| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Cripple X Seasoned
Joined: 24 Jul 2008 Posts: 126 Location: Athens, Georgia, USA
|
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:30 pm Post subject: Smarts vs. Spirit Spell Range/Disruption |
|
|
I was wondering what the rational behind having spell range and disruption vs. non-damaging means (test of wills) based off of Smarts rather than the attribute linked to you're casting skill is? It seems to me that it gives characters with Arcane Background: Magic an advantage over characters with Arcane Background: Miracles.
I am GMing a campaign and I'm heavily considering having characters with AB: Miracles use Spirit rather than Smarts for their spell range and to avoid disruption vs. tests of will, I just wanted to check first to make sure I understand all the implications behind such a switch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vinzent Seasoned

Joined: 13 Mar 2009 Posts: 275
|
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Makes a whole lotta sense to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
77IM Veteran

Joined: 23 Jun 2009 Posts: 736 Location: Austin, TX
|
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:22 pm Post subject: Re: Smarts vs. Spirit Spell Range/Disruption |
|
|
| Cripple X wrote: | | I was wondering what the rational behind having spell range and disruption vs. non-damaging means (test of wills) based off of Smarts rather than the attribute linked to you're casting skill is? It seems to me that it gives characters with Arcane Background: Magic an advantage over characters with Arcane Background: Miracles. | Magic backlash causes Shaken, which is removed with a Spirit check, so it's not like the Magic guy can ignore Spirit and go full Smarts, either. And getting Shaken from the backlash occurs in combat a lot more often than being out of range or being disrupted during maintenance, so if you had to pick, you'd want Spellcasting to be based on Spirit rather than Smarts, like a Sorcerer. Or would you rule that Shaken caused by backlash can be removed by a Smarts check for a magician? If the magician's backlash actually causes a Wound, and he tries to Soak it, should that be a Smarts check instead of a Vigor check? The attributes are relatively well balanced against one another and skill pricing is only one part of that; no reason you couldn't build a Miracles caster with Smarts d10, Spirit d6, and just take the hit buying Faith skill up past Spirit.
The different stats represent different things. Look at how telekinesis uses Spirit. Would you rule that a Magic character using telekinesis bases their damage on Smarts instead of Spirit? Smarts is used to "keep your cool" for Edges like Berserk and Skills like Taunt, so it makes sense that it is used to maintain powers. And it's linked to Notice so it kind of makes sense that it can affect range.
Of course your proposed change also makes sense, and if you implement it I am pretty sure everything will work just fine. But I think the Arcane Powers system loses a little of its flavor if you start linking everything (not just the skill) to one attribute.
-- 77IM |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Clint Site Admin

Joined: 13 May 2003 Posts: 12184
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:16 am Post subject: Re: Smarts vs. Spirit Spell Range/Disruption |
|
|
| Cripple X wrote: | | I was wondering what the rational behind having spell range and disruption vs. non-damaging means (test of wills) based off of Smarts rather than the attribute linked to you're casting skill is? It seems to me that it gives characters with Arcane Background: Magic an advantage over characters with Arcane Background: Miracles. |
77IM pretty much nailed it; the rationale is that Smarts is the Attribute that makes the most sense for it (being "mental agility") and it's balanced like anything in SW in a more holistic sense by looking at everything as a whole.
A miracle user needs Smarts for Ranges, where a Magic/Psi user needs Spirit for Backlash. There's no "meta-Attribute" a character can get all their benefits from. _________________ Clint Black
Savage Worlds Core Rules Brand Manager
www.peginc.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|