There is nonsign the spell succeeded and affected the target.
Which not only does not break the Hermetic Limit (which btw is that demons lie perfectly, not that they cannot be detected, noble's parma), but is not really a problem as far as I can tell.
You are in fact, allowed to learn that something is a demon, you just can't use a spell to get a perfect reading.
I don't see the problem.
Now, as for the pink-dot-on-a-demon problem...
The appearance of a demon could be argued to be a lie, and they lie perfectly, so... I still fail to see the problem?
Technically, it's that Intellego does not work on them, exactly because they lie perfectly. I dislike that you cannot tell if a damsel-in-distress is a demon-in-disguise by Intellego-ing her, but you can do so by Perdo-ing her.
No no no! I must have really botched my communication attempt in this thread. It's not about pink-dotting demons. It's about answering questions about a generic target by pink-dotting it with appropriately restricted spells, that effectively provide yes-no answers to the nature of the target.
Even ones that Intellego would not be able to answer, or have a hard time at answering. Without ever using Intellego.
"Is this person a woman?" Pink-dot the person with a spell that can only pink-dot women.
"Is this person vengeful?" Pink-dot the person with a spell that can only pink-dot vengeful people.
"Is this person related to the emperor?" Pink-dot the person with a spell that can only pink-dot people related to the emperor. Etc.
It's extremely unmythical, it devalues Intellego, and it is the harbinger of additional problems (imagine a Focus on "the pink-dotted"). My mistake was to bring in PeVi on demons as an example of a similar problem. I had hoped it would make the issue clearer, but it just seemed to confuse most folks.
I agree with Ezzelino about the information aspect. Category restrictions can be exploited, and I apply my usual thought process if someone tries to abuse it. If the spell makes reasonable sense, having the category restriction, it works. if the spell is exploiting the system, it doesn't.
Another option. Any spell with a restricted target which is cast on a target which is not in the restricted category automatically botches, with botch dice equal to the magnitude of the spell.
Only the most gung-ho wizard is casting DEO on a target they aren't sure is a demon.
1 Like
3rd edition, possibly/probably more earlier editions, had all demons be immune to fire.
So that would make Pilum of Fire a spell for detecting demons?
1 Like
Can narrow spells be sometimes used to detect something? Yes, there may be edge cases.
But then again, most Magi that restrict their spells do it due to a Focus.
I don't know any Magi that would research a spell with a limit of "only people related to the Emperor". That would be a waste of time, unless he has a deep grudge against the Emperor, or something.
I have designed a Maga who might research spells limited to women, because she cares about women. But that's more likely for healing spells. And even then she might not, because she has no Focus in women, so it's not too important.
1 Like
I think there are a few cases. A Room/Structure might-destroying spell that doesn't affect your familiar for some reason may be good, for instance the primary use of Room might-destruction is to kill spirits you can't sense to target which often means demons but I can see a reason for a Magic realm-aligned might-destroyer in a ghost infested area and there you might limit it to Spirits rather than any being with Magic realm-aligned might.
No, because there are many other creatures immune to fire. But, really, can we stop talking about demons? I already mentioned they were an ill-considered example!
We had though something similar (ok, a bit more lenient, but along the same lines). The problem is that a) it does not quite work with "area" targets and b) it's a bit tricky to have it work with non-botchful magics, such as those from creatures or items plus c) it makes magi extremely wary of casting spells on targets that have even a small chance of being ineligible, seriously changing the game feel.
Auto-botching with the wrong restriction seems extreme. I'd be worried about things like this:
Mage: I'm worried about that animal. CrAn calm.
SG: Sorry. Auto-botch. You needed CrMe.
1 Like
Magic is an art, not a science. No botch as the magi expected it to be an animal. Magic is inconsistent except for it's consistent rule that any dodgy exploits fail.....
I am often flippant. To be more serious for a patch. The auto-botch if no target is more a hypothetical option than a realistic suggestion. Hopefully the SG and players are on the same page regarding the fringe cases; what is a reasonable interpretation of magic, and what is not.
Some players may despise any attempts to do any exploit of any kind. Some players love things which others might call exploits. Some groups may see casting a room Demon's Eternal Oblivion just common sense. I personally think it removes the mystique of demons.
If having to actually use a mechanic like that fairly brutal auto-botch I mentioned, it sounds like something has gone wrong with the relationship between the SG and the players.