- Location
- Bulgaria
[X] Plan: Van Ropen
Yeah I was joking - about the legilimency.It doesn't make a lot of sense to allocate XP to Legilimency or Occulmency at this time. They have huge negative XP modifiers (x0.3).
I don't understand why you want a Patronus this early.[X] Plan: Van Ropen
Spells
Protego: 3 -> 4
Expecto Patronum: 0 -> 3
Reducto: 0 -> 3
Impervius: 0 -> 2
Attributes
Perception: 17 -> 25
Willpower: 15 -> 25
Skills
Awareness: 15 -> 20
Evasion: 15 -> 20
Transfiguration: 28 -> 35
Charms: 28 -> 35
DADA: 28 -> 35
Potions: 17 -> 35
Spells
Protego: 260
Expecto Patronum: 340
Reducto: 340
Impervius: 180
Attributes
Perception: 210
Willpower: 250
Skills
Awareness: 100
Evasion: 100
Transfiguration: 175
Charms: 175
DADA: 175
Potions: 425
Total Spent: 2730
Reasoning
Spells: Alright, first order of business was deciding to focus on spells or raising base stats - and I figured we should do a split between the two. Snag some of the more critical spells before bringing our skills up to par. To that end, first thing I did was raised Protego to Adept. Because while Proficient (Wand motions and vocalization comes easily to you; the spell never straying far from your mind, but in situations of extreme duress you may slip up.) is good enough for most things, if there is one thing I want at Adept (You've grasped the spell to a point you can cast it by reflex alone.) it is casting shields. Beyond that, I wanted some actual offensive punch/environment manipulation to syngergize with Waddiwasi. Reducto fits the bill there, up to Proficient so its completely integrated with the rest of our repertoire. Impervius is super useful as a utility spell, up there with the Unbreakable Charm - but in the interest of saving XP, only brought it up to Novice. At that point we can cast it at will without risk of flubbing, and if we were in a fight for whatever reason its probably something we would want to have applied beforehand anyways, not cast off the cuff. That's what Protego 4 is for, for now at least.
Attributes: Bringing up Perception and Willpower to 25, so we have all our Mental Attributes there. Willpower is a given, I would have raised it more if I could - Harry Potter with 10 Willpower? Atrocious. But we need to work on other stuff too, so up to 25 will do for now. Bringing Perception up was important too, given it is "a measure of how perceptive and aware the character is at all times. A high stat here means the character is more adept at picking up hints and out of place details in both social encounters and the environment, and generally being more aware of one's surroundings". We want that. We want that a lot.
Skills: Both Evasion and Awareness were lacking - and more importantly, basically dirt cheap to raise given they are under 20. No reason not to bring them up to 20, where we can leave them for a bit unless we really need to focus on dueling. That leaves the four core subjects: Transfiguration, Charms, Defense Against the Dark Arts, and Potions. These are the fundamentals of everything - our Harry is gonna be a magical badass, and that means having a rock solid foundation in the core magical arts. Raised all of them to 35, the high end of "Average Adult". That should set us up for basically anything we want to learn at this level, with the ability to go "Professional" (36+) in whatever field we decide to specialize in first when the time comes.
I don't understand our need for Strength. I also don't understand our need to go to 35 Transfiguration if we have 40 charms since many problems just need one or the other and the synergy isn't great that I'm aware of.[X] Plan Caversham
Attributes:
Strength +4 (20)
Stamina +4 (20)
Agility +2 (25)
Reflexes +4 (22)
Intelligence +5 (30)
Perception +5 (22)
Willpower +8 (23)
Improvisation +5 (30)
Skills:
Awareness +5 (20)
Evasion +5 (20)
Transfiguration +7 (35)
Charms +12 (40)
DADA +7 (35)
Potions +11 (28)
Magical Theory +7 (27)
Spells:
Protego (Adept)
Confrigo (Learning)
Aguamenti (Learning)
Incarcerous (Learning)
Total XP: 2747
Here is the spreadsheet with the XP allocated.
HP and the Whims of Fate (Plan Caversham) - Google Sheets
Harry will be a 4th year. This means that we should probably pick a couple of fields for Harry to begin specializing in. I have chosen Charms as his first specialization since this is the most utilitarian discipline. However, I have not neglected the other core subjects (DADA, Transfiguration, Potions). Since we do not know what elective subjects Harry will be taking, I have not allocated any XP into the elective subjects.
I have also tried to balance the attribute XP allocation towards both the Phyiscal and Mental attributes. These attributes indirectly affect a lot of the skills and also affect dueling (Health and Energy).
I have allocated XP for 4 spells. I upgraded Protego to Adept, shielding is one of the most important spells. I upgraded Confrigo, Aguamenti, and Incarcerous to Learning.
Get it out of the way so we can write off Dementors, the fact that it can also function as unstoppable/traceable/detectable magical communcications, and a desire to try and match, at minimum, Canon Harry's skill.Yeah I was joking - about the legilimency.
I don't understand why you want a Patronus this early
Maybe if you're a scrub who isn't proficient in all the core magical disciplines,I also don't understand our need to go to 35 Transfiguration if we have 40 charms since many problems just need one or the other and the synergy isn't great that I'm aware of.
God yes. As far as I am concerned, learning spells at level one is worthless. Look at the description: "You've only just learned of the spell, and still struggle to cast it under even the most favourable of circumstances"...no, you might as well not know it and actually be able to cast something else. Incarcerous is also a poor pick, I think, given we can cast Petrificus Totalus at Proficient. Aguamenti is a decent utility spell, but there are better.
I don't understand our need for Strength. I also don't understand our need to go to 35 Transfiguration if we have 40 charms since many problems just need one or the other and the synergy isn't great that I'm aware of.
I'd propose any of perception, willpower, confringo/aguamenti/incarcerous at 2, awareness, etc. in place of these.
God yes. As far as I am concerned, learning spells at level one is worthless. Look at the description: "You've only just learned of the spell, and still struggle to cast it under even the most favourable of circumstances"...no, you might as well not know it and actually be able to cast something else. Incarcerous is also a poor pick, I think, given we can cast Petrificus Totalus at Proficient. Aguamenti is a decent utility spell, but there are better.
Protego at Adept is excellent, I was torn between Confringo and Reducto but we do need one of them - preferably at proficient, but definitely not at level 1 since level 2 is when we can reliably cast. I myself went with Reducto because it is more targeted, and finer control over disintegrating stuff can yield more effective rubble for use with waddiwasi than confringo might, even if it does more raw damage thanks to the power of explosions.I would be open to suggestions. However, we have to learn these spells sometime.
while Impervius is something we can probably see far more day to day use from and is probably worth applying to ourselves before a fight.
Sidh and Mazrick look to be equating on some level the Impervius (where we only know the incantation and effect) and Imperturbable Charm (where we have a name and an effect which matches the former, but no incantation):FYI - The Impervius charm is to repel water and mist, not to protect against bodily harm. Using examples; Quidditch players would cast it on their eyes so as not to have their sight hindered by rain, and it did not protect against the cursed treasure in the Lestrange vault.
It's still a super useful spell though.
Impervius
This spell makes something repel (literally, become impervious to) substances and outside forces, including water.
Protego at Adept is excellent, I was torn between Confringo and Reducto but we do need one of them - preferably at proficient, but definitely not at level 1 since level 2 is when we can reliably cast. I myself went with Reducto because it is more targeted, and finer control over disintegrating stuff can yield more effective rubble for use with waddiwasi than confringo might, even if it does more raw damage thanks to the power of explosions.
But I can't think of any reason to use Incarcerous instead of Petrificus Totalus. Aguamenti is at least as niche, while Impervius is something we can probably see far more day to day use from and is probably worth applying to ourselves before a fight.
Sidh and Mazrick look to be equating on some level the Impervius (where we only know the incantation and effect) and Imperturbable Charm (where we have a name and an effect which matches the former, but no incantation):
You're right, not sure how much harder Incarcerous is to dispel - but I'd still probably prefer branching out before moving on to redundancy.I agree that Protego at Adept is excellent. This should be one of the first spells we master.
Petrificus Totalus has a very simple counter-curse, if we ever get into a duel with multiple opponents they will easily be able to revive their ally. It is unclear from canon how simple the Incarcerous counter-course is.
I have reviewed the rules and you are correct, there is not much point in having a spell at level 1. I have changed the allocation in my plan and put 2 in reducto and added 1 to potions to get near the 2750. It doesn't appear like it will matter since your plan is winning handily.
It's oddly specific to limit "substances and outside forces" to rain and water - and while we can get very specific spells in Harry Potter, we also see them as very flexible. In this case, we are talking about the same effect (preventing physical contact between a solid object and light things striking it), and the name and incantation even go together to some extent. I was just interpreting the distinction as a result of sometimes referring to spells by normal name and sometimes doing so by incantation.Hmm, I don't read it that way. Outside forces merely means rain I would presume, so it is completely in line with the canon Impervius charm.
>focusing on a sword instead of actual magicOkay, is Harry Golden Gryffindor still alive? Can we learn how to use that badass sword? Pleeeeease?
Incarcerous is harder to dodge and harder to dispel than petrificus totalus, in addition to being lower on escalation of force tiers. It's the most reasonable spell I know of to cast at an unknown person taking us unawares.Protego at Adept is excellent, I was torn between Confringo and Reducto but we do need one of them - preferably at proficient, but definitely not at level 1 since level 2 is when we can reliably cast. I myself went with Reducto because it is more targeted, and finer control over disintegrating stuff can yield more effective rubble for use with waddiwasi than confringo might, even if it does more raw damage thanks to the power of explosions.
But I can't think of any reason to use Incarcerous instead of Petrificus Totalus. Aguamenti is at least as niche, while Impervius is something we can probably see far more day to day use from and is probably worth applying to ourselves before a fight.
...gonna have to explain all of that to me. Because I don't why it would be harder to dodge, it may be harder to dispel but that is unknown and still doesn't address branching out before acquiring redundancy, and your latter point is...well, I can't help but call it retarded. Why would you go through the effort of wrapping them in rope and then setting off an explosion in order to burn someone alive instead of just lighting them on fire? Ignoring why you want to burn someone alive in the first place.ncarcerous is harder to dodge and harder to dispel than petrificus totalus, in addition to being lower on escalation of force tiers. It's the most reasonable spell I know of to cast at an unknown person taking us unawares.
Is strength of casting opposing eachother a fanon or canon thing? It seems to me that a Impervius charm protecting against mist ought to protect against cursed mist if cast with sufficient oomph. I don't favor Impervius versus our other options though.Sidh and Mazrick look to be equating on some level the Impervius (where we only know the incantation and effect) and Imperturbable Charm (where we have a name and an effect which matches the former, but no incantation):
Cursed treasure...well, it was cursed. I doubt it would be that easy to get around. But anyways, it is a useful spell regardless.
Ropes flying at you versus a ball of magic - it seems obvious to me. It's a conjuration which I don't recall harry&co ever dispelling - such as harry's duel with draco - while they do dispel petrificus totalus early on. I didn't say a person. Fire is a good bet against a dark creature, which won't be wearing conveniently flammable robes. It's just a bit of synergy....gonna have to explain all of that to me. Because I don't why it would be harder to dodge, it may be harder to dispel but that is unknown and still doesn't address branching out before acquiring redundancy, and your latter point is...well, I can't help but call it retarded. Why would you go through the effort of wrapping them in rope and then setting off an explosion in order to burn someone alive instead of just lighting them on fire? Ignoring why you want to burn someone alive in the first place.
*shrug*Is strength of casting opposing eachother a fanon or canon thing? It seems to me that a Impervius charm protecting against mist ought to protect against cursed mist if cast with sufficient oomph. I don't favor Impervius versus our other options though.
Why.Ropes flying at you versus a ball of magic - it seems obvious to me.
Vanishing is a thing, and just as easily done by the competent.It's a conjuration which I don't recall harry&co ever dispelling - such as harry's duel with draco - while they do dispel petrificus totalus early on. I didn't say a person. Fire is a good bet against a dark creature, which won't be wearing conveniently flammable robes. It's just a bit of synergy.
It's oddly specific to limit "substances and outside forces" to rain and water - and while we can get very specific spells in Harry Potter, we also see them as very flexible. In this case, we are talking about the same effect (preventing physical contact between a solid object and light things striking it), and the name and incantation even go together to some extent. I was just interpreting the distinction as a result of sometimes referring to spells by normal name and sometimes doing so by incantation.
But anyways, no reason not to check. I just bugged @Sidhenlae and @Mazrick about it on Rolz, and they confirmed they are the same spell used differently.
The mists bit is certainly speculative.*shrug*
God only knows. It seems to make sense that the skill with which spells are cast affects how they interact and stack up against one another, and we know broadly speaking that willpower can allow for countering magical effects, which further supports this notion. But I don't see why that matters, we are talking about fundamentally different things when we are comparing mist and "cursed" mist, not just a matter of degree. Dark Magic, quite explicitly, changes the game.
Why.
You didn't explain anything, why are these ropes harder to block than the spell?
Vanishing is a thing, and just as easily done by the competent.
Fire is a decent bet against certain creatures, which is why you just throw fire at them/set them on fire magically.