Spell for moderation - Stealing the lock

Stealing the lock
Re (Pe) Co 25
Base 10 (Transport the target instantly up to 5 paces)
R: Voice (+2)
T: Part (+1)
D: Mom (0)

The spell will cut and teleport a lock of hair from the target into the casters hand.

Imperius of Bonisagus created this spell for use in his many Wizard Wars. He mastered it, then cast it at high penetration onto his enemies to gain Arcane Connections, so that his more powerful spells could penetrate.

Base 10 seems a little high just to transport a few hairs - maybe I missed something?

Here are my first thoughts on this...

Excellent spell idea, but..

I personally would design it as a PeCo spell with a (Re) requirement rather than the other way around.

Since you are first removing the hair and only thereafter needing to draw it to you, the control aspect is to my mind, secondary.

Removing a lock of hair would be, as written, "doing superficial damage to Target" (as per example given) pg. 133. This is base level 3.

Now, one could do it with Voice range for a casting level of 10, however, consider that Voice range to Target must incorporate a volume necessary to reach the target, suggesting that the Target will undoubtedly hear you casting the spell. Considering also that what you are attempting to do is to obtain an AC to them for far worse spells, this doesn't strike me as a particularly covert means of acquiring the same. Range Sight would allow for far more stealth (from a rooftop say).

That would make the PeCo aspect level 15, as the guidelines are written, however, there is an argument (dependent on the flexibility of any given SG mind you) that unlike the example given in the PeCo guidelines, you aren't removing ALL the Target's hair, but merely a small lock. So I might be inclined to call the base effect level 2 and allow the PeCo spell to clock in at a casting level of 10.

The secondary aspect of the spell presents its own issues for any given SG to decide upon. Does one take it as an integral and indispensable effect of the spell or an added effect? If integral then it imposes no further magnitudes to the overall spell and you get a level 10 spell with requisite as per your original design. If not (and I DO tend to side with this view) then it IS an added kudo to the spell and you should make it level 15, since you ARE getting a valuable asset to your nastier attack spells if you succeed.

Considering that this spell could be just as easily invested into an item with considerably cheap penetration bonuses added onto it, this is the lowest level I should think most SGs would be inclined to allow.


I don't think so. Looks perfect to me. Very nice spell.

I disagree with Boxer in that I do think of the Rego effect as primary - both in terms of how hard it is and in that it's the major effect sought. And I agree that the Perdo effect is necessary, and hence should not increase the spell level. In other words, I agree with the spell as presented.

If the "teleporting" part is harder than the "snipping" the hair, it should use the higher level of the Rego effect.

I've seen this spell in my old (4th ed) saga. Back than ACs comletely negated the Parma, so it was very powerfull then. But still good now!

Anyhow, doing it as a Perdo spell, I don't think the level should be lower because you're snipping off only a lock, not the entire head of hair. Since Part is harder than Individual, and there is no reduction for affecting smaller targets than default!

To not imbalance the system, devaluate Parma and have everybody violent or paranoid use this spell, all the time, and try all sorts of things to avoid it, this spell must not be too easy!

Yay for the excellent spell, i have an almost identical spell in the tomes of a magus i play

Tenebrous’ Bloody Hand
ReCo30 (Pe)
Tenebrous developed this spell for use against enemy mages. It draws a small amount of their blood from their veins and teleports it onto his hand. This causes no damage as such but can be felt. Tenebrous’ hand becomes coated in a shiny layer of gore. Although highly disturbing, its true purpose is to acquire an arcane connection from the enemy.
(Base 15, +2 Voice, +1 Part)

The only difference is the range it can teleport the arcane connection. At present my character wears a charged device with this effect in the shape of a ring that has an obscene penetration bonus. Its very effective. Especially if you don't manage to slay your foe and they escape, because then you have the connection to follow :smiley:

Upon review I see that my elaborate reasoning was based on a total misread of the OP's spell level. :blush:

I really should learn not to post at 2 am when I should be in bed. lol

At any rate, yes I agree (YR7, Ultraviolet) that 1. The spell should be ReCo since getting the hair in hand in the whole purpose, and 2. That suggesting a lower base level contradicts the RAW. My bad.

I still do think that the spell would either be better as an invested effect as per Gribble's ring or else upped to a Range: Sight to be cast with more stealth. Otherwise the Target magus might not only vaporise the floating lock but take a shot at the offending magus as well.

Thanks for the input.

I had considered it as an invested device, but as you can get really high penetration on them, you could just put in an effect to create massive wounds. This is more for someone who suddenly found himself the target of numerous Wizard Wars, and wanted a quick way to deal with them.

Also, given his lab-totals, inventing a lvl 25 spell is easier to do in 1 season than enchanting a lvl 45 effect (25 + 20Pen) over a few seasons.

Bald people are immune to this spell ! ^^

I suggest adding a Creo requisite to make some hair grow before cutting it.

Good spell anyway, I like it.

Who says it has to be head hair?

You might want to master this spell at a still and silent level. Even as far away as sight range, you can still be seen and if you get caught you might find yourself in a wizards war. Maybe all magi should shave their heads. :open_mouth:

Hmm, I seem to have an echo :wink:

It is a good spell. I like it too! :laughing:

(sorry 'bout that)