Do Mages roll to hit in your games?

[pblackcrow]

Do mages roll to hit when casting spells? If so, do you give the opponent get a chance to save verses magic, based on that to hit roll? Add spell strength bonuses to it. I RARELY do roll to hits when doing magic. But it would be 1 way to do it.

Also, when doing a mind control spell, I thing it should be based on a battle of wills...the total of 3 rolls on a D20 + Will or ME, since not everyone uses the Will attribute...the greater one wins. If they tie, it's doesn't succeed.

[kiralon]

Mostly not unless they are trying to hit something that is hard to see, and I always thought it was odd that physical endurance would help you throw off mental attacks. That's why I use the Willpower stat. Its just like PE for bonuses to save vs magic, but a very high willpower can also get you up to +2 spell strength for a willpower of 24.
Also, rather then making the mages roll to hit I sometimes use spell casting success.
The mage wants to cast a spell, he has a %50 chance to get it off, modified by the following
every point of IQ over 14 adds +%5 (15 is +5%, 16 is +10% etc)
every level the spell is above the spellcaster is -%20 per lvl difference.
every level the spellcaster is above the spell is +%5 per level difference.
01%-05% is critical success - x2 damage +3 spell strength +%50 range
95%-%100 is critical failure - Feedback, save vs spells, 1d6 damage per level of spell (not spellcaster) and if save is failed massive headache gives -%100 to spell casting until caster is well rested (other things like soothing touch can help here).

This gives spell wielders the chance to critical just like warriors.

[Cinos]

Depends on the spell. Fire balls and what have you ordinarily do, things like debuff spells that are resistable via save vs magic do not. My general rule of thumb is that it requires a dodge or a save vs magic, not both, and almost always one (Some spells like Call lightning where that is the spells 'thing' may not).

[pblackcrow]

every level the spell is above the spellcaster is -%20 per lvl difference.

OUCH...That would hurt my chances of getting a familiar at level 3, but it makes since.

[kiralon]

I am a follower of learning magic is hard rather then easy and I really didn't like the fact that a 1st level mage can cast any wizard spell without any training other then what they got to begin with. It meant whenever the mages in the party found a high level spell on a scroll they would try and transcribe it rather then save it for when it was needed because they had as much chance as transcribing sanctuary as they did sense evil. I also wanted some stats to effect spell casters a bit like some stats effected warriors.

[The Dark Elf]

Only if the spell says "saving throw: dodge". Also if it says dodge 18+ then I dont roll I count the strike roll as being 18 automatically.

this can mean Armour of ithan is great against fireball....

[pblackcrow]

I am a follower of learning magic is hard rather then easy and I really didn't like the fact that a 1st level mage can cast any wizard spell without any training other then what they got to begin with. It meant whenever the mages in the party found a high level spell on a scroll they would try and transcribe it rather then save it for when it was needed because they had as much chance as transcribing sanctuary as they did sense evil. I also wanted some stats to effect spell casters a bit like some stats effected warriors.

I can understand that. But still like to know if in your game a 3rd level mage could use a 9th level scroll to cast a spell or perform a ritual 1 time.

[kiralon]

I am a follower of learning magic is hard rather then easy and I really didn't like the fact that a 1st level mage can cast any wizard spell without any training other then what they got to begin with. It meant whenever the mages in the party found a high level spell on a scroll they would try and transcribe it rather then save it for when it was needed because they had as much chance as transcribing sanctuary as they did sense evil. I also wanted some stats to effect spell casters a bit like some stats effected warriors.

I can understand that. But still like to know if in your game a 3rd level mage could use a 9th level scroll to cast a spell or perform a ritual 1 time.

They would be able to use a scroll yes, as a scroll can be used by anyone who can read it and all the magic and skill required to cast the spell were put into the scroll. Another mage can reverse engineer it but otherwise scrolls are a bit like any other 1 use magic item.

[pblackcrow]

They would be able to use a scroll yes, as a scroll can be used by anyone who can read it and all the magic and skill required to cast the spell were put into the scroll. Another mage can reverse engineer it but otherwise scrolls are a bit like any other 1 use magic item.

Perfect! So, I could have a familiar at 3rd level in your game.

[kiralon]

They would be able to use a scroll yes, as a scroll can be used by anyone who can read it and all the magic and skill required to cast the spell were put into the scroll. Another mage can reverse engineer it but otherwise scrolls are a bit like any other 1 use magic item.

Perfect! So, I could have a familiar at 3rd level in your game.

Yes Indeed, and Id probably play it so you weren't sure who was the familiar mwahahahaha
(Is my crow looking out of my eyes, yes he is the damn sneaky little so and so, or hmm those worms look good).

[pblackcrow]

Yes Indeed, and Id probably play it so you weren't sure who was the familiar mwahahahaha
(Is my crow looking out of my eyes, yes he is the damn sneaky little so and so, or hmm those worms look good).

LOL. Nice try...But that wouldn't go over real well, Mate.

[kiralon]

I wouldn't actually make it not a familiar but it would amuse me no end watching a player try to figure out if his sudden liking of worms came from the familiar link that he just made without knowing the ins and outs of the spell, it was on a scroll, they can't go wrong can they ? (insert evil laughter)
I actually did it to someone who tried to familiar link an alien creature called fluffy (Think warhammer tyranid/alien from aliens, it was fully out of the spells reach but sounded like a fun idea except that I made it a 2 way street. Worked fairly well surprisingly but the player was one of the better ones, she didn't even try to control it very much amusingly enough and laughed when she found out it ate Frodo. (She was concerned, but laughing). The party was using it as a body disposal unit because it always seemed to be hungry until it hit its full growth at about 18ft tall, and it also seemed to pickup attributes from the things it ate.

[Justthis Guy]

Mages should have to roll to "hit" this is a roll to see if they recited the spell correctly Roll a 20 then perhaps the spell does dbl damge for a crit hit.
Roll a one!?! oh crap! Look out! that is a crit fumble! bad things can and often do happen in this case. I use some nice crit fumble tables for magic gone awry. one mage shank himself by 6" now all his robes a lose fitting and drag the ground.
This mage actually crit fumbled his spells 3 times in the course of a single battle. He was lucky that the results did not kill him or other party members and did no serious damage to himself. One fumble actually gave the party a level boost! They had to remember that it happened and ask for it for it to be rewarded, otherwise they missed out on it.

[torjones]

Do mages roll to hit when casting spells? If so, do you give the opponent get a chance to save verses magic, based on that to hit roll? Add spell strength bonuses to it. I RARELY do roll to hits when doing magic. But it would be 1 way to do it.

Also, when doing a mind control spell, I thing it should be based on a battle of wills...the total of 3 rolls on a D20 + Will or ME, since not everyone uses the Will attribute...the greater one wins. If they tie, it's doesn't succeed.

Generally speaking, I've found that most spells will call out if they have a saving throw or require a roll to strike. Generally it's one or the other.

[Lukterran]

I do everything according to the standard rules.

Only spells that specifically state that they need to roll a strike have to roll to hit. All other are either save vs. spell magic or whatever their description stays.

[MaxxSterling]

Just follow the rules. If it says to roll, roll. If it doesn't, don't. Why over-complicate things.

[eliakon]

Do mages roll to hit when casting spells? If so, do you give the opponent get a chance to save verses magic, based on that to hit roll? Add spell strength bonuses to it. I RARELY do roll to hits when doing magic. But it would be 1 way to do it.

Also, when doing a mind control spell, I thing it should be based on a battle of wills...the total of 3 rolls on a D20 + Will or ME, since not everyone uses the Will attribute...the greater one wins. If they tie, it's doesn't succeed.

Generally speaking, I've found that most spells will call out if they have a saving throw or require a roll to strike. Generally it's one or the other.

Very much this.
Or as has been often said "you don't get a save against a fire ball"
And there is no need to see if you hit with a curse.
If the spell is targeted and can be dodged, or parried I require a strike roll. I usually allow the spell to automacally hit regardless of the roll.....but a 1 is going to be pretty easy to dodge(assuming you are allowed to do so) Of course I also allow PP, WP: Spell, and Targeting bonuses to stack on this
If there is a flat 'dodge 18' or 'dodge 24' or what ever, then well gee its 'dodge 18...guess that means the spell always hits with a 17'

[Justthis Guy]

Ok here is my stance
Agreed that mages are "squishies" with poor armor, but they compensate that with really nice spells
Agreed that men at arms have good armor and nice bonuses to S/P/D and Dam - aka TANKS
Tanks always roll to hit and can crit hit or crit fumble -bonuses apply
a mage in combat situation should roll to "hit" ( recite properly) GM determine bonuses applied based on the combat and the spell level
mage in a non combat situation may or may not roll based on GM discretion and spell level

So a 1st or second lvl mage casting in combat has much higher chance of flubbing a phrase in the recitation and having an "OH CRAP!" moment
penaties could range for no spell cast but dbl PPE used to "you turned Fred into a dobberman just now, a really big dobberman . . "
be creative I say.
As a mage matures the chance of a crit fumble goes down but still existis . .
same goes for a crit "Hit" spell works at dbl damage or duration, or half PPE . . .

Mage rolling to "hit" makes uber sense and adds to role playing, "I jump on Fred/Dobberman and ride him to safety so i can try to get the real fred back"
you get the idea.
JTG

[Arthemus]

I think it's wonderfully balanced exactly as written. My lvl 1 wizard is going to throw 2 5d6 firebolts at you in a melee, but your lvl 1 Merc Fighter is going to hit me 3 times with a 3d6 (+ps bonus if any) battle axe in a melee.

The simplest thing to do is to just go by the book. Roll to strike if it says to. Otherwise, don't.

[eliakon]

I think it's wonderfully balanced exactly as written. My lvl 1 wizard is going to throw 2 5d6 firebolts at you in a melee, but your lvl 1 Merc Fighter is going to hit me 3 times with a 3d6 (+ps bonus if any) battle axe in a melee.

The simplest thing to do is to just go by the book. Roll to strike if it says to. Otherwise, don't.

Agreed. Especially since it opens up a questions like "what about spells that say they always hit?"
And to be perfectly honest the mages run out of PPE in ways that swords don't really run out of.
If I was going to implement some sort of 'skill check' for a mage I would NOT make it a strike roll, mages don't really get bonuses to strike easily and the idea of increasing your 'to hit' to be a better caster sounds wrong.
If I had to do it, I would, maybe make some sort of 'Principles of Magic' roll. Maybe.

[torjones]

Mage rolling to "hit" makes uber sense and adds to role playing, "I jump on Fred/Dobberman and ride him to safety so i can try to get the real fred back"
you get the idea.
JTG

I want to clarify a few things before replying properly here...

someone playing a wizard in your game, casts armor of ithan in combat upon themselves. What, if any, roll is required to be successful?

[Lukterran]

Ok here is my stance
Agreed that mages are "squishies" with poor armor, but they compensate that with really nice spells
Agreed that men at arms have good armor and nice bonuses to S/P/D and Dam - aka TANKS
Tanks always roll to hit and can crit hit or crit fumble -bonuses apply
a mage in combat situation should roll to "hit" ( recite properly) GM determine bonuses applied based on the combat and the spell level
mage in a non combat situation may or may not roll based on GM discretion and spell level

So a 1st or second lvl mage casting in combat has much higher chance of flubbing a phrase in the recitation and having an "OH CRAP!" moment
penaties could range for no spell cast but dbl PPE used to "you turned Fred into a dobberman just now, a really big dobberman . . "
be creative I say.
As a mage matures the chance of a crit fumble goes down but still existis . .
same goes for a crit "Hit" spell works at dbl damage or duration, or half PPE . . .

Mage rolling to "hit" makes uber sense and adds to role playing, "I jump on Fred/Dobberman and ride him to safety so i can try to get the real fred back"
you get the idea.
JTG

That is bad rule. I will tell you what the players that have spell caster type characters in your group will eventually start to do with this crummy rule is that they will just start casting only area effect spells.

[eliakon]

Ok here is my stance
Agreed that mages are "squishies" with poor armor, but they compensate that with really nice spells
Agreed that men at arms have good armor and nice bonuses to S/P/D and Dam - aka TANKS
Tanks always roll to hit and can crit hit or crit fumble -bonuses apply
a mage in combat situation should roll to "hit" ( recite properly) GM determine bonuses applied based on the combat and the spell level
mage in a non combat situation may or may not roll based on GM discretion and spell level

So a 1st or second lvl mage casting in combat has much higher chance of flubbing a phrase in the recitation and having an "OH CRAP!" moment
penaties could range for no spell cast but dbl PPE used to "you turned Fred into a dobberman just now, a really big dobberman . . "
be creative I say.
As a mage matures the chance of a crit fumble goes down but still existis . .
same goes for a crit "Hit" spell works at dbl damage or duration, or half PPE . . .

Mage rolling to "hit" makes uber sense and adds to role playing, "I jump on Fred/Dobberman and ride him to safety so i can try to get the real fred back"
you get the idea.
JTG

That is bad rule. I will tell you what the players that have spell caster type characters in your group will eventually start to do with this crummy rule is that they will just start casting only area effect spells.

Even AoE spells still need a strike roll.
Which means the best solution is to just stock up on things that add strike bonuses...which can get...funky
Is there a W.P. Spell available for instance?
Do they get to add PP bonuses?
If not then why? And what do they get to compensate (warrior types as you point out have to roll 'to hit'...but under the RAW they only have to get a 4 or better, after bonuses to hit, and have many sources of bonuses to strike.)
Do warriors also have the same n1 rule applying (critical miss is a common enough house rule...just as long as it applies to everyone)

[Arthemus]

I want to clarify a few things before replying properly here...
someone playing a wizard in your game, casts armor of ithan in combat upon themselves. What, if any, roll is required to be successful?

No roll is required.

[Arthemus]

Even AoE spells still need a strike roll.

Are you saying this as a suggestion? Because there's no strike roll required on most "AoE" spells.

[eliakon]

Even AoE spells still need a strike roll.

Are you saying this as a suggestion? Because there's no strike roll required on most "AoE" spells.

If one is using the guidelines set up by Justthis Guy then they would need to roll a strike...since he is saying that he thinks all mages should need to roll a strike....
That is what I was talking about.

[Justthis Guy]

let me clarify
when a mage casts a spell the roll is not a to hit roll but a roll for success roll a 20-2 things go fine, maybe even dbl damage/ or AoE /duration for a 20
roll a 1 and then he muffed the incantation- spell failed- he was distracted or got hit by something. a critical fumble

thats what I am saying. This is for combat or in a high stress situation.

[Arthemus]

let me clarify
when a mage casts a spell the roll is not a to hit roll but a roll for success roll a 20-2 things go fine, maybe even dbl damage/ or AoE /duration for a 20
roll a 1 and then he muffed the incantation- spell failed- he was distracted or got hit by something. a critical fumble

thats what I am saying. This is for combat or in a high stress situation.

Hey man, whatever floats your boat. With this system (and I do love it, warts and all, but we can probably all agree that it's complicated), I try and simplify rather than add additional rules/dice rolls/etc.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Spells with range self are automatic 'hits'. No die roll needed.

If a attack spell that is a bolt-blast-ball then is takes a strike roll to hit.
Attack spells like 'horrific apparition' or 'domination' do not.

However, some GMs are lazy and only ask for an attack roll when the spell gives a bonus to strike.

[torjones]

let me clarify
when a mage casts a spell the roll is not a to hit roll but a roll for success roll a 20-2 things go fine, maybe even dbl damage/ or AoE /duration for a 20
roll a 1 and then he muffed the incantation- spell failed- he was distracted or got hit by something. a critical fumble

thats what I am saying. This is for combat or in a high stress situation.

Considering that there are already rules for interrupting a mage who is casting a spell, there is no need for an additional die roll. The system works fine if you just follow the rules.

[kiralon]

let me clarify
when a mage casts a spell the roll is not a to hit roll but a roll for success roll a 20-2 things go fine, maybe even dbl damage/ or AoE /duration for a 20
roll a 1 and then he muffed the incantation- spell failed- he was distracted or got hit by something. a critical fumble

thats what I am saying. This is for combat or in a high stress situation.

Considering that there are already rules for interrupting a mage who is casting a spell, there is no need for an additional die roll. The system works fine if you just follow the rules.

I do understand the urge to put a roll in to see if a mage succeeds, a fighter has to check to see if he succeeds by rolling to strike, palladium just says a wizards roll to strike is always 12 and diabolists and summoners is 13.
I have always liked spell critical success and spell failure from other games as they add a little extra flavour, just like critical hits and fumbles.

[Alrik Vas]

plus you can set up neat stuff like, "I want to increase the damage", then the GM tells you, "Take a -8 to your roll, then."

I think magic should involve skill more often, I don't like bogging it down with roll after roll, but really there is enough abuse with things that don't give saves.

[torjones]

let me clarify
when a mage casts a spell the roll is not a to hit roll but a roll for success roll a 20-2 things go fine, maybe even dbl damage/ or AoE /duration for a 20
roll a 1 and then he muffed the incantation- spell failed- he was distracted or got hit by something. a critical fumble

thats what I am saying. This is for combat or in a high stress situation.

Considering that there are already rules for interrupting a mage who is casting a spell, there is no need for an additional die roll. The system works fine if you just follow the rules.

I do understand the urge to put a roll in to see if a mage succeeds, a fighter has to check to see if he succeeds by rolling to strike, palladium just says a wizards roll to strike is always 12 and diabolists and summoners is 13.
I have always liked spell critical success and spell failure from other games as they add a little extra flavour, just like critical hits and fumbles.

The rules work WELL on their own, as written. According to the system, you have spent a substantial amount of time learning magic, just like the fighter has spent time learning how to fight. You have spent days or even weeks, sometimes even months, learning individual spells to the point where you can cast them. The fighters don't have to spend days learning how to use a rapier because they previously were using a saber, or next time they will want to use a falchion.

When you do cast them in combat, nearly every spell either calls for a roll to strike or a saving throw on the part of the victim, just like melee and ranged combat from fighters. I can't think of/remember a single spell that didn't fit that format, but I'm not saying that they don't exist. Not only do they have the same number of die rolls already, but it is possible to interrupt a magic user in the middle of his spell casting so that they can't cast that spell, having to start over. Your fighter types don't have to worry about that.

If you are adding a die roll to the mage to make it "more even" with the fighters, then you have missed that the system already includes the same die rolls for magic users as for non-magic users.

Spells that require rolls to strike should certainly get critical success status, just like with the fighters, you already have that opportunity for great effect built into the game. It's built right into the spell stating that it requires a roll to strike.

Adding an extra die roll to magic users is like telling the fighter that he has to roll to remember how to use his sword with every swing. It's illogical. It's unnecessary. It's ignoring the fact that there are already die rolls in place for just those same purposes.

So, no, I do not understand why you want to penalize magic users, unless you just want to discourage players from playing magic users. If that's the case, just tell them that the magic users aren't available in your game.

After reviewing the PF combat rules, I re-discovered that it doesn't have a lot of the rules that many of the other settings have. No called shot. No range penalty. no small target penalty. It can be summed up in "Beat the AR of the target, and deal damage to the person, if the roll is 5 or better and under the AR, you deal damage to the armor, otherwise, you missed." If you do use the ranged combat rules from other settings, don't forget to allow magic users some kind of spell proficiency bonus (such as WP Targeting or the like) to offset those penalties.