Forums of the Megaverse®

Killer Cyborg wrote:[
Most of that post seems to be a long-winded way of saying, yet again, "Because the rules say so!"

Other than that, it seems that you think it has to do with metal.
So, do you think that it would be legal for a mage inside a non-metal vehical (a conastoga wagon, for example) to cast spells outside of it? Or for a mage on the outside to cast spells at the people inside?

Personally I'd say you shouldn't have a problem. By what I've read in the books the problem of casting spells through a vehicle or robot only occurs when the vehicle is "sealed". If you were to open a window, or a door, then presumably the magic would be able to get through. As for you example of the conastoga wagon....I would never consider an SDC vehicle to be difficult to cast magic through. SDC objects are never mentioned as causing mages difficulty. Just the MDC ones.

Traska wrote:I disagree with it solely being about metal or, again, there'd be a disclaimer about not being able to teleport through metal.

It's only a problem when the location your attempting to teleport to is totally enclosed by MDC metal. Hence the wording on page 21 of the BOM. And the only rules I've seen apply to robots and giant vehicles only, with no mention of MDC houses, buildings, factories, or what-not.

With power armor, the mage is confined. S/he doesn't get the same range of motions as usual, and PPE cannot flow around the mage as normal. In a robot or vehicle (where there's more space), it can.

If it's all about the metal, then how come a mage inside a vehicle can cast spells at all? The entry on Page 21 *clearly* states that spells can be cast while in a vehicle, it just won't affect anything outside of it.

You've just hit it square on the head!! The metal does not seem to stop magic in it's vicinity, only hamper it's progress "through" metal. The mage can cast a healing spell on himself while inside the vehicle with no problems or penelties. The same with such spells as tounges, breath without air, eyes of thoth....just to name a few. But try to cast a fireball spell through the window of a sealed robot and see what happens. Or a lightning bolt, or a teleport. Unless your GM happens to be Doom then you'll be just fine. But any GM that follows the rules will not allow it.

Dr. Doom III wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Most of that post seems to be a long-winded way of saying, yet again, "Because the rules say so!"

Other than that, it seems that you think it has to do with metal.
So, do you think that it would be legal for a mage inside a non-metal vehical (a conastoga wagon, for example) to cast spells outside of it? Or for a mage on the outside to cast spells at the people inside?

Or the fact that Power Armor has no adverse affect.

Doom, you just can't help but be wrong can you?!?!?! Any mage wearing power armor must spend at least 20% more PPE to cast a spell, and roll on the chart on page 21 to see what adverse effects happen to his spell. Such as reducing the damage, duration, range, etc by up to 40%.
If this is "no adverse affect", then you need a new dictionary!!!

By the way a "dictionary" is a book with definitions in it.
A definition is what words mean.

Hope that helps ya out!!

Tyciol wrote:Canon rules. Cannons are for shooting ships

Since when do all environmental vehicles made contain these large amounts of metal?

I'd have a difficult time imagining an MDC vehicle that wasn't made of metal. What other material is going to provide the protection from lasers, particle beams, plasma, super-sonic kinetic rounds, etc....that large heavy sheets of metal does?? That's not even considering magic fires, lightning strikes, and whatever damage psionic energy is composed of, such as psi-swords and energy bolts!!

Temporalmage wrote:Personally I'd say you shouldn't have a problem. By what I've read in the books the problem of casting spells through a vehicle or robot only occurs when the vehicle is "sealed". If you were to open a window, or a door, then presumably the magic would be able to get through. As for you example of the conastoga wagon....I would never consider an SDC vehicle to be difficult to cast magic through. SDC objects are never mentioned as causing mages difficulty. Just the MDC ones.

Line of Vision affects SDC as well as MDC.

Temporalmage wrote:Doom, you just can't help but be wrong can you?!?!?! Any mage wearing power armor must spend at least 20% more PPE to cast a spell, and roll on the chart on page 21 to see what adverse effects happen to his spell. Such as reducing the damage, duration, range, etc by up to 40%.
If this is "no adverse affect", then you need a new dictionary!!!

By the way a "dictionary" is a book with definitions in it.
A definition is what words mean.

Hope that helps ya out!!

What affect does it have on a mage casting a spell on someone in Power Armor?
None.
How adverse is none?
Mages don't even get those penalties in bots or vehicles when casting spells inside them.

Keep trying you almost had me there if I didn't now exactly what you would say.

Temporalmage wrote: But try to cast a fireball spell through the window of a sealed robot and see what happens. Or a lightning bolt, or a teleport. Unless your GM happens to be Doom then you'll be just fine. But any GM that follows the rules will not allow it.

Now you're just not listening.
A fireball would hit the window.
Call lighting would be fine as long as you have a clear Line of Vision.
Teleport of course is almost flawless when you can see where you’re going.

Temporalmage wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Most of that post seems to be a long-winded way of saying, yet again, "Because the rules say so!"

Other than that, it seems that you think it has to do with metal.
So, do you think that it would be legal for a mage inside a non-metal vehical (a conastoga wagon, for example) to cast spells outside of it? Or for a mage on the outside to cast spells at the people inside?

Personally I'd say you shouldn't have a problem. By what I've read in the books the problem of casting spells through a vehicle or robot only occurs when the vehicle is "sealed". If you were to open a window, or a door, then presumably the magic would be able to get through. As for you example of the conastoga wagon....I would never consider an SDC vehicle to be difficult to cast magic through. SDC objects are never mentioned as causing mages difficulty. Just the MDC ones.

1. Check out p. 19, BoM
"Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head abd upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic. Many spells also require line of sight to strike a specific target; the spell caster must be able to see his quarry."
So the vehicle being "sealed" doesn't really matter.

2. The books only say "vehicle", not "MDC Vehicle". Since you're such a stickler for the letter of the law, there is no real reason for you to believe that it doesn't include SDC vehicles.

3. But even if you go with that, what about a MDC Conastoga Wagon? Do you suppose it would stop a mage from casting spells out of it?

You've just hit it square on the head!! The metal does not seem to stop magic in it's vicinity, only hamper it's progress "through" metal. The mage can cast a healing spell on himself while inside the vehicle with no problems or penelties. The same with such spells as tounges, breath without air, eyes of thoth....just to name a few. But try to cast a fireball spell through the window of a sealed robot and see what happens. Or a lightning bolt, or a teleport.

But you don't teleport *through* anything. Ever. Teleport just doesn't work like that. It's effectively a sidestepping of physical space. You vanish from one location, and are suddenly at another. There's NO crossing of physical space in any way, or a psi-stalker in the line of teleporting would easily be able to sense it. And as far as I know, they can't.

A teleport doesn't affect the destination OR the departure point in any way. You not casting on, through, in, or around the metal in any way. You're casting on the mage, and *only* the mage.

That's why you don't need line of sight to teleport. You can 'port to someplace completely underground pretty easily, so long as you've been there before.

Tyciol wrote:TM you're getting far too enthusiastic and insulting. Most body armour is made from artificial ceramics and plastics, not raw metals. I don't see why vehicles would be any different. I'm sure there is metal, but not enough to interfere.

How the heck is it that I insult so many peaple???? Is everyone but me, Killer, and Doom thin skined?? Just asking!! I don't mean to insult anyone!!!

I know that a few armors give some idea of what they may be made of. Not all of them do, but a few give token mention. The BOM does say man-made materials and metals, and don't give much of a leyway for those that would choose to play strickly by the book.
Rules aside I thought your first post, questioning "when do all environmental vehicles contain these large amounts of metal?", was an off the cuff question that was asking for personal opinions. Which is exactly what I gave. But your question does beg for a regbuttle question Tyciol....
Why wouldn't environmental vehicles have huge ammounts of metal in the world of Rifts, especially when manufacturing artificial materials like ceramics and plastics require much larger and more complex manufacturing proccesses than just smelting raw ore, or even making making alloys?

Dr. Doom III wrote:What affect does it have on a mage casting a spell on someone in Power Armor?
None.

Not quite. Try casting lightning bolt on someone in power armor, with a clear faceplate that you can clearly see through, and see what happens. Does the persons face sudenly get zapped??

How adverse is none?
Mages don't even get those penalties in bots or vehicles when casting spells inside them.

Your correct. Mages get no penelties when casting spells inside of robots. Because the spell can not get out of it. That's a penelty in and of itself. For further clarification see Killer Cyborgs post, he gives page numbers to yet another book quote that makes teleporting into/out of robots/vehicles against the rules.

Keep trying you almost had me there if I didn't now exactly what you would say.

I had you before this topic was even started!!

Temporalmage wrote:How the heck is it that I insult so many peaple???? Is everyone but me and Doom thin skined?? Just asking!! I don't mean to insult anyone!!!

I'm sick of you and your insulting sarcarm.
You've made an enemy for life!!:x








(Just kidding)

Killer Cyborg wrote:1. Check out p. 19, BoM
"Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head abd upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic. Many spells also require line of sight to strike a specific target; the spell caster must be able to see his quarry."
So the vehicle being "sealed" doesn't really matter.

Killer, your absolutly right. I forgot about the above quote from the BOM. I stand corrected. And for the record thank you for providing even more material against teleporting from robots/vehicles.

2. The books only say "vehicle", not "MDC Vehicle". Since you're such a stickler for the letter of the law, there is no real reason for you to believe that it doesn't include SDC vehicles

.
The only reason is personal. By the "letter of the law" as you put it your right once again. Though I would be hard pressed to believe that a mage sitting in a convertable car would have difficulties casting a spell at someone outside the car. This would also bring up questions about motorcycles, dune buggy's with nothing that really blocks even LOS. After all they are all "vehicles".

3. But even if you go with that, what about a MDC Conastoga Wagon? Do you suppose it would stop a mage from casting spells out of it?

According to the rule you have so elequently quoted....yes. A mage would have problems unless the mage hung out of the vehicle to cast the spell. My personal opinion.....no. Unless we're talking about some custom wagon with full environmental capabilities, an MDC metal covering, or some such stuff then as long as the mage can establish a LOS, even a MDC wagon shouldn't be enough to stop magic. Once again this is just my personal opinion.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Temporalmage wrote:How the heck is it that I insult so many peaple???? Is everyone but me and Doom thin skined?? Just asking!! I don't mean to insult anyone!!!

I'm sick of you and your insulting sarcarm.
You've made an enemy for life!!:x








(Just kidding)

Hey Killer...I edited my previous post to include you!!

Temporalmage wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:1. Check out p. 19, BoM
"Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head abd upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic. Many spells also require line of sight to strike a specific target; the spell caster must be able to see his quarry."
So the vehicle being "sealed" doesn't really matter.

Killer, your absolutly right. I forgot about the above quote from the BOM. I stand corrected. And for the record thank you for providing even more material against teleporting from robots/vehicles.

2. The books only say "vehicle", not "MDC Vehicle". Since you're such a stickler for the letter of the law, there is no real reason for you to believe that it doesn't include SDC vehicles

.
The only reason is personal. By the "letter of the law" as you put it your right once again. Though I would be hard pressed to believe that a mage sitting in a convertable car would have difficulties casting a spell at someone outside the car. This would also bring up questions about motorcycles, dune buggy's with nothing that really blocks even LOS. After all they are all "vehicles".

3. But even if you go with that, what about a MDC Conastoga Wagon? Do you suppose it would stop a mage from casting spells out of it?

According to the rule you have so elequently quoted....yes. A mage would have problems unless the mage hung out of the vehicle to cast the spell. My personal opinion.....no. Unless we're talking about some custom wagon with full environmental capabilities, an MDC metal covering, or some such stuff then as long as the mage can establish a LOS, even a MDC wagon shouldn't be enough to stop magic. Once again this is just my personal opinion.

Okay, so the "metal" theory is kind of shot.
The "environmental" theory is shot.
What else do we have left to explain why magic can't penetrate vehicles?

Killer Cyborg wrote:Okay, so the "metal" theory is kind of shot.
The "environmental" theory is shot.
What else do we have left to explain why magic can't penetrate vehicles?

Well here's a hypothosis.
Magic is a natural force. A force of nature so to speak. As has always been the case, nature and technology don't mix, or at best don't mix well. (Techno-wizardry being the sole exception, and even then a TW's magic is reduced by half because his focus of magic is reserved for technology) Perhaps magic itself is repulsed by technology to the extent that when someone is compleatly covered by the stuff in large quantities, such as inside of robots and giant vehicles, the magic itself refuses to approach it. The same could be construde from magic cast on the outside. We are talking about magic here. Capable of ripping the fabric of time and space, yet according to the books incapable of passing through a Spider Skull Walker. Comparitivly the Walker would seem to be a much easier thing to pass through IMHO. Magic can make mountains dance, volcano's erupt, the very sky to suddenly cloud up and create tornadoes. Yet the technological robot or giant vehicle is totally inviolate. Magic being ony able to attack it's surface untill enough damage is done to get to the inside. This may explain why certain materials used in body armor causes mages to have a lessoning of power. Because the materials are man made, or at least rearanged by man. Remember that there is no steel mines in the world. Steel being a man made substance composed mostly of iron, but still not 100% natural. Think of technology and magic as being two magnets. Each repulses the other. Only a techno-wizard is capable of making the two work togeather.

Temporalmage wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:Okay, so the "metal" theory is kind of shot.
The "environmental" theory is shot.
What else do we have left to explain why magic can't penetrate vehicles?

Well here's a hypothosis.
Magic is a natural force. A force of nature so to speak. As has always been the case, nature and technology don't mix, or at best don't mix well. (Techno-wizardry being the sole exception, and even then a TW's magic is reduced by half because his focus of magic is reserved for technology) Perhaps magic itself is repulsed by technology to the extent that when someone is compleatly covered by the stuff in large quantities, such as inside of robots and giant vehicles, the magic itself refuses to approach it. The same could be construde from magic cast on the outside. We are talking about magic here. Capable of ripping the fabric of time and space, yet according to the books incapable of passing through a Spider Skull Walker. Comparitivly the Walker would seem to be a much easier thing to pass through IMHO. Magic can make mountains dance, volcano's erupt, the very sky to suddenly cloud up and create tornadoes. Yet the technological robot or giant vehicle is totally inviolate. Magic being ony able to attack it's surface untill enough damage is done to get to the inside. This may explain why certain materials used in body armor causes mages to have a lessoning of power. Because the materials are man made, or at least rearanged by man. Remember that there is no steel mines in the world. Steel being a man made substance composed mostly of iron, but still not 100% natural. Think of technology and magic as being two magnets. Each repulses the other. Only a techno-wizard is capable of making the two work togeather.

Okay, that's pretty good.
Except...
1. What about my MDC Conastoga Wagon? No high tech involved...
2. MDC buildings and other structures involve a lot of technology, but there isn't anything in the book saying that magic can't penetrate their walls. Although, if your theory is right (and they just never mentioned it in regards to buildings) then it would be great news for the Coalition.

Tyciol wrote:

Tyciol wrote:TM you're getting far too enthusiastic and insulting.

Temporalmage wrote:How the heck is it that I insult so many peaple???? Is everyone but me, Killer, and Doom thin skined?? Just asking!! I don't mean to insult anyone!!!

See above. While not personally insulted, I see you doing it to others and I don't like it.

Well if I insulted someone else....I probably ment to. I usually say exactly what I'm thinking when I type. What surprises me is that everyone gets insulted the most when I DON"T mean to insult someone.

Temporalmage wrote:I know that a few armors give some idea of what they may be made of. Not all of them do, but a few give token mention. The BOM does say man-made materials and metals, and don't give much of a leyway for those that would choose to play strickly by the book.

I don't have that dumb BoM, so I play strictly by the rules in the main book, conversion book, and first edition FoM. But yes, I suppose the BoM and GM Guides and whatever are official, so we can change it to man-made materials. Prior to that rule change though, I'd be right.

Um, ok. Thanks for the spelling tip??

Temporalmage wrote:Why wouldn't environmental vehicles have huge ammounts of metal in the world of Rifts, especially when manufacturing artificial materials like ceramics and plastics require much larger and more complex manufacturing proccesses than just smelting raw ore, or even making making alloys?

They're MDC. Normal allows and smelted ore are SDC. You really need to make some tightly knit polymers if you want MDC.

It's "alloys" by the way. And I dont' remember "tightly knit polymers" being mentioned in any official Rifts book. You may be right in the real world, but this is just a game.

Temporalmage wrote:Not quite. Try casting lightning bolt on someone in power armor, with a clear faceplate that you can clearly see through, and see what happens. Does the persons face sudenly get zapped??

Doom shouldn't even have to answer a stupid question like this. Energy spells are launched from point to point, usually from the caster's person, or in this case, the sky. The face plate gets in the way, so it stops it. Doom refers to things such as blind or fear.

And peaple wondered why I said Doom had followers!! Ok, then how about replace the spell lightning bolt with the spell fear? It's still gonna have the same effect unless the spell fear says' that it can bypass power armor. Which only a few spells can by the way!!

Temporalmage wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:1. Check out p. 19, BoM
"Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle). Many spells also require line of sight to strike a specific target; the spell caster must be able to see his quarry."
So the vehicle being "sealed" doesn't really matter.

Killer, your absolutly right. I forgot about the above quote from the BOM. I stand corrected. And for the record thank you for providing even more material against teleporting from robots/vehicles.

I believe KC's quote shows that environmental blocks have nothing to do with anything, which is what you've based the entirety of your argument on up until this point. Would you care to drop all your previous arguments and admit they were foolish, and begin upon this new tangent? If so I look forward to it, it'll be fun and easy. Unless of course you don't, which seems to be the case going by your following statements, in which case it doesn't provide any material against teleporting from robots/vehicles at all, it merely confuses your environmental protection position by making the rule seemed more upon line of sight than environmental protection. After all, you can't see through walls, or truly see it on a viewing screen, but you can by looking out the window. Why stick your head out the window? How else can you see something in front of you by looking out a side window?

OH MY GOD YOUR ABSOLUTLY RIGHT!!! I'll just have to drop all of my previous statements right now, throw myself on the mercy of the moderators and beg forgivness of the almighty Doom!!!

Except for one small thing..... Way way back on the first pages of these posts, and several dozen times since, I've repeatedly said that I am only quoting the book rules. At no time did I ever say why the rules are the way they are. I may have given my personal hypothesis and opinions from time to time. But my argument does not hinge one little bit on any environmental issues. My sole argument is that magic is blocked by robots and giant vehicle, and magic cannot pass through them from either the outside, or the inside. This argument is straight from the BOM, with honorable mention from the first source book. And you had the gall to tell me that I was far too enthusiastic and insulting!! Man you gotta get your facts right!!

Killer Cyborg wrote:[Okay, that's pretty good.

Thanks!!

Except...
1. What about my MDC Conastoga Wagon? No high tech involved...

Man...theres always an "except"!! Well in that specific case the composition of the wagon itself would, or could, be construde as the offending "high tech". UNLESS.... the wagon was made of materials that were made MDC by magic. I believe I read someplace that magical materials, or materials made MDC by magic, didn't effect mages in any way. If that was the case of your "super wagon" there would be very little problem. Rule wise that is.

2. MDC buildings and other structures involve a lot of technology, but there isn't anything in the book saying that magic can't penetrate their walls. Although, if your theory is right (and they just never mentioned it in regards to buildings) then it would be great news for the Coalition.

Well my hypothosis may be the most logical reason why someone hasn't just teleported a nuke into Chi Town yet!!

Temporalmage wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:1. What about my MDC Conastoga Wagon? No high tech involved...

Man...theres always an "except"!! Well in that specific case the composition of the wagon itself would, or could, be construde as the offending "high tech". UNLESS.... the wagon was made of materials that were made MDC by magic. I believe I read someplace that magical materials, or materials made MDC by magic, didn't effect mages in any way. If that was the case of your "super wagon" there would be very little problem. Rule wise that is.

Well, if you find that rule then you're in business...
I haven't seen it anywhere, though.
(Oh, the easiest way to make a MDC Conastoga Wagon would likely to use Ironwood and the hide from dinos or other MDC creatures)

2. MDC buildings and other structures involve a lot of technology, but there isn't anything in the book saying that magic can't penetrate their walls. Although, if your theory is right (and they just never mentioned it in regards to buildings) then it would be great news for the Coalition.

Temporalmage wrote:Well my hypothosis may be the most logical reason why someone hasn't just teleported a nuke into Chi Town yet!!

Yes.
While I still don't agree with you about teleportation, your theory does have some incidental benefits.

Something Tyciol said bothered me a bit and I really feel the need to address it.

Tyciol wrote:[After all, you can't see through walls, or truly see it on a viewing screen, but you can by looking out the window. Why stick your head out the window? How else can you see something in front of you by looking out a side window?

If your driving a robot or giant vehicle, and that robot or giant vehicle has a large window, such as a Behemoth explorer or Mountaineer, and someone is on the road in front of you. As the driver the person on the road is clearly visable from the cockpit straight through the windshield. There is no "viewing screen" or wall in the way. A clear line of sight is established from a perfectly clear "window" to the target person on the road, and vice versa. Could either person, assuming they are both mages, cast a spell that would effect the other? The answer is no. Unless whatever spell they cast was an visual spell that only effected what they see, such as cloud of smoke or an illusion of some sort. Or a spell that specifically stated that it could bypass robots. Otherwise the only way either could cast a spell on the other is if the pilot was to go to a window or door, open it up, and according to the book of magic "stick his head and upper body out". There is no line of sight issue here either. It's just a simple rule that Palladium has imposed for whatever reason that magic can not be cast from inside of a robot or vehicle to the outside, nor vice versa. And once again none of the teleport spells say anything about being exceptions to this rule that sopposedly apply's to "all magic".

Temporalmage wrote:Not quite. Try casting lightning bolt on someone in power armor, with a clear faceplate that you can clearly see through, and see what happens. Does the persons face sudenly get zapped??

I choose not to answer this foolish question.

Your correct. Mages get no penelties when casting spells inside of robots. Because the spell can not get out of it. That's a penelty in and of itself. For further clarification see Killer Cyborgs post, he gives page numbers to yet another book quote that makes teleporting into/out of robots/vehicles against the rules.

So if a mage who is wearing power armor gets no penalties when casting spells on himself?

I had you before this topic was even started!!

Had me whippin’ your behind.

Temporalmage wrote:Something Tyciol said bothered me a bit and I really feel the need to address it.

Tyciol wrote:[After all, you can't see through walls, or truly see it on a viewing screen, but you can by looking out the window. Why stick your head out the window? How else can you see something in front of you by looking out a side window?

If your driving a robot or giant vehicle, and that robot or giant vehicle has a large window, such as a Behemoth explorer or Mountaineer, and someone is on the road in front of you. As the driver the person on the road is clearly visable from the cockpit straight through the windshield. There is no "viewing screen" or wall in the way. A clear line of sight is established from a perfectly clear "window" to the target person on the road, and vice versa. Could either person, assuming they are both mages, cast a spell that would effect the other? The answer is no. Unless whatever spell they cast was an visual spell that only effected what they see, such as cloud of smoke or an illusion of some sort. Or a spell that specifically stated that it could bypass robots. Otherwise the only way either could cast a spell on the other is if the pilot was to go to a window or door, open it up, and according to the book of magic "stick his head and upper body out". There is no line of sight issue here either. It's just a simple rule that Palladium has imposed for whatever reason that magic can not be cast from inside of a robot or vehicle to the outside, nor vice versa. And once again none of the teleport spells say anything about being exceptions to this rule that sopposedly apply's to "all magic".

Your enjoing all this aren't you. Hey Doom should loose his title "rules lawyer" then again he may be the defendants attorney or a physical injuries lier... I mean lawyer. just kidding Doom.

Tyciol wrote:TM would be a rules lawyer, if he knew the rules.

I do know the rules. And unlike alot of peaple I give exact page numbers, books, and quotes verbatum so that others can check on what I'm saying. If I give my opinion I almost allways say that it's my opinion and not book material. Most importantly if someone proves me wrong I'm man enough to admit it on the boards!!

By the way TM, do what I do and put all your replies into a single jumbo-post. It saves room, organizes your thoughts, and doesn't give the impression that you're posting multiple consecutive replies to increase your post count

Well I've actually tried that in the past. But it usually just gets confusing and I end up derailing my train of thought. It's just easier for me to address each individual post as it comes. And I could really care less about my post count.

Temporalmage wrote: Most importantly if someone proves me wrong I'm man enough to admit it on the boards!!

We are waiting.

Dr. Doom III wrote:

Your correct. Mages get no penelties when casting spells inside of robots. Because the spell can not get out of it. That's a penelty in and of itself. For further clarification see Killer Cyborgs post, he gives page numbers to yet another book quote that makes teleporting into/out of robots/vehicles against the rules.

So if a mage who is wearing power armor gets no penalties when casting spells on himself?

Good question Doom. Unfortunatly the books don't give examples for every single possible scenario. But extrapolating on what is said in the BOM, I'd have to say probably not.
In D&D they had mages doing all kinds of things with every single spell. Stuff like extending thier right hand straight up and eating a spider with the left will dancing a jig on one foot. Palladium's spell system is much more lax, with the common spells being stated as being "invocations". My favorite deffinition of the word Invocation is "An incantation used in conjuring". So if all invocation spells require, for the most part, is incantations then mages in Palladium don't have to worry as much about movement or restraining armor or anything like that. I'd personally have no problem with a mage casting a spell on themselves while inside power armor. As long as the spell only effects the mage inside and not the rest of the world. Such spell examples would be tounges, see aura, see invisability, eyes of thoth, eyes of the wolf, healing spells...etc. You get the idea.

I had you before this topic was even started!!

Had me whippin’ your behind.

Only in your dreams Doomy!

Dr. Doom III wrote:

Temporalmage wrote: Most importantly if someone proves me wrong I'm man enough to admit it on the boards!!

We are waiting.

Yes Doom, we are waiting for you to admit your wrong. Unless you've found something in the books to back your position up that is. But alas, you havn't have you??

Temporalmage wrote:Yes Doom, we are waiting for you to admit your wrong. Unless you've found something in the books to back your position up that is. But alas, you havn't have you??

You've been quoting the rule that prooves Doom is right for weeks.
You just need to learn how to read it right.

Temporalmage wrote:

Tyciol wrote:TM would be a rules lawyer, if he knew the rules.

I do know the rules. And unlike alot of peaple I give exact page numbers, books, and quotes verbatum so that others can check on what I'm saying. If I give my opinion I almost allways say that it's my opinion and not book material. Most importantly if someone proves me wrong I'm man enough to admit it on the boards!!

You mean unlike certain peoples who like to enterpret rules however they like, sort of like a certain religion durring the middle ages causing both the Crusades and the Inquisition. Though I'd have to say sometimes his translation makes more sense than the "word of the law" and may actually have been the intended "spirit of the law".

By the way TM, do what I do and put all your replies into a single jumbo-post. It saves room, organizes your thoughts, and doesn't give the impression that you're posting multiple consecutive replies to increase your post count

Well I've actually tried that in the past. But it usually just gets confusing and I end up derailing my train of thought. It's just easier for me to address each individual post as it comes. And I could really care less about my post count.[/quote]

Of course I agree too, since I'm notorious for contiguous posts. My mind is too chaotic, each person deserves thier own response anyway and others get confused if I respond to multiple people in one post.

Dr. Doom III wrote:

Temporalmage wrote: Most importantly if someone proves me wrong I'm man enough to admit it on the boards!!

We are waiting.

Where as your never wrong even when staring the facts in the face. I guess that just makes you BOY enough to argue.

It's all interpretation. "I'm going to Hell." Did I mean place of damnation or Hell, MI? By asking the question I didn't mean I wanted Doom and TM to take up alternate views and start arguing them.

Well I'd like to take the time to re-state all the places that tell us, from the books, that a mage or supernatural creature can't teleport into a robot or giant vehicle. Then I'll re-state all the places that say you can.

Can't teleport into or out of a robot or giant vehicle:
1: Sourcebook 1 page 10: "...the psionic or mage inside the robot or power armor can not use his paranormal powers to affect anybody outside the armor or bot."
2: Book of Magic page 21: "Magic can not penetrate the skin of giant robots, or vehicles. Any spell cast inside will only affect the occupants and the internal systems of the vehicle/robot. Likewise, any spell directed at vehicles/robots outside, only affect the robot itself and can not affect the occupants inside."
3: Book of Magic page 19: "Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head and upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic."

Can teleport into robots or giant vehicles:
There is no single peice of evidence in any Palladium book that states you can. Not even a lawyer can win this argument!!

Does anyone else believe as Tyciol does... that we should re-run this poll to find out if anyones answers would be differant?? Just curious.

Temporalmage wrote:Well I'd like to take the time to re-state all the places that tell us, from the books, that a mage or supernatural creature can't teleport into a robot or giant vehicle. Then I'll re-state all the places that say you can.

Can't teleport into or out of a robot or giant vehicle:
1: Sourcebook 1 page 10: "...the psionic or mage inside the robot or power armor can not use his paranormal powers to affect anybody outside the armor or bot."
2: Book of Magic page 21: "Magic can not penetrate the skin of giant robots, or vehicles. Any spell cast inside will only affect the occupants and the internal systems of the vehicle/robot. Likewise, any spell directed at vehicles/robots outside, only affect the robot itself and can not affect the occupants inside."
3: Book of Magic page 19: "Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head and upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic."

Can teleport into robots or giant vehicles:
There is no single peice of evidence in any Palladium book that states you can. Not even a lawyer can win this argument!!

Does anyone else believe as Tyciol does... that we should re-run this poll to find out if anyones answers would be differant?? Just curious.

How about:
Can teleport into robots or giant vehicles:
-The very nature of the spell to bypass physical objects.

You still have not come up with any strong in-game reason for why magic can't penetrate robots. The real reason is obvious; Palladium doesn't want some mage flying around in SAMAS armor or Glitterboy, casting spells at everybody. It is yet another hass-alfed attempt at game balance. The other reason is because they don't want a mage to be able to take out a Glitterboy with a single spell by casting it through his armor.

Going strictly by the letter of the law, the reason for magic's inability to penetrate vehicles cannot be Due to the presense of metal or Due to high-technology. Because there are vehicles that lack both of these elements. Doom's line of sight theory is the strongest so far, and it still isn't that strong because of the passage that explains that a mage can't just look out a window; he has to be sticking halfway out of it.
This passage again indicates that the reason for the rule is a lame attempt at balance. Palladium doesn't want mages to be able to run around in a MDC vehicle and use it for protection while casting spells. They insist that a mage should have to be a target in order to cast the spell.

Back to teleportation...
1. Teleportation can take you any place that the caster knows of or has seen.
2. There are NO mentions of any restrictions on the spell other than distance and familiarity, not in the spell description and not elsewhere. The closest thing to a restriction is the idea that you can't teleport past forcefields, and I don't know if that's actually been in a book or if it just came up in the FAQ online.
3. Any of the reasons come up with so far as to why magic cannot penetrate the skin of a vehicle would NOT just apply to vehicle; they'd apply to buildings as well.

So what we're left with is this:

-There is no real difference between vehicles and buildings. Certain things (like mobile homes) area both. If you cannot teleport into a vehicle, then you cannot teleport into a building either.
-The teleportation spell description makes no mention, or indication, that the spell won't take you into buildings. Since that is the most likely way for the spell to be used, you would think that it might be mentioned if the spell isn't supposed to be used this way.
-Since it is obvious that you can teleport into buildings, it is also obvious that you can teleport into vehicles. There is no real distinction between the two.

Killer Cyborg wrote:How about:
Can teleport into robots or giant vehicles:
-The very nature of the spell to bypass physical objects.

The "very nature" of the teleport spells is NOT to bypass physical objects, it's simply to transport someone from one place to another. It "bypass's" distance. If you teleport across an empty field your "bypassing" nothing physical except the distance across the field.

You still have not come up with any strong in-game reason for why magic can't penetrate robots. The real reason is obvious; ...SNIP.

I've said it a dozen times, and will say it again. My argument against teleporting into robots is strictly from a rules perspective. From that standpoint I don't need a "in-game reason for why magic can't penetrate robots." My answer is simply because the rules don't allow it. And I've backed up my argument with quotes to prove that the rules dont' allow it. If this topic asked for an opinion, or how everyone else does it in thier game my answer would be totally differant. Instead the question was posed as a rules question, and so must be given a rules answer. Somthing that no one who believes teleporting into robots is possible can provide. Because the rules don't allow it.

Back to teleportation...
1. Teleportation can take you any place that the caster knows of or has seen.
2. There are NO mentions of any restrictions on the spell other than distance and familiarity, not in the spell description and not elsewhere. The closest thing to a restriction is the idea that you can't teleport past forcefields, and I don't know if that's actually been in a book or if it just came up in the FAQ online.

Except for three differant places that say magic can't pass through robots or giant vehicles that is.

3. Any of the reasons come up with so far as to why magic cannot penetrate the skin of a vehicle would NOT just apply to vehicle; they'd apply to buildings as well.

Not according to the books. No mention of buildings is made or even hinted at. Any correlation between the two is hypothosis and assumption.

So what we're left with is this:

-There is no real difference between vehicles and buildings. Certain things (like mobile homes) area both. If you cannot teleport into a vehicle, then you cannot teleport into a building either.
-The teleportation spell description makes no mention, or indication, that the spell won't take you into buildings. Since that is the most likely way for the spell to be used, you would think that it might be mentioned if the spell isn't supposed to be used this way.
-Since it is obvious that you can teleport into buildings, it is also obvious that you can teleport into vehicles. There is no real distinction between the two.

Apples and oranges. I'm a carpenter, shade tree mechanic, and an ex-Marine. I can tell you for a fact that there are huge differances in buildings and a car. And huge differances in a car and a tank. Remember that the rules I've quoted state "Robots and Giant vehicles". Your average hovercar isn't a giant vehicle. Nor is a pickup truck, moble home, dune buggy, conastoga wagon, or any number of other vehicles that could be named. A Deaths Head transport is. A Behemouth Explorer is both a robot, and giant. Do you see the differance? The only thing that would be up to individual interpretation is what defines Giant.

Temporalmage wrote:Well I'd like to take the time to re-state all the places that tell us, from the books, that a mage or supernatural creature can't teleport into a robot or giant vehicle. Then I'll re-state all the places that say you can.

Can't teleport into or out of a robot or giant vehicle:
1: Sourcebook 1 page 10: "...the psionic or mage inside the robot or power armor can not use his paranormal powers to affect anybody outside the armor or bot."
2: Book of Magic page 21: "Magic can not penetrate the skin of giant robots, or vehicles. Any spell cast inside will only affect the occupants and the internal systems of the vehicle/robot. Likewise, any spell directed at vehicles/robots outside, only affect the robot itself and can not affect the occupants inside."
3: Book of Magic page 19: "Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head and upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic."

Here's the thing- none of those say anything about not ebing able to teleport into or out of a vehicle/bot.
1. They aren't using their powers to target someone outside the bot if the target of the spell (whether themselves or another person or object) is inside the bot with them. *If* they were outside the bot, trying to cast teleport on someone/thing that is inside the bot, then this rule applies and the teleport doesn't work.
2. Again, the teleport spell, if cast inside of the bot/vehicle, will affect other occupants of that bot/vehicle.
3. This rule is badly worded anyway, contradicting itself within the first sentence. If it is impossible to cast magic from inside a vehicle/bot, how could there be any damage/effect to strike those inside the vehicle? Even without that discrepancy, however, we're back to the same argument as in the previous two. The target of the spell is *inside* the vehicle/bot with the caster, and is therefore a perfectly legal target of the teleport. The magic doesn't need to "penetrate" the skin, the target is right there next to the caster (or is the caster himself).

I know, I know, your response is going to be all those passages that say things about magic not being able to penetrate the skin, and that only those spells which specifically say they can penetrate are able to do so, and that teleportation doesn't say anything about that, so therefore must adhere to those rules. The counter-argument, of course, is that the very nature of teleportation is that the magic doesn't need to "penetrate" anything, as evidenced by the fact that the spells themselves say you can teleport *anywhere*, whether from an open field to another open field, or from a house to a hermetically sealed impermeable MDC vacuum chamber with 20 foot thick walls with no openings buried a mile and a half under the sea bed.

I, therefore, still stand by my statement that both TemporalImage (and those who share his views) and Doom (and those who share his view) are all wrong. In this case, there *is* no canon ruling. Whether intentionally or not, this issue is left completely up to each GM to make his own ruling, because the information provided is ambiguous, unclear, incomplete and sometimes contradictory.

PigLick

Killer Cyborg wrote:-There is no real difference between vehicles and buildings. Certain things (like mobile homes) area both. If you cannot teleport into a vehicle, then you cannot teleport into a building either.
-The teleportation spell description makes no mention, or indication, that the spell won't take you into buildings. Since that is the most likely way for the spell to be used, you would think that it might be mentioned if the spell isn't supposed to be used this way.
-Since it is obvious that you can teleport into buildings, it is also obvious that you can teleport into vehicles. There is no real distinction between the two.

Excellent points KC

Temporalmage wrote:Well I'd like to take the time to re-state all the places that tell us, from the books, that a mage or supernatural creature can't teleport into a robot or giant vehicle. Then I'll re-state all the places that say you can.

Can't teleport into or out of a robot or giant vehicle:
1: Sourcebook 1 page 10: "...the psionic or mage inside the robot or power armor can not use his paranormal powers to affect anybody outside the armor or bot."
2: Book of Magic page 21: "Magic can not penetrate the skin of giant robots, or vehicles. Any spell cast inside will only affect the occupants and the internal systems of the vehicle/robot. Likewise, any spell directed at vehicles/robots outside, only affect the robot itself and can not affect the occupants inside."
3: Book of Magic page 19: "Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head and upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic."

Not one of your examples applies.
Teleport doesn't affect anything inside from the outside and vice versa.
And all those passages are referring to is line of sight.

Exchange the words Bot or vehicle with the words cardboard box and they still mean the exact same thing. The only difference is you can more easily blow a hole in a cardboard box.
Does a cardboard box stop teleportation?

Well... The Carboard Box of the Godly Tramp at the End of Time does have that property, yes, nobody but HIM can teleport to or from it...

PigLickJF wrote:Here's the thing- none of those say anything about not ebing able to teleport into or out of a vehicle/bot.
1. They aren't using their powers to target someone outside the bot if the target of the spell (whether themselves or another person or object) is inside the bot with them. *If* they were outside the bot, trying to cast teleport on someone/thing that is inside the bot, then this rule applies and the teleport doesn't work.
2. Again, the teleport spell, if cast inside of the bot/vehicle, will affect other occupants of that bot/vehicle.
3. This rule is badly worded anyway, contradicting itself within the first sentence. If it is impossible to cast magic from inside a vehicle/bot, how could there be any damage/effect to strike those inside the vehicle? Even without that discrepancy, however, we're back to the same argument as in the previous two. The target of the spell is *inside* the vehicle/bot with the caster, and is therefore a perfectly legal target of the teleport. The magic doesn't need to "penetrate" the skin, the target is right there next to the caster (or is the caster himself).

I know, I know, your response is going to be all those passages that say things about magic not being able to penetrate the skin, and that only those spells which specifically say they can penetrate are able to do so, and that teleportation doesn't say anything about that, so therefore must adhere to those rules. The counter-argument, of course, is that the very nature of teleportation is that the magic doesn't need to "penetrate" anything, as evidenced by the fact that the spells themselves say you can teleport *anywhere*, whether from an open field to another open field, or from a house to a hermetically sealed impermeable MDC vacuum chamber with 20 foot thick walls with no openings buried a mile and a half under the sea bed.

Well no one is arguing about teleporting into some sealed chamber at the bottom of the sea. And the rules I've quoted don't mention it so that specific example would indeed be up to each individual GM.
The rules I've quoted are basicly saying you can't target anything inside from outside, and vice versa. Is this correct? Now Doom's stand is that they are refering to line of sight, which is to say what they can see. But I've given examples of peaple being able to see each other and not effecting each other through a robot. Also if line of sight was possible how could you even attempt to cast some spell on an invisable person you couldn't see? I'm talking about spells like electric arc, or Fireblast, or Fire Bolt. These spells require a strike roll to hit, and invisable targets have a penelty of -8 to hit them. BUT if we go with Dooms theory of "line of sight" then it would be impossible to target somthing you can't see. Which is utterly ludicrous. Also if we continue to subscribe to Dooms theory of line of sight then what purpose would teleportation serve anyway? You very rarly can see your target destination when you cast teleport!! And I used the words "Target Destination" for a reason. You see, if you read the spell teleport superior, that's exactly the way it's worded. So if you can't target anything inside a robot from outside, or vice versa, then you obviously can't have the inside of a robot be the "target destination".

I, therefore, still stand by my statement that both Temporalmage (and those who share his views) and Doom (and those who share his view) are all wrong. In this case, there *is* no canon ruling. Whether intentionally or not, this issue is left completely up to each GM to make his own ruling, because the information provided is ambiguous, unclear, incomplete and sometimes contradictory.
PigLick

The cannon rules I've quoted all say the same thing. "No magic can penetrate..". Teleportation is magic, and therfore by default falls into the catagory of magic, and can't penetrate. It's not really up for argument except to those that just don't get that. What IS up to each GM is wiether or not they USE those rules.

Dr. Doom III wrote:

Temporalmage wrote:Well I'd like to take the time to re-state all the places that tell us, from the books, that a mage or supernatural creature can't teleport into a robot or giant vehicle. Then I'll re-state all the places that say you can.

Can't teleport into or out of a robot or giant vehicle:
1: Sourcebook 1 page 10: "...the psionic or mage inside the robot or power armor can not use his paranormal powers to affect anybody outside the armor or bot."
2: Book of Magic page 21: "Magic can not penetrate the skin of giant robots, or vehicles. Any spell cast inside will only affect the occupants and the internal systems of the vehicle/robot. Likewise, any spell directed at vehicles/robots outside, only affect the robot itself and can not affect the occupants inside."
3: Book of Magic page 19: "Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head and upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic."

Not one of your examples applies.

They all apply when teleportation is magic and all of the quotes say magic can't work. It's elementary my dear Doomy.

Teleport doesn't affect anything inside from the outside and vice versa.
And all those passages are referring to is line of sight.

Read page 19 of the BOM again. The last sentance of the paragraph I quoted says this: "Many spells also require line of sight to strike a specific target; the spell caster must be able to see his quarry."
The word your looking for Doom is "many". Not all. They added that sentance in there because it's NOT just about line of sight, though I admit it's a small part of it.

Exchange the words Bot or vehicle with the words cardboard box and they still mean the exact same thing. The only difference is you can more easily blow a hole in a cardboard box.
Does a cardboard box stop teleportation?

Not unless the cardboard box was a robot or giant vehicle. Geesh, do I have to explain everything to you??

Temporalmage wrote:Now Doom's stand is that they are refering to line of sight, which is to say what they can see. But I've given examples of peaple being able to see each other and not effecting each other through a robot. Also if line of sight was possible how could you even attempt to cast some spell on an invisable person you couldn't see? I'm talking about spells like electric arc, or Fireblast, or Fire Bolt. These spells require a strike roll to hit, and invisable targets have a penelty of -8 to hit them. BUT if we go with Dooms theory of "line of sight" then it would be impossible to target somthing you can't see. Which is utterly ludicrous. Also if we continue to subscribe to Dooms theory of line of sight then what purpose would teleportation serve anyway? You very rarly can see your target destination when you cast teleport!! And I used the words "Target Destination" for a reason. You see, if you read the spell teleport superior, that's exactly the way it's worded. So if you can't target anything inside a robot from outside, or vice versa, then you obviously can't have the inside of a robot be the "target destination".

What examples?
A window? A window although you can see through it is a physical obstruction. Have you read the Line Of Vision definition? I think I quoted it a month ago or so. Even if you did you need a refresher. It's on Pg. 166 of the main book at the top.
You can't target something you can't see. If you are trying to shoot someone with a fireball who is invisible then you target the area where you think he is.
Teleport does not have that limitation.
Target destination is the target of the journey not the magic.

The cannon rules I've quoted all say the same thing. "No magic can penetrate..". Teleportation is magic, and therfore by default falls into the catagory of magic, and can't penetrate. It's not really up for argument except to those that just don't get that. What IS up to each GM is wiether or not they USE those rules.

"No magic can penetrate TO TARGET THINGS...
Teleport is not targeting anything. The range for the spell is touch or self. You can't teleport something on the inside from the outside and vise versa. That is the only way the skin of a vehicle or bot stops a teleport.
If you can touch it or you are sending yourself you can go anywhere you know.

WOW Doom!!! Did you hurt yourself writting that much???
I'll look up your info and get back to ya.

Temporalmage wrote:They all apply when teleportation is magic and all of the quotes say magic can't work. It's elementary my dear Doomy.

1: Sourcebook 1 page 10: "...the psionic or mage inside the robot or power armor can not use his paranormal powers to affect anybody outside the armor or bot."
2: Book of Magic page 21: "Magic can not penetrate the skin of giant robots, or vehicles. Any spell cast inside will only affect the occupants and the internal systems of the vehicle/robot. Likewise, any spell directed at vehicles/robots outside, only affect the robot itself and can not affect the occupants inside."
3: Book of Magic page 19: "Trying to cast magic from inside a vehicle or giant robot is impossible, causing the magical effect/damage to strike those inside the vehicle (can not penetrate the walls of the vehicle; even novice students of magic are taught this). As a result, the spell caster must at least open a window or hatch, and stick his head and upper body out (a nice target for snipers) to weave his magic."

Read page 19 of the BOM again. The last sentance of the paragraph I quoted says this: "Many spells also require line of sight to strike a specific target; the spell caster must be able to see his quarry."
The word your looking for Doom is "many". Not all. They added that sentance in there because it's NOT just about line of sight, though I admit it's a small part of it.

It's just directing you to that rule.

Not unless the cardboard box was a robot or giant vehicle. Geesh, do I have to explain everything to you??

Except it's exactly the same thing.
How about a cardboard box with wheels? Now it's a vehicle.

Temporalmage wrote:
The cannon rules I've quoted all say the same thing. "No magic can penetrate..". Teleportation is magic, and therfore by default falls into the catagory of magic, and can't penetrate. It's not really up for argument except to those that just don't get that. What IS up to each GM is wiether or not they USE those rules.

Except that, like I said, due to the incomplete, unclear, ambiguous, and somewhat contradictory way in which the rules and spell descriptions in question are worded, the rules don't say anything at all, really. For example, the very statement that "No magic can penetrate..." is contradicted by the fact that there are some spells that *do* penetrate. Furthermore, the decription of the teleport spell and the workings of magic don't give us enough information to know whether or not any "magic" needs to "penetrate" anything when teleporting. Someone much earlier brought up the question of whether one can teleport into an anti-magic cloud. Arguments can be made either way, and the rules don't tell us which is correct, because there isn't enough information in the rules to specify, and it's the same issue with teleportation.

PigLick

Dr. Doom III wrote:You can't target something you can't see. If you are trying to shoot someone with a fireball who is invisible then you target the area where you think he is.

I stand corrected. Chalk it up to frustration and attempting to make a point.

Teleport does not have that limitation.
Target destination is the target of the journey not the magic.

The cannon rules I've quoted all say the same thing. "No magic can penetrate..". Teleportation is magic, and therfore by default falls into the catagory of magic, and can't penetrate. It's not really up for argument except to those that just don't get that. What IS up to each GM is wiether or not they USE those rules.

"No magic can penetrate TO TARGET THINGS...
Teleport is not targeting anything. The range for the spell is touch or self. You can't teleport something on the inside from the outside and vise versa. That is the only way the skin of a vehicle or bot stops a teleport.
If you can touch it or you are sending yourself you can go anywhere you know.

I disagree. How could the magic deposit the mage or item if the magic didn't target the inside? Does it just kinda *toss* the mage or item in the general direction, then suddenly the magic is gone and the mage just hurtles to the place he wishes to teleport too?? No! Magic is in effect the entire time of a teleport spell, which is exactly one instant. And that magic can not penetrate to drop off the item or person or whatever. Unless you can provide me with book evidence to the contrary, or prove that teleportation isn't magical your wrong.

Temporalmage wrote:I disagree. How could the magic deposit the mage or item if the magic didn't target the inside? Does it just kinda *toss* the mage or item in the general direction, then suddenly the magic is gone and the mage just hurtles to the place he wishes to teleport too?? No! Magic is in effect the entire time of a teleport spell, which is exactly one instant. And that magic can not penetrate to drop off the item or person or whatever. Unless you can provide me with book evidence to the contrary, or prove that teleportation isn't magical your wrong.

He didn't target the inside.
He just thought of where he wanted to go/send something.
You don't cast the spell at the destination because that's way out of range. All you do it visualize your target destination.
Teleport doesn't "penetrate" anyway. It bypasses all intervening space completely.

PigLickJF wrote:

Temporalmage wrote:
The cannon rules I've quoted all say the same thing. "No magic can penetrate..". Teleportation is magic, and therfore by default falls into the catagory of magic, and can't penetrate. It's not really up for argument except to those that just don't get that. What IS up to each GM is wiether or not they USE those rules.

Except that, like I said, due to the incomplete, unclear, ambiguous, and somewhat contradictory way in which the rules and spell descriptions in question are worded, the rules don't say anything at all, really. For example, the very statement that "No magic can penetrate..." is contradicted by the fact that there are some spells that *do* penetrate. Furthermore, the decription of the teleport spell and the workings of magic don't give us enough information to know whether or not any "magic" needs to "penetrate" anything when teleporting. SOmeone much earlier brought up the question of one can teleport into an anti-magic cloud. Arguments can be made either way, and the rules don't tell us which is correct, because there isn't enough information in the rules to specify, and it's the same issue with teleportation.

PigLick

I believe that the rules were written as a simple "no magic" clause that is all encompasing because there are a few that specifically do penetrate, and Palladium didn't want to get tied into only listing those that currently can penetrate, when it's obvious that they will produce more books, which could have spells in them that penetrate robots/giant vehicles also.
As for teleportation there are two things that teleportation specifically targets: the mage or item to be teleported, and the final destination of the teleport. Here's a couple questions that should be asked:
1. If a mage teleported near a dog-boy or psi-stalker, would either one sense the teleportation that just occured? I say yes, as magic was used nearby.
2. If an anti-magic cloud happened to be in effect on the exact spot a mage wanted to teleport to, would he be able to arrive inside that anti-magic cloud? I say the mage would have to make a saving throw, and if the save failed would have to roll on the failed teleport chart to determine where he ended up. Could be fatal.
Just my opinion, but I'm interested in reading what others that have paid attention to this long winded thread think.

Temporalmage wrote:1. If a mage teleported near a dog-boy or psi-stalker, would either one sense the teleportation that just occured? I say yes, as magic was used nearby.
2. If an anti-magic cloud happened to be in effect on the exact spot a mage wanted to teleport to, would he be able to arrive inside that anti-magic cloud? I say the mage would have to make a saving throw, and if the save failed would have to roll on the failed teleport chart to determine where he ended up. Could be fatal.
Just my opinion, but I'm interested in reading what others that have paid attention to this long winded thread think.

Exactlly, both of those are your opinion, because the rules don't tell us one way or another. And if the rules don't tell us whether magic needs to "affect" the destination, they don't tell us whether one can t-port into a vehicle/bot or not. As I said, there is no specific canon ruling, and it's a GM's call.

PigLick

Dr. Doom III wrote:He didn't target the inside.

Yes he did. Thats why its called the "Target destination".

He just thought of where he wanted to go/send something.
You don't cast the spell at the destination because that's way out of range.

The range of the teleport superior spell is listed as: Self or others; distance of 300 miles per level of experiance. So you DO cast the spell at the destination, which could only be within range. The same is true of teleport lessor which lists it's range as: 5 miles per level of experiance; touch. You have to touch the object, but the spell still targets the final destination, otherwise how would it ever arrive?

All you do it visualize your target destination.
Teleport doesn't "penetrate" anyway. It bypasses all intervening space completely.

Once again I partially disagree. While it does bypass intervening space, the magic itself must still target where the mage or object is to appear. If the magic doesn't target the space properly then the mage or object is off course and ends up elsewhere. Once again I'd have to ask how the person ends up at the final place if magic wasn't present?

Temporalmage wrote:1. If a mage teleported near a dog-boy or psi-stalker, would either one sense the teleportation that just occured? I say yes, as magic was used nearby.

Only if the spell was actually cast nearby. If it was cast half way around the world they will not detect any magic.

2. If an anti-magic cloud happened to be in effect on the exact spot a mage wanted to teleport to, would he be able to arrive inside that anti-magic cloud? I say the mage would have to make a saving throw, and if the save failed would have to roll on the failed teleport chart to determine where he ended up. Could be fatal.
Just my opinion, but I'm interested in reading what others that have paid attention to this long winded thread think.

Yes. He would't be able to teleport out however.