Water Magic like water bending

[kurtpotts]

I have a player who likes to use her water magic like a water bender, but I'm always confused on whether the magic should be ground out by the water she's using.

The first incident was awesome so I let her do it, but how would you guys rule this for future reference?
The Sorcerer fills a room full of ghouls with fire then the wizard steps up behind him and with the drum of holy water they brought along creates a wave of holy water from one end of the room to the other filling the zone satisfying the their catch and finishing them off.
She was creating running water should that make the spell more difficult because of said running water?

[MijRai]

My personal interpretation of it is that the water has to be running 'naturally' to ground out magic.  So, a shower (rain or bath), a brook or the flow of a lake would disrupt magic, but manipulating relatively still water wouldn't be an issue.

[Tedronai]

Is the ability to physically manipulate water 'like a water bender' represented by one of the character's permanent aspects?
If yes, then they can do so without difficulty.
If no, then see MijRai's analysis.


Magic of this sort is outside the 'standard' for the Dresden Files, so make a story out of it.  This practitioner is special.  Why are they special?  What can they accomplish because of this that no one else can?  Who stands to gain from that?  Who stands to lose?

[solbergb]

Obviously a hydromancer could do a Dispel type spell and have an easy excuse for it, just as a spirit caster can easily justify an invisibility+avoidance type veil of the sort Molly uses.

You don't get it for free as a side-effect of other magic though. It's something you choose to do, just like hexing or whatever.    You can use water as a ram or water to make someone choke or water to dissolve things or water to dispel by grounding out, just as you can use fire to attack, or to set somebody on fire, or to vaporize a barrier or to "cleanse" some types of magic by burning.

It's just flavor for an effect.  Most elements can do most things, water does dispels by "running water" over the effect and "grounding it out".

[MijRai]

Obviously a hydromancer could do a Dispel type spell and have an easy excuse for it, just as a spirit caster can easily justify an invisibility+avoidance type veil of the sort Molly uses.

You don't get it for free as a side-effect of other magic though. It's something you choose to do, just like hexing or whatever.    You can use water as a ram or water to make someone choke or water to dissolve things or water to dispel by grounding out, just as you can use fire to attack, or to set somebody on fire, or to vaporize a barrier or to "cleanse" some types of magic by burning.

It's just flavor for an effect.  Most elements can do most things, water does dispels by "running water" over the effect and "grounding it out".

No, they're talking about the specific in-setting rule about how water grounds magic.  Basically, they're asking how it's possible to control water, when water is supposed to erode the controlling element. 

[PirateJack]

According to Jim, water magic is all about working with the 'flow' of the natural world, so I see no reason for a Wizard who thinks in that way to be unable to cast using waterbending-type spells. I'd hypothesise that the difference between water magic and that of other elements is that water magic seeks to follow the smoothest path down a river, whereas non-water magic hits every eddy and vortex on the way down. The latter gradually diffuses the energy of the spell while the former allows it to remain (relatively) whole and able to do its job.

[Quantus]

No, they're talking about the specific in-setting rule about how water grounds magic.  Basically, they're asking how it's possible to control water, when water is supposed to erode the controlling element.

For the same reason that you can do Fire magic despite the metaphysical effect it has of purifying and destroying Magic, I see no reason why you could not manipulate literal water the same way.  Cinematically it would be something of a Tai Chi move (which Waterbending was physically modeled on), collecting and grounding the enemy energy using the physical water as the medium.  But that's the difference between Water Grounding vs Fire Destroying.  Not unlike the scene in GP where Harry used his Sight to throw an immaterial Spell out the window and then hit it with literal Fire to destroy it.

Also, Jim has said accomplished Water Mages (like LTW) have far less difficulty doing magic over open water than others.  So there's that effect for your Water Mage, even if their not powerful enough to get a huge benefit.

[Quantus]

I'd hypothesise that the difference between water magic and that of other elements is that water magic seeks to follow the smoothest path down a river, whereas non-water magic hits every eddy and vortex on the way down. The latter gradually diffuses the energy of the spell while the former allows it to remain (relatively) whole and able to do its job.

I really like that image, thanks

[MadAlchemist]

It all depends on what your player wants to get out of it. If she just wants to use her environment to add flavor to her effects no mechanics are needed, being a water-mage gives her the capacity to do that without extra problems. If she wants advantages above what the basics of magic do you have options;
Invocation for Effect of her high concept to counter magical effects not normally covered by countermagic would be appropriate. Particularly since it is setting appropriate and used base mechanics.
If she wants to be extra effective at countermagic (and you are ok with stunts affecting magic) She could get a stunt giving +1 power and +1 control when she is countering with actual water at hand. I think that is mechanically sound enough.