"can not be tried again for at least a year and a half" - FL

Diabolists, Techno-Wizards & Psionicists, Oh my! All things that are Magics and Psionics in all Palladium Games.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

"can not be tried again for at least a year and a half" - FL

Unread post by Axelmania »

Page 128 of Rifts Book of Magic (and probably anywhere else the spell is printed) includes that phrase.

Which I figure you could also express as "at least 18 months" or "at least 548 days" (rounding up fractions).

The question is "after what? when do I begin this countdown?"

Another Familiar Link can not be tried again for at least a year and a half.

This sentence is immediately preceded by this one:

If he does, the mage will lapse into a coma for 1-6 hours.

So what I'm wondering is, does the 18-month moratorium on additional uses of the Familiar Link spell begin after the coma ends?

Does the moratorium exist at all if you DON'T fall into a coma? (50% chance)

Coma results because you "suffer shock from the ordeal" (half do not) so I'm wondering if perhaps those who do not suffer shock could re-cast the spell to get a new familiar immediately without needing to wait over a year.
User avatar
Mack
Supreme Being
Posts: 6297
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:01 am
Comment: This space for rent.
Location: Searching the Dinosaur Swamp
Contact:

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by Mack »

Yes, the moratorium exists without the coma.

And one to six hours is trivial compared to the year and a half wait, and not worth debating.
Some gave all.
Love your neighbor.
Know the facts. Know your opinion. Know the difference.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

#1 nope the RBoM is not the 'is all-be all' on/about magic. It only works for the Rifts game.
➣ In the PFRPG 2nd ed Game: a mage, after loosing their familiar to death, won't want a new one for 1D4 years.

#2 When presenting a question you need to start at the beginning and not just asking a question without giving any background about what you are asking about. We Are Not Psychics knowing what you are asking without you telling us.
To used this OP as an example.
It would of been better is you had said something like...I was reading up on the Familiar Link spell and was reading the part about when a mage's familiar is killed and how long after that could they get another familiar.

#3 to answer your question. The delay built into the text is measuring time in years not hours. So when the clock starts, at the start or end of the coma is irrelevant in this context. It takes One and One Half orbits of the world the mage is one for the mage to recover from loosing their familiar to contemplate getting another.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by Axelmania »

Mack wrote:the moratorium exists without the coma

In cases like this how do we discern whether it's a followup to one sentence or the next?

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:#1 nope the RBoM is not the 'is all-be all' on/about magic. It only works for the Rifts game.
➣ In the PFRPG 2nd ed Game: a mage, after loosing their familiar to death, won't want a new one for 1D4 years.

Thank you for highlighting this, it's not a contrast I recall noticing before. Making notes in my books now pointing to pages in each other.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:#2 When presenting a question you need to start at the beginning and not just asking a question without giving any background about what you are asking about. We Are Not Psychics knowing what you are asking without you telling us.
To used this OP as an example.
It would of been better is you had said something like...I was reading up on the Familiar Link spell and was reading the part about when a mage's familiar is killed and how long after that could they get another familiar.

Guess I figured it was implied since I was asking about it.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:#3 to answer your question. The delay built into the text is measuring time in years not hours. So when the clock starts, at the start or end of the coma is irrelevant in this context. It takes One and One Half orbits of the world the mage is one for the mage to recover from loosing their familiar to contemplate getting another.

88-day years on Mercury... time for a vacation!
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

#3: That was only half the response I was hoping for.
I was hoping for some sort of response to the 1st half of the point #3.
While I am disappointed, it is not totally unexpected.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
Curbludgeon
Hero
Posts: 1183
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:08 am
Comment: They/Them

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by Curbludgeon »

Axlemania, I think it will prove useful to look at changes in wording across all the versions of the spell/ability. Excluding the familiar mage from the Rifter here are all the examples I could think of offhand to which I had access, roughly in chronological order. I can't speak to whether or not there are changes in-between printings of a given work.
Spoiler:
Palladium Fantasy 1st Edition Revised, pg. 66 wrote:If the familiar is slain the spell caster permanently looses[sic] the six hit points gained from the union plus an additional four points. There is a 50% chance he will also suffer shock from the ordeal; if he does he will lapse into a coma for 1·6 hours. Another familiar link cannot be tried for a period no less than one year.
Beyond the Supernatural 1st Edition, pg. 118 wrote:If the familiar is killed, the arcanist permanently loses 10 hit points. There is a 50% chance he will also suffer shock from the ordeal; if he does, he will lapse into a coma for 1-6 hours. Another familiar link can not be tried again for at least 1 1/2 years.
Heroes Unlimited 2nd Edition, pg. 152 wrote:If the familiar is killed, the arcanist permanently loses 10 Hit Points! There is also a 50% chance he will suffer shock from the ordeal. If he does, he will lapse into a coma for 1D6 hours. Another familiar link cannot be tried again for at least 1D4 years.
Rifts Main Book wrote:pg. 87: Shifter: 7. Familiar Link: Special Endurance: If the animal is killed, the shifter will permanently lose 10 hit points (the six from the link and four additional). There is also a 1-50% chance that the shifter will suffer shock from the ordeal and lapse into a coma for 1D6 hours. Another familiar can not be linked for a period of one year.
pg. 182: If the familiar is killed, the arcanist permanently loses 10 hit points. There is a 50% chance he will also suffer shock from the ordeal; if he does, he will lapse into a coma for 1-6 hours. Another familiar link can not be tried again for at least 1 1/2 years.
Nightbane, pg. 143 wrote:If the familiar is killed, the arcanist permanently loses 10 hit points. There is a 50% chance he will also suffer shock from the ordeal; if he does, he will lapse into a coma for 1-6 hours. Another familiar link cannot be tried again for at least 1/2 a year.
Palladium Fantasy 2nd Edition, pg. 207 wrote:If the familiar is killed, the arcanist permanently loses 10 hit points. There is also a 50% chance he will suffer shock from the ordeal. If he does, he will lapse into a coma for 1D6 hours; another familiar link cannot be tried again for at least 1D4 years.
Rifts Book of Magic, pg. 128 wrote:If the familiar is killed, the sorcerer permanently loses 10 Hit Points. There is a 01-50% chance he will also suffer shock fom the ordeal. If he does, the mage will lapse into a coma for 1-6 hours. Another Familiar Link can not be tried again for at least a year and a half. Although the familiar understands and obeys its master, it can not actually speak to him.
Rifts Dimension Book 7:Megaverse Builder, pg. 42, Shifter: 8. Familiar Link: Special Endurance: wrote:If the animal is killed, the Shifter permanently loses 10 Hit Points (the six fom the link and four additional). There is also a 01 -50% chance that the Shifer will suffer shock fom the ordeal and lapse into a coma for 1D6 hours. The character cannot link to another familiar for at least one year, due to the shock and trauma
Rifts Ultimate Edition, pg. 123 wrote:If the animal is killed, the Shifter permanently loses 10 Hit Points (the six from the link and four additional). There is also a 01-50% chance that the Shifter will suffer shock from the ordeal and lapse into a coma for 1d6 hours. The character cannot link to another familiar for at least one year afer losing his original animal.
There are a couple of takeaways, the least of which being the Nightbane version of the spell has arguably the least punishing familiar death tax. The quotes most suggestive that the moratorium is the result of a coma are PFRPG 2E's semicolon linking phrases regarding coma and time out, and DB7's outright stating the time out is due to the shock that there's only a chance to have been suffered. The RUE quote for Shifters, however, is pretty cut-and-dried.

I don't know of any quotes defining a year's duration for magical effects as dependent on the planet of casting, and would ask anyone claiming such to produce a citation before what appears to be an attempt at inserting headcanon. Allowing such would lead to all sorts of silliness, exploiting both short and long orbital periods. Similarly, I would argue that any moratorium should be held from the perspective of the caster, thus preventing shenanigans like traveling to a much slower dimension so the subjective time out is resolved quickly in-game.
User avatar
Mack
Supreme Being
Posts: 6297
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:01 am
Comment: This space for rent.
Location: Searching the Dinosaur Swamp
Contact:

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by Mack »

Axelmania wrote:
Mack wrote:the moratorium exists without the coma

In cases like this how do we discern whether it's a followup to one sentence or the next?

By understanding the context.

If the massive 1 1/2 year penalty was conditional on the 50% chance of coma, it was be expressly identified as such.
Some gave all.
Love your neighbor.
Know the facts. Know your opinion. Know the difference.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by Axelmania »

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:#3: That was only half the response I was hoping for.
I was hoping for some sort of response to the 1st half of the point #3.
While I am disappointed, it is not totally unexpected.


Oh, you mean about it not mattering whether it begins at start/end of coma?

Actually that seems like it could matter (especially on Mercury).

1.5 mercury years is 88+44=132 days, so if a coma lasted 1 day or 40 days (never underestimate my PE min-maxing) that could make a difference for when you could cast the spell again, right?

Curbludgeon wrote:I think it will prove useful to look at changes in wording across all the versions of the spell/ability. Excluding the familiar mage from the Rifter here are all the examples I could think of offhand to which I had access, roughly in chronological order. I can't speak to whether or not there are changes in-between printings of a given work.

Thanks for all the work in compiling that! Very helpful to see it lined up like this.

I like the "six gained plus four additional" notes in PRPG/RMB/DB7/RUE rather than just saying ten (no sum explanation) in BTS/HU2/NB/PF2/RBOM

Very intersting contrast on 6 months (Nightbane) 12 months (PRPG and Shifter ability) 18 months (BTS and Rifts spell) 12-48 months (HU2/PF2)

Curbludgeon wrote:The quotes most suggestive that the moratorium is the result of a coma are PFRPG 2E's semicolon linking phrases regarding coma and time out, and DB7's outright stating the time out is due to the shock that there's only a chance to have been suffered. The RUE quote for Shifters, however, is pretty cut-and-dried.

Nice catch with the semicolon, not something I think I would've noticed without your pointing it out.

Very glaring contrast between DB7/RUE too.

RUE lacks DB7's "due to", but it occurs to me that "after losing" still might apply to the context of "if you suffered shock" (though not written) implied by following that sentence.

After all, if it was intended to apply to ALL instances of loss then shouldn't you state it directly after, and before the coma part? Or have a "regardless of shock" thing?

DB7's "due to" seems the clearest expression of intent we've ever had, thanks for identifying it.

Curbludgeon wrote:I don't know of any quotes defining a year's duration for magical effects as dependent on the planet of casting, and would ask anyone claiming such to produce a citation before what appears to be an attempt at inserting headcanon. Allowing such would lead to all sorts of silliness, exploiting both short and long orbital periods. Similarly, I would argue that any moratorium should be held from the perspective of the caster, thus preventing shenanigans like traveling to a much slower dimension so the subjective time out is resolved quickly in-game.

That's going to cause a lot of angst for those who want to exploit the Astral Plane's passage in time.

Also interesting how that might affect Wormwood since I remember something along the lines of a 1:4 ratio (Tarn spent ~6 months there, came back and ~24 had passed? I might be off here...) so we could use a dimension-hopping Shifter like Salome (can't remember if she had an explicit Familiar... you'd THINK she would...) to craft some kind of anecdotal example/experiment.

Mack wrote:
Axelmania wrote:
Mack wrote:the moratorium exists without the coma

In cases like this how do we discern whether it's a followup to one sentence or the next?

By understanding the context.

If the massive 1 1/2 year penalty was conditional on the 50% chance of coma, it was be expressly identified as such.


So we discern the context by understanding the context?

I'm not sure Palladium always uses express identification, sometimes it just seems like adjacency that implies the context of application...

"Another familiar link cannot be tried" for example does not specify "if you suffered shock", (1 sentence prior condition) but it doesn't specify "if your familiar died" (2 sentence prior condition) either, so if we are going as wide-scope as possible without specified conditions, you could actually apply it to the casting of the spell as a whole.

Which is a good way (for books which do not limit you to 1 familiar, I think several (most? all?) do, will need to check pages 'bludgeon mentioned later to remind myself which) to slow down the aquisition of multiple familiars if (regardless of deaths) you had to many months between each new bonding. When I do look that up I'm not sure if it's worth making a new thread for or if I should just include it here. I like the "I have a hundred raven familiars all watching you and giving me 600 HP but if you kill a couple I'll probably die" idea and want to figure out if any games allow (or more like "don't explicitly forbid") that.
User avatar
drewkitty ~..~
Monk
Posts: 17737
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Location: Eastvale, calif
Contact:

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by drewkitty ~..~ »

How does "laps into a coma for 1D6 hours" turn into 40 days?

drewkitty ~..~ wrote: The delay built into the text is measuring time in years not hours. So when the clock starts, at the start or end of the coma is irrelevant in this context. .


My point with this is that 1D6 HOURS is...Soo Very Insigificant when compared to years of any planet...it does not matter how long the coma was. One hour...3 hours...or maybe 6 hours.... Because it was less than a day long there is no reason to even consider how many hours the after death of familiar coma was.
May you be blessed with the ability to change course when you are off the mark.
Each question should be give the canon answer 1st, then you can proclaim your house rules.
Reading and writing (literacy) is how people on BBS interact.
User avatar
Axelmania
Knight
Posts: 5523
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 1:13 pm

Re: "can not be tried again for at least a year and a half"

Unread post by Axelmania »

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:How does "laps into a coma for 1D6 hours" turn into 40 days?

Yipes that's a two-tier goof on my end, firstly in thinking standard coma recovery rules applied, and secondly in misremembering it as PE in days rather than PE in hours.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:1D6 HOURS is...Soo Very Insigificant when compared to years of any planet...it does not matter how long the coma was. One hour...3 hours...or maybe 6 hours.... Because it was less than a day long there is no reason to even consider how many hours the after death of familiar coma was.

It would rarely be important, I'd agree to that.
Post Reply

Return to “Guild of Magic & Psionics”