DwD Studios

I think one thing you need to account for is the limitation on the number of active runes an enchanter can have at any time based on level.

p.38 - Limits - An enchanter can have a number of un-triggered runes (temporary or permanent) equal to twice his enchanter level. For instance, at enchanter level 3 he can have 6 un-triggered runes. If he dies, all his temporary un-triggered runes fade.

IMO, the limitation on the use of the runes is not per the spell description, E.g., other examples I have seen on these forums would allow an enchanter to use as many heal types spells/runes as he has prepared and active, limited by the above.

1) Using a rune is typically an action (as we play it, and as you describe with in your question #3) if it involves you doing something. If the rune is just place in a doorway and triggered to go off when someone crosses the threshold then it is the person moving through that triggers.

2)Not at all. The limits are as ShadowStalker states above. 2/enchanter level. Period.

3)This is a really qood question. Permanent runes can be used at a rate described by the "usage" of the spell described. p38. Later in the Examples they say that the runes are released as if cast by a spellcaster of the level of the enchanter. So It could follow that each time the rune object is pointed at someone and the word "melt" is spoken it will trigger as a 6th level spellcaster. I would use the original enchanter skill roll for this as an action. So the limits would be 1) how many of these the enchanter can create, and 2) the multi action penalty to use it multiple times in a turn.

Thank you, ShadowStalker and jasales, I appreciate your help. As you can understand my concern about usage runs on the lines of the Enchanter being a MUCH better healer than the Cleric, albeit a bit more Vancian in his/her spell use. Basically, we have an encounter and get hurt, we can get more or less fully healed by the Enchanter's runes, then spend anywhere from 2 to 20 minutes on restoring the runes and head into the next encounter is the GM does not interrupt us.

jasales, just to check, do you make the Enchanter do a skill check for rune creation and then for the trigger if it is something like an Offensive Strike (or you use the roll that created the rune - so, if the roll was 70, but a -20 to the Enchanter skill would make it a failure, I could only trigger the Permanent Rune once per turn)?

Thanks again for the replies (preparing to be GM under BBF rules for the first time).

Runes depend upon the trigger. The book says it could be "an action, phrase, situational condition," but it could be anything, including a time limit or an environmental factor. Actions are just one thing that can trigger them. However, of course, placing a rune requires an action, whether outside of or during a battle.

Hello, I'm Faust's friend and the one who found this problem :). The issue is it seems like no roll is required to trigger a rune. Actions are normally limited because at some point, the cumulative -20 penalties mean you won't succeed at anything you try. However, if the action succeeds without a roll, there's effectively no limit on the number of actions you take.

As written, it doesn't even require a level 6 Enchanter to break the system. A level 3 Enchanter can have 6 runes. Suppose he has 6 runes of Charm which puts a group of enemies to sleep. He can trigger all 6 of them in 1 turn. Even if the enemies succeed on the first 5 resists, the last one is attempted with a -100 penalty IF they didn't take any other actions that turn.

Using the original roll mitigates this, but unless you do secret rolls, the player knows what rolls each rune got. Suppose a player has 85 in Enchanting and got an 83, 59, 38, and 12 on his rolls to place the runes. He can trigger them in that order in one turn and know they'll all succeed. A targeted enemy who didn't take any actions previously that round must make resist rolls at a -0, -20, -40, and -60 penalty respectively. This also requires a lot of bookkeeping especially if the DM makes the secret rolls and has to track them in addition to everything else.

My thought for fixing this would be to force the Enchanter to make the roll when the rune is triggered, with some bonus for taking more time to prepare the rune.

A spellcaster can cast an unlimited number of spells in a battle. An enchanter is limited by the number of runes he brings into battle. I don't see the system as anywhere near broken. Yeah, you might get one really good use out of a handful of runes used all at once, but how often are you going to get that chance? Such a measure would be a one-off. After that, the enchanter is virtually useless. Thus, it's a "better make it count" maneuver, and therefore could never really be broken.

I thought it might be best to answer in bullet form with some examples. Everyone has some good thoughts on the subject.

Creation

• Runes are created by an enchanter by writing on a surface in a very exact pattern to store a specific spell.

Spell and Effect

• The spell and effects are chosen at the time of rune creation.

Trigger

• They have a defined trigger which unleashes the stored magic, requiring no further action on the enchanters part. Once triggered the rune/spell is gone.

Combat

• Creating a rune is an action. Out of combat I allow my players to create runes without an enchanter skill check. In combat they can scribe a rune on a surface in 1D turns at a -20 to the enchanter check.

Example:
Creation

• People are dying all round, in a desperate situation Tadd, a level 2 enchanter writes on a small scroll with ink & quill.

Spell and Effect

• The rune he is creating will use the illusion spell and the effect will be "my body lying on the ground, dead".

Trigger

• "When I hold the scroll in my right hand and say, "As still as stone"

Combat

• Tadd rolls 1D, a 1. His chance of success is normally 68%, however he has a -20 since he's trying to hurry. After waiting 1 turn, Tadd must roll 48 or under to create the rune. He rolls 36, success. As a group of orcs run towards him he graps the scroll in his right hand and says "As still as stone." and then heads towards the nearest cover. The orcs run up to his lifeless body, "Me say he dead, what you say?" The GM rolls a LOG-20 check for each orc to see if they are fooled by the illusion.

--

Example: One of my players scribes a healing rune on a small stone he keeps in his pocket. The trigger is "when the holder of the stone takes damage, fully heal". He's a level 1 enchanter, and keeps 1 stone in his pocket, when he takes damage he rolls 2D and heals that much. After he's healed the stone is useless.

Example: A level 3 enchanter creates six runes of sleep (using the charm spell). The trigger is "when I toss it a foe, the rune goes off if it's close enough to put the foe to sleep". While engaged with a dozen orcs the enchanter tosses the stones at them. The GM rules it's a ranged attack and ask him to make a warrior ranged skill check for each stone he tosses. The player decides to toss them all at once (he doesn't want to take more than one action).

In this example the action is throwing the stone, not triggering the rune, that happens if the stone is close enough to a foe to put him to sleep.

Note: On pg. 38 the example "Electrolance Wand (3 charges) 4D electrical damage" should read "Electrolance Wand (3 charges) 3D electrical damage".

Welcome, good to see players involved in the forms.

As stated previously, the number of un-triggered runes is the limitation, as well as the enchanter level for the spell effect.

I guess it depends on the how you defined the effect and trigger. Is it 'single target' or 'multiple targets'? Each target after the first, there is a +5 bonus to resist. 6 x 5 = +30 to resist, which is offset bye your enchanter level. If you use 6 runes on a single target, then yes there is a multi-ation penalty, however all your runes have been trigger and you have to make more.

I set a d6 next to the miniature (if using) or next to the NPC's name on my GM sheet to track how many actions they have taken. I typically ask players to do the same (it's so easy to forget).

Hello Larry, thank you very much for responding in this thread :). I really appreciate your response, but I'm not sure it addressed my concerns. Let me see if I can rephrase and provide an example so you understand what my concern is.

I understand the number of un-triggered runes is the limitation, but this is a high limitation at intermediate to high skill levels. A warrior or spellcaster with 85 in their skill can use up all their actions for about 2.25 attacks/spells in one turn. A level 3 enchanter seems to be able to trigger up to 6 runes in one turn. This uses up resources which take time to replenish. However, the advantage is if they're all used on one target, the later runes are very difficult to resist.

For example, suppose Talon the level 3 Enchanter has six runes of Charm. When he touches a rune with all five fingers of his right hand and points at a person with his left, the rune triggers and tries to put the person to sleep. I assume this requires no roll to successfully trigger.

Talon runs into Smashy, a scary orc warrior with strong mental fortitude. Talon wins initiative. He triggers his first rune. Smashy doesn't want to fall asleep, and resists with 85. Lets say he succeeds. Talon triggers the second rune. This would ordinarily take a -20 penalty, but triggering runes don't seem to require a roll. It succeeds. Smashy resists with 65, and succeeds again. Talon triggers the third rune. Smashy resists with 45, and once again succeeds (only a 25% chance to pass all three of these resists). Talon triggers the fourth rune. Smashy has to resist with 25. Talon triggers the fifth rune. Smashy has to resist with 5. If Smashy somehow made it past all of these awake, Talon has one more rune and Smashy again has to resist with 5 because it's the minimum success chance.

This seems to be a cheap way of winning combat. In a team game, even if the runes don't succeed, it still stacks the enemy's multi-action penalty and makes him helpless against the rest of the team. Obviously this won't work against all enemies (Offensive Strike is more reliable but not as deadly). It also requires a lot of prep time. Still, the ability to "automatically" win a fight is very strong and feels wrong.

One person suggested using the roll on the Enchantment check with the multi-action penalty to see if the rune triggers. This isn't a perfect solution because it requires keeping track of what runes had what rolls. If the player keeps track of this, he can trigger the runes in an order such that multiple runes are guaranteed to succeed. If the GM keeps track of this, it's one more thing he has to keep track of.

My suggestion would be that scribing the rune (the slow way) requires no check, but triggering the rune does. Scribing the rune by itself gives a bonus to that check, and an Enchanter can spend extra time inscribing the rune to increase the bonus. A rune only has one chance every round to be triggered; if it doesn't succeed, it can be triggered next round. This limits the number of runes the Enchanter can trigger in one round.

Since a level 3 enchanter cannot make more than 3 untriggered runes, a level 3 enchanter cannot trigger 6 runes without another enchanter's help.

So while a party of enchanters would be a force to be reckoned with, that's not exactly broken.

And a 6th level enchanter is likely going up against someone who can defend their self more than 6 times (If the GM is prepared for such tactics.) A good GM takes account of such tactics, especially if a player is in the habit of using such tactics. You may surprise the GM once, but not likely twice in the same adventure. After all, the characters are only as effective as the GM's encounter allows them to be. Any GM worth his salt isn't going to let a one-off ruin the adventure.

@Ascent that is incorrect, an Enchanter can have Level*2 untriggered runes.

Pocketwatch, I believe your comparison is problematic. Of course the Enchanter can use ALL his runes at once and be nearly unstoppable. But after that he can´t properly defend himself anymore. A fighter can attack every round. A Wizard can cast his spells every round. Indeed, the Ecnhanter can act as a WMD, but only once. Afterwards he needs time to reprepare his runes. And I know if I was the GM I would make sure he does not have that time. Permanent runes might be a different thing but then I would not allow the same permanent rune to be triggered more then once per turn.

Quite right. Sorry. (I haven't played one yet, but have heard of no difficulty regarding them.) But my point regarding the GM remains. It's just as valid. The GM has the power to control the circumstances, and the vulnerability or awareness of the encounter, to account for the enchanter's tactics, and/or simply to impose a difficulty. Maybe the GM would impose a rule on the fly that the stones have to work in tandem with a difficulty added by each additional stone on the trigger. It's up to the GM to respond to the circumstances. A single failed attempt at using all 6 at once could teach the enchanter to be more discriminating in their use of such a trick. The GM may like it sometimes and allow it unaltered and dislike it other times and impose a penalty.

When you think about it technically, a trigger is area-specific, and the trigger that picks up the trigger first goes off first, and would likely usually pre-empt the triggers of the other runes unless all the runes are specifically designed to go off at the same time using a single trigger and therefore a single roll, in which if even one is missing, perhaps none of them can go off, or the single roll may fail, rendering them useless.

There is an example of such limiting rulings on runes in the wand example in the book. The publishers should not be required to rule on every such circumstance. Thus, it is up to the GM to impose limitations or accept and account for the windfalls that result for the characters.

We have an Enchanter in the group. He has put several runes in pockets and on gear of characters that wanted them. These will heal the character upon taking damge. This is great when they take a large hit and not so great when they take a scratch.

He hasn't made any permanent runes yet so I haven't had to deal with unlimited usage yet. But I expect if he made a wand there would be some sort of ranged roll needed to successfully attack the target since we know the magic will go off. And then the victims get a resistance roll of course.

pocketwatch,
I do understand what you are saying, I get it. BBF allows you to build a character concept and does not restrict you based on class or the number of abilities, spells, etc. you get for your class. If you are comparing to other RPG's you may get the sense it's broke, however in a game like BBF, the balance of the game comes from GM adjudication.

In BBF, you can wear platemail armor, carry a two handed sword and freely cast any spell in the game. In fact, my very first play test I had 8 people at the table. My GM Nancy and her husband Rob were at the game, after I walked through character creation Nancy put her pencil down and said, "Wait a minute. I can carry a 2-handed sword, wear chainmail and cast spells?" Yes, I replied. Nancy, "Hot damn." Of course one of her descriptors was "Can't hear well" and asked people to shout at her all through the game. hahaha

--
A GM might rule that a turn is what you can see pictured in a single frame of a comic book. To use your example, "When he touches a rune with all five fingers of his right hand and points at a person with his left, the rune triggers and tries to put the person to sleep", the GM might require the player to make a DEX check after 2 or 3 runes since he feels that the time it takes to touch and point is more than his concept of a turn.

Another GM might rule the charm spell is 1/turn and only one rune can be triggered each turn.

Example character concept: A uber-healer.
I start with spellcaster as my primary and cleric as my secondary. I place 1 level in spellcaster and pick 'heal' and 'aid'. After my first BBF game session, lets assume I earn 6DP. I spend 3DP on cleric and pick 'heal', then spend 3DP on enchanter. I tell my GM I'm taking a few minutes to scribe a rune of healing on my walking staff and one on our front-line-warriors shield, triggered by taking damage. I can cast heal from spellcaster, then heal from cleric (-20) and the runes automatically activate, that is 8D of possible healing. Is that broke? Nope, it's the concept I wanted for my character, the party healer.

But wait, I can make "spell scrolls". In addition to the above, I create 3 spell scrolls during the course of my day by spending 1Dx5gp and making a spellcaster skill check. All I have to do is read from the scroll and the spell kicks off. Of course, as a GM I would adjudicate the reading of the scroll is an action. :)

I hope this helps your situation. This is a great thread, helping all of us define how we want to run and play our BBF games.

Personally, if I run a game, a space is always 2 yards for characters. I would describe a turn more as a scene in a show in which multiple actions are shown through various cuts. It lasts only as long as the actions it depicts, sometimes 2 seconds, other times 5 or 6 seconds. It is generally the time it takes for someone to respond to their opponent's actions while planning out and preparing for their next volley of actions.

This is exactly why I'm playing this game. Character concept is permissive, not restrictive.

I am glad to see that my comment/questions prompted such an active discussion. Thank you for the replies.

So, what do you think is better for Permanent Runes:

(1) Trigger the unlimited rune (Offensive Strike - Acid Arrow) using the original roll (so, inventory would read: Rune Ring (Acid Arrow) (56)) which would limit the use

(2) Make the Enchanter act as if he/she was a Spellcaster who knows a very limited version of Offensive Strike (roll every time, using Enchanter skill - this allows the Enchanter to get critical hits on his/her spells)

(3) Limit the rune usage via other checks (as in Mr. Moore's example above).

I generally like option (2) as it is very much in tune with the core BBF rules, I think.

Thanks again.

For the spirit of the enchanter as a non normal spell caster I would suggest option 1 if these are the only three you are considering. I find it makes sense that a permanent item is only as good as it was crafted originally. The quality and effectiveness of an item does not change from use to use in my opinion.

Ok, this is very interesting. Because...

That's why your rune wand (45 roll needed) sucks Borkul! You bought it from Hadrans Discount Magics. I bought mine (92 roll needed) from Rodran's Imporium. Works every time!

Them's fighting words...

I know it's a bit old, but I was reading thru this thread to see what solution others came up with. Mind you I am a compleat noob to BBF but have quickly fallen in love with the system.So here are my thoughts.

A permanent runed item functions a lot like an enchanted item which gives me two thoughts. Either you can get rid of the option of permanent runes all together, which forces the enchanter to make/get magic gear like everyone else, while still having access to 12 runes by level 6.

OR make permanent runed items "attuned" to the energies of an enchanter only. This allows for the enchanter to have easy access to magic items and effects but unable to, for example to give that wand of acid arrow away to a teammate. She wants that wand she has to go thru the magic item creation rules.

Using items that for example an opposed/ranged touch attack, or a physical/thrown attack can all acquire action penalties and doesn't "break balance" as others are afraid of happening. Not counting spell resistance and saves. Yes a permanent rune can only be activated once a round but what about items like a wand with four permanent runes on it?

I like the idea of keeping the rolls from rune creation, (Example: Wand of acid arrow, %56 RTH) but that makes for a lot of book keeping if each roll is different for multiple runes. So you can do a catch all roll when making the runes with a penalty for each additional rune beyond the first to be made, thus encouraging less grandiose and complex items.

Last thought, to me an enchantment strong enough to remain persistently would give off a lot of energy feedback when used. If the additional rune creation penalty above is not in use, you can add an energy interference penalty for each additional rune that is activated in a single round. This activation penalty progression is separate from round penalty progression.

Thoughts and feedback?

One thing to keep in mind, and I hope I remembered to note this in the game rule book, will have to check. The most important difference between a permanent rune and a magic item is that a magic item is permanent forever... even after the creator dies. Permanent runes are bound to the enchanter who created them (as alluded to by how many runes he can have in effect at one time). So kill the enchanter and all "permanent" runes lose their power.

In my personal games, I also make it so that if an enchanter is enclosed in iron bars or bound by iron shackles, his runes have a temporary disconnect until the enchanter is removed from the iron. But that's just something I adapted recently for campaign flavor.

Dennis,

Welcome to the site, great to have you.

Mark