Topic: Fireballs
Started by: Bob Richter
Started on: 5/30/2002
Board: The Riddle of Steel
On 5/30/2002 at 9:31am, Bob Richter wrote:
Fireballs
One of the things that's bothered me about tRoS sorcery is it says THERE ARE NO FIREBALLS, and yet there's an easy (at least as easy as Armor of Air) way to create them. Watch:
--
Fireball (Master)
Spell of One
CTN: 9 (Casting time - 9 seconds)
T) 1 (air is inanimate, yes?)
R) 2 (if I can see it, I can fry it. WayCool.)
V) 3 (up to 300 gallons of air. Big Fry.)
D) 0 (I don't need any. Movement 3's acceleration effects are instantaneous. From there, nature takes its course.)
L) 3 (Movement 3. I said that already.)
Vagary: Movement 3 (I'm repeating myself.)
Effects:
Speed (3:) to get it going.
Maneuverability (3:) to keep it contained.
Instantaneous (I said that too.)
Through friction (air against air) instantly heats up to 300 gallons of common atmosphere to temperatures sufficient for the explosive combustion of diatomic nitrogen. The resulting short-lived atmospheric firestorm will be sufficient to incenerate anything within the target area.
--
Notice that I haven't violated any rules.
1) It doesn't create matter from nothing (It creates ENERGY from nothing and applies it in interesting ways, but that's pretty much what magic does.)
2) It doesn't give life to objects.
3) No life is restored to anybody (though people will likely be deprived of it.)
4) Time is not reversed.
5) Beings did not get younger (The sorceror will probably get bunches older. As for the un-targets, you can't get much older than dead.)
6) No Souls, Spirits, or Demons were destroyed in the creation of this destructive blast.
7) FIRE HAS NOT SUDDENLY APPEARED, NOR IS IT BURNING ON NOTHING. (It was caused through friction heat and is literally burning in -- and on -- thin air.)
This effect is similar to the atmospheric firestorm that accompanies the detonation of a nuclear explosive. It's just much smaller.
On 5/30/2002 at 10:36am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: Fireballs
A couple variant ways to create fireballs have been previously discussed on this forum. I haven't figured out (probably because I haven't tried) how to link to other posts, but if you go back a page or two, you'll find 'em. Look for a post asking for spells. You can find the specifics there.
Generally, though, it requires taking a bit of pre-existing flame, and flinging it at a target fast enough that it does not burn out prior to reaching the target (at which point, it will have ALL sorts of fuel.. Most of said fuel will probably be screaming and beating at itself with hands, though)
On 5/30/2002 at 10:55am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Wolfen wrote: A couple variant ways to create fireballs have been previously discussed on this forum. I haven't figured out (probably because I haven't tried) how to link to other posts, but if you go back a page or two, you'll find 'em. Look for a post asking for spells. You can find the specifics there.
Generally, though, it requires taking a bit of pre-existing flame, and flinging it at a target fast enough that it does not burn out prior to reaching the target (at which point, it will have ALL sorts of fuel.. Most of said fuel will probably be screaming and beating at itself with hands, though)
Tossing bits of a campfire at people isn't my idea of a fireball.
Did you look at my spell? What do you think?
On 5/30/2002 at 11:02am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Did you look at my spell? What do you think?
Yes I did. It looks quite workable, but it would require a sorceror who is very educated to come up with it. Not particularly difficult considering that Sorcerors are generally forced to be reclusive, and what better to do in your free-time than study and formulate spells?
Also, I think the CTN is rather prohibitive. The variants I mentioned are considerably lower due to the restrictions, and therefore less likely to end up with a passed-out and considerably older sorceror. They don't have the destructive power of your spell, granted... But the point of your spell seems more useful against structures and fortifications.. Against a few people, it's... overkill. I think there is room for both types of fireball.
And hey, go easy on Driftwood, eh? Methinks the "NO FIREBALLS" ruling was a kneejerk reaction to try to head off of the plain-vanilla magic so prevalent in games which the Riddle of Steel attempts emphatically to NOT be.
On 5/30/2002 at 11:19am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Wolfen wrote:\Did you look at my spell? What do you think?
Yes I did. It looks quite workable, but it would require a sorceror who is very educated to come up with it. Not particularly difficult considering that Sorcerors are generally forced to be reclusive, and what better to do in your free-time than study and formulate spells?
Also, I think the CTN is rather prohibitive. The variants I mentioned are considerably lower due to the restrictions, and therefore less likely to end up with a passed-out and considerably older sorceror. They don't have the destructive power of your spell, granted... But the point of your spell seems more useful against structures and fortifications.. Against a few people, it's... overkill. I think there is room for both types of fireball.
And hey, go easy on Driftwood, eh? Methinks the "NO FIREBALLS" ruling was a kneejerk reaction to try to head off of the plain-vanilla magic so prevalent in games which the Riddle of Steel attempts emphatically to NOT be.
Believe me, I *AM* going easy on Driftwood. You should see my critiques of the (now-defunct) FASA Corporation's stuff. :)
But they're trying to tell me that I can't burn air, while at the same time telling me I can dismantle myself and hurl myself through air at the speed of light and somehow arrive at my destination intact (FOLD.)
I'm not buying it. :)
Though I really _DO_ like the magic system. It's a little rough, and I have myriad complaints, but at least there's no "spell levels" or "spells per day"
The CTN can be reduced through formalization (which I heartily recommend) Also, it's not too hard to make smaller (30 gallon) or slower (apprentice-level) fireballs, this is "The Big One."
And you're going to be older anyway. Might as well just live with it and get a good KO....:)
On 5/30/2002 at 4:09pm, contracycle wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Cunning. But in driftwoods defence, IMO its a good thing that they started from the position that there should be no fireballs - that they didn't create a system that made them actually *impossible*, hey, I let 'em off the hook.
OTOH, funnily enough one of my favourite magic systems was from CJ Cherryh's Rusalka, which if I understand the settings influences, is the right location - east europe. And that definately had no fireballs but I have never been able to conceptualise it in game mechanics.
Hmm - I also want a game that did Prince Ivan (book in fairytale style, authoer escapes me).
On 5/30/2002 at 4:29pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Bob-
I actually like your fireball spell quite a bit, I would like to point out, however, that it isn't a fireball in the traditional RPG sense...or rather doesn't need to be.
You're spell could ingnite anywhere within your line of sight--no need to "throw" it when you can just have a 300 gallon ball of fire appear two inches from your opponent. That would be even better, and wouldn't look as cheesy.
Fact is that you can do just about anything with TROS magic, but we wanted to stay away from comic-book style or "vanilla" magic, going for something scarier and more subtle. Your spell seems to do that pretty well, and I might even end up using it myself one of these days.
A quick note about magic, while we really like the system we realize that the first printing had several organizational flaws and was confusing in places. I will shortly be putting the "new" sorcery chapter up for people that have the "old" book, so that everyone is on equal ground. I've had it read and critiqued by several TROS players now, and it is unanimously agreed to be a better representation of the same system. I'll let everyone know when it's up.
Jake
On 5/30/2002 at 7:26pm, Brian Leybourne wrote:
Re: Fireballs
Bob Richter wrote:
Fireball (Master)
Spell of One
CTN: 9 (Casting time - 9 seconds)
T) 1 (air is inanimate, yes?)
R) 2 (if I can see it, I can fry it. WayCool.)
V) 3 (up to 300 gallons of air. Big Fry.)
D) 0 (I don't need any. Movement 3's acceleration effects are instantaneous. From there, nature takes its course.)
L) 3 (Movement 3. I said that already.)
Vagary: Movement 3 (I'm repeating myself.)
Effects:
Speed (3:) to get it going.
Maneuverability (3:) to keep it contained.
Not bad. Although given that you can't SEE the air molecules to rub them together, I would enforce Vision 3 (Clarvoyance 3) to be able to see what you're doing (there are plenty of examples of this requirement in the sample spells).
That makes it a spell of three with a CTN of 10, taking 100 seconds to cast, so it's suddenly not quite as useful...
On 5/30/2002 at 7:36pm, Valamir wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Jake Norwood wrote:
Fact is that you can do just about anything with TROS magic, but we wanted to stay away from comic-book style or "vanilla" magic, going for something scarier and more subtle. Your spell seems to do that pretty well, and I might even end up using it myself one of these days.
Bruce Galloway's old Fantasy Wargaming RPG had a similiar take to magic. One of my favorites was "create rock". Amount: small sliver. Location: inside my enemy's heart. Range: whereever he is in the world, because I now have a lock of his hair, a drop of his blood, and knowledge of his True Name.
Or "remove air". Amount: 1 cubic meter. Location: sphere centered on that swordsman's head. Duration: oh, about 5 minutes ought to do it.
It had one of the first, and still one of the best assemble a spell sections I've ever seen. Also had one of the best "summon demons and make them cast spells for me" rulesets including this advice "be careful what you wish for. I once commanded my demon to 'create light'...he exploded a 30' diameter fireball in the middle of the 10' diameter room."
Also had a FANTASTIC piety and religious system modeled on the early Catholic church including rules for asking Saints for intercessions and miracles.
The mechanics of the game were somewhat chart heavy and klunky (ok, VERY chart heavy and clunky) but the applications were amazing.
On 5/30/2002 at 9:41pm, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Re: Fireballs
BrianL wrote:Bob Richter wrote:
Fireball (Master)
Spell of One
CTN: 9 (Casting time - 9 seconds)
T) 1 (air is inanimate, yes?)
R) 2 (if I can see it, I can fry it. WayCool.)
V) 3 (up to 300 gallons of air. Big Fry.)
D) 0 (I don't need any. Movement 3's acceleration effects are instantaneous. From there, nature takes its course.)
L) 3 (Movement 3. I said that already.)
Vagary: Movement 3 (I'm repeating myself.)
Effects:
Speed (3:) to get it going.
Maneuverability (3:) to keep it contained.
Not bad. Although given that you can't SEE the air molecules to rub them together, I would enforce Vision 3 (Clarvoyance 3) to be able to see what you're doing (there are plenty of examples of this requirement in the sample spells).
That makes it a spell of three with a CTN of 10, taking 100 seconds to cast, so it's suddenly not quite as useful...
Thus why I mentioned Armor of Air, which also manipulates air without the help of Vision.
:)
On 5/31/2002 at 2:55am, Lyrax wrote:
RE: Fireballs
It's a little different. Armor of Air doesn't need to deal with molecules. It only takes a bunch of air and tells it not to move so much. Your spell needs something to rub up against (otherwise, no friction and no fireball), thus a Vision3 requirement (you are rubbing molecules together, right?) and it would also probably need something to burn... oxygen is not flammable, though fire needs it to burn.
On 5/31/2002 at 3:25am, Brian Leybourne wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Lyrax wrote: It's a little different. Armor of Air doesn't need to deal with molecules. It only takes a bunch of air and tells it not to move so much. Your spell needs something to rub up against (otherwise, no friction and no fireball), thus a Vision3 requirement (you are rubbing molecules together, right?) and it would also probably need something to burn... oxygen is not flammable, though fire needs it to burn.
Umm...Oxygen is one of the more flammable elements in the lower periodic table. It's just not when it's diluted by everything else present in air (the 70-odd percent nitrogen, specifically).
Easy enough to get around with Sculpture 3 - seperate the O2 from everything rlse and rub two bits together to make a spark and WOOF! Of course, now the spell has a CTN of 11 and takes 110 seconds to cast...
Brian.
On 5/31/2002 at 3:52am, WhistlinFiend wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Doesn't all of this presuppose the sorcerer knows about oxygen, friction and the like? It seems as if we're really streatching credibility thin here...
-dave
On 5/31/2002 at 4:39am, Jaif wrote:
RE: Fireballs
http://antoine.fsu.umd.edu/chem/senese/101/reactions/faq/is-oxygen-flammable.shtml
Oxygen is not flammable.
Which is besides the point, I think. You could just get the air molecules moving very fast, strip off some electrons, and end up with plasma.
Of course, I think it's better, and more credible, for our middle-ages educated wizard to just remove all the air from the target's lungs, or something along those lines.
-Jeff
On 5/31/2002 at 5:23am, Julian Kelsey wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Jaif wrote: Oxygen is not flammable
Very true, but if you heat it up enough nitrogen is.
The fireball as described is heating air up until the nitrogen gets above its combustion point at which point the nitrogen happily bonds with oxygen, releasing more energy, driving more combustion.
This feed back loop is the one that scientists were afraid would set the atmosphere alight when they first started atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons.
In the end if doesn't become an unstopable chain reaction, it heats up the by products of the combustion, not distributing heat out to to more combustable material, so after a while it just smothers and radiates the ramaining heat.
This is what was described, clearly and unambiguously, in the initial post.
Would a sorcerer imagine air to be a burnable thing? They wouldn't need to think of molecules. I rub my hands together to generate heat, I could rub two hard sided clumps of air together and end up with a sheet of fire expoding out into a fire ball.
Metal smiths learn that rock and metal will burn if you heat it up enough, it's not so unlikely that a crazy sorcerer might seek to burn the very air.
However, I understand the design logic that want's to avoid a dull magical artillary. Why not have it a story about the suppression of burning air magic, a dreadful menace which even sorcerers might discuss only in whispers. Maybe in future ages it will be an obvious spell, and people will look back and laugh at how little we knew then.
Food for thought,
Julian Kelsey.
On 5/31/2002 at 8:16am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Lyrax wrote: It's a little different. Armor of Air doesn't need to deal with molecules. It only takes a bunch of air and tells it not to move so much. Your spell needs something to rub up against (otherwise, no friction and no fireball), thus a Vision3 requirement (you are rubbing molecules together, right?) and it would also probably need something to burn... oxygen is not flammable, though fire needs it to burn.
Actually, what I'm doing is more or less exactly the opposite of what Armor of Air does. I'm telling it to move A LOT MORE. With a volume of gas, movement = temperature, and as the temperatures rise, NITROGEN (not oxygen) will combust.
On 5/31/2002 at 8:24am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
BrianL wrote:Lyrax wrote: It's a little different. Armor of Air doesn't need to deal with molecules. It only takes a bunch of air and tells it not to move so much. Your spell needs something to rub up against (otherwise, no friction and no fireball), thus a Vision3 requirement (you are rubbing molecules together, right?) and it would also probably need something to burn... oxygen is not flammable, though fire needs it to burn.
Umm...Oxygen is one of the more flammable elements in the lower periodic table. It's just not when it's diluted by everything else present in air (the 70-odd percent nitrogen, specifically).
Easy enough to get around with Sculpture 3 - seperate the O2 from everything rlse and rub two bits together to make a spark and WOOF! Of course, now the spell has a CTN of 11 and takes 110 seconds to cast...
Brian.
Nitrogen combustion is the basis for most chemical explosives, and for a very good reason. Combusting a volume of 70-odd-percent-pure diatomic nitrogen is very functional indeed, if you have enough energy to start the reaction.
Thus this spell burns NITROGEN in the PRESENCE of oxygen (as I explained in the spell description.) The mix isn't exactly ideal, but it's good enough. :)
On 5/31/2002 at 8:32am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Jaif wrote: http://antoine.fsu.umd.edu/chem/senese/101/reactions/faq/is-oxygen-flammable.shtml
Oxygen is not flammable.
Which is besides the point, I think. You could just get the air molecules moving very fast, strip off some electrons, and end up with plasma.
Of course, I think it's better, and more credible, for our middle-ages educated wizard to just remove all the air from the target's lungs, or something along those lines.
-Jeff
Nope. Fortunately, Weyrth's atmosphere has more or less just enough oxygen to burn things, without making them burn EXPLOSIVELY. Unless someone tells me different, I'll assume most of the rest of it is Nitrogen, which DOES burn, and quite explosively.
BTW, I don't know if you'd describe it as a COMBUSTION reaction exactly (it probably isn't by definition) but 2O2 (diatomic -- biologically useful -- oxygen) + O2 = 2O3 (Ozone, IIRC.) It's quite a workable arrangement, and it's a chemical that exists in nature. It just takes some pretty energetic stuff to make it happen.
Your average middle-ages Wizard knows fire kills. If he can find a way to MAKE a fire, it's just possible he'd use it to kill someone.
Maybe a wizard just decided to see what happened if he heated THAT volume of air one day and this was the result....
On 5/31/2002 at 8:38am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Julian Kelsey wrote:Jaif wrote: Oxygen is not flammable
Very true, but if you heat it up enough nitrogen is.
The fireball as described is heating air up until the nitrogen gets above its combustion point at which point the nitrogen happily bonds with oxygen, releasing more energy, driving more combustion.
This feed back loop is the one that scientists were afraid would set the atmosphere alight when they first started atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons.
In the end if doesn't become an unstopable chain reaction, it heats up the by products of the combustion, not distributing heat out to to more combustable material, so after a while it just smothers and radiates the ramaining heat.
This is what was described, clearly and unambiguously, in the initial post.
Would a sorcerer imagine air to be a burnable thing? They wouldn't need to think of molecules. I rub my hands together to generate heat, I could rub two hard sided clumps of air together and end up with a sheet of fire expoding out into a fire ball.
Metal smiths learn that rock and metal will burn if you heat it up enough, it's not so unlikely that a crazy sorcerer might seek to burn the very air.
However, I understand the design logic that want's to avoid a dull magical artillary. Why not have it a story about the suppression of burning air magic, a dreadful menace which even sorcerers might discuss only in whispers. Maybe in future ages it will be an obvious spell, and people will look back and laugh at how little we knew then.
Food for thought,
Julian Kelsey.
Fire isn't _dull_ magical artillery. Disintegrating things is dull (replace Movement in this spell with Sculpture.) Fire has a little "Flash" to it. But I do like the idea of superstitiously suppressing "air-burning magic." THAT has flavour, and I like things with flavour. (Don't tell me I can't cast a fireball, tell me WHY.)
Besides, there's a thousand other good ways to turn Movement into magical artillery. :)
On 5/31/2002 at 8:40am, Rattlehead wrote:
Is it hot in here, or is it just the air molecules?
Well, I think it might not be necessary to use Vision to see the molecules. Firstly, as others have pointed out a Sorcerer is not even going to know what a molecule is, most likely.
(Then again, perhaps he's been using Vison 3 as a sort of microscope to study the world around him?)
But, that's neither here not there, as you wouldn't really have to manipulate the air on a molecular level. In fact, to produce enough heat, you'd want to move a lot of molecules. So, perhaps the sorcerer would just take 2 "blocks" (cubes, whatever) of air, make the air stationary within those blocks, and then "rub the blocks together" to generate the heat.
This, of course, assumes the sorcerer has knowledge of 2 things:
1: Friction, and how it works. Sure, that's realistic. I would imagine that a sorcerer would know more or less what's involved there.
2: The flammability of atmospheric gasses. That one's a bit more questionable. It's possible that flammable gasses have been encountered before. (One of the dangers of mining, for example) But, knowing that the air you're breathing could erupt into flames under the right circumstances is probably beyond the ken of someone (even a sorcerer) in a medieval time period. They would have no real reason to suspect this, much less just "happen to know it".
Given that, I'd say that you'd need to come up with some other fuel for your immolation party...
Just spilling my 2 bits across the electron void...
Brandon
PS: I'm of the opinion that the statement in the TROS rulebook that "there are no Fireballs" was not to be taken literally, but merely to point out that this magic system doesn't work like the D&D (or whatever) system. Spells aren't chosen from a list, and they're not, as someone else described it: "A gun of a different color". I believe that's how they said it, anyway... :-)
On 5/31/2002 at 8:43am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
WhistlinFiend wrote: Doesn't all of this presuppose the sorcerer knows about oxygen, friction and the like? It seems as if we're really streatching credibility thin here...
-dave
Your Wizard is the most likely TO know. Using Vision, he can LOOK AT THE MOLECULES and see how they interact. A sufficiently curious and methodical Wizard could replicate much of modern empirical science in the course of a single lifetime. (The most powerful observational tool ever created has that effect.)
Or, like most good discoveries, Fireball could have been an accident.
:)
On 5/31/2002 at 9:46am, contracycle wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Bob Richter wrote:
Fire isn't _dull_ magical artillery.
Yes, it is. Dull dull dull dull dull. Terribly terribly dull.
On 5/31/2002 at 10:14am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
contracycle wrote:Bob Richter wrote:
Fire isn't _dull_ magical artillery.
Yes, it is. Dull dull dull dull dull. Terribly terribly dull.
As I said. You think that's dull....
...just replace the "Movement" component with a "Sculpture" component and you have a "disintegration ball." That seems quite a bit duller to me.
Eh. The TN would climb by two, but Formalize it and it comes right back down to 9.
*ANY* good form of magical artillery is just as dull as another, and there are a LOT of them.
On 5/31/2002 at 10:58am, contracycle wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Bob Richter wrote: ...just replace the "Movement" component with a "Sculpture" component and you have a "disintegration ball." That seems quite a bit duller to me.
Not as much, 'cos its not been done as much.
*ANY* good form of magical artillery is just as dull as another, and there are a LOT of them.
Thats right. Hence, they are barred in my games, pretty much. I ran a celtic themed game a while ago when the most dramatic piece of actual magic used was a continual light spell cast on a coin, and it freaked the players out no end. It was even used in a way to kill a monster. It was far and away the simplest and most atmospheric use of magic I have ever pulled off in my games.
On 6/1/2002 at 11:29pm, Brian Leybourne wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Jaif wrote: Oxygen is not flammable.
-Jeff
OK, I'll concede to the superior chemistry knowledge of others :-)
So, given that, can someone explain the whole "leave a bottle of oxygen leaking into a room and then introduce a match" thing to me then. Just a bit of movie fiction?
Brian.
On 6/2/2002 at 12:34am, Bob Richter wrote:
RE: Fireballs
BrianL wrote:Jaif wrote: Oxygen is not flammable.
-Jeff
OK, I'll concede to the superior chemistry knowledge of others :-)
So, given that, can someone explain the whole "leave a bottle of oxygen leaking into a room and then introduce a match" thing to me then. Just a bit of movie fiction?
Brian.
Pure oxygen makes combustion easier for OTHER things, thus the Apollo disaster, etc.
On 9/23/2002 at 12:00am, Bladesinger wrote:
RE: Fireballs
If you will pardon my saying,the problem with most peoples take on the TROS magic system is the spell design assumes a very large degree of scientific knowlege to understand and then alter reality. This produces great results and stops some of the silliness of other magic systems. That said it alos assumes the characters have that same knowledge and this is where I see problem. My solution as a player was to try and avoid creating spells that my character would not be able to understand the science behind.As a Senechal that job is not so easy. I guess what I'm trying to say is allowing a sorcerer to generate magic based on theory he has no way of fomulating himself, or, more than likely having no access to, just feels wrong. What say you all?
On 9/23/2002 at 4:06am, Ace wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Don't forget about Vision 3! That vagary allows the Sorcerer more knowledge of things than we can do now. Assuming somehow Sorcerers never write down what they know or discuss it with other or are never conjured as ghosts and compelled to obey is silly
Remember there is no need for game balance in TROS. A Sorcerer is not matched with a Warrior in anyway. In fact he/she can do pretty much anything minus a few limits.
On 9/23/2002 at 8:23am, Thirsty Viking wrote:
RE: Fireballs
Bob Richter wrote:
Pure oxygen makes combustion easier for OTHER things, thus the Apollo disaster, etc.
While I'm sure the majority of folks know the details, let me illustrate this with the launchpad appolo disaster that happened within 2 days of my birthday.
They were sitting on the launchpad, doing preflight checks. To test the integrity of the capsule it was pressurized with full oxygen. I'n the checks someone thre a switch, which threw out a tiny electrical spark. This spark ignited the ALLUMINUM and destroyed the capsule. The three Astronaut died. This is what happens in the precence of rich oxygen environements.
--------------------------------
I was never here for the previous discussion on spells, nor have I read up on them. If you spot mistakes, please correct me.
As for this fire ball spell. There are no spells examples that change Temperature in my edition (2nd printing). Air is "FROZEN" in place, but not Chilled. Think of this as invisible plate mail at the same temperature as the air surrounding the target.
For a master level movement spell cast on air... I'd allow the volume air to be given a direction. This volume is less than the size of 6 55 gallon Fishtanks. hmmmm... quick rule of thumb for those who aren't looking to do the math, or keep fish a cube slightly larger than 1 meter is 300 gallons. BORING MATH ALERT
1 gallon = 3.785 liters = 0.003785 cubic meters
300 gallons = 1135.5 liters = 1.1355 cubic meters
Math Refrences
For a ball the radius would be ....
1.1355 m³ = 4/3¶r³
(¾*1.1355³)/¶ = r³
r³ =(0.851625m³)/3.1416
r³ =(0.271080023m³
r =.647191m = 64.7 cm = 25.47 inches ~ 2.1 feet
objects more than 4.2 feet apart are not touched by the same ball ... let alone engulfed One person however could be turned into a pretty torch. If the spell worked.
DOES THE SPELL WORK?
Not as a spell of one. A VOLUME of air can be given movement ... this is called wind. The spell can be sustained as other spells can, but if you put air at light speed, you lose sight of it rather instantly. However the Volume affected is one object for purposes of the spell.... Usefull for knocking over people (save vs knockdown/TN 9 + casting success). Knocking down the front rank of spearman in a unit just before the calvary/infantry charge hits them is a terific combat multiplier. (shield wall broken, many of the second ranks' spears as well)
Another intersesting use would be to "freeze" a wall of air 1 inch thick about 18 inches high and ~ 120 yards wide. You now have an invisible trip wall set in front of troops about to recieve a charge... :-) or a trip ring up to ~ 20 yard radius or a square upto 30 yards to a side. These are not effectiv against a deliberate advance.. but Dreadfully effective on running opponents.
LASTLY as a spell of three... IF it were me... i'd require two spells with volumes under these could then be made to rub against each other to heat up. As air heats... it expands... losing some weight beyond your volume limits.
ALLOWING indescriminate physics from our world into Weyrth is a BAD idea .... Picture a 300 pound asteroid hitting the earth at just under the speed of light. (movement 3 volume 3) I'm not going to do the math... i assume this at leasts makes big volcanic crater... OTOH it could be a primary extinction event for the game world. Allowing the chunk to convert to pure energy at the speed of light is also quite devastating. Possibly though it could be played as a bottomles pit(cut by your laser beam) to the other side of the world.... no doubt leading to tales that all worlds are beeads on the necklace of God (see this is where you thread it).
So the statement there are no fireballs... is very right in the D&D sence where a 1 combat round spell unleashes flames on everything within a 20' radius. Having a Spell take 90 times as many combat rounds, even when formalised for 1/1000 the volume, qualifies in my book as no fireballs.
As far as burning the nitogen... there are lost of issues involved... and the math is more than i'm willing to take one. Assuming Air on Weyrth is = our air. then 300 galons of air at sea level contains ~ 1385.31 grams of air with 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen. Enjoy the rest of the math... I won't allow it to matter in my world. However I'd require Vision 3, movement 3,
On 9/23/2002 at 9:28pm, Apprentice of Steel wrote:
The Terror of Fire
2 parts
Vision of the Function
CTN 3
Vagrie Vision 5
D=0 hold it not a prob
T=0 you yourself
R=0 dito
V=2
L=3
This spell allows one to see the blood in a foes veins and arteries (literally or if you are being really picky you can go to sub celluar levels.
hey its only -3 spell pool can be lived with with formulization or gestures and vocals.
do that in the morning drop your spell pool by 3 for the day (hey its worth it later trust me)
Boil Blood
CTN 8 or 9
Vagrie movement 2 or 3 what do you think works?
T=2
R=2
V=2
L=2 or 3
By targeting the blood in the veins of the target (asuming you can see it hence previous spell)
And hyperAgitating the blood (if you use move 3 you are evil)
You can LITERALLY boil a foes blood
effects will range from
Air pockets in blood = painful nasty death through cardiac arrest
Blood burns way out of veins arteries etc = painful death through bleedout
Blood and Body spontaneously combust = you guess the outcome.
Oh true it may be survivable but it is a quick nasty way to go.
And all with out any clue in a dark stylee, half the tavern was watching him, when he exploded......
Its almost as funny as attempting a form of Calling Lightning by diverting the strike path in a storm so the bolts literally bend to strike the targets.
Some times they say dont offend the gods lest they hit you,
The wise say dont offend gods when druids are listening and theres a storm coming
Then again with some meterological expereince, Vision and movement you could make a storm (first observe the thing in action and build up then experiment till you know how to make a storm