Author
|
Topic: Callandor and
Other Angreal: Where's the Difference? |
Grayswandir_Blade Member Member
# 92933
|
posted August 20, 2002 02:34 PM
It's been a
while since I've read the novels, but as I recall, all (most?)
of the angreal and sa'angreal in existence provide a buffer so
that you don't overchannel more than you can handle.
Callandor, however, provides no such buffer--just the raw
power. Yet, by the game rules, there's no difference between
the two.
By the game, you get "free overchanneling" up
to the Power Rating of the angreal or sa'angreal in question.
Then you can overchannel further if you want to (pg. 290).
However, though the description of Callandor specifies how
unsafe it is to use, there are no rules that represent that
danger; it's just like any other sa'angreal.
Before
re-reading the rules, I thought perhaps angreal prevent
overchanneling further--thus the buffer. Have there been any
references in the novels to a channeler holding more OP than
even an angreal allows? Otherwise, it seems like the angreal
should act as free overchanneling and an overchanneling cap.
Protect the channeler by not allowing them to channel more OP
than the angreal allows.
Callandor, then, should
eliminate that cap, allowing +8 free overchanneling then a
chance to accidently draw in too much, represented in some way
by a CON or WIS save. If the save fails, the weave in question
becomes an even higher level and the channeler suffers normal
over-the-angreal overchanneling rules.
Opinions?
[ August 20, 2002, 02:37 PM: Message
edited by: Grayswandir_Blade
]
-------------------- "We laugh in the face
of danger, just before it hits us and knocks us out" -
Lysander. :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E:
Registered:
Jul 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
DanausMantrose
Member Member # 50531
|
posted August 20, 2002 02:48 PM
I agree. In
fact, in my own houserules for my PBEM game, I have stated
something much to this effect. I use the modified Slot Pool
method (slightly different from what is in the UTDB netbook.
To quote my houserules in regards to Angreal:
"A
Channeler may *NOT* Overchannel while using an Angreal or
Sa'angreal. The Angreal/Sa'angreal are designed with a special
buffer that prevents the channeler from drawing more of the
One Power than they can safely handle. The only exception to
this rule would be if the Channeler uses an Angreal/Sa'angreal
that was built without this buffer. An example of such a
sa'angreal would be Callandor, which lacks the
buffer."
Straight from my House Rules page. If a
channeler found/created/used an *angreal without the buffer,
then they could Overchannel while using it the same as
always.
Linking works in a similar manner, in that no
one in the link can Overchannel to add more to the circle.
While I didn't specifically state it in my rules, I'd say that
while in a circle the Leader cannot Overchannel; the circle
acts as an angreal with the safety buffer in place.
If
you're curious about the rest of the houserules, just go to http://home.attbi.com/~prophecies_gm/houserules.html
From:
Michigan | Registered: Nov 2001 |
IP: Logged
| |
Grayswandir_Blade Member Member
# 92933
|
posted August 20, 2002 07:34 PM
Okay, and
how about this as an additional rule: when using angreal and
sa'angreal that do not have a buffer, the channeler must make
a Will save versus a DC of 15 + power rating of the angreal or
sa'angreal. If failed, the channeler overchannels by 1. If
failed by 10 or more, the channeler overchannels by
2.
This represents that when using an unfamiliar amount
of OP, the border between enough and too much becomes very
small. The stronger angreal you're using, the harder it is to
realize how much is too much, and the easier it is to burn
yourself out. Sound good?
[edit:] This would be every
time the channeler uses the angreal to weave. The
overchanneling *would* make the weave stronger (which can
really be nasty for things like Fireballs )
[ August 20, 2002, 07:35 PM: Message
edited by: Grayswandir_Blade
]
-------------------- "We laugh in the face
of danger, just before it hits us and knocks us out" -
Lysander. :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E:
Registered:
Jul 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
Targul
Member Member # 88826
|
posted August 22, 2002 10:44 PM
Maybe I
need to reread the series a 5th time but I thought that
Cadsuane Sedai said that Callandor didn't provide a buffer
against the Taint on Saidin. I always assumed that this was
because of the fact that it was made during the breaking after
the Taint was already in place. Maybe it's just me but that's
what I remember. Anyway in my game if someone were to actually
use Callandor I have told them that it will increase their
Madness points as well, just like overchanneling does but to a
greater extent.
Registered:
Jun 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
Grayswandir_Blade Member Member
# 92933
|
posted August 22, 2002 11:05 PM
I don't own
the books, else I'd look it up...heh
But I'm pretty sure Callandor doesn't
provide a buffer against overchanneling. Taint, of course,
comes along with it...which is an interesting way of looking
at it. Perhaps any/all angreal should increase madness, if a
save fails or something? After all, it *is* overchanneling,
just *free* overchanneling.
-------------------- "We
laugh in the face of danger, just before it hits us and knocks
us out" - Lysander. :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E:
Registered:
Jul 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
DanausMantrose
Member Member # 50531
|
posted August 23, 2002 06:10 AM
Actually,
the lack of the safety buffer in Callandor has the
"side-effect" of making the Taint affect male channelers more
easily. The barrel tap has been popped off the barrel, so the
user gets the liquid inside as well as the dirt/grim left
there.
What supports this is in Winter's Heart,
Cadsuane makes a passing mention about one Sa'angreal (I won't
say which, and won't go into details) that "unless it lacks
the buffer like Callandor, (so-and-so) should be protected
from drawing too much to do physical harm..."
So the
comment implies that the buffer in most angreal simply keep
the channeler from drawing in more of the One Power than they
could safely hold. That implies that if they use an angreal,
they CANNOT Overchannel also, unless it is with a flawed
*angreal.
As for the Taint.. it makes sense. Since the
Taint is part of Saidin, and if you have no buffer to keep you
from drawing more of it than you should, it makes sense that
you'd also be drawing more of the Taint than you should.
Annnyway...
From:
Michigan | Registered: Nov 2001 |
IP: Logged
| |
Grayswandir_Blade Member Member
# 92933
|
posted August 23, 2002 08:20 AM
So, in
other words, the taint comes along with it, like I said?
But that still doesn't determine whether or
not angreal should be considered overchanneling when
considering madness. Like you said, even *with* a buffered
angreal, you still draw taint--moreso than with normal
channeling. Therefore, doesn't it make sense that when using
an angreal, you should get a madness point if you go over your
max level?
-------------------- "We laugh in the
face of danger, just before it hits us and knocks us out" -
Lysander. :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E:
Registered:
Jul 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
Arr MiHardies
Member Member # 86473
|
posted August 23, 2002 08:48 AM
But an
Angreal seems to me, for all intents and purposes, raises that
max level. Now, if you are mad enough that angreal causes a
trigger for madness, then, yes, check for that, otherwise, I
would treat it as though the channeler could normally cast
that level. Kind of light light passing through a lens, It
spreads out to cover more area. Which leads to an interesting
thought. Light can also cover less area depending on the shape
of the lens. Perhaps there are angreal that SUBTRACT
levels?
-------------------- You might be a
king... or a little street sweeper... but sooner or
later... you dance with the
reaper... ----------------------------- professional D20
Character Sheets, NPC Sheets, and DM screens http://amhsheets.notcrazy.com/
From:
Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Grayswandir_Blade Member Member
# 92933
|
posted August 23, 2002 10:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Arr MiHardies: But an
Angreal seems to me, for all intents and purposes, raises
that max level
Good point. But it seems like that's what the per-level
1D6 does; as you progress into channeling, you wield greater
and greater amounts of One Power (greater and greater levels).
Thus, you get madness periodically. Using an angreal, however,
makes you suddenly draw in all of this OP at a super-high (or
significantly, in any case) level before you get to the actual
clvl that can wield it. And the taint *does* come with
it.
So, how about this as a house rule: when using an
angreal to cast weaves of a level higher than the maximum
level you could normally cast, add one point of madness for
the entire duration of the seizing of saidin.
Good?
-------------------- "We laugh in the face of
danger, just before it hits us and knocks us out" -
Lysander. :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E: :88E:
:88E:
Registered:
Jul 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
Xythlord
Member Member # 70903
|
posted August 23, 2002 10:11 AM
Wow!, I
like that ruling, makes sense and it is not really harsh. It
does make a male channeler think twice though. Nice and easy
to implement as well.
And with that ruling you could
have calander set of the user (since it is unbuffered) with an
immediate madness check and maybe add the power rating of the
angreal/sa'angeal to the DC. (only a flawed or unbuffered
angreal/sa'angeal). The exception with this is using the item
in a circle with at least 2 other women (as per the
novels).
[ August 23, 2002, 10:14 AM: Message
edited by: Xythlord
]
-------------------- Only two things are
infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure
about the former. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
From:
Denver, Co | Registered: Mar 2002 |
IP: Logged
| |
Wowbangers the
Infinitely Prolonged Member Member
# 101183
|
posted August 23, 2002 04:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Arr MiHardies: Perhaps there are
angreal that SUBTRACT levels?
Don't ya have to channel into an through an Angreal to
make it, uh, 'go'. So it couldn't work as a weapon. Besides,
who would willingly want to have something made to allow them
to uh, 'underchannel' when you can do it naturally? ![[Confused]](Wizards_Com Boards Callandor and Other Angreal Where's the Difference_fichiers/confused.gif)
-------------------- I have gone out to
look for myself. If I should happen to return before I get
back, please tell myself to wait.
From:
The middle of nowhere....South Dakota | Registered:
Aug 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
JosephKell
Member Member # 99447
|
posted August 24, 2002 06:27 PM
Here is a
question: Why (not how) does a character (pc) get a hold of
Callandor? Or any other Sa'Angreal without messing up
the game balance?
And to answer the first post:
Overchanneling with an Angreal or (a normal)
Sa'Angreal is like a free +X, so if you had a +1
Angreal and wanted to boost a weave by 4 you
overchannel 3 and you get the +1. Callandor is different, to
channel more than 8 higher (the power rating) you would have
to do an overchannel for the WHOLE thing, like to go 9 over
you would do 9, but there aren't any rules for it. Only Rand
and other Uber NPC's (that Rand trusts) would have Callandor
anyway, and there shouldn't be another Power 8
Sa'Angreal out there in the game otherwise Callandor
looks like crap, even a +5 Sa'Angreal[i] can make a nice GM
into a ****** off one, because you end up with One Turbo
Charged Channeler, and in a party of more than one or all
channelers, a lot of "Sidekicks," and these games are about
teams, if I had a +5 [i]Sa'Angreal I wouldn't keep the
Wilder (that is 3 levels below the rest of the party) with me
because I wouldn't need her or her +1 Angreal to give
me a boost.
Just look at the Linking Table and you will
see why Sa'Angreal should be kept out of players hands,
or be so big that transporting them is useless or that using
it is a one time thing (like the Eye of the World kind
of).
-------------------- Instant Message me @
JonERPG on the AIMer
Visit AielManSpear
-If you cast Meteor
Swarm to avoid wasting your REALLY good spells... -If your
character sheet is longer than the Player's Handbook... -If
you have a magic item that can destroy the world...with four
charges left... -If the God of Destiny asks you what will
have next... ...you might be a Munchkin.
From:
California | Registered: Aug 2002 |
IP: Logged
| |
Dashiva_32
Member Member # 103123
|
posted August 26, 2002 08:58 AM
i agree to
that remark, that sa'angreal should be kept out or
non-transportable, but then again, what if somehow you got a
hold of one of the sa'angreal in the stone of tear, since
thats where many are held? saying that a ring sa'angreal is
too big to carry is not fair to those who somehow find one. my
idea is that angreal are useable at all levels, but sa'angreal
are usable only at level 10 and above. this makes it so you
can still have them for experienced veterans, but makes sure
that a 3rd level wilder is not able to take on Moghedian or
Elayne if in a fight with them
somehow.
-------------------- The Aes Sedai lay
huddled in their White Tower, doing nothing against the shadow
except skeeming. We of the Black Tower do something. We are
the Asha'man.
From:
Massachusetts | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Arr MiHardies
Member Member # 86473
|
posted August 26, 2002 09:21 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Wowbangers the Infinitely
Prolonged:
quote:
Originally posted by Arr MiHardies: Perhaps there
are angreal that SUBTRACT levels?
Don't ya have to channel into an through an Angreal
to make it, uh, 'go'. So it couldn't work as a weapon.
Besides, who would willingly want to have something made to
allow them to uh, 'underchannel' when you can do it
naturally?
yes, you do have to channel through it, but if a
character doesnt score high enough to get an idea of what the
angreal actually does, they may be in for a rude awakening if
they suddenly need to use it. They may be able to tell it is
an angreal. and it may be a powerful angreal, but it doesnt
necessarily do what they think it does. Perhaps a level
inhibiting angreal was a form of punishment applied to those
who misused the power in the Age of legends? would make for
some interesting role
playing
-------------------- You might be a
king... or a little street sweeper... but sooner or
later... you dance with the
reaper... ----------------------------- professional D20
Character Sheets, NPC Sheets, and DM screens http://amhsheets.notcrazy.com/
From:
Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Wowbangers the
Infinitely Prolonged Member Member
# 101183
|
posted August 26, 2002 04:26 PM
quote:
yes, you
do have to channel through it, but if a character doesnt
score high enough to get an idea of what the angreal
actually does, they may be in for a rude awakening if they
suddenly need to use it. They may be able to tell it is an
angreal. and it may be a powerful angreal, but it doesnt
necessarily do what they think it does. Perhaps a level
inhibiting angreal was a form of punishment applied to those
who misused the power in the Age of legends? would make for
some interesting role playing
You may have missed my point among all the bad grammer
I used, but I don't think that any one can be forced to use an
Angreal, thus it would be impossible to use as a punishment
device. It would be like telling someone to cut their own hand
off. Punishment it would be, but it would be all but
impossible to get them to do it themselves. Since using an
Angreal takes conscous effort from the user it would be
impossible to trick them into continually using it. They might
do it the first time, but after that the Angreal would be
history. It would be impossible to burn themselves out by
overchanneling while their levels where 'underchanneled'
because angreals have that buffer (overchanneling cap). Unless
it was flawed like Calindor.
-------------------- I
have gone out to look for myself. If I should happen to return
before I get back, please tell myself to wait.
From:
The middle of nowhere....South Dakota | Registered:
Aug 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
Arr MiHardies
Member Member # 86473
|
posted August 26, 2002 07:00 PM
It could be
a device similar to the a'dam that creates a link between the
channeler and the angreal, and can not be removed as per a'dam
rules. this can be forcing. but i never said anything about
continually using it. if they find it, and have no need to use
it until a big fight, say, you can tell them a weavesight
check says they can use it only once or something, then when
they go to use it as a last resort in a fight they find their
weave was cast at a lower level. anyways, I only suggested it
as a one time practical joke to play on an angreal happy
channeler.
-------------------- You might be a
king... or a little street sweeper... but sooner or
later... you dance with the
reaper... ----------------------------- professional D20
Character Sheets, NPC Sheets, and DM screens http://amhsheets.notcrazy.com/
From:
Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Wowbangers the
Infinitely Prolonged Member Member
# 101183
|
posted August 26, 2002 08:07 PM
Perhaps
this thing could be a ter'angreal, and it could not be removed
by the wearer (like an a'dam). Ter'angreals don't need to be
channeled into to make them, um, 'go', so it could become a
rather nasty toy for an unfortunate PC to get a hold of. I can
hear one of my Channelers screaming already. ![[Devilish]](Wizards_Com Boards Callandor and Other Angreal Where's the Difference_fichiers/diablo.gif)
-------------------- I have gone out to
look for myself. If I should happen to return before I get
back, please tell myself to wait.
From:
The middle of nowhere....South Dakota | Registered:
Aug 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
Xythlord
Member Member # 70903
|
posted August 26, 2002 10:02 PM
Well we do
have the rules from drothgery's page for the Latent Maker
feat, and the weaves for making angreal/sa'angreal.
What if the characters who are trying to make one of those
items, and after many days of concentration and sweating out
the formula (KS: Arcana), screw it up and make a inhibiting
angreal.
That is assuming they are able to make
these items and you as the DM allow these feats/weaves. Could
be fun though to see the look on their faces when the new
angreal they just made actuall lowers the level of the weave
they cast after taking the full weave slot ![[Devilish]](Wizards_Com Boards Callandor and Other Angreal Where's the Difference_fichiers/diablo.gif)
-------------------- Only two things are
infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure
about the former. Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
From:
Denver, Co | Registered: Mar 2002 |
IP: Logged
| |
Dashiva_32
Member Member # 103123
|
posted August 27, 2002 07:09 AM
from the
whole series that i read, not once did i ever read about an
inhibiting angreal or sa'angreal. i think that if one was
made, then it may be made for a lower power level, but finding
one would be virtually impossible. Even the ter'angreal have
some purpose a user couldn't do on his/her own, so i think it
should be the same for angreal/sa'angreal, whether it be
boosting power by one or
onehundred.
-------------------- The Aes Sedai lay
huddled in their White Tower, doing nothing against the shadow
except skeeming. We of the Black Tower do something. We are
the Asha'man.
From:
Massachusetts | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Arr MiHardies
Member Member # 86473
|
posted August 27, 2002 08:02 AM
We never
said they did exist, we mentioned it is a possibility, and
something meant to throw at the players. hell, they might even
try to use it a few times before they realize it is lowering
their level. Think of it as a cursed magic
item!
-------------------- You might be a
king... or a little street sweeper... but sooner or
later... you dance with the
reaper... ----------------------------- professional D20
Character Sheets, NPC Sheets, and DM screens http://amhsheets.notcrazy.com/
From:
Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Dashiva_32
Member Member # 103123
|
posted August 27, 2002 03:07 PM
clever,
it'd be funny to watch their reaction, especially if
Rhuidean.... the doorways with the other worlds might help.
the people who gave mat his ashandarei might give you a level
weakening angreal or sa'angreal, or even a ter'angreal that
draws the ability to channel out of the person for like, 2
levels. hehehehe
-------------------- The Aes Sedai
lay huddled in their White Tower, doing nothing against the
shadow except skeeming. We of the Black Tower do something. We
are the Asha'man.
From:
Massachusetts | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Arr MiHardies
Member Member # 86473
|
posted August 27, 2002 04:03 PM
answer me
this. what would happen to a female channeler wearing mats
foxhead medallion? would it absorb all the saidar gathering
around a person when they tried to embrace it, or simply
absorb their weaves as they are cast? or maybe it simply
protects then from weaves cast on them. from the sounds of the
description it protects against saidar.
hmm...
-------------------- You might be a
king... or a little street sweeper... but sooner or
later... you dance with the
reaper... ----------------------------- professional D20
Character Sheets, NPC Sheets, and DM screens http://amhsheets.notcrazy.com/
From:
Las Vegas, NV | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
| |
Wowbangers the
Infinitely Prolonged Member Member
# 101183
|
posted August 27, 2002 04:28 PM
Don't quote
me on it, but I think that it protects him from weaves
directed specifically at him. As to if this could stop
Balefire of even a fireball, I am not sure. (It's probably in
the Core rulebook)
-------------------- I have gone
out to look for myself. If I should happen to return before I
get back, please tell myself to wait.
From:
The middle of nowhere....South Dakota | Registered:
Aug 2002 | IP: Logged
| |
The Great Gray
Skwid Member Member
# 34606
|
posted August 28, 2002 07:55 AM
Mat's
medallion is discussed in the WOT FAQ.
Whether Balefire is a direct
or indirect Power weapon is debatable, but a fireball is
almost certainly direct.
As to whether a channeler
could channel while wearing it...we just don't know. I suspect
they probably could, though.
I don't think any of this
is in the core rulebook,
though.
-------------------- Evan "Skwid"
Langlinais The Humblest Mollusk on the Net http://www.thehumblest.net/ Ask me for
information about the Texas Darkfriends!
From:
The Big D | Registered: Jul 2001 |
IP: Logged
| | |