A sight range tunnel to a cloud allows level 10 CrAu lightning strikes.
Level 20 if you want @10 strikes per spell.
At least for suicide purposes.
Nope. You aren't touching the lightning. You are in effective touch range for the spell, but not touching.
A level 5 ReVi Touch range and diameter duration tunnel allows level 15 spells through. The ReVi sight for the lightning is level 15.
Touch range tunneling and spell containers were the reason for Reynard's Troupe Upbringing. Hand a coin to a merchant or tax collector, they put it with the other coins. Steal the coins or explode the guy at will.
Cast tunnel on an arrow, fire arrow into the air, lighting strikes for a few rounds.
Conduit and Container tricks with Throwing and Legerdemain for days.
It gets really obnoxious with the Merinita Spell Timing. Which is why I made the guy Tytalus.
But what is the target then?
If the tunnel to the cloud is part of it, the target should be either you or the cloud.
Your other post, with a touch range tunnel for mundane delivery made a lot more sense.
Aurum is weird. The target is always the origin of the weather phenomenon. Which if one doesn't increase, the caster pays for the effect with "unnatural". It's kinda annoying because Terrem cast in the sky or ocean, fire in the middle of a lake isn't "unnatural", creating water out of no where isn't "unnatural". Aurum you pay for the magnitude in Range or in "unnatural"
If you can get around the "unnatural" then it's really low level.
This also means there are no guidelines for static electricity or sound generation... should continue in the Elementalist spell level thread, I don't want to hijack this one.
Not that weird: the target of a Creo Auram spell is not the origin of the weather phenomenon, it is the weather phenomenon, which the sidebar says uses to naturally happen in upper air, and that makes the default range Sight, and then to put things at ground level you must invest in unnatural magnitude levels. But your tunnel to a cloud wouldn't either put you casting the lightning from the sky neither channel lightnings from the cloud to you (which would be a suicidal thing to do anyway).
The only way to cast lightnings through tunnels is go with a regular R: Touch version of Incantation of Lightning, which would be a level 30 spell, and then through them through lvl 30-wide intangible tunnels.
Apparently, I am too rusty to appreciate such weirdness.
It does not sound like an attack spell though. If it can be targetted at all, it must be pretty hard to hit your enemy at cloud range, with remote control also at cloud range. But can it be targetted and remain natural?
I concede that you can probably hit the church tower, or a caste keep, with no finesse roll, while also keeping it natural. That could be useful on occassions.
Was that what you had in mind?
The insert says "phenomena naturally begin in the upper air, and so spells which create weather must have enough Range to meet this area" ... "A flying wizard could, of course, use touch range to create a natural weather phenomena"
So a tunnel allowing effective touch range allows "Natural"
Target- "Individual: a single phenomenon: one cloud, one wind, one lightning bolt"
"A base Individual for Aurum is a weather phenomenon that affects that affects an area within a standard Boundry- an area one hundred paces across."
Base 5 Create Lightning. Target is the phenomenon, Lightning bolt. Range is to target, to the phenomenon's creation. Range of a spell to create wind isn't to the end of where the wind blows.
A lightning bolt springing from the caster's hands +4 magnitudes. Means range is touch.
Incantation of Lighting is an erroneous spell. It uses Voice and Unnatural, then shoots lightning from fingers. It considers its target the thing hit, requiring a clear path from caster to target.
The springing forth the hand is unnatural, then to make it natural let it spring from a cloud, base 5, +2 Voice. Level 15. Necessitates a cloud and being outside. The target is the thing struck.
Or base: 5, +2 Voice, +4 unnatural lightning bolt occurs over there any time I want. Using a tunnel makes this Natural so level 15
If I want the spell to function as the description the range can be dropped to touch. Then if that is the case, we can use Touch and Natural through a tunnel.
The Form is inconsistent between techniques:
I can use muto 3 +1 touch +1 part, level 5 and bolt anything anywhere the wind blows. Worst case it's base 10 for level 20 MuAu bolt anyone in the wind caster is touching.
I would only be OK with that as long as the caster would need to resist his own spell or suffer damage as well, in the lines of the R: Touch ignem spells. The target is Voice because you create the lightning at R: Voice. The springing-hand stuff is, as in Ignem spells, a cosmetic effect added probably just because the creator of the original spell wanted his targets to know who was blasting them.
Which makes perfect sense from my point of view. Hadn't you considered that probably the part of making the lightning strike exactly where you aim it is the most unnatural one? (unless you always aim to tower tops or highest trees in the area...).
Well, on my table you should do a pretty quick fast-cast and a hell of a big Finesse roll, while explaining why wind, which moves pretty much slowly than lightning, is going to move a lightning.
The "Ignem is the most damaging Art" is a pretty consistent rule that should be cautiously kept if only because it quickly helps to deal with how much damage causes any given spell (5 damage points less than the matching CrIg, and it's done). Because, you know, there was this legendary dude named Flambeau who came with it (not to talk about the dedicated House that came after to follow his heritage), and I just don't see any Auram specialist overdoing Old Flambie's tricks.
The wind doesn't move the lightning.
The target is the entire weather phenomenon of the wind. 100 paces across boundary is individual. Then you don't want to kill everyone turning the whole thing into lightning, so you select part of the wind.
You could do it with fog. You touch the fog, the entire fog is your target. MuAu 10 wholly unnatural. Examples are in the elementalist thread.
Can add a Rego requisite to not hurt yourself.
Ignem should be named "damage". It's wholly inconsistent. The rules for Ice are in Ignem. Lol. Flambeau is powerful because it's written that way. Ignem adheres to it's own rules and is out of place. Gotta give people what they want though.
My character atm is an Auram specialist, but I'm thinking of PeAq that throws fire lol.
I think all of CrIg. Needs redone.
Nope. Because it isn't. Ever consider spontaneous fire is unnatural? It's more unnatural than someone getting hit with lightning without a storm, which actually happens. It's very rare and is a different weather phenomenon, but more natural that most of Ignem.
Anyway MeAu with a Terrem req just kills people. Lightning is just for show.
Really? I've seen canon spells that disagree with this. Eg. The Crystal Dart exceeds it: (Base 3, +1 Rego requisite) for +10 damage. Plum of Fire using Base 4 would do +5 damage.
You need to go back and reread things. What you're saying is highly inconsistent with the rules as actually written. Look at Aquam/Ignem/Terram for some stuff about ice. You might specifically look at the Elemental Forms box on page 79. Ignem governs hot/cold, not ice itself.
I think we misunderstand each other. I'm saying that having a straight forward scaling of +5 per magnitude is out of place. I'm also saying that PeIg having the only description for damage scaling and the best descriptions of freezing targets... when it shouldn't.
Consider PeAq. For PeAq to destroy water in a person or animal it needs a Corpus or Animal requisite. But Ignem, the favored special Form for power gamers, doesn't need a requisite for destroying heat in a person or animal. Remember this is Aristotelian physics. PeIg is destroying a persons inner fire. To make someone lose a fatigue from PeAq, we have to look at PeIg to figure out the level.
PeIg should not make Cold unless PeAq makes heat. Aquam and Terrem, or I should say Aquam with Terrem requisites can make ice and snow etc. However to figure out how much damage an effect does we have to extrapolate from Ignem. PeIg is one magnitude behind CrIg in damage and scales the same.
So to figure out how much damage you do with the Arts that actually should freeze people, we need to base it off CrIg. It isn't until you get the power gamer house book that ice is given damage and even then is incorrect in interpretation. ReAq shackles of frozen ice states the cold is magical. No. The ice is magical. The ice is cold. The ice makes things cold naturally.
All the other Forms have to use Aristotelian Physics. Magic Resist is in part based upon the fact there is no such thing as momentum or inertia. Newtonian physics do not work here. Except for Ignem and House flamed.
The Damage of crystal dart is based on the object being made dense Muto and force of Rego. Again different from Ignem scaling.
And btw, It's not like a dislike the game or the system. The only reason I take umbrage with your position is it simply ignores these facts. Most of the time I'm posting here about rules etc is to figure out proper mechanics for the rest of the arts.
Uh... It doesn't have the only description for damage scaling. Take a look at the Creo Aquam and Muto Aquam guidelines.
I don't follow at all. Why should PeAq make heat?
Why? Wasn't there an idea of heat, and weren't heat and fire conflated? And as for Newtonian physics, it doesn't work all with Ignem, not even close. It gets even further from working as we extend Newtonian physics from Newton's time to now.
You say I'm ignoring these facts, but you're not really presenting list of facts, are you? I already pointed out that your "fact" about Ignem and damage scaling is incorrect. I've also pointed out your "fact" about Ignem obeying Newtonian mechanics is incorrect, though I don't want to spend the time explaining Newtonian mechanics and thermodynamics. And here you have another incorrect statement right after where I told you to go:
If you only need Creo Aquam, how would it be that a Terram requisite is needed. The book is quite explicit that this is incorrect.
Terrem is solids. It's mentioned as a necessary requisite for ice.
PeAq should make heat because PeIg makes cold. Aquam is moisture and cold.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic ... tation.svg
Cold is the opposite of Heat. They are contraries. Perdo only destroys. It does not create Cold. Creation is Creo.
Like I said. Ignem is the only one that follows modern physics. If PeIg makes cold because lack heat is cold, then PeAq makes heat because the only way to destroy cold is add heat. Either way you look at it, if PeIg does the opposite of CrIg, then it should be applied everywhere are my thoughts.
Aquam can manipulate Lava, because Lava is a liquid. Terrem and Aquam can make lava. It just won't be hot. Unless we treat it like Ignem and say it does its effect because of physics.
My point isn't to necessarily limit Ignem or declare only one way to do things, it's to show there are multiple ways and show it is not consistent.
If it all seems confusing and weird, it's understandable, the world we know works differently.
Oh, so many things to correct...
Why are you so insistent that Hermetic magic follows Aristotelian physics?
As you can see, Magic Theory is based on some mix of pagan rituals, Platonic physics, and Aristotelian physics. If you work from the assumption that it all lines up perfectly with Aristotelian physics, you are working from an incorrect assumption. The ArM5 authors have explicitly written that this is a possible direction you can take (that magi can do research to move it to match better) but that, as is, Hermetic magic is not perfectly aligned with Aristotelian physics.
Where is that mention? When I do a computer search for ice in ArM5, I get this rule which utterly disagrees with your statement:
I also find Flames of Sculpted Ice has no Terram requisite, only Aquam. Now I switch to HoH:S to find a guideline that says nothing about Terram being required:
I also find Dagger of Ice has no Terram requisite, only Rego for its movement. If you're going to make all these arguments about what doesn't work properly in ArM5, the least you could do would be to actually get what ArM5 says correct when someone has pointed you right to the statement, as I did above with the box on page 79. If you can't get what ArM5 says correct even in those circumstances, I don't see that your arguments carry much weight at all.
You must not know much modern physics. I'll try to not go too deep here while saying enough to show you how terribly off this statement is. Ignem doesn't even come close to following modern physics. If we were to follow modern physics, a closer fit would be to put fire under Auram (gas/weakly-ionized plasma). Sure, you could make the argument that we'll put plasma under Ignem, but then you have to move lightning to Ignem while fire is still iffier between Auram and Ignem; so even that wouldn't fix it. Meanwhile heating and cooling, being energy changes, would fit more closely with Rego just like changing water into ice; heating and cooling are not things themselves but rather changes being made to things' states. That now leaves light, electromagnetic waves and photons. Images are formed based on the direction light of whatever wavelengths arrives from. So if I can create light aimed as I choose, I should be able to create images. But images are the purview of Imaginem, not Ignem, so even this part of Ignem doesn't seem to work properly with modern physics. So, as you can see, Ignem doesn't follow modern physics well at all.
Your argument ultimately relies entirely on your above statement that "Aquam is moisture and cold," which goes back to your incorrect statement about Hermetic magic specifically following Aristotelian physics. If Aquam were cold, then your argument would make sense. But Aquam doesn't cover cold in ArM5. That falls within Ignem:
As long as you're going to keep arguing there are problems with ArM5 based on things you're choosing to say are correct that ArM5 explicitly tells you are wrong, you're not arguing there are problems with ArM5. You're arguing that you're not reading what has been written properly.
No. This is very incorrect. Terram makes lava, not Aquam:
And, yes, it will be hot because that's how lava is. This is just like created ice via CrAq is cold, because ice is cold. If you want to make warm ice, you need to involve Ignem. Similarly, if you want to make cold lava, you need to involve Ignem.
Until you start saying ArM5 says what it actually says with any consistency, I'm not going to take your word on how inconsistent it is.
Because it does and always has.
A&A says access to translated "new Aristotle" gives a Philosophiae bonus. Then the possible breakthroughs listed are for a troupe to decide how the world works. Plato or Aristotle. Pick one or both for magic. So... yes... the world and magic is based upon a mixture of the world views.
If ArM5 doesn't operate that way, throw A&A away, it's garbage. So which of the rules are inconsistent? Because they aren't consistent.
lol yand ou're the one that sites inserts without reading them. Reread the Creo Auram sidebar. You need to back the f up and respond to your point on Auram that I showed was wrong. Show me how your Auram targeting view is correct. Then maybe we can talk about your point the game is both not based on Aristotle and not based on modern thought about heat and whatever the f you think 1200's world view on physics was.