This might be Personal: "such as an invisibility spell cast on a magus outside the Aegis", but nothing about spells cast inside the Aegis.
Note that this would apply to Lycanthropy, as the Flaw was most likely gained outside the Aegis.
And a fun question: "unless the time was within the Aegis at the time of casting"... the Aegis casting, not the device use, no?
Nowhere does it say that every object within the Aegis gains a Magical Resistance against effects within the Aegis. What you state is more or less the conclusion of the Casting into an Aegis through IT thread earlier this month, but for spells coming through the Aegis.
Just to make it clear: ArM5 p 85, "Spells cast with Personal range do not have to overcome magic resistance." Therefore the wolf succeeds even if the Penetration total is negative.
To be clear, the dearth of examples in-spell has a very easy explanation.
When the authors wrote: 'subtract half the level of the spell from all casting totals" they likely didn't think anyone would be confused and think:
"When they say ALL casting totals, clearly they don't mean ALL casting totals. They only said that to mean something entirely different!"
Because, really, who would anticipate someone actually thinking that?
Sigh.
Read above.
Heartbeast.
Please.
Read.
I fully agree with you, and for spells cast within the Aegis it seems to be the consensus. But I'll refer you to Casting into an Aegis through IT earlier this month which kinda implies your light would fail to affect anything in the Room when cast from outside.
No. No. No. You are taking the rule for "foreign" spells, meaning spells from outside of the Aegis, and applying it to everything, even when there are totally different rules for things from within the Aegis written quite clearly for you to read.
Please note that you're the one who has directly contradicted the spell description, not the rest of us. You said items are always resisted while the spell description explicitly states circumstances under which they are not resisted.
Once you stop misapplying affects on "foreign" spells to non-"foreign" spells, you'll see many of your conclusions are incorrect. Please go back and read it a little more carefully, paying specific attention to "foreign" when it talks about the need to penetrate the Aegis. No such need to penetrate the Aegis is ever put on non-"foreign" (let's call them interior) effects. In the case of interior effects there are other rules (casting total penalty for spells, penetration penalty for powers, no penalty for items).
Chris
Yes, I read that exception. As long as this is not repeated outside the Heartbeast section, it only applies there. If you can come up with something in any RoP that applies the same exception to Might creatures, I am ok with it, though.
Yes, that's how you apply a casting total penalty to a Supernatural Ability. Heartbeast sometimes requires a roll, and this is how that roll is affected. If you were correct, this is how Heartbeast would work: You would need to beat 3+(Aegis magnitude) with enough to penetrate the Aegis. But that's not how it works, so you must be wrong.
Here's a different example: a regular human with Personal Power (equine form). No roll is ever used for a power, and it's R:Personal so it automatically succeeds. Lycanthrope might as well be this but as a Flaw.
Chris
That is true, but Formulaic spell can fail by 10 and still succeed. And using Abilities does not involve Casting Total, even for Might creatures (well, Noble's Parma here).
I don't see how this relates to that.
Here's the trouble for me. There is no roll associated with lycanthropy. It isn't a spell or a supernatural ability. Most importantly, it isn't a voluntary effect. It's a flaw.
This does lead to an interesting additional topic...
How does Aegis of the Hearth interact with Purifying Touch (lesser or greater)? What about Immunity (lesser or greater)? Those are supernatural effects.
Purifying Touches and Greater Immunities, however, seem to be part of the Essential Nature of the person.
OH! There's something else: Lycanthropy could be a change to the Essential Nature of a person, so untouchable by Hermetic Magic.
Well, even with R:Touch and the like, as long as the target has no magic resistance the effect works with a negative penetration. I would say any Supernatural Ability (not accelerated, which is more like an Art and I'd have to check) being rolled would be penalized by the Aegis's magnitude. But if there's no roll, then it's more like the power for a non-Might being I mentioned above.
Chris
Why would heartbeast be an exception?
And please, again reread the section.
"...any magus affected by spells which would NORMALLY SUPPRESS HIS MAGIC (SUCH AS AEGIS OF THE HEARTH)...."
That's not written to say, "oh look, an exception" that's written to say, "this falls under this normal rule.
Its says Aegis of the Hearth Normally suppressed magic.
The exception is the manner win which Aegis suppresses the magic, making it easier to overcome.
No Chris, you're confused. Please. Read.
"ALL casting totals"
This is a new paragraph. Each paragraph explains a different aspect and function of the spell.
So, when they write ALL CASTING TOTALS, they really do mean ALL, not just foreign ones.
There's no need to be condescending. The language is confusing. But they didn't expect people to be confused into thinking that all casting totals didn't actually mean all casting totals.
Just look above. You said "PENETRATE THE AEGIS," not "all casting totals." I said that rule applies to foreign spells. Now you're trying to correct me by saying that the casting total rule isn't restricted to foreign spells. How is that correcting me? Just look at what I quoted above. I'm only trying to analyze one thing:
I have shown this to be explicitly contradicted by the text. Can you or can you not back up this statement for non-foreign effects?
Chris
When it comes to flaw, I usually say: "they are flaw, thus part of your essential nature". And as we know, hermetic magic can't prevent that to be bad for you.
So if penetration is needed, flaws have infinite. Period 
.
Ok, with all the shooting left and right this is getting confusing.
paragraph 2 = "... cast toward the Aegis ... resisted ... penetrate ... fizzle ..."
paragraph 3 = "... cast spells within ... subtract ... all their Casting Totals ... normal effects ..."
So, "not just foreign ones" doesn't make sense here, as foreign ones do not subtract anything but must penetrate.
But yes, if you are inside, your casting total will be reduced by the Aegis which might put it more than 10 points below the Spell Level, enough for Formulaic spells to fail, even for Range:Personal spells. Once the spell succeeds, penetration has no impact on Range:Personal spells.
Is that what you mean?
I realize my use of "internal" is bad since there are two different non-foreign things to identify. One is inside at the time of casting the Aegis. The other is inside at the time of casting the spell or using the power. I'll have to come up with better words because my one word started conflating the two. Sorry. Things like Skinchanger might or might not work, depending on timing; I should have said they could work without penalty and without needing to penetrate the Aegis when used from within it.
That's what I've been saying all along. But I'm being told I'm wrong: I'm being told that the R:Personal spell will still have to penetrate the Aegis.
Chris
From the basic fact that supplements should not affect the base rules. If I do not own HoH:MC, this rule does not exists. Nowhere in the description of Aegis are Supernatural Abilities mentioned, nor are there any aura-like effect described which would reduce Ability Rolls. If what HoH:MC state was general, there would be an errata to the spell.
If we accept that penalty as general, it uses "magical act". What is a magical act, is Shapeshifting one? At most if it comes from the Magical Realm. Therefore it would not affect faerie gifts. Absurd!
I do agree that all Supernatural Abilities should be penalized by the magnitude of the Aegis, I wish there was a errata for that and I would use it as a House Rule otherwise, but for the reasons above I do not consider it RAW.