A new thought re: requisites

Ok, so many of us are by now familiar with the need for requisites in effects such as MuCo(An) shapechanges which would account for any clothing or other items worn (i.e. Herbam and Terram). These, of course, not necessarily adding additional magnitudes to a spell but which are required nonetheless to avoid one finding him/herself standing there naked at the conclusion of the spell/effect.

With that thought in mind, has it occurred to anyone else (or just me in my particularist musings) that this principle has been overlooked in a number of other Corpus spells which affect the caster such as Seven League Stride or Leap of Homecoming?

Nowhere in the descriptions of those two spell examples has any thought been added as to what becomes of the clothing, armour, items, etc. on the target's person at the moment of the effect.

Wouldn't it make more sense and be more consistent to require requisites for such significant and instantaneous transport of an individual lest he/she arrive with only his/her birthday suit to show for it?

Maybe I'm being overly precise. Your thoughts?

Certainly that is how it is played in my current Saga and I think it is how I ran it in my 3rd edition saga. I seem to recall the evil necromance in that saga dressing in materials made of Corpus to ennable them to teleport more easily. My Animal expert certainly has made sure not to wear Herbam based clothing .

We have allowed enchanted items to be brought along without a casting requisite which has proved useful for those mages who favour armour and did not want to learn Terram .

Hmm isn't that a rather inconsistent application of the principle then? To make such a point about clothing but then to allow items (which in many cases are not even so much as "worn" as simply held (which most certainly doesnt count for shapechanging spells without the appropriate requisite form)) simply because the magus/maga "doesn't want to bother learning the form??

Sounds like a case of wanting one's cake and eating it too. :wink:

The enchanted items part is not my house rule just one in the saga I play in. There are fairly tight limits on what enchanted items you can take but My mage manages with a Sword and Armour so it can't be that restrictive.

I am uncertain if I think the casting requsites are worth while , it is already fairly difficult to Teleport without needing to be good at 4 forms (Terram, Animal, Herbam, Corpus) and possibly Aquam. On the other hand it fits the 'Physics' of magic and so I like it for versimilltude.

This is more or less the essence of the question more so than seeking justification for being restrictive. It just sort of jumped out at me all of a sudden that the business of needing requisites for shapechanging one's clothing and items was spelled out so clearly whilst the same did not hold true for teleporting.

Thanks for your thoughts at any rate.

OTOH, HoH: Societates contains a low-level teleport spell, Wizard's Leap (ReCo 15, per/mom/ind), which description includes the following:
His talisman comes with him automatically but casting requisites are required to bring along any other clothing or equipment.

So, what is true for it must be true for Leap of Homecoming and Seven League Stride.

Or, alternatively, the Supplement is mistaken and the Core Book is right. :slight_smile:

Consider the definition of Individual, ArM5 p. 112.

Thus, a ReCo spell to move a person will move it along with his cloths, and a ReTe spell will move a boulder along with its moss. No requisites required - it's part of the Individual (Corpus/Terram) target.

Generally speaking, I'm in favor of using as few requisites as makes sense. Nearly anything has a little of something in it. Heck, people are supposedly made from the four elements, so perhaps we need to add an Ignem requisite... No, it's far more appropriate IMO to go with the "main" Art involved, adding secondary Arts (requisites) only when appropriate. Thus teleporting a person brings his cloths and personal gear along with him, but pulling a person pulls at his body, not his sword. Inconsistent? Yes. But more Mythic? Yes, too, IMO. I find ArM needs to be interpreted with an eye to "story-logic", not the precise application of game mechanics.

Then how do you rationalise needing such requisites (as is clearly spelled out in the MuCo guidelines) for shapechanging a person?

Surely by your reasoning, the core rules are wrong as well since a personal ranged, individual targetted shapechanging spell should count the clothing and objects worn, but it doesnt unless you add the appropriate requisites.

Indeed :slight_smile:
I'm happy to live with the discrepancy. I agree that it makes sense that the cloths change, they are part of the Individual affected. If I were writing the shapechanging spells, I might have written them to include clothing - or I might not have. The decision would be based on imagining the situations and thinking what would be cooler, and perhaps looking at how shape-changing magic worked in real myths. Since this is a border case I'm less concerned about consistency and more about the Mythic feel.

As I see it, this means simply that you don't need to use a target:group spell to affect a person and his clothing...

If cloth and armour were not part of the individual, you could teleport someone out of his armour with a fairly low level spell leaving him naked and unarmed on the battlefield :blush:
I would regard this as misuse of magic and destroying the mythic feeling of the game.

That's a valid interpretation.

I keep imagining people being teleported without their blood (Aq), stomach contents (He & An), or even weight (Te). Just the thought of a person's weight being left behind... :stuck_out_tongue:

I think the game is better if requisites are used more sparingly. There are cases where they're appropriate, and cases where they aren't even though a strict reading of the rules may say they are. For example, I've devised a "Hermes Circle", teleporting anyone that enters the circle. It is "balanced" by inducing warping and requiring the lowering of Parma, but if this wasn't the case I could see it not teleporting equipment without a requisite, thus keeping it less desirable than the more iconic and flavorful Hermes Portal.

Well that is going to far in interpretation, frankly. The Limit of Essential Nature rather includes anything intrinsically a part of the human form. Clothing and items worn are not part of one's physical essence, thus the reason for the question.

Considering that you would need a voice range (already +2 mags there) and likely a Group target (another +2 mags) for any spell/effect that could be effective against more than the rare lone opponent (especially on any real battlefield) I'd say:

  1. The final spell/effect level would not be small even if it wasn't monstrously high (probably 6th or 7th magnitude in line with LoH or SLS).

  2. This is magic, so its supposed to be capable of many otherwise spectacular feats. Against a mundane army any magus worth his salt should be a force to be reckoned with. Besides, if you were on the receiving end of a given spell to prevent your attack, would you rather suffer some minor embarrassment by being made a fool of on the battlefield or get a full blown series of ReTe effects leaving you and your comrades dead and dying?

  3. If teleporting mundane soldiers out of their armour and weaponry is over the top by your standards then the simple fix is to give said army a Hermetic benefactor who is capable of equipping them with magical armour, then you can fight it out with your players over what penetrates and what does not.

A decent knight might have a full chain with a greathelm, preventing you from actually seeing the knight, just his armour... Besides - it would be easier to destroy said armour...

As to the first part of your response, a spell/effect would not need to see the knight in order to have its effect, especially not at Voice range.

As to the second part, true. It would be easier to PeTe the armour but where's the novelty in that? :wink:

Even at voice range, you'd still need to sense your target - unless you have an AC...

Armour is not going to stop you "sensing your target". A man in armour is still a target individual for spell/effect purposes. Unless of course you think that:

  1. a ReCo spell is incapable of differentiating between metal armour (Te) and the fleshy being (Co) contained therein.

  2. That mundane armour (without any MR) is able to thwart any spell targetting the person within. Or that a full suit of chain and great helm is any disguise capable of preventing the magus to sense that it is a person or persons standing before him/her.

Lol. Interesting argument though. :wink:

Actually, my thought was that since you're spesifically targeting the person inside, leaving his armour behind, you might need to sense the man inside...

Not really. It's the effect of the chosen Arts, not the metaphysical philosophizing of the caster as to whether that man shaped hulk of armour lumbering toward him might somehow contain a bear instead, which would make the spell successful.

The magic itself effects whatever is within its Technique+Form + range and target parameters.

One of my magi learned the spell "Leap of Homecomming" and sice then the balance of the group was crushed! No more travels for him, extreme combat power, more seasons, no need for supplies, no need for a base and so on. It was only a matter of time till all other magi learned this spell too... this would have made the game boring in my opinion and would have erased much of its fun.

Because of this I loved the rules from Societates! With his such spells are useful for some magi, might also serve as a escape-plan, but arent making magi traveling in an instant to every place in europe.

So its at least a matter of game-balancing.