Ask a simple question...

[Locnil]

Get a simple answer.

Seriously, though, I had dozens of questions I'd been meaning to ask lying around, but when I get a spare moment to actually ask, all I can remember is this one. How does this keep happening?

Anyway, if you buy both Toughness and Recovery powers, do you get The Catch rebate twice (once for each power), or just once for both? I.e. Would a fae with a cold iron catch, pay 1 Refresh for Supernatural Toughness and Supernatural Recovery, or 5 Refresh?

P.S. If anyone else has questions, feel free to use this thread.

[Sanctaphrax]

Heh, this reminds me of computerking's old thread. I wonder where that guy went...

Anyway, one Catch rebate only. The fairy pays 5 Refresh (or 4, depending on how you interpret cold iron's Catch value). So doubling your Toughness quintuples (or quadruples) your cost.

Personally I don't like this, so I recommend Becq's rewrite. It gives a proportional rebate.

[Locnil]

Link?

[Sanctaphrax]

Yo.

(It's my post, but the credit for this one belongs to Becq.)

[Locnil]

When a spellcaster chooses a rote spell, must all the details be written out and set in stone?That is, after choosing his rote spells, can he change:
- Whether it's single-target, spray attack or zonewide
- The number of zones affected
- The exact maneuver
- Duration of the spell
- Element used
- The power of the spell
- The skill used to resist it
- Focus items
- Aspects invoked or tagged

Also, re: the last one on that list, I have the impression that the caster can choose any skill to be used in resisting the spell, so long as it makes sense. Is that true, or is it always athletics?

[InFerrumVeritas]

When a spellcaster chooses a rote spell, must all the details be written out and set in stone?That is, after choosing his rote spells, can he change:
- Whether it's single-target, spray attack or zonewide
- The number of zones affected
- The exact maneuver
- Duration of the spell
- Element used
- The power of the spell
- The skill used to resist it
- Focus items
- Aspects invoked or tagged

Also, re: the last one on that list, I have the impression that the caster can choose any skill to be used in resisting the spell, so long as it makes sense. Is that true, or is it always athletics?

Per a strict reading of RAW, they must all be set in stone. 

[Orladdin]

...
Also, re: the last one on that list, I have the impression that the caster can choose any skill to be used in resisting the spell, so long as it makes sense. Is that true, or is it always athletics?

It's not the caster that gets the only say in what skill can be used to defend against the spell.  The defender can rationalize suggestions, too, and the GM makes the final say.

For example, if the caster makes a rust spell, he could say he expects someone to defend against it with Athletics (to dodge the energy bolt).
The defender might be a great armorsmith, and suggest that since he made the armor, and the spell targets the armor, it should use his Craftsmanship (or whatever) skill to defend.
In this situation, the GM would probably nod and say, "yeah, makes sense."

And as for Rote attributes being locked in stone, remember, you still get the extra shifts from an exceptional attack roll added to your effect.  I believe the book says you have to declare what they go towards in the creation of the rote (for example, to damage); though, I could be mistaken.

[Mr. Death]

When a spellcaster chooses a rote spell, must all the details be written out and set in stone?That is, after choosing his rote spells, can he change:
- Whether it's single-target, spray attack or zonewide

Yes. Just about all of the example attack rotes mention this as a possibility.

[amberpup]

What type of spells are best for rote spells has caused alot of discussion in my group. I was going with one attack, one defense, and one misc. My friend was thinking more just defense for blocks and such. Yet another, it just meld his brain and he didn't mess with them at all.

[JDK002]

What type of spells are best for rote spells has caused alot of discussion in my group. I was going with one attack, one defense, and one misc. My friend was thinking more just defense for blocks and such. Yet another, it just meld his brain and he didn't mess with them at all.

Defensive rote spells would depend on your conviction rating.  Defensive rote spells are limited if they only last for one exchange.  If the player in question only has a conviction of 3, then the rote can only block a power of 2 and last for one additional exchange, not very useful.  But with a conviction of 5, it's a strength 4 with one additional exchange duration.  That is assuming I'm remembering the rules right.  I still feel like I need to read them a 3rd time haha.

[GryMor]

Defensive rote spells would depend on your conviction rating.

I'm not sure where you are getting this from. IIRC, the only real limitations on what a rote can be are that control isn't rolled and that almost all the decisions need to be made when the rote is created.  AFAICT, you can have a 'rote' that takes you out from mental stress and physical backlash at the same time.

[Locnil]

Yes. Just about all of the example attack rotes mention this as a possibility.

So, everytime a wizard casts a rote spell, he can change them? A zonewide for a gang of thugs, a spray if he recognises one of the thugs as an undercover cop, or a single target if he just wants one specific thug?

[Locnil]

Also, is there a formula or tool around for calculating the probability of success on any given 4dF roll?

[Sanctaphrax]

When a spellcaster chooses a rote spell, must all the details be written out and set in stone?That is, after choosing his rote spells, can he change:
- Whether it's single-target, spray attack or zonewide
- The number of zones affected
- The exact maneuver
- Duration of the spell
- Element used
- The power of the spell
- The skill used to resist it
- Focus items
- Aspects invoked or tagged

Also, re: the last one on that list, I have the impression that the caster can choose any skill to be used in resisting the spell, so long as it makes sense. Is that true, or is it always athletics?

Those aren't simple questions.

I don't know the answer to the first, and I know that the second is a bit of an irritating issue.

IIRC, the rules say nothing about what skills are used to defend against Evocation. So you'd normally assume that you use whatever skills have appropriate trappings, which generally means Athletics for attacks and whatever seems reasonable for maneuvers.

(Craftsmanship and other such skills aren't really valid defences by the RAW, but I might allow them in some situations.)

Except that there's this attack spell in the example list, which says that you use Might to defend against it.

I strongly advise you to ignore that spell. It's not remotely fair to let spellcasters choose what skills their opponents use to defend against their attacks.

PS: Whaddaya think of the Catch rewrite?

[Locnil]

I see.

Well, that Catch rewrite... I'm rather conflicted on it, to be honest.