h Barring any enchantments or magical effects, garb strikes count as hitting the player if the magic ball would have continued on to hit the player. i.e. You may not block Lightning Bolts with your cloak.
by the rule blocking a lightning bolt with your cloak would only kill you if the ball would have hit you. Otherwise it would just be a garb shot..
Correct? That's how I read it.
Post edited by: FitzCaliston, at: 2006/08/03 19:54
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
FitzCaliston
User
Posts: 169
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/03 19:53ie if the lightning ball were going to miss you by x inches/feet and your cloak were flung out behind you from the "wind" or an arm etc. and the Lightning bolt hits the cloak, then it's a garb shot.
Similary if the lightning bolt is hurled between your legs, at knee height , and your legs are spread far enough apart that the ball would not have hit you (passed between your knees) if not for the Skirt/tunic/tabbard you were wearing it is a garb shot, correct?
Post edited by: FitzCaliston, at: 2006/08/03 19:56
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Rewth
Admin
Posts: 1523
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/03 21:50correct.
there are some exceptions though. Iceball, Entangle, and Petrify are engulfing. if they hit your garb you are still effected.
but as far as magic bolt, lightning bolt, fireball and sphere are concerned, if they only contact garb, and would not have hit you if the garb wasn't there, then you have not been it.
be careful with any goofy interpretations though. its always best to err on the side of "yer dead"."But right now I'm a little concerned about my pants, since I don't know where they are." - Valathina Nailo
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
orion
User
Posts: 181
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/04 02:57So that would hold up at an IM event."if they wont take the first shot,hit harded, if that dosent work ,hit cleaner. if that dosent work ,practice.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
FitzCaliston
User
Posts: 169
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/04 20:14Ok, so then "legally" a "person" with a cloak/billowy garb could also prevent team mates from getting hit with lightening bolts, fireballs and SoA's the same way that monks play human shield against archers. Works even better when the person with a cloak on also has pro mag.
this exploitation of the rules brought to you by your friendly neighborhood Fitz.....
edit/add: Oh by the way this was brought up to show a loophole that I think is retarded, not because I want to exploit this loophole like I know other will. Just be aware....
Post edited by: FitzCaliston, at: 2006/08/04 20:16
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Rewth
Admin
Posts: 1523
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/07 15:08Combat Notes 3) Shots that only strike garb or equipment do not count as a hit unless said items blocked a blow that would have struck a combatant.
Rules of Magic h. Barring any enchantments or magical effects, garb strikes count as hitting the player if the magic ball would have continued on to hit the player. I.e. You may not block Lightning Bolts with your cloak.
i would use both of those quotes to prevent a player from using a cloak to intentionally block spellballs from hitting other players. but... its a grey area. rule h should be changes to "continued on to hit a player" instead of "the player". whats more, it really comes down to the fact that in doing this the player would absolutley know they are exploiting a grey area. that by itself is grounds for a beat down... i mean... reeve to step in and "clarify" (them right upside the head)."But right now I'm a little concerned about my pants, since I don't know where they are." - Valathina Nailo
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
FitzCaliston
User
Posts: 169
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/08 19:26perfect Fix, We should add that to the list being made for next rules change/clarifications.
add: and it needs to be fixed on the magic rule since Spell ball hits are not neccesarily "Shots" as defined by the combat rule. That is, unless your of the mind that Spell balls are projectiles and therefor stopped by pro-projectile like that "perfect" guy at Rakis was arguing.....(from what I hear)
Post edited by: FitzCaliston, at: 2006/08/08 19:31
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Grendel
User
Posts: 1802
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/08 19:48FitzCaliston wrote: add: and it needs to be fixed on the magic rule since Spell ball hits are not neccesarily "Shots" as defined by the combat rule. That is, unless your of the mind that Spell balls are projectiles and therefor stopped by pro-projectile like that "perfect" guy at Rakis was arguing.....(from what I hear)
you referring to Brennon? I didn't hear him argue that, you could always send him a PM on here or esam (esam would be better, he's not on here very often from what I've seen)
A clarification wouldn't seem to be necessary, as Rewth mentioned "using gray areas to gain a battlefield advantage" is not allowed, that's in the rulebook already.Dragoon Strike First. Strike Hard. No Mercy. Hús Vetra Skald IMU
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Rewth
Admin
Posts: 1523
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/08 20:02well. grey areas are bad. yes, there is a rule covering them, but its better if they aren't there in the first place. and changing a single word to another word to fix it would be a great one."But right now I'm a little concerned about my pants, since I don't know where they are." - Valathina Nailo
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
FitzCaliston
User
Posts: 169
Re:Rule of Magic 14-h - 2006/08/08 20:38Grendel wrote: you referring to Brennon? I didn't hear him argue that, you could always send him a PM on here or esam (esam would be better, he's not on here very often from what I've seen)
A clarification wouldn't seem to be necessary, as Rewth mentioned "using gray areas to gain a battlefield advantage" is not allowed, that's in the rulebook already.
Actually yes I was refering to B, The story I heard was that He was arguing that Pro-P negated spell balls during a battle game at which point Mhog (who was reeving) threw down his reeves sash and walked away from the game in disgust. Anyhow I wasn't there, so it's meer 2nd hand, possibly 4th hand by the time it got to me.
I was using the point to say that the Combat Shot/garb rule doesn't apply to spellballs IMHO and can/would be argued that way, leaving only the Rule of Magic 14-h to govern this situation/abuse and the "grey area". Additionally, what seems grey to most folks seems Black to some and Pristine White to others, which is where fixing the rule to an absolute makes perfect sense as Rewth mentions.
However even with this as an absolute you could have situations where pure accidental garb blocks on spell balls MAY have hit someone from the casters perspective while others would argue no.
For instance if the garb block "happens" when the possible reciepient of the shot was more then a few feet behind the block point the angle of attack is put into question. Could the person have still dodged? would the throw have had the power to make the distance etc.
put I digress, making the rule clear as Rewth listed would be the best option.
Post edited by: FitzCaliston, at: 2006/08/08 20:40
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Home 
