Containers, Spell Types, and Circles

Can someone give me an example of a Type 1 circle spell in the book? I was not aware they existed till now so finding this hard to follow.

It’s more an issue of type 1 circles are how the circle guideline is currently written, the target(s) must be in the circle at the time of casting. There have been some changes with the proposed errata that split out type 2 as there are spells that go against that. The decision whether type 1 circle spells won’t end when the circle is broken is new. That said, there have always been instances of container type 2 spells which seem to gain legal targets when they enter the container but that is not how the guidelines, except boundary, are defined.

1 Like

There aren't many examples, but I found one:

  • Magi of Hermes p.13, Retreat As Flying Vermin (MuCo 35, An req)

Which, incidentally, is ... not terribly effective if the circle is vulnerable to erasure, in that the caster and his grogs, that the spell tranforms into bats as a way to escape e.g. from superior foes, will simply transform back and plop to the ground as soon as said foes erase the circle.


Good catch, Arthur, and you're right, Ezzelino, although it's likely non-hermetic opponents wouldn't know better.

10 posts were split to a new topic: Frequency of Warping

Oh, definitely. That's why I put effort into trying to find a more precise definition. I have come to the conclusion that we probably can't, however.

1 Like

Well, they can't leave the circle and stay transformed anyway (T: Circle, remember).

MoH had a lot of problematic stuff.

@cj.23: Currently, Type I Circles don't actually work. But if we make generalised Type I & II containers, they would come into existence, despite being - to steal a phrase and abuse it - about as unmythic as it comes. To my mind anyway.

Really? Better check (ArM5 p.112).

Ah, mea culpa I must've been thinking D: Ring. I need to sleep more.

Finally, something on which we agree wholeheartedly :slight_smile:

I may not have been clear: it's indeed a "variant" of Watching Ward that applies the ReVi guideline "create a container etc.". But it has a "standard" Hermetic Duration, rather than having a Special Duration "until triggered by predefined action".
It's that "special" duration that makes Watching Ward a Ritual, so every "bomb" would have a vis cost.
I have seen the non-Ritual variant printed somewhere, but I can't remember where (I think with D:Conc). With type I circles vulnerable to erasure, bombs have no need for the Ritual (which, let me stress, must also be able to hold an Intellego spell if you want to activate them at a distance).

So I guess Ring duration requires a type 2 container?

Not by my reading, you just don’t get the benefit of the targets being able to leave the circle/ring and staying affected if you use the ring duration but then with type 2 they can’t leave either or the spell ends.

1 Like

Yeah I guess you could use Ring on Type 1 containers, though there's not much advantage to doing so vs. Type 2. At least with Type 2 you could put the item back in the Ring and get the spell effect again?

1 Like

Agreed. I think it's an interesting puzzle to figure out a very special case in which a type 1 Ring would be the better choice.
I guess that ... if you have a very devious apprentice, want to confine him into some area for, say, a season while you are travelling, you can "hold" him in a D:Ring effect and if it's of type I ... when you come back you'll probably know if he has managed to leave the Ring and return: by the fact that he's no longer affected by it. I'm sure someone can come up with something nicer!

A few observations, moving towards a conclusion.

First, the existence of a published spell using a Type I Circle means that Type I Circles are definitely possible. Errata that create errors in published material should be avoided as far as possible.

Second, the published spell and consistency both tell in favour of not ending the spell when the circle is broken.

Third, the current rules do say that Circle target spells end when the circle is broken.

Fourth, there are good examples of weird looking practices on both sides, and strong feelings on both sides.

Finally, leaving it vague is not an option. The general clarification on container targets means that Circles either must be explicitly carved out as an exception, or the spell will persist even if the circle is broken.

My assessment is that both sides have good arguments, but that they are balanced. I think I may have to simply make a call on this, because I think the benefits of increased clarity for all the other cases are worth it.

I have not yet decided how to call it.


Meh, it's from MoH - more bugs there than in your average apiary :wink:

Probably not going to be possible though.

PS: I still think the idea of the type I circle should be destroyed.

Who d'you think you are, Cicero?

1 Like

Hey, it worked for him! :wink:
But thank you for recognizing the quote. Now, please consider the eventual fate of Carthage. It works for type I circles as well. :wink:

PS: I still think the idea of the type I circle should be destroyed.