Hmmm, let's see: Night One with max possible Quick (12) , max possible Int(9) , max possible Will(9). Make him and Adept, Geas away the Cyber and BI and add the 3 points of Combat Sense (+3 Combat Pool), and Boosted(Quickness(6)).
(((12+6)+9+9)/2)+3 = ((18+9+9)/2)+3 = (36/2)+3 = 21 Combat Pool

Using Exceptional Attribute edge you might get another point out of it, but that might make the character seem munchkiny...

That's it. The target does no more rolling. The target's roll was the damage resistance test.

I believe that most GMs treat an area-affect EM spell as bursting out from the center point the magician used as a target. Our team plays that way, and therefore we use vision mods from the spellcaster to the center point, and hard-cover mods appropriate from that center point to the people in the blast range. We don't use concealment mods at all.

I just re-read this section, and I believe you are reading this wrong. Under Elemental Manipulation Spells it says they may be staged up, but I can't find anywhere that states that spells may be staged up or down. They simply succeed and do the base damage chosen by the caster, or they fail and do nothing.

Edit: Ah, to take the time and read errata before one contradicts other board members

I am mistaken, and I appologize, since I have not played since before the new errata was posted. Under the errata (and I'm sure in more recent print runs) this line was indeed added, and spells do stage up damage.

Maybe it's time to get an updated book

*cough* um munchkiny? yeah, I'd say so. Lets see him dodge 4 kilo's of plastic-12, though, combat pool or no.

1) No, you can add it to dodge.

2) Sounds good. I've never heard of someone applying the grenade (blast reflecting off barriers) rules to something like this.

1) As far as I've gathered, just Willpower (or Body for physical spells). As to the semantics of why you can't use Combat Pool, see the above posts.

2) I don't see why you couldn't treat the spell like a granade, since it's a physical effect. If you did, then once the spell hits a barrier, you would campare the Power to the Barrier Rating (I can't remember if it's double the rating or not; don't have the book handy). Considering that the windows were blown already, you could argue that the blast flies out the window, so it can't rebound back into the room.

On the other hand, even though it's a physical creation, you could say that there isn't an explosion, but that fire is spontaneously created. If you have fireball create a damaging effect, plus an explosive effect, plus a secondary effect (which is now a tertiary effect), then no one will take points in any of the other ElemMan spells. Add into that the argument that if it creates an explosive effect, then it should also incorporate knockdown. The spell now has four effects attributed to it and I think that unbalances the spell.

Only against EM's. Otherwise, no.

Technically, it keeps going-- EM's affect everything in their area equally, so the ball would have simply enveloped the house. It may not have damaged it, since that depends on Barrier rating vs Force, but it would have surrounded it. The spell doesn't have any more knockback than any other attack of that Power level, so it may or may not blow out windows.

Let me try explaining it this way. The mage sees his target sitting in an armored van. One window is open, so he has unobstructed LOS. He throws a force-6 fireball, withholding no dice, and gets a decent number of successes.

Now, what happens is a 12-meter diameter ball of fire blossoms around the target. It doesn't "detonate" outwards, it simply appears. (Although *saying* it detonates is cool, remember that the mechanics work somewhat differently.) Now, at force-6, the fireball is going to be completely ineffective against a Bulldog, with Armor 5. So, the vehicle escapes with nothing more than a few cosmetic burn marks.

However, the two guys on the other side of the van, completely obscured from the mage's vision *and* covered by the armor of the van, are enveloped in the fireball. And the guys in the nearby building, if they were within 6 meters of the central point, may get cooked as well. The building could be made out of cardboard or solid brick; the fireball still gets to them. If you want to get really technical about it-- the sewer repairman, under the streets, also gets singed.

This is why I don't apply cover modifiers to EM spells, although I may apply Blind-Fire penalties and I do apply the Barrier rating as armor/hardened armor, as appropriate. This is why you want to measure the radius on these sort of spells very carefully!

So, the guys inside the tank will still get the benefit of the hardened armor, even as flames fill the inside of the tank-- it's a cosmetic effect more than a damaging one.

But let's reverse the situation, so we can better answer the original question. Let's say that the mage has LOS into the tank, and throws his fireball into it. Now, inside the tank is a crew of people; but there's also a mechanic working underneath it. There's also several people outside the tank, one guy in a nearby tent, one guy behing a brick halfwall, and one unlucky sewer repairman working below.

Unless the spell was thrown by Harlequin, there's not much chance that the tank itself is going to be hurt by the spell. So, nothing of consequence happens to it-- some scorchmarks is about all.

The crew inside the tank, however, takes the full brunt of the spell. This much is inargueable. What's more, the people standing around outside the tank take the full brunt as well-- they were in range and in the open, even if the center of the blast was inside the tank. The guy in the tent is afforded no protection, and he gets hurt as well. LOS or burst pattern doesn't really matter, since it fills the area equally.

The mechanic working underneath the tank may get some cover, depending on how the GM wants to call it. The guy behind the brick halfwall may be able to use the wall's barrier rating as a Power reduction, as appropriate. As for the guy in the sewer, the GM rules that the spell's force was reduced enough to qualify as a hardened armor reduction; the repairman suddenly loses his eyebrows as a pocket of methane ignites, as far as he can tell. He takes a funny look at his tools, and decides to never eat spearmints while on the job again.

Why do they get the hardened armor. The flames are FILLING the tank. They are toast.


Thanos

And as far as that analogy goes your are correct. However we were talking about men in a TANK with hardened armor. Not even remotely the same thing. Also the flamethrower has to heat up you car to kill you (or shatter the windows so the flames actually get you) not just magically show up inside your car and kill you.

Thanos

The way I read it, the crew inside the tank would take the full brunt of the attack, but everyone outside would not take any damage at all, because they'd all be able to use the tank's armor as cover.

The way you've interpreted the rules, armor doesn't protect a vehicle's occupants at all from area EM attacks, and that doesn't seem like good game balance to me. Why should my mage be allowed to take out the tank crew of a sealed up tank, when I can't even see the crew, just by casting fireball 6" away from the tank?

But that's not the way I interpreted the rules.

Which is exactly how it should be. Armor works perfectly well against Elemental Manipulations, and they actually have a lot of trouble affecting (let alone bypassing) armored vehicles. The only people beyond the crew who would possibly be affected by an Elemental Manipulation cast inside a tank were those near the point of entry for the spell or any other major openings.

He shouldn't, and he wouldn't.

You can target people out of your line of sight if they're within range of the Elemental Manipulation when it hits its target area, such as aiming at the corner in order to nail some people hiding around it... but it's only going to do damage if they're actually exposed to it. If they were in the room around the corner the spell would have to obliterate the wall before it would have a chance to affect those inside, and the Power of it would still be reduced as normal.

This I belive had to do with what happened when you cast something like fireball in an area that is smaller than the spells diameter. I belive he's maintaining that the spell fills all empty spaces with in that area of effect regardless of wether it is a closed room, empty jar, or what have you. Example using the tank. I cast fireball 1 meter in front of the tank. The tank is sealed. I maintain that the crew would get the full benefits for being in the tank. (spell has to work against armor, body, etc.)

Cain I belive is suggesting that the spell would take place in side the sealed tank because it's within the area of effect for the spell.

And man if that ain't it, I'm really confused.

Thanos

Actually, this is pretty close to my concept. If someone's around two corners, the flames can still reach him, but the force of the spell would be seriously reduced. He'd get the barrier rating of the walls, which may just reduce the damage to nothing.

In the case of an open tank, even with the effect centered inside the tank, there's ample room for the flames to spread once they exit. My ruling is that they spread to completely fill the area. How much *damage* you take depends on the circumstances, but you'd definitely notice the fireball going off around you.

So, the guys inside a sealed tank have a nasty little shock as ghostly green flame leaps through their compartment. However, they're not actually hurt by it. The barrier rating/armor absorbs the damage, and all they're left with is a scary, but harmless, special effect.