[Magic] Rebuilding Diamonds

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by MagicalMeddler

Does it? "This spell totally rebuilds any object from as little as a fragment." It does not say, "The spell draws in all the old materials of the object to reform it, because the spell finds it easier to reach across the universe, even into suns and black holes, to recycle the scattered atoms of the starship you're trying to fix."

When I suggested it destroying the rest of the item's remains, I wasn't arguing "this is the way the spell was intended to work from the beginning," but rather "here's a potential fix for it." Honestly, my guess is that the designers of the original spell were just thinking "this lets you repair on object from just a portion of it, rather than needing the whole thing," without any consideration of "this is what happens if multiple portions of the broken object have the spell cast on them separately." It's sort of like how, in some magic systems, there can be two or more levels of "bring back from the dead" spells - a low-level one requires a mostly-intact corpse, while a high-level one can bring someone back from a shard of fingerbone - but you generally can't use the latter spell to split someone in half and then cast it twice to clone them! Repair is akin to the lesser spell, Rebuild to the greater one. Not being able to clone someone is easy to justify as a case of "they only have one soul to bring back, and it's really the soul that has the blueprint to rebuild the body" or similar. Objects are harder to justify it not working to make duplicates, unless the metaphysics of your setting has objects having a soul of sorts (which can open a whole other can of worms).

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by MagicalMeddler

Two things: By that logic, anything made out of iron requires that we re-create a planet.

If you just have an undistinguished bit of it, sure does. Or possibly the entire universe. Certainly anybody arguing you can recreate something from a single atom has this problem.

It's a problem with any definition of the Rebuild spell, since most "objects" are potentially bits of many different things. Just look at that bit upthread about the sheet of paper originally being part of a big roll of paper from the mill. If you Rebuild a torn page do you get the page, the whole book, the roll of paper, or the genetically engineered tree the pulp was made from? Why one or the other? How does the spell know if you want the page with or without ink vs. dirt? There are controls you can put on Rebuild (e.g. since it's rebuilding it has to be an artificial thing, it has to be the most recent recognized "thing" and can't make "copies" since the artificial thing only has one "item soul" or something) but that doesn't solve the problem for creation magic in general.

The spell was included in the Grimoire and kept in later editions, so it's there for some reason.

It is, but not an economic one. No spells are actually vetted for economic applications. That's true in basically all games ever, the spell lists are written for cool adventuring utility, not as part of a worldbuilding exercise.

I'd also note than many spells in Grimoire have had a reputation as unbalanced, poorly thought out messes ever since the book came out, so arguing "it's there for a reason" isn't going to fly with most long time GURPS players. Maybe there was a reason that made sense in the context of whoever's campaign the spell first appeared in, but it may not have been rethought since.

[MagicalMeddler]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Not being able to clone someone is easy to justify as a case of "they only have one soul to bring back, and it's really the soul that has the blueprint to rebuild the body" or similar.

On the other hand, if I Rebuild a body, at least I have a good-looking corpse... while the original is still alive! :)

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by MagicalMeddler

On the other hand, if I Rebuild a body, at least I have a good-looking corpse... while the original is still alive! :)

Then you can cast Resurrection on it... and the GM throws a pretzel at you and shouts 'NO!'

(OK, not all GMs would react that way, but it's something I can see a player doing, and thus something GMs should think about in advance.)


Mind you, if a character wants to fake their death, that would be one way to do it, if the GM permits Rebuild to both exist and be able to rebuild corpses in a way that won't be easily discovered.

[Anthony]

Generally speaking, if you want magic to not produce nonsense economics, you either have to set values based on assuming magic is used where appropriate, or you have to design your magic with economics in mind. The simplest fix for spells that permanently create things of value is:

Material Component: $X in Mana Crystals, where X is the value of the item created.

This basically turns most creation spells into 'instant shopping', which is still pretty useful, but far less likely to outright break things.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Material Component: $X in Mana Crystals, where X is the value of the item created.

Indeed, from a world-building perspective, this may well be how the value of Mana Crystals are determined - by what they can be used to make. Note this also means, if such magic is fairly common, that anything that can be made by magic will have a very consistent pricetag everywhere - you can't buy precious gems in one place and trade them for wootz ingots elsewhere, then turn around and sell those in a third location for a net profit (taking advantage of the differences in value between each location) if people can just buy a predetermined amount of Mana Crystals and turn them into the desired items.

For my Oubliette setting, the Shards one acquires from killing monsters and conquering dungeons function like this, being able to be turned into a set value worth of items, although there it's not something you need a specific spell for - rather, any craftsman can turn Shards into anything they personally can create. In that, every S100 (that is, enough Shards to make $100 worth of stuff) can actually be traded on the market for around $200 - Shards are basically used to have the option of paying double to get what you need instantly (and as they are nearly weightless for purposes of transport, in many cases it's worthwhile to just carry Shards instead of certain supplies, and just make what you need as you need it, rather than needing to haul what you'll need all the way to your destination). And, yeah, I intend to use the existence of Shards as an excuse to simplify the economy so most things cost the same amount regardless of where you are.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

After checking I see that he 5% limitation is in the text of Schematic. So it's only when doing castings that don't require Schematic that the 5% clause can be avoided.

Good to know. That limits a mage's ability to Rebuild huge machines from a single part. The same logic might apply to an item constructed of low-tech materials, like a castle.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by MagicalMeddler

B: Following this logic: I have a gold ring. It breaks into several pieces and I can only recover one. Since gold is a raw material, it cannot be Rebuilt?

It depends on how you want magic to work. Because the ring is an artifact, which took skill and time to shape, you could rule that it's no different than a machine and that breaking the ring and casting rebuild on each part gives you multiple rings.

Originally Posted by MagicalMeddler

C: Yeah, laying down a flat fiat of "Because I say so!" never occurred to me.

Possibly because it's the cheesiest method for the GM to control unwanted consequences of magic. Unless such bans are clearly stated in advance, GM fiat can seem unfair. It's generally more fun for everyone if the GM goes for the "sure you can, but . . ." route and lays down conditions which make it extremely challenging but not impossible for players to get what they want.

For example, if a player really wants their character to recreate the Mona Lisa from a chip of paint, build an adventure or a campaign around it. By the time they have everything they need to cast the spell, they'll be well on the way to earning the character points required for Filthy Rich or better Wealth.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

Then you can cast Resurrection on it... and the GM throws a pretzel at you and shouts 'NO!'

Unless you've got access to ultratech braintaping which allows you to copy the memories of the body's original owner into the newly animated "clone." Alternately, the restored corpse could be used as a host for a spell like Soul Jar or Possession, allowing someone else's soul/spirit to occupy it.

At the very least, given all the magical energy required to restore the corpse from nothing, you should be able to animate it as a Zombie.

It might also be legit to use Rebuild to restore a corpse to "perfect but dead" condition even after it's reduced below -HP x 10, and then cast Raise Dead on it rather than needing Resurrection. That wouldn't be much different than creating a clone body from a single cell.

[RGTraynor]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

'Exotic" is for things usually called "unobtainium" or soem simialr term.

"Exotic" is for anything I damn well want to decide it is, and likely it's a zeitgeist thing anyway. Up until pretty recently, in the grand scheme of things, aluminum would've been categorized as a pretty "exotic" material.

But Pursuivant nailed it, in that laundry list. I'd figured out a long time ago that if I could know just one spell out of Magic, it'd be Clean. I'd be the premier art restorer in the world.

Originally Posted by malloyd

I'd also note than many spells in Grimoire have had a reputation as unbalanced, poorly thought out messes ever since the book came out, so arguing "it's there for a reason" isn't going to fly with most long time GURPS players. Maybe there was a reason that made sense in the context of whoever's campaign the spell first appeared in, but it may not have been rethought since.

Yep, exactly. I was on the BBS for the discussions, some of the spells that went in were mine, and there was absolutely, positively no rhyme or reason to the selection. (Nearly thirty years on, I'm still pi$$ed that it took until The Least of Spells for a birth control spell to be included, and retain dark thoughts as to why that was.) It was a bunch of people suggesting their own favorites, and we were working out mechanics rather than giving much of any thought to whether any one spell would disorder society.

The way I handle this at my own table is straightforward. Yeah, there are a number of spells that can break an economy. They are otherwise illegal, or tightly controlled, taught only to mages who take stern magical oaths against misuse, and policed by the College of Mages, which does NOT want howling mobs tearing mages to pieces. With the armies of monarchs not stopping the mobs because they're leading the mobs.