One drawback: it's hard for a magic resistant individual to ride a flying carpet (unless the carpet has penetration, it won't be able to push the passenger up). Similar problems may crop up when trotting on a pink dotted, or magically created, horse -- though a mundane saddle will probably solve them!
A puddle of mud on your path? Pink-dot it and keep your shoes clean.
Pink dot the onion as well, to prevent onion-induced crying.
I can imagine a massive ritual that Pinks Europe. Then magi go arround with small PeVi spells to be able to interact with certain items and people. I can certtainluy see magi turning Westminster and anything inside it pink before entering to negotiate with the king.
The future of Mythic Europe:
Come to think of it: A pink-dot-device (pdd) would greatly increase lab-security. Or be used as an all-purpose safety-net. Just pdd anything that could eventually be harmful.
- Handling poison that kills on touch? pdd!
- Prevent traps from killing you while you set them? pdd!
- Do you knock over your glassware to often? pdd it to keep it standing where it is supposed to!
I can only say...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu7vySQbgXI
...too fast for my liking. Not embracing the dot around here.
None of the examples in the core book of what is stopped by magic resistance correspond to the pink dot effect. All the magical objects mentioned are the product of Cr or Mu effects. The stopping of objects driven by Re is linked to the no momentum in Mythic Europe physics rule which means that the exclusion of the magical motive force is enough to prevent forceful impact.
Still if we are going to embrace the perverse interpretation...
Magi are not the only things with MR. Bind a might 1 fairy into an immobile form with a flat top. Place an iron disk with a circle duration forceless effect on top. You now have a base that will support any load, Architecture will never be the same.
Pink dot water and no magus can can float because the water cannot exert an upward force on her but her weight can force the water to part beneath her.
Pink dotted air cannot pass a magus's lips which could be unfortunate.
If you use Im to target the species themselves rather than the quality that generates them the a creature with MR will be unable to perceive them.
The teeth (claws, fists etc) of supernatural beings tend not to have a penetration score - inform your storyguide that you are functionally invulnerable as you beat the fairy lord that was meant to be a long term antagonist to death with a horseshoe.
I don't think it would work this way. Hmm, it's very hard for me to get rid of Newtonian prejudice... but in Ars Magica there seems to be a fundamental difference between "active" force, that attempts to move you, and "reactive" force, that offers resistance to your movement. Interestingly, they even have two different names in Latin, vis (active force) vs. robur (passive force, the same name carried by type of oak and the same root as the English "robust"). Parma blocks the first, but does not eliminate the second. So a parma-protected magus is still buoyant. If submerged, however, he would have to actively swim up rather than being able to simply float to the surface.
This is not true unless the teeth are subject to some magical effect. A supernatural creature under no magical effects is unaffected by magic resistance.
Hmm, I don't think there's a specific definition of "the pink dot effect", but I've always taken it to mean "affect a target with low level magic that makes the target magical and thus subject to magic resistance". I think the original use was the idea of using MuTe on a sword to make a pink dot appear on it; with the Target being Individual, the entire sword is now magical and affected by magic resistance.
The pink dot effect is not restricted to Creo and Muto -- you can conceive similar effects with Perdo, Rego and even Intellego (I'm not talking about the actual pink dot, but about the "tainting with magic"), as well as non-hermetic magic.
-
Just for once i´ll have to start with saying that the wiki entry is dreadfully bad.
-
I never claimed anything about FTL possible or not. Although you should take note that there are a whole bunch of very serious FTL projects underway in the world, there was a pressrelease from NASA not that long ago about their own project for that. Because there are many potential ways to ignore the energy limits.
-
Causality has nothing to do with it. Mass inflation has. This is why something going fast will experience time dilation but someone observing it will see it´s movement relative to themself as normal, but if capable of observing something moving as part of such an object will see the effect.
-
Common, basic textbooks are the problem. The damn things don´t make sure to differentiate between terms properly. Personally I wondered if old Albert was an idiot, up until i actually read a direct translation of one of his works, then i realised that him and me were actually in perfect agreement, just that a lot of other people can´t read it seems.
More importantly, this is a perfect example of the problem I´m talking about:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-tha ... ossibility
In other words, any travel that is faster-than-light will be seen as traveling backwards in time in some other, equally valid, frames of reference, or need to assume the speculative hypothesis of possible Lorentz violations at a presently unobserved scale (for instance the Planck scale). Therefore any theory which permits "true" FTL also has to cope with time travel and all its associated paradoxes
One second they even use the correct wording, the next it suddenly means something completely different.
Who cares if what someone does, from some points of view might LOOK like they´re going back in time?
Not once, EVER does anyone serious about the subject claim that actual time travel happens.
It´s the basic point of naming it the theory of relativity. Apparent vs actual.
Anyone dont believe me, i recommend reading Einstein, ORIGINAL works(or exact translations) only, not the crap that is oh so common.
For anyone annoyed at posting this here, sorry about that. This has been a pet peevee of mine ever since i read up seriously on the subject 15 years ago.
But how can fluid water have enough robur without vis? When you first step onto water you plunge and the robur merely slows you down, making you bob back up requires vis - if the water cannot apply vis then it cannot push you back to the surface and we already know that your weight is enough to push the water aside or you wouldn't be this deep now, there fore you will continue to sink. You may still exert vis upon the water to swim upward but without buoyancy it is harder and you cannot rest even for a moment or down you go.
Well, as I said, if you take a dive you'll have to actively swim up. But if you just float lazily, you won't go down.
The idea that if you take a dive you get submerged, and thus your weight is enough to keep you going deeper and deeper does not ... float my boat 
If you drop a rock from high up it will make a dent in the ground, but its weight is not enough to keep it burrowing. Same for diving. You dive, you sink until at a certain point you stop -- when the robur of the water is enough to counter your vis. Without magic resistance, at that point the vis of the water would push you back to the surface. With magic resistance, you need to actively swim up.
Yes, I understand what it means and, as I say, there is no RAW support for objects "tainted with magic" are subject to MR. The original pink dot was an Im effect by the way. No one is arguing that a target individual MuTe effect would not make the sword subject to MR because that makes the very substance of the sword magical.
"Tainted with with magic" is an overly broad and ill defined category that makes the game world utterly alien to ME as written and to the experience of RW players. To narrow it down to the point where the game is playable again and keep it requires so many inconsistent excisions that what you are left with is "The pink dot trick works in combat but don't think about it." Don't think about it is anathema to playing Ars Magica, if you are not going to think about it go the cinema the special effects are better and so are the accents - Skyfall is pretty good.
It seems medieval scholastics could argue both sides of this indefinitely. Clearly the answer is to drop a magus into a deep pool of magical water and see what happens. :mrgreen:
Again, I said "tainted with magic" informally, but you can make it more formal, at least within Hermetic magic -- in fact, it must be clear, or one would be at loss when computing warping. Something is "tainted with magic" if is the Target, or is encompassed by the Target, of some currently ongoing magical effect.I think one need not spend many more words to clarify what "ongoing" means. Target should also be clear -- it's Target as in Range/Duration/Target, so the victim of a Pilum of Fire isn't the Target, the Pilum is.
It should be noted that all these "pink dot" exploits don't actually require the pink dot trick to work. Forceless MuFo rather than MuIm may be less useful as a combat defense because it needs to be specific to the form of incoming attack rather than using Im for everything but for any given exploit it's no hardship to use the right form.