it, it's very powerful. Campaign reasoning is that as technology is becoming more common, magic is being harder to cast and use.

When it comes to the divine magic, if miracles isn't affected the same, their spells would be quicker to cast, but less potent than the harder arcane spells. Which works within the same thematic reasoning as well.

[Bill Whitmore]

Normally, I wouldn't apply the Sorcery sub qualities to Miracles as the two are independent Campaign Qualities.

However, the whole purpose of Campaign Qualities is to modify the game to fit with your vision of the world.  If technology interferes with divine powers in the game than apply Difficult and Potent magic to spells from Paths.  If technology doesn't interfere with divine powers, then don't.  So long as everyone knows which way it is working for that specific game, you're golden.

[Mister Andersen]

It's in the back of the Epoch chapter, not the mechanics chapter.

[mothball]

Hey guys. My group and I came across an interesting by-product of casting the Insanity spell on someone last session. I couldn't find any mention of it on the forum, so I'm posting here.

Insanity says that on a roll of 15-20, the character becomes enraged. At the start of the init count, you roll again.

Under enraged, it says that you roll a DC 20 resolve check to calm yourself, or it fades at the end of the scene. The big thing is that at the very end of the condition, it states: "In either case, the character falls unconscious immediately after."

So, would Insanity make people fall unconscious if they end up rolling the enraged condition?

I argued that it wouldn't, otherwise the spell would be terminal, just like sleep. That's what we went with, but I'm just wondering what an official ruling would be?

Thanks. (Love FC, keep up the good work.)

[MugMug]

So, would Insanity make people fall unconscious if they end up rolling the enraged condition?

Rules Lawyer:
The enraged condition description defines two methods to lose that condition, either of which ("in either case") results in unconsciousness. The Insanity spell provides a third method to flip that toggle, which method is not described as causing unconsciousness. So, Insanity can cause the enraged condition without causing unconsciousness.

Common Sense:
Of course it wouldn't cause unconsciousness, as that "would be terminal, just like sleep."

Walter

[Gentry]

The summoning spells all carry the line "the (summoned thing) may not act during the round it appears". This means you must spend a full round summoning the creature, and then the creature spends a full round doing nothing (though you can certainly do other stuff once the spell's complete). So a summoning spell cast immediately after Initiative is rolled won't have an offensive impact on a combat until Round 3 (though it could have a defensive impact, as it's a meatshield for a round while it does nothing). This is a comparative slowdown of the spell's effect over 3.x (as there the summoned creature can act immediately upon appearing). Is this intended? 

[VisualStatic]

The summoning spells all carry the line "the (summoned thing) may not act during the round it appears". This means you must spend a full round summoning the creature, and then the creature spends a full round doing nothing (though you can certainly do other stuff once the spell's complete). So a summoning spell cast immediately after Initiative is rolled won't have an offensive impact on a combat until Round 3 (though it could have a defensive impact, as it's a meatshield for a round while it does nothing). This is a comparative slowdown of the spell's effect over 3.x (as there the summoned creature can act immediately upon appearing). Is this intended? 

My guess and how I would rule it, is that the summoned thing appears at the end of the round it was summoned in, but get no actions that round.
I.e  Summoned round 1, appears at the end of round 1 and gets no action, can act in Round 2.

My 2 cents.

[Big_Jim]

VisualStatic is on the right course, me thinks.

[Gentry]

I'd be with you both on that, except that the casting time for the summoning spells is listed as 1 Round, and when a casting time is measured in non-action increments (i.e. "1 half action", "1 full action", etc.), "the effect happens at the start of the caster’s first Initiative Count after the casting is complete" (pg 113). So as written it appears that:

Round the First: You declare "I cast a spell" (doubtless with every intention of attacking the darkness)

Round the Second: At your Init count, your "1 Round" spell casting time is complete, and your summoned creature appears. It cannot act here in round 2, but is at least a physical presence that can absorb an incoming blow or two. Note that you the spellcaster are free to do other stuff in this round (like run away and let your summoned creature take one for the team, or spend a few seconds to spell out for your summoned creature what you want it to do).

Round the Third: Your summoned creature can act normally (presumably during your Init count, for ease of use).

Is there a balance issue at play here? Was the spell slowed down for a reason? Was the casting time of one round intended, or should it have been 1 Full Action (in which case the "it appears but can't act this round" notion would hold up much better)?

[Bill Whitmore]

I'd be with you both on that, except that the casting time for the summoning spells is listed as 1 Round, and when a casting time is measured in non-action increments (i.e. "1 half action", "1 full action", etc.), "the effect happens at the start of the caster’s first Initiative Count after the casting is complete" (pg 113). So as written it appears that:

Round the First: You declare "I cast a spell" (doubtless with every intention of attacking the darkness)

Round the Second: At your Init count, your "1 Round" spell casting time is complete, and your summoned creature appears. It cannot act here in round 2, but is at least a physical presence that can absorb an incoming blow or two. Note that you the spellcaster are free to do other stuff in this round (like run away and let your summoned creature take one for the team, or spend a few seconds to spell out for your summoned creature what you want it to do).

Round the Third: Your summoned creature can act normally (presumably during your Init count, for ease of use).

Is there a balance issue at play here? Was the spell slowed down for a reason? Was the casting time of one round intended, or should it have been 1 Full Action (in which case the "it appears but can't act this round" notion would hold up much better)?

This was my understanding of the rules, too.  I think of it more along the lines of the creature recovering from disorientation.  "WTF just happened? Where am I and how did I get here?  Why are these people trying to kill me!?".

Round the Third: Your summoned creature can act normally (presumably during your Init count, for ease of use).

Since it doesn't act the turn it comes into play, it can act on its own initiative, too.  Making it wait to act until the following round removes the problem of deciding what happens if its initiative ends up higher than yours and should have already acted this round.

[Sletchman]

As written, you're totally correct Gentry.  it takes a round to cast, a round for the creature to sit around, and it finally acts on round 3.  I personally play that it acts on round 2, after taking the entirty of round 1 to summon it (during which time it can't act).  My reasoning is mostly a non-mechanics one - no one I play with would ever use summons in combat with the rules as written.  For what it's worth, I would also guess the reason it is listed as "1 round" is to stop the player using other options to do a bunch of other stuff while summoning - they have to concentrate fully on the summons - not because it should take 2 full rounds before you summon really takes effect.

I'd most definitely like to hear some designer intent on this one though.

[Bill Whitmore]

Thinking on it some more, this doesn't really bother me.  If you let it act the round it appears it could be subject to abuse through Spell Conversion that reduces the casting time to a free action.  Also, things that give you more actions are the ones most subject to abuse and this gives you the equivalent of a full turn's worth of actions for every single summoned creature every single round they exist.

If I was to change anything it would be to change the casting time to 1 Full Action rather than allow it to act the turn it appears.  Then the elemental would appear at the end of your turn and be available to act the following round.

[Sletchman]

If I was to change anything it would be to change the casting time to 1 Full Action rather than allow it to act the turn it appears.  Then the elemental would appear at the end of your turn and be available to act the following round.

That's basically what I do (because rereading my post it wasn't very clear).  No one has yet to abuse summons, so I'm cool with that way.