Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Centering vs Penalties (was Re: [SR3] Spell Rituals)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 11:01:38 -0700
> This forced me to ponder (no easy task at 6AM on a Saturday) the exact
> functioning of area effect spells. If I understand correctly you toss the
> spell at a target and if it grounds out from him it hits anyone else in the
> area of effect, but only if you can see them. Yet if the spell doesn't
> ground throught the original target then it doesn't go off. If you have to
> target the auras of all the targets why wouldn't the spell try to hit them
> all regardless, and if you have to just hit the one target why would you
> have to see the other targets? Now if the caster does not need to see the
> other targets (I just checked the BBB and didn't find anything that said
> one way or the other, but I just read the little blurb about area of effect
> spells in the "spells" section) then why would vision and other situational
> modifiers ,other than cover, effect the target numbers to damage them?
> This would make more sense to me, and then the centering question would be
> a moot point.

I don't see much of a reason that visual modifiers should affect
spellcasting at all: the mage 'glances' into the Astral, where things
like smoke and glare don't exist, and locks the spell to the target. If
he can see it, he can it (and if he can see a part of it, he can hit it
just as well: it's all one aura.)

As far as area effect spells, I've never liked the explanation for them,
but it seems to me that it spreads in the Astral first, covering (x)
area, and then grounds, individually, through each aura (target) in the
area. Of course, I'm not big on the Astral having a 1:1 correspondence
with 'reality', but that's just me.

I /really/ disagree with the 'mirror as targeting scope' since it's an
image of the target, but not hte actual aura of the target. Equivalent
to seeing someone's picture on a computer monitor, though less tech
involved.

And yes, I disagree with the 'LOS through fiberop' thread begun with the
CorpSec Handbook, but that's mostly because I don't see being able to
see through a FO line without some assistance from electronics.


-Matt

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.