Terram: Encompassing or not?

Games Discussion Ars Magica
1

First new topic in ages :smiley:

So, here's the thing: the base terram individual is earth.
To affect stone or glass, you must add 1 magnitude, and 2 magnitudes for metal or gemstone.

Now the question is: By a strict reading of the rules, for +2 mag, you affect metal OR gemstones (same thing with stone OR glass), but does this include the "lower levels" of stone/glass and earth/mud? And if so, what does this means for each casting, in terms of quantity of material affected/created?

This has a very concrete impact, in that:
A) a focus in Metals would help you invent spells affecting stone, while the Stone expert would not be helped by their focus if they wanted to affect Metals, in effect making "higher" focuses better than "lower" ones.
B) it becomes easier to ward yourself against attacks, you just need a ward vs metal to be also protected from those vilano pebbles. Now, my personal preference would be to say "nay, spells do one thing and one thing only, you must choose at creation, if you want to be warded against Metal and stone, you need one more magnitude"

So, my question is: do you think "metal" also include "stone" and "earth"?
The raw doesn't seem to conclude either way:

I found no Creo spell that could create both soil and steel(for example), although The Laboratory of Bonisagus seems to assume creation of both steel and glass items (although with+ mag for complexity)
Muto Terram has "transmutation of flame" (MoH 113)which affects "stone (...) or soil".

The real problems come with Perdo Terram, ansd spells like "Shattering Touch" (Apprentices 47) which affects "stone or weaker earthy material" and "fist of shattering" (Core 155) which, likewise, destroys "An object of stone or weaker material". Similarly, "Obliteration Of The Metallic Barrier( Core 155) "Shatters a barrier of metal or stone".

Rego Terram does the same with "Ward Against Faeries Of The Mountain" (Core 155), which protects against "faeries of earth and stone" (go, go, ston focus!) and "Scribe The Perfect Circle" (TM96), which "scribes a mathematically perfect shape on the ground" (since it has +1 mag for stone, it seems to assume to be working on stone and earth). MoH50 gives us "The Instant Ring Fort" which excavates Earth and stone. Luckily, " Sword ward"(TtA78) "Wards the caster against metal weapons." without any mention of, say, stone. I should also note that "Unyielding Earth" (core 156) affects both mud and soft earth (disproving the OR part of the guidelines). We also have Follow The Route I Command (HP57) which explicitely moves "a large amount of earth", while having a +1 mag for affecting stone, so I assume it is supposed to affect both. again in Core 156, we have "Earth Shock", which doesn't even bother with addditional magnitudes if the target is on solid stone.
MoH 40 again hates my guts with "Mold The Earth Within Sight" , which "works on dirt, rock, and stone" although it also notes that "other more-exotic forms of Terram (metal, diamonds, gemstones, etc.) are unaffected" (sigh of relief)

Tell me, what do you think? Is Terram encompassing or not?And should we recalculate the amount of affected marterial with each spellcasting or not?
And what about other forms, like Auram? Does a ward vs lightning also protects against abrasive winds? and can the same ward protect against acids and "Mighty Torrent Of Water"?

Thanks! :smiley:

  • Can't you read? Obviously, Metals include stone and earth!
  • and gemstones too! Metal benders are the best! :heart_eyes:
  • No way! I hate this for #reasons
0 voters

Edit: btw, many thanks to whoever compiled the grand grimoire of hermetic spells, this saved me a lot of time :smiley:

1 Like
2

I think you have two different things that need to be discussed here. The Art of Terram and its spells, and the scope of a Magical Focus / Potent Magic.

IMHO, if you are stricly speaking of Terram, a spell that affects metals can include stone, clay, sand, etc., provided that the spell description says so.

Also IMHO, Magical Focus and Potent Magic are not inclusive. If you have a focus with metal, then the focus only applies when casting a spell on metal, not stone/clay/sand/etc. And when you invent a spell, in order for the bonus from your Magical Focus / Potent Magic to apply, the spell can only affect metal.

That explains why the description of some spell might specify a more limited scope than the Art might allow -- because the inventor wanted to apply his virtue to the invention of the spell.

7 Likes
3

I think the important thing to remember is that it's the intent of the spell/effect that determines what happens. Creating a laboratory includes glass, clay, stone and metal. A spell that destroys a barrier that has the +2 magnitude will destroy either a metal or stone barrier. A spell that turns swords into snakes (with +2 mag) will turn any sword (including wooden training swords) into snakes.

But a spell that creates a brass wall only creates a brass wall.

1 Like
4

Yes, probably. Sometimes. Depending on how your effect is defined.

But there's no reason why this should imply that your magical focus would apply, just because your effect has the ability to affect metals. Rather, you'd only get the bonus (from MMF) to your lab total if (and only if) your effect was designed to only affect metals.
And similarly, assuming you'd designed your effect to affect a multitude of materials, you'd only get the bonus from MMF to casting if (and only if) you targeted only metal.

That is the strict reading of MMF. And how it was played when I'd somehow picked up a mMF in copper.

Essentially, this is exactly the same as @Arthur said (if not, please correct me).

6 Likes
5

I will also chip in with agreement with Arthur and Tellus.

Regarding another part of the question in the OP.

The amount of material and type has to be specified. For example, one can't with a perdo spell, specify destroy heaps of dirt, but if there's rocks, reduce the amount destroyed and destroy the rocks. The spell will either destroy everything up to metal, but be the smaller amount of material, or be a rock and sand destroyer with bigger area, or a sand destroyer only with a much bigger area.

I also agree with earlier commenters that affecting the lower Terram forms is optional, so one could choose gems only, metal only,etc.

As an aside, as you mentioned metal benders and lava benders existed in the sequel. Would Lava be Aquam? Terram? Aquam with a Terram Requisite? Terram with an Ignem requisite?

1 Like
6

iirc, lava is affected by Aquam with an ignem requisite

thanks, everyone :).

7

No, lava is explicitly basically Terram, per ArsM5 Rulebook pg79 sidebar the Elemental Forms. You don't even need an Aquam or Ignem requisite to create lava.

1 Like
8

What Form you need to use with lava depends on what you want to do with it - if the spell treats it as a solid or as a liquid or what.
See Hermetic Projects p12 for details on what Forms to use when dealing with lava and volcanoes.

1 Like
9

back to the topic at hand.
thanks to everyone who contributed :smiley:
I now believe that the problem lies with the raw MMF in Metals, as it is too broad, noting that Stone is also an example of MMF

I agree about the focus only applying at casting when applicable.But that is not always known: If I've got a MMF in metals and a Sun Duration ward against Metal (and stone, and earth...) that I cast every time I may face a fight, no one can know that, 4 hours later it'll help me against a shield grog's sword and his master's flung stones, and that, even if the only way for me to cast it is to use my focus.
this is shifty, and weird. So what do we do?Do we disallow the use of foci with spells lasting longer than a moment? If not, my MMF in metals is now roughly 2 MMFs: Metals and stone. Sorry, this is giving me a headache. I think Tellus summed it best: "there's no reason why this should imply that your magical focus would apply, just because your effect has the ability to affect metals." This seems simple and logical, meaning anytime there's a duration, I can't use my focus, even if I need it to cast the spell successfully :dizzy_face:

likewise, if I've got Perdo 6, Terram 6, int+MT+ Aura 5, and want to learn "Obliteration Of The Metallic Barrier", using a text. I need a lab total of 20+ to invent it in a season, which I I can reach through my MMF in Metals. If the SG says the focus doesn't apply then because the spell also affect stone, I'll need a lab total of 40+ to invent a "metal only" version, the same level of skill needed by my pal with similar abilities and a MMF in Stone to invent the same "metal only" spell. If my SG allows me to use this raw focus to invent this raw spell, we're back to the situation above: I have the equivalent of 2 MMFs (at least for Perdo and Rego), and my pal is screwed.

Crap! i just realized that Arachne had a HUGE blind spot regarding anything that isn't magical, because I stupidly forgot that vim spells must be aspected :crazy_face: that's good, I can keep thinking about her :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

Sorry for wasting your time, I should go to sleep now. I wish you all the best :slightly_smiling_face:

10

If you cast a ward against metal and stone, then your MMF in Metals won't help you at all with casting that spell.
If you cast a ward against metal only, your MMF in Metals will help.
Duration is irrelevant for deciding if a magical focus is applicable or not.

A spell that is described as affecting metals will affect metals, not metals and stone and earth and ....
You can create a spell that affects both metal and stone, but then the spell has to be designed for that.

You need to decide when inventing the spell (for Formulaic and Ritual spells) or when casting it (for Spontaneous spells) what material(s) will be affected by the spell.

1 Like
11

Then that ward would never benefit from the MMF in metals, just like learning the spell in the lab did not, because the spell is too broad.

Benefitting from the Magical Focus at the time of casting depends on being able to target something that is completely covered by the Focus. In the case of a ward, you can only do that if the scope of the spell is completely covered by the Focus.

I'd allow the magus to use the lab text to either invent it with the same scope (without the bonus of the Focus) or as a more restrictive variant that only affects metals (with the bonus from the Focus). He'd get the advantage of using the lab text either way, but YMMV.

12

Your comment about "anytime there's a duration, I can't use my focus..." make me think that you're also confusing the wizard's intent in casting a spell with the spell's intent -- i.e., it's stated effect.

If you cast a "Ward Against Metal and Stone" spell, your Metals MMF does not apply because the spell isn't "metals." Even if your intent is protect against metals; it's the spell that matters. If you cast a "Ward Against Metals Only" spell, your Metals MMF applies. Duration isn't a consideration (for this MMF, at least).

If you want to invent an "also effects stone" version of a metal-only spell that you already know, your MMF would not apply. But you can probably get a Similar Spells bonus from the similar spell that you already know which you might have needed the MMF to invent. So your Metals MMF isn't totally useless in affecting stone... it's just more complicated to get that benefit.

1 Like
13

I think the problem is not the guideline. The problem is how your MMF was defined.

If you landed that your MMF is Metal and softer materials then it should apply for all those effects.

It is it just Metals then it is limited to only Metals and may qualify to being just a mMF

W

1 Like
14

If by "Metal and softer material" you mean sand, dirt, mud, clay, stone, base metals and precious metals then I'd say that is more than "smaller than a single Art" as required for an MMF. That's pretty much the entire art except for gems. Even if you preclude it applying to other Arts; MMF Metals, for example, should apply to illusions of metals as well.

Arguing that Metals should be mMF... eh. I'd estimate there are significantly more applications than "narrower than a single Technique and Form combination." But might be something a group would be open to house-ruling.

2 Likes
15

That is a different issue, but I have come to the conclusion that, ideally, a focus should be formulated in a word or two, no more. A single concept, not a list.

2 Likes
16

Non-living Solids or Inert Solids

Damage is a cannon example that might better fit your needs

Explosions, Entropy or Destruction

W

17

They still need to respect the scope of mMF or MMF, of course. Explosions or Entropy might work. Destruction would be too wide for even a MMF. So would the both solids examples.

The point is that the concept should be clear and concise, not an amalgalm of several distinct concepts.

But as I said, that's another discussion entirely, out of the scope of the OP.

18

Why? It still affects a wide range of effect, covering a wide variety of effects within a single Art (See MMF, ArM5, p. 45), rather wider than a single TeFo combination (See mMF, ArM5, p. 46)

Magical Foci aren't supposed to be All-Encompassing. That's the whole point, really.

19

One TeFo combination is about equal in scope to one fifth of a whole Form.
Is metals a fifth or less of Terram? Then it might qualify as a Minor Magical Focus.

20

YSMV, but I'd rule that metals is slightly more than one-fifth. If it was a specific metal -- even iron (that includes steel in my mind) -- I'd qualify it as a Minor Focus. So would copper alloys (brass and bronze) or precious metals (silver and gold*).

Stone is clearly more than one-fifth (and is specifically mentioned as being a Major Focus), and so is earth (that encompasses sand, dirt and mud). But clay, glass or gemstones would qualify as Minor, IMHO, as would sand, dirt or mud by themselves (instead of the general label earth).

*Not platinum, since it wasn't really known as a distinct metal in Europe until the 16th century.

2 Likes