Formulaic spell to counterspell

[Marko_Markoko]

@Iudicium

["crossed steel" and "clash of steel" it is, then. ]
I recognise now that the rules are sufficiently clear about this subject: we are given two choices of interpretations.
A) "I think the most compelling argument in the RAW is under the Spontaneous Spells section - the fact that nowhere does it say "Oh, btw - PeVi stops anything!"

It says that in the Perdo Vim guidelines, though not with speech as eloquent

I would add: "nor does it discuss the matter in the dimicatio section of Societates."

I say it does, right in the section where it says that Vim counters use normal Vim rules. According to the standard guidelines, Perdo Vim does stop anything.

and
B) " Winds of Mundane Silence or Unraveling the Fabric of (Form) can do the exact same thing if they are Mastered and Fast Cast. " ... meaning "exact same thing" as a spontaneous fast-cast defense tailored to the spell you want to counter.

No, and I don't know why you are stuck on that point. I suppose Unraveling the Fabric of (Form) is custom tailored, but I would say you need to cast it as a spell and not as an enchanted device (because you cant fast cast from a device). Winds of Mundane Silence doesn't need to be customized at all. We are not dealing with the spont rules here, we are talking about fast cast formulaic Vim spells. Totally different animal.

Some months ago, someone suggested on this forum that MuMe(Vi) spells could be used to transform the idea of a spell into that actual spell. Nothing in the rules forbid it expressly (formally), but the spirit of the rules does. This is the same here.

Sorry to say that I disagree. In my view, your trying to discourage this is against the spirit of the rules.
And I think that the MuMe(Vi) spell is an interesting idea. It needs a Creo requisite and requisites of the Arts of the spell it emulates, and would need to be at least twice the level of the emulated spell. And you need to either know the spell or be reading the mind of a magus who knows the spell. Under those conditions, I would allow a player to invent such a spell. Maybe requiring a Mystery just so the other players don't howl.

Since those two spells are already very powerfull and usefull without counter-spell possibilities, and that I think the editor wrote the RAW with game balance in mind, I find interpretation A) more sound than B). That is a sufficient argument for me when deciding what we should do in our saga.

And that is all well and good for your saga. But I find your arguments unconvincing and I think you are grasping at straws.

But there is further arguments showing A) is RAW...
Cuchulainshound is very eloquent when he say: "Until a spell is cast, there is no Vim target - and after it is cast is too late, ".

Then how does a MuVi spell manage to function? And don't hand me that "Muto is different" argument. There is obviously a point in time bbetween casting and effect, even if only a milisecond. If not, then no fast cast defense spell of any sort could ever work ever.

There is an underlying difference all over the rules of Ars Magica that make a difference between the effect of a spell, and a mage actually casting a spell. And any dispelling magic would be effective only in the first case (which will require that spell to have some duration longer than momentary to be of any use, see down here). The two of them needs to be understood differently.

That makes no sense. Could you restate that in another way?

:arrow: Even if you are right and Perdo Vim can be used as a General Purpose Counter Magic (and Dispell it seems!!)

And I am

then it's perfectly sound to say that you would have to penetrate Parma if you are trying to disrupt the spell as it is being cast. Since you are targeting a spell within the mage in the process of casting a (nasty) spell.
This seems not right to me when doing defensive spells? but if you are dispelling a mage casting, this is so...

That sounds like you are just throwing restrictions at me in desperation. If the spell it affecting that magus only, then yes, I do need to penetrate parma. But if he is targeting me, then there is a micro-milisecond when the spell is "in the air" between us. Like an arrow in flight.

:arrow: I need to correct you Marko about my maths: (cling this would be counteracting your effects )

Argghh!! The puns are caustic!!!!!!!!!!

Me:Well, your spell at level 20 would dispell spells of level 15 with a casting score of only 10,
Where the rules demands a spontaneous spell that need a casting score of 30 to acheive the same goal. Notice that a casting score of 15 would only redirect the spell, or protect only one person, and does not counter is entirely. This is still 5 more needed than your formulaic-all-purpose-PeVi-spell.
Yours at level 40 dispell level 25, need casting score of 30, rules demands casting score of 50 for 100% dispell and 25 for partial dispell. It's similar, but in some circumstances yours will be a lot better (no fatigue,etc).

You did the math wrong,

Not quite so, as it appear you confused my use of the words casting score with casting totals.

(snip math) Okay, fine. But you will get no sympathy from me trying to compare the power of a spontaneous spell to a Formulaic.

:arrow: Notice (p. 83) ... "a fast-cast defense with half the level of the attacking spell is enough to protect the maga herself or opne other individual." Too bad for the grogs when an Arc of Fiery Ribbons is thrown at your group. The idea of using WoMS as a general dispell always dispell 100% of the spell. This is very powerfull.

Yes, and it is very difficult to do as well. I am totally fine with this, as a player and as a storyguide.

:arrow: Notice also that the definitions of the spell WoMS read: "You raise a metaphorical "breeze" that blows the magic away from an area, cancelling the effects of any spell there." This imply that there is actually ongoing spell effect there. But the intent of countering a spell is for it to have no effect on it's target. Hence if the effect is instantaneous, it cannot be dispelled with WoMS.

You miss my point. In this case, the "there" is an imaginary point between the caster and the defending magus, a split second between casting and effect, which is why a countering can only be done with Fast Casting.

:arrow: The quote from Societates p. 21 is indirect comments about those kind of spells. The aim was to describe a form of duel in house Flambeau.

The Storyguide must apply some judgement in deciding whether a particular Form or Technique combination is effective as a defence against a particular spell (...). For example, if one magus casts Ball of Abysmal Flame (Crig 35), his opponent might defend using Creo Aquam (to quench the fire), Rego Ignem (to deflect the fireball) or even Creo Herbam (to create a wooden shield). Perdo Vim defences can work, but they need to satisfy the normal rules for dispelling magic (ArM5, page 160) This become difficult if the defender fails to identify the Form.

The intent here is clearly not to say "unprepared maga use spontaneous magic to counter, while intelligent one learn forumlaic Perdo Vim that will dispell any spell."

There is a difference between theory and practice. You know what? Thwarting the Thaumaturgical Threat is too weak for Dimicatio. My one character invented it for that, and the fist time I used it was a combat situation. I countered a ReMe15 spell, but it took every ounce of effort to succeed. I had to blow confidence on a successful Fast Cast initiative, I had to spend two levels of Fatigue (via Life Boost) just to get the minimum casting total, a third Fatigue level because of a low casting total, and the countering roll I barely made by a hair.
This spell won't work in Dimicatio. It is too weak.

The reference to p.160 was probably misleading here, and could aim at the guideline Cuchulainshound noticed, the one that supress magic. I think the intent where to say spontaneous PeVi could be used using the Unravelling guideline to defend.
How could "Ball of Abysmal Flame be a crowd-pleaser" (p.21 HoH:S) in Dimicatio when it suffice to learn a level 25 PeVi Unravelling Ignem spell and a casting score of 15 (25 for no fatigue) to counter? Wouldn't all Flambeau participating in such contest learn that spell? What do you think? Where's the fun in that?
That's why a SG needs to use it's judgement when applying rules.

I say it is lots of fun, and I do use judgement. Very wise judgement indeed. Are you suggesting otherwise? I am a storyguide of my own saga as well as a player in several others.

As for Thwarting the Thaumaturgical Threat, the old BoAF is the very reason why it simply won't work in Dimicatio. I need a counter roll of 70 or higher using that spell. The highest level I can go without needing a Ritual is 50th, giving me a roll of 60 plus a die. Which means I need a Casting of at least 50, as I subtract 10 for Fast Casting, and I would loose Fatigue unless I rolled a 60 or higher. Then I need to roll a 1 followed by a 5 or more, as I need a roll of at least 10 (an "0" is a botch)
It is almost impossible for a PeVi specialist to manage this feat, and if he does, that is also quite spectacular. And that is as high as he can go. Level 55 requires a ritual, and thus is no good for Fast Casting.

Marko:

It is a bbrutal and corse effect, much more difficult than using the "appropriate" counter.

It is not more difficult: you need to be prepared, that's all.
[/quote]
You don't think that speding a season crafting a frmula spell followed by a season spent mastering it resulting in a spell that need three consecutive successful rolls in not some how harder than casting a spontaneous spell you put no thought or effort into?

My conclusion: Thwarting the Thaumaturgical Threat should be renamed GPCaMD (General Purpose Dispell and Counter Magic). Don't tell me that spell is not an outrageously powerfull spell!

Sorry, but "It is NOT at all an outrageously powerfull spell. Not by a longshot. It is a weak spell with some minor utility against low level magic.

Even if it were in the RAW, which I still argue it is not, the line editor should be going to errata and change that "RAW-status" right away !

And you're the guy who wants to ban multi-casting. Sorry, but I am not going to measure what should and should not be RAW by your preferences.

Sorry if I seem harsh. The clash of steel can get like that sometimes. I respect your ability to debate and enjoy having crossed swords with thee

But I am still totally right