Topic: What spells do you have the most trouble with in SL?

[markc]

What gives people problems about inviability?
MDC

[Elton Robb]

invisibility?  I think they talked about it in GM Law.

[markc]

So just those problems nothing else?
MDC

[ToM]

What gives people problems about inviability?
MDC

Invisibility has an absurd duration time. 24 hours? What the heck! No other "E" spell has a similar duration! It is absurdly overpowered being able to remain totally concealed all the time with the ridiculous expense of 4 PP PER DAY!

[yammahoper]

yet while invisible, you can do nothing.  any melee or spell attack ends the invisibilty, so except for spying, hiding, or getting away, the spell is not that useful.

btw, counting invisibility at a gate is as easy as putting in a turnstile like device, or a tunnel with hanging sheets or leafy branches that must be walked through.

[ToM]

yet while invisible, you can do nothing.  any melee or spell attack ends the invisibilty, so except for spying, hiding, or getting away, the spell is not that useful.

btw, counting invisibility at a gate is as easy as putting in a turnstile like device, or a tunnel with hanging sheets or leafy branches that must be walked through.

My problem with Invisibility is that, combined with other spells like Silence and Fly, becomes virtually impossible to detect the caster in almost any occasion, by any means.
Such a caster may be extremely useful to the party and practically is the perfect scout/infliltrator. Can pass through any obstacles (Long Door), see through darkness (Darkvision), close/open ways (Portal, Wall spells). He can also be active part of any combat without casting any direct attack spell but modifying terrain trough Elemental spells, empowering allies through Haste/Deflection/Bladeturn spells, countering magic...
IMHO, if the player likes this kind of play, can become rapidly very frustrating to the GM and other players.
But, I think, it is a problem common to all mid to high-level Essence spell-casters.

[Kristen Mork]

The definition of what spells cancel Invisibility is rather fuzzy.  In my game, I assume that any F or E spell will cancel the invisibility.  So, the caster can provide a support role, but his choice of spells is somewhat limited.  That said, I have no problem with a caster choosing to go invisible and move into a supporting role.  Seems like sound tactics to me, without being unbalanced.  Throw some enemies with similar tactics at them and take notes as to how they respond!

[markc]

  The GM who taught me RM2 had a unique way that inviability worked in his world, you shifted dimension slightly and had a good chance of not coming back to you own dimension.
  In my game world you need other spells to see while invisible as it bends the light around you, ie so you eyes do not have anything to see. But I have thought of a higher level inviability spell that would include vision. What do you think about my take on low level invisibility, that you have to have an other means to see?

MDC

[Elton Robb]

  The GM who taught me RM2 had a unique way that inviability worked in his world, you shifted dimension slightly and had a good chance of not coming back to you own dimension.
  In my game world you need other spells to see while invisible as it bends the light around you, ie so you eyes do not have anything to see. But I have thought of a higher level inviability spell that would include vision. What do you think about my take on low level invisibility, that you have to have an other means to see?

MDC

If it bends light, then it creates a powerful magnetic field around you.  That means some form of electrical current is involved (hehehe!).  It's powerful enough to create the magnetic field, but not powerful enough to kill you.

[markc]

  The GM who taught me RM2 had a unique way that inviability worked in his world, you shifted dimension slightly and had a good chance of not coming back to you own dimension.
  In my game world you need other spells to see while invisible as it bends the light around you, ie so you eyes do not have anything to see. But I have thought of a higher level inviability spell that would include vision. What do you think about my take on low level invisibility, that you have to have an other means to see?

MDC

If it bends light, then it creates a powerful magnetic field around you.  That means some form of electrical current is involved (hehehe!).  It's powerful enough to create the magnetic field, but not powerful enough to kill you.

  IMHO no the magnetic field's energy gets shunted into the plane of magic so you do not take damage or anyone else for that matter.
MDC

[yammahoper]

The definition of what spells cancel Invisibility is rather fuzzy.  In my game, I assume that any F or E spell will cancel the invisibility.  So, the caster can provide a support role, but his choice of spells is somewhat limited.  That said, I have no problem with a caster choosing to go invisible and move into a supporting role.  Seems like sound tactics to me, without being unbalanced.  Throw some enemies with similar tactics at them and take notes as to how they respond!

What he said.  casting a force or elemental spell should collapse the invisibility.  At the very least, a sheer folly mnv roll of SOME TYPE should be required to cast F or E spells and not cancel Invisibility.

[Elton Robb]

The definition of what spells cancel Invisibility is rather fuzzy.  In my game, I assume that any F or E spell will cancel the invisibility.  So, the caster can provide a support role, but his choice of spells is somewhat limited.  That said, I have no problem with a caster choosing to go invisible and move into a supporting role.  Seems like sound tactics to me, without being unbalanced.  Throw some enemies with similar tactics at them and take notes as to how they respond!

What he said.  casting a force or elemental spell should collapse the invisibility.  At the very least, a sheer folly mnv roll of SOME TYPE should be required to cast F or E spells and not cancel Invisibility.

I would say that irregardless of the manuever, throwing a shock bolt, lightning bolt, or a plasma bolt should cancel the invisibility because the spell might use the invisibility as the source of the shock (or plasma) and amplify it.

You learn a lot of things while studying the Electric Universe (hehe).

[ToM]

Excuse me sirs, but Invisibility does not work as you said.

My copy of Spell Law (RMC one, but AFAIK it is identical to any previous versions) states that Invisibility lasts "until 24 hrs pass or the target is struck by a violent blow (being hit by a weapon, falling, etc.) or the object makes a violent move (i.e., an attack)".

By the rules only, even a subtle attack (example: a Sleep Spell or Charm or a spell cast without somatic and voice components) will not be eligible to end Invisibility.

Then, we can house-rule the thing as we want.
But the fact is that, strictly by the rules, Invisibility is horribly broken IMHO.

[Kristen Mork]

Under the RaW, one could easily rule that F spells (and even P spells!) cancel invisibility because they require an attack roll (namely a BAR).  DE and BE spells also require an attack roll.  That just leaves E spells, and it seems odd that a Shock Bolt is an attack, but Vacuum (or some other auto-crit spell if Vacuum is F and not E) is not an attack.  So, I think ruling that F/DE/BE spells cancel invisibility is certainly within the RaW and E spells are in a grey area.

[yammahoper]

I see no grey area, AT ALL.  An attack is a violent option, be it with a tooth pick, an axe or a sleep spell.

All attacks cancel invisibility, period.  No grey.

[markc]

   It has been ruled in the past that hard rain will cancel an invisibility spell. Now we can all debate what hard rain is.
MDC

[Elton Robb]

   It has been ruled in the past that hard rain will cancel an invisibility spell. Now we can all debate what hard rain is.
MDC

Rain from a thunderstorm?  Or rain from a Typhoon?

[markc]

   It has been ruled in the past that hard rain will cancel an invisibility spell. Now we can all debate what hard rain is.
MDC

Rain from a thunderstorm?  Or rain from a Typhoon?

 Thunderstorm.
MDC

[Kristen Mork]

I see no grey area, AT ALL.  An attack is a violent option, be it with a tooth pick, an axe or a sleep spell.

All attacks cancel invisibility, period.  No grey.

I think the grey area involves the E spells.  Is Call Cold an attack?  You aren't targeting an individual, but you're inflicting a critical on the target.  This certainly sounds (to me) like an attack.  How about Stun Cloud?  Now any victims have the chance to leave the area.  So, in many cases you don't inflict damage, but otherwise the spell is no different than Call Cold (now we're in a grey area).  How about Aura Burn (causes crits to all that come within some distance of the caster)?  The spell just summons some elemental material.  How about Bind Fey?  It's E so there's no attack roll, but it seems pretty violent.  At the other extreme, how about Snake Eyes (causes the target to appear to have slitted eyes)?  Doesn't sound like an attack to me.  (Unless the target really doesn't want to look all freaky?)

So, if we accept that Call Cold is an attack and Snake Eyes is not, we have to define the dividing line between the two.  Personally, rather than trying to choose (and then justify to the players) that line, I've ruled that all E spells are attacks.  I suppose you could rule that Call Cold doesn't target anyone specifically, so it's not an attack, but that would make Invisibility too powerful.

My justification: F and E spells involve the caster violently forcing their will on the world.  Whereas P spells provide for a RR, the RR only lets the target detect the spell, and besides, the P stands for Passive.  I and U spells are a more subtle application of magic than F/E.

[providence13]

I use anything faster than a walk to have a good chance of disrupting invisibility.
Fly I is 75'/rnd. 5 mph for 10 sec rnds, 8.5 mph for our 6 sec rnds.
Once you get to Fly III, or Fly True, the wind would easily be a violent blow against you.