You could argue that it only specifies that for circle wards or wards against stuff with might or both. And you can argue about what constitutes indirect, or acting across. Page 162 has a ward against demons would definitely stop demons from harming someone inside. I would argue firing an arrow or using a power to harm someone still means the demon is harming someone.
This is not a mini-Aegis for several reasons. First it doesn't provide general magic resistance. It must penetrate to provide any protection AND exceed might AND be against the right target. Most notably it presumably causes warping. You would need at least five wards, and sixth if you didn't want a stray rhino breaking anything. All of which are level 30+ unless you want big ones to be able to get through. Finally, some creatures have ways to skip past wards, such as dropping from their realm or possession and that would leave you without the Aegis's penalty to casting totals.
Yes. That's why I wrote circle in parts of what I wrote. I don't think it works that way for an individual ward. For example, if warding to protect you from damage via human contact means nothing to the magus creating a huge amount of fire right in front of your face that scorches you.
Oh, I forgot one of the simpler methods: MuAn. Make the animal really small and keep it in a little pouch tucked somewhere on your person, under your shirt or similar. Just be careful not to crush the wee critter while it hides within your PM.
What about basing what is and isn't warded against by this kind of Corpus ward along the lines of the "what a Parma would cover if you have/had one" and/or "would it teleport with you as a part of T:Ind"?
Also, is there a parallel that can be drawn here to how Wielding the Invisible Sling vs. the Vilano version differ from each other?
As I see it, there are two basic ways to think about a ward. One is to think of it a kind of invisible wall that is impermeable to certain kinds of things. This is a "technology" image of a ward. The other way is to think of the ward as something that magically protects against a certain kind of thing (and its actions). More of a "magical" image of a ward.
I think that the later is more consistent with the RAW, and feels more like "magic". I admit that this interpretation seems harder to adjudicate in some circumstances. However, in-play, it hasn't really posed any problems for me. In play, it is actually pretty easy --- "if someone's warded against you (with sufficient penetration, etc), you can't affect them (unless you do something exceptionally cunning)".
As far as I can tell, Richard Love's interpretation is mostly correct (which is why I dislike RAW personnal wards and House Rule them instead).
IIRC, there are at least 2 exemples of such Personnal Wards against Humans. One is a verditius from an antagonist covenant (the one with Drums as casting tools), I can't remember from which book. He uses it before going into Battle
The other is in Magi of Hermes. One maga (a tytalus) has a twin sister, and both have an item enchanted with such a Ward. However, I may be wrong, but I believe that is doesn't work against missile weapons, which, while it contradicts the RAW on Wards, make things a lot simpler.
As per the OP, I believe the answer is yes, the reason being here (And I can't believe this hasn't garnered any reaction, given how huge this is IMO): https://forum.atlas-games.com/t/anti-magic-zones-mr-for-everyone/9279/1
If this works for ReCo, I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work for PeVi.
I was under the impression that the whole "ranged weapon" thing was answered by Aristotillean physics: it's the air that moves the thrown weapon, not the person. As such, you need to ward against the missile weapon type - although I suppose an auram ward would work, as well.
Appears to be based on the below-mentioned Repulse the Unwated Attention from MoH. Tales of Power, p. 119.
Repulse the Unwanted Attention, MoH, p. 95. Expicitly does not block thrown weapons or missiles.
And as always, I'd urge caution before using MoH as an argument for anything.
I disagree with the assesment that the second version is more 'magical'.
And this I disagree with rather strongly, on several levels.
Corpus is not the 'Art of Humans' the ways the ie Animal is the 'Art of Animals'. It is specifically the Art of the Human Body. And while my body powers my swordblows, when I hit you with my sword, I do not hit you with my body. Please remember that humans are already divided into 2 Arts - Corpus and Mentem. And I don't really see people suggesting a ReMe ward protecting against swords, though it would make at least as much sense, since my sword is driven by my Will as much as by my body. To me, this would feel much more magical.
On a game design level, I also deeply dislike the idea, because it forces every magus to focus on Corpus (and already excellent Art), and probably Rego (another very nice Art), because being Immune to Humans is quite simply too useful. Every magus with any interest in physical conflict - and most who has none - would want to be able to cover themselves in this ReCo Ward and be casually immune to 90% of effects from humanoids.
Magus wants to blast you? ReCo ward (except the power's plausibly external to him, but still manipulated by him).
Holy man wants to blast you? ReCo ward, never mind that he's channeling the Power of God, certainly externally sourced.
etc..
This is a 'one cure for all ills' or at least very close, which is exactly what the penetration rules of 5th edition are designed to counteract.
As Quite Possibly a Cat wrote explicitly and I implied, the "warded things cannot act across" part is specifically written for circular wards. You really don't run into the same game-balance issue with a circular ward against humans. You cannot just cast such a ward instantaneously. You can't leave the circular ward while enjoying its protection. You may have trouble getting out anyway if you penetrated against yourself. If you want to fight humans in melee, they can just stay away from you. If you want to fight them at range, you could be flying or have any of another bunch of defenses.
I take it to mean that you're talking about spontaneous events in response to something, not as a spontaneous spell. If one has the Arts to do it, one can cast a ward spontaneously. It's not going to be a big circle, and in the middle of combat it's conceivable that the circle can be breached prior to finishing the casting, whether it is a spontaneous spell or formulaic spell.
Thinking about magic and acting across the boundary, I have to say that magic should work across the boundary. Tellus brought up the issue of Mentem. The act of working Magic might be mental, the gestures would be corpus, but they happen outside of the circle, and thinking more about it, the Voice is Imaginem, and it would carry to the target. Earlier I had said something about communicating across the boundary being inhibited, but this view only holds if you accept that the ReCo ward stops any and all action across the boundary, even actions that have nothing to do with Corpus.
I don't necessarily hold that working magic is entirely Mentem, but it is certainly not Corpus, or it's not entirely Corpus. Perhaps gestures can't be used, because that's the act of Corpus trying to move or act across the boundary.
Casting a Pilum of Fire on the outside of a circle ReCo ward is not strictly Corpus acting across the boundary. The act happens on the outside, the item created is on the inside, and it is not the Form of what is warded against. The voice used to carry the spell to the target is Imaginem, and also not of the Form of what is warded against.
I can see that some person (who is, of course, Form of Corpus) can't make his body work correctly when faced with an action that would allow him to act across the boundary or damage the circle, or both. If the ward penetrates a magus outside of a ReCo circle ward, I can accept that he can't work a spell with gestures, and has to take the -5 penalty, because that's the Form of Corpus attempting to act against/across the circle. I have no issue with that. The idea that a Rego Corpus ward stops any and all action that is outside the Form for any person from acting in any manner across or on the boundary is very powerful.
So, what if I ask the question in the other direction. In your view of stopping Corpus acting across the boundary, what constitutes a person warded against acting across a circle that is not covered by stopping the person's body from crossing the circle? If my only Corpus way to act across a boundary is via reaching across it, doesn't the whole statement about action become redundant or essentially become negated?
I'm trying to follow what you're asking and failing.
If it's a ReCo ward, you can't reach across it. Should you be able to throw something across it? IMO, yes. Wards should be narrow and strong across the Form, but they shouldn't be completely immune to any action taken by a person, unless that action is physically crossing the boundary OR trying to break the circle.
What about the Virtue Invisible to Magic from HoH:TL, page 106? It's Major and Heroic, granted, but could a familiar acquire it somehow, through bond empowerment, RoP:M rules or something? Even if it is otherwise doable, would it cause issues with the magus/familiar bond or the use of bond powers?
It's a Rego Corpus guideline to ward something against humans. Normal penetration rules apply. For the average person in Mythic Europe, they wouldn't be able to cross the boundary. We are discussing, most recently, starting with Richard Love's comments about cases where the ward penetrates, and what action is allowed across the boundary.
Totally serf's parma here, but that requires a very particular kind of individual AND, invisible to magic requires that the user concentrate to become invisible. Both are nontrivial issues, and I'm going to sidestep the whole put into the bond thing as something pretty far out...
I'm asking where your cut-off is. It sounds like you have no cut-off. So a person could use a stick to push something on the other side of the circle. But at that point, the meaning of the other sentence in the rule has been entirely eliminated.
I don't know.
How does the ward prevent someone from grabbing a stick and keep the stick from moving it through? Clearly the stick isn't warded, and the person doesn't ever interact with the Ward until the point his hand touches the edge of the ward, but then the Ward would stop it. The only way something couldn't be pushed across the boundary is if doing so would damage it indirectly. Note, indirect action isn't forbidden, unless it affects the boundary. The Ward acts on the person outside of the boundary, but really only at the boundary. If I'm 15 feet away, why can't I throw a rock through a Rego Corpus Ward? Because the act of throwing is impossible for the person on the outside 15 feet away is my acting across the boundary? The stone is acting across the boundary, my act happened on the outside of the boundary, but has a consequence on the inside of the circle.
Clearly a ReHe ward would stop someone from throwing a stick across it. A ReTe ward would stop a stone or metal thing. ReIg would prevent fire, if those wards penetrated a magus, he wouldn't be able to fling those forms against a target warded within. And yet, a ReCo ward stops all those things and more, because a human initiates and acts outside the circle, with a cause happening outside the circle and an effect happening within.