Hey guys, I just wanted to check I'm not missing something, as this doesn't appear in any Errata.

The spell Fog of Confusion [ArM 128] is listed as a MuAu spell of level 45. However, it seems to me it should be Level 65. The base level is 2. The listed magnitude increases are +1 Touch, +4 Year, +4 Size, +1 Imaginem requisite and +1 Rego requisite. That of course does equate to level 45. However, it the Target is Boundary, which adds a further +4.

You are missing the size base to Auram: one weather phenomenon that covers one area within the a standard Boundary - an area on hundred paces across. AM5Ed page 125.

As written it does seem flawed, Baseline is T:Ind and Boundary is +4 magnitudes for this. The fact that Baseline T:Ind for Auram is 100 paces across only means that the +4 magnitudes for size listed for the spell (presumably, I've not done the math) makes the final total 6 miles across.

It doesn't add up for me either, never sused the spell and never spotted the flaw. The same spell propably was the same level in the previous editions, but that's no excuse. Perhaps this merits an Errata report?

Actually, this is where part of my confusion arises. There appears to be a contradiction. I've also spotted another anomology with Size increases, which I'll post here and seperately. Here are the particular points:

Other Spells: As you identify, at page 125 we are told that for Auram spells, the Target Individual is a phenomenon the same size as a boundary (100 paces or 300 feet). That to a point makes sense, as you are still targetting an individual thing and the size of an Individual Target is determined by the Form (p. 113). However, all other Auram spells list the Target as Individual. Only Fog of Confusion changes this to Boundary. Changing the Target would therefore increase the Magnitude by +4.

Auram Targets: Also we are told the Target Boundary has a Size of 100 pace (300 feet) for "all Forms". This begs the question is there a difference between a Target Individual, Size Boundary and simply Target Boundary. If there is, what is it? If there is not, why does Fog of Confusion change the Target to Boundary (unlike the other spells as noted above) but not change the Magnitude.

Targets and Size: Here is the other anomoly I've observed. When altering the Size of Individual, for each +1 Magntitude (or 5 levels of spell) you increase the Area of the Size by x10. That is all well and good. However, under the description for Boundary we are told the Base Size is 300ft in Diameter. It again says for each +1 Magniude you increase the Area Size by x10 or alternatively increase the Diameter by just over x3. But mathmatically that cannot be correct. This only works for increasing by 1 magntiude. So if you increase the Diameter by x3 you get approx 900 ft. If you increase the area (which for 300 ft is approx 70k ft.sq) you get 700,000 ft.sq. 900 ft Diameter does equal 700 ft.sq. If you go beyond +1 Magnitude it does not work. For example if you modified the +2 Magnitude the Diameter would be 1800 ft (300 x 3 x 2) and the area 1,400k ft.sq (70k x 10 x 2). However, 1,800 ft diameter = 2.5million ft.sq not 1,400k. The difference gets exponentially bigger as you go up. Given that this alternatively calculation is not provided for under the Individual category, one must assume the Diameter x 3 calculation is erroneous. Incidentally, this would lead to far greater area increase.

FoC Size: Assuming, therefore that the correct approach is to increase the area by x10, the Spells +4 Magnitude for Size is insufficient. The spell describes the Size as being 6 miles across (as the depth is not described as less, this would mean 6 miles in diameter). That equates to 31k ft in (diameter) or 788 million ft.sq (area). That would require a magnitude increase of +1,115. The only way I could get my head around it, was if the increases were exponential. So Base = 70k ft.sq. +1 = 70k x 10 fts square. +2 = 700k x 10 ft.sq. If that were the case +3 would equal an area of 424 million. +4 would equal 16,964 million. The size would therefore be closer to +3 Magnitude.

It would seem that is where I went wrong on the Size Increase. I've just noted if you multiply the diameters by 3.1623 exponentially (i.e. to the power of the magnitude increase), this equates approximately. So it must be right as you say that the increase are exponential. I did try to find a reference in the rules for this but couldn't. I don't suppose you could point to where it says the Size increase are exponential, as opposed to for example x10, x20, x30, x40? Incidentally 6 miles diameter would work out to approximately +4.

However, I'm still lost on the Target, Boundary issue,

Bizarrely I know how to spell it, but got it wrong twice. The other was "anomology". Brian obviously misfiring today!

I'm not sure I follow. How would this be different for any oher spells which affects a single phenomenon that is 300 ft in diameter? Even if there is a distinction, why is there no magnitude increase?

The spell is Auram in nature, and therefore the standard individual is a size equivalent to an area of Boundary size, 100 paces across.

the Size +4 is equal to a maximum of 706,857,750 square feet. The area described by the spell is (assuming a square of 6 miles on each dimension) of 167,090,400 square feet. That is more than the max of Size +3 and less than the max of Size +4, so size +4 is appropriate.

The Boundary (since it's already defined in the individual for the form) is incidental to the functioning of the spell, with the exception of keeping it in one spot, and not moved by the weather.

The spell might be written more correctly as T:Ind, Size +4. The Boundary, IMO is almost incidental to the functioning of the spell, the only exception is it defines the area. Making it T:Boundary and Size +4 both seems to be excessive...

I amended my previous post as I worked it out. If the size increases are exponential, +4 would be as you say 706,857 ft.sq. 6 miles in diameter would have an area (for a circle not a square) of 788k sq.ft (close enough).

I think I follow. It seems to me the Target must be Individual. It affects a single phenomenon and (as I've now realised) the size is appropriate. I'm a little lost about the point that it should be Boundary as the effect is static. First, there is nothing in the description to suggest the effect remains in a certain area. But even assuming that were true, I'm unclear why this would mean the Target changes, or that it changes to Boundary but with no corresponding +4 Magnitude. It would mean this was the only spell where the D/R/T were altered for free. At best it seems there is an additional effect (controlling the fog after casting), but this should also require a magntitude increase of say +1 or +2.

I agree, the description is vague, but I think it is strongly implied by the Rego requisite (control a weather phenomenon) and the Boundary target in the original spell as written. This spell would be less useful if it were moving about with the weather.

That's a very good observation. The Rego requirement does imply the weather is controlled after casting. But would that no be sufficient? The Target would remain Individual (size as discussed) but the phenomenon would remain in situ because of the Rego requirement, which increases the magnitude by +1.

It seems to me that altering the Target to Boundary and not increasing the magnitude is an unnecessary fudge which leads to a blemish in the rules consistency.

Yes, the "Target Boundary" is only there to describe that the spell is retained at a location defined as Boundary.
It should probably be better described but this seems to be both a correct and proper explanation for the oddness.

P113, big insert on the right, left column of text. "Adding one magnitude to the spell multiplies the maximum size of its target by ten."

"x10, x20, x30, x40" is linear increase and isnt used anywhere i can recall.

I usually dont pester people with corrections(as a proofreader, that would mean work, and that´s not supposed to happen when i´m not working ) but since you did it more than once and it made the text look so very "off" i felt i had to get you to notice it.