The Book of Spell Rules

[dok]

This really doesn't seem that complex at all. Place the spells next to the card of a figure with Magical Defense.

[Tornado]

Oh, that.
I do not like that but it would make the spells even tougher to utilize to full effect.
I actually like the spell pool.
What would be the benefits of what you are proposing dok?

I wanted to have each specifically say which casters could use it. So something like Crimson Bands of Cytorak would be mainly Strange only.

[japes]

Originally Posted by dok

This really doesn't seem that complex at all. Place the spells next to the card of a figure with Magical Defense.

I don't think the complexity was what drove the direction because I remember that exact idea being stated. It was more my previous comment where some folks thought drafting spells to a figure would lead to spells not getting to be used. Personally I didn't mind that as figures die all the time without getting to use there big special and I envisioned the system being a light touch with only a few spells at a time. Others envisioned it being like the Arena of Planes walker type with a small deck of cards that you can play.

[dok]

Yeah, to me, discouraging players from playing a deck of spells with a bunch of spellcasters is a feature, not a bug. I'd rather hew a little closer to Heroscape norms.
@Tornado , it was the Epidermal Mimicry interaction that led me here.

[dok]

I think it's worth looking at whether having one consolidated deck makes multiple spellcaster builds too strong. When this rule set was initially tested and developed, there wasn't the same set of spells we have now - and that set will only expand more. Right now Crimson Bands of Cyttorak is presenting some challenges in testing, and a big part of that is that the threat of springing that spell lives on multiple cards.

Think about it this way - if you have a unique spell attached to a single card, you're essentially giving that card a "once per game" power. If you have multiple MD figures that can all use it, though, then that power is now living on multiple cards. It's not simply a matter of security and knowing you can use the power if one figure goes down. It's also a force multiplier on the threat the power presents to your opponent.

If we go back to AotP (which is, to some extent, the inspiration for these rules), you can only have one planeswalker in your army. AotP would be a very different game if you could play multiple planeswalkers. That's where we are here. In AotP there's no difference between a single deck and attaching spells to a planeswalker, because you only have one. Here there is a difference.

Additionally, I'll say again that I think it's a bit weird on theme. Spellcasters don't necessarily all share the same tricks, even if they happen to be working together.

[quozl]

Yeah, I definitely think the pile of spells with multiple magic users should be tested. Could someone make a PDF of all the spells so I can print them all for testing?

[Viegon]

Personally, I like the idea of the spells creating a sort of synergy for MD figures. I mean, it's actually thematic getting to run Doc Strange, Brother Voodoo, Scarlet Witch, etc. as an army.

[Yodaking]

I did run spell tests with multiple MD figures in the same army, it was one of the first things I did when trying out the rules. We started out with 9 different spells being tested, of which only 6 were later moved forward with. Arkham, Gutudak, & Viegon all also ran spell tests using multiple MD figures in the same army as the spells. Many, many months were spent developing, testing, and refining these rules. Community contributions and input from the CRB, Sidekicks, former Heroes, and Allies with Danger Room access were sought out and received. Tests were run, changes were made, more tests were run. Once everyone was happy the rules were voted on a passed with a yea vote from every hero. Ronin's second set of tests for Doom II featured multiple MD figures in the same army as some spells. When Ronin tested Daimon Hellstrom he again ran testes using multiple MD figures along with multiples of his new spells. When I ran tests for Daimon Hellstrom and the new spells, I also used multiple MD figures in the same army. L_O ran tests for Daimon Hellstrom, she included a test featuring multiple MD figures and a pile of the new spells. Does nobody ever actually read the test reports other people post?

[Tornado]

If a spell like CBoC is a problem, we could force it to be tied to an individual caster.

I prefer the pool in general though.

Also we could add to the spell rules that Mimicry of MD does not allow for spell casting.

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by Viegon

Personally, I like the idea of the spells creating a sort of synergy for MD figures. I mean, it's actually thematic getting to run Doc Strange, Brother Voodoo, Scarlet Witch, etc. as an army.

I'd be cool with having a mechanic in place to anchor high-end spells to a specific card, though.

[dok]

Originally Posted by Viegon

Personally, I like the idea of the spells creating a sort of synergy for MD figures. I mean, it's actually thematic getting to run Doc Strange, Brother Voodoo, Scarlet Witch, etc. as an army.

That's neat, sure, but does it really make sense for a unique spell to be effectively attached to multiple figures? And does it really make sense for the sort of complex/signature effects that a unique spell is supposed to represent to be something that everyone, collectively on a team, can cast once? How are we justifying that once Scarlet Witch casts the bands, Doctor Strange can't?

Am I the only one who feels that this is a theme break? Can anyone justify this for me?

Originally Posted by Yodaking

I did run spell tests with multiple MD figures in the same army, it was one of the first things I did when trying out the rules.

That's good; I would have known this but none of the tests are linked in the OP. (And no, I didn't hunt it down through all the threads. But I did see the problematic results in CBoC.)

At any rate, as the pool of spells expands, and we are seeing more unique effects like CBoC put into spells, the impact of making a unique spell effectively a common power of multiple figures is becoming more of an issue. The past testing couldn't really reflect this because it was less of an issue.

Originally Posted by Tornado

If a spell like CBoC is a problem, we could force it to be tied to an individual caster.

I prefer the pool in general though.

I could see a pool for common spells, but even then it still just seems awfully strange on theme.

Not to mention that, again, it encourages loading up on spells with no real concern of leaving some un-used. We have talked about trying to be conservative and play it safe in the spell rules design; I think making spells attached to single cards is a big step in that direction. We give ourselves more flexibility to avoid future design pitfalls by just taking this fairly simple step now.

Originally Posted by Tornado

Also we could add to the spell rules that Mimicry of MD does not allow for spell casting.

This seems like a tricky, slippery rules area to get into. It's so much simpler to just attach the spells to the cards! That gets rid of the problem in a very natural way.

[japes]

Originally Posted by dok

That's neat, sure, but does it really make sense for a unique spell to be effectively attached to multiple figures? And does it really make sense for the sort of complex/signature effects that a unique spell is supposed to represent to be something that everyone, collectively on a team, can cast once? How are we justifying that once Scarlet Witch casts the bands, Doctor Strange can't?

Am I the only one who feels that this is a theme break? Can anyone justify this for me?

That part I can answer...Unique means only one per army since it's a pool.

as for the later comment. No you are not the only one.