Magical Lighting in Labs

In regards to magical light leaving a ring, there was a discussion a while back that I can't find right now. In a nutshell, the conclusion was that you can create a magical source of light or heat that will shed natural light or heat - which will go beyond the limits of a ring and also bypass a magus' parma (otherwise, parma magica would keep a magus in the cold and in the dark when using magical heat and lighting of insufficient penetration).

In regards to a lab bonus from simple spells, it's tricky. Our troupe finds it contrived and inelegant that if you can cast a spell you get no bonus, while the same effect from a magical item gives a bonus. After a lot of debate and exploring a number of different solutions, we decided to allow any effect to help regardless of whether it comes from a magical item or not. Keep in mind that a formulaic spell requires time to develop (which is far more valuable in our sagas then vis), often "leaves" with the caster, and does not benefit from shape and material bonuses; that a fatiguing spontaneous spell (barring exceptional circumstances) typically entails one botch die and thus roughly one botch and one warping point per season of daily use; and that non-fatiguing spontaneous spells are very, very low level. This does give a little extra oomph to labwork, but it's "paid" by colourful descriptions, very much like resonance (at least the first level) is almost a free bonus to book quality but it gets "paid" by colourful descriptions of a covenant's library.

In regards to item warping, as it's handled now it's one of the very, very few things that we find totally wrong with the Ars Magica system - or more precisely, from the way that the system has evolved over the years (no matter what the authors may claim, the corebook did not give the impression that magic was like radioactive poisoning, quickly corrupting everything around the magus). In our saga, this is one of the very few things that gets house ruled. Items not already aligned with a supernatural realm (such as relics, magical items etc.) do accrue warping points, but these donotimpair the effectiveness of an item except by negotiation within the troupe; and for any negative effect accrued, a positive one of similar magnitude results. The weirdness of items resulting from warping is treated very much in the same way as twilight scars.

Using spells for lab improvement increases warping or lowers safety. That is the rule, no ambiguity. The rest is just dancing and trying to use one rule to break another rule.
And I have a problem just saying magically generated heat & light is itself not magical and can pass through the ring and parma. It seems reasonable, yes. But how much? Blinding lights? Face melting heat? Is this another way to circumvent magic resistance?

I agree that the whole warping score being derived from spells, and not from items is completely contrived. I can also follow a bit of a rationale behind the contrivance.

Items always work (the exception is within an Aegis when they weren't in the Aegis at the time of the casting or the item wasn't invented within the Aegis and then they need penetration). Anywhere, anytime, they always work. They perfectly reproduced their intended effect, this means that the magus can predict the impact the item has on his lab work and make allowances. Casting spell has a bit of variance to it (ignoring Mastery). The entire purpose of the "Spells for Laboratories" section in the Laboratories chapter of Covenants (page 122) discusses the contrivance at length and why it exists. It's interesting that game balance is used, because Ars isn't a game about game balance. But, I think the guiding principle mentioned in the last chapter should always apply.

The entire basis of avoiding something for nothing. Discussions about warping score from items aside.

Edit: fixed munged quote tag.

I can conceive of it as a sort of "shielded, grounded electrical current" for an item versus "portable, so the wires aren't fully grounded properly" of a formulaic effect.

Absolutely, that was my point.

Forgive me, I don't understand the point. If Superior Heating and Light can be installed and paid for with money, then they increase the Upkeep of the lab and provide the desired bonuses. That's not reasonable?

If we assume that Magical Lightning/Heat are added this easily, I would consider them part of the default lab-package. Thus their inclusion would have no effect.

This renders the mentioned virtue null and void and essentially a waste of page-space and ink.
Essentially, you cannot install these into you lab, because they are already part of a default lab.
I'm not sure how much clearer I can make this?

Mind you, I'm in the camp that thinks these effect are not trivial, and indeed I agree with your comment above

Indeed this has been my default assumption for years and I have yet to see an argument to truely change it.
If you create light/heat with a D: Ring, it will not leave the Ring.

I can see the argument that one creates fire within the Ring and that the fire gives off heat and light, but I'm not willing to accept it just yet.

The fire one is actually valid, since it's creating species perfectly naturally (that's what fire does). I'd agree that without at least a minor breakthrough, the creation of light plain and simple won't work. But I'd also be prepared to say that it depends on what the target is too. Duration ring, target individual simply creates an individual of fire that lasts as long as the ring does. A steel ring and a relatively weak fire means you've got ring shaped source of the fire, but it spreads as a mundane fire would, and creates light in the same way.

I'm pretty sure in the core rulebook it mentions that species aren't affected by magic resistance, being perfectly natural.

Well, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. That's clearly a HR. I have no problem with a troupe deciding to spend money (silver) to improve the heating and lighting available in their labs. I mean if they use silver, they either have to get it from somewhere, or have less available for something else. As far as magical heating and lighting, using an expenditure of time and vis to eliminate the silver cost is entirely reasonable, and something not everyone will be interested in. Also, others who have esoteric and expensive tastes for their lab might not be able to take superior heating, and if they want the bonuses, need to spend the time to acquire them magically, or pay the ever increasing price associated with increasing the lab's upkeep score.

Jonathan, I don't think you're actually responding to Tellus' post. His point (which is a repetition of mine--something that happens when the thread gets too long :stuck_out_tongue:) is that every lab will have these Virtues, because, with permanent Ring spells, there's no cost in vis, and no significant cost in time.

Yes, if you adopt the very reasonable house rule that Ring spells cause Warping, this problem doesn't exist, and I realize that you're under the impression that having Ring spells cause Warping is merely the most obvious interpretation of the spells-in-lab rules, thus not even requiring a house rule, but Tellus clearly believes (as do I) that this is not the case--and so you're talking right past his point, rather than actually disagreeing with it.

Scott

Perhaps, because I've previously mentioned that permanent ring spells providing bonuses are not RAW. I'll quote what I said previously which was similarly ignored, I suppose.

I think I understood Tellus perfectly, he is also eliminating Superior Lighting and Superior Heating, because, any magus is already doing it, and they offer no bonus and to use his words they are a waste of ink on the page. Presumably he meant the page they are on in Covenants.

I had moved on from ring spells or whatever kind of spell. Speaking generally the guiding principle, the RAW, if you will says you can't get bonuses to your lab total from spells (spontaneous or formulaic), but you can from items and rituals, both of which involve an investment of time and vis. Touching back on ring spells, their use for justifying bonuses in the lab is clearly not RAW (or consistent with the guiding principle if you don't like calling the citation from Covenants RAW). Of course, I'm leaving aside any discussion of warping here.

I didn't answer this the first time, though I was tempted, because I'd already pointed out, in detail, how that reasoning was wrong, and I didn't want to be argumentative. I tried to ignore that whole post, because it was clear we agreed on most of the substance, even if we disagreed on what the RAW are.

Nonetheless, let me say it again. Note that last sentence, "Anything that comes directly from the magus’s own magics in the same season cannot." Neither "from the magus' own magic" or "in the same season" need be true of a permanent Ring spell--that is, the test fails on two counts. Likewise, the test presented earlier in the same section, "[c]asting spells on a daily or monthly basis", also does not apply to a permanent Ring spell--and Tellus was referring, explicitly, to permanent Ring spells, making any point about other types of spells moot.

I don't know if you're just missing something, or if you need your preferred way of doing things to be RAW, rather than accepting you need a house rule, because you believe that the RAW are the inerrant word of G...er, Chart, and any apparent problems must be explained away. No matter what the case, the rules clearly are not what you say they are.

I think permanent Ring spells in the laboratory are frigging annoying, and broken, but I understand they're part of the RAW, like them or not, and that eliminating them requires a house rule, just as, while I believe that requiring wards to penetrate was not put into the rules intentionally (no matter what G...er, David said when someone noticed the problem), having wards penetrate is the RAW, and I do in fact change that with a house rule in my saga.

Yes, and I already suggested doing that, in my original post of the thread. Both obvious and old news.

You, Tellus, and I cleary do disagree on one important point of substance: whether it's worthwhile to incorporate a bonus that will, in effect, apply to every lab. You think that's OK, and Tellus and I don't. I can see both arguments, but it's largely a matter of preference, and there's not much more to be said about it--let alone a need to wrap this essentially aesthetic disagreement in a pointless argument about what the RAW are.

And to be clear what both arguments are:

Argument #1: If you leave Magical Heating and Lighting in the rules, even though every lab woud logically have them, you create unnecessary bookkeeping--and frankly, it's inelegant. An additional issue is that many new players are going to miss the point that every lab would have these Virtues. Most times, this won't be a problem, since everyone in a group will play the same way, and once one person knows, everyone will (though there might be annoyance once the group figures it out). However, in certain circumstances, like when players are doing "Extremely Complex Character Generation" for an elder magi saga, this little quirk puts the characters of ignorant players at a slight relative disadvantage.

Note also that the RAW already in effect eliminate the Superior Heating and Lighting Virtues, because only a pyromaniac would want the extra Upkeep and Virtue space, when the magical varieties are essentially free. Including completely useless Virtues in the rules, especially if they're presented as being useful, is, again, both inelegant and confusing.

Argument #2: If you wrap Magical Heating and Lighting into the lab baseline, you lose the bonuses to Health, Aesthetics, Texts, Im, and Ig that every magus would get. The loss of two points of Aesthetics I suspect is not going to trouble many people; the loss of a point of Health (again, to every magus) is more serious, but at least affects everyone equally. However, the loss of the bonuses to Texts, Im, and Ig will place characters who want those lab specializations at a slight relative disadvange.

In short, if you do accept that essentially costless Magical Heating and Lightings is in the RAW, neither way of resolving the situation is entirely satisfactory, making the choice between the two one of preference.

Did I miss something, or can we move on now?

Scott

We can differ on which statements are more important. That doesn't mean that my reasoning is wrong or your reasoning is wrong.

Note the first sentence. Does a ring spell use vis? Does it require time? The last sentence is meant to provide an example to the guiding principle. Yes, I read the first sentence of what I'm quoting to be more important than the second sentence. Don't call it RAW, call it a reasonable guiding principle. It's pretty clear to me that the intent of the author wasn't to allow bonuses from spells, or to do so very cautiously (the previous example in that section regarding CrTe spells to provide a bonus to Imaginem lab work). Ring spells of more or less permanent duration certainly are closer to spells that provide a bonus during a season than rituals or magic items.

Tellus wasn't applying the bonus to every lab, he was flat out removing the bonuses, period. I'm saying that if people want bonuses, they can darn well do the work to acquire the bonus. To me, as I read the rules, and what feels right (whether or not it is a house rule, written or otherwise) is that you need to spend time and vis to acquire bonuses. I never said anything about applying the bonus to every lab, I'm pretty much against that. I'm not sure how you understood me to suggest something I don't think I ever came close to suggesting.

I don't know what the purpose of this statement is. It adds nothing to your argument and seems provocative. It's fair to say that the rules are clearly not what you say they are, but I don't need to not so subtly suggest that I consider RAW to be the inerrant word of David Chart. There are numerous problems in RAW with many different things. I've written about them, too. Do I think the intent of the authors and David Chart was to allow indefinite duration ring spells to allow bonuses in the lab? Certainly not. So I discount the second sentence that you seem to give more credence, while you discount the first sentence that I give credence. RAW, at best is contradictory here.

Might I suggest a house rule of inflicting warping only if the magnitude of the spell is greater than the level of (realm aligned) aura it is in. That gives you covenants in a standard aura that can maybe have magical light and heat, and those in a high level aura that can get away with much more.

Um no. The warping doesn't effect the magus it effects the environment in his lab. The environment picks up flaws (and one virtue) that are then expressed. For example, the air might take bad eyesight - giving the effect of an ever present mist that imposes a vision penalty. That would imply that - at some point - some type of magical airing our might be needed. I'm not sure how you would do this, but it would probably make a great story hook.

Sure you can suggest any house rule! :smiley:

I think it's important to recognize that a Lab's warping score isn't like inflicting warping on a character (or a thing, depending on your stance on that). Some characters/players don't object to warping in their lab (I had a lab that had warping in one saga), and a low score isn't too risky. It's kind of fun giving up some of the certainty that many players seem to have with their characters.

Magical light and heat running constantly affects everything, technically, anything under the influence of a continuous effect is subject to warping. Of course, that's basically impossible to track and manage and putting a warping score on the lab is much simpler. That was my point. We are saying the same things, differently.

Here's the full quote again:

This quote establishes two categories of effects. The author probably intended this list of two to be exhaustive. Unfortunately, permanent Ring spells don't fall into either category--which is why I quoted the earlier passage about multiple castings per season.

It's pretty clear to me that the author didn't anticipate permanent Ring spells. You are absolutely right that they violate the spirit of the rules, but they don't violate the letter. Moreover, the in-game reasoning, about the dangers and fatigue involved in multiple spell castings, clearly doesn't apply to permanent Ring spells. However, since they do violate the spirit of the rules, I'm comfortable with a house rule making them cause Warping, though I need to come up with an in-game justification that actually applies to them.

He was removing the bonuses under the assumption that no work was involved; he explicitly limited his statements to permanent Ring spells. Yes, if we assume your interpretation, there is work involved, but Tellus explicitly rejected that assumption, and so, if you want to argue, you need to argue about that assumption, and limit your response to that one disagreement, rather than pretend he agrees with it.

Everyone agrees that, if work and/or vis is required to avoid Warping, the Virtues are fine as written. Acting as if Tellus is somehow talking about something other than permanent Ring spells is creating the illusion of a disagreement--that is, talking past his point.

Tellus's post was about how to deal with the assumed fact that permanent Ring spells grant lab Virtues for no expenditure of time or vis, one implication of which is that virtually every lab would get the bonus. If your response doesn't incorporate that assumption (even just for the sake of argument), you're not responding to the main point of his post.

I agree I was mistaken about what you believed--because I assumed you were responding to the point that Tellus was making.

As for being provocative...well, yeah. Or more accurately, provoked. You've repeatedly responded to both Tellus and me in a way that talked right past the points we were making, apparently because you believed we shared with you an assumption that we don't share. I could dismiss that as simply obtuse, but I keep pointing it out, and you still talk right past our points. That's frustrating.

Scott

Yes, but I wasn't intending to be provocative. And as much frustration you felt, I probably felt the same. I still didn't use deliberate language designed to provoke. Perhaps it's a matter of writing style, or perhaps I am, as you said, obtuse.

Jonathan, I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to be provocative. I'm just frustrated, and not having a great day in the first place. But having someone talk past me is a pet peeve of mine, because unnecessary argument drives me batty.

I'm still not sure what to do about my saga, and it will depend on the opinions of the other two players. I'm inclined though to rule that permanent Ring spells add to the lab's Warping score. As an in-game justification, I'll say something like, despite the effective permanence of the spell, the magic involved in a Ring spell is very fluid (indeed, any spell-casting involves "fluid vis"), and that therefore it leads to Warping, where an invested device, with "cooked vis", wouldn't.

Scott

Circle spells increase warping. Nothing new here, it is in the RAW after all, under the provision for "more than half year" magics. So if you are using magical lighting it increases warping. Being so easy to implement it is fairly likely that a lot of magi would use it, especially young ones. Older ones might have commissioned more permanent solutions. Where is the problem here? Not everybody would use it, but a fair number of magi are likely to do it, though.