| From: | Damion Milliken <u9467882@***.EDU.AU> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Spell locks |
| Date: | Thu, 17 Nov 1994 18:09:06 +1100 |
> > I was not refering to "stealing" the lock. Just able to take the
thing off
> > the magician using it. It will go mundane the minute it leaves,
> > leaveing the projecting mage empty-handed, but it be unatached to
> > the using mage. Is this possible?
>
> I don't think so. I don't believe you can separate the aura from the
> physical object, and you can't move any physical object by picking it
> up astrally.
OK, here are two possible interpretations from the main book. Firstly, the
mandatory quoted passages:
"A magician can see it if he is astrally perceiving..."
"If a magician spots thr lock, he can remove it."
Now, if one accosiates the astral _perception_ of the previous sentance with
the act of removing the lock, then it can be concluded that to remove the
lock the magician must be astrally perceiving. This makes sense, as an
astrally perceiving magician is present in both the physical and astral, so
he could easily take the lock. On the other hand, there is no actual
indication that the magician can only remove the lock if he is perceiving,
it depends on whether you interpret "perceiving", as the actual act of
astral perception, or as being able to perceive on the astral plane. If you
take the second, then a projecting mage could remove the lock. Now, if you
were to take the second (which does seem wrong to me now that I've considerd
it), then as soon as the projecting mage removed the lock, it would have a
physical form, and he would drop it.
> > Yeah. I say that you shoudl be allowed to ground mana spells through a
> > quickened/sustained mana spell.
>
> You can. It just requires that the spell you're grounding _through_
> has a physical effect (e.g. Increase Reflexes [Huh? I wonder what that
> was supposed to really be? Increase Reaction?]).
By physical effect, just what do you mean? I had previously thought that you
meant a physical spell, but that rules out Increased Reflexes and the like.
As far as I can see, most every spell has a physical effect, so the rule is
pointless.
[His GMs ruling on grounding through spell locks]
So he allows grounding through sustained and quickened spells too I take it?
Erik writes:
> What evidence is ther in teh rules or within the basic theory of SR magic
> that sasys _anyone_, even an astral mage, can touch a spell lock?
I assume you mean _after_ it is activated? Because until it is activated
then it has a physical presence, so anybody can touch it.
Page 138 SR II, under the heading "Spell Locks":
"For all intents and purposes, the spell lock vanishes once it is in
place... A magician can see it if he is astrally perceiving... If a magician
spots the lock, he can remove it."
Now, while this isn't a blunt statement that says "magicans can touch the
lock", that is what I think FASA had in mind when they wrote it. How else
would you remove a spell lock, besides touching it?
> but how in the Hell could an astral mage pick up a lock and run away with
> it?
The concensus is that he couldn't.
> It does NOT turn strictly astral.
How do you interpret "...but mundanes cannot see it, touch it or affect it.
A magician can see it if he is astrally perceiving, but that is the only
way." if it is not to assume that the lock becomes entirely astral?
> but the whole concpet of a mage beintg able to run away with someone
> else's lock, or even just turning it off, strikes me as being more than just
> a little bit absurd.
Well, if I have a spell lock which is bonded to me, but was bonded by my mage
friend, then he can turn it on and off whenever he pleases. So someone can
turn my lock on and off.
Hmmm, that's a thought. It doesn't actually say that a spell lock can be
deactivated anywhere, it only says the can have their link broken (except by
activation and deactivation by the maker). When talking about activation and
deactivation of a foci, it says "The only exception to the above it spell
locks, which are discussed below." And then below, it only mentions that the
maker of the lock can turn it on and off, but that an astrally perceiving
magician can remove the lock and break its link. No mention of anyone
besides the maker of the lock being able to turn it on or off. [Note that an
astrally perceiving mage can remove the lock, which effectively turns it
off, but the turn off is somewhat permanent.]
luke writes:
> Although I have no idea how to justify the spell lock's `dematerialisation'
> when it's activated, so that you could argue about it - allowing such thefts
> would only lead to abuse.
>
> And I'm quite content with the following explanation for spell lock's
> `dematerialisation' -
>
> It's magic.
And that's about the best explanation we'll get for the dematerialisation of
spell locks I feel.
--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au
(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+)('') !tv(--)@ b++ D+
B? e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
