There's no 'Attack roll' for Touch spells in Ars Magica.
And you can use your talisman to extend your reach to touch someone, but you can't make an attack with your sword talisman to deliver the spell.
Source? Because Performance Magic would seem to indicate otherwise.
Performance Magic is an exception to the rules. You need a virtue to disguise your spellcasting while using another Ability.
And I will have to check it, cause am not sure you can actually attack as you cast the spell. This is more of a dance with the blade as you cast the spell.
You say rules, but as you say, we don't have any regarding delivering touch ranged magic.
That said, you can absolutely attack with Performance Magic as that's precisely the whole point of the virtue, to disguise your magic while performing another ability. Now you take some hefty penalties, because as you say, you're being far more ceremonial than not, but still, the rules a clear on that front.
To my point though, Belisarius has Subtle Magic, so there's no need to make a bunch of weird gestures, he can just reach out and touch you. And if his talisman is a sword, and since there's nothing talking about how to deliver touch range attacks, then it stands to reason that he should be able to swing his sword and do just that.
But as I said, I'm obviously biased, so I'd like other folks to toss their two cents in.
Casting a spell while engaging in combat is difficult -- even if no gestures are involved. See the Concentration rules on ArM5 p.82. Unless you just stand there and let your opponent hit you (Dfn total of 0), you will be at least Dodging to some extent. So the Ease Factor will be at least 12 on your Concentration roll.
Just touching your target with your sword is easier that actually hitting it, since even touching a shield or armor is sufficient from a spell-casting perspective. So I'd probably give a +6 bonus to an Attack if that is all you are trying to do.
Performing an actual damaging attack with the sword at the same time is a different story. First off, you are actually performing an action during the round -- a melee attack -- so any spell would need to be fast cast. Then you want to also hit your target with a damaging sword attack, which I'd consider needs a normal attack roll. If you miss, than you miss and also failed to touch your target for your spell's purpose.
1 Like
Performance Magic has a side box regarding using martial abilities while casting. See TMRE p.29. The relevant text:
While Brawl and Martial Abilities may be used in Performance Magic, the magus needs to perform semi-ritualistic movements to cast spells, responding to the needs of the spell, not to the actions of an opponent. If the magus is in combat, then he may only use Performance Magic (Brawl or Martial Abilities) if the player rolls a stress die with three extra botch dice, and treats all non-botches as die rolls of zero. (This represents ignoring the opponent and casting the spell.)
So, clearly allowed, but also, carries some risk.
There is also an example of using Performance Magic (Music), and I think the last phrase of the first paragraph is relevant:
He can cast spells silently, but only by not using Sorcerous Music.
*sorcerous music is a particular term for Performance Magic (Music).
The example character needs to produce music to cast using the virtue. He can play/sing quietly, but not abscond with the noise.
Based on that my understanding is that for Performance Magic (Single Weapon) you need to make the gestures. Subtle Magic wouldn't help because you can't suppress them. You could, in theory, make subtle gestures (with a -2 to the casting total) but I'm not sure this is fully compatible with actual fighting (it would be, OTOH, with a series of small stretches using the sword). See also this paragraph from pg. 29:
The magus must actually perform the Ability to count as using this Virtue, and other Virtues or Mastery Abilities do not remove that requirement. For example, he cannot sing silently, although he can hunt silently.
So, he needs to actually use the weapon.
As for casting without gestures w/o Performance Magic, I understand you couldn't do that and attack (the whole point of Performance Magic is to allow one to do something else and cast at the same time).
If using Performance Magic I don't think you'd need to concentrate (the whole point of Performance Magic is to allow one to do something else and cast at the same time), unless something else happened to disturb the magus. So, no concentration to fight and cast, or to fight whie concentrating on an already cast spell, but if you get hurt by an enemhy while fighting and concentrating this prompts a concentration roll as usual.
I agree that touching someone hostile is difficult. I'd suggest, instead of giving the caster (attacker) getting a bonus, the defender can only dodge (no parry is possible, shields are useless).
OTOH, HoH:S speaks of the Wizard's Melee, where only Personal and Touch spells are allowed (@Nithyn, please put Belisarius in one f these!!! If you don't, I will!!! =D). No penalty or bonus is mentioned to touch hostile targets (possibly to make things simpler?).
I think that the magus is clearly exposing himself to danger by approaching an hostile target, and a clever opponent could exploit that. Maybe we could use rules of interrupting initiative from Lords of Man to allow an opponent to try to hack a magus as he extends his hand? Or maybe, simply say that a magus who cast a touch spell on an opponent can't benefit from a shield grog in that turn?
But these are just suggestions, and some of them would make combat too tiresome. Maybe we want to err on the side of simplicity and narrative storytelling.
Finally, for a Talisman sword, I think it's fair play to have an enchanted effect that triggers on touching the blade (maybe only one side of the blade, so that you can use the other side against targets with MR?). But for this I'd require an attack (as before, this can only be dodged, not parried or blocked).
I think this is accurate given the example of "Dodging" is one of the difficulty 12 examples. So he would need be able to regularly overcome the distractions of combat to be able to cast reliably under those circumstances. But it can be done.
I would tentatively suggest that the right Mentem spells/effects might be useful here to augment the ability to overcome distractions. But that could also detract from combat awareness, which is ... not something the military man in me would generally endorse. 
Sounds like Belisarius is going to need to be able to find the "Calm In The Storm" on the regular.
I would concur with this more or less though I would posit that by RAW he could use his own physical attack as the thing he wanted to Fast Cast in response to in order to deliver it while he is still touching or as he is touching the enemy. If that is precluded by a "defense only" view of Fast Casting that might affect things.
Also he could attack and even if he didn't "hit" the enemy, if the enemy blocked the attack instead of dodging they could still have been "Touched" for spell purposes via blocking?
Re: Other Views of Fighting & Casting At the Same Time
I think it seems pretty clear in the Performance Magic description that it is "possible" to fight and cast at the same time. The thing that Performance Magic lets you do, significantly, is blend them into a single action. Nithyn doesn't have or seem to want Performance Magic, he wants to be fighting normally and add in the occasional spell via Fast Casting in combat. And this casting would be unimpeded by him fighting at the same time specifically from the perspective that his lack of gestures for casting doesn't matter due to that virtue. (Meaning Subtle Magic here.)
Touch spell use in combat is something of an ill defined thing in the rules as is, and using them offensively doesn't seem outlandish to me just on that account. Also a Talisman expressly extends your Touch so making use of that is ... part of the point? Even if most of us never take advantage of that aspect of it, it is by design one of the reasons to have and use a Talisman. So delivering a Touch spell via his sword Talisman to me is just RAW being applied.
The only debatable aspect here to me is how Fast Casting modifies these things.
All in all I think it makes for an interesting character and set of ideas. Just also one who is built on the concept of doing a set of things that are rather challenging in their own way. He needs to regularly pass Concentration checks for casting, Finesse checks for Fast Casting, and be at least ok/decent in a physical fight for it all to be worth it. These are not casual level of investments in various things to make this all work, so I don't see any problems here. I tend to be of a view that we should need explicit reasons for things not to work and I don't see any here.
Makes sense to me, cheers mate.
Oh you bet your bottom dollar he will be! It's one of the reasons I had him spend the last few years at Castra Solis after all!
Had something like this in mind actually! A PeTe(He) effect to weaken or destroy wood/metal at part would be an interesting effect to enchant into a sword talisman. Would let ya cleave right through things without MR.
Agreed. Seems like a quick way to end up with... problems.
Well said, thanks mate! Yeah, this is an extremely heavy investment as you say, but it feels very flavorful and fun, ya know?
1 Like
Speaking of random niche things, I wanted to address something that I have been playing with in my head for a while now, and is something that I suspect affects @Vortigern too given his character's focus.
Container effects.
Now I know this is a 5e change and as such rubs some people the wrong way, but as there is no requirement that containers are rituals, it opens up a whole new, and very interesting can of worms. Especially as you're allowed to choose the method of triggering the effect when casting the container, so there's quite a bit of flexibility.
Think for example, of a literal pilum that has a touch range piulm in a container. Now hand some of those out to the turb... And that's just the tip of the iceberg as it were. The ability to spont a spell or two (or ten) and then store them in a container allows for quite a bit of flexibility. Quite a lot of it in fact. While hardly game breaking, it felt important to address this very real possibility. There are of course some big limfacs. Namely the preparation required, the duration of the container itself, and the fact that only one can be put in any given item. But the point still stands
As an aside, potentially spells in containers could be activated as a 'fast cast' as it were. Again, not that this is game breaking as items can already do that, but still. There's just a lot of interesting applications I hadn't considered.
I think Containers are nifty but have a lot of potential for not being received well, trying to put it delicately?
The guideline for creating them really is rather giving so nearly anyone could spont a short to day duration one that could hold a meaningful amount of spell levels. So it isn't "hard magic" as it were. It just takes forethought (and having formulaic spells helps) and book keeping if you will.
I haven't gone super heavy into this yet with Vorsutus though obviously with his focus I intend to. So far he just has enough to allow him to layer effects as he successively casts them when doing his "high ritual" style of casting so that he doesn't have to make Concentration checks as he lines up his chains of spells.
But there are far more complex and/or active uses of them that are possible. I'm not sure however what you are concerned about here as regards their application.
The only sparsely defined area of the rules involving Containers is their triggering I think. Past adventures and the like have them going off "when someone else other than the magus enters the lab" or the like. Or other times having spells in the Container that then are used to be the trigger condition.
When a trigger spell is required vs not seems vague. Otherwise they seem to function pretty clearly/consistently. I think they are just jarring at times because prior editions didn't have the explicit container guideline allowing for non-ritual magic to employ them as effects?
What are Containers? Where i can find more info?
It's a ReVi guideline out of the core rules. Check out Watching Ward for an example (though it's a ritual due to duration but still).
Ahhh, ok ok. Ty! 
Now im starting to understand the conversation 
Since their Duration is special, and the very own duration contains the triggering element... i dont feel like there is the possibility to change durations to make "Sun" Containers or similar. They should be always D:Special & Ritual.
Where did you find that they can be non-ritual?
Happy to help!
And if it was a unique spell that couldn't be modified, then there would be no guidelines for it. IE Aegis. Instead, it's very clearly does (it's the last of the ReVi General guideline), and in fact, shares the same guidelines as Intangible Tunnel, something that doesn't require a ritual.
Exactly. There is nothing in the rules that requires them to be rituals, it's just that our only example in the corebook is a ritual.
A common houserule I have seen is to require ritual containers to contain ritual spells. Do we want that?
I'll note that the guideline, as written, requires the target of the container to also be the target of the spell, and the spell is contained "for a specific length of time". I have always read this as "for the duration of the container", but this is up for debate.
As I see, Watching Ward (and Waiting Spell) are specific implementations that don’t conform to the general guideline.
Aegis is it’s own thing, in that it doesn’t even use a proper guideline.
So, if i make a Duration: Until (Condition) with a max Station duration it wouldn't be a Ritual too? 
The trigger condition is inside the Duration: Special, so you cannot change the Duration, so it will always be Ritual. If instead of "Special" they used a better name like... idk "Wait Until (Condition)" maybe it would be more clear that then u cannot remove it to place Diameter without losing the very own foundation of the spell.
I mean... you "CAN" do a Container with Sun duration. But then there is no trigger... it will contain a spell (or several) for a Sun duration, and then i will end without doing anything in any moment with them.
I believe this is correct. There is an explicit guideline that does not stipulate that the effect must be a ritual, and there are plenty of other guidelines that explicitly do that. Instead this seems like any other guideline, providing magnitudes of modification and allowing for design at different R/D/Ts.
I explicitly brought this up before, about requiring any spell that interacted with/manipulated a Ritual to be a Ritual itself. One reason was dispelling, which was the context I brought it up in. But I also think it is a good idea because it would also (in my view) pertain to things like Containers, or Sustainment, or arguably also Tunnels. (All things Vorsutus is interested in and does...)
I won't say there isn't an argument to be made either way here. But I think Rituals deserve some "oomph" (not to be casually dispelled by spells that don't cost vis), and also that the manipulation/maintenance of them should similarly be a Ritual. This would prevent say casting a big Ritual (Boundary) only then to keep extending it forever with Moon Sustainment spells that didn't cost vis. It is perfectly RAW as is. Doesn't mean I like it. 8P I brought this up in the context of dispelling an Aegis ... which is something of an extreme case, because I thought that would be more explicit and persuasive. But there are lots of other use-cases for interacting with/manipulating Ritual effects with Vim that seem like they either undermine the investment necessary for Ritual magic or stretch that investment potentially too far (infinitely).
The target does not have to be the container. There is no language to that effect and in fact Containers (watching wards most commonly) are frequently used in RAW defenses of Sanctums/Labs to cast spells at intruders. And generally with nothing other than the watching ward trigger condition being "cast at anyone else who comes into the lab". Which is part of why I say it is very vague about when a trigger intellego spell is necessary vs. not, inside the container.
But otherwise ... really it seems to function very similarly to triggering a charged item with a single charge. Though not quite since it can have built in trigger conditions etc. But they also, depending on trigger conditions again, can be purposefully activated by a user as an expendable.
The duration of containment I think is "up to the duration of the spell, or the trigger conditions are met" whichever comes first.
I agree with this. The ritual nature of Watching Ward is what gives it an indefinite duration.
Until (Condition) specifies that it as a Duration requires a Ritual, so ... it seems roughly equivalent to the actual construction of Watching Ward. Until (Condition) is equivalent to Year, or +4 Magnitudes. And Watching Ward is Touch, or +1, and then lasts until triggered. The guideline has a +5 magnitude adjustment in it. So this seems to match exactly how the effect is designed.
There is nothing in the description of the effect that I can see that seems to support this. Can you tell me what it is that you see that does?
Why wouldn't any other Container effect be triggerable other than a ritual one, given the guideline and examples we have?
There is nothing in the description of the effect that I can see that seems to support this. Can you tell me what it is that you see that does?
Why wouldn't any other Container effect be triggerable other than a ritual one, given the guideline and examples we have?
To the question: "When it finish the Watching Ward?", the default answer would be: "The Watching Ward is dispelled when it releases its spell".
So, that means that the very action of releasing the spell is attached into the duration.
But, if you change the duration... suddenly has 2 durations? The original + another limit? Thats like 2 conditions. The spell will trigger when X happens or when Y time runs.
I don't feel that a spell with 2 durations is ok.
Moreover, if you change the Duration: Special with another duration, it stops being Special D: So, it cannot have 2 durations!
The ritual nature of Watching Ward is what gives it an indefinite duration.
No as i read it into the spell: "The Ritual nature of this spell supports the potentially indefinite duration".
You aren't making it Ritual so your condition can be indefinite (its Ritual even if the condition is "the next time that i go to pee"), but since the duration is potentially infinite (the contained spell isn't released never since the condition doesnt happen), it must be Ritual. It the very nature of "having a condition" that makes it Ritual.
Its like telling that the Sun comes into the sky because it the Day started . No, its the other way around.
Think about it. If you can make those spells for free with Moon duration or whatever, why would you lose a season to make potions/wands to add protections? Just spam a bajillion free Watching Wards in each piece or cloth that you bring with you and you are ready for everything. You could even prepare them on the fly depending of the expected dangers.
I think there is a language barrier here, but I'm trying to feel out what you're intent is regardless. But if I get it wrong then just to be clear I'm not sure, and we may have miscommunicated.
The duration, it seems clear to me, is the length of time the Container effect can last, while waiting to be triggered. The ritual version lets that be indefinite. The spell inside the container is distinct and has its own duration.
That isn't one spell with two durations, even if we didn't have examples of spells with two durations (of particular types) in RAW ... which do exist. But that isn't this.
The trigger/activation conditions of the Container do not require anything else additional.
You can declare trigger conditions when casting the spell and/or you can put intellego effects into the spell to have them be used to amplify and detect/determine trigger events/conditions.
It is not a restrictive guideline the way it is presented between the guideline and the examples we have.
So ... I'll be clear here.
The rest of this seems like rationalization for what you said here at the end. That you don't like it and don't think that it "should" work. Which is different from it not actually working as explicitly described in RAW.
I think I've clearly established how it works and why it works, and what RAW is on this so I'm not really going to keep going in circles about whether it works. I am convinced that it does, or I wouldn't design a character in significant part around using it including in his magical focus. I'm really not interested in having my focus "re-interpreted" now that I've already built my character.
As for why it isn't common, there are several reasons. One, it is a particular Technique and Form combination that doesn't seem super common. Rego isn't exactly rare but Vim seems less common. Rego Vim specifically mainly only comes up because of Aegis and Spirit Magic a lot of the time. If you want strong Containers you have to go dip into Rego Vim and that just isn't everyone. It also isn't something that typically helps you "right now" as a spell choice. For the same reason there aren't tons of people that learn Watching Ward itself. Because it takes forethought and planning to make decent use of, and then only when circumstances permit. It favors casters that put time into casting and preparing things ahead of time, which is also part of why I think it is an apt choice for people of a Mercurian bent. Because those elements are directly what they kind of do. (Meaning time, preparation, and doing things ahead of time. And/or just big things.) Your stereotypical CrIg Flambeau isn't thinking like that and isn't built for doing it. Why would he try? Maybe when he is already 10 or 20 years out of Gauntlet if he is also interested in Vim like Ranulf from the Magi book. But that is the thing. If you aren't interested in Vim, you aren't going to be doing this at a very high level just on that alone.
As for why you wouldn't layer up tons of containers, firstly ... as Watching Ward says, only one Container can be tied to a given object. Also there are practical issues when having lots of Containers. What are all of their trigger conditions? How many command words do you want to have to remember? Can you find widget number 37 out of your bag when you want to throw the spell out of it? Good luck doing that quickly in a fight. Maybe you could have a set of Containers (of a practical limited number I think) that are in some way accessible and organized. But there is a feasible limit to that I think. Beyond that and even just organizing them and making sure you set off the one you actually want to set off becomes something of a problem.
That said I do think there are more reasonable, less burdensome, ways to use it well. To get mileage out of it in game, do interesting things, and not be trying to walk around with 110 Containers. In theory I think it is very abusable personally, but it doesn't have to be. And frankly ... that logic applies to a lot of things in Ars. There are tons of things that are abusable in Ars, but work just fine if people don't go there as it were.