Forums of the Megaverse®

Nightmask wrote: we don't have to assume it carries a piece of paper since we're already TOLD it can carry a piece of paper.

No, we are never told that it can carry a piece of paper.
We are told that it can deliver a written message, which is not necessarily the same thing.
There a many ways to deliver a written message that doe NOT include carrying a piece of paper.

(I'm using one of those ways right now, in fact. Although I'm pretty sure that's not the same technique that Magic Pigeons use.)

Nightmask wrote: It can deliver a written message, it's fashioned to resemble and function like a carrier pigeon, ergo it delivers a written message on paper that it physically carries from the caster's location to the target location and attempts to deliver to its intended recipient.

A logical assumption, but still an assumption.
And it's an assumption that has flaws the more one looks at it.

A Magic Pigeon is fashioned to resemble a pigeon, but it does not really function like one:
-They seem impervious to normal physical forces, from gunshots to wind and bad weather.
-They can deliver spoken messages without need of a micro-cassette or other recording device.
-They cannot be contained by physical constructs such as nets, boxes, walls, etc.
-They are not alive, and cannot die.
-They do not need to eat or drink.
-They do not need to rest.
-They have a constant speed of 30 mph, unlike real pigeons who only have it as an average speed.
-They can identify specific individuals, knowing whether or not the individual is within the target location.

In fact, when it comes to function, I'm not sure of any way in which they actually DO function like a real pigeon.

It most certainly doesn't do anything as ridiculous as transmit what you tell it to transmit but can make it a written piece of paper at the end instead of being verbal in the delivery, that would require a completely different sentence structure such as: 'The pigeon can deliver a message of up to 30 words in length either verbally or by leaving it transcribed to a piece of paper that magically appears to the recipient.'. What we do have is quite clear: it delivers either a verbal message of 30 words or less or it delivers a written message that it carries from where it is to the target with the limits of how much you can fit to the written page for delivery.

Both bolded sentences are equally absent from the book.
If the first bolded sentence is "required" in order to be assumed to be true, then logically the second should likewise be required in order to be assumed to be true.

J.L. Duncan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Nightmask wrote: we don't have to assume it carries a piece of paper since we're already TOLD it can carry a piece of paper.

No, we are never told that it can carry a piece of paper.
We are told that it can deliver a written message, which is not necessarily the same thing.
There a many ways to deliver a written message that doe NOT include carrying a piece of paper.

(I'm using one of those ways right now, in fact. Although I'm pretty sure that's not the same technique that Magic Pigeons use.)

Is it possible the MP can read, rather than being able to understand spoken word?

You don't deliver a written message to someone by speaking it to them, you deliver a written message by handing them a written message. Seriously I can't imagine how anyone would try and argue 'or deliver a written message' doesn't mean to hand over a written message on a piece of paper to someone. You may tell someone what a written message says but you didn't deliver the actual written message to them. Really, it's a magic pigeon, it's not that difficult. All the rest seems to just be arguments trying to make it more ambiguous than it actually is out of some desire to justify imposing the spoken word limitation on a written message (since you can fit a lot more than 30 words onto a written piece of paper) and saying 'no really there's enough play in the language to make this canon' when there simply isn't and it's just a house rule to make the spell less effective while trying to claim it's canon to the write-up when it isn't.

I mean if you bought a book and someone read it to you over the phone and said 'hey I delivered you the book you bought' would you go 'gee thanks' or go 'what are you talking about? I'm supposed to receive a physical book.'? Because you clearly haven't had a physical book delivered to you like you were thinking you were supposed to, just as 'deliver a written message' means you receive an actual bit of writing on paper or you haven't had it delivered to you.

Nightmask wrote:

J.L. Duncan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Nightmask wrote: we don't have to assume it carries a piece of paper since we're already TOLD it can carry a piece of paper.

No, we are never told that it can carry a piece of paper.
We are told that it can deliver a written message, which is not necessarily the same thing.
There a many ways to deliver a written message that doe NOT include carrying a piece of paper.

(I'm using one of those ways right now, in fact. Although I'm pretty sure that's not the same technique that Magic Pigeons use.)

Is it possible the MP can read, rather than being able to understand spoken word?

You don't deliver a written message to someone by speaking it to them, you deliver a written message by handing them a written message. Seriously I can't imagine how anyone would try and argue 'or deliver a written message' doesn't mean to hand over a written message on a piece of paper to someone. You may tell someone what a written message says but you didn't deliver the actual written message to them. Really, it's a magic pigeon, it's not that difficult. All the rest seems to just be arguments trying to make it more ambiguous than it actually is out of some desire to justify imposing the spoken word limitation on a written message (since you can fit a lot more than 30 words onto a written piece of paper) and saying 'no really there's enough play in the language to make this canon' when there simply isn't and it's just a house rule to make the spell less effective while trying to claim it's canon to the write-up when it isn't.

I mean if you bought a book and someone read it to you over the phone and said 'hey I delivered you the book you bought' would you go 'gee thanks' or go 'what are you talking about? I'm supposed to receive a physical book.'? Because you clearly haven't had a physical book delivered to you like you were thinking you were supposed to, just as 'deliver a written message' means you receive an actual bit of writing on paper or you haven't had it delivered to you.

So if I use my computer, voice type an email, and then deliver it via a Fax....I have to have some one take a piece of paper from me and hand it to them? I thought that I used the technology to deliver them a written message...with out ever writing it (until the technology makes a paper for them at their end.)
The canon is that...it delivers a message. period. dot. end of story
HOW that message is created/what form it takes other than (written/verbal) is NOT clear in canon.
Thus it could be done either way. We don't KNOW since this spell, like most of palladiums (or most magic in most games period) is not clear, and we don't have a 'real' grasp of the 'metaphyshics of magic', just how the rules work in certain cases.

Nightmask wrote:You don't deliver a written message to someone by speaking it to them, you deliver a written message by handing them a written message. Seriously I can't imagine how anyone would try and argue 'or deliver a written message' doesn't mean to hand over a written message on a piece of paper to someone.

I'm pretty sure that pigeons don't have hands, so it's unlikely that they ever hand anybody anything.

You may tell someone what a written message says but you didn't deliver the actual written message to them.

You DID deliver the message to them, though.
Although I do get where you're coming from on this point.

All the rest seems to just be arguments trying to make it more ambiguous than it actually is out of some desire to justify imposing the spoken word limitation on a written message

Keep up with the conversation.

... and saying 'no really there's enough play in the language to make this canon' when there simply isn't and it's just a house rule to make the spell less effective while trying to claim it's canon to the write-up when it isn't.

I don't think anybody is really trying to MAKE anything canon. We're simply trying to determine what exactly canon is supposed to be.
Right now, it looks to me like the intent of the official description is that a magic pigeon is intangible. That seems to be the simplest explanation that fits all of the facts.

I mean if you bought a book and someone read it to you over the phone and said 'hey I delivered you the book you bought' would you go 'gee thanks' or go 'what are you talking about? I'm supposed to receive a physical book.'? Because you clearly haven't had a physical book delivered to you like you were thinking you were supposed to, just as 'deliver a written message' means you receive an actual bit of writing on paper or you haven't had it delivered to you.

I agree with everything except for the bolded portion, for the most part.*
a) Because there is nothing about being a "written message" that requires any kind of paper.
People can write on all kinds of things, not just paper.
b) It is perfectly possible to deliver a written message without delivering the actual physical copy that was created by the writer.
That, in fact, is how you and I are communicating right now (to the extent that we are).
I'm writing a message to you, that message is being delivered to you via your computer screen, and you are writing a message back.
Nobody is handing anybody a physical anything.

*(Though, for the minor part, I wouldn't consider a phone book to be a "message.")

I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

The Beast wrote::eek: I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

*laughs* I love that, after all that's totally in agreement with the argument some have been making.

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote::eek: I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

*laughs* I love that, after all that's totally in agreement with the argument some have been making.

Well it's not his fault the book doesn't clarify enough. As I said early, if it's something light enough that a normal pigeon could carry it, I don't see why the spell version couldn't. Now you can rightly point out that the book specifies a verbal or 30-word-written communication, but you can't claim that it has to be written on paper since the book never specifies that.

The Beast wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote::eek: I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

*laughs* I love that, after all that's totally in agreement with the argument some have been making.

Well it's not his fault the book doesn't clarify enough. As I said early, if it's something light enough that a normal pigeon could carry it, I don't see why the spell version couldn't. Now you can rightly point out that the book specifies a verbal or 30-word-written communication, but you can't claim that it has to be written on paper since the book never specifies that.

Except the text doesn't say the written message is limited to 30 words like the verbal message it can carry is and I can certainly insist that the written message is meant to be on paper because it's a magic pigeon not a magic dragon and it would be an unrealistic claim to try and make it out that the spell is meant to be able to carry anything so long as it has a written message on it.

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote::eek: I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

*laughs* I love that, after all that's totally in agreement with the argument some have been making.

The some who are arguing that the pigeons are tangible, and can physically carry objects...?

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote::eek: I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

*laughs* I love that, after all that's totally in agreement with the argument some have been making.

Well it's not his fault the book doesn't clarify enough. As I said early, if it's something light enough that a normal pigeon could carry it, I don't see why the spell version couldn't. Now you can rightly point out that the book specifies a verbal or 30-word-written communication, but you can't claim that it has to be written on paper since the book never specifies that.

Except the text doesn't say the written message is limited to 30 words like the verbal message it can carry is and I can certainly insist that the written message is meant to be on paper because it's a magic pigeon not a magic dragon and it would be an unrealistic claim to try and make it out that the spell is meant to be able to carry anything so long as it has a written message on it.

if you have to 'insist' on something, then its just a house rule. This argument here, though absurd, is a good look at what the extremes of allowing the spell to carry a physical message can go to. Since this whole discussion was started specifically to LOOK at extremes, then it is a valid point to bring up.

Glistam wrote:

wyrmraker wrote:

Glistam wrote:The Magic Pigeon can deliver a "written message," which implies that it can carry objects. How much can it carry? Can it carry explosives? Letter bombs? White powders?

Or a letter with a curse written into it that's activated by opening it?

10th Level Spell "Wards." A Curse: Phobia or a Curse: Minor.

Phobia: Pigeons!

especially deadly in a TW Gattling pigeon gun

Oh I thought of another use. Taking out the engines of aircraft

Another abuse... use it to confirm assassination targets.

You think you're about to cap the CS emperor, nope, it's a body double. Utilize a MP to see if it flies to the guy in the pope-mobile. If so, then detonate your nuke.

Someone might have said this...I see horde of missiles put said pigeons in front of them...bye bye missiles..or use them take down airplane like in the Indiana Jones movie..

Oborous wrote:Another abuse... use it to confirm assassination targets.

You think you're about to cap the CS emperor, nope, it's a body double. Utilize a MP to see if it flies to the guy in the pope-mobile. If so, then detonate your nuke.

Good call!

J.L. Duncan wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote: It certainly doesn't carry a verbal message.

I think I'm confused here, could you clarify?

I can rephrase:
The pigeon does not grab sounds (the spoken words) out of the air in its feet or beak, then carry those sounds around with it until it reaches the destination.
The verbal message is not carried. It might be repeated, but the Magic Pigeon does not actually, literally CARRY spoken words.

I wasn't sure what the rest of your post was trying to say/ask.

Location and Recipient: I wonder if you could send a message to yourself; if you were 15th level that would be 2 1/2 years in the future. Say you were planning to open a shop or open a business in a city-but you just hadn’t got to it yet.

Hm. Seems a bit of a stretch. There's no mention of being able to choose the time of delivery.

nilgravity wrote:Oh I thought of another use. Taking out the engines of aircraft

If they're tangible and indestructible, that'd certainly do the job!

eliakon wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

The Beast wrote::eek: I have an idea!

The Tolkeen Retrobution squad that you belong to just succeed in taking over a Death's Head transport. No one there (either living or dead) is able to pilot it, so you have some squad members paint a 5-word message on the hull, tie a Magic Pigeon to it, and tell it to go find Lord Dunscon. The spell just says the written message has to be 30 words or less! It doesn't specify what it needs to be written on!

*laughs* I love that, after all that's totally in agreement with the argument some have been making.

Well it's not his fault the book doesn't clarify enough. As I said early, if it's something light enough that a normal pigeon could carry it, I don't see why the spell version couldn't. Now you can rightly point out that the book specifies a verbal or 30-word-written communication, but you can't claim that it has to be written on paper since the book never specifies that.

Except the text doesn't say the written message is limited to 30 words like the verbal message it can carry is and I can certainly insist that the written message is meant to be on paper because it's a magic pigeon not a magic dragon and it would be an unrealistic claim to try and make it out that the spell is meant to be able to carry anything so long as it has a written message on it.

if you have to 'insist' on something, then its just a house rule. This argument here, though absurd, is a good look at what the extremes of allowing the spell to carry a physical message can go to. Since this whole discussion was started specifically to LOOK at extremes, then it is a valid point to bring up.

Correct.
It's also, at this point, to explore how the spell actually works, because if we don't know how it works then some of the extreme exploits won't work.
For example, if they're tangible and indestructible, then my Pigeon Armor idea would work.
But if they're intangible, then it would not work.
Of course, if they're intangible, then that opens the door to other kinds of abuse.
So knowing whether or not they're tangible is pretty important to the discussion.

J.L. Duncan wrote:What I was saying is that I thought the text of the spell here: “The magic pigeon is able to deliver a spoken (30 words or less)…” is referencing only the spoken portion of the message delivery. Not the written portion of the message. As some have referenced the number of words, as a limit for written messages as well. The truth is no specifics are given for the amount of words or weight of the package that can be delivered.

Correct.
Earlier, I misread the text and thought that the 30 word limit was for the paper, then Nightmask corrected me, I apologized.

If the pigeon can’t physically deliver a written message-then why are both (written/spoken) included in the write up?

Because there are ways in which a written message can be delivered without physically picking it up and carrying it from one place to another.
As I've pointed out, we're doing that right now- communicating via written messages that are not physically picked up and carried from one place to another.

If the pigeon isn’t tangible-then I suppose the pigeon can read?

I wouldn't say so. They don't seem to have any kind of intelligence.

There might be a reason, to write the message down (rather than say it), but if the pigeon can’t carry the message (because it’s not tangible) then it must be able to read or at least comprehend word symbols (of sorts) to deliver the message.

Can your computer comprehend the words that you're writing?
I'd like to think that it cannot.
Yet it CAN convey your written messages to me.

J.L. Duncan wrote:The question is: How can the Magic Pigeon deliver a written message without physically picking it up?

Off the top of my head:
-By visually recording the message, then projecting the words onto another surface later (no wilder a theory than assuming that they record and playback spoken words).
-By the original message disappearing when the spell is cast, then re-appearing when the pigeon reaches its target.
-By the original message physically transforming into the pigeon, then reforming into the message once it has reached the destination.
-By the pigeon eating the message, and the words appearing on the pigeons wings.
-By the pigeon eating the message, then crapping out another message when it reaches the target.
-By the pigeon reading the message, memorizing it, then speaking the message aloud when it reaches the target.
-By the pigeon flying to the target, then teleporting the message to the target's hands.
-By the original message disappearing, then the pigeon rewriting the message onto a handy surface using laser eye-beams

Should I go on...?
There are near infinite possibilities, though some are obviously more absurd than others.

It is by inference (though logical) that we surmise that the pigeon must have the capability to record spoken word in order to deliver a spoken message whether in its own voice, or the voice of the messenger.

More or less. Although there are other options as well.

If the pigeon is not tangible (as you say-though is an inference as well), and which is a logical conclusion given the description of the spell; then we must infer (as well) how the magic pigeon can deliver a written message also.

Right. So far, I've been working really hard to get people to get beyond the idea that pigeons are necessarily flying tape recorders/players, and are necessarily NOT not flying cameras/projectors.

Killer Cyborg wrote: As I've pointed out, we're doing that right now- communicating via written messages that are not physically picked up and carried from one place to another.

The ways that a written message can be delivered without being physically carried, are only relevant if we factor in how the Magic Pigeon could accomplish this.

Agreed... NOW that we've gotten to the point where people can agree that it IS possible to transmit a written message in any other way beyond "I write the message on paper, then hand it to somebody."
But it's been a long, hard battle to get even this far. And I'm betting that a number of people will backslide inexplicably to the that starting point.

I think you’d agree, that saying the pigeon is a magical computer-or could use a computer is a stretch (such as your example), yet the magic pigeon must be able to record and recite audio to some level and we must infer this-from the poor quality of the spell description text.

I'll agree that this seems to be one likely scenario, and on the surface seems to be the most likely.
Even still, there are some immediate questions about that function, such as:
Does the mage have to actually speak the verbal message aloud, or can he think the message as he casts the spell?

My point here is that the magic pigeon must have some way in which to communicate a written message-if it cannot physically carry it. It is a possible inference-such as what we’ve all thought-when we look at (as I said) the magic pigeons ability to deliver a spoken message.

Agreed.
Keep in mind, I haven't necessarily ruled out the idea that the pigeon does physically carry the written message, only questioned it.
Even if the pigeon is intangible, that does not necessarily exclude the possibility that they carry the message physically. Perhaps, upon casting, the written message turns intangible at the same instant that the intangible pigeon manifests around the message in some way.
Ideally, we might find a method of message transport that would make equal sense with both written and verbal messages. As in, "it records and plays back the message" rather than "it records the audio message, but has to physically carry the written message."

Depending on how you view the rules of the indestructibility of magic pigeons, and the manner in which it conveys the message:

Magic Pigeon + Deathword

Killer Cyborg wrote:One of my thoughts is that since the spell creates the pigeon anywhere in your immediate area, you might be able to use the spell to Parry an incoming attack, in a pinch.
Though casting time might be an issue unless one is using a magic device to cast the spell, and I think that the GM would be well within his/her rights to impose penalties.

Which leads to pidgeon armour.

Can MP be affected by other spells? Can we cast Giant on the pigeon. If so the uses get really crazy, like being able to meet up with the rest of the group if you missed the last session.

nilgravity wrote:Can MP be affected by other spells? Can we cast Giant on the pigeon. If so the uses get really crazy, like being able to meet up with the rest of the group if you missed the last session.

ooh that would be funny a giant magical pigeon. So would that double or triple its capacity and at that point if it is tangible. could you use it to fly to a destination by sending to where you wanted to go?

As they can deliver a spoken or written message, I am wondering what prevents that spoken message from being Death Word, and that written message from being a Scroll or paper with either Diabolist Wards or Nazca Line Drawings on them. In the latter 2 cases, these could include triggers causing magical energy attacks or summoned animals to attack whoerver the pigeon delivers the paper to.

Also if the written message is indeed transferable via a physical medium, a Siphon Entity could be put into it. Or the paper could be made into a talisman or an amulet, I think. A means of transporting weapons or other magical resources where you need them.

Killer Cyborg wrote:4. Cast Magic Pigeon.
5. Have your Diabolist make the MP permanent as well.

Permanence wards can not be put on creatures of magic, would say pigeons would qualify as one of those, since they are created purely from magic. Not the most common usage of the phrase, but accurate.

Killer Cyborg wrote:6. Stick the MP onto the armor/vehicle.
7. Repeat until the entire outer portion of the armor/vehicle is covered with indestructible, permanent Magic Pigeons.
8. Enjoy your new semi-indestructible armor/vehicle.

Not clear we know that pigeons are tangible and would be able to block attacks. While they can carry the written word, you do not need to be tangible to do that, could be ethereally telekinetic.

The Beast wrote:

kaid wrote:Intangible probably is one of the better all around ways to make sense of how the power seems to work.

But then it shouldn't be able to carry a written message.

Haunting entities are intangible yet can carry written messages. So are some human mutants.

Killer Cyborg wrote:If the pigeon doesn't have to carry a physical recording of an audio message in order to deliver it, why would it have to carry a physical recording of a visual message in order to deliver it?

It could remember and recite it, having a magical mind and mouth that we know of, but no writing implements we know of. It is a facsimile of a pigeon so it can do what pigeons can do, such as make sounds from their mouth. Normal pigeons can not do English, but mutant ones can, so it is not as huge a stretch compared to imbuing the idea to write magical letters in the air, which is a larger leap.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Conversely, if the pigeon does have to physically carry a piece of paper in order to deliver a written message, why would it NOT have to carry a micro-cassette or other physical recording of an audio message?

In either case it can remember what it has heard or seen, but in the case of hearing it could recreate a sound through less of a leap compared to transmitting what it has seen.

Killer Cyborg wrote:For that matter, if the pigeon is physically carrying the written message, why is the message limited to 30 words or less? Why can't you just write small? Or use a micro-dot? Or otherwise take measures to bypass that 30 word limit?

The 30 word limit is in parenthesis after -spoken-, not written. A written message is NOT limited to 30 words. It could be a novel.

Tor wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:4. Cast Magic Pigeon.
5. Have your Diabolist make the MP permanent as well.

Permanence wards can not be put on creatures of magic, would say pigeons would qualify as one of those, since they are created purely from magic. Not the most common usage of the phrase, but accurate.

You don't need to put the ward on the pigeon in order to make it permanent.

Killer Cyborg wrote:6. Stick the MP onto the armor/vehicle.
7. Repeat until the entire outer portion of the armor/vehicle is covered with indestructible, permanent Magic Pigeons.
8. Enjoy your new semi-indestructible armor/vehicle.

Not clear we know that pigeons are tangible and would be able to block attacks. While they can carry the written word, you do not need to be tangible to do that, could be ethereally telekinetic.

Interesting combo. That would prevent them from going through walls as long as they were carrying a physical message.

Killer Cyborg wrote:If the pigeon doesn't have to carry a physical recording of an audio message in order to deliver it, why would it have to carry a physical recording of a visual message in order to deliver it?

It could remember and recite it, having a magical mind and mouth that we know of, but no writing implements we know of. It is a facsimile of a pigeon so it can do what pigeons can do, such as make sounds from their mouth. Normal pigeons can not do English, but mutant ones can, so it is not as huge a stretch compared to imbuing the idea to write magical letters in the air, which is a larger leap.

Not by much.
Being a facsimile of a pigeon doesn't mean that it's anything like a pigeon, except for as stated.
A robot pigeon would also be a facsimile of a pigeon, but that wouldn't mean anything regarding the odds of it having eye lasers.

Killer Cyborg wrote:Conversely, if the pigeon does have to physically carry a piece of paper in order to deliver a written message, why would it NOT have to carry a micro-cassette or other physical recording of an audio message?

In either case it can remember what it has heard or seen, but in the case of hearing it could recreate a sound through less of a leap compared to transmitting what it has seen.

It's a magical construct designed to deliver messages.
It's not a leap to assume that it has whatever abilities are necessary to deliver messages.

Killer Cyborg wrote:For that matter, if the pigeon is physically carrying the written message, why is the message limited to 30 words or less? Why can't you just write small? Or use a micro-dot? Or otherwise take measures to bypass that 30 word limit?

The 30 word limit is in parenthesis after -spoken-, not written. A written message is NOT limited to 30 words. It could be a novel.

Addressed already.