Re: (TFT) My thoughts on the Fog spell

[daniel@jaws.greatwhite.com (Dan Tulloh)]

Rick,

   Thanks for the comments!  Ok, here goes ...

   As stated in the original email, the ideas for this Fog
spell were off of the top of my head and had not been play-
tested, so Im not surprised it would generated questions.

>	First the fST cost of the 3 versions of the spell are
>unclear to me.  The first number is the casting cost I assume 
>but what is the second number?  The cost to maintain the 
>spell?

Yeah, Im sorry - that's the shorthand I use.  When a spell has
a maintenance cost, I've usually presented it in the "slash"
format.  Under this format, a BLUR would cost 1/1 - 1 to cast
and 1 to maintain.

> Re: Cumulative Costs:
 
Yes, I had originally intended that maintenance cost increases
for each hour along an arithmetic series, ie the cost of 
maintaining the spell is not a single number, but constantly
rises.  So, for Light Fog, the first hour is free, the second
hour costs 1ST, the third hour costs 2ST, the fourth costs 3ST
and so on.

When casting Fog, the wizard is manipulating the forces of 
nature that causes natural fog to be generated, ie lowering 
the air temperature, increasing the humidity and/or dew
point (whatever it is that causes fog to created).  So the
fog is a by-product of the spell and not the actual spell.
Thats why it takes so long to form and then dissipate.

The idea behind the arithmetic series is that the wizard is
holding nature at bay while the fog is present.  I thought
this manipulation should get harder and harder as time goes
on, otherwise even a beginning wizard could maintain light
fog for 8 hours!  This just didnt make sense.

In the same vein, it didnt make sense to me to use the cost
per turn idea as then a wizard would not be able to maintain
fog long enough for it to be of any real use.

>	Does the casting wizard have to be within the
>fog (or with in creation spell range) to maintain the spell?
>After an hour he or she might be a long way away.

I hadn't thought about this: perhaps it would be a good idea
to have the wizard remain within the fog in order to maintain
it.

>	It seems to me that you could have the different 
>versions of the spell requiring different IQ's to cast.  So
>the IQ 10 version would be Light Fog, an IQ 13 version
>being the Medium Fog, and the IQ 16 version being the
>Heavy Fog.  The spells are prerequisites of each other so
>someone who knows the Heavy Fog spell automatically
>knows the other two versions for no extra memory cost.

Good idea, I hadnt thought of this when I jotted the idea
down.  It is more along the lines of TFT to use different 
IQ levels for the different versions.

>	I am uneasy about this being a creation spell.
>Creation spells have a large number of 'built in' rules,
>and this spell breaks many of them.  (For example,  it 
>takes 15 minutes to come into being, it has a vastly 
>longer duration than a creation spell, etc.)  I would 
>suggest that this spell is placed in its own class (a 'W' 
>for weather spells, or at least it is made a Special spell).  
>In some ways this seems like an enviromental magic, 
>would this fog spell be stopped by a rune line?

Rune lines?  I'm not familiar with that.  The idea for a
new class of spell (W) is interesting - I was trying to 
pick a class which came closest to the idea.

>	Rules need to be made for what happens to
>the fog in a breeze.

Well, lets see.  The wizard is holding the forces of nature
at bay while the fog is present, so any breezes that are in
the area would be routed around the fog. Within the fog, if
a wizard were to cast OPEN TUNNEL, a hex of clear air would
be generated, afterward fog from the surrounding hexes would
move into the open hex. If a wizard somehow creates a breeze,
I'd have to ponder on how that would be handled.

>	In your discussion with John, you mentioned
>you thought of this as a battle magic.  (That is, a spell
>for battle fields so you can hide troops.)  If that is the 
>case, I think it should be larger (especially since people 
>can see in a fair distance into the fog).

Larger is certainly do-able.  :)  Perhaps at a higher initial
cost though.  People can see a fair distance into Light Fog,
hence the LOS rules I threw in.  I've personally been in fog
so thick I couldn't see objects 10 feet in front of me. That's
some serious fog. Hence the idea of Heavy Fog, Medium Fog and
Light Fog.

>	As for Mage Sight, I would rather keep things
>simple.  Either the Mage Sight allows you to see thru the
>fog with out penalty or it does not help at all. I would 
>lean towards saying it does not help at all.

I think I am coming around to this point of view as well.

>	I see two ways to handle the spell.  Version
>1 says it is a magical obstical, i.e. a creation spell.  It
>appears at once and the physical location does not
>matter.  Thus it will stay for its duration in high winds,
>hot desert, etc.  It will keep its shape.  Mage sight 
>could see thru it.  The Destroy Creation spell and the 
>Advanced Destroy Creation spell will toast it.  Generally 
>it acts 'magical'.  

This would fall in line with its classification of a Creation.
If it were a new class, such as Weather (W), Im not sure the
above would apply.

>	In the second version this spell subtely affects 
>the enviroment by slowly making the spell's area of effect 
>cooler and more moist. (Perhaps stilling slight breezes.)
>Thus the chance of a fog forming naturally would be 
>greater but it would not work in high winds or in a 
>dry desert.  Its area is approximate and it would look
>natural.  It would logically take a long time to form.
>It is not a creation spell, so the Destroy Creation spells
>would not work.  The Mage Sight spell would not help 
>at all.  Basically it forms a natural, and in all ways real, 
>fog.

This is what I had originally intended.

>	The problem with this version is that it is
>unlike any other spell in the normal TFT rules, and is
>much more difficult to describe in the spell description
>and for an inexperienced GM to handle.  If you would
>like the 2nd version,  discuss the background theory
>so the GM knows that this is a horse of a different 
>color.

Which is why I asked for comments from the list.  :)  BTW,
if we can agree on the background for the fog, perhaps 
other weather manipulations might be envisioned, such as
Snow, Rain, etc.  The only other thing that comes close
is the Magic Rainstorm.  But this is extremely localized.
It would be neat if we could think up some way for a 
wizard or group of wizards to affect the forces of nature
over a large area.

A Druid grove close to a farming community might be very
desirable in that case as the Druids could help to ensure
that rain arrives on a regular basis.  Also, the idea of
a group of wizards forming a tornado is interesting.

Dan

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