I meant ring and its Base 2 +1 Touch +2 Ring ... Circle it self is +0 so I assumed that when I add +2 Circle its understandable that its means Target circle and duration Ring.
And yes Blessing Base 2 give +6 Recovery!
There's also the question of whether the spell covers Recovery rolls for injury, Recovery rolls for disease, or both. Under the core rules, a single Recovery roll applies for both. But then A&A (published after RoP:D) changed that to say that one spell can only give a bonus to injuries OR disease, not both. The question is whether that applies to Blessing as well as hermetic magic.
I'm inclined to apply the same ruling to both and say that it's a separate blessing to give a Recovery bonus to injury and a Recovery bonus to disease.
LIke I said, that's a long time to force someone to live inside of a ring. They'll have to have someone bring them food and a chamberpot, and they can't even walk around outside of the ring. That's fine for badly injured people who are stuck in bed anyway, but not so much for the walking wounded.
hmm ok I have no problem with that change as I want to have 2 more lvl 25 Cr Co spells invented what means I can invent 2 more lvl 5 recovery spell also 
.
Anyway I think I have to ask in the main forum tomorrow how the duration Sabbath would work out for Recovery spells. As not giving the recovery bonus each Sunday and need to recast the spell at monday might be to much of a break.
The main targets for circle recovery are the heavy wounded and incapacitated because ritual magic to heal them would give warping but for people with a wound penalty of -6 or greater its also better to use the circle. Also the circle could be drawn around a building instead of just a bed especial if we have many sick or wounded at once but the chance that it is broken get much bigger then.
That seems reasonable.
I would think that the chances of the ring being drawn around the building lasting an entire month would be slim indeed. Even a ring around a bed lasting 30 days is difficult.
There's also the concentration check to make a ring that big, and the automatic botch if anything happens to the ring before you finish drawing it. Not something I'd risk.
Yea but moon duration / 40 day is problematic as well for wounds that need a full season for a recovery roll.
Although Magus have a better time planing then your average human and there is for sure some leeway in how much time you have to recast the spell once it ended to still count as "in effect for the whole recovery period" but miss it by a full day and that was it.
moon duration works until there has been both a full and new moon, so if you recast after one of these it will remain in effect through the other...
I'm thinking of a spell to see creatures with Magic Might. Since Magic creatures have vis inside them, I'd assume that it would be a base of 1, so
See the Blessed Creatures InVi 10 (Base 1, +1 Concentration, +4 Vision) Does this seem correct?
However, I'd need to penetrate Magic Might to see them - the example dragon in the main rule book has a Magic Might of 50, so I'd need to hit a casting total of 60 to detect him, right?
To quote Reverend Lovejoy from the Simpsons: Short answer, "yes" with an "if"; long answer, "no," with a "but"
The spell seems perfectly reasonable to detect vis. I also think you're correct that if that vis is a part of a magical being you'd have to penetrate MR. But I don't think it will exactly "detect a creature," just the presence of vis. So if there's a dryad standing next to you, you'd see that there was some vis over where she was standing, but not the type of vis, the amount of vis, or whether or mot she's magical (she could simply be a maga carrying some vis - and you've just used a scrying spell on her!). The spell you've described senses the presence of vis, nothing more; nothing less.
I'm not sure what the intention of the spell is. For the most part, if there's a dragon over there, you can just see that it's a dragon. I'm assuming that you're looking at finding magical creatures hidden in plain sight. For example, if a dragon were transformed into a man and wandering the street, would you be able to tell that he was really a creature of might in disguise. I'd say no with that spell. That spell would let you know that the man over there had some vis on him, but not whether it was a part of him or just in his pocket.
It gets more complicated if you're talking about seeing an invisible creature of might. I've thought about it and the best I can come up with is that the spell would not let you see the creature, but would let you know that there was a quantity of vis over there where nothing seems to be. Of course, whether it's an invisible creature, a pile of vis on the ground, a magical wind, etc., you wouldn't be able to tell.
Now, if you wanted to actually detect a magical creature, I'd use the guideline of "detect magic of [Nth] magnitude or greater."
So I'd use the following spells for actually detecting a magical creature:
Detect Greater Wyrm
InVi 10
R: Sight, D: Conc, T: Ind
This spell allows you to detect a creature with a magical might of 50 or higher.
(Base 1, +1 Conc, +4 Sight)
Detect Dragon
InVi 15
R: Sight, D: Conc, T: Ind
This spell allows you to detect a creature with a magical might of 40 or higher.
(Base 2, +1 Conc, +4 Sight)
Detect Wyvern
InVi 20
R: Sight, D: Conc, T: Ind
This spell allows you to detect a creature with a magical might of 30 or higher.
(Base 3, +1 Conc, +4 Sight)
Detect Serpent
InVi 25
R: Sight, D: Conc, T: Ind
This spell allows you to detect a creature with a magical might of 15 or higher.
(Base 4, +1 Conc, +4 Sight)
Detect Wyrmling
InVi 30
R: Sight, D: Conc, T: Ind
This spell allows you to detect any creature with magical might.
(Base 5, +1 Conc, +4 Sight)
Your spell has the benefit of being much lower level than most of these, though is limited in scope. Still, if you detect that a person has vis on them, then they're likely either a magus or a magical creature. And if you detect that an animal or plant has vis, then they're probably magical.As to how powerful they are? Well, that's another question requiring a different spell.
Deleted
I've always had trouble with that interpretation. All that's happening is that the cat is spraying the target with a scent. Nothing comes from the target to the cat. If anything, it's the target who should have an arcane connection to the cat. The rules on ACs state that mystically, the Arcane Connection "is still a part of the target." It further notes that something is an Arcane Connection to something else "if the
connection was very closely associated with the target, often by being a part of it," noting further that "[o]nce the connection is removed from the target, the connection starts to fade." (All ArM core rules p. 84.)
A sprayed scent was never part of the target, has not been closely associated with the target, and has not been removed from the target. For at least those reasons I would not consider the scent or fur of a cat marking to count as an arcane connection to the target for opening an Intangible Tunnel (or any other reason).
However, the scent/fur does remain an AC to the cat. Just like if I pissed on someone or bled on them or handed them a lock of my hair, they'd have an AC to me. (Pretty dangerous for the cat, I'd think.)
I leave open the question as to whether you can use yourself as an AC for a remote part removed from you, e.g., could you find a sample of your blood that someone stole by using yourself as an AC to the blood? If that were possible, then for purposes of using magic to find the target, scry on the target, teleport to the target, or anything that merely relies on the target's location I think the cat could use itself as an AC to its scent markings.
I would think not. It's a mystical connection, not a physical one. You're not there to draw a circle, e.g., around the target. A Circle spell "affects everything within a ring drawn by the magus at the time of casting." (ArM, core rules, p. 112.) You're not there to draw the circle, so you can't make a circle spell work through an intangible tunnel.
I'm not sure what you mean. Even assuming that a scent marking were an AC (which, as I noted, I don't agree with), you'd still need an Arc, Sun, Ind ward to make them work that way. If I had a vial of your blood, I still couldn't cast a Touch, Sun, Ind ward on you. Or have I grabbed the wrong end of the stick on your question?
I think it just has to be a regularly used thoroughfare. It seems to me that a game trail might qualify. I wouldn't call a scent trail or a set of tracks a road. Nor would I call it a road if it was just the path through the forest that someone happened to go. I would say that the sine qua non of a road is that it's a path that multiple beings use to get from one place to another.
For the Touch, Sun, Ind ward I mean similar to say warding a chair at a dinner table. Rubbing oil and leaving fur in a doorway, then targeting the marking itself.
I am with you on the Arcane Connection interpretation, my rational has been it breaks hermetic theory of sympathetic connections because of flavor and only works for cats.
I had forgotten that even if a circle is drawn already it needs to be traced when casting, avoiding that stipulation is the whole point of hermetic geometry, derp.
I think the real question would be whether a spell could be developed using the arcane connection to yourself in order to cast spells remotely, the same was as your talisman counts as an arcane connection to you and you are considered to be touching what it touches. It certainly wouldn't be opening the intangible tunnel...
How about this:
The Teacher's example: This spell creates a human-sized image of the topic being discussed in a lecture. This visual aid also includes sound to help communicate information. It provides a +2 to Source Quality, when used frequently during lecturing. Adapted from Phantasm of the Human Form.
CrIg 20 (Base 2, +2 Voice, +1 Concentration, +2 Move at command, +1 Intricacy)
It extends your touch range when touching it. As though it was part of your body, seems to fit the description.
If you aren't touching your talisman, you have an arcane connection to it, you. Then use Arcane connection range Tunnel to touch it from anywhere in the world known or unknown. As long as it isn't in a regio or behind a warded barrier like aegis etc. you can use Tunnel to touch it.
You steal my staff in combat, teleport away. While you gloat I fast cast Tunnel. I'm touching you.
I'm think that is wrong, you touching the staff and not the one who is holding the staff and that make a big difference what you can do! Same with laving behind your hairs at specific locations its the hairs you touch with arcane connection and not what else is there.
So you can use a room spell to hurt all people in the same room as your talisman or hair but at the same time your talisman/ hair also take point blank damage of this spell.
I don't think it quite works that way. You have to be touching the staff for it to extend your touch. And even if it were touching the target, it's still not an AC to the target.
So, once your enemy steals your staff and you're no longer touching it, then you are no longer considered to be touching what the staff touches. Therefore, you can no longer cast Touch range spells at that target,
Furthermore, as Adauli points out, you have an Arcane Connection with the staff, not with the person holding the staff. You can open up an intangible tunnel with the staff, but that's not going to do anything to the person holding the staff. Consider, even if you were still touching the staff and the staff were touching the target you still couldn't cast Intangible Tunnel on him. Intangible Tunnel is an Arc Range spell, not a Touch Range spell, You need an AC to the target to cast it.
Of course that doesn't mean that you can do nothing. You can scry your staff with a Room Target scrying spell; you could teleport to your staff; you could cast any other Room Target spell; etc. You just can't target the person holding the staff with an Arc Range, Ind target spell.
Consider an alternative example. If I give someone a lock of my hair, I probably still have an AC to that lock of hair. But it gives me no connection to the person holding the lock of hair. I can't target them with an Arc Range spell just because they happen to be holding an AC to me.
Consider I am in a pond. Someone else too is in the pond. We are both touching the pond, not touching each other.
I cast a lightning bolt personal ... the lightning is conducted through me, to the pond, to the other person. I use that example because the ReVi effect of the Tunnel spell is ArM: pg161 'create a conduit or container for spells'. The water in my example conducts the electricity, but not the spell. Analogue to the electricity through water, or water in a canal, is a spell through a spell conduit.
A talisman, my interpretation at least, is an extension of the magical 'body', essence, nature what have you of the magus while touching. Then a conduit to that extension, while not physically touching, simply extends further.
I wouldn't consider myself having an AC to someone who's holding my talisman. I would think that I would need to over come the Parma of the magus holding my talisman. However if I successfully create the conduit, then the magus holding my talisman is like a magus holding my hand (attached to my body). I can cast spells on my hand while it is held. Spells which are personal affect my hand while it is held. Spells of touch range can affect anyone holding my hand.
Edit: I would think the connection would be two way.
A Theseus' Boat example may be arduous, but an interesting thought experiment. Don't mean to derail thread, I will likely not have one.
I agree with most of what you say, just not all. I think it's helpful to digest the analysis in small bites. Here are the facts that we know.
- Spells have a Range. This range can vary from Personal through Arcane Connection.
- A Touch Range spell can affect anything you touch.
- An Arcane Connection Range spell can affect anything you have an arcane connection to.
- When you are touching your talisman it is an extension of yourself (i.e., anything it touches you are considered to touch as well).
- A talisman is always considered to be an arcane connection to you.
So far, so good. Now, let's look at what happens when I'm holding my talisman. I can cast a variety of spells at a target. These include:
- Any Touch Range spell if I am touching the target.
- Any Touch Range spell if my talisman is touching the target (even if I am not)
- Any Arcane Connection Range spell if I have an arcane connection to the target
But what if I'm no longer holding my talisman? Say the target has stolen it. I can still cast spells on the target. These include:
- Any Touch Range spell if I am touching the target.
- Any Voice Range spell if I can see the target and he's within range of my voice
- Any Sight Range spell if I can see the target (even if he's out of voice range)
- Any Arcane Connection Range spell if I have an arcane connection to the target
However, I can no longer cast Touch Range spells if my talisman is touching the target and I am not.
In addition, even though I'm no longer touching my talisman, I can still cast spells on my talisman. These include:
- Voice Range spells if I can see my talisman and it's within range of my voice
- Sight Range spells if I can see my talisman (even if it's out of voice range)
- Arcane Connection spells, since I have an arcane connection to my talisman
So, what does this tell us about what spells I can cast against the magus who is currently holding my talisman. Let us assume that I am not touching him and I do not have a separate arcane connection to the magus. Well, as I see it, I have several options. These include:
- Voice Range spells if I can see the magus and he's within range of my voice
- Sight Range spells if I can see the magus (even if he's out of voice range)
However, I cannot cast arcane connection spells targeting him, since I don't have an arcane connection to the magus. The fact that he is holding an arcane connection to me does not give me an arcane connection to him. I also cannot cast Touch Range spells since I am not touching him. The fact that he is touching my talisman does not extend my touch, since I am not touching the talisman. Again, I can still cast any of the types of spells listed above on my talisman, But those spells do not target the magus holding it. They may capture him in their area of effect if they are Room Target, for example. But any Individual Target spells are targeting the talisman, not the magus.
What does this tell us about an Invisible Tunnel? Well, it's an Arc Range, Ind Target spell. So, we can cast it on one individual target that we have an arcane connection to. We definitely have an arcane connection to our talisman, so we can cast the spell to open up an invisible tunnel to our talisman. With that tunnel open, we can now cast any spell on my talisman that has a range of Touch or greater. So, for example, if I had a Voice Range spell that caused the target to burst into flames, I could cast it on the talisman, causing the talisman to burst into flames (likely causing some damage to the magus holding it). But I can only harm the magus holding the talisman indirectly. He is not the target of the invisible tunnel, the talisman is. A sleep spell or a direct damage spell, or a mind control spell would have no effect on the magus, since it is only the talisman that can be the target of spells through the invisible tunnel.
But what about casting an invisible tunnel on the magus? Well, that's an Arc Range spell. I can only cast an invisible tunnel on a target for whom I have an arcane connection. I do not have an arcane connection to the magus simply because he has an arcane connection to me. And lacking an arcane connection, I cannot target him with any spell (invisible tunnel included) that has an Arc Range.