Mist vs. Shadow Options

[phlapjack77]

Mist (Environmental, Area)
Type: P • Range: LOS (A) • Duration: I • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 3
Mist creates a thick fog that fills the entire area of effect.
The mist is dense and difficult to see through, imposing a visibility
modifier equal to the hits scored by the caster. Because
the spell is not sustained, the mist dissipates quickly, based
on the surrounding temperature and winds; reduce the vision
modifier by 1 per Combat Turn.


Shadow (Environmental, Area)
Type: P • Range: LOS (A) • Duration: S • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 1
Shadow creates a globe of darkness with a radius equal to the spell’s
Force in meters. Every hit imposes a –1 die pool visibility modifier
against targets within the area (maximum –6).


The only difference that I can see between these two spells is that Mist is Instant, whilest Shadow is Sustained. In the spell creation rules of Street Magic, Duration of Instant and Sustained are both +0 DV.

So why does Mist have a DV of (F/2)+3 and Shadow a DV of (F/2)+1?

Am I missing something (errata?) or is there a misprint somewhere?

[Caelwyn]

Well shadow has a clearly delineated area of affect (radius) and a cap on the number of hits, plus it needs to be sustained.

Mist fills the entire area of effect (which appears to just be LOS) and while it degrades, cast at enough force and with enough dice it can quickly exceed shadow's limitations.

[phlapjack77]

"The base radius for all area spells is the Force in meters."

So it seems that Mist and Shadow both have the same area of effect, it's just they chose to explicitly state this for Shadow for some reason...

The capping on the number of hits is also meaningless. -6 visibility is total darkness, which is the logical limit to how much you can impair someone's vision. So both Mist and Shadow top out at -6.

Instant and Sustained spells should have the same drain value, all other things being equal...and it seems like all other things are equal (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Caelwyn]

Well thats what i get for answering without the book in front of me. Is casting a sustained spell a different action to casting an instant spell? i.e. complex vs simple? Cause that might help explain the discrepancy.

[Makki]

would you rule one can't penetrate mist/shadow with vision enhancement like thermographic? one can argue it's magical, then in the other hand it's just environmental...

[toturi]

The capping on the number of hits is also meaningless. -6 visibility is total darkness, which is the logical limit to how much you can impair someone's vision. So both Mist and Shadow top out at -6.

I do not think that this is a valid assumption. Mechanically speaking just because total darkness is -6, it doesn't necessarily mean that Mist can only top out at -6. I think it can potentially top out at more than -6, given a high enough force.

[Traul]

Even if it could, one would just have to close the eyes to come back to -6.

[phlapjack77]

I agree with you, RAW, it sounds like Mist can go higher than -6.

But to try to use some "realism" (I know, I know), what is worse than total darkness, vision-wise? I think the word "total" means you can't get any more obscuring (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Every modifier that implies that something can't be seen (blind-fire, invis, darkness, etc) cap out at -6. On the visibility table, nothing goes higher than that either. To me that says, the highest vision penalty possible is -6.

[Ascalaphus]

Mist would block low-light vision and thermographic vision. Also, the Mist is stationary, but you can move around the area of sustained spells such as Shadow.

And yeah, closing your eyes would limit the penalty to -6.

[phlapjack77]

Traul, that's exactly what I'm thinking. The biggest visibility modifier would be to NOT HAVE EYES, and then that would cap out at -6. I think the Blindness negative quality also gives a -6 as a penalty. (don't have the RC in front of me)

So how can Mist obscure your vision worse than literally having no eyes? I don't think it can, so it must cap out at -6.

(sorry for saying "cap out" so much)

[phlapjack77]

Ascalaphus, I think both Mist and Shadow block low-light and thermographic...not sure why I think that. But even if they don't, reading both descriptions, they will both block the same sight group(s), no matter what they are...

And the fact that you CAN move Shadow around, while Mist is stationary, seems to me that Mist should have a lower drain value, not a higher one, than Shadow...of course, Mist is a "fire-and-forget" spell, so that can be useful too...but according to Street Magic, both Instant and Sustained spells should have the same DV....

[Traul]

Mist would block low-light vision and thermographic vision.

All types of vision at least halve the penalty for mist. See the table p. 136.

[Ascalaphus]

Ascalaphus, I think both Mist and Shadow block low-light and thermographic...not sure why I think that. But even if they don't, reading both descriptions, they will both block the same sight group(s), no matter what they are...

And the fact that you CAN move Shadow around, while Mist is stationary, seems to me that Mist should have a lower drain value, not a higher one, than Shadow...of course, Mist is a "fire-and-forget" spell, so that can be useful too...but according to Street Magic, both Instant and Sustained spells should have the same DV....

Hmm, you're right. I suppose this could be because the spells aren't really all that completely balanced with each other..

[Czar Eggbert]

I would say there are two reasons.

1) Mist can be confused for a natural occurance.

2) Mist does not have to be sustained, so, while it may be a +0DVfor instant, there may be a a +2DV for persistant effect.


-CE

[TheOOB]

A sustained spell can last longer, say for stakeouts, and aren't the spells different schools? That can matter for some characters.

[Shinobi Killfist]

Do vision mods actually help for these spells?

Shadow is creating a globe of magical darkness, does thermo work fine in magical darkness or only real darkness. Mist at least is a manipulation spell so I can say though magical in origin that is actually mist.

Anyways the fire and forget part is fairly huge IMO, it is unique in that aspect as far as I know. Consider that it kind of added something like an elemental effect to it so it effects the environment even after the spell is over like how a fireball lights things on fire.

[phlapjack77]

I guess everyone has some good points, but I feel that any points that are made for why Mist is more "expensive", the same points can be made for why "Shadow" should be more expensive...

The fire-and-forget part could be huge, but then again, there are downsides in that it dissipates pretty quickly and is "stationary". Sustained spells have upsides and downsides too.

It just feels like a misprint to me...

[Shinobi Killfist]

Well technically it is correct. It is an illusion spell and illusions have a specific drain modifier of effects single sense -2.

Whether it make sit balanced is a different question and is more of a judgment call. Not much of the spell creation system is well put together IMO, and many of the spells fall victim to it. Sometimes I think D&D had it right or at least the older versions, Make a spell hand it to the DM he decides its level and makes some changes as he sees necessary. Hard rules lead to things like this, spells designed to wreck peoples ability to shoot you generally only need to target one sense, its not really much of a limitation to say one sense. But follow the guidelines and this is what you get.

[phlapjack77]

Both are manipulation spells...

I agree, hard rules on this might not work too well. Kind of like the pheromone vs. armor thread...

[Shinobi Killfist]

Wow, others had said it was an illusion and I had assumed they were right but damn it is a manipulation spell. I got nothing this is lame. I'd also point out that I think creating darkness falls out of the normal arena of manipulation but I'm not the one writing the rules and having manipulation cover almost everything. Something like darkness is better served as a physical illusion spell, not as manipulation spell.

[phlapjack77]

I agree, it seems like darkness should be a physical illusion, maybe having something like "blindness" for a mana-based version...but then I guess there's already "remove sense" for that?

Hmmmm...maybe I'm putting way too much thought into this...it just seems like a misprint happened somewhere along the way...

[Apathy]

Has anyone mentioned yet that shadows/darkness don't affect astral perception but mist would since it represents physical things (water droplets) blocking LOS?

[phlapjack77]

Interesting idea...

I don't think that's what the devs intended but I could see it working that way...

Cool!

[McCummhail]

They are different drain values because of how you are using mana to affect the environment.
It is highly likely that Mist is counted as an elemental effect garnering a +2.

For things with a water allergy this would be bothersome.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Wow, others had said it was an illusion and I had assumed they were right but damn it is a manipulation spell. I got nothing this is lame. I'd also point out that I think creating darkness falls out of the normal arena of manipulation but I'm not the one writing the rules and having manipulation cover almost everything. Something like darkness is better served as a physical illusion spell, not as manipulation spell.

Well, Both of them are indeed Environmental Effects, so there is a "Physical" manifestation of both of their powers, so I would not classify them as Illusions myself... But MIST does Linger once it is cast, and Shadow does not... which could account for the discrepency... Though it may not linger long; and it will blow on the wind so to speak (I do not see it as being truly stationary), so that is also a bonus (Though a small one) in my opinion... And because it is environmental (with none of the Spooky connotations of an impenetrable globe of Darkness), I would say that it will probably pass as a natural effect in many cases, especially if used in an environment where Mists and lw-laying fogs are common. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

I would say that all the above would be a good reason to have a slightly higher Drain Code... at least in my opinion.

Keep the Faith