General Table Talk

My preference is a little different. If we look at the Flambeau in MoH with the weapons, his weapon has a permanent enchantment with no penetration that makes it sturdy. By what's written there, this does not need to penetrate for the other effects to get through (assuming they penetrate). I would prefer things work in that fashion. So how would I word this?

I would say things that are fully magic cannot get through, while things with magic that affects the one with magic resistance have such effects suppressed.


  • A boulder shapechanged into a stone and launched would bounce off magic resistance because it's all magical at this point.
  • A magus falling onto a magically created bridge would still suffer impact from stopping, but wouldn't quite touch the bridge so things like spikes on it would not impale him.
  • A non-magical sword with flames dancing on it would pass through the magic resistance with any flames inside the resistance suppressed, so normal damage without flame.
  • A sword enchanted to have a sharp edge would not have a sharp edge on the parts inside the magic resistance, but it would still inflict non-super-sharp damage.
  • A sword enchanted to not break (doesn't affect the victim) would have no problem with magic resistance.
  • An invisible sword would become visible (I would say the magic is used against the victim, but I would be fine with an argument the other way.) where it is inside the magic resistance, but the sword would inflict damage.

This avoids the pink dot problem. Yet it keeps magical weapons useful things against strong beings, as befits such items in stories/mythology. Sure, your specially enchanted sword may not be as useful when some cool effects can't penetrate, but at least it's still a superior or excellent sword and maybe can't be damaged so easily. This also makes having a sword as a talisman more viable.

How about another opinion/option? I really like the pink dot, especially when faeries and faerie wizards use it against us (they generally have pretty awful penetration), so it is very effective on grogs and companions. But I like that when you put a magic effect on something, that something has to penetrate resistance, simple.

So we have votes for what now? 2 for RAW, 2 for Magic blocked but item not, two for a mix.


Debate some more and I will contemplate. I don't wanna get to far out there, and we don't need to theorize about things that will simply never happen.

Faeries and dots....

One thing to consider: should a magus carrying an enchanted talisman be able to walk into a foreign covenant? Of course there would be penalties, but should the magus be able to carry the talisman or have to drop it at the boundary?

I say yes, of course. Talismans are just things, unless they have Might. Familiars generally need tokens to come in, though.

Because it has a might score (99.9% of the time)

Right, but look at what we're talking about with magic resistance. The talisman generally isn't just a thing but is rather a thing with enchantments. What if Guillaume's talisman has an enchantment to make it nearly indestructible (R: Personal, 0 penetration)? (Yes, Guillaume did do that enchantment on his armor.) Creatures with low enough Might can't get in. Things shapeshifted with too little penetration won't get in, or will and will have it cancelled. Does his armor get into the Aegis with him? (And if it does, is the effect still active.) Based on that, does it get past magic resistance? For example, does that mean he could take it off and swing it at a creature with magic resistance and possible hurt the creature (not that swinging armor makes for a great attack)?

I don't think the Aegis resists effects. It acts as a ward for creatures with Might, and it lowers the casting total of spells cast within it. Isn't that it?

Pretty much. There's a really nice post-slash-thread that goes over what's Rules-as-Written, Common House Rules, Uncertain, etc., with regards to Aegis.

No, it does a lot more than that. There are a lot of cases where the Aegis "resists" a spell or an effect.


The Aegis certainly doesn't push Guilaume's enchanted armor out. And it doesn't affect Magic Resistance at all; if Guillaume hits someone inside the Aegis with his armor, it is just as if he hit them outside the Aegis with it. If there is some kind of invested effect in the armor, that effect might not work when activated or brought inside the Aegis depending on its penetration, and if it does get through the Aegis it might not penetrate the Parma when swung, but otherwise it's just like a normal suit of armor. Or enchanted sword, or whatever.

Let me rephrase to make the overall issue I'm bringing up clearer.

Permanent effects like this example don't dispelled without specialized ritual magic. The Aegis dispels foreign effects brought into it that don't have sufficient penetration. Should this item be resisted or not? If you say it doesn't register in that way, then there is no problem. But if it doesn't register as magic for resistance, then Parma Magica would't stop it, right? If you say it does register and it is affected by the Aegis, how do you reconcile this with reduced penetration not mattering and with specialized ritual magic not being needed (and likewise for the familiar bond)? Or should it be held outside instead to not violate the specialized ritual part (but still consider familiar bonds)? Or does register and is not affected by the Aegis while it is affected by Parma Magica, but why would the Aegis not affect it and Parma Magica affect it if the Aegis is supposed to affect whatever Parma Magica can and more?

There isn't really a right answer so much as there are opinions. I'm just trying to show how interwoven and thus messy all these things are.

Edit: For me the pink dot really isn't as bothersome as Parma Magica defending against essentially internal and permanent effects. For example, a sword enchanted to not break doesn't affect the opponent at all, so I'd want Parma Magica to ignore it. Similarly, I'd want the Aegis to ignore it as well as familiar and talisman bonds.

What item? Guillaume's enchanted armor? If the armor has an active supernatural effect on it, that effect might not work inside a foreign Aegis, just like casting it as a spell wouldn't work either. It doesn't permanently dispel the enchantment, though. Is anyone saying it should?

I agree that it seems silly for characters under the effects of Longevity Rituals to be unable to punch each other. I suppose something could be worked out where Creo Corpus magic sort of infuses the target with natural health, much like Creo Ignem makes nearby things hot, but it's complicated because the target still gets Warping. I generally agree with David that simpler is better, even if it has a few rough edges like this.

Simpler is better. i think we should go standard raw, beacause that system is tested and we know what the bugs are.

Yes. It's just the example I'm working with to be specific.

But if it were a spell it would work because no penetration is needed so a negative penetration wouldn't stop it.

The rules for Aegis of the Hearth suggest it if the Aegis resists the effect. (There is a problem with the specific meaning of "fizzle," though.) And if it is dispelled even temporarily, it's over. This is because a permanent effect only happens once and then remains active forever (clarification from David Chart in answer to effect frequencies in HP). The whole D: Sun, 2/day, environmental trigger is just a level-equivalent calculation, not what actually happens.

OK, going with RAW is cool with me. But for clarity, do you include Hugh of Flambeau as RAW? This answers the permanent internal thing for me.

Personally, I see the permanent indestructible thing being like a longevity ritual, which I see being like creatures with Might. By RAW a creature (meaning its body parts, such as claws) with Might is not resisted by Parma Magica, though magical effects from it are. It is strongly implied Hugh's indestructible effect is not resisted, though the other effects are. This would put those under a longevity ritual or familiar bond in the middle and not have them resisted.

Can you quote the specifics of the power the armor has invested in it?

It seems to me like that should make it easy. If it were a spell it would work, so the item works.

That sounds needlessly complicated to me, so I'm not sure why David would advocate that. It was my understanding that there are no Permanent effects in Hermetic Magic, just momentary (old-school Instant) and "continuous," which essentially trigger twice a day. If one of those effects is dispelled, it just triggers again at dawn or dusk.

It actually has two, but both of the same nature. It has Hardness of Adamantine and Hauberk of Sublime Lightness (both HoH:S, Flambeau section), both at R: Personal, constant, and 0 Penetration.

It's so that it's one continuous effect instead of being a repeated effect. I suspect some of it has to do with worries about flickering. I know some of it is related to MuVi effects attached to them. Whatever the specific reasons, that's the official standing on it and the way it's been handled in published materials.

If you designed them as a spell, the durations would be Sun?

I don't see what that gets us. Isn't it easier to just say they are D:Sun effects that don't flicker, instead of changing how item durations work?