Blink Other spell

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

The "Blink Other" spell (M148) says that it can be used to Blink
someone (i.e., instantly move him up to three yards). It does not
state that the target has to be willing, nor does it state that the
spell is Resisted.

This can, in its mildest form, be used to confuse an enemy by moving
him to unexpected (and even disadvantageous) locations. It can also
severely restrict his actions since he has to do a Body Sense roll in
order to act in the first round after the Blink. In more devious
forms, it can be used to Blink an enemy onto a land mine, or into
nearby lava, or whatever.

I suspect that this is not how the spell was meant to be used and that
either it should be Resisted by Will or it should be usable on willing
targets only.

Both of these are problematic, however. In each case, the spell is
guaranteed to work only if the target is willing and the instant
nature of the spell (a Blocking spell) suggests that there isn't much
time for caster and subject to negotiate the issue. All in all, this
doesn't seem like a viable way of using the spell.

So how is it meant to actually work?

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Bent C Dalager wrote:

> This can, in its mildest form, be used to confuse an enemy by moving
> him to unexpected (and even disadvantageous) locations. It can also
> severely restrict his actions since he has to do a Body Sense roll in
> order to act in the first round after the Blink. In more devious
> forms, it can be used to Blink an enemy onto a land mine, or into
> nearby lava, or whatever.

Blink does not allow the caster to choose the target's destination, so
blinking a person into a hazard doesn't work all that well. It's also
possible to rule that blocking spells can _only_ be used on a willing
target, or that blocking spells only work on someone who wants to be protected.

--
Jefferson
http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Bent C Dalager wrote:

> The alternative is that the target spot is random. The spell
> description doesn't specify whether or not it is, but the wording of
> "Blink" seemed to me to suggest that for that spell, at least, the
> caster gets to pick the spot.

In 3e the Blink spell quite definitely placed the target in a random (safe)
location. I don't have 4e Magic yet, but if the wording is at all
ambiguous, I'd go with the 3e interpretation.

--
Jefferson
http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

> The "Blink Other" spell (M148) says that it can be used to Blink
> someone (i.e., instantly move him up to three yards). It does not
> state that the target has to be willing, nor does it state that the
> spell is Resisted.
>
> This can, in its mildest form, be used to confuse an enemy by moving
> him to unexpected (and even disadvantageous) locations.

I think there is a "misunderstanding" here. As I read the spell it says "as
Blink, but for others". With blink it is the _subject_ that chooses
destination - which means that not only 1) does someone need to attack the
enemy for the mage to use the spell, but also that 2) _he_ has control over
where he goes. IMHO.

The Wrathchild

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

In article <%6CJe.63961$Fe7.204753@news000.worldonline.dk>,
The Wrathchild <wrathchild@hippieSPAMMERSDIEINHELL.dk> wrote:
>> The "Blink Other" spell (M148) says that it can be used to Blink
>> someone (i.e., instantly move him up to three yards). It does not
>> state that the target has to be willing, nor does it state that the
>> spell is Resisted.
>>
>> This can, in its mildest form, be used to confuse an enemy by moving
>> him to unexpected (and even disadvantageous) locations.
>
>I think there is a "misunderstanding" here. As I read the spell it says "as
>Blink, but for others". With blink it is the _subject_ that chooses
>destination - which means that not only 1) does someone need to attack the
>enemy for the mage to use the spell, but also that 2) _he_ has control over
>where he goes. IMHO.

Ok. I still have problems with this though.

First, it seems illogical that the subject should need to be under
attack for the spell to be usable. Who decides what "an attack" is? On
the more ludicrous side, the caster could decide that he wants to
protect the subject from the rays of the sun, or from a sudden
breeze. More realistically, he would just kick some sand in the
subject's general direction and protect him from this. Requiring that
the subject be under attack will only lead to ridiculous attempts at
finding loopholes and I'd rather avoid that situation altogether.

(Mind you, the system already seems to have this idiocy in the Retreat
rules so it might very well be intended to work like this.)

Second, having the subject decide suggests to me that for the spell to
work, the subject needs to have some prior warning (or at least a
realistic expectation) that the spell will be fortcoming. Not that
this is terribly unfeasible, it just reduces the utility of the spell
somewhat.

What happens if the subject fails to make a decision?

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

In article <11fdskngkmhmt05@corp.supernews.com>,
Jefferson <Jeff_Wilson63@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>Bent C Dalager wrote:
>
>In 3e the Blink spell quite definitely placed the target in a random (safe)
>location. I don't have 4e Magic yet, but if the wording is at all
>ambiguous, I'd go with the 3e interpretation.

What is meant by a "safe" location and who gets to decide?

What happens if the "safeness" of the location is somehow magically
cloaked? Does the caster, the spell or the subject get to resist such
cloaking?

I try to avoid giving single spells built-in intelligence and powers
of decision if at all possible so I tend to be wary of such
approaches. If this was allowed for the spell, then in my opinion
there should be some appropriate Knowledge-based prerequisites for the
spell (alternatively the Danger Sense advantage).

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Bent C Dalager wrote:
> In article <11fdskngkmhmt05@corp.supernews.com>,
> Jefferson <Jeff_Wilson63@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>>In 3e the Blink spell quite definitely placed the target in a random (safe)
>>location. I don't have 4e Magic yet, but if the wording is at all
>>ambiguous, I'd go with the 3e interpretation.
>
> What is meant by a "safe" location and who gets to decide?

It's defined quite thoroughly in 3e. Essentially, one where the subject
won't be affected by the attack being blocked or a worse danger, and no
one, respectively. The spell uses the caster's knowledge, but it doesn't
choose.

--
Jefferson
http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

In article <11ff5037icbd576@corp.supernews.com>,
Jefferson <Jeff_Wilson63@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>It's defined quite thoroughly in 3e. Essentially, one where the subject
>won't be affected by the attack being blocked or a worse danger, and no
>one, respectively. The spell uses the caster's knowledge, but it doesn't
>choose.

Ok. So if there exists some danger that the caster isn't aware of, you
might find yourself blinked straight into it?

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Bent C Dalager wrote:
> In article <11ff5037icbd576@corp.supernews.com>,
> Jefferson <Jeff_Wilson63@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>>It's defined quite thoroughly in 3e. Essentially, one where the subject
>>won't be affected by the attack being blocked or a worse danger, and no
>>one, respectively. The spell uses the caster's knowledge, but it doesn't
>>choose.
>
> Ok. So if there exists some danger that the caster isn't aware of, you
> might find yourself blinked straight into it?

Yes. In practice I'd probably reroll and not reroll if second roll was
also into a hazard.

--
Jefferson
http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 09:23:31 +0000 (UTC), bcd@pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C
Dalager) wrote:

>In article <11fdskngkmhmt05@corp.supernews.com>,
>Jefferson <Jeff_Wilson63@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>>Bent C Dalager wrote:
>>
>>In 3e the Blink spell quite definitely placed the target in a random (safe)
>>location. I don't have 4e Magic yet, but if the wording is at all
>>ambiguous, I'd go with the 3e interpretation.
>
>What is meant by a "safe" location and who gets to decide?
>
>What happens if the "safeness" of the location is somehow magically
>cloaked? Does the caster, the spell or the subject get to resist such
>cloaking?
>
>I try to avoid giving single spells built-in intelligence and powers
>of decision if at all possible so I tend to be wary of such
>approaches. If this was allowed for the spell, then in my opinion
>there should be some appropriate Knowledge-based prerequisites for the
>spell (alternatively the Danger Sense advantage).
>
>Cheers
> Bent D

safe in this case probably just means not full of something solid.
--
"Ineffective, unfocused violence leads to more violence. Limp,
panicky half-measures lead to more violence. However, complete,
fully-thought-through, professional, well-executed violence
never leads to more violence because, you see, afterwards, the
other guys are all dead."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

In article <p06Ke.64229$Fe7.205171@news000.worldonline.dk>,
The Wrathchild <wrathchild@hippieSPAMMERSDIEINHELL.dk> wrote:
>
>My take: It's magic. Logic go away.

I could go for this if it weren't that the magic system is built up in
such a thoroughly logical manner. If this were, say, D&D, where there
is little rhyme or reason to individual spells at all other than it
being fun or interesting, then, yes, sure. But GURPS Magic just
doesn't convey that feel at all. Trying to pull off a "nah, that's
just the way it is" on such a system seems like a cop-out and I try to
avoid doing that too much.

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

"Bent C Dalager" <bcd@pvv.ntnu.no> wrote in message
news:dd77u5$oev$1@orkan.itea.ntnu.no...
> In article <%6CJe.63961$Fe7.204753@news000.worldonline.dk>,
> The Wrathchild <wrathchild@hippieSPAMMERSDIEINHELL.dk> wrote:
>>> The "Blink Other" spell (M148) says that it can be used to Blink
>>> someone (i.e., instantly move him up to three yards). It does not
>>> state that the target has to be willing, nor does it state that the
>>> spell is Resisted.
>>>
>>> This can, in its mildest form, be used to confuse an enemy by moving
>>> him to unexpected (and even disadvantageous) locations.
>>
>>I think there is a "misunderstanding" here. As I read the spell it says
>>"as
>>Blink, but for others". With blink it is the _subject_ that chooses
>>destination - which means that not only 1) does someone need to attack the
>>enemy for the mage to use the spell, but also that 2) _he_ has control
>>over
>>where he goes. IMHO.
>
> Ok. I still have problems with this though.
>
> First, it seems illogical that the subject should need to be under
> attack for the spell to be usable. Who decides what "an attack" is? On
> the more ludicrous side, the caster could decide that he wants to
> protect the subject from the rays of the sun, or from a sudden
> breeze.

The way I read it, the purpose of the spell is to avoid attacks, but it's
not necessary to be attacked to use it.

> Second, having the subject decide suggests to me that for the spell to
> work, the subject needs to have some prior warning (or at least a
> realistic expectation) that the spell will be fortcoming. Not that
> this is terribly unfeasible, it just reduces the utility of the spell
> somewhat.

I don't think it makes it that much less useful if you can only use it on
your friends who know you have the spell and might be using it during
combat. But since we're talking about magic, you could just tell the player
"the mage touches you, and suddenly you are filled with the certain
knowledge that you can teleport up to 2 hexes instantly. Time seems to move
in slow motion while you make your decision." Or whatever.

> What happens if the subject fails to make a decision?
>
I'd say they wouldn't go anywhere.