Forum

Re: Power from the Body, is there any reason for the current system of rolling a die and changing that many points from HP to WP? Why not just say you can directly use HP to power spells? Is it to add an element of risk because the randomness might knock you down to 0 HP whereas presumably you would never do that if you had control?

Re: Power from the Body, is there any reason for the current system of rolling a die and changing that many points from HP to WP? Why not just say you can directly use HP to power spells? Is it to add an element of risk because the randomness might knock you down to 0 HP whereas presumably you would never do that if you had control?

I think that is the intention. The impression i get of the game is that regaining HP and WP during an adventure is supposed to be difficult, so freely choosing the amount of HP converted to WP would make that too easy.

This is why you choose which kind of die you want to roll to regain WP, so you can make a calculated risk.
Let's say i have a wizard with moderet amount off HP (13-14) and 16WP .i've just run out off WP and i wanna cast a Power Level 1 spell. I could then choose to roll a d4, i'd have about 75% chance of gaining enough to cast one spell, maybe get a little extra to cast one more, but i only take a moderate amount of damage.

Or maybe i wanna restock my WP alot more while casting that PL 1 spell, so i roll a d12. I have good odds of getting more than 2WP but even if i take full damage i can't be knocked out.

Or maybe i wanna cast a PL 3 spell. That means i must get 6 or more WP. So i pick the d20. It gives me the the best odds of rolling 6 or higher, but with a risk of knocking myself out. This is why the rules states if you are knocked out or killed, the spell is cast first before you fall, so if you have a bit of bad luck, your not robbed of the spell if you can pay the WP.

My mage(animism) pointed out the relationship between power from body (page 58) and healing spells are heavily favored towards healing.
You pay d4 hit-points to gain 2d6 hit points worth of healing (treat wounds: page 64).

Now i don't think you are allowed to heal yourself with treat wounds as he plans to do (this should be clearly stated, as its common from other games that you can heal-yourself).
But the point still stands if you have two spell-casters in the group, they basically have an endless supply of healing, especially if you don't run with magic mishaps.

Also is power from body allowed with stone shield(page 66)? Also seems a very obvious and overpowered combo.

This is a great point. Power From The Body for some reason says “if you reach 0 from the damage it happens after the spell is cast.”

I think that needs to change to “damage from using power from the body is applied after the spell is cast” so it happens that way even if you don’t reach zero. Still, luck is in the mage’s favor for this exploit at the moment.

The easiest fix would be to say that healing spells can’t target the caster if they are using power from the body to cast the spell. This would allow them to sacrifice health to heal others but the magic won’t allow the contradiction of simultaneously harming and healing oneself.

Then again what would stop two players from making mages, and using this to keep their health and will power near the top all the time. Especially since Power From The Body just says they gain WP. It doesn’t say leftover points are lost. So they take turns burning a low amount of health to heal the other, and vice versa til they are back to a decent pool of both, and off they go.

I believe that the Iron and Magic paragraph (p. 58) could be better explained. One of my players is arguing with me that the text only talks about "direct contact", so if he wears a layer of fabric or leather underneath, he could wear metal armor. Or, if he uses a leather gauntlet, he can use a normal weapon. I believe it would be better to write it like this: "Iron has an anti-magical effect, which means that you cannot use magic while in direct contact with iron or steel, or if you are carrying or wearing any iron or steel equipment, including weapons and armor, except for tiny items."

I believe it would be better to write it like this: "Iron has an anti-magical effect, which means that you cannot use magic while in direct contact with iron or steel, even if you're not touching it but carrying it or if it's a part of your equipment or carried weapons, except for tiny items."

Let's cut out the filler:
"Iron had anti-magical effect. If you are carrying or wearing any iron or steel equipment that is not a tiny item, you cannot use magic."

Magic and iron has been a debate since the 80s, so hopefully FL clarify this a bit.

I believe that the Iron and Magic paragraph (p. 58) could be better explained. One of my players is arguing with me that the text only talks about "direct contact", so if he wears a layer of fabric or leather underneath, he could wear metal armor. Or, if he uses a leather gauntlet, he can use a normal weapon. I believe it would be better to write it like this: "Iron has an anti-magical effect, which means that you cannot use magic while in direct contact with iron or steel, or if you are carrying or wearing any iron or steel equipment, including weapons and armor, except for tiny items."

I actually agree with your player, saying your wizard is powerless because they are using an iron buckle to hold up their pants is silly and smart players are just going to ask the local smith to make bronze armor and weapons for them. Aside from that what are the dark and evil necromancers of the world using to sacrifice their victims? Sharp sticks? I will be house ruling this out for my own table.

I believe that the Iron and Magic paragraph (p. 58) could be better explained. One of my players is arguing with me that the text only talks about "direct contact", so if he wears a layer of fabric or leather underneath, he could wear metal armor. Or, if he uses a leather gauntlet, he can use a normal weapon. I believe it would be better to write it like this: "Iron has an anti-magical effect, which means that you cannot use magic while in direct contact with iron or steel, or if you are carrying or wearing any iron or steel equipment, including weapons and armor, except for tiny items."

I actually agree with your player, saying your wizard is powerless because they are using an iron buckle to hold up their pants is silly and smart players are just going to ask the local smith to make bronze armor and weapons for them. Aside from that what are the dark and evil necromancers of the world using to sacrifice their victims? Sharp sticks? I will be house ruling this out for my own table.

I’m just assuming they can’t simultaneously have a weapon in hand, or at the ready, and also cast spells. Not wear metal armor.

An iron buckle would fall under the “tiny item” category too.

When the willpower is low, time to draw the sword or whatever.

Thunderstroke (p.65) - thunderstroke is the noise, but the wording of the spell description indicates this should be called 'lightning stroke'. (Maybe a translation issue?)

Thunderstroke (p.65) - thunderstroke is the noise, but the wording of the spell description indicates this should be called 'lightning stroke'. (Maybe a translation issue?)

Direct translation it should be thunderbolt (SWE: Åskvigg)