Ethereal Body on someone else?

[OddGamer]

Can you cast Ethereal Body on someone else? If so... um... it's a pretty powerful spell. Take your typical heavily armed/armored foe, and cast this on them. There's no listed resistance to the spell, so they don't get one, and for ten seconds (or one if you specify when casting it) they are invulnerable, then suddenly they are back and all their lovely armaments are on the ground instead of on them.
Nothing I can see in the spell description says it has to be cast on the caster.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by OddGamer

Can you cast Ethereal Body on someone else?

Yes, but a casting time of 30 seconds rather limits its combat use.

[OddGamer]

That's what Hang Spell is for! Hang Spell + Ethereal Body = No Equipment for the major baddy.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by OddGamer

it's a pretty powerful spell.

Sure, but it's a difficult spell, too. Very Hard spell, 30-second casting time, 8 fatigue points, needs Magery 3, you need to be pretty close to the target, it only works on one target, and you'll have a SM penalty for any target greater than SM+0. You've got to be a seriously powerful wizard to use this spell.

Any Regular spell can affect any single subject unless the spell description says otherwise.

[Dalin]

If this doesn't seem palatable, you can always rule that all Regular spells can be resisted by an unwilling target using HT or Will (depending on the spell). Powerful casters may still be able to succeed, but the rule of 16 will limit the impact of their skill.

I played in a campaign with this house rule and it didn't break anything or seem to nerf the casters too much. (There were a number of high-point PC wizards in that game.)

[Ejidoth]

Originally Posted by Dalin

If this doesn't seem palatable, you can always rule that all Regular spells can be resisted by an unwilling target using HT or Will (depending on the spell). Powerful casters may still be able to succeed, but the rule of 16 will limit the impact of their skill.

I played in a campaign with this house rule and it didn't break anything or seem to nerf the casters too much. (There were a number of high-point PC wizards in that game.)

I use something similar, although it's more generally phrased as, "If this would take an Affliction to build as an advantage, it's resistable" to avoid confusion over regular spells that create weapons, like flame jet.