Goodman Games

Back when bholmes4 had asked what was to stop someone from using massive spellburn to get a good result on the patron bond spell. Well, that thread (http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/vie ... 67&t=15311) is in a locked forum now, but I recently had the answer turn up in play (http://unseenservant.us/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=757).

One player, having an elf PC and 4 weeks downtime, decided to reduce Strength, Agility, and Stamina to 3 by spellburn, and then use the remaining time to heal, thus allowing the best possible spell check for patron bond. Unfortunately, the die roll for spellburn was 13 - the caster "develops a bleeding sore that will not heal until he pays back the aid of the power that assisted him." So, I have ruled that the spellburn will not even start to heal until the PC completes a specific transaction for the newly acquired patron.

Even if the chances of true disaster are small, spellburn is not a sure thing. There are reasons to use it; there is no certainty in the outcome. While I am sure that the player will appreciate the long-term benefits if he survives the short-term drawback, it becomes clear that one is gambling each and every time one attempts something so drastic.

Kudos, Mr. Goodman, for making magic feel dangerous and unpredictable!

_________________
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.

Yeah. Also, there was no guarantee of a 32+ result... I had to roll >= 9, and I rolled a 10. Yeah, it was a good risk. And, long term, it's worth it. But man... being completely gimped suuuuuuucks.

I concur wholeheartedly on the magic system though, very well done.

Any system that encourages Faustian bargains like this is A-Okay with me!

_________________
SoBH pbp:

Cathbad the Meek (herbalist Wizard 1): AC 9; 4 hp; S 7, A 7, St 10, P 17, I 13, L 8; Neutral; Club, herbs, 50' rope, 50 cp; -1 to melee attack rolls. Hideous scar.

Awesomeness!

My favorite spellburn related incident revolves around a player burning 20 points of physical scores and electing to roll with +20 on top of his normal bonus rather than simply treat the roll as a natural 20 as allowed by the rules... and he rolled a 1.

Players are their own worst enemy most of the time - he could have just taken a result of 25 with no chance of mishap, but he wanted that 32+ result so bad that he talked himself out of it and wound up with his spell failing and a brand new crab claw to keep him company.

They could have burned a point of luck to avoid the corruption, correct?

Why would you EVER burn luck to stop CRAB CLAW?!?!?!?!

COOLEST THING EVAAAAARRRRRR

Only as long as it didn't interfere with spellcasting. But yeah, it sounds pretty kewl. I'd give the character a claw attack.

Disagree... crab claw is cool no matter what.

Yes, the player could have burned Luck to avoid the crab claw... he decided that having a crab claw was too cool to pass up, especially because it came with a claw attack.

It doesn't directly hinder his ability to cast spells, yet, since its only restriction is inability to hold and use things normally with that "hand."