Teleportation travelling at high speeds

[Braden Campbell]

Yes... the Law of Inertia would apply, and he would take 1D6 points of damage for every ten mph he was going.

[Qev]

I'm generally pretty forgiving with teleport and inertia, myself. It's magic, after all. Nobody wants to deal with an unexpected 200km/h velocity using Teleport: Superior to jump from Tolkeen to the Kingdom of Worth, say.

[Mouser13]

Personally its magic and I think he would get the inertia at the end. He if he teleports in to car he doesn't going crashing into the sides because he was moving, but then again I always allow people to choice their new position it is teleport nothing says you can just you how you come out save the old star trek reference.

Personally I like the idea of teleporting from the ground to a car it just seems cool and magical.

The rule question is if you teleport to say a move car would you make the NPC or player get on the ground and cast the spells so he is in the same position.

Or if teleporting into a bed. Some reason I think the would be a little werid to teleport and be standing on a bed.

THough in the end their is no rules for it. It would be your choice as the dm. THough I would sure remember it has a player and make you have to change you plans in the future if you teleport a NPC.

[verdilak]

I dont use the laws of Inertia, mainly because there are no Laws of Teleportation. Besides, you picture in your mind where you want to be... that also includes picturing where you want to be in that area, such as standing next to the park bench, the tree, sitting down on the bench, sitting on the grass, ect. YOU decide how you are going to end up where you want to be. So yea, there is no inertia from the Teleport spell.

[Jesterzzn]

I dont use the laws of Inertia, mainly because there are no Laws of Teleportation.

Bingo. Its silly. The caster gets to appear where he wants in whatever state of motion he wants within the limits of the spell.

Think for a moment how silly this gets if extrapolated out. Teleport off a plane? Dead. Teleport onto a moving vehicle? Dead. D-Port from a world with a fast rotation onto one with a slow rotation? Dead. It just gets to be completely absurd.

It sounds more like the player made a good play on the situation and the GM should reward the quick thinking rather than make up some junk about teleport inertia.

[Jesterzzn]

Exactly. There ARE no laws of telportation. But that doesn't mean we must ignore other Laws.

By the very use of the magic spell you are ignoring a great many physical Laws.

In the end its the GM's call based on what they feel is right.

This is always the case. However it does not mean that GM's can't be wrong.

Alos I consider inertia of the person relative to thier surroundings the factor. NOT the world.

I will assume that this is directed at my statement about D-port wo worlds with differing rotational speeds. And so I ask how the world and its innate inertia is not a factor? How can you just ignore the Law of inertia as it applies to large stellar bodies? You can't just go picking an choosing which laws you include in the game...can you?

[Jesterzzn]

By the very use of the magic spell you are ignoring a great many physical Laws.

Actually teleportaion has be therorize using science and the current Laws governing our world. I think it has also been sucssesfully tested. Quantum level if I recall. So whos to say that all magic really is is extreamly advanced science done intuitionally. So then Inertia must apply.

Well I think its best to just use the books definitions on magic, and none of them refer to it as "advanced science done intuitively."

I will assume that this is directed at my statement about D-port wo worlds with differing rotational speeds. And so I ask how the world and its innate inertia is not a factor? How can you just ignore the Law of inertia as it applies to large stellar bodies? You can't just go picking an choosing which laws you include in the game...can you?

Also there is more at play than just the rotaion of the world generating inertia If there wasn't we couldn't land planes, toss a ball in the air etc etc. Things like Gravity.

As long as the rotaional speed is constant then yes you are correct, but I was talking about a massive and instantanous change in speeds between worlds which, if you wanted to claim the spell does not compensate for inertia, would kill just about any SDC being instantly. Shifters beware!

[Jesterzzn]

Sorry about chopping up your post, I just wanted to take these points in what I felt are order of importance to the topic.

But you cant always reward creative ways of getting around problems in the game, when it stretches the rules.

What rule was stretched? The player used a spell within the rules. You have taken issue with that use by claiming a spell, that by its very nature defies natural laws, is subject to those laws when you see fit. That's fine, its your game, but the player didn't stretch any rules, he just had some rules tacked on because you thought they should be. But again, that's your call in your game. I just find it to be a ridiculous limitation to put on a spell that has no mention or inference to such within its descriptor.

The spell does not create a doorway that the caster travels through, it does not propel the caster to his new location via another dimension, rather the caster simply thinks of where he wants to be and he is there. Momentum, inertia, whatever the physical state of motion he is in at the time is irrelevant. He just appears where he wants to be.

i really wouldnt think that the creator of the spell would have a need to make it in such a way in the first place. Its a spell to move you from one place to the next expediently, not a spell to save you from fall damage.

It really doesn't matter if the spell is used as the originator might or might not have intended. All that matters is if the player used the spell withing the limitations outlined in the book. From what you described it sounds like he did. I'll also note you have no idea what the original intent was, you are just speculating. So while that will work fine for your game, this forum is about what is in the books and as far as I can see the limits you want to impose just are not there.

one could assume the D-teleport spell takes things like that into account. As you said, it couldnt work otherwise.

however, i dont see any reason to assume the normal teleport spell would.

I don't think the spells take anything into account other than what the caster wants. If he wants to be standing over by the door...*cast spell* he's now standing by the door. If he wants to be standing on the ground instead of the plane speeding over it...*cast spell* he's now standing on the ground. If he wants to be standing on the ground instead of on a flying item not under his control...*casts spell* He's on the ground. It's just that simple.

[verdilak]

one could assume the D-teleport spell takes things like that into account. As you said, it couldnt work otherwise.

however, i dont see any reason to assume the normal teleport spell would. i really wouldnt think that the creator of the spell would have a need to make it in such a way in the first place. Its a spell to move you from one place to the next expediently, not a spell to save you from fall damage. Creative use, and quick thinking yes. But you cant always reward creative ways of getting around problems in the game, when it stretches the rules. Spellcasters are plenty powerful enough without opening sets of possibilities like that.

Why can't it save from damage? By stating that's how you feel, what about none of the books talking about what happens when you are teleporting? I mean, you could be walking, teleport someone and due to your views on which laws apply, inertia could cause the guy to fall from the top of the tower he was teleporting to.

If I was a player in your game with that spell and those asinine rules imposed on him, I would always make sure to teleport right above some type of water or in the water, so that no laws of inertia would apply. Of course, I would be worrid that you might decide there are sharp ricks, monsters, whatever in the water.

Do you see what I am getting at here? By throwing a rule in a game that is not in the books after the fact, i.e. telling him about inertia AFTER he casts the spell and not at the beginning of the session as a new house rule, it then become players against the GM. To see how they can get around your silly rules and play the spell as it was written.

Nowhere in any of the books does inertia ever play a role.

Think of it like this, you are in a car, going lets say 100mph, and its about to crash into something. you teleport out of it a mile away 1000 feet in the air. With inertia, its the sudden stopping that would do the damage, but do to being in the air, there would be no stopping, instead, the inertia that is still with you would plumet you even faster towards the earth. Then its a simple matter of using levitation, or weightlessness, or any other combination of spells.

Or if you were falling off a cliff with water below it. The GM states that falling into water this way would kill you unless you get a 18+ on a roll with impact. So instead, you teleport yourself under the water. In that way, you would not have hit the surface, which is what would be your downfall, but would have been deposited INTO the water itself. There is no barrier there to deal you any damage and you might get extra XP for quick thinking.

As I said, using inertia rules on magic would only get your players to move their thinking from roleplaying to how to best the GM and try to get around the inertia rule. It is then turned into a Us vs Them, and no GM wants that in their games.

[Damian Magecraft]

Fascinating arguments all the way around...
However...
one important aspect of the game was missed.
Shadow was selected to be the GM, this means the other players agreed to play by his interpretations of the rules. To argue against a call he made (while the game is still going anyway) is poor gaming etiquette.

I can see the argument going either way (and would have to use a case by case ruling on it).

[verdilak]

Fascinating arguments all the way around...
However...
one important aspect of the game was missed.
Shadow was selected to be the GM, this means the other players agreed to play by his interpretations of the rules. To argue against a call he made (while the game is still going anyway) is poor gaming etiquette.

I can see the argument going either way (and would have to use a case by case ruling on it).

Understood, but to throw out a House Rule in the middle of game play is also poor GMing. If you, as a GM, see something that you don't want to be repeated, you say so at the end of the session and make it a new House Rule from that moment on. You dont throw it out there in the middle of things, especially something that is not mentioned in ANY of the books, under ANY circumstance.

I dont like arguements because it takes time away from actually playing, not because arguements are bad etiquette.

[Jesterzzn]

Before this degrades into righteous indignation and flames, let me remind everyone that the Q&A forum is solely related to what can be shown from the books and not about critiquing GM styles.

So sorry to Solace if he felt ganged up on. However, its also bad form to ask people to comment on your ruling and then complain when someone didn't care for the way you handled things.

In the future the best way to present things in the Q&A thread is to just ask a question without all the context.

Ex. When a player teleports from a moving platform, are they subject to potential damage from the inertia of their movement before the teleport?

Or something similar.

[verdilak]

Ya know, id like to point out i feel attacked by verdilak...

I am sorry, I wasn't meaning to imply I was attacking you, though I was attacking the idea of inertia. I am sorry if I didnt convey myself better.

Also i pointed this out when he said he wanted to cast the spell, and wasnt making him follow through with the spell. you seem very quick to assume the worst about people.

Well, you said he casted the spell while traveling, and then you brought up the inertia rule and argued about it for half an hour. So it seemed, to me at least through the words you used, that he didnt want to cast the spell, he did cast it, and then had a new rule thrown at him outta left field.

Also, im a generous GM, and when enough players spoke out against it. I let it slide for ONE session, and told them i would have a ruling ready next session.

I am sorry, I didnt know you let it slide for one session, it seemed that you made a judgement right then and there and stuck with it. SOme of my aggression would have been reduced if you had pointed that out earlier. Sorry.

I dont appreciate the attitude, and would appreciate it if you avoided posting on threads i started, freedom of speech, and free message board or not.

As far as avoiding your topics, please realize that I do not stalk you about, looking for ways to be arguemenative towards you and posts. I just post on what catches my fancy as most here do I would think. I do take offence that you seem to think that I purposefully look for ways to comment on your threads. Basically it's this, if you post a thread, and I want to respond, I am, tough noogies.... but I do not go out of my way to look for ones specifically posted by you. I am not that type of person.

Your criticism is not constructive in the least. And your assuming that since a rule doesnt take something into account, it doesnt exist. Because inertia isnt talked about in the spell, i would assume the writer of the spell never took inertia into account when making the spell. (I know, I know, its far fetched idea isnt it? )

It's not that I don't think inertia doesnt exist in regards to teleportaion, I think that since inertia isnt mentioned upon in ANY book that inertia laws are not to be taken into account. i can think of numerous other instances, spells, psionics, ect that would make sense to have inertia applied to them, however since magic is a force that operates outside of known science and known laws, inertia doesnt apply to them.

My criticism isnt constructive? That just tells me that you are going to do what you want, and hoped for everyone agreeing with you so you could show you players how they were wrong and you were right.

I'm sorry, but if you can find me inertia rules in any PB product, that would change things, but so far, I have not found anything relating to inertia in any of the books.

[drewkitty ~..~]

Hi, I was wondering, what everyone thinks i should do about a player. His character was travelling at 60 MPH due to an item giving fly as the eagle, it wasnt under his control, simply riding on it, and it was on a crash course with a group of enemies (another player wanted to ram it into the enemies), he used a teleport spell to get off it.

Now i figured he should still be travelling 60 MPH in the same direction he had been when he teleported. We actually had a half hour argument in the middle of the game. (I may stop GM-ing for them because they wouldnt shut up and accept my ruling) Anyway, what do others think? I think he argued just because he didnt want to take the damage from hitting the ground.

Also, where can I reference damage done from high speed collisions?

"It's Magic"
The use of a spell to tela-port by-passes the law of inertia, T-porting the mage from the relitive stop in relation to the flying device to the relitive stop of target area T-porting to.

However, you are the GM. RPG rule #1 "The GM is always Right"
So if you want you can impose a extra PPE cost to the spell account for the speed differential. This can be used when t-porting from the ground to a moving object also. Or you can impose a -% penelty to the mage's T-port emergance roll. Or both. With each the GM will decide what rate if its +1 PPE per 10 mph. or +1 PPE per 100 mph or what ever. And whether or not the % penilty is -1% per mph or -1% per 5mph, or whatever.

If they miss their t-port emergance roll they have to take that damage.

If using PSI or Super Power to do the same I would have no dis-agreement about the law of inerta being applicable. However, with those two type I would, as a GM, want the player and you to come to an agreement about how the power works, at char creation. And not after the fact when the player has vested self interest in defining the power's 'way they work' to his immedate adavntage.

[Qev]

A teleport with explicit inertial control would have a lot of interesting tactical applications, I bet... especially if one could teleport objects without traveling with them.

[Damian Magecraft]

This is indeed a rather crazy topic, even if it does come up only rarely.

What my group decided to do was to make the inertial change take time, so that for every few seconds (attack) the Teleporter can spend focusing in on his on his destination, he can bring his own inertia closer to that of his target destination.

This would only be used when either, say, teleporting into or out of a car.

Obviously not an official rule, but we find that this works for us. We have to play the speed by ear, but its pretty much 1 attack per each 10-20 MPH you need to gain or drop.

You can never add extra inertia to yourself (greater than your current speed + that of your target destination), and combat teleporting will usually retain inertia as one won't have the time to focus properly.

Hope this helps.

Hrrrrmmm this sounds rather plausable actually....i may have to adapt it to my games...

[Qev]

I'd probably nix the "never add extra inertia" bit, since from the caster's frame of reference, any change in velocity is an increase in inertia. Not everyone likes relativity as much as I do, though.

[Qev]

Oh, I wouldn't let them add velocity for free. I liked Drewkitty's idea of spending extra PPE to modify your arrival velocity.

[Mouser13]

a) It then becomes a very good attack, being able to add 10000 MPH to a knife and then teleporting it directly behind an enemy. See the blood fly for hundreds of miles! Giga-damage! (Ok, extreme scenario, but SOMEONE would try and do it)


-AF

Or just teleport a object into them and instant death.

[Sun Phoenix]

"Inertia is a non-quantifiable property of matter by which it remains at rest or in uniform motion in the same straight line unless acted upon by some external force"

I would qualify magic as a non-quantifiable external force, and thusly able of elminating inertia.

Otherwise teleport becomes a very simple perpetual energy generator. Portal, anyone?


edit: Also, there are no "Laws of inertia"....inertia is a law of physics.

[Tinker Dragoon]

This message has been moved to the GM's Forum, where the topic is more applicable and appropriate. If you have a problem with how this post was handled please direct all inquires to deific.nmi@gmail.com, including the url to the post in question.

[The Beast]

IMO, any time you magically teleport your inertia is set to the location of where you're teleporting to, not from. This would include rifts to other dimensions as well.

[cornholioprime]

I dont use the laws of Inertia, mainly because there are no Laws of Teleportation.

Bingo. Its silly. The caster gets to appear where he wants in whatever state of motion he wants within the limits of the spell.

Think for a moment how silly this gets if extrapolated out. Teleport off a plane? Dead. Teleport onto a moving vehicle? Dead. D-Port from a world with a fast rotation onto one with a slow rotation? Dead. It just gets to be completely absurd.

It sounds more like the player made a good play on the situation and the GM should reward the quick thinking rather than make up some junk about teleport inertia.

Agreed.

Right now, in the Real World, you are "traveling" at a rotational speed of up to 26,000+ MPH at the Equator relative to the Earth's axis, and at slower speeds as you approach the poles.

At the same time this planet is traveling at several tens of thousands of miles an hour relative to the Sun. And I just don't know how fast our Solar System is traveling as part of our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy, but it is a pretty good clip; one Galactic Rotation takes "only" 225 million years from our point relative to the Galactic Center.

The Teleport spell "takes all this into account" when you cast the spell, thus there are never any reports of vaporized remains when somebody teleports from a faster rotating part of the planet to a slower part, or if they teleport to other planets/dimensions where the final destination of said teleport is definitely NOT moving at the same relative speeds as our Earth is.

If the spell can take the motion of Universal bodies into account, it would ceratinly have no problem taking a guy from a 60 MPH vehicle and depositing him safely at his intended destination at full stop (relative to his new location, of course).

[Talavar]

I dont use the laws of Inertia, mainly because there are no Laws of Teleportation.

Bingo. Its silly. The caster gets to appear where he wants in whatever state of motion he wants within the limits of the spell.

Think for a moment how silly this gets if extrapolated out. Teleport off a plane? Dead. Teleport onto a moving vehicle? Dead. D-Port from a world with a fast rotation onto one with a slow rotation? Dead. It just gets to be completely absurd.

It sounds more like the player made a good play on the situation and the GM should reward the quick thinking rather than make up some junk about teleport inertia.

Agreed.

Right now, in the Real World, you are "traveling" at a rotational speed of up to 26,000+ MPH at the Equator relative to the Earth's axis, and at slower speeds as you approach the poles.

At the same time this planet is traveling at several tens of thousands of miles an hour relative to the Sun. And I just don't know how fast our Solar System is traveling as part of our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy, but it is a pretty good clip; one Galactic Rotation takes "only" 225 million years from our point relative to the Galactic Center.

The Teleport spell "takes all this into account" when you cast the spell, thus there are never any reports of vaporized remains when somebody teleports from a faster rotating part of the planet to a slower part, or if they teleport to other planets/dimensions where the final destination of said teleport is definitely NOT moving at the same relative speeds as our Earth is.

If the spell can take the motion of Universal bodies into account, it would ceratinly have no problem taking a guy from a 60 MPH vehicle and depositing him safely at his intended destination at full stop (relative to his new location, of course).

Exactly. If teleportation doesn't take factors like inertia and momentum into account, it's a useless ability. Magic regularly breaks the laws of physics in Rifts/Palladium.

[verdilak]

I dont use the laws of Inertia, mainly because there are no Laws of Teleportation.

Bingo. Its silly. The caster gets to appear where he wants in whatever state of motion he wants within the limits of the spell.

Think for a moment how silly this gets if extrapolated out. Teleport off a plane? Dead. Teleport onto a moving vehicle? Dead. D-Port from a world with a fast rotation onto one with a slow rotation? Dead. It just gets to be completely absurd.

It sounds more like the player made a good play on the situation and the GM should reward the quick thinking rather than make up some junk about teleport inertia.

Agreed.

Right now, in the Real World, you are "traveling" at a rotational speed of up to 26,000+ MPH at the Equator relative to the Earth's axis, and at slower speeds as you approach the poles.

At the same time this planet is traveling at several tens of thousands of miles an hour relative to the Sun. And I just don't know how fast our Solar System is traveling as part of our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy, but it is a pretty good clip; one Galactic Rotation takes "only" 225 million years from our point relative to the Galactic Center.

The Teleport spell "takes all this into account" when you cast the spell, thus there are never any reports of vaporized remains when somebody teleports from a faster rotating part of the planet to a slower part, or if they teleport to other planets/dimensions where the final destination of said teleport is definitely NOT moving at the same relative speeds as our Earth is.

If the spell can take the motion of Universal bodies into account, it would ceratinly have no problem taking a guy from a 60 MPH vehicle and depositing him safely at his intended destination at full stop (relative to his new location, of course).

Exactly. If teleportation doesn't take factors like inertia and momentum into account, it's a useless ability. Magic regularly breaks the laws of physics in Rifts/Palladium.

My 2 cents... EXACTLY!

[Lenwen]

The way I look at it how can some one be running full out fast as one can Teleport an be standing still ? In my Gm'ming I use this simple explanation as a case in point . Course ... The argument could be had both ways as is shown in the movies . certain people can port out of planes to grab some one falling .. then port back INTO the plane with out ill effects . An yet still be fighting 10+ people in the next scene using thier ability to port all over the place an you can see the person kicking one guy teleporting while the inertia from the kick turns him all the way around he grabs another person with a tail or what ever an tosses that one then teleports then with the inertia from the throwing of the gaurd uses that to punch another gaurd an so on an so on .. So like I said it can be argued both ways to no ends Thus the deciding factore = GM's.

-Lenwen

[cornholioprime]

As fun as it is to argue inertia via teleportation, we are taking a fantasy concept entirely out of proportion. Star Trek doesnt really explain how intertial dampeners work, they just do or it would have been one short series. Now whomever it was that inveted teleportation in the first place obvoiusly went through a lot of trial and error. Magic is an excercise of will over a physical environment to achieve a certain effect. A spell that caused the caster to die would be listed as dangerous magic and not normal wizardry.
Lets take the argument in reverse for a moment. Air Warlock spell levitation has no saving throw. At high enough level you can raise someone to decent heights pretty darn quick. So I cast this spell raise Joe Smith 110 feet in less than 5 seconds, according to the inertia rule his brain and everything else inside should be coming out his back side .. This does not happen, same thing with teleportation. The purpose of magic and even higher science is to overcome all of these effects or they wouldn't be useful.
If nothing elses fantasy literature is full of the extraordinary to countermand the ordinary, otherwise everyone should just play a man at arms.

:ok:

[Noon]

I think he argued just because he didnt want to take the damage from hitting the ground.

And if he didn't?

Does he deserve anything in that case?

[cornholioprime]

In general, which is more fun? Teleporting to safety from a crashing air vehicle, showing the power of magic, or taking impact damage like the rest of the jokers on board the wreck after wasting a ton of PPE on a powerful spell?

:ok:

[Lenwen]

Curious as to if anyone knows exactly . What is the absolute most times lets say a HERO with that ability to Teleport can teleport an then now lets say a Baal Rog Demon (lesser Teleport that is ) is it once per melee round or is it limited by some sort of factor that I am as of yet unaware of ?


-Lenwen.

[Rallan]

Exactly. There ARE no laws of telportation. But that doesn't mean we must ignore other Laws.

By the very use of the magic spell you are ignoring a great many physical Laws.

In the end its the GM's call based on what they feel is right.

This is always the case. However it does not mean that GM's can't be wrong.

Alos I consider inertia of the person relative to thier surroundings the factor. NOT the world.

I will assume that this is directed at my statement about D-port wo worlds with differing rotational speeds. And so I ask how the world and its innate inertia is not a factor? How can you just ignore the Law of inertia as it applies to large stellar bodies? You can't just go picking an choosing which laws you include in the game...can you?

Nobody's ignoring them, they're just assuming that Teleport and Dimensional Teleport have built in ways around them, because nothing in the text ever mentions characters coming to a bad end because they teleported to the far side of the planet, or because they dimensionally teleported to another world with a different angular velocity. If we had to take inertia into account, nobody would ever ever EVER use Superior Teleport because it'd be an instant death sentence. Hell, with a high-level mage (or if you just cast it from a Nexus Point), even Lesser Teleport could take you far enough that, if we made you keep your inertia, you'd stand a damn good chance of spraining an ankle when you hit your destination.

[Rallan]

Right now, in the Real World, you are "traveling" at a rotational speed of up to 26,000+ MPH at the Equator relative to the Earth's axis, and at slower speeds as you approach the poles.

Um... not quite. The Earth's circumference at the equator is roughly 40,000km (or 26,000 miles). It gets through that distance in 24 hours, so your speed relative to the Earth's axis is only around 1670km/h (roughly 1000mph).

That's still pretty fast though, and plenty fast enough to be absolutely positivel 100% fatal to any human being who tries to use Superior Teleport instead of just buying a plane ticket. If we assume that teleportation doesn't do anything about inertia and velocity, a dude on the equator who teleports himself to the far side of the world would wind up a thin red smear as he streaks along the ground at a speed of around 3300km/h. If a dude standing on the equator in Africa teleported himself halfway around the world to the equator somewhere in southeast asia he'd rocket straight up at a speed of 1670km/h, fast enough that (if we ignore wind resistance) it'll take about 45 seconds to reach his apex before he starts plummeting back to Earth again. If a dude on the equator in southeast asia were to make the trip backwards to Africa, he'd piledrive himself into the ground because his inertia would give him a speed of 1670km/h straight down relative to his new location.

[Jesterzzn]

Exactly. There ARE no laws of telportation. But that doesn't mean we must ignore other Laws.

By the very use of the magic spell you are ignoring a great many physical Laws.

In the end its the GM's call based on what they feel is right.

This is always the case. However it does not mean that GM's can't be wrong.

Alos I consider inertia of the person relative to thier surroundings the factor. NOT the world.

I will assume that this is directed at my statement about D-port wo worlds with differing rotational speeds. And so I ask how the world and its innate inertia is not a factor? How can you just ignore the Law of inertia as it applies to large stellar bodies? You can't just go picking an choosing which laws you include in the game...can you?

Nobody's ignoring them, they're just assuming that Teleport and Dimensional Teleport have built in ways around them, because nothing in the text ever mentions characters coming to a bad end because they teleported to the far side of the planet, or because they dimensionally teleported to another world with a different angular velocity. If we had to take inertia into account, nobody would ever ever EVER use Superior Teleport because it'd be an instant death sentence. Hell, with a high-level mage (or if you just cast it from a Nexus Point), even Lesser Teleport could take you far enough that, if we made you keep your inertia, you'd stand a damn good chance of spraining an ankle when you hit your destination.

I am guessing you missed all my previous and subsequent posts, and therefor the not so subtle sarcasm of my last few questions there.

[Rallan]

Exactly. There ARE no laws of telportation. But that doesn't mean we must ignore other Laws.

By the very use of the magic spell you are ignoring a great many physical Laws.

In the end its the GM's call based on what they feel is right.

This is always the case. However it does not mean that GM's can't be wrong.

Alos I consider inertia of the person relative to thier surroundings the factor. NOT the world.

I will assume that this is directed at my statement about D-port wo worlds with differing rotational speeds. And so I ask how the world and its innate inertia is not a factor? How can you just ignore the Law of inertia as it applies to large stellar bodies? You can't just go picking an choosing which laws you include in the game...can you?

Nobody's ignoring them, they're just assuming that Teleport and Dimensional Teleport have built in ways around them, because nothing in the text ever mentions characters coming to a bad end because they teleported to the far side of the planet, or because they dimensionally teleported to another world with a different angular velocity. If we had to take inertia into account, nobody would ever ever EVER use Superior Teleport because it'd be an instant death sentence. Hell, with a high-level mage (or if you just cast it from a Nexus Point), even Lesser Teleport could take you far enough that, if we made you keep your inertia, you'd stand a damn good chance of spraining an ankle when you hit your destination.

I am guessing you missed all my previous and subsequent posts, and therefor the not so subtle sarcasm of my last few questions there.

Dude, I didn't even notice I was responding to a month-old post. You think I noticed all that other crap?

[Noon]

You have genre.

The fun of (simulation) play is to bend genre, but not so far that it breaks. When it breaks, play crashes.

But when you bend it, play is exciting and thrilling.

If you don't bend it at all, it's dull as dishwater (though it hasn't crashed - many people will take dull and safe over risk and excitement).

You and your players have to take a risk with how you interpret teleport, for fun play to be had. But you all have to realise your taking the risk of breaking the genre entirely when you bend it. That way no one will be trying to bend it too far.