The Dresden Files > DFRPG
From how far away can you hit someone with an evocation?
Deadmanwalking:
--- Quote from: biff_dyskolos on May 01, 2010, 06:41:54 PM ---Hmmm. Old things are now made of new material. Earlier, you mentioned a evocation sniper with a telescope. If the lenses of the telescope are glass then it's okay? If they are made of Lexan then it's not?
--- End quote ---
Hmmm. Like a knife made of plastic there's nothing to go wrong there, so I think it'd be okay. Fiber optics have more to go wrong, if only by virtue of being a long and relatively fragile cable.
--- Quote from: exploding_brain on May 01, 2010, 06:42:41 PM ---If that's what's fun for your group, sure, that works.
--- End quote ---
That's actually the tack taken by the RPG in general. See p. 258.
Biff Dyskolos:
--- Quote from: Deadmanwalking on May 01, 2010, 06:46:06 PM ---Fiber optics have more to go wrong, if only by virtue of being a long and relatively fragile cable.
--- End quote ---
Actually, fiber optics are pretty darn simple and they are fairly rugged. Not that I like the whole evocation down a pipe direction tis topic has turned to.
I would disallow fiber optics on the bases that it is an indirect attack. Evocations don't turn corners - thats thaumaturgy. Also, forcing power down that fiber would burn it out - no hexing involved. Just like trying to bounce a Weapon:5 evocation off a mirror would break the mirror.
And I think the telescope idea is out because of the
--- Quote ---Inherent Limitations
--- End quote ---
(YS:250) that requires a "more permanent construct" (thaumaturgy) for spells beyond a "certain distance."
neko128:
--- Quote from: Deadmanwalking on May 01, 2010, 05:39:55 PM ---The fibre-optic cables and fish-eye lenses. Instantly. Anything electronic goes boom/fizzle almost immediately, and more importantly it's how new and advanced the technology is that makes it screw up. The newer, the easier and quicker it gets screwed up. Or are you going to tell me fibre optics aren't advanced technology?
--- End quote ---
I am, actually. The mistake you're making is the "electronic" bit - I specifically excluded electronic elements. Fibre optics are nothing more than pieces of transparent or translucent material that transmit light - like windows. The reason most people consider them high-tech is because the almost exclusive use in the current day and age is digital data transmission - which is done by firing lasers or LED flashes down fibre optic channels, and interpreting the digital data at the far end... But that's the actions of a computer. Fibre optics do nothing but carry light.
Similarly, a lense is nothing more than lump of glass or plastic that reflects light. Again, like a thick or curved window.
To screw up the fibre optics and fisheye lenses, you would have to change the behavior of light, and I have seen no precedent to believe that magic can do that (at least when it isn't intentional).
neko128:
--- Quote from: Deadmanwalking on May 01, 2010, 06:35:30 PM ---It's not about how it's being used, it's about it being new. Clearly, the magic making things not work doesn't give a damn about logic or guns would be immune. They aren't. It's a conceptual, not logical process. Is it new? Yes. Well then it fails.
--- End quote ---
Guns are subject to mechanical failures on small parts that are manufactured to fairly high tolerances. :)
Rel Fexive:
Of course, if there's a wall between you and your target, I don't care what you're using to see him - if you're casting your spell from inside a locked room expect property damage and a target running away fast when he hears the bang. It's not just the 'targeting' that's line of sight with evocation. And without a symbolic component would thaumaturgy be able to target someone you can only see?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version