Posting over hear, since it's not directly related to Eve...
Fire, as in BoAF and PoF I think it makes sense that armor doesn't add to soak, because it superheats the armor, which is part of the damage. In short nothing adds to soak, I think this also applies for the Incantation of Lightning.
Aquam probably should have some sort of soak bonus if in armor, against Torrent of Mighty Water, but that soak might come at the expense of being knocked down more easily.
Terram could conceivably have a knock back effect for stone of sufficient size. For glass, there might be some secondary damage where first round is +10, and second round is +0 representing the person moving about with bits of glass sticking in his body. Or something. Just thinking outloud...
A quickness roll to get to cover. That's what I was asking for weighing in on. Is a quickness roll of 9 a reasonable requirement for being able to get to cover in almost time?
Soaking the damage. Yeah, armour should apply to soaking the glass. I could see an argument that metal armour might not help as much against fire. Maybe even argue it doesn't help at all. But then I would allow soak for say... heavy clothes that have been soaked. Or for that matter leather armor.
Glass leaves the battlefield a mess. If you don't have good foot wear it will do repeated damage. The exact rules can be found in Hermetic Projects if you want to puzzle it out from the various spells. That said, Eve's won't last long enough. Its momentary glass.
how hard is it to raise one's shield to prevent the glass from hitting?
Things that have been pre-wetted, sure, I can see it offering a soak bonus, but it's not generally going to happen.
I keep forgetting your spell is not the same as the one in HP. The glass is technically gone as soon as it does the damage. D:Momentary. No subsequent bonuses, no repeated damage as I outlined. If it was real glass that existed beyond the moment, sure.
The specifics are a bit different, first you're opening a crack in the earth 5 feet wide, 60 feet long and 10 feet deep in about 6 seconds with Earth Split Asunder. Your spell creates glass in the air and drops it onto people. Is it harder to move out of the way of something 5 feet wide and 60 feet long or raise one's shield to avoid glass?
I'd just automatically allow the shield bonus, period, and add it as a bonus to soak, leaving damage at +10. A heater adds +3 to the soak total. Most armors will add to the soak total. And let's not forget, soak rolls can be botched, in which case the total is 0 and the spell delivers +10 damage.
This shouldn't affect the discussion, but for fire damage I've always ruled that (metal) armor is effective, but after just a bit of time it will heat to the point where it is actually another source of damage. So for one blast of fire it might be useful, the next it isn't and under sustained heat will cause damage after the spell ends.
Well, before, I never gave it much thought, but Yair's recent discussion about someone lobbing massive boulders and the inherent bonuses to aiming made me question a whole bunch of stuff about spell damage. It made me think of everything in a new light. For example, I couldn't find it explicitly spelled out how one determines one hits with a Finesse based attack. Is it a straight EF? A contested roll like combat? I actually am rather confused by finesse based attacks now. So I think getting everyone on the same page as far as determining how one soaks damage from spells...
The rules you are looking for are on p.86 of AM5, hidden among the rules for Magic Resistance of all things. The Aiming Roll is Perception + Finesse + Die, and this is treated as an attack total, which means the defender gets to roll his defense as normal. Which means if the spell does damage, you add the attack advantage to the basic damage and subtract the defender's soak; if it has some other effect, then the effects occurs in the right place.
Of course, I couldn't find it. Thought I had read it, but couldn't find it again. The +X damage convention is confusing when for one set of spells it means Die+X damage, whereas for the finesse spells it means add X to the AA.
+X makes sense for anything that isn't finesse based.
If it is finesse based, then the damage must add to the AA, and compared against soak. Nothing gets rolled twice, as AA is a derived total of Attack Total -Defense Total, which has rolls in it.
So Ophelia's Invisible Gastraphetes of Vilano does +15 damage. Her Attack total before die is Per 2+ Finesse 8, or 10. On average she has an attack total of 16. Hrm. Not great, need to do some precise mastery practice on that bad boy ASAP. Although, the defense roll, might only be reliant upon a dodge roll...
JL you any closer to figuring out what you want the 75 build points to be spent on? If all else fails a few queens of vis or a bunch of books in greek can't be remiss. Especially since we have a translator.
How about teleport requisites? Do they apply in this saga? Having played with both ways in different sagas, I'm indifferent to lean towards requisites. If we are requiring requisites, I need to adjust some Art scores a bit. I'm still tweaking.
I would argue by RAW you can include cosmetic stuff. Some light clothing so you don't appear naked. But stuff like casting tools enchanted items, or weapons and armor not so much.
What's the support for your argument under RAW?
Especially when Wizard's Leap from HoH:S is pretty explicit about needing requisites for clothing or equipment (other than the Talisman, which I don't agree with, but...).
Its cosmetic! As long as its not enough to give you protection or help do damage. In terms of stuff that will give an actual bonus or mechanical advantage, but otherwise its one of those things that could fall under "cosmetic effect".
I understand your argument, that it's cosmetic. I'm asking for your support under RAW, and I also disagree with your assertion that it is cosmetic. It's not cosmetic, if one can jump to a city, not naked and walk around without the social stigma of being naked. Not everything is about combat. So, teleports needs to include items one is wearing and carrying are transported; requisites are ignored. Or it is requisites are enforced, as per RAW. If requisites are enforced, I need to increase Ophelia's Herbam score to ensure she can actually get ReCo(An, He, Te) total of 15 with some degree of reliability for her Extraction spell. That's going to require some rejiggering of things, which I don't mind. The last version of Ophelia that I posted has a HE score of 0, which will put the effective CS of her Extraction and Leap spells of 11 and 5, respectively. When taking fast casting into account it becomes 1 and -5, which makes it useless.
But, I'm asking because in Bibracte I didn't enforce requisites, and allowed pretty much anything that could be carried to be included in the transport. But it hasn't been discussed here, and I have based a large part of the character on the ability to do something she might not actually be able to do[1]. I don't know what the troupe's sensibilities are generally, and jebrick's, specifically.
[1]It's much easier to adjust this now, before spells have been slung and abilities used, than afterwards.
I don't think you can just add requisites on the fly. Requiring requisites means the total goes jumps three magnitudes. A teleport can get them out but leave their equipment behind. Which means the requisites add to what the spell does. Or we have another potential problem if teleportation can't shake off other stuff if the requisite isn't included. (Namely if the grogs get wet they're stuck)