Blind Magi any concept in mind

[callen]

@One Shot

I would rather append an additional phrase, which then could result in an errataed spell like this:

PRYING EYES
R: Touch, D: Conc, T: Room
You can see inside a room, as long as you can touch one of its walls. You can only see what a normal human in the room would: so your vision is hindered by smoke, shadows and bad lighting. To magically affect, e. g. enhance, your sight into the room, one needs to target it separately from your normal vision. You may change your viewpoint within the room throughout the duration of the spell.
(Base 1, +1 Touch, +1 Conc, +2 Room)

Yes, a statement like this to separate the two should work.

@One Shot

EDIT: Writing a clean proposal for an erratum takes time.

Don't I know it. I've submitted over 50% of the items in the errata. Doing the math in MoH accounted for much of that, though. I never did get through all the magi there...

[callen]

@ExarKun

f your sense were moved, then they should be T: Vision (or Hearing for The Ear for Distant Voices)

How could those be used since it is only used for Intellego guidelines, where "moving" something is a Rego form spell?

Maybe not intentionally, but you're just playing with semantics there. I specifically defined two terms above in the context of the conversation to distinguish between two interpretations of "use." The spells being discussed are InIm spells, so T: Vision can be used.

@ExarKun

IMO, prying eyes let you just see normal species. In the dark, species are dark so you don't see them. You see but you don't see what you want to see. You can't see with this spell something the spell cannot see. For example, you will not be able to see an invisible character. That should require another guideline (which serf's parma is not included, but is used in the first of the InIm spells, which use a general level type).

But according to Prying Eyes itself, if you can see in the dark already, then you can see in the dark using Prying Eyes. Same thing if you can see invisible things normally, such as with Second Sight. This is part of why Prying Eyes is so screwy. It's behaving as a T: Vision spell while not being that type of spell at all.

@ExarKun

A blind magus would see using the prying eyes, because I would decide he is blind because he can't use his eyes, but using magic bypass his eyes - otherwise, what's the point of having it for a character?

Yet, as has been pointed out, Prying Eyes itself ends up making this nonsensical, while it is totally consistent with Fingers for Eyes.

What One Shot and I were just writing about above is how to correct Prying Eyes so it is internally consistent, so it is consistent with the other similar spells, and so the guidelines remain consistent with other distance-based guidelines. What we're trying to do would actually make Prying Eyes work as you think it should.

[The_Fixer]

@callen

After reading through so much of this recently, I think I can resolve this in two ways, both in agreement. First, both spells, and The Ear for Distant Voices, are written the same way in terms of R/D/T. If your sense were moved, then they should be T: Vision (or Hearing for The Ear for Distant Voices) and R: Personal. So they're all using R/D/T with the clairvoyance interpretation, not the moved interpretation. Second, guidelines that move thing have a second set of ranges built into the guideline for how far the thing is moved. Look at ReCo for example. These guidelines are not written that way at all, so they don't seem to be about a moved sense and are instead designed as clairvoyance (or other clairsentience).

Don't know if this adds much to the conversation, but see in Through the Aegis p80, Palm of Seeing and Palm of Hearing , also by Richard Love

To me, using InIm with a classic target means you perceive your target, but nothing outside of it (So you couldn't see what's outside a room's windows). Using it with a sense target means you're only limited by your sense's range. There's a nice relationship between power and cost there.

For what it's worth, I'm on the "your sense is moved" camp, and these 2 spells make perfect sense to me given that interpretation, the only anomaly being Finger for Eyes. Otherwise, you have to rewrite the guidelines, plus Prying Eyes, and maybe clarify the 2 spells above.
For a blind maga, I'd probably use InIm 3 "Enhance one of your senses"

[Argentarium]

Actually, I see little sense in a blind magus that uses magic to see.
Instead I find really fascinating and challenging the concept of a wizard that is blind, full stop. He has to rely on other people for the simplest task, but he is otherwise powerful and knowledgeble. He may have a horse of virtue and some dedicated grogs that take care of him, and he specializes in a kind of magic that doesn't need vision. The unfixable blindness may be enforced by a malediction, a personality flaw or the consequence of an ordeal of a mystery cult.