| From: | run@***********.com (run@***********.com) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Lightning Ball vs Vehicle. Uber Spell or How Does It Work? |
| Date: | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:21:38 -0400 |
Back to the rules, it says under the definition of ball lightning
that metallic armor does not count. (if you have ballistic gel
or ceramic, then you will get the rating). Most vehicles use
some form of metallic armor, it the vehicle would be affected.
As for Faraday cages, Korishinzo is right. A faraday cage
stops electromagnetics and has to not have any openings larger
than the frequency it is trying to keep out.
On the other conductor note, the frame is a great conductor but
doesn't go to the ground. The lightning might not be able to transfer
the energy to ground effectively because the tires are insulators, so
it will jump around the frame, engine, fuses and circuits for a moment
before arcing to ground.
At 12:00 PM 7/29/2005, you wrote:
> > >--not too many rigger driving around in Farraday cages :>
>
> > Except that they are...
>
>Nope. Vehicles are not, as a rule, effective Faraday cages. Too
>many imperfectively conductive materials that penetrate the 'shell'
>of the vehicle. Those will function as resistors to the current,
>especially with a ball of lightning versus a bolt, where the entire
>shell of the vehicle could easily be simultaneously exposed to the
>lightning. A lot of heat, components melting/burning, etc.
>Electricity is famous for trying to -create- the shortest path to the
>ground, unless you have very carefully made sure it already has one.
>
>I would rule that the primary effect of the Ball Lightning, that of
>causing a bunch of damage, corruscates off the vehicle in spectacular
>fashion without appreciably damaging it, leaving its occupants
>unscathed (maybe in need of a change of underpants). However, I
>would call for a resolution of secondary effects that could damage
>the car. Sure, the overall vehicle too no damage. The petrochem
>tank didn't detonate. But, all four tires have melted/exploded. And
>a couple of low points on the vehicle frame are badly warped.
>Functioning as the focal point for an arch welder is not what the
>average vehicle frame was designed for. Electronics in the vehicle
>(especially sensors, which stick out through the shell all over) are
>probably damaged. How badly depends on how much ECM hardening your
>vehicle has.
>
>On a somewhat tangental note, why is Ball Lightning force halved?
>Who says that a 12 meter diameter ball of electricity is implicitly
>~not~ anti-vehicular? Not that it matters. Armor 12 vs. Force 8.
>The armor still wins. But, my point remains... Having seen first
>hand what electricity can do to vehicles (saw the remains of a car
>that took out a power pole and ended up with live lines laying across
>it), I rather think that the spell should be considered
>anti-vehicular for purposes of resolving damage.
>
>======>Korishinzo
>--What's the drain on that spell? +3(Damage Level)? Don't cast it
>at Deadly... :>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.6/59 - Release Date: 7/27/2005
