Circling the subject

From: Kirsten K. Niemann (eco0kkn@cabell.vcu.edu)
Date: Tue 05 Oct 1993 - 20:33:18 EET



Mike Dawson again, following up Protective Circle.

Somebody replied to my solicitation for comment on Protective Circle. Sorry, I failed to copy your name. Your comments appear in quotes. Can you tell I don't understand JOVE?
"Radius=intensity seems fair to me. I'd add the option that the
radius can
be smaller than the intensity if desired. " Why would the caster want to make the intensity of the Prot Circle *larger* than the radius of the inscribed circle, if the effect
cannot extend beyond the circle? There is nothing in the spell description that says the intensity of the Circle must equal the intensity of the Resist spells Multispelled with it.

"I agree that the circle can't be bigger than the object that it's
cast
upon (gods help any GM who rules otherwise). " One fellow e-mailed me of his campaign's use of the spell with just this interpretation. He has guys using force-fields in his campaign. Far beyond what I would tolerate in mine, but that's why I asked for comments. He also suggested that the chair (in my example) would sink to the ground because the earth has a 1% chance (per round or something) of getting through the 10 pt Resist Damage. I disagree, because the earth is doing NO damage to the circle.

(Along the same line, someone else added their interpretation of Protective Circle as rather like the "Dune" novel personal shields: you must move slowly through them to overcome them. This is explicitly untrue in the current rules. Note that you CANNOT enter a circle until you overcome the Damage resistance of the circle. Going slowly just makes you do LESS damage. I have no intention of changing this in the errata.)

"If you're going to make the inscription of the circle separate from
the casting of the spell, then I'd add a note about how long it takes

to scribe the circle (say DEX SR + 2 SR per m radius)." Hmmm....this doesn't quite work as a formula. The result is that the larger the circle, the faster the sorcerer can move while inscribing it! Dex SR + 2SR per M of DIAMETER is what we need.

"You listed a cloak as an example of the kind of object it might be
cast on:
I assume this means a sorcerer can pre-cast a long duration Protective Circle
on his cloak and, when the moment arrives, he can roll his cloak out on the
ground and stand inside it. "

No, this is not what I meant. That is an example of abuse, I think. However, if the sorcerer's cloak (or rug, whatever) is inscribed along the base, and the base is one piece (a strange, but possible cloak, I'll admit) then he can toss it down, smoooth it out, and *then* cast the spell on it, without having to worry about inscribing a circle.

"What about the belt-&-braces approach: the sorcerer has a
personal Spell
Resistance up, and then steps inside his protective circle of Spell Resistance.
Does he get to resist incoming spells thrice (once with the circle; with his
personal spell; and with his MP vs MP) ? I'd say yes..."

I'd say yes too. This is clear.

Many of the advantages of doing the spell as I suggest come from the necessary and colorful pre-planning that sorcerers must do to make the spell useful. Western castles will be built with inscribed circles built into tower bases, floors of Sanctums will have them carved in, etc. This plays a part in Strangers in Prax, where the presence of just such an inscribed circle in the Rubble is the reason a Magus "assumes ownership" of an aerial defense tower called the Arm of Pavis.
I'm of two minds about allowing the actual shape of the area to vary from a circle. Maybe different schools have different shaped protections? Or maybe there are different spells for the different shapes. On one hand, I am generally for things being flexible, but on the other hand, I am also for certain magical "facts" affecting how cultures can do certain things: Protective *Circle* = round defensive works, for example. And finally, the idea that sorcerers must be exacting does appeal.
From a practical standpoint, what sort of a limit do you put on the shape of the area, if you are not going to limit it to a circular form? What if someone wanted an area of protection shaped like a starfish? Sure, you use radius= intensity, but how detailed within the diameter can it be?
I don't seem to have made it clear before, but I certainly intended the bottom of the hemisphere to be part of the protected area. If I wanted to be really rune-wacky about the form of the circle, I could define the hemisphere as a geodesic dome, made up of thousands of triangular Law Runes, of course.



Making the Priestess Scream.
I'm still looking for people interested in forming a team for the live trollball game scheduled for RQ Con. I know there are more than a few SCA fighter types around this list. Paul, how 'bout it? We'd need to make up some boffer shields & such, but we should be able to kill & eat any other team. I guess we could call ourselves the "SCArs".....
David Hall, Mike O'brien, somebody: could you please post the live trollball rules?
Note again please, this is by Mike Dawson, not Kirsten! M >|<

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:31:49 EEST