mfb
Sep 27 2007, 01:06 AM
Batman knocked Funk into a vat of estrogen, and he's been PMSing ever since.
Buster
Sep 27 2007, 01:09 AM
| QUOTE (mfb @ Sep 26 2007, 08:06 PM) |
| Batman knocked Funk into a vat of estrogen, and he's been PMSing ever since. |
LOL! Ah, the Dark Goddess mentor spirit's flaw...
Blog
Sep 28 2007, 06:56 PM
The way the group I play in rules this.
1) if the object/objects were part of the orginal casting, they will be invisible for the sustained duration.
2) if the object/objetcs have a method to fully encompass other items (ie inside a bag/box/coat/car) then will cause said items to also be invisible untill they are removed from said container.
3) if a method that breaks what was defined as the orginal space occurs that area it was hiding becomes visible untill such time that it is restored. (roll down window, open the back doors of a van, etc.
With the above rules using the sheet example. You have an invisible sheet! Hides stains like no other. Usefull to cover doorways and perplex people when they run into it. Toss it on anything and.... you still dont see the sheet but can see whatever its laying on. If you can manage to fully wrap said item in the sheet so that no part is showing, then the sheet becomes a container (like a bag) and follows the container rules.
Simon May
Oct 12 2007, 07:34 AM
Blog essentially has it right, if the rules are read literally.
To quote the book:
| QUOTE |
| "Improved invisibility creates an actual warping of light around the subject that affects technological sensors as well." |
If you compare this idea to a chameleon suit*, light on one side of an object is bent so it appears to pass through that object instead of reflecting off and creating an image. This means the object itself is not actually invisible. Instead it's the surface of the object that is invisible.
In the case of a vehicle, if the doors are all closed when improved invisibility is cast, then opening the door will reveal the interior, the contents of the car, and anything within the boundaries of the spell. This means that opening the car, tossing something or someone in and closing it up again won't affect the invisibility unless a piece of cloth ends up hanging out or one of the doors is left open.
In the case of a tarp or cloak, the spell's boundaries are the edges of the cloak. In essence, one side of the cloak will warp light around to the other side. If you put it on, it will look like there's no cloak or tarp on you or the object. In the case of the door, the boundaries of the object are each side of the door and the edges of the door are where the light is bent, making the door invisible, but not the objects behind it.
When looking at the issue of water or blood splatter, as in Adarael's example of standing in a pool, the character would not only displace the water, but the area would appear completely devoid of water since the light hitting the character on one side would be bent to appear on the other. If the water were to get in the characters boots, it would not be visible as it's within the original boundaries of the spell. However, any water or blood laying on top of the character would be visible and apparently hanging in midair.
Of course, all this applies to Improved Invisibility. Because Invisibility is a Mana Illusion and not a physical illusion according to the book, the warping of light explanation does not apply. With regular Invisibility, you should assume that the only objects affected by the spell are those it was originally cast upon. In other words, using regular Invisibility would hide a vehicle, but not its contents. This is why Improved Invisibility is a better spell.
----------
*A chameleon suit is a series of cameras and displays. Whatever object is inside is essentially invisible because the suit records images from either side and projects them on the opposite side using a chip to coordinate images to make the background match up. This is why it's easy to stay unnoticed when not moving, but when moving, the background blurs slightly as angles of projection are recalculated.
eidolon
Oct 12 2007, 02:22 PM
I despise that "warping of light" nonsense. It's another classic mediclorean. Don't try to explain magic at that level.
Improved Invisibility: Works as normal invisibility, but affects technological sensors as well.
There. Now the people that want to make up reasons for that to be a problem can, and the rest of us don't have to suffer nonsense.
AbNo
Oct 12 2007, 10:34 PM
| QUOTE (Simon May) |
Blog essentially has it right, if the rules are read literally.
To quote the book:| QUOTE | | "Improved invisibility creates an actual warping of light around the subject that affects technological sensors as well." |
If you compare this idea to a chameleon suit*, light on one side of an object is bent so it appears to pass through that object instead of reflecting off and creating an image. This means the object itself is not actually invisible. Instead it's the surface of the object that is invisible.
In the case of a vehicle, if the doors are all closed when improved invisibility is cast, then opening the door will reveal the interior, the contents of the car, and anything within the boundaries of the spell. This means that opening the car, tossing something or someone in and closing it up again won't affect the invisibility unless a piece of cloth ends up hanging out or one of the doors is left open.
In the case of a tarp or cloak, the spell's boundaries are the edges of the cloak. In essence, one side of the cloak will warp light around to the other side. If you put it on, it will look like there's no cloak or tarp on you or the object. In the case of the door, the boundaries of the object are each side of the door and the edges of the door are where the light is bent, making the door invisible, but not the objects behind it.
When looking at the issue of water or blood splatter, as in Adarael's example of standing in a pool, the character would not only displace the water, but the area would appear completely devoid of water since the light hitting the character on one side would be bent to appear on the other. If the water were to get in the characters boots, it would not be visible as it's within the original boundaries of the spell. However, any water or blood laying on top of the character would be visible and apparently hanging in midair.
Of course, all this applies to Improved Invisibility. Because Invisibility is a Mana Illusion and not a physical illusion according to the book, the warping of light explanation does not apply. With regular Invisibility, you should assume that the only objects affected by the spell are those it was originally cast upon. In other words, using regular Invisibility would hide a vehicle, but not its contents. This is why Improved Invisibility is a better spell.
----------
*A chameleon suit is a series of cameras and displays. Whatever object is inside is essentially invisible because the suit records images from either side and projects them on the opposite side using a chip to coordinate images to make the background match up. This is why it's easy to stay unnoticed when not moving, but when moving, the background blurs slightly as angles of projection are recalculated. |
Now wait.... if it warps light AROUND an object, wouldn't that mean anything concealed by the object would be invisible?
Think like the airflow around a moving car. Wouldn't it move light around the object the same way?
Simon May
Oct 13 2007, 08:07 AM
I would certainly say yes, assuming that the object in question was within the boundaries of the spell. If you put a stick inside your jacket, it would be invisible. If you held it to your chest, it would not.
Garrowolf
Oct 13 2007, 09:45 AM
Actually I think that you guys are missing the most important part of the spell - sustained!
This means that the caster is actively controlling the spell. It's not like the spell gains some independant life after it is cast. If you are sustaining a spell then you can make it do anything you want it to within the description of the spell.
Now if you originally cast it on a sheet and you drape that over a car then you as the caster know that you are really trying to expand it to cover the car so I think that you would have to beat the Object restistance of the car now. If not then you either fail at both (ei the sheet is visible) or you have an invisible sheet on a visible car, which will probably make you drop the spell.
The problem is that you can not trick magic because it comes from you so it always knows what you are trying to do. That is the way I rule magic.
Simon May
Oct 13 2007, 06:32 PM
Sustained and adjusted are two very different beasts. Sustaining means keeping it in the same state. Adjusting means making it fit new criteria. If a spell is sustained, it should remain in the same state as the moment it was cast. To adjust to new criteria, it would need to be adjusted (which I allow as a free action, assuming the radius or criteria changing isn't too drastic) or recast with the new criteria involved.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.