Spells and Combos

[StarHawk]

Just to clarify and to see if anyone knows of contaradicting text, Spells can't be comboed in any way. Am I correct? I know the core book said no, and I haven't seen errata saying otherwise. But I would like to know before Tuesday, so I can tell my player that I'm right, or that he's right...

 

[lauge_perto]

You can not, in any way, combo a Spell with a Charm, and I have never seen anything to indicate you could, so not to worry, your players character wont be that grotesque (or at least not because of this).


- Lauge

 

[Haku1]

You should bear in mind that..,


One, spells can't be placed in a combo. It's stated explictly.


Two, -nothing- says he can't have a persistent charm in effect. Say a persistent dodge and/or parry charm giving him some measure of protection.


That's it, really...

 

[StarHawk]

the player in question was telling me that nothing says that spells can't be comboed with other spells. And I'm confident that I'm correct, I just want to be sure.

 

[Haku1]

Tell him to READ the text for the 'charms' for learning how to cast spells in the core book on page 191.


At the -end- of every single write-up, there is a line stating such and such circcle sorcery can never be part of a combo.


I think it's rather clear that spells + combos don't mix.

 

[Haku1]

And if spells can't be placed in a combo with -anything-, I'm fairly certain that two seperate spells can't be comboed together.


At least by a -single- person. I'm not sure what happens if you get two people casting spells at the same time... other then one going off after another.


Synergistic effects might be possible. In that one spell is used to boost the effects of a second one.

 

[lauge_perto]

At least by a -single- person. I'm not sure what happens if you get two people casting spells at the same time... other then one going off after another.

Even more people die than normaly

Synergistic effects might be possible. In that one spell is used to boost the effects of a second one.

Sounds interresting, but were have you picked that up, other than the obvious synergi of more damage:


Initiative 19: DIE EXTRAS - DEATH OF OBSIDIAN BUTTERFLIES!


Initiative 12: DIE EXTRAS - DEATH OF OBSIDIAN BUTTERFLIES AGAIN!


Initiative 6: Auw...


- Lauge

 

[Persell]

Synergistic effects might be possible. In that one spell is used to boost the effects of a second one.

I actually don't see why not. I don't think it is stated anywhere, that you can't make spells that work together. So to sorcerers cast two different spells designed to boost each other. I could be a quite interesting take on spell casting.


/Orm

 

[Joseph]

the player in question was telling me that nothing says that spells can't be comboed with other spells. And I'm confident that I'm correct, I just want to be sure.

Sorcery is a Simple Charm.  More than one Simple Charm cannot be in a Combo.  Thus, to Combo Sorcery, you'd have to break the Combo rules, even if Sorcery COULD be in a Combo.


Comboing Sorcery with Sorcery is even MORE illegal than just including Sorcery in a Combo, because it breaks all the previous rules, plus more.

 

[lauge_perto]

But it wasn't really comboing sorcery Haku talked about - it was combining the effects. One sorcery (cast by mr. 1) affects and enhances mr. 2's sorcery. Isn't this very possibly, albeit you would need some sorcery for mr. 1 to cast that had this effect.


- Lauge

 

[Joseph]

But it wasn't really comboing sorcery Haku talked about - it was combining the effects. One sorcery (cast by mr. 1) affects and enhances mr. 2's sorcery. Isn't this very possibly' date=' albeit you would need some sorcery for mr. 1 to cast that had this effect.[/quote']
I wasn't referring to whatever Haku said, I was referring to the person who said they knew someone who said Comboing Sorcery was not illegal.


Sure you can cast a Spell that powers up the next Spell you cast, if you know such a Spell.  That has nothing to do with Combos whatsoever though.

 

[lauge_perto]

Sure you can cast a Spell that powers up the next Spell you cast, if you know such a Spell.  That has nothing to do with Combos whatsoever though.

It appears that I have either:


a) Not read your post very well


b) Left my brain on a bus (and I have admitted to this earlier).


- Lauge

 

[psychoph]

I would see it as highly unlikely to have one player cast 2 spells in some sort of combo.  Not only because of the above mentioned simple charms can;t go with simple charms, but also because spells have a casting time that is at a minimum one full turn of no other action and no maximum.  Some of the solar spells take days to cast how coudl you fire off another spell in a combo with a spell that is taking 24hours.


It seems to me that the only way you could have multiple spells in either in rapid succession or haing 2 socerers in harmony.


Does anyone know of a spell or rule that states the number of turns it takes to cast the spell is reduced by more socerers participating in the spell.  I seem to remember reading one that explicitly stated this.

 

[Haku1]

As far as I know there isn't such a ruling in place regarding the casting duration being lowered.


There ARE artifacts out there that can store spells that you can release in an instant.... which means that in theory someone with say a spell binding cord could pop off a few potent spells in a turn via the artifact...

 

[Forn Clakes]

Left my brain on a bus (and I have admitted to this earlier).

That will stain if left for too long.


~FC.

 

[Rokan]

As far as I know there isn't such a ruling in place regarding the casting duration being lowered.
There ARE artifacts out there that can store spells that you can release in an instant.... which means that in theory someone with say a spell binding cord could pop off a few potent spells in a turn via the artifact...

 Instant release of spells?  I would have thought that a knot in a spell binding cord would be of a complexity related to the spell, taking more time to unravel than a fake knot.


 Could I get the protective sphere of water spell in water balloon form?

 

[Haku1]

As far as I can tell... you make a roll to unravel said knot... and the spell is unleashed... nowhere is it stated that it takes 1 full turn or 1 full action to unravel a knot. Which means, that in combat, you could do a few split actions and let lost a number of spells.

 

[Persell]

As far as I can tell... you make a roll to unravel said knot... and the spell is unleashed... nowhere is it stated that it takes 1 full turn or 1 full action to unravel a knot. Which means, that in combat, you could do a few split actions and let lost a number of spells.

I for one think that would make the sorcery capturing cords FAR too powerful if they could unleash multiple spells in one turn, otherwise I can see groups of Exalts asking each other to hold the cord whilst their mates 'charge it up' for use in combat. Whilst this doesnt appear to be written as a no no anywhere, it would be rather unbalancing and certainly against the spirit of the rules of the artifact. One spell either in or out per turn would be my house rule.

 

[Coyotekin]

Yes, I think if th cord could be used that way then it would be time for an ST to intervene if it would upset the game balance. Besides, Exalted are powerful enough not to need to combo off spells as it is. I think that would just be plain cheesy.

 

[Haku1]

As far as I can tell... you make a roll to unravel said knot... and the spell is unleashed... nowhere is it stated that it takes 1 full turn or 1 full action to unravel a knot. Which means, that in combat, you could do a few split actions and let lost a number of spells.

I for one think that would make the sorcery capturing cords FAR too powerful if they could unleash multiple spells in one turn, otherwise I can see groups of Exalts asking each other to hold the cord whilst their mates 'charge it up' for use in combat. Whilst this doesnt appear to be written as a no no anywhere, it would be rather unbalancing and certainly against the spirit of the rules of the artifact. One spell either in or out per turn would be my house rule.

True... but according to the rules of that artifact. in the twilight caste book, they do have limitations. First, it has to be of the -appropiate- level to catch said spell (3 for emerald, 4 for sapphire, 5 for adamant), then there is also the fact that any said cord can ONLY hold 3 spells at any given time and they HAVE to be spells capable of being directed at someone.


Also, the cord can only hold 3 spells at any time and there is no way for you to figure out what is in each knot if you weren't the one to tie it.


This is outside of the fact of what happens if you destroy the cord with a physical attack, all knotted spells go off at once.


And if it's your game, you're free to go with the house-rule, if you want...

Yes, I think if th cord could be used that way then it would be time for an ST to intervene if it would upset the game balance. Besides, Exalted are powerful enough not to need to combo off spells as it is. I think that would just be plain cheesy.

I would suggest looking at the twilight castebook, but it's not cheesy... this is what you should be expecting from someone willing to burn 3 or more artifact points on something useful.


It has limited use. Also bear in mind that popping off spells with this artifact means it's -still- subject to all the rules of spell-casting, ie, it's still vulnerable to counter-magic, perfect defenses and so forth.