[Magic] So Lasers Can Hurt Ghosts

[pestigor]

While Gurps CAN be broken down into a bunch if "if, then" statements it will lead to ridiculous paradoxes. If someone is running an "Alice in Wonderland" style game, by all means but the minute someone seriously says "ergo..." in regards to rules at my table,#1 I'd be amazed they made it past my vetting process and #2 they'd be politely asked to leave.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by pestigor

While Gurps CAN be broken down into a bunch if "if, then" statements it will lead to ridiculous paradoxes. If someone is running an "Alice in Wonderland" style game, by all means but the minute someone seriously says "ergo..." in regards to rules at my table,#1 I'd be amazed they made it past my vetting process and #2 they'd be politely asked to leave.

On the other hand, it could be fun to run a game that specifically runs on dumb logic. If she weighs the same as a duck, that means she's made of wood, and is therefore a witch.

[PTTG]

I mean, the part of any magical attack that allows it to affect ghosts is that it is magical, not the damage channel it uses.

[scc]

Originally Posted by Balor Patch

A Sunbolt may be magic, but it's hardly a "(nonmaterial) magical attack" that Insubstantiality wouldn't protect against.

I guess your argument is that light is "nonmaterial", is somehow not included when the previous sentence calls out "Physical and Energy", and so magical light can affect Insubstantiality? That still wouldn't include non-magical light.

I also have plenty of issues with Magic's editing and underlying model but I think dying on this particular hill is indeed flimsy and absurd.

Huh, interesting point, I was nonmaterial literally and and isn't material assumed it would thus count, but even so what caused this was statements that to my mind suggested that Missile Spells are magical bullets that damage you as if you had been burnt, not fire that burns you, making the point moot

Originally Posted by malloyd

The blatantly false step there is "Sunbolt is also clearly a laser attack". It's clearly *not*, it's a magical attack defined as concentrated sunlight (lasers are of course monochromatic and quite unlike sunlight) and able to bounce off mirrors (lasers intense enough to cause damage will shatter mirrors). Sunbolt is a weapon grade laser to about the same degree Create Fire is an acid attack (it causes rapid oxidation right?, acids cause rapid oxidation ergo...)

Edit: That's not to say lasers can't hurt ghosts, maybe they can in some campaign, just that this isn't a logical reason. For that matter there's nothing to say that *Sunbolt* necessarily affects ghosts. If it does in a particular setting it's probably because ghosts are antithetical to the magical conception of light (lasers might work) or sunlight (lasers probably don't), but ghosts that can walk around in the daylight might well be immune.

Laser as it has entered the cultural zeitgeist to mean, or rather to include, any beam or directed energy weapon that works via means of light simply because of a lack of a better terms

Originally Posted by malloyd

This appears to be a point of slight debate because of some things Kromm said in a discussion of Magic Resistance in Dungeon Fantasy. Personally I'd be inclined to disinvite rules lawyers who made a big deal of it either way, but some people like this sort of thing.

Note that Sunbolt has explicit rules in its text for some effects - Force Domes block it, it ignores Missile Shield - which make it a particularly bad spell to try to generalize from.

Yep, my thread

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Um...what? I have no idea what magic defenses you are talking about.

Mainly this was about Manaplasms and several spells, including Missile Spells, Jet Spells and the like, chiefly things like Expolsive Fireball, my view is that the Manaplasms Immunity to Magic trait wouldn't work against such spells.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by scc

Mainly this was about Manaplasms and several spells, including Missile Spells, Jet Spells and the like, chiefly things like Expolsive Fireball, my view is that the Manaplasms Immunity to Magic trait wouldn't work against such spells.

What's "manaplasma"?

[Kromm]

A manaplasm is a monster found in Dungeon Fantasy Monsters 2. It has a trait called Immunity to Magic.

Immunity to Magic is a top-level Immunity that includes Immunity to Direct Magic (magical effects cast on or triggered by the subject, whether or not they're resistible, and whether they originate from spells, innate magical abilities, magic items, or something else), Immunity to Ambient Magic (persistent magical effects cast on or inherent to the environment, which affect the subject upon encountering them – again, regardless of specific origins), and Immunity to Magically Conjured Effects (beams, energy fields, flames, gas, projectiles, etc. created out of nothing using magic, even if the conjured matter or energy isn't itself magical). It is a dramatic filter that asks: "Is magic necessary to have this noxious effect?" And yes, it assumes that magical conjurations have a "memory" of their origins.

The idea is to distinguish ordinary burning fuel ignited by Fire spells, but that could burn anyway, from fuel-less fires that burn only because of Fire spells; existing rocks dislodged by Earth spells, but that could fall anyway, from stony projectiles that exist only because of Earth spells; natural sunlight focused using Light and Darkness spells, but that could cause sunburn anyway, from artificial sunlight conjured by Light and Darkness spells; and so on. This is why jet and Missile spells count: They are matter or energy created from nothing by magic. Were magic not possible, neither would be the spells. It's irrelevant to the discussion whether the stuff flying through the air is magical.

All of this – especially "it assumes that magical conjurations have a memory of their origins" and "it's irrelevant whether the stuff flying through the air is magical" – appears to cause difficulties for some. However, I think that most gamers grasp that the idea here is that casters cannot affect the creature simply by casting a spell. They have to get creative: collapse the ceiling, ignite a flammable gas, or otherwise use their magic to trigger a damaging effect that could as easily be triggered by mundane means.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Kromm

A manaplasm is a monster found in Dungeon Fantasy Monsters 2. It has a trait called Immunity to Magic.

Ah, you can tell I don't have that book. :)

I almost never buy monster books.

Also, [Magic] isn't the right tag and general Gurps is probably not as appropriate as the Dungeon Fantasy Forum. Though the OP didn't make that clear at the beginiing.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Also, [Magic] isn't the right tag and general Gurps is probably not as appropriate as the Dungeon Fantasy Forum. Though the OP didn't make that clear at the beginiing.

I'm not entirely sure . . .

The issue appears to be the wording in GURPS Magic. Compare the Sunbolt spell there (which specifically draws a comparison to a laser, isn't affected by Missile Shield but is affected by Force Dome, and does impaling damage for some reason) to the version in Dungeon Fantasy Spells (which explicitly calls itself a "missile" so that it's affected by Missile Shield, and does burning damage, and where there's no Force Dome spell to worry about).

There's also the fact that generic Insubstantiality doesn't exist in the Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying Game; specific monsters can be partially or completely intangible, and their vulnerabilities are spelled out in the monster write-up. For instance, the specter's description devotes two paragraphs to explaining that the entity is immune to material dangers other than people and objects using Affect Spirits or Ghost Weapon (with a list of examples, both matter and energy), and also to magic other than Communication and Empathy, Mind Control, and Necromantic spells; that pretty much rules out Sunbolt on the strength of it being both a material danger and not a spell from one of the three allowed colleges. The manaplasm (which isn't insubstantial) comes with similarly detailed wording that proclaims utter immunity to all magic and then for good measure calls out spells cast on it, ongoing spells in areas it traverses, and jet and Missile spells.

If you take spells from GURPS Magic and try to interpret them in the Dungeon Fantasy RPG, or monsters from the Dungeon Fantasy RPG and try to use them in GURPS campaigns that use Magic you're going to: (1) always be posting in the wrong forum, and (2) get a headache, because there are too many subtle changes between the games.

The Dungeon Fantasy RPG is not generic, and defines a great many things using special-case language in individual spell or monster descriptions. If you port its content back to GURPS, you're obliged to translate that special-case language into generic GURPS. Likewise, if you port GURPS content into the Dungeon Fantasy RPG, you'll have to make sure to adjust the generic language of the origin game to the specific assumptions of the destination game – which are at times radically, not subtly, different. Importing things as if they're modular and need no changes won't end well.

I can say, though, that in either game, "material" is used to mean the opposite of "insubstantial" or "intangible," and refers to time, space, matter, and energy as experienced in the usual world as opposed to whatever passes for those things in the astral, ethereal, spectral, or spirit realm. "Material" is not synonymous with "matter" and thus is not a contrast to "energy." The Dungeon Fantasy RPG also uses "physical" this way; it's the opposite of "insubstantial" (for a monster), "mental" (for a character trait), or "magical" (for an effect), not of "energy." The contrasting realm to "energy" is "matter." GURPS is less good about this, and sometimes contrasts "physical" with "energy."

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Sunbolt spell there (which specifically draws a comparison to a laser... does impaling damage for some reason)

Carryover from 3e Magic, isn't it? Lasers used to be impaling damage.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Carryover from 3e Magic, isn't it? Lasers used to be impaling damage.

That seems likely. It's a shame it says "burning" in the descriptive text but "impaling" in the stats block – though the real sin is in comparing this to a laser.

("Sunlight can hurt ghosts!" would make sense in most cultures' folkore . . . shades, specters, undead, whatever are traditionally unable to withstand the cleansing power of the sun. That's why they mostly turn up at night and in dismal haunted houses.)