More Spell help... water

[dlw32]

I need help with a spell. This is related to the Blocks thread started by Dragonshadow.

You know how in Dresdenverse, water can ground a wizard's power; well, I wanted a spell to drench a wizard and "Sever the Tie" making it hard for him to summon power. Originally I thought of it as a block on his Discipline but that doesn't work (or is so horribly inefficient that there'd be no point).

So how would you do this? It sounds easy, but I can't figure a way in the mechanics to make it work. I'll admit I might be having trouble because I'm an old fart trying to wrap my head around mechanics that work very differently than I expect.

I don't think applying an aspect works. As I understand it aspects don't mean anything until a player/GM compel them. I suppose the first compel would be free, but I had hoped to use the duration mechanism to keep it up and that would mean spending FP to keep it going.

I'd really like to say that whatever power I put into the spell reduces his discipline roll to control his spells. That's sort of inventing a whole new ruleset.

Anyway, any suggestions?

[Haru]

Problem is, to short circuit a wizard using water, you would have to have a constant stream running over him, like Nick did in DM. Other than that, most you would likely accomplish is him not being able to cast for an exchange or 2, so a block against his discipline would probably be the way to go. As long as he can't overcome the block he won't be able to cast any spells. Sort of like an entropy cloud around him that keeps him from shaping a spell.
Or, as you pointed out, you can do it as a maneuver.

Another way to do this would be through thaumaturgy, like Harry did to Kravos in GP. He had a doll with some of Kravos Hair and he used it to block out his spellcasting for the entire scene. Would also be a block against his discipline (or maybe even conviction?) I think, but with a hell of a lot more oomph than you could accomplish with evocation. Plus it will last a hell of a lot longer than an evocation would.

And of course there is the simple "draw a circle, add a drop of blood" trick. Kincaid used it on Harry once, but I have no idea how one would do that in terms of the rules. Plus, the circle is easily broken. Still, even mortals can do this.

[MijRai]

If anything, make an Offensive Water Manuever that applies the aspect 'Drenched'. Tag it when the magic user tries to call up magic, and give a -2 to their roll. They can still do it, sure, but at a disadvantage. Like Harry on that reef in Small Favor.

[mostlyawake]

There's a reason that Water isn't the first line of attack when facing other wizards or demons.  In my games, it's because magically creating water to ground out magic just doesn't work.

However, we have a character who's sponsor gives her salt water, and that works really well vs zombies. 

Otherwise, I treat it just like any normal magical block.

Manipulating nature itself to make it rain in an area, though, that might work... but then why wouldn't they have just made it rain over bad guy rituals the whole series?

[dlw32]

The source of water might be an issue... or not: sprinklers, water coolers, water heater in the basement, etc. But let's pretend there's a river nearby and all you have to do is divert it a little.

And if there is sufficient quantity to run over him once surely we can use water magic to have it loop back up and do it again? It's magic after all.

[Crimson Overcoat]

Using water magic to create an overpressure effect on the local water main, neighborhood sprinkler system, building fire suppression system, etc, would create the appropriate flow of water to ground out most magic that was getting thrown around, and take care of the sustainability issue that a simple "super soaker" evocation would have.

Instead of "Drenched", you could say "Caught in a man-made downpour." If facing a supernatural bad guy, they would also be more likely to expect a direct attack, not an indirect assault. Nothing like getting your mojo shorted out then shot in the face with a .44 magnum. Nobody like that.

[Dragonshadow]

Problem is, to short circuit a wizard using water, you would have to have a constant stream running over him, like Nick did in DM. Other than that, most you would likely accomplish is him not being able to cast for an exchange or 2, so a block against his discipline would probably be the way to go. As long as he can't overcome the block he won't be able to cast any spells. Sort of like an entropy cloud around him that keeps him from shaping a spell.

dlw32's intent is to ground the magic, and I respect the discussion here regarding the special place water holds in the four elements.  The problem is the rules don't really give it much sovereignty.  The Discipline 4 block sounds good, but most likely the strength of any spell they attempt to cast is probably better than 4 shifts anyway, so they simply have to roll their normal discipline check as if the blocking spell weren't even there.

We're trying to figure out a better way to truly have a "block" in this situation instead of a maneuver, but the maneuver keeps coming up as the better choice.

[Becq]

I think that using a Block is the way to go.  I'd describe it as coalescing moisture out of the air, making making a thin sphere of swirling liquid around the target.  Why, by the way, are you limiting yourself to 4 shifts?  This would be enough to stop a low-grade caster, but might only be a minor setback for a trained wizard.  You might want to look into a focus to aid in casting a bigger version of the spell, or just pump a bit more juice into it when going against a serious threat.

[mostlyawake]

In a sort-of related idea, to simulate actual rain you could simply make a list of levels and impose more conditions... an increasing number of "raining" aspects... on the scene.

drizzle - no penalty
light rain or minor flooding after rain -  1 aspect "raining" or 1 aspect "standing in water"
moderate rain or flooding - 2 aspects "raining", "raining" ect
heavy rain, ect - 3 aspects "raining" x3 ect

thus the more severe the weather the more aspects you can use against a caster to impede casting

[Ranma1558]

We really don't know if 'magical' water causes magical grounding in the Dresden verse, but you could easily declare you burst a sprinkler or water main to really get moving water. This likely would place a zone wide (or more) aspect on the scene, which could be compelled by you or the GM whenever anyone tries to cast a spell. Its more powerful then a block, is inline with lore, and you get to be witty with a phrase like "Looks like you're all wet" or "guess you're a real wash out". Win win for everyone.

[MijRai]

I'd say go with an Manuever. You lay an Aspect, and then tag it when they cast a spell for -2. That could cause some backlash or fallout in control.

[Lanir]

Just curious, but why wouldn't a counterspell action fit this idea better? I get that it wouldn't have duration but isn't that effectively what you want to do? Effect is more important than the method in story-centric systems like this.

Also, counterspelling has one big advantage that an in-place "you can't cast any magic" effect doesn't. It's balanced. Effectively it's a kind of anti-magic grapple. You hold down their magic but only while you concentrate on doing that. It also has the bonus of being playtested while a custom solution trying to use other types of actions to account for a lack of spellcasting wouldn't. Spellcasting, if you have it, is a pretty big deal. It's probably a really good thing that you (and your enemies, must not forget the bad guys can be clever too) don't have a way to casually lock someone away from their magic. Depending on what type of character is targeted that might be removing the majority of what their effectiveness in an encounter.

[mostlyawake]

Counter-spelling, by the book, can only be used against an on-going magical effect. It does not prevent use of evocation, and the book suggests that you cannot use it reflexively to end an evocation as it is cast.

From my example, counter-spelling is what my PC is doing when she shuts down magic in an area (meet the complexity of the spell to counter) - I'm just giving her a bonus to do so for using "salt water". 

The question, then, is how to you prevent evocation from being cast by using water?  While I am against this being done from character to character, I would like a system for modeling the effects of casting in the rain and the like, to fit the rules of the novel. (Again, Harry says it's possible in some rain, impossible in other circumstances).

[Lanir]

Ack, right, missed that note in the sidebar about it. Not that it's a matter of it taking too much time to assess or anything. It's just that you have to see it to assess it, which for an instant spell means it goes off... and is all done doing it's thing before you get a chance to mess with it.

I see how the block thing applies now. Probably the best model for your spell is something like the Grasping Branches or Whirlwind spells on 294-295. You basically want to put a sticky aspect on a zone that you immediately tag for free to put up a block on magic. You don't have to get too into the thing with running water shorting out magic here to do it. You could always describe it as an entropy effect on that area targeting magic only. The only potential problem I see for this spell is it'd be kind of hefty. Looks like it would either not be all that strong of a block or it would cost you a lot to get it off. And all you really do is set a minimum target number for any spellcasting roll in that zone. You obviously beat the block if your Discipline roll has a higher difficulty just to get the spell off than the block rating.

[Dragonshadow]

You basically want to put a sticky aspect on a zone that you immediately tag for free to put up a block on magic. You don't have to get too into the thing with running water shorting out magic here to do it. You could always describe it as an entropy effect on that area targeting magic only. The only potential problem I see for this spell is it'd be kind of hefty. Looks like it would either not be all that strong of a block or it would cost you a lot to get it off. And all you really do is set a minimum target number for any spellcasting roll in that zone. You obviously beat the block if your Discipline roll has a higher difficulty just to get the spell off than the block rating.

The fact that it's a mediocre block that's probably lower than the target Disc. check is the big problem.  Cinematically, the block is a cool concept: you dump an endless bucket of water on the caster's head, and it's going to make it tough for him to cast.  The rules, on the other hand, essentially play this out that if he's already casting a more difficult spell than the block value, he doesn't even notice the block.

So basically someone blasting you in the face with a Super Soaker will make it tough for you to dial a cellphone, but not to perform brain surgery.

I haven't implemented it yet, but am toying with the idea that a block lower than your target difficulty still grants +1 to the difficulty (perhaps to a limit of one or two such blocks for a given action).  It just doesn't make sense for the block not to count at all, but alternatively we don't want to make such a block all powerful that it locks down an unlucky caster in an imbalanced way.