[AS&SH] Volume II: Sorcery

[Ghul]

Hello fellows,

The topic for this thread is Volume II, of Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea, which is developed and entering the early stages of editing. Bear in mind that the editing process may effect changes to what I present below.

ASTONISHING SWORDSMEN & SORCERERS OF HYPERBOREA
©2011 North Wind Adventures LLC

Text: Jeff Talanian
Illustrations: Ian Baggley

Volume II: Sorcery

• SPELLS (how magicians study arcane tomes, unlock eldritch formulae, trace weird diagrams; how clerics practice clandestine theologies, enter sacred pacts, perform rites, and supplicate to otherworldly beings )
  
  Starting Spells: Magicians and Clerics begin play with 3 spells apiece.
  Acquiring New Spells: Magicians gain 1 new spell per level gain; clerics gain 3. Also there are ways to gain spells independently, outside of level gains (research, copying, etc.)
  Spell Memorization: Following a decent night's sleep (6-8 hours)
  Spell Casting: Rules for casting spells (gestures, incantations, very few requiring components), an optional "concentration" check if struck while casting, casting scroll spells, casting from the pages of a spell book, casting while wearing prohibitive armour (spell failure chance), etc.
  
  
• SPELL TABLES (here the seven disciplines of magic are each presented with their own table of spells; each presented in 6 levels of power; there is some overlap -- e.g. phantasm is a 3rd level magician spell, but a 1st level illusionist spell)
  
  Magician Spells
  Cleric Spells
  Druid Spells
  Illusionist Spells
  Necromancer Spells
  Pyromancer Spells
  Witch Spells
  
  
• SPELLS A-Z (over 400 spells, a blend of traditional, new, and modified versions; subtle differences often present when the spell is seen through the Hyperborea lens; some spells are unique to a single discipline of magic, while other spells are common to several disciplines)
  

Of course, any questions or comments are quite welcome, fellows. Next up is Vol. III: Adventure & Combat.

[geoffrey]

How are the spell descriptions listed?

1. Is it like the AD&D Players Handbook (i. e., first all the cleric spells by level, then the druid spells by level, etc.)

2. Or is it like the Castles & Crusades Players Handbook (i. e., all the spells, regardless of type or level, listed in alphabetical order)?

[Ghul]

Nov 18, 2011 10:20:24 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

How are the spell descriptions listed?

1. Is it like the AD&D Players Handbook (i. e., first all the cleric spells by level, then the druid spells by level, etc.)

2. Or is it like the Castles & Crusades Players Handbook (i. e., all the spells, regardless of type or level, listed in alphabetical order)?

Alphabetical order. The 1e PHB has 4 disciplines of magic, so dividing them by class was relatively simple and intuitive. With 7 disciplines of magic in AS&SH, it soon became obvious that it was best to organize things alphabetically, like so:

Blur
Level: ill 2; Range: 0; Duration: 5-8 (1d4+4) rounds
The sorcerer becomes vague, hazy, nebulous. All melee and missile attacks against him are made at –2 “to hit” for the duration of the spell. Likewise, the sorcerer gains a +2 saving throw vs. aimed magical device attacks (e.g. rods, staves, wands and some rings).

Brain Death
Level: nec 4; Range: touch; Duration: permanent
This subtle spell kills a small portion of the victim’s brain region related to memory. The target must be touched, and if so is allowed a saving throw vs. death. If the saving throw is successful, the target is aware that foul sorcery has been attempted, though resisted. If the saving throw fails, the victim has not an inkling that a spell was cast. The sorcerer must then describe the memory he is killing. The memory is limited to an event, a person, a place, a thing, a conversation, etc. This spell cannot be used to kill an ability; e.g. a farmer cannot be made to forget how to raise crops, a cleric cannot be made to forget how to cast spells, etc. If the target rolls a 1 on his saving throw, he loses a year of memories and 1 point of intelligence; this blank is far the more noticeable by the victim’s allies. In either case, a throbbing headache follows the failed saving throw.

Breathe Fire
Level: drd 5, pyr 5; Range 10 feet; Duration: special
The sorcerer must purse his lips after speaking the final incantation of this spell, for the next time he opens his mouth he releases a gush of flames that is 10 feet long and 5 feet wide at its terminus. Victims in the path of breathe fire take 6-27 (3d8+3) points of damage, though they can make a saving throw vs. breath weapon for half damage. The sorcerer can open his mouth at will to release this spell, so he may move, engage in combat or perform other like activities, though he may not cast other spells. If, however, breathe fire is not released within 1 turn (10 minutes) the sorcerer immolates, taking maximum damage (27 hp) with no saving throw applicable. This spell can be dangerous if the caster is forgetful and speaks to an ally or other person.

As you can see, the blur spell is specifically for illusionists, brain death is specifically for necromancers, and breathe fire is for druids and pyromancers.

Cheers,
Jeff T.

[kent]

wrt Brain Death:- "The sorcerer must then describe the memory he is killing."

This is tricky stuff unless you handwave it. How explicitly aware must or speculative may the necromancer be of the memory of his victim he targets. How much witnessing, hearsay or guesswork *must* inform his "description" of the memory to be eradicated?

[Ghul]

Nov 19, 2011 20:59:18 GMT -6 kent said:

wrt Brain Death:- "The sorcerer must then describe the memory he is killing."

This is tricky stuff unless you handwave it. How explicitly aware must or speculative may the necromancer be of the memory of his victim he targets. How much witnessing, hearsay or guesswork *must* inform his "description" of the memory to be eradicated?

Kent, a valid though, but I think we are venturing into "referee's discretion" when you present this line of questioning. Let's think of some examples and see what we come up with. Looking at the spell, I hope you don't mind if I turn the question back at you, but how might you resolve the following instances:

• Massive minotaur guards entrance to dungeon. Party beats the hell out of him but does not kill him. Party moves into cave, but on their way in, the necromancer of party casts brain death, causing minotaur to forget what happened to him.
  
• Thief enters a shop and steals a precious, valuable item. Necromancer enters a short while later and casts brain death, attempting to cause the shop owner to forget he ever saw the thief; alternatively, he might attempt to erase all memory of the item itself!
  
• Man in tavern claims to have found the location of a sunken ship containing a treasure horde. Wants to strike deal with party: if they can recover the treasure he wants 50% and they can share the rest. Party agrees to terms, he tells them location, then necromancer casts brain death to erase man's memory of ever finding lost ship.
  
• Man can't live without his wife. Her death haunts his life and he can't take it anymore. He seeks the aid of a magician -- a necromancer. For 200 gp the necromancer offers to make the man forget he was ever married.
  

So, are there any of these you would rule against being possible?

[kesher]

Breathe Fire = Awesome.

[kent]

Nov 20, 2011 8:29:42 GMT -6 Ghul said:

I think we are venturing into "referee's discretion" when you present this line of questioning.

You called it a 'subtle' spell and I agree.

Consider the AD&D Illusionist which is an ill-considered failure to implement a uniquely interesting class. The illusionist exists as a chip off the MU block and no rules are presented for how to judge illusions for the simple reason the concept is very difficult and paradoxes hard to avoid.

So your spell is a small example of a moment when the writer could step back and define 'memory' for the purpose of the game to avoid idiotic nonsensical miss-use as with the Illusionist.

I only say this because I think the spell idea is interesting and could be unfolded into a suite of related spells if the idea was properly grounded.

For example my own AD&D Illusionist primes his target verbally through roleplaying, and builds plausibility with cantrip like effects before unleashing tableaux which normally would strain credibility.

With Brain Death the necromancer might (covertly) elicit from his victim in conversation the explicit memory and this calling forth of the memory into consciousness might make his task both easier and the surgery more precise.

Nov 20, 2011 8:29:42 GMT -6 Ghul said:

• Massive minotaur guards entrance to dungeon. Party beats the hell out of him but does not kill him. Party moves into cave, but on their way in, the necromancer of party casts brain death, causing minotaur to forget what happened to him.
  
• Thief enters a shop and steals a precious, valuable item. Necromancer enters a short while later and casts brain death, attempting to cause the shop owner to forget he ever saw the thief; alternatively, he might attempt to erase all memory of the item itself!
  
• Man in tavern claims to have found the location of a sunken ship containing a treasure horde. Wants to strike deal with party: if they can recover the treasure he wants 50% and they can share the rest. Party agrees to terms, he tells them location, then necromancer casts brain death to erase man's memory of ever finding lost ship.
  
• Man can't live without his wife. Her death haunts his life and he can't take it anymore. He seeks the aid of a magician -- a necromancer. For 200 gp the necromancer offers to make the man forget he was ever married.
  

So, are there any of these you would rule against being possible?

Minotaur: Memory of event shared with Necromancer. Straightforward success. Could make a low level version of spell for that.

Thief: Necromancer knows what thief looks like but did shopkeeper see the thief? How does one eradicate a memory that might not exist? So the conversation idea works here I think and could call for good roleplaying. The item is a good example so long as the necromancer himself has seen it, otherwise how does he know which item memory to excise?

Sunken Ship: Good example and this is my favourite use of it. Now what would happen if the Man with the Tale was lying? Could the necromancer tell something was up when casting his spell? Maybe a higher lvl one could.

Wife: You yourself invalidated this scenario in the spell description. It is too involved and not an event. I do however think there should be a variant spell (more difficult) that could attempt it.

I know that some would wonder if these considerations are necessary. They are for me. I call it 'thinking' and couldn't play in a game where 'thinking' was discouraged.

[Ghul]

Nov 21, 2011 9:47:47 GMT -6 kesher said:

Breathe Fire = Awesome.

Glad you like it, Aaron. We have a bunch of new fire related spells, several of which are accessible solely to the pyromancer subclass, but also some that are accessed by druids, too.

Over the past few years we've brought pyromancer pre-gens to the conventions where I've run demos of the game, and they've gone over pretty well. However, they don't have nearly as many available spells as magicians.

One of the more popular spells has been fire web, a second level spell that targets a single man-sized or smaller person. If the target fails their save, the fire web incapacitates them for three rounds, each round causing fire damage, though on a decreasing scale per round. Anyway, thanks!

[Ghul]

Nov 21, 2011 15:01:13 GMT -6 kent said:

Consider the AD&D Illusionist which is an ill-considered failure to implement a uniquely interesting class.

The illusionist exists as a chip off the MU block and no rules are presented for how to judge illusions for the simple reason the concept is very difficult and paradoxes hard to avoid.

Oh, I wouldn't go so far as to say ill-considered, but I do wholeheartedly agree that the impact and interpretation of illusions from 0e, to 1e, to 2e can be cause for confusion. Actually, 2e seemed to have recognized some of the issues with the class, no doubt brought on by how many times the Sage had to answer illusion related questions. In my system, I struggled to resolve a system that I feel is effective, and it begins with the first level phantasm spell (level 1 spell for illusionists, level 3 for magicians), and the "improved" and "advanced" tree of illusion spells that branch from it. I digress. We were chatting about the brain death spell...

So your spell is a small example of a moment when the writer could step back and define 'memory' for the purpose of the game to avoid idiotic nonsensical miss-use as with the Illusionist.

Kent, I understand what you are saying, so perhaps some examples are in order. Because of space constraints, however, our intention is to use the web site for examples of play and other definitions as you note. These will be located at our "resources" tab.

I only say this because I think the spell idea is interesting and could be unfolded into a suite of related spells if the idea was properly grounded.

For example my own AD&D Illusionist primes his target verbally through roleplaying, and builds plausibility with cantrip like effects before unleashing tableaux which normally would strain credibility.

That's fine. You illustrate precisely (IMO) why tabletop gaming is superior to its video game counterparts, because you as DM can define the various parameters; here you opt for some role play, which is excellent.

With Brain Death the necromancer might (covertly) elicit from his victim in conversation the explicit memory and this calling forth of the memory into consciousness might make his task both easier and the surgery more precise.

Nov 20, 2011 8:29:42 GMT -6 Ghul said:

• Massive minotaur guards entrance to dungeon. Party beats the hell out of him but does not kill him. Party moves into cave, but on their way in, the necromancer of party casts brain death, causing minotaur to forget what happened to him.
  
• Thief enters a shop and steals a precious, valuable item. Necromancer enters a short while later and casts brain death, attempting to cause the shop owner to forget he ever saw the thief; alternatively, he might attempt to erase all memory of the item itself!
  
• Man in tavern claims to have found the location of a sunken ship containing a treasure horde. Wants to strike deal with party: if they can recover the treasure he wants 50% and they can share the rest. Party agrees to terms, he tells them location, then necromancer casts brain death to erase man's memory of ever finding lost ship.
  
• Man can't live without his wife. Her death haunts his life and he can't take it anymore. He seeks the aid of a magician -- a necromancer. For 200 gp the necromancer offers to make the man forget he was ever married.
  

So, are there any of these you would rule against being possible?

Minotaur: Memory of event shared with Necromancer. Straightforward success. Could make a low level version of spell for that.

Agreed on success. Low level version? Well, I feel my necromancer list is extensive enough, so this sort of tinkering would have to fall to the capable hands of the individual referee. Remember, the effect is permanent. Perhaps a low level version, as you suggest, could suffer the same limitations of re-checked saves the way charm person functions.

Thief: Necromancer knows what thief looks like but did shopkeeper see the thief? How does one eradicate a memory that might not exist? So the conversation idea works here I think and could call for good roleplaying. The item is a good example so long as the necromancer himself has seen it, otherwise how does he know which item memory to excise?

Exactly! Here you think much the same way I do. I would go forth like this: Was the shop busy with other patrons? If so, did the thief specifically garner the attention of the shop owner? If the player did not state so, I would roll a d6, determining a chance of likelihood of the shop owner having seen the thief (or not). So, failure in this example is possible! But I would probably allow success if the target of the spell was the item itself, specifically, and yes, the necromancer would have to see it.

Sunken Ship: Good example and this is my favourite use of it. Now what would happen if the Man with the Tale was lying? Could the necromancer tell something was up when casting his spell? Maybe a higher lvl one could.

I would say the man forgets the lie, but no matter how you slice it, the party is screwed, going on a wild goose chase. That would be some mean refereeing. Heh.

Wife: You yourself invalidated this scenario in the spell description. It is too involved and not an event. I do however think there should be a variant spell (more difficult) that could attempt it.

I would not allow this one either. Way too involved, way too many synapses to neutralize (kill).

I know that some would wonder if these considerations are necessary. They are for me. I call it 'thinking' and couldn't play in a game where 'thinking' was discouraged.

Certainly everyone's style is different. And certainly I can not go into this level of detail, or the game (which is over 200k words) would double in size. When I was a kid, before the internet, before I could do more than look at Dragon on a magazine shelf at Walden Books, I had to make my own decisions. Now we live in the information age, so we, the collective traditional gaming community, have the opportunity to share ideas on methods, resolution, and clarifications. This is fun stuff!

[Finarvyn]

I think that the neat thing here is that there are some wonderful spell effects but they are vague enough that the Referee can interpret as fits the scenario. Too many RPGs try to spell out every different rule, but I can see that this memory erase thing (for example) could be as handy or worthless as the level of creativity of the players. That's a good thing.

[kent]

Ghul, I like the way you are going about this book unafraid of complicated ideas even if the presentation to the general reader has to be easily digestible.

There is a difference for me between roleplaying material which is simple, because the writer is simple, and simplified because the readers are simple. ;D

[Ghul]

Nov 25, 2011 17:36:19 GMT -6 kent said:

Ghul, I like the way you are going about this book unafraid of complicated ideas even if the presentation to the general reader has to be easily digestible.

There is a difference for me between roleplaying material which is simple, because the writer is simple, and simplified because the readers are simple. ;D

Kent, I think there is a lesson to be learned from Gary Gygax: Don't talk down to your reader. Gary spoke to us like we were his peers. And he didn't talk down to children, either. He was one of those rare figures who believed in the intelligence of children to learn and absorb somewhat complicated concepts and ideas.

When I was 10, reading through my DMG, I had to use my family dictionary to figure out some of the terms I'd never heard before. I thoroughly enjoyed this! In my impressionable youth, Gary became an idol of mine.

Now at age 40, scribbling some of my own gaming material, I endeavor to apply some of what I learned from the greatest there ever was. I appreciate that some of my ideas thus far work for you, but I will likewise accept that it might not work for others.

Cheers,
Jeff T.

[Deleted]

What makes the witch different from other spellcasters? I'm guessing a mix of spells and potions?

[Ghul]

Nov 26, 2011 15:23:04 GMT -6 dilvish said:

What makes the witch different from other spellcasters? I'm guessing a mix of spells and potions?

Yes, there is the mix of spells, and the witch has a great selection. I'm taking a glance at the list now, and I see a mix of spells shared with the magician class, spells shared with the necromancer subclass, and spells shared with the druid subclass. Also, the witch has its own unique spells shared by no other sorcerer class.

There is indeed the potion making, including philtres, hallucinogens, paralytics, poisons, and soporifics. The witch has an animate broom ability, as well as a powerful dance of beguilement ability that can charm onlookers. The witch can create an effigy of an opponent, using it to control the target, bring pain to him, or (at high level) even kill him. Also there is the familiar ability: a summoned minor demon that takes animal form (typically a bat, cat, owl, rat, or raven).

So, it is an excellent class, archetypal yet unique. Thanks for asking!

Cheers,
Jeff T.

[Finarvyn]

A cool idea. It makes sense that there would only be a certain number of spells to work with, and defining a different mix of spells for each sub-class makes each one individual and unique. (Kind of like spell schools in AD&D.)

[mabon5127]

Man can't live without his wife. Her death haunts his life and he can't take it anymore. He seeks the aid of a magician -- a necromancer. For 200 gp the necromancer offers to make the man forget he was ever married.

Great example that is outside of the combat box. Paying to get rid of painful memories could cause other long term role-playing possibilities as well. Other people didn't forget his wife. What happens when he is confronted with the facts later...Maybe a bad memory is better than a gap of nothing. Perhaps insanity fills the gap and the mind rolls off a cliff when confronted with a lost memory. Perhaps other darker things fill the gaps of our memories that are forcibly taken...

[Ghul]

Dec 22, 2011 6:46:32 GMT -6 mabon5127 said:

Man can't live without his wife. Her death haunts his life and he can't take it anymore. He seeks the aid of a magician -- a necromancer. For 200 gp the necromancer offers to make the man forget he was ever married.

Great example that is outside of the combat box. Paying to get rid of painful memories could cause other long term role-playing possibilities as well. Other people didn't forget his wife. What happens when he is confronted with the facts later...Maybe a bad memory is better than a gap of nothing. Perhaps insanity fills the gap and the mind rolls off a cliff when confronted with a lost memory. Perhaps other darker things fill the gaps of our memories that are forcibly taken...

Well, here is where I see some great refereeing on your part, Morgan. See, the easy path for a referee presented with this situation might well be to say: "No, you cannot do this with the spell; it does not work that way. Sorry, but your spell fails." But a veteran referee might allow it to work in some fashion that effects a less than desirable result, a perfect case of "Be careful what you wish for..." One might even go further than insanity as you rightly suggest; perhaps a demon occupies these gaps, or some other baleful entity. This can have a lasting effect on the campaign.