Topic: Miscast table... Doubt

Every magic there has its own miscast table, and if the result is a 7 or plus, we go to the fist table of miscast results. What are you doing there? Allowing the players to re-roll the 1d12 or just looking the 7 or plus result? Because what happens when using the first logic is very simple: you give the player the hope that maybe nothing happens with a new 1-6 result, but if you use the latter logic, something terrible will always happens.

Re: Miscast table... Doubt

tbastos wrote:

Every magic there has its own miscast table, and if the result is a 7 or plus, we go to the fist table of miscast results. What are you doing there? Allowing the players to re-roll the 1d12 or just looking the 7 or plus result? Because what happens when using the first logic is very simple: you give the player the hope that maybe nothing happens with a new 1-6 result, but if you use the latter logic, something terrible will always happens.

So you're basically asking whether we follow the rules in the book or house rule it to encourage better results from dice rolls?

I play the rules as-is, because:

1) The player is choosing to cast the spell and understands the risks.
2) They can cast the spell without making a roll as long as they memorized it in the morning and are not casting more spells than allowed.
3) If they DO decide to risk it and cast an un-memorized spell or spells beyond their daily allotment, then per "1" above they know the risks, and are pushing their luck to cast an extra spell or one they really need right now.
4) Even in the case of "3" above, they get a saving throw to see if they even need to roll on the miscast table.
5) They now get a 50% chance of the "not so bad" results on 1-6, or the "worse" results on 7+
6) Going through all of the above, and getting some crazy miscast result is actually pretty fun (even for the players).

Just to be clear, you are NOT rolling on the miscast table after every single casting of every spell, right?

Re: Miscast table... Doubt

I am already starting to create miscast rules for 1-6. If I haveN't then nothing happens on 1-6

Re: Miscast table... Doubt

Crunk Posby wrote:
tbastos wrote:

Every magic there has its own miscast table, and if the result is a 7 or plus, we go to the fist table of miscast results. What are you doing there? Allowing the players to re-roll the 1d12 or just looking the 7 or plus result? Because what happens when using the first logic is very simple: you give the player the hope that maybe nothing happens with a new 1-6 result, but if you use the latter logic, something terrible will always happens.

So you're basically asking whether we follow the rules in the book or house rule it to encourage better results from dice rolls?

I play the rules as-is, because:

1) The player is choosing to cast the spell and understands the risks.
2) They can cast the spell without making a roll as long as they memorized it in the morning and are not casting more spells than allowed.
3) If they DO decide to risk it and cast an un-memorized spell or spells beyond their daily allotment, then per "1" above they know the risks, and are pushing their luck to cast an extra spell or one they really need right now.
4) Even in the case of "3" above, they get a saving throw to see if they even need to roll on the miscast table.
5) They now get a 50% chance of the "not so bad" results on 1-6, or the "worse" results on 7+
6) Going through all of the above, and getting some crazy miscast result is actually pretty fun (even for the players).

Just to be clear, you are NOT rolling on the miscast table after every single casting of every spell, right?

Actually no. I am in doubt of what Raggi wanted here. It tends more, reading carefully, to the catastrophic end, which, of course, is better and it is what I will follow.

Re: Miscast table... Doubt

tbastos wrote:
Crunk Posby wrote:
tbastos wrote:

Every magic there has its own miscast table, and if the result is a 7 or plus, we go to the fist table of miscast results. What are you doing there? Allowing the players to re-roll the 1d12 or just looking the 7 or plus result? Because what happens when using the first logic is very simple: you give the player the hope that maybe nothing happens with a new 1-6 result, but if you use the latter logic, something terrible will always happens.

So you're basically asking whether we follow the rules in the book or house rule it to encourage better results from dice rolls?

I play the rules as-is, because:

1) The player is choosing to cast the spell and understands the risks.
2) They can cast the spell without making a roll as long as they memorized it in the morning and are not casting more spells than allowed.
3) If they DO decide to risk it and cast an un-memorized spell or spells beyond their daily allotment, then per "1" above they know the risks, and are pushing their luck to cast an extra spell or one they really need right now.
4) Even in the case of "3" above, they get a saving throw to see if they even need to roll on the miscast table.
5) They now get a 50% chance of the "not so bad" results on 1-6, or the "worse" results on 7+
6) Going through all of the above, and getting some crazy miscast result is actually pretty fun (even for the players).

Just to be clear, you are NOT rolling on the miscast table after every single casting of every spell, right?

Actually no. I am in doubt of what Raggi wanted here. It tends more, reading carefully, to the catastrophic end, which, of course, is better and it is what I will follow.

I guess I'm confused about why you ask about a reroll? I would say there is a 50/50 chance to either get a 1-6 or a 7-12, so to me it doesn't "tend toward the catastrophic end."

(But in most cases, you should assume Raggi always tends toward catastrophic results! wink

Re: Miscast table... Doubt

I have started writing results for 1-6