hahnsoo
Jan 27 2005, 04:51 PM
1) Does a vehicle (or a character or any sufficiently large object) enshrouded by an Improved Invisibility spell allow LOS through it for the purposes of spellcasting? What about a manipulation spell version of Invisibility (something that bends light around the target)?
2) If you had an Ally Spirit with a reflective form (say, a large mirror), could you use it to chuck a spell around a corner? What about a magically created reflection (maybe a "Polish" manipulation spell that makes a normally non-reflective glass pane or metal plate reflective)?
3) What happens (in terms of drain and sensory feedback) if a mage tries to cast a spell at something he/she sees, but doesn't have valid line of sight (i.e. targeting a person behind a Ruthenium-cloaked vehicle)? Does the mage know that the spell isn't going to be successful?
This all assumes that the mage who is casting is not using astral perception... once a mage astrally perceives, then all becomes clear.
Moon-Hawk
Jan 27 2005, 04:56 PM
1) I'm gonna say 'no', but I'm not very positive about that. Manipulation: then I'd say yes.
2) Sure.
3) Mage tries, spell fails, mage takes drain anyway.
I'm not quoting any books, these are just my knee-jerk opinions.
Tarantula
Jan 27 2005, 04:59 PM
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
1) I'm gonna say 'no', but I'm not very positive about that. Manipulation: then I'd say yes.
2) Sure.
3) Mage tries, spell fails, mage takes drain anyway.
I'm not quoting any books, these are just my knee-jerk opinions. |
1) has spawned huge debates, that always end in NO! Manipulation yes, if you wanted to customize the spell, as written, NO on either invis.
2) sure, if its reflecting the light.
3) Mage takes drain, spell does nothing.
hahnsoo
Jan 27 2005, 05:32 PM
| QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
3) Mage tries, spell fails, mage takes drain anyway.
|
Does the mage know WHY it failed? Let's say the mage is casting a combat spell at a Trid Phantasm or a lifelike hologram... if the spell fails, will the mage know that the target doesn't exist (and in the case of Trid Phantasm, know that it was an illusion)?
I've personally argued that even manipulation spells that are used to circumvent a blocked LOS would not work for the purposes of spellcasting, since they represent a "virtual" image instead of an actual one. But that would mean the "Polish" example wouldn't work unless it was a permanent spell.
I hope these situations never come up in my games, but our group is discussing such things as a sort of academic exercise.
Tarantula
Jan 27 2005, 05:44 PM
Manipulation makes the light move, same as say a fiber optic cabling system for sec mage does. Minus the cableing of course. Maybe throw on a few modifies, because of the displacement and the like.
I'd say the mage knows that said thing he tried casting on made the spell fizzle. Depending on the illusion/circumstances give him an INT check to figure out why precisely.
BitBasher
Jan 27 2005, 05:45 PM
| QUOTE |
| Does the mage know WHY it failed? Let's say the mage is casting a combat spell at a Trid Phantasm or a lifelike hologram... if the spell fails, will the mage know that the target doesn't exist (and in the case of Trid Phantasm, know that it was an illusion)? |
He wouldn't know it was an illusion for sure, but there's a very limited set of curcumstances that would cause a spell to fail like that, so his options for the reason it failed are pretty limited.
| QUOTE |
| I've personally argued that even manipulation spells that are used to circumvent a blocked LOS would not work for the purposes of spellcasting, since they represent a "virtual" image instead of an actual one. But that would mean the "Polish" example wouldn't work unless it was a permanent spell. |
I kind of have to agree, especially since it says that spells cannot be used to modify LOS to make something a valid target. Just carry around a mirror to cast around corners.
GrinderTheTroll
Jan 27 2005, 06:17 PM
| QUOTE (hahnsoo) |
| 1) Does a vehicle (or a character or any sufficiently large object) enshrouded by an Improved Invisibility spell allow LOS through it for the purposes of spellcasting? What about a manipulation spell version of Invisibility (something that bends light around the target)? |
Illusion = NO, Manipulation = YES.
The Illusion makes you "think" the objects are invisible, so if you fail to resist the spell, you'd see what you think should be where the invisible object is, but still not have (or see) a valid target (see my answer to #3).
Since Manipulations cause physical change, then light would be bent and you would actually see what is beyond the invisible object.
| QUOTE |
| 2) If you had an Ally Spirit with a reflective form (say, a large mirror), could you use it to chuck a spell around a corner? What about a magically created reflection (maybe a "Polish" manipulation spell that makes a normally non-reflective glass pane or metal plate reflective)? |
I'd say anything that actually physically re-directs the light in a non-technically-electronical manner should provide LOS to a target.
| QUOTE |
| 3) What happens (in terms of drain and sensory feedback) if a mage tries to cast a spell at something he/she sees, but doesn't have valid line of sight (i.e. targeting a person behind a Ruthenium-cloaked vehicle)? Does the mage know that the spell isn't going to be successful? |
Unless it's a Manipulation, I'd have to say you couldn't cast at the intended target without proper LOS. Visibility modifiers do apply for TN, so perhaps adding those for dark situations, etc., but if you can't see the target then you can't cast at it.
edit - I'd let him roll dice all the same to keep up the impression of the illusion, since in their mind it's real.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.