Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gravity supremacy rules

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Kumiko View Post
    They very much are locations I have no idea why Satchel would think differently.
    Next time I need to hammer in a nail I'll be sure to borrow my neighbor's land.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

      Next time I need to hammer in a nail I'll be sure to borrow my neighbor's land.
      You are not convinced only because you are not Awake and you are living in the Lie


      [2E] Moinen's Homebrew Hub

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Moinen View Post
        You are not convinced only because you are not Awake and you are living in the Lie
        No, I'm not convinced because that isn't a persuasive argument backed by evidence. The game treats area as a different thing than a subject.
        Last edited by Mrmdubois; 02-17-2017, 05:34 AM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

          No, I'm not convinced because that isn't a persuasive argument backed by evidence. The game treats area as a different thing than a subject.
          I understand your argument. I'll drop the 'area can contain multitude of subjects' line for the sake of a different question that I don't think suits this thread. So I'll ask it in the other one.


          [2E] Moinen's Homebrew Hub

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

            Next time I need to hammer in a nail I'll be sure to borrow my neighbor's land.
            The relationship doesn't go both ways. Objects and people are locations, but locations aren't objects and people.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

              Next time I need to hammer in a nail I'll be sure to borrow my neighbor's land.
              ​Seems like an unnecessary and wasted step but whatever floats your boat.

              Comment


              • #52
                How much Scale of land would convert to how much damage?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Kumiko View Post
                  ​Seems like an unnecessary and wasted step but whatever floats your boat.
                  I'm being sarcastic by pointing out how it seems kind of ridiculous to equate objects, people and places as all metaphysically being the same thing according to Space.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

                    I'm being sarcastic by pointing out how it seems kind of ridiculous to equate objects, people and places as all metaphysically being the same thing according to Space.
                    As a bit of an aside, the Secret Room spell would allow a mage to shrink a chamber such that the ceiling could drive a nail through a board (assuming the nail was already in position and the ceiling was durable enough), considering that it crushes people for lethal damage. So, it does seem that it would be possible for an adept of Space to suspend a board and a nail over a field, then alternately reduce and increase the distance between the field and the board in order to hammer the nail into the wood--assuming the field contained some rocks that were up to the task, that is. (I wonder, would it be beyond a master to warp the space the field occupies to reshape and resize it into a hammer made of grass and dirt? What a topological mess!)

                    I say that this is a bit of an aside because none of the above actually equates objects, people, and places as metaphysically the same. I'm in the Mrmdubois camp on that point.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Well... Before anything else, I didn’t grasp fully the rules of “Gravitic Supremacy” in this passage: “subtracting a distance equal to Strength from success rolled.” (p. 144)

                      Which Strength? If it refers to the mage, I guess it is really weird, because then a mage should spend her time in a gym, rather than in a library, to get more powerful spells.
                      However, if it refers to the target, I do not see a sense in it as well: after all, the stronger the target is, the more penalized will he be?

                      For me, it would be far more reasonable if, instead of “Strength”, it was written “Potency”, for example...

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Werethunder View Post
                        Well... Before anything else, I didn’t grasp fully the rules of “Gravitic Supremacy” in this passage: “subtracting a distance equal to Strength from success rolled.” (p. 144)
                        That is not what Gravitic Supremacy says, it says to subtract potency. Make sure you have the most up to date copy of the book, it may have been part of the errata.


                        Mentats - a 2e Free Council Obrimos Legacy (Mind/Forces) built around being a human computer; Thaumatech Engineers - a 2e Free Council Obrimos Legacy (Matter/Prime) focusing on the creation of Imbued items and the enhancement of Sleeper technology

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I agree that a gravity spell that follows a target should be possible. The subject of a spell is what is being affected in the Imago, and I'll claim what the spell does is makes gravity do what the mage wishes at 2 dots. As an area of effect, all gravity relations shift to the Mages whims. Only Earth matters here, if I say gravity now goes up, people fall up in that area, but it also means that the gravity between any objects inside the aoe also now repel each other, but, you won't see that because their gravity is already so weak.

                          So, as an AoE, Control Gravity should affect all gravity fields in the subject area.

                          If we target a person, I am guessing the issue is our Imago. Now real quick, the spell not mentioning the capacity of targetting a person and it being Withstood if you do?? Its been said already that each arcana had a different person working on it and the word-count was very strict. So declaring absolutism on the rules due to omissions strikes me as hasty when we already know stuff got omitted that the devs really wanted to discuss but couldn't.
                          But if you DO target a person (and it wooould tootally be Withstood), what does that mean?
                          I think what a lot of you are saying is that this, as a target spell, is changing the victims own gravity field, which is negligible anyway, resulting in say... a werewolf who produces anti-gravity and repels things but is still pulled to the Earth.
                          And what some of us are looking for is instead, an imago in which a subjects *relationship* to gravity has been altered so that only the victim responds to all gravity fields in a way the mage specifies.

                          Why is this so unreasonable? Espeeecially after Signs of Sorcery!! It has a yantra for powering up at midnight! I didn't even think that was possible, and Signs of Sorcery is teaching me I've been close-minded of the limitations of magic--they're less limited than I'd thought!

                          So again, AoE, the imago is "all gravity fields in this subject area are now going this direction." And I do believe the subject here *is* the area effected.

                          As targets, the arguement at hand is, if you target a creature, is the imago that the target's pitiful gravity field changes, or, is the target itself compelled to respond differently to any gravity field the creature encounters (in this case Earths' is the only that matters).

                          Well why can't both these be possible?

                          Now I personally think the spell does need a change of practice (weaving) OR fate 2 to follow a person around if its normally expected to not do that. The most demanding I can think of is Weaving Life and Forces to get this Imago, but there is no reason a spell like that shouldn't exist. The imago is just too straight-forward for it to be off the table. "My victim will respond to any gravity it encounters by going the opposite direction."

                          I think Weaving can do this personally. The Ruling one probably wants to affect the fields themselves and defaults to "aoe" NOT because of anything you've all brought up like the Withstands or that areas aren't subjects, but because if Control Gravity affects gravity the subject/target needs to be a gravity field, which exists in a target space. Sooo, if I target a werewolf and want to do something other than create an anti-grav woof that falls to earth put pushes the earth away? I need to create a werewolf shaped spell-area the werewolf falls out of and now theres this silly werewolf shaped reversed gravity field.

                          But to make a werewolf fall endlessly up to space as long as they don't crash into anything? Should be possible with at least another practice, and maybe another arcanum inclusion at worst.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by proindrakenzol View Post

                            That is not what Gravitic Supremacy says, it says to subtract potency. Make sure you have the most up to date copy of the book, it may have been part of the errata.
                            Oh, thank you, Mr. Proindrakenzol! This is probably why I have been struggling in some parts of the book...

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

                              No, I'm not convinced because that isn't a persuasive argument backed by evidence. The game treats area as a different thing than a subject.
                              The game actually treats locations as valid spell subjects, so you are wrong about that. You have to argue why in this particular spell's case it wouldn't make sense, but it does make sense to me: it's similar to how you can scry a person or object OR a location.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by EW-Matias View Post
                                The game actually treats locations as valid spell subjects, so you are wrong about that. You have to argue why in this particular spell's case it wouldn't make sense, but it does make sense to me: it's similar to how you can scry a person or object OR a location.
                                An area can be affected by magic, sure, but a subject and an area are different things on the Scale factor chart which is what I was saying. You can disagree with me if you want, but then you have to argue how the Scale chart doesn't make any sense. You'd also have to explain to me how say, Time Square is the same thing as a person.
                                Last edited by Mrmdubois; 07-06-2019, 05:32 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X