Gian:
> Bad choice of words by me. I mean: magical senses enhance physical
> senses and, usually, should be harder to be fooled. "Illusion" magic
> (the inverted commas are related to Greg's posting) should be
> primarily intended to fool physical un-enhanced senses.
Absolutely so. Greg's comments are well-taken, but I'm not sure they particularly impinge on the day-to-day consciousness of the average Heortling, say, or the operation of magic in that context. In particular, magic available thereabouts is I think not going to be able to manage the "temporary magical creation" of a fully realized Sword of Humakt (other than the traditional method involving unskilled workers, followed by waiting 20-odd years). Rather it's more likely to involve a more limited magical creation, or altering the appearance of an existing person, etc.
> The same way that a RW smuggler can conceal drugs in a false-bottom
> baggage (the illusion magic in this metaphor), to fool the
> policemen's sight and tact, but can't fool a dog (the magic sense in
> this metaphor) since the dog's superior smell is not obstacled. BUT,
> if the smuggler is aware of the dog, he can conceal the drug is a
> wheel of blue cheese (the specifically devised illusion magic) and
> try to cover its odour.
Indeed. In rules terms I think what you need to consider it first, as Greg says, the power of the magician, and secondly, the 'applicability' of both the magic being used to create the effect, and of that being used to penetrate it. Detect Truth would presumably be the best possible type of magic to discern such flim-flam (positive sit-mod), Detect Runic Powers (is this a Gift Carrier avoiding spelling of "RuneQuest Sight"?) somewhat less so, ordinary senses not too great at all. And if you have a feat specifically _designed_ to defeat such detection, then great.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail