Magic (Arcane Lance)

[donsensey]

Hey guys

I've read for the first time paying close attention the Magic (Arcane Lance) focus, and it says: Using the mage’s class power of the same name. And as it isn't explicity prohibited, it crossed my mind the possibility to use the Arcane Lance with a class different than Mage. Always having a Staff or Wand [which seem to be the only explicit requisite].

What do you think about that?
Common sense would tell me No, but I think the RAW rules didin't prohibit a character to use it.
Of course a Mage get it for free at level 1, but a non-mage can get the Arcane Lance focus at level 3 [or any other secondary ability level up], so if you have a Wand or Staff and the Arcane Lance focus, maybe you can become a beam thrower warrior.

I insist, at first sight common sense would tell me No, but I'm a Rule person, and if the rules allow me to fly, I'll fly, not matter how ridiculous it sounds.

[Ghostdanser]

Ummmm...if you read the Class Power it states:

Arcane Lance: Mages learn to focus magical power through a staff or wand.

So if you want to be a stickler for the rules the the Magic (Arcane Lance) focus points you back to the Class Power...and the Class Power states it's for Mages...that pretty well eliminates Warriors and Rogues from using Arcane Lance in my book. Feel free to interpret differently, but I don't see a loophole.

[Sidmen]

You are absolutely right on one count, and horribly wrong on another.

On the one hand, anybody could pick up the focus and gain a +2 bonus to their Arcane Lance attack rolls. On the other, only a Mage with the class power can even make those attacks, so its kinda pointless to pick it up.

Like how anyone can pick up Magic (Primal) for a +2 bonus to their Spellcasting tests, while only mages can make those tests.

[si1vergecko]

anyone can pick up Magic (Primal) for a +2 bonus to their Spellcasting tests, while only mages can make those tests.

That said it is not completely useless for non magic users to take some scores and talents in magic since many Entropy spells the test against it for defense is a Magic (Entropy) roll so a dwarf or templar for example could take it just to bolster their defenses.

[donsensey]

Ummmm...if you read the Class Power it states:

Arcane Lance: Mages learn to focus magical power through a staff or wand.

Yeah, but maybe they've written that first line to give flavor to the reading. In the end, they are in the Mage Class section, and needed to talk about Mages and some [extremely] short history.

I won't say it's OK to pick the Arcane Lance power from anyone just by that, but I won't say either that it's explicity prohibited.

So if you want to be a stickler for the rules the the Magic (Arcane Lance) focus points you back to the Class Power...and the Class Power states it's for Mages...that pretty well eliminates Warriors and Rogues from using Arcane Lance in my book. Feel free to interpret differently, but I don't see a loophole.

Saying "Mages learn to focus..." is not the same as "only Mages learn to focus...". I won't say that that line states that only Mages can use Arcane Lance.

Sidmen, paraphrasing you:

You are absolutely right on one count, and horribly wrong on another.

Considering Set 1 and Set 2, there are four spells which ask for an opossed Magic (X School) test from the affected PC [not the caster]. Those are:

Affliction Hex
Mana Drain
Vulnerability Hex
Weakness

[Ghostdanser]

Interesting interpretation...good luck with that.

*exits stage left*

[Sidmen]

:P

Considering Set 1 and Set 2, there are four spells which ask for an opossed Magic (X School) test from the affected PC [not the caster]. Those are:

Affliction Hex
Mana Drain
Vulnerability Hex
Weakness

Which is why I used Primal, since that isn't one of the focuses used to resist magic. Doesn't negate my point about how having a focus to give you a +2 to a test isn't the same as gaining the class feature that allows you to make those tests.

[Hellebore]

Hey guys

I've read for the first time paying close attention the Magic (Arcane Lance) focus, and it says: Using the mage’s class power of the same name. And as it isn't explicity prohibited, it crossed my mind the possibility to use the Arcane Lance with a class different than Mage. Always having a Staff or Wand [which seem to be the only explicit requisite].

What do you think about that?
Common sense would tell me No, but I think the RAW rules didin't prohibit a character to use it.
Of course a Mage get it for free at level 1, but a non-mage can get the Arcane Lance focus at level 3 [or any other secondary ability level up], so if you have a Wand or Staff and the Arcane Lance focus, maybe you can become a beam thrower warrior.

I insist, at first sight common sense would tell me No, but I'm a Rule person, and if the rules allow me to fly, I'll fly, not matter how ridiculous it sounds.

Rules don't tend to be prohibitive, they tend to be PERMISIVE. ie the Dragon Age RPG doesn't state that Warriors can't throw their two handed swords 60 yards, auto hit and do exactly 47 damage to whatever they hit. That doesn't mean they CAN...

Arcane Lance is a class ability only found within the Mage class. A class can't use abilities not found within it. You can take the Arcane Lance Magic Focus, but there is no where you can take the Arcane Lance Class Ability, as the only things a class can take within their advancement scheme are: focuses, talents, specialisations. As Arcane Lance is none of these Rogues and Warriors can't take it.

The same is true of weapon focuses. There is nothing stopping a rogue taking the Heavy blades focus, but as there is no capacity for them to actually take the Heavy Blades weapon group, it doesn't really matter that they get +2 to hit with heavy blades.

Hellebore

[donsensey]

The same is true of weapon focuses. There is nothing stopping a rogue taking the Heavy blades focus, but as there is no capacity for them to actually take the Heavy Blades weapon group, it doesn't really matter that they get +2 to hit with heavy blades.

That's the analogy I was looking for.

Thank you
and the rest of you =D

[Teryn]

I would like to point out that only mages can take magic focuses.

[Sidmen]

I would like to point out that only mages can take magic focuses.

Could you cite a location for this rule, because it doesn't list it in the "character advancement" section of the player's guide, nor the Focuses section.

[Grumm]

All in all, I found this just a tad silly.

Games are written to explain all of the things your characters CAN do, not all of the things that they CANNOT do. A book that listed every single thing that your character could not do would be infinitely long. Using the logic of 'well, it doesn't explicitly prohibit me from doing so', I as a DM could say 'well, it doesn't explicitly state that you don't have to declare that your character was breathing, so he/she passes out'.

DA is a pretty clear-cut system with specific classes. Warriors and Rogues don't get to cast spells, period. If they were allowed to, it would be in their class abilities.

I insist, at first sight common sense would tell me No, but I'm a Rule person, and if the rules allow me to fly, I'll fly, not matter how ridiculous it sounds.

I appreciate players who know the rules. I despise players who use their knowledge of the rules to try and break the system by doing things they know are not intended and totally against the nature of the system. I don't think you and I would get along very well in a game

[donsensey]

All in all, I found this just a tad silly.

Games are written to explain all of the things your characters CAN do, not all of the things that they CANNOT do. A book that listed every single thing that your character could not do would be infinitely long. Using the logic of 'well, it doesn't explicitly prohibit me from doing so', I as a DM could say 'well, it doesn't explicitly state that you don't have to declare that your character was breathing, so he/she passes out'.

DA is a pretty clear-cut system with specific classes. Warriors and Rogues don't get to cast spells, period. If they were allowed to, it would be in their class abilities.

I've made this post because I find it a little ambiguous, not because I'm a rule-exploiter, or I need a book with everything you can't do. But, actually, there's a lot of "you can't X" in the Player's Guide.

On the other hand, in D&D you have casters without Magic, and I know it's another game, but maybe the Devs attempted to do something similar, why not?

I appreciate players who know the rules. I despise players who use their knowledge of the rules to try and break the system by doing things they know are not intended and totally against the nature of the system. I don't think you and I would get along very well in a game

What I meant was that you can't fly in real life, and if the Rules says you CAN fly in a given game, then I will fly without thinking about how impossible it is to fly in real life.

On the other hand, while I would say that in Dragon Age you definitely can't fly, if the official rules states clearly that you can, then I would. And that's nothing like "use their knowledge [...] to try and break the system". That's just the rules.

As I said before, I'm not a rule-exploiter. I'm just an open-minded guy who see ambiguous things and wants clarification.
Why you think I'm asking? If I wanted to exploit the rules, I wouldn't even ask what you think. If I want to do whatever I like, I wouldn't ask for permission and I would make my own game.

[Loswaith]

The best way to look at it is spell casters have a major tie to the fade, as such they can channel magic energies, it's something they are born with not something they can learn (like in D&D), sure you can learn to use that talent better, but can never learn to be tied to the fade.
Arcane lance needs that tie to the fade to manefest the bolt of magic energy through the focus.

Templars show that with enough infusion of lyrium you can kind of get a semblance of magic, however their power doesnt typically come from the fade so much as the traped fade energy in the lyrium itself. Which has its own costs and issues such as addiction.

[Arimmus]

If you wanted to have casters that are not mages, you could do what I do for a homebrew game and have at character creation all players make (after ability scores focuses, etc are all sorted) a Magic(Spirit) TN 15. If they make it, they cast magic, (Which allows for arcane lance) and random spells chosen by the GM. All spell target numbers are increased by 5, and players must make a Magic (Arcane lance) TN 14, to cast arcane lance before using it normally. Any Failures are subject to the Magical Mishap table as a normal mage is (Adding +1 to the result).

That's just a thought at least.

[donsensey]

Great =)
Thank you all for your answers
I will see what I do =)

[shonuff]

There are also the Divine Talents in the Kobold Quarterly... can't remember which issue though.

[Elfie]

There are also the Divine Talents in the Kobold Quarterly... can't remember which issue though.

Issue 18

[donsensey]

There are also the Divine Talents in the Kobold Quarterly... can't remember which issue though.

Divine Talents?
What's that? =O

[Elfie]

Divine Talents?
What's that? =O

It's a bunch of Talents in Kobold Quarterly 18 designed for the AGE system, particularly for their Midgaard setting, but completely usable in Dragon Age as well. Thematically, they are blessings from various deities, but I actually used them in my campaign as "rewards" for dealings with demons and spirits (though currently, most of my players actually don't know that demons are the source of their strange powers.)

[Giorgio]

On a related note, Arcane Lance has a range of 16 yards. Is that short range 8, long 16; or just short 16, no long range?

Its treated like a normal range attack, so I am not clear on this.

[Elfie]

There's no long range on Arcane Lance. Short only.