new target (clothing)

the target is clothing-not sure waht the increase would be though,please help there!

It'd be the same as target Individual in 5th edition. For someone's complete outfit, try Group (a set of items defined by the person wearing them). Lots of fun applications here, though. Muto to alter the appearance. Rego has many interesting uses, too, and Perdo goes without saying. :smiley:

Correction: Part
At least if you want to affect the clothes and not the person.

interesting... No I don't think Part is right, as the clothes are not an actual part of the person, though they are included in various Ind targets (see defn of Ind). They are normally affected in Ind if the body is affected too; if you target the body (Ind) with a spell that does not alter bodies (eg PeHe destroy cloth) then the clothes of the Ind are affected with an Ind target. Ditto CrIg etc.

The question then is how to affect clothes but not the body, when the spell would affect the body if cast as an Ind target...
I would say that is Group.
The clothes are distinct, recognisable, and multiple -- all the criteria for a well-formed Group.

I think so long as someone is wearing them, they should be considered Part. After all, if someone resists a spell with MR, their clothing survives, too, just like a hand or their hair.
It isn't a PIECE of them, yes, although it can be attached in the form of Jewelry. It enjoys their protection.

Otherwise, I'd say it'd be a Group, yes.

When you cast a spell at the clothing itself, it doesn't matter if they're worn or not - thus ind (or group if you target several seperate pieces, like a pair of boots).

You can (with casting requisites) affect clothing as you are affecting the body (i.e. Seven league stride).

I agree with Ulf. Targets can't be situational. They apply or they don't apply.

Well, if you cut someone's hand off, wouldn't that change it to an individual target?

The same target that was 'part' earlier is now 'individual' because the context has changed.
(Although I'm fairly convinced of your side of the clothing argument now. ;D Just I disagree with that last statement.)

thanks for the input about this target idea!