Wards guidelines are alone in the book in stating a specific Target and Duration. On the other hand, Vim guidelines (and others, I believe), provide for a Magnitude adjustment to compensate for Voice range.
Couldn't this be taken as implying that the wards guideline are intended to only work with those parameters?
Now, I'm sure there are counter-examples and suchlike which I have forgotten, but given how people have stated that they didn't like the Personal/Sun equivalence, I'm left pondering if that wasn't the intent all along.
steps back and traces his ReIg Circular Ward of Protection Against Forum Flames
, my flames have only half the intensity here as opposed to the Berklist
True, some people have stated that they didn't like the Personal/Sun equivalence. Let them take that into account in their own games. Leave RAW Vanilla in peace. I actually prefer Touch/Sun, because I see the wisdom in protecting other people. But a lot of players think of grogs as cannon fodder rather than people.
What? I have been totally well behaved over there as of late! In fact, at the Berkeley Tribunal last year, a fellow Berklister even made a personal apology for nasty things they said to me over there, realizing that I am actually a nice person in real life. And for the life of me, I have no idea what they said or if it was really all that bad, and I prolly deserved it anyway. They are super cool in my book, as I admire fire. And, I do believe, that this very person may be reading this very post at this moment
Of course wards can be made personal - there are several examples of such in the core rules.
But what's important to remember is that Wards are a ~very special case~, and have their own unique guidelines. So, altho' they use Rego, that doesn't mean that any and every Rego effect can necessarily be made into a Ward - much less any effect other than a proper Ward.
Yes. The thing that you are warded against cannot touch you, throw stuff at you, etc. And, yes, according to RAW, the ward needs to penetrate you (not a problem if it is Range Personal, but could be a problem if it is Range Touch) and it needs to penetrate the Magic Resistance of whatever it wards against.
Assuming you are the thing that the ward is effective against you cannot teleport in or out of the ward. If you are someone else, say the caster of the ward, then you can teleport in and out of the ward fine.
On the other hand, I think that it should be possible to summon something into a ward. Or maybe you can't and that's why infernalism is so dangerous --- you need to summon the demon and then (quickly) cast the ward. Not, of course, that anyone would be summoning demons.
I'm less sure about a magic creature who is trapped in a ward disappearing into the Magic Realm, that sounds a bit wrong, but may well be RAW.
The "indirectly" part is usually ignored (tho' perhaps it should not be). But that's usually only relevant against intelligent creatures. Personal Wards more often take the form of a barrier against a Form or some subset of it - metal (weapons), the human touch, fire, etc etc.
And, yes, it's like your very own suit of impervious (or so you hope!) magical armour against X.
I think the 'indirectly' part is pretty important, or it becomes a breeze.
My main point here is whether a warded Magic Creature with a 'go to the magic realm' power is able to avoid it.
Transcendence rather than teleportation, or plane-shifting, or whatever.
What I meant was most personal wards are not Wards Against Faeries of ______, or Wards Against Creatures of Magical Might, but wards against weapons or direct damage.
That will vary from Saga to Saga and mage to mage, esp in the case of a personal Ward vs Demons, which could be ~very~ popular in some instances.
"Directly" vs "Indirectly" becomes moot, as there is no circle to break (which is what that terminology specifically refers to) - but it would cover a weapon wielded by that creature, etc etc (or that's the way I'd rule it.)
As for, say, a tree pushed over onto a mage by a Magical Creature, when the mage is warded against Magical Creatures and not against trees? It would not break a Circle, but I think it would break the mage - just feels different to me.
The indirect part is why making the moveable wards grant soak or a natural resistance bonus tends to work better. A magus protected against humans cannot have the humans even try to attack him, according to the raw, even if it is using a trebouchet in his general direction. That makes no sense at all IMO (YMMV).
The tree example is something that makes indirect attacks a breaker of Suspension of Disbelief for me. According to the RAW the creature cannot push the tree at all. Yeah, sure. And magi cannot cast spells at you either if you are protected vs humans.