While the effect "Convenient Warehouse" has already received errata to increase its Size, it also goes against the ArM5 write-up on Range Personal which limits effects with that Range to no larger than Individual.
The effect two later, "Charm Versus Dampness", also uses Range Personal and Target Room. Both of them are part of the same enchanted item.
Therefore ether the Core book requires clarification on page 111 or the Range of "Granary Chest" effects needs to be changed to Touch and their cost recalculated.
It's good to give page numbers: MoH p.69.
It may or may not. It depends on how "larger than" is interpreted. If "larger than" is by magnitude, then you cannot do Personal/Part. But if "larger than" is by something like volume, then the room being the item would mean Room is no larger than the Individual here. I had figured the latter, which is why we see Personal/Part and Personal/Room both working canonically.
If this is a problem, then Bag Without Bottom (MoH p.126) is also problematic.
You mean to say that the room targeted by a R:Personal, T:Room effect couldn't be larger than a base Individual? Because that's not quite what is written. What is written is that the target can't be larger than Individual, and that's a comparison that doesn't make sense (Individual is a single discrete thing, it has no inherent size or volume, differently from base Individual).
EDIT: To clarify what I'm trying to say: however we try to spin it, there is some disconnection between what is written in R:Personal and what it's meant to signify. Either way, R: Personal itself can probably benefit from some rewritting and clarification.
It doesn't say "Base Individual," does it? It says "Individual," which can include size modifiers, but with Personal it's pretty clear how big this Individual is. That is part of why size is rolled into the Targets, so you can do things like use a Personal spell even if you're Size +2. Of course, I don't think any of the items actually do target a room that is bigger than a Base Individual anyway. One is a box and one is a bag.
Yes, clarity on that Personal statement in the core book would never have bene a bad thing.
The errata moving range personal to touch would be in line with existing errata for the same book using other non-individual target...
Ok, then I for sure don’t get what you meant here:
Which Individual? The enchanted item itself?
Yes, the item itself, which is exactly what the Individual would be with a Personal spell on it.
Then an errata is indeed needed, but to change that errata.
The justification to change Familial Secrets and Family Gathering is "Personal Range must have Individual Target". First, this is not really the direct interpretation of Personal (that says the target can't be larger than Individual). Second, this would require one to errata all Personal Part and all Personal sense spells.
Also, I'd say these are not the same issues. Personal reads as follows:
Personal: The spell only affects the casting magus or things that he is wearing or carrying. The target is thus never larger than Individual.
The question hinges on what the second phrase (The target is thus never larger than Individual) is supposed to mean. And in my understanding, on essence it's supposed to mean that a R:Personal effect must be cast upon "a single discret thing" (the definition for Individual) or less. The target of Familial Secrets and Family Gathering is Bloodline. More than "a single discret thing".
On the other hand, in Convenient Warehouse the effect is cast upon the room (in the specific case, a chest), which is itself not larger than an Individual (self-evident, I hope). Nothing on this violates R:Personal as written (except insofar R:Personal assumes the caster is a person and not an object, but if we go that way, no enchanted item would be left unturned).
Well, the written justification is that. The justification I provided as to why an erratum was needed is that Bloodline does not conform to being no larger than Individual. I had not said it needed to be Individual. So those errata may well deserve some editing.
@RafaelB +1 for your logic.
I see the part you mentioned -
the same as you explained it.
In this case the individual means you can't just use yourself as part of a group and cast a R:Personal spell with a T: Group - so essentially get a "+1 Touch & +2 Group" effect for simple +2, and imbue all your fellow mages or all the grogs with some serious buffs.
But if you "are" a room/chest/sack you are essentially a container. It is your Essential Nature to have things inside you. Using R: Personal IS the correct way to cast magic on yourself (if you are an enchanted item). Using T: Room for +2 magnitudes is more about consistency of the system and game balance in this case to have the final effect with which you as a container can affect yourself and/or all the things inside you.
An other example to make it clearer:
If you are a container (a wooden box) and you are in a room next to 8 other totally identical wooden boxes you can't use R:Personal and T:Group to affect all 9 of you.
The effect on you have to use R:Touch and T:Room to affect the other wooden boxes inside the same room as you are in.
My current thinking is that we need some errata and clarification here. The intent was the Personal only affects the caster, and thus ignores Magic Resistance. However, at the time no-one considered the case in which the caster is an item.
I think the two effects leading off this thread need to be errata'd to Touch. The things inside the caster are not the caster. The faerie glamour effect on page 126 is fine, because it affects the bag, not the things placed in the bag. It does affect the caster.
The description of Personal needs clarifying, but that probably needs a new thread.