I feel our saga's solution is the best, but since it conflicts with (apparently) clear canon in 5th, I'll suggest the alternative of rewriting AotH to exempt spells cast at R: Personal within its boundary. That could be a simple addition to an Errata entry if the change were made in 5th ed., or put right in at the start if the mythic 6th ed. ever manifests.
It attempts to block all magic performed by "invaders" within its area.
Part of my job for decades was designing and implementing facility/base defense in combat zones. Engaging hostiles "within the wire" is a defensive rather than offensive action.
You also seem to believe that spells/effects with Personal range should be viewed differently from other spells. An invisibility spell can be cast with Range: Personal. Combat boosters, transportation, sensory spells, and several other effects which are actively or passively dangerous to the locals are possible. Preventing "invaders" within your area from turning invisible, boosting themselves, flying, and collecting information on internal activities are all defensive in nature.
Since the intent behind all actions by outside "invaders" can not be known, preventing all of them is the only valid defense.
2 Likes
I guess that clears that up.
This entire thread has been illuminating.
I had not thought about needing to penetrate the magi's magical resistance (Parma plus Vim Form resistance). I had always thought that a magus could always enter a AotH, since they had no Might to block, but then automatically suppressed.
So the subset of Spell Mastery abilities applicable to Aegis casting would be Penetration, Rebuttal in general, and Quiet and Still if you wish to cast an Aegis unnoticed.
A magus can always enter a Aegis of the Hearth, but the question then is if the Aegis needs to penetrate the magus' Magic Resistance in order to give him a penalty to spellcasting while within it.
Quiet and Still casting would be of very limited use for Aegis of the Hearth since it is a ritual. Casting without words or gestures is only an option for Formulaic or Spontaneous spells, not for Rituals.
Of the Spell Mastery abilities in the core rules, it is really only Magic Resistance and Penetration that are useful for Aegis of the Hearth. There are several options in the rest of the books that could also be useful though. (Rebuttal, Stalwart Casting, Adaptive Casting all come to mind)
The only part of the Aegis that has been stated to require penetration by the devs is the warding effect against beings with Might. When this was done, no mention of requiring the rest of it to penetrate was made. Unless some other clarification comes from them, it requiring to penetrate to give the penalty to spellcasting is a HR.
2 Likes
It could be that the Aegis defends the Aura, cutting off access to it. We already know Auras don't need to penetrate to cause casting/penetration penalties. AotH may act in that type of way, locking away the local area from magic. That would work against Personal effects just fine without needing to penetrate. Or maybe it directly affects the caster like a PeVi effect and needs to penetrate.
2 Likes
Another option for how it works narratively and bypasses the MR of casters and their effects is that it makes the fluid vis in the area less accessible. This may be functionally equivalent to “works like or defends an aura” but it seems more supported by what has been written about how magic works in the world.
This appears to be consistent with how we play it.
I disagree. Magic directly hampering a spellcaster is resisted by his MR. This is a general rule that is always valid unless explicitly contradicted.
Note that an effect identical to the Aegis' "spellcasting bane" is a PeVi guideline (and we read that the Aegis ought to have a Perdo requisite, if not for Notatus' brilliance); and that must penetrate.
Okay, this finally convinced me that the Aegis as written does need to penetrate. I would still disagree if the Aegis didn't interfere with R: Personal spells, but no exception is made for them. So, it's not just ablating spells that an uninvited magus sends out into the world. It's actively interfering with the caster's magic, even when that magic is contained entirely within his or her Parma Magica.
1 Like
Note that it's one thing what the Aegis' text currently says (I am 100% convinced it requires penetration); it's another thing what the Aegis's text should say (I lean towards not requiring penetration, but there are pros and cons).
1 Like
But is it directly or indirectly hampering? For example, I cast a non-Hermetic ritual to create a Divine Aura. If you cast a Hermetic spell inside that Divine Aura your magic will be hampered, and creating a penalizing Aura also creates a hampering effect like an Aegis (penalty to spells or penetration). But if I use the PeVi guideline to reduce your casting totals, your magic will be hampered as well.
That's hard to adjudicate, because the divine runs by its own rules. It's very etimology is about separation!
However, assume some guideline existed that allowed one to create Auras via Hermetic Magic as if they were ... clouds. Creo Auram! Then those sustained by magic, i..e. created without a D:Mom Creo Ritual, would be magically resisted, yes.
Similarly, if you used the Purity+Intervention guideline to create a Divine Aura, I'd say it would be magically resisted ... unless created with the 4 extra magnitudes that make it "a natural and permanent part of the world" - in which case, no, it would not be resisted.
Now consider the following. I cast a Personal, Hermetic spell. A bunch of my buddies cast Wizard's Communion to make casting it easier, boosting my casting. How many of you require those Wizard's Communions to penetrate my Magic Resistance?
Or, similarly, I cast a Personal spell and a buddy boosts my penetration with MuVi. Do you say my buddy must penetrate my Magic Resistance? Or what if I do it myself? Do I need to penetrate my own Magic Resistance to boost my penetration since the MuVi isn't Personal?
None. MuVi targets the spell. Spells do not have magic resistance. Ruling that Personal spells are special because they're "inside" your Parma, as I think you're implying, gets into Parma-As-Forcefield and reopens the whole can of worms regarding swallowing conjured or Muto'd substances.
It's quite simple: Your Parma protects you. The end. (Okay, you and your talisman while you're touching, so almost the end, I guess.)
1 Like
Just like you cannot stand on a CrTe bridge without it penetrating? I'm not sure I buy that a created Aura should need to penetrate even if it isn't Momentary to be real.
Then AotH doesn't need to penetrate to penalize even your Personal effects because it's acting on the effect, right?
I'm not the one specifying Personal effects are the issue. That was other people above. I'm just trying to show things aren't specified very well here, and people are hiding a whole bunch of issues, probably unintentionally, when presenting their reasoning.
1 Like
Almost: just like someone can't bludgeon you with a CrTe-ed boulder without penetrating.
ArM5's "physics" (including magic!) are not symmetric.
If I act on an Aura hypothetically sustained by a spell, my MR does not hamper me.
If that same Aura acts on me, on the other hand, my MR hampers it.