Re: (TFT) When to deduct for a thrown spell

[Matt Fraser <matt@chem.QueensU.CA>]

>In this case, the spell is cast, ST is expended, but there's no tangible
>effect this round, only the promise that I can control the animal next round
>for the extra ST point it costs to renew the spell.  That seems contrary
>to the intent.  There are cases (missle spells spring to mind) where you
>may spend the ST without a result, but that's clearly known ahead of time.
>It seems like the reward for a successful cast should be seen in that round,
>by having the animal make another attack.

I don't agree with this.  You do know ahead of time that you will be
spending strength with no immediate result.  If you've already seen the
creature attack, you know that you will not get to attack again (not to
mention the chance that the creature will resist the spell).  You can either
target another opponent who has not yet attacked with the spell, or get the
benefit of controlling a higher DX figure next turn.  If you let the
creature attack again, it *and the wizard* will effectively be getting two
actions that turn.  Don't forget that the wizard can still perform his own
action on the following turn as well as attacking with the controlled
figure, which is a huge advantage on its own.

Looking at the spell description, you don't spend the extra fatigue to
maintain the spell until the 2nd turn.  This means that Control spells
behave just like Summon spells: summoned creatures cannot attack on the turn
they are summoned either, so you also have to spend and extra fatigue to get
any use out of them.

I think this is balanced, especially when you consider that a control spell
can get you something much tougher that a similar IQ summoning spell (albeit
at the risk of the creature making a saving throw).

>As to the case of a high DX low IQ fighter getting controlled by multiple
>wizards, in order of adjDX, there's still one attack being made per figure.

No there isn't.  The fighter is making 2 or more attacks on that turn.  That
is open to abuse by PC's and FM's alike.  Imagine this: your high DX party
have all had their actions in a large combat.  Your opposition has a bunch
of wizards either with low DX or who have taken the Delay Action option.
Each one in turn then casts Control Person on a figure in the middle of your
group who then dispenses with one or two of your party.  There's nothing you
can do about it this turn, and the last successful casting wizard on the
other side still maintains control of your teammate forcing you to waste a
spell to neutralize your friend.  Of course, PC's c(w)ould use similar tactics.

>If you think about it in terms of a melee turn equalling 5 seconds, and
>one figure making 2, 3 or 4 attacks in that time, it seems absurd, but
>TFT combat is more an approximation than an attempt at close simulation.
>It's attempting to be fair, not accurate, I think.

I don't have a problem with figures being able to attack more than once in a
turn, but they should either be using bows, have *very* high DX and
appropriate talents, a magic item or a powerful spell, not some IQ 11 spell.

Matt

=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"