Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

User Profile

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
  • Source
Clear All
new posts

  • Sorry, but this thread reminds me of those games people would play in middle school where they would compare superheros from Marvel and DC and ask who would win. It's not a really useful question. The world is more complex than "which one is the most powerful?". You have to ask yourself what your intention is with using any given contract. Is it to kill someone? Hide from someone? Create something out of nothing? Make someone feel a particular emotion? Find something that is hidden? Flee from a raging enemy?

    The magic available via contracts is fairly widespread to the point...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Falcon777
    replied to What if a fetch gets killed?
    Not quite. Rather, fetches have magic called echoes. Some of these echoes only work in the presence of changelings, and some of them only work on the changeling they are impersonating.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Falcon777
    replied to What if a fetch gets killed?
    Fetches dying before the changeling makes it back ironside isn't an uncommon thing. And while as far as I know nothing stops a Fae from making another fetch, my understanding is that it's so unlikely to happen that it might as well be unheard of.

    As to what fetches are capable of and what kind of ideas someone might have, I'd honestly recommend reading the Fetch portion of the book. There is quite a bit there that can be used, and if the game is truly crossover then you'd want to read it anyways. You're looking at pages 233-239 (not that much, really).
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Which, if you wish to acknowledge all of that you immediately add the +2 reach option that says: This spell now allows the subject to bypass solid barriers that would block its path so long as the area factor would not need to be increased.

    Break boundary should allow you to go through walls. Maybe just my opinion, but I will not change it....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • The "unable to move" part of the +2 reach option is where I see the spell allowing you to bypass walls. Nobody is ever placed into a situation where they truly cannot move unless they are bound stiff or paralyzed, which, quite frankly, is so rare that I disagree with that being the only interpretation of that clause.

    Edit: It can also be argued that adding a +2 reach option to bypass solid barriers that block your path would not be unreasonable. Word count limits are a thing.

    Edit 2: Furthermore, as an aesthetic thing: when designing a spell that has universal...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Falcon777; 07-06-2019, 11:33 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • The reason people haven't made such a spell is that break boundary already does that when you include the reach option.

    Edit: Granted, your interpretation of the +2 reach option could be different from my own....
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Falcon777; 07-06-2019, 11:08 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Falcon777
    replied to Spell relinquishment loop hole
    Honestly, if you're truly, truly intent on relinquishing lots of spells and you want to still have all of your willpower without a large xp tax, I would talk with your ST about it because that desire goes against at least one theme built into the game. No one is stopping you from having that option, but it's still something you should talk with your ST about since that very likely would change the expectations of your game.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Falcon777
    replied to Spell relinquishment loop hole
    You THEORETICALLY could innure the spell that did it...but then you're dealing with paradox. At that point you'd need mana and/or double dedicated magic tools to completely do this "safely." And without Space 2 you're going to be limited to casting spells on your sanctum (or wherever else you created your demesne, you crazy person you).
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Falcon777
    replied to Signs of Sorcery Errata
    Logged issue: Title of Chapter 3 is missing from the Table of Contents.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Falcon777
    started a topic Signs of Sorcery Errata

    Signs of Sorcery Errata

    I am making this thread as a repository for everyone that has ALREADY submitted a report. This is specifically for everyone that hasn't submitted one in order to cut down on duplicate errata reports. This is NOT the place to actually submit an errata report for Signs of Sorcery. For that you need to go to this page:
    https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F..._LDKQ/viewform
    See more | Go to post
No activity results to display
Show More

Profile Sidebar

Collapse
Profile Picture
Falcon777
Member
Last Activity: Today, 04:03 PM
Joined: 09-13-2015
Location:
Working...
X