[net.games.frp] spell casting time, range, and duration

mr-frog@sdcsvax.UUCP (Dave Pare) (05/17/84)

<>

>	almost all AD&D referees ignore both [time limits and casting
>	times] (because low level MU's have to ait up to a full minute
>	to get off a spell).

It may be your experience that DM's do not use casting times, ranges,
or durations; I do.  I come from the other side of things; I've never
seen a game in which casting times were not used.

Having the Player's Handbook in front of me when writing such
articles is a great advantage.  You should try it sometime.
To clarify your misleading statement "first level mages have to
wait up to a minute to get off a spell" is referring to such amazing
feats of magic like "comprehend languages", "find familiar", "identify",
"nystul's magic aura", "read magic", and "write".  Not one of these could
be considered a "combat spell".  Every other first level spell
takes ONE SEGMENT to get off.  Wow.  A whole six seconds.

I don't pretend to like the "time" system, but it's simply
rediculous to simply ignore an integral part of the game.
For example, a 9-segment-casting-time meteor swarm gives the
enemy time to hit the magic user with other spells, arrows,
etc before the meteor swarm goes off.  He has an obvious
advantage if nobody can do anything to him to stop his spell.

>	I did not say that I do not know about rules to the contrary buried
>	somewhere deep in the system, only that unless a referee worships
>	the book(s) he will never find them.

I've never particularly worshipped the books, but when something
like a Xorn gets taken out by a first level spell, I would be
sorely tempted to at LEAST take a look at the spell description!
If this is your definition of a "book worshipper", then I must
admit I pray faithfully just about every game I play.


Dave Pare

[ucbvax | dcdwest]!sdcsvax!mr-frog

"A megaton of prevention..."
(Keith Laumer)