ArM5, page 164: The Source Quality range for Practice should be 4 to 8, because the following description gives no situation in which it could be 3.
Or have I forgotten something important?
1 Like
There are two I know of, but they're special exceptions, and even 3-8 wouldn't cover them anyway. Those two exceptions are Nature/Forest Lore's practice Source Quality equal to the Aura and Monistic Mysticism's Source Quality of Concentration (probably would never be 3, but it could be). As those are both special exceptions and go outside of the 8 region as well, I wouldn't worry about them.
Ancient Magic, page 114, left column: no double-space between Slaying of Niobe's Children and Eternal Youth of the Sun, and incorrect indenting of the latter.
While LoM p.139 uses "Weapon Attack Modifier" and the core book p.176 and p.177 use "The modifier to Attack" while p.171 and p.227 use "Weapon Attack Modifier" for one thing and there are many instances of "Attack Total" for something else, there is no such thing as "Attack Bonus" as used for The Avenue that Splinters and the Station of Blood and Bronze (HoH:MC p.67). "Attack Bonus" there needs to be changed, probably to "Weapon Attack Modifier."
In the meantime, although it's obvious, it would be good to align the core book's p.176 and p.177 with p.171, p.227, and with LoM by changing p.176's and p.177's "The modifier to Attack" to "Weapon Attack Modifier." Likewise for initiative, defense, and damage.
If my current understanding of how T:Circle is supposed to work is correct, "Be Rid the Tell-Tale Smoke" (PeAu20, MoH 28) is completely nonfunctional for its intended purpose; it would destroy all smoke within the circle at the time of its casting, but could not continue destroying any smoke that passed through it or was generated inside it, because that smoke wasn't there when the spell was cast.
Technically, due to the definition of R: Personal, the spell Last Flight of the Phoenix doesn't do what I think it's supposed to do: It will (despite the size modifier) only do damage to the caster and whatever said caster is carrying.
Assuming it has duration ring it would continue to destroy smoke within the circle, since that is how sustained perdo spells work. However smoke crossing into the circle would end the effect.
Smoke crossing the boundary of the circle wouldn't break the ring, though. Is this covered somewhere other than the RDT section of the core book?
thepsyborg is correct. D: Ring is fine and does what the spell intends. The issue is T: Circle. Changing that to Individual should work and won't change the level.
Generally smoke won't be able to cross it anyway since it's destroying smoke inside of it before the smoke can even cross it, though there is a possibility smoke from outside of it will cross it. However, I don't see how smoke crossing the ring would break the ring, and smoke coming in from outside wouldn't qualify as moving outside.
Consider that if a non-momentary duration of pit of gaping earth were cast- it has target part, but dirt placed into the pit during its duration would vanish, even though it was not part of the original target. Clearly this is something requiring clarification, but I don't believe the flaw is in the spell design.
Actually, considering further, I think this one comes down to a clarification that was asked for earlier about the parsing of the language within Circle. It's perfect with one reading and quite useless with the other reading.
2 Likes
Speaking of Circle spells, unrelated to the current issue:
House Arrest of the Unruly Child (ReCo30 MoH22) and Ward Against the Curious Scullion (ReCo10 Cov104) appear to do the exact same thing, one off of a level 3 guideline and one off a level 15 guideline.
EDIT: Already errata'd. Sorry.
This spell is correctly build and what both should be guideline/level wise by their descriptions.
EDIT: Upon review, this spell has already been added to the errata.
Circle of Undisturbed Rest (ReIm5 MoH30) is supposedly based off of a Base 1 guideline; no Base 1 Rego Imaginem guidelines exist. Should probably be PeIm20, based off the level 5 "destroy an object's ability to affect any four senses" guideline. Could also possibly be formulated as a ReIm ward, if a ReIm guideline for warding against species existed (but according to ArM579 "Imaginem spells affect the process by which species are produced, rather than the species themselves.", so this would probably require the least-useful Hermetic Breakthrough of all time, to change how the entire Form of Imaginem functions).
1 Like
There is an issue with the errata for the spell Ward Against Mundane Intrusions (Cov, p.104). It has been changed to level 50 (which is correct) and made a ritual. As a level 50 spell it is of the 10th magnitude and does not need to be a ritual.
As per AM5, p. 114, Formulaic spells may not have a level greater than 50.
2 Likes
IIRC, there's already errata on that spell, changing it to ReCo30, with the correct base.
1 Like
Conceptually I think it’s supposed to be a ward against species. But there is none that I can find in previous guidelines. Also, if they had any light that would still be visible reflecting off the trees outside of the circle even if a ward against species existed.
I'm pretty sure I've brought it up at least once before, but the example stats for Ulf's wolf form given on page 23 of Houses of Hermes: Mystery Cults just don't add up.
There's also a few things I've found that seem ambivalently worded or otherwise unclear, but am unsure if they would constitute 'errata' in this context.
1 Like
a note regarding MoH- given how much, lets say variation, I have noted between standard guidelines and the spells in this book I have generally assumed that spells in that book may have been arrived at with experimentation and be highly individualized spells not achievable with canon guidelines, and i believe a notification to that effect should cover those variants.
2 Likes
That would be good. But I would ask that the note be placed on the variants rather than a blanket statement for the whole book because a blanket statement would say no one can trust any effect in the book. Such a blanket statement would ruin a lot of the value of the book for a lot of people, as many people value the book for the spells and items they can use or work off of.
3 Likes