Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)SEAL Team Six versus MagesWhen do I teach children to use magic?How could channeling spell be useful during battle?How to balance magic?How does a modern military defend against a guerrilla Army of wizardsReimagined Weaponry: The Illidari WarglaivesHow would it make sense that spellbooks or grimoires teach only one wizard?Possible character body modification for wielding large swordsHow to realistically implement magic-users in medieval warfare?Nuclear magic: Surviving your own spells
Is there hard evidence that the grant peer review system performs significantly better than random?
Did Mueller's report provide an evidentiary basis for the claim of Russian govt election interference via social media?
Mounting TV on a weird wall that has some material between the drywall and stud
Project Euler #1 in C++
Printing attributes of selection in ArcPy?
How can I save and copy a screenhot at the same time?
How do living politicians protect their readily obtainable signatures from misuse?
How many time has Arya actually used Needle?
Can you force honesty by using the Speak with Dead and Zone of Truth spells together?
Are the endpoints of the domain of a function counted as critical points?
In musical terms, what properties are varied by the human voice to produce different words / syllables?
RSA find public exponent
Why is a lens darker than other ones when applying the same settings?
Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell
How can a team of shapeshifters communicate?
The Nth Gryphon Number
What is the difference between CTSS and ITS?
New Order #6: Easter Egg
The test team as an enemy of development? And how can this be avoided?
What is the origin of 落第?
Why complex landing gears are used instead of simple,reliability and light weight muscle wire or shape memory alloys?
I can't produce songs
NERDTreeMenu Remapping
Is there public access to the Meteor Crater in Arizona?
Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)SEAL Team Six versus MagesWhen do I teach children to use magic?How could channeling spell be useful during battle?How to balance magic?How does a modern military defend against a guerrilla Army of wizardsReimagined Weaponry: The Illidari WarglaivesHow would it make sense that spellbooks or grimoires teach only one wizard?Possible character body modification for wielding large swordsHow to realistically implement magic-users in medieval warfare?Nuclear magic: Surviving your own spells
$begingroup$
Wizards have developed a Grasp-at-a Distance spell. It has numerous uses in everyday life of course but the Emperor (may he live forever) wants it to be deployed as a weapon of war.
Spell operation
- A wizard (but no-one else) can grasp objects at a distance. Both hands (and other body-parts) can be used, as in normal life. Whatever body-part is used, full skin contact is required, so no gloves, etc.
- Suppose my ale is across the room - I can reach out my hand and make a grasping motion. If I am accurate enough, it feels to me precisely as though I am holding the glass in my hand.
- If I maintain the grasp and lift the glass, an observer will see it floating in exact synchrony with my hand - apparently in mid air.
Limitations
(a) If I pull the grasped object towards me, it will only move as my arm moves. In other words I can't pull it all the way. I have to bring it in arm-length stages. The simplest way is to alternate hands. It looks rather as though I am hauling on a rope. Eventually the object will be near enough to actually grasp it normally.
(b) I can't 'grasp' a red-hot or sharp object without injuring myself. The effect is exactly as though I was really touching it.
(c) I only have my normal strength so I can't 'grasp' and lift a weight that I wouldn't normally be able to lift. Most wizards are not at all muscly and non-wizards (e.g. warriors) cannot use the spell.
(d) I can break a fragile item precisely the way I could if I was holding it normally - the object will interact with items close to itself. My hand will interact with items close to me and objects near the object. .
(e) In most cases the wizard must be able to see the object being grasped in order to correctly and accurately locate it - this is the most difficult skill to master because your distant 'hand' is invisible. In theory someone who can play piano blindfold could play it at a considerable distance by first locating the piano and then finding the correct keys by touch even if they were too far away to be discerned individually.
(f) If the wizard grasps at a distance and someone else grasps the object normally, they won't feel each other's hands but will experience the forces. Thus a weedy wizard couldn't wrestle a sword away from a strong warrior who was holding the weapon firmly but the opposite would be the case.
Question
Non-fatal tests have been performed with the Emperor's own soldiers who weren't pre-warned. They soon learned to keep a tight hold on their weapons or strap them into their scabbards when not in use. They also learned to keep an eye on any obvious hand-movements by the wizards.
So - How can weedy wizards use their Grasp-at-a-Distance spell as an effective long-term weapon against powerful warriors?
Note
There are hundreds of warriors on each side in this battle but only ten wizards on the Emperor's side. They all know the spell. The other side has no wizards but a slight advantage in foot-soldier numbers.
Edits in response to comments
(1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
magic warfare weapons medieval
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Wizards have developed a Grasp-at-a Distance spell. It has numerous uses in everyday life of course but the Emperor (may he live forever) wants it to be deployed as a weapon of war.
Spell operation
- A wizard (but no-one else) can grasp objects at a distance. Both hands (and other body-parts) can be used, as in normal life. Whatever body-part is used, full skin contact is required, so no gloves, etc.
- Suppose my ale is across the room - I can reach out my hand and make a grasping motion. If I am accurate enough, it feels to me precisely as though I am holding the glass in my hand.
- If I maintain the grasp and lift the glass, an observer will see it floating in exact synchrony with my hand - apparently in mid air.
Limitations
(a) If I pull the grasped object towards me, it will only move as my arm moves. In other words I can't pull it all the way. I have to bring it in arm-length stages. The simplest way is to alternate hands. It looks rather as though I am hauling on a rope. Eventually the object will be near enough to actually grasp it normally.
(b) I can't 'grasp' a red-hot or sharp object without injuring myself. The effect is exactly as though I was really touching it.
(c) I only have my normal strength so I can't 'grasp' and lift a weight that I wouldn't normally be able to lift. Most wizards are not at all muscly and non-wizards (e.g. warriors) cannot use the spell.
(d) I can break a fragile item precisely the way I could if I was holding it normally - the object will interact with items close to itself. My hand will interact with items close to me and objects near the object. .
(e) In most cases the wizard must be able to see the object being grasped in order to correctly and accurately locate it - this is the most difficult skill to master because your distant 'hand' is invisible. In theory someone who can play piano blindfold could play it at a considerable distance by first locating the piano and then finding the correct keys by touch even if they were too far away to be discerned individually.
(f) If the wizard grasps at a distance and someone else grasps the object normally, they won't feel each other's hands but will experience the forces. Thus a weedy wizard couldn't wrestle a sword away from a strong warrior who was holding the weapon firmly but the opposite would be the case.
Question
Non-fatal tests have been performed with the Emperor's own soldiers who weren't pre-warned. They soon learned to keep a tight hold on their weapons or strap them into their scabbards when not in use. They also learned to keep an eye on any obvious hand-movements by the wizards.
So - How can weedy wizards use their Grasp-at-a-Distance spell as an effective long-term weapon against powerful warriors?
Note
There are hundreds of warriors on each side in this battle but only ten wizards on the Emperor's side. They all know the spell. The other side has no wizards but a slight advantage in foot-soldier numbers.
Edits in response to comments
(1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
magic warfare weapons medieval
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Is there a change in leverage? It's easier to lift a 100# object when it's against your tummy than when it is at arm's length (a lot easier). Are the leverage rules equal to the caster's hands? (e.g., the spell behaves as if the object were physically being touched), or is there a leverage penalty the further away the object is, just as in real life?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MarielS, that looks more like an answer than a comment... 😉
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Let me clarify my comment a bit. A spell caster is strong enough to lift an anvil, but he must be standing over the anvil and lifting with his legs. Assuming the caster can keep an eye on the anvil a half mile away, can he make the very same motions to lift the anvil, or is there a penalty for the distance?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
When you say, "most cases ... must see the object," what happens if the caster loses eye contact after the grasp is "connected?" If the strain of lifting the anvil causes the caster to close his eyes, does he lose grip on the anvil? Or is eye contact irrelevant after the grasp is connected?
$endgroup$
– JBH
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JBH - (1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Wizards have developed a Grasp-at-a Distance spell. It has numerous uses in everyday life of course but the Emperor (may he live forever) wants it to be deployed as a weapon of war.
Spell operation
- A wizard (but no-one else) can grasp objects at a distance. Both hands (and other body-parts) can be used, as in normal life. Whatever body-part is used, full skin contact is required, so no gloves, etc.
- Suppose my ale is across the room - I can reach out my hand and make a grasping motion. If I am accurate enough, it feels to me precisely as though I am holding the glass in my hand.
- If I maintain the grasp and lift the glass, an observer will see it floating in exact synchrony with my hand - apparently in mid air.
Limitations
(a) If I pull the grasped object towards me, it will only move as my arm moves. In other words I can't pull it all the way. I have to bring it in arm-length stages. The simplest way is to alternate hands. It looks rather as though I am hauling on a rope. Eventually the object will be near enough to actually grasp it normally.
(b) I can't 'grasp' a red-hot or sharp object without injuring myself. The effect is exactly as though I was really touching it.
(c) I only have my normal strength so I can't 'grasp' and lift a weight that I wouldn't normally be able to lift. Most wizards are not at all muscly and non-wizards (e.g. warriors) cannot use the spell.
(d) I can break a fragile item precisely the way I could if I was holding it normally - the object will interact with items close to itself. My hand will interact with items close to me and objects near the object. .
(e) In most cases the wizard must be able to see the object being grasped in order to correctly and accurately locate it - this is the most difficult skill to master because your distant 'hand' is invisible. In theory someone who can play piano blindfold could play it at a considerable distance by first locating the piano and then finding the correct keys by touch even if they were too far away to be discerned individually.
(f) If the wizard grasps at a distance and someone else grasps the object normally, they won't feel each other's hands but will experience the forces. Thus a weedy wizard couldn't wrestle a sword away from a strong warrior who was holding the weapon firmly but the opposite would be the case.
Question
Non-fatal tests have been performed with the Emperor's own soldiers who weren't pre-warned. They soon learned to keep a tight hold on their weapons or strap them into their scabbards when not in use. They also learned to keep an eye on any obvious hand-movements by the wizards.
So - How can weedy wizards use their Grasp-at-a-Distance spell as an effective long-term weapon against powerful warriors?
Note
There are hundreds of warriors on each side in this battle but only ten wizards on the Emperor's side. They all know the spell. The other side has no wizards but a slight advantage in foot-soldier numbers.
Edits in response to comments
(1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
magic warfare weapons medieval
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
$endgroup$
Wizards have developed a Grasp-at-a Distance spell. It has numerous uses in everyday life of course but the Emperor (may he live forever) wants it to be deployed as a weapon of war.
Spell operation
- A wizard (but no-one else) can grasp objects at a distance. Both hands (and other body-parts) can be used, as in normal life. Whatever body-part is used, full skin contact is required, so no gloves, etc.
- Suppose my ale is across the room - I can reach out my hand and make a grasping motion. If I am accurate enough, it feels to me precisely as though I am holding the glass in my hand.
- If I maintain the grasp and lift the glass, an observer will see it floating in exact synchrony with my hand - apparently in mid air.
Limitations
(a) If I pull the grasped object towards me, it will only move as my arm moves. In other words I can't pull it all the way. I have to bring it in arm-length stages. The simplest way is to alternate hands. It looks rather as though I am hauling on a rope. Eventually the object will be near enough to actually grasp it normally.
(b) I can't 'grasp' a red-hot or sharp object without injuring myself. The effect is exactly as though I was really touching it.
(c) I only have my normal strength so I can't 'grasp' and lift a weight that I wouldn't normally be able to lift. Most wizards are not at all muscly and non-wizards (e.g. warriors) cannot use the spell.
(d) I can break a fragile item precisely the way I could if I was holding it normally - the object will interact with items close to itself. My hand will interact with items close to me and objects near the object. .
(e) In most cases the wizard must be able to see the object being grasped in order to correctly and accurately locate it - this is the most difficult skill to master because your distant 'hand' is invisible. In theory someone who can play piano blindfold could play it at a considerable distance by first locating the piano and then finding the correct keys by touch even if they were too far away to be discerned individually.
(f) If the wizard grasps at a distance and someone else grasps the object normally, they won't feel each other's hands but will experience the forces. Thus a weedy wizard couldn't wrestle a sword away from a strong warrior who was holding the weapon firmly but the opposite would be the case.
Question
Non-fatal tests have been performed with the Emperor's own soldiers who weren't pre-warned. They soon learned to keep a tight hold on their weapons or strap them into their scabbards when not in use. They also learned to keep an eye on any obvious hand-movements by the wizards.
So - How can weedy wizards use their Grasp-at-a-Distance spell as an effective long-term weapon against powerful warriors?
Note
There are hundreds of warriors on each side in this battle but only ten wizards on the Emperor's side. They all know the spell. The other side has no wizards but a slight advantage in foot-soldier numbers.
Edits in response to comments
(1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
magic warfare weapons medieval
magic warfare weapons medieval
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
edited 4 hours ago
chasly from UK
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
asked 5 hours ago
chasly from UKchasly from UK
20.1k983174
20.1k983174
$begingroup$
Is there a change in leverage? It's easier to lift a 100# object when it's against your tummy than when it is at arm's length (a lot easier). Are the leverage rules equal to the caster's hands? (e.g., the spell behaves as if the object were physically being touched), or is there a leverage penalty the further away the object is, just as in real life?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MarielS, that looks more like an answer than a comment... 😉
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Let me clarify my comment a bit. A spell caster is strong enough to lift an anvil, but he must be standing over the anvil and lifting with his legs. Assuming the caster can keep an eye on the anvil a half mile away, can he make the very same motions to lift the anvil, or is there a penalty for the distance?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
When you say, "most cases ... must see the object," what happens if the caster loses eye contact after the grasp is "connected?" If the strain of lifting the anvil causes the caster to close his eyes, does he lose grip on the anvil? Or is eye contact irrelevant after the grasp is connected?
$endgroup$
– JBH
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JBH - (1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Is there a change in leverage? It's easier to lift a 100# object when it's against your tummy than when it is at arm's length (a lot easier). Are the leverage rules equal to the caster's hands? (e.g., the spell behaves as if the object were physically being touched), or is there a leverage penalty the further away the object is, just as in real life?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MarielS, that looks more like an answer than a comment... 😉
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Let me clarify my comment a bit. A spell caster is strong enough to lift an anvil, but he must be standing over the anvil and lifting with his legs. Assuming the caster can keep an eye on the anvil a half mile away, can he make the very same motions to lift the anvil, or is there a penalty for the distance?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
When you say, "most cases ... must see the object," what happens if the caster loses eye contact after the grasp is "connected?" If the strain of lifting the anvil causes the caster to close his eyes, does he lose grip on the anvil? Or is eye contact irrelevant after the grasp is connected?
$endgroup$
– JBH
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JBH - (1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Is there a change in leverage? It's easier to lift a 100# object when it's against your tummy than when it is at arm's length (a lot easier). Are the leverage rules equal to the caster's hands? (e.g., the spell behaves as if the object were physically being touched), or is there a leverage penalty the further away the object is, just as in real life?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Is there a change in leverage? It's easier to lift a 100# object when it's against your tummy than when it is at arm's length (a lot easier). Are the leverage rules equal to the caster's hands? (e.g., the spell behaves as if the object were physically being touched), or is there a leverage penalty the further away the object is, just as in real life?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@MarielS, that looks more like an answer than a comment... 😉
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarielS, that looks more like an answer than a comment... 😉
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Let me clarify my comment a bit. A spell caster is strong enough to lift an anvil, but he must be standing over the anvil and lifting with his legs. Assuming the caster can keep an eye on the anvil a half mile away, can he make the very same motions to lift the anvil, or is there a penalty for the distance?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Let me clarify my comment a bit. A spell caster is strong enough to lift an anvil, but he must be standing over the anvil and lifting with his legs. Assuming the caster can keep an eye on the anvil a half mile away, can he make the very same motions to lift the anvil, or is there a penalty for the distance?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
When you say, "most cases ... must see the object," what happens if the caster loses eye contact after the grasp is "connected?" If the strain of lifting the anvil causes the caster to close his eyes, does he lose grip on the anvil? Or is eye contact irrelevant after the grasp is connected?
$endgroup$
– JBH
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
When you say, "most cases ... must see the object," what happens if the caster loses eye contact after the grasp is "connected?" If the strain of lifting the anvil causes the caster to close his eyes, does he lose grip on the anvil? Or is eye contact irrelevant after the grasp is connected?
$endgroup$
– JBH
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JBH - (1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JBH - (1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Traps
Being able to move things from a distance would give the art of trap-making and -springing much more flexibility, because you wouldn't have to figure out how to set it off without endangering yourself in the process. Simply stand at a distance and "PULL THE LEVER, KRONK!"
Step 1: Set up a trap with a trigger. Step 2: Wait until the enemy is over/under it. Step 3: Pull the rope/lever/whatever from afar. Step 4: Voila! The enemy is in a pit, or under your falling rack of spikes, or beneath the pile of boulders you just dumped on them.
Traps are a classic tool of the wimp against the muscleman. They don't require you to overpower your enemy, just be more clever than they are.
I initially posted this as a comment, because it's a fairly simple reply to what may be a more complex question, but there you go...
I wanted draw some traps for fun... So I did. Hope you enjoy. 
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
BEHOLD THE GREAT WIZARD MOE!
http://mentalfloss.com/article/550053/facts-about-the-three-stooges
The Moe Howard skill set is perfectly suited for this spell. Among the Moe Moves that Grasp-At-A-Distance would make so much more effective:
1: Eyeball grasp. Most effective in this bunch but variety is the spice of life.
2: Double nostril grasp.
3: Ear pull.
4: Titty twister. Best vs the bare chested warrior types.
5: Moe's got your tongue!
6: Hair pull. Useful against hair showing on any part of an adversaries body.
7: Package grabbage. Self explanatory.
8: Last but not least: WEDGIE FEVER!
Stooge magic will keep the king happy and keep your adversaries on their toes - especially #8.
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Daggers
What you’ve essentially done is given melee weapons a huge boost in their reach. If you don’t know, reach is one of the most important factors in melee combat, if my spear can reach you before your sword can reach me, i’m almost always going to win (obviously it depends on what armour you’re wearing and how skilled you are, i’m just talking generally here).
With this in mind, daggers will likely be the weapon of choice for these wizards. The reason being is that a dagger is just as effective as a sword or a spear for killing someone. The only problem is that, because you’re opponent will always be able to outreach you, daggers are not often used in Medieval-style combat. However, the major exception to this is against armoured opponents.
If an opponent is wearing full steel plate, they are extremely hard to kill, you either need blunt force (such as that from a a war hammer or poleaxe) or you need to stab in between the openings. The one place you can guarantee will always be exposed is the eye slits, you can’t have armour in front of your eyes or you wont be able to see. Knights often carried daggers to stab them through these eye slits, killing their opponent. Knives or daggers were used rather than swords as, being smaller, they are much easier to aim with and are typically narrower, making it easier for them to slide in.
Your wizards would likely use daggers in the same way, slipping them into the eye slits of fully armoured opponents to kill them. You could also use this against people who are not wearing full plate, in this case you can go for the face (especially if wearing an open face helmet), the neck or the back of the knees where the tendons and arteries are. A stab to any of those places could easily be lethal.
Hammers
You may instead use hammers, use your magic to swing it and deal a lot of blunt force damage. It would also be easier to hit someone in the head than to try and slide a dagger into their eye slits, especially from afar. You could also use it to disarm or knock people off their feet. A simpler version would be to just drop a rock on them.
Grappling
You may also use the magic to pull opponents to the ground, using magic simply pull their leg as they walk or pull their shoulders back and down. If a solider falls on the battlefield, he is likely dead, especially if wearing full steel plate. The enemy will quickly be able to kill him whilst he is vulnerable and can’t adequately fight back. This could be used in the battlefield to great effect, the wizards pull, the soldiers stab.
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144451%2fweaponising-the-grasp-at-a-distance-spell%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Traps
Being able to move things from a distance would give the art of trap-making and -springing much more flexibility, because you wouldn't have to figure out how to set it off without endangering yourself in the process. Simply stand at a distance and "PULL THE LEVER, KRONK!"
Step 1: Set up a trap with a trigger. Step 2: Wait until the enemy is over/under it. Step 3: Pull the rope/lever/whatever from afar. Step 4: Voila! The enemy is in a pit, or under your falling rack of spikes, or beneath the pile of boulders you just dumped on them.
Traps are a classic tool of the wimp against the muscleman. They don't require you to overpower your enemy, just be more clever than they are.
I initially posted this as a comment, because it's a fairly simple reply to what may be a more complex question, but there you go...
I wanted draw some traps for fun... So I did. Hope you enjoy.
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Traps
Being able to move things from a distance would give the art of trap-making and -springing much more flexibility, because you wouldn't have to figure out how to set it off without endangering yourself in the process. Simply stand at a distance and "PULL THE LEVER, KRONK!"
Step 1: Set up a trap with a trigger. Step 2: Wait until the enemy is over/under it. Step 3: Pull the rope/lever/whatever from afar. Step 4: Voila! The enemy is in a pit, or under your falling rack of spikes, or beneath the pile of boulders you just dumped on them.
Traps are a classic tool of the wimp against the muscleman. They don't require you to overpower your enemy, just be more clever than they are.
I initially posted this as a comment, because it's a fairly simple reply to what may be a more complex question, but there you go...
I wanted draw some traps for fun... So I did. Hope you enjoy.
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Traps
Being able to move things from a distance would give the art of trap-making and -springing much more flexibility, because you wouldn't have to figure out how to set it off without endangering yourself in the process. Simply stand at a distance and "PULL THE LEVER, KRONK!"
Step 1: Set up a trap with a trigger. Step 2: Wait until the enemy is over/under it. Step 3: Pull the rope/lever/whatever from afar. Step 4: Voila! The enemy is in a pit, or under your falling rack of spikes, or beneath the pile of boulders you just dumped on them.
Traps are a classic tool of the wimp against the muscleman. They don't require you to overpower your enemy, just be more clever than they are.
I initially posted this as a comment, because it's a fairly simple reply to what may be a more complex question, but there you go...
I wanted draw some traps for fun... So I did. Hope you enjoy.
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
$endgroup$
Traps
Being able to move things from a distance would give the art of trap-making and -springing much more flexibility, because you wouldn't have to figure out how to set it off without endangering yourself in the process. Simply stand at a distance and "PULL THE LEVER, KRONK!"
Step 1: Set up a trap with a trigger. Step 2: Wait until the enemy is over/under it. Step 3: Pull the rope/lever/whatever from afar. Step 4: Voila! The enemy is in a pit, or under your falling rack of spikes, or beneath the pile of boulders you just dumped on them.
Traps are a classic tool of the wimp against the muscleman. They don't require you to overpower your enemy, just be more clever than they are.
I initially posted this as a comment, because it's a fairly simple reply to what may be a more complex question, but there you go...
I wanted draw some traps for fun... So I did. Hope you enjoy.
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
answered 4 hours ago
MarielSMarielS
886112
886112
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Interesting suggestion. I suppose I wonder if an enemy is going to knowingly walk under racks of spikes or boulders. Wouldn't they just go around? Also this is an army of hundreds so you'd only get a few of them.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Ah, Chasly, but you didn't mention where that army is. Walking through a ravine or defile with the hollywood-esque barrage of stones waiting from above, needing only a gentle push from a magic user watching from behind the next ridge. (I'd give you +2 for the Kronk reference! Love that show. But, alas, I'm stuck with +1.)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Dang... I mean... dang... I'd give you another +1 for the illustrated guide and yet another just for "armored beefcakes" if I could. :-)
$endgroup$
– JBH
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
$begingroup$
...just realized I typoed an extra "a" into "tarantula". Yet another win for my dyslexia! Oh well. :/
$endgroup$
– MarielS
51 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
BEHOLD THE GREAT WIZARD MOE!
http://mentalfloss.com/article/550053/facts-about-the-three-stooges
The Moe Howard skill set is perfectly suited for this spell. Among the Moe Moves that Grasp-At-A-Distance would make so much more effective:
1: Eyeball grasp. Most effective in this bunch but variety is the spice of life.
2: Double nostril grasp.
3: Ear pull.
4: Titty twister. Best vs the bare chested warrior types.
5: Moe's got your tongue!
6: Hair pull. Useful against hair showing on any part of an adversaries body.
7: Package grabbage. Self explanatory.
8: Last but not least: WEDGIE FEVER!
Stooge magic will keep the king happy and keep your adversaries on their toes - especially #8.
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
BEHOLD THE GREAT WIZARD MOE!
http://mentalfloss.com/article/550053/facts-about-the-three-stooges
The Moe Howard skill set is perfectly suited for this spell. Among the Moe Moves that Grasp-At-A-Distance would make so much more effective:
1: Eyeball grasp. Most effective in this bunch but variety is the spice of life.
2: Double nostril grasp.
3: Ear pull.
4: Titty twister. Best vs the bare chested warrior types.
5: Moe's got your tongue!
6: Hair pull. Useful against hair showing on any part of an adversaries body.
7: Package grabbage. Self explanatory.
8: Last but not least: WEDGIE FEVER!
Stooge magic will keep the king happy and keep your adversaries on their toes - especially #8.
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
BEHOLD THE GREAT WIZARD MOE!
http://mentalfloss.com/article/550053/facts-about-the-three-stooges
The Moe Howard skill set is perfectly suited for this spell. Among the Moe Moves that Grasp-At-A-Distance would make so much more effective:
1: Eyeball grasp. Most effective in this bunch but variety is the spice of life.
2: Double nostril grasp.
3: Ear pull.
4: Titty twister. Best vs the bare chested warrior types.
5: Moe's got your tongue!
6: Hair pull. Useful against hair showing on any part of an adversaries body.
7: Package grabbage. Self explanatory.
8: Last but not least: WEDGIE FEVER!
Stooge magic will keep the king happy and keep your adversaries on their toes - especially #8.
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
$endgroup$
BEHOLD THE GREAT WIZARD MOE!
http://mentalfloss.com/article/550053/facts-about-the-three-stooges
The Moe Howard skill set is perfectly suited for this spell. Among the Moe Moves that Grasp-At-A-Distance would make so much more effective:
1: Eyeball grasp. Most effective in this bunch but variety is the spice of life.
2: Double nostril grasp.
3: Ear pull.
4: Titty twister. Best vs the bare chested warrior types.
5: Moe's got your tongue!
6: Hair pull. Useful against hair showing on any part of an adversaries body.
7: Package grabbage. Self explanatory.
8: Last but not least: WEDGIE FEVER!
Stooge magic will keep the king happy and keep your adversaries on their toes - especially #8.
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
answered 3 hours ago
WillkWillk
118k28224495
118k28224495
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
You're gonna kill me, Will. "Will K's Death by Laughter syndrome." indications include forehead bruises from bouncing off the monitor while laughing, chest pain from heaving giggles, shortness of breath (yup, giggles), and overt concern from coworkers and family who all wonder what will happen when the laughing stops, because it might mean I'm dead. Let's call it, Ridibundus Willinus Interitio disease.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Daggers
What you’ve essentially done is given melee weapons a huge boost in their reach. If you don’t know, reach is one of the most important factors in melee combat, if my spear can reach you before your sword can reach me, i’m almost always going to win (obviously it depends on what armour you’re wearing and how skilled you are, i’m just talking generally here).
With this in mind, daggers will likely be the weapon of choice for these wizards. The reason being is that a dagger is just as effective as a sword or a spear for killing someone. The only problem is that, because you’re opponent will always be able to outreach you, daggers are not often used in Medieval-style combat. However, the major exception to this is against armoured opponents.
If an opponent is wearing full steel plate, they are extremely hard to kill, you either need blunt force (such as that from a a war hammer or poleaxe) or you need to stab in between the openings. The one place you can guarantee will always be exposed is the eye slits, you can’t have armour in front of your eyes or you wont be able to see. Knights often carried daggers to stab them through these eye slits, killing their opponent. Knives or daggers were used rather than swords as, being smaller, they are much easier to aim with and are typically narrower, making it easier for them to slide in.
Your wizards would likely use daggers in the same way, slipping them into the eye slits of fully armoured opponents to kill them. You could also use this against people who are not wearing full plate, in this case you can go for the face (especially if wearing an open face helmet), the neck or the back of the knees where the tendons and arteries are. A stab to any of those places could easily be lethal.
Hammers
You may instead use hammers, use your magic to swing it and deal a lot of blunt force damage. It would also be easier to hit someone in the head than to try and slide a dagger into their eye slits, especially from afar. You could also use it to disarm or knock people off their feet. A simpler version would be to just drop a rock on them.
Grappling
You may also use the magic to pull opponents to the ground, using magic simply pull their leg as they walk or pull their shoulders back and down. If a solider falls on the battlefield, he is likely dead, especially if wearing full steel plate. The enemy will quickly be able to kill him whilst he is vulnerable and can’t adequately fight back. This could be used in the battlefield to great effect, the wizards pull, the soldiers stab.
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Daggers
What you’ve essentially done is given melee weapons a huge boost in their reach. If you don’t know, reach is one of the most important factors in melee combat, if my spear can reach you before your sword can reach me, i’m almost always going to win (obviously it depends on what armour you’re wearing and how skilled you are, i’m just talking generally here).
With this in mind, daggers will likely be the weapon of choice for these wizards. The reason being is that a dagger is just as effective as a sword or a spear for killing someone. The only problem is that, because you’re opponent will always be able to outreach you, daggers are not often used in Medieval-style combat. However, the major exception to this is against armoured opponents.
If an opponent is wearing full steel plate, they are extremely hard to kill, you either need blunt force (such as that from a a war hammer or poleaxe) or you need to stab in between the openings. The one place you can guarantee will always be exposed is the eye slits, you can’t have armour in front of your eyes or you wont be able to see. Knights often carried daggers to stab them through these eye slits, killing their opponent. Knives or daggers were used rather than swords as, being smaller, they are much easier to aim with and are typically narrower, making it easier for them to slide in.
Your wizards would likely use daggers in the same way, slipping them into the eye slits of fully armoured opponents to kill them. You could also use this against people who are not wearing full plate, in this case you can go for the face (especially if wearing an open face helmet), the neck or the back of the knees where the tendons and arteries are. A stab to any of those places could easily be lethal.
Hammers
You may instead use hammers, use your magic to swing it and deal a lot of blunt force damage. It would also be easier to hit someone in the head than to try and slide a dagger into their eye slits, especially from afar. You could also use it to disarm or knock people off their feet. A simpler version would be to just drop a rock on them.
Grappling
You may also use the magic to pull opponents to the ground, using magic simply pull their leg as they walk or pull their shoulders back and down. If a solider falls on the battlefield, he is likely dead, especially if wearing full steel plate. The enemy will quickly be able to kill him whilst he is vulnerable and can’t adequately fight back. This could be used in the battlefield to great effect, the wizards pull, the soldiers stab.
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Daggers
What you’ve essentially done is given melee weapons a huge boost in their reach. If you don’t know, reach is one of the most important factors in melee combat, if my spear can reach you before your sword can reach me, i’m almost always going to win (obviously it depends on what armour you’re wearing and how skilled you are, i’m just talking generally here).
With this in mind, daggers will likely be the weapon of choice for these wizards. The reason being is that a dagger is just as effective as a sword or a spear for killing someone. The only problem is that, because you’re opponent will always be able to outreach you, daggers are not often used in Medieval-style combat. However, the major exception to this is against armoured opponents.
If an opponent is wearing full steel plate, they are extremely hard to kill, you either need blunt force (such as that from a a war hammer or poleaxe) or you need to stab in between the openings. The one place you can guarantee will always be exposed is the eye slits, you can’t have armour in front of your eyes or you wont be able to see. Knights often carried daggers to stab them through these eye slits, killing their opponent. Knives or daggers were used rather than swords as, being smaller, they are much easier to aim with and are typically narrower, making it easier for them to slide in.
Your wizards would likely use daggers in the same way, slipping them into the eye slits of fully armoured opponents to kill them. You could also use this against people who are not wearing full plate, in this case you can go for the face (especially if wearing an open face helmet), the neck or the back of the knees where the tendons and arteries are. A stab to any of those places could easily be lethal.
Hammers
You may instead use hammers, use your magic to swing it and deal a lot of blunt force damage. It would also be easier to hit someone in the head than to try and slide a dagger into their eye slits, especially from afar. You could also use it to disarm or knock people off their feet. A simpler version would be to just drop a rock on them.
Grappling
You may also use the magic to pull opponents to the ground, using magic simply pull their leg as they walk or pull their shoulders back and down. If a solider falls on the battlefield, he is likely dead, especially if wearing full steel plate. The enemy will quickly be able to kill him whilst he is vulnerable and can’t adequately fight back. This could be used in the battlefield to great effect, the wizards pull, the soldiers stab.
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
$endgroup$
Daggers
What you’ve essentially done is given melee weapons a huge boost in their reach. If you don’t know, reach is one of the most important factors in melee combat, if my spear can reach you before your sword can reach me, i’m almost always going to win (obviously it depends on what armour you’re wearing and how skilled you are, i’m just talking generally here).
With this in mind, daggers will likely be the weapon of choice for these wizards. The reason being is that a dagger is just as effective as a sword or a spear for killing someone. The only problem is that, because you’re opponent will always be able to outreach you, daggers are not often used in Medieval-style combat. However, the major exception to this is against armoured opponents.
If an opponent is wearing full steel plate, they are extremely hard to kill, you either need blunt force (such as that from a a war hammer or poleaxe) or you need to stab in between the openings. The one place you can guarantee will always be exposed is the eye slits, you can’t have armour in front of your eyes or you wont be able to see. Knights often carried daggers to stab them through these eye slits, killing their opponent. Knives or daggers were used rather than swords as, being smaller, they are much easier to aim with and are typically narrower, making it easier for them to slide in.
Your wizards would likely use daggers in the same way, slipping them into the eye slits of fully armoured opponents to kill them. You could also use this against people who are not wearing full plate, in this case you can go for the face (especially if wearing an open face helmet), the neck or the back of the knees where the tendons and arteries are. A stab to any of those places could easily be lethal.
Hammers
You may instead use hammers, use your magic to swing it and deal a lot of blunt force damage. It would also be easier to hit someone in the head than to try and slide a dagger into their eye slits, especially from afar. You could also use it to disarm or knock people off their feet. A simpler version would be to just drop a rock on them.
Grappling
You may also use the magic to pull opponents to the ground, using magic simply pull their leg as they walk or pull their shoulders back and down. If a solider falls on the battlefield, he is likely dead, especially if wearing full steel plate. The enemy will quickly be able to kill him whilst he is vulnerable and can’t adequately fight back. This could be used in the battlefield to great effect, the wizards pull, the soldiers stab.
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
answered 2 hours ago
Liam MorrisLiam Morris
2,417431
2,417431
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
A dagger would be hilarious were it not for the arms-length limitation. Can you imagine some dagger suddenly shanking everyone from behind? The average soldier would wet himself trying to get away.
$endgroup$
– JBH
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
I like the idea of a hammer - imagine a warrior holds a hammer for the wizard at the top of a castle wall. Wizard grabs it then (looking out an arrow slit to aim) starts slamming this down on knight after knight of the other army. Damage bonus from gravity acceleration + speed boost of someone actively pulling down = world of hurt. Plus you'd get the "what the F*?! just happened to Fred?!" as a hammer falls from the sky then jerks upwards for the 2nd pass. Someone grabs it or it gets stuck? "Hey, Warrior! Hold out another hammer!"
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
54 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
Nice! The murder is strong with this one. I think the main limitation of all our answers so far is that none of them permit the massive numbers of casualties necessary for 10 magic dudes to take out hundreds of soldiers. But your tactics combined with mine and Willk's would at least make 'em all bloody terrified (and jumpy as a spooked cat, never knowing when they're going to get hit next!), even if we do end up swarmed by their overwhelming numbers!
$endgroup$
– MarielS
34 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
$begingroup$
...Then again, if you've got all 10 wizards up on the wall knifing people down below, you might get quite a few while they run around screaming! Video game style! You'd probably have to be close enough to actually see the weakpoints in their armor, though, so that might limit how many you can get at once.
$endgroup$
– MarielS
32 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144451%2fweaponising-the-grasp-at-a-distance-spell%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Is there a change in leverage? It's easier to lift a 100# object when it's against your tummy than when it is at arm's length (a lot easier). Are the leverage rules equal to the caster's hands? (e.g., the spell behaves as if the object were physically being touched), or is there a leverage penalty the further away the object is, just as in real life?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@MarielS, that looks more like an answer than a comment... 😉
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Let me clarify my comment a bit. A spell caster is strong enough to lift an anvil, but he must be standing over the anvil and lifting with his legs. Assuming the caster can keep an eye on the anvil a half mile away, can he make the very same motions to lift the anvil, or is there a penalty for the distance?
$endgroup$
– JBH
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
When you say, "most cases ... must see the object," what happens if the caster loses eye contact after the grasp is "connected?" If the strain of lifting the anvil causes the caster to close his eyes, does he lose grip on the anvil? Or is eye contact irrelevant after the grasp is connected?
$endgroup$
– JBH
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JBH - (1) No change in leverage. Just make sure you are standing on a firm surface and the area around you is clear. (2) No penalty for distance. In theory you could grope around blindly behind objects such as castle walls. However mind you don't accidentally grab something dangerous. (3) Eye contact is only needed to locate the object and that is the main problem. Trying to grasp a small object at a mile away could be tricky. That's why I mentioned the piano. It's easier to grasp the piano first and then slide your hand until you find the keys.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
4 hours ago