Really? That surprises me, because I've never said so, and I do not believe this is the case.
That makes the shape very unnatural (+ magnitude). Also, it's not clear who much damage a tiny portion of such a fire would cause.
You said: Shouldn't it be Range:Touch? After all, Range is the distance to the nearest part of the Target
There is nothing what so ever preventing anyone from letting a PoF be created so that it moves out from "Touch".
BS. Not by your reasoning. And since you expect to have lightning actually strike where you point it at, this is waaaay easier and much more realistic.
Of course thats not the same as saying it IS realistic. It isnt. Which was the point.
I wanna cast lightening.
Well, I think we probably should wait until we get home.
No. Wanna cast lightening.
Really? You want to cast lightening?
Yeah. Lightening.
You know it's Sight range? So you have to choose somewhere you can see.
Yeah, I know. There.
But there's a man standing there.
Yeah, I know.
But he'll be in the way, won't he? And he does look quite important.
Yeah, I wanna zap him.
Well, you said that last time about the Bishop of Winchester and there was that awful kerfuffle with the Quaesitor and the Pope, do you remember?
No.
(No, I didn't think so) So you're sure? You want to "zap" Lord William Marshall, the Earl of Pembroke, regent to the young king Henry, and favourite to successive kings since Henry II, through Richard and John, God bless their regal souls?
Yeah.
Positive?
Yeah.
Okay.
ZAP
There. He's all burnt flesh and melted mail now. That's right, isn't it?
No... Wanted the other one.
Well, then, what's the point of the guidelines? There will be a thunderstorm somewhere. I'll just create a totally natural bolt from that storm. I'll use voice range, so it will have to strike somewhere within voice range of me, possibly traveling through doorways and cave entrances. After all, as long as part of it is in voice range and I don't have to use a size, it's fine. So I don't need any of those other guidelines, right?
I think it's pretty clear that this interpretation of the guidelines is inconsistent with them.
If you want to change things around and do a range touch version to do as you intend, you should put a size modifier on it so it's big enough to reach the target. That would make it consistent with the rules for the closest part being in range.
Chris
That I did say, and I'm fairly confident it's very different from what you attributed to me 
Let me try to clarify this one last time. Should I fail, I'll just give up. Pilum of Fire creates a fire at Voice range. These are the mechanics. The "visuals" are that the caster appears to throw this fiery javelin thingy. But it's cosmetic only. The mechanics do not reflect this. Otherwise it would be Touch range, with a Rego requisite for the throw.
Now, you could argue: what if the caster made a long, thin fire, extending from the caster's fingertip all the way to the target - maybe a target at Sight range? You certainly could. At the very minimum the guidelines say that you would be adding a magnitude, because it's an unnatural shape with effects that are not purely cosmetic. This is very clear cut.
Now, I am also saying, but this is far fuzzier, that a base Individual of Ignem (a volume equal to that of a campfire) stretched that long would be very thin, not enough to enshroud a human. This should cause a further reduction in damage, since the damage given assumes "full immersion" (see p.181) which can be achieved with a "glob" but not with a thin "ray". You could still argue: what if I made Ignem in a shape that was a thin, thin line expanding into a large bubble around the victim - with a minimal amount of volume spent on the line portion, and most of it on the bubble? At this point I would invoke the Central Rule and say that what you are doing is really equivalent to creating the Fire where the victim is, so pay the full cost and shut up
I am not sure I can follow you here. I say "X". You cite it as proof that it's not what I said? You certainly have an odd, if forceful, way of arguing.
Note that you do not create the "beginning" of a lightning bolt, and let it propagate from there. You create the whole lightning bolt, placing each part of it exactly where you want (subject to the fact that the lightning still has to maintain the shape of a lightning...). So no need to aim, just like you do not need to aim a Ball of Abysmal Fire.
Uhm, no.
First of all, you really might have to use size. Like, a lightning bolt can be hundreds of paces long, but it really can't be seven leagues long, unless you use modifiers for size.
Second, and I think this is not clearly phrased but it's consistent across the examples and is vaguely mentioned in the Creo Auram guidelines, when you create a phenomenon that extends from some point or area (disregarding cosmetic effects), Range is computed as the distance from that point or from the closest portion of that Area, rather than from the closest point in the phenomenon's path.
Finally, I think that you would have to add "unnatural" magnitudes for a lightning bolt that sneaks its way through doorways and cave entrances.
However, I do think that to call a bolt from down from the sky, at a Target within Sight range, according to the guidelines should be level 20. That's level 5 for a lightning bolt, +3 magnitudes for Range. I would contend that since it originates from the upper air it is natural, both because "out of the blue" lightning bolts exist and because you can create a lamb without the need of a sheep. If you insisted on the need of a cloud, I could then move the Target up to Group, and create a Storm, with rain, wind, and all the bolts I wanted, within reason. This would be level 30, still below the current Incantation of Lightning, despite the multiple bolts and the greater range. Yes, this would not work indoors, but good luck casting IoL indoors anyways (that's the hug disadvantage of creating a lightning bolt - it's BIG).
I do not think the level of Incantation of Lightning should be reduced. I do think the results one gets from adhering to the guidelines are too low, and the guidelines should be adjusted.
Not a size mod, a lightning is pretty much "long enough" regardless. However what IS extremely needed is a Rego requisite to make the lightning go where you want it to. It most certainly wont go where you want it to "just because". And a Finesse roll to see if you DID manage the Rego part properly.
This version of the spell, i think i can accept it, because while it essentially gives Sight Range to the lightning strike, it does so at the cost of adding a Finesse roll for aiming it right and adding a Rego requisite.
If you´re equally good at Cr and Re, it will be a nice variation on the normal spell.
Who cares, i can change it to use Touch instead...
Not by your logic it wouldnt. If you agree that its the same for lightning, then fine, if not then you´re simply trying to get the lightning spell for cheap.
You´re arguing that you can use lightning that way, lightning does NOT go straight or in the direction you point it, end of story. The only way you can make, or rather actually TRY to make lightning strike where you want it is to place something conducting or with the opposite charge close enough. And there is zero guarantee that it will still strike where you want it.
Predictable lightning, and you think that is less unnatural than shooting a thread of fire? I can create a thread of fire for real, not a very long one(well in theory i could that as well) but it can certainly be done.
I could never ever hold lightning in my hand and make it strike where i want.
Thats not a problem at all. Just make the "firing thread" thin enough and you wont even use 1% of the total amount of fire for it.
Who said anything about NOT having identical effect on the target? You´re totally forgetting your own rules lawyering. The thread is only needed to connect my Touch to where the target is, the damage effect is identical to PoF. I only need to touch the effect at all, nothing more, by YOUR logic.
Read above.
The reason is that you´re reading and interpreting everything just to have it be convenient to how you want it to work.
I very much doubt you will find anyone else who agrees with you about this.
Ah, and here you actually give yourself the answer to your previous two questions and misconceptions.
Thank you, you just justified my Touch Range PoF again. Because its logic is identical to what you said above.
A lightning can be at least leagues long.
Why? You make it go where you want without using anything to control it without adding magnitudes for unnatural. And for your information, a lightning bolt CAN go through doorways and cave entrances quite well, even closed doorways even if its rare.
So your perfect control without Rego is actually monumentally more unnatural.
Make that from stormy clouds above and i might agree. I would still add 1-2 magnitudes for making it strike where i want.
You DO realise that the reason why people talk about "out of the blue" is when something happens that is EXTREMELY surprising? Because lightning from a clear blue sky is also EXCEPTIONALLY rare.
Yes, but then you´re creating natural lightning, over which you have zero control where they strike.
You´re doing some extreme rules lawyering and im yet to see anyone actually agree with you on it.
Base 10, +2 Voice. Cognitive dissonance much?
So, how is this different from TIoL?
"A XXX shoots forth from your outstretched hand ..."
"A XXX shoots from your hand ..."
Yes, yes. I can see they are very different. One is purely cosmetic but not the other. Do as you wish in your saga.
P.S. I am invoking the Central Rule and saying that your standard lightning does +25 damage.
Yes, that's a touch-range incantation of lightning. Like a touch-range BoaF.
I'm 100% with callen on this one: Making lightning appear at your fingertips (touch range) or on a distant target (voice) is exactly as unnatural. In one case, you'll fry someone you touch, in the other, someone further away.
We disagree on this. It's one of those mileage issues. If your troupe agrees, fine, go with it, but, clearly, not everyone will.
How many, since you warrant creating a lightning bold in a cave or building to be only worthy of a +1 magnitude? I doubt very much Callen's lighting bolt, passing through a window (or even a dozen), would be worth more than this (and it certainly should be worth less).
Ya, having been struck in such a way (happily with a weak remaining portion and not the whole bolt), I would tend to agree with Fixer. In a really huge cave complex, perhaps not, but outside of that it's more unlikely than unnatural.
Chris
I always viewed the Incantation of Lightning just like a Pillum of Fire and BoAF : the fact that the lightning arced from your fingertip to the target being just a cosmetic effect, while the fact that the spell works 'wholly divorced from its normal context' gets the +4 magnitude. Incidentally, it means that the same spell level does the same damage with both Auram and Ignem, and that is important.
Nothing prevents you from rewriting the spell differently, with Range: Touch. You still have the +4 magnitude, of course, and you will have to use a Rego requisite to direct the lightning to the target (and incidentally, keep it from frying you, since you are touching it !). Or a targeting roll, to aim your lightning precisely at the target (and it is still touching you !). Remember, when you Creo something, unless you put in extra magnitudes or make a Finesse roll, you create an 'average' example of the thing with no fine control over its shape.
I don't see that you need the Rego in there. IF you wanted a ReAu lightning spell it would work fine provided you had natural lightning to base if off of. Then you would need targeting rolls and it would ignore magic resistance. But if you don't have a suitable storm handy it wouldn't do much. I would be fine with such a spell and it probably would have a relatively low level for the damage of the spell.
1 Like
Otherwise, the lightning will go and hit wherever. And you wont know where and cant control where unless you physically touch the desired target.
I doubt it. How do you expect to be able to direct lightning that appears and is gone completely randomly for a fraction of a second?
Once again, lightning doesnt go straight nor is it likely to move in the direction you "sent it" the instant you no longer directly control its direction.
Lightning goes where ever the lord wills it. Remember that we are dealing with medieval understandings. Even from a scientific understanding you could bias the conductive path. When people trigger lightning for scientific experiment it is no at all random after all. So it is entirely possible it is chaotic but not random in the real world.
And you can create the lightning in what ever shape you want anyway.
This is the only aspect of the spell that bothers me, though I don't see the reasoning on the Touch range but I don't really care too much. The increase for "unnatural" should be defined WHAT is unnatural. The fact that you cast a lighting bolt from you fingers, without a cloud, is not what I think they are referring to when they call it unnatural. I suspect, and it's the best I can do really without speaking with the person who came up with the spell, that the "unnatural" is the actual controlling and focusing of the lighting to a target. That to me seems the unnatural thing.
You call lighting down from a clear sky to zap where ever it wants. Fine, natural. You fling bolts of lighting from your finger tips without a care where they land. Fine, natural. You direct and create a bolt that goes exactly where you are wanting it to go... that seems to be where you get caught with unnatural.
But I have a problem with unnatural modifier as well. Spell guides seems to pick and choose when to add a mod for "unnatural" and when not to... I suppose most of the time I understand it, but on this occasion I cannot see how a a jet of flame and a lighting bolt, one can distinguish between one being natural and the other not.
As for the rest... have fun.
There are no CrAu guidelines for damage. I think the logic is every CrFo should do the same damage at the same magnitude, nothing more. There's nothing to gain by breaking that.
I am in complete agreement. In the end this is probably the biggest reason for the level of the spell.
From what I have seen in the midd range spells, Ignem is supposed to do +5 damage at the same spell level than other forms. I think this is a design option "creo ignem is the damage combo". Following that, I always thought that crystal dart should be +5 damage, not +10 (legacy spell).
Regarding lightnings out of the blue. No, they do not exist. If more than half the posters in a thread are saying something is wrong, it probably is wrong. Do whatever you fancy in your saga, but it is not RAW by any far stretch of imagination.
Cheers,
Xavi
I don't have a problem with that, but I agree that the general principle applies. BUt remember crystal dart is a Mu(Re)Te spell not a basic Ce-- spell. So the requisite would make it fair.
You can fairly canonically(by guideline if not example) get cut price lightning spells by requiring that they be cast during a thunder storm. The lowering of the utility of the spell should balance. Another example of unequal damage for equal level would be a concentration levitation spell that you drop the target of it from a great hight. The several turns it would take to get them to that hight would mitigate the potential for greater damage.