Teleport: Lesser question

[Toc Rat]

Ok has this one ever happened to anyone here? You're running a group of players, one of which is a Ley-Line Walker with a very active imagination. They get ambushed by a group of pecos bandits and during the ensuing fight the wizard decided to use teleport lesser to teleport one of the bandits armor...5 miles up!

Now I know what those of you famailiar with the spell are thinking, "You can't do that! It doesn't work on living matter!" and you're 100% correct. Except this player also knew that and so wasn't trying to teleport the bandit inside the armor, just the armor itself. he aruges that since the bushman armor he (the bandit) was wearing isn't alive, weighs less then the 50 lbs. limit and doesn't get a saving throw, it should work. Since I hate to delay game play over rules issues, I allowed it.

What I am curious about is:
1. Has anyone else had this happen?
2. If so how did you handle it? Allow it or not and why?

[Toc Rat]

The player grappled with the bandit, I guess I should have mentioned that part. With the new rules given to us in the RUE regarding magic, it now only take one melee action to cast that lvl of spell. As for the range, like I said, 5 miles straight up, meaning the player had his character simply look up and since they were outside he could see that far and thus...POOF. There goes the bandits nice MDC armor.

The bonus was a few minutes later when it came back down again, after brushing off the dirt it was a fully intact suit of MDC armor for the players to use/sell.

I hate to house rules things for the sole purpose of hurting creativity, rather I like to reward such original thinking.

[Thinyser]

Ok has this one ever happened to anyone here? You're running a group of players, one of which is a Ley-Line Walker with a very active imagination. They get ambushed by a group of pecos bandits and during the ensuing fight the wizard decided to use teleport lesser to teleport one of the bandits armor...5 miles up!

Now I know what those of you famailiar with the spell are thinking, "You can't do that! It doesn't work on living matter!" and you're 100% correct. Except this player also knew that and so wasn't trying to teleport the bandit inside the armor, just the armor itself. he aruges that since the bushman armor he (the bandit) was wearing isn't alive, weighs less then the 50 lbs. limit and doesn't get a saving throw, it should work. Since I hate to delay game play over rules issues, I allowed it.

What I am curious about is:
1. Has anyone else had this happen?
2. If so how did you handle it? Allow it or not and why?

I Think all good players that have access to this spell should have thought of this sooner rather than later and IMO it is perfectly acceptable assuming that you are using an alternate form of casting that doesn't require two full actions to cast and two full melees to exicute the t-port then it would be entirly possible for the mage to do this, but it would in no way move the living being inside. The armor is teleported not levitated, it would simply disappear from around the dude and reapear at the new location leaving the dude without armor and essetialy easy pickings....Though useing TK or Levitation on the armor would do nasty things because the dude inside WILL go along for the ride in these cases.

[Toc Rat]

Ok has this one ever happened to anyone here? You're running a group of players, one of which is a Ley-Line Walker with a very active imagination. They get ambushed by a group of pecos bandits and during the ensuing fight the wizard decided to use teleport lesser to teleport one of the bandits armor...5 miles up!

Now I know what those of you famailiar with the spell are thinking, "You can't do that! It doesn't work on living matter!" and you're 100% correct. Except this player also knew that and so wasn't trying to teleport the bandit inside the armor, just the armor itself. he aruges that since the bushman armor he (the bandit) was wearing isn't alive, weighs less then the 50 lbs. limit and doesn't get a saving throw, it should work. Since I hate to delay game play over rules issues, I allowed it.

What I am curious about is:
1. Has anyone else had this happen?
2. If so how did you handle it? Allow it or not and why?

I Think all good players that have access to this spell should have thought of this sooner rather than later and IMO it is perfectly acceptable assuming that you are using an alternate form of casting that doesn't require two full actions to cast and two full melees to exicute the t-port then it would be entirly possible for the mage to do this, but it would in no way move the living being inside. The armor is teleported not levitated, it would simply disappear from around the dude and reapear at the new location leaving the dude without armor and essetialy easy pickings....Though useing TK or Levitation on the armor would do nasty things because the dude inside WILL go along for the ride in these cases.

I guess I should have been more clear mention that I ruled that while the armor was teleported, the bandit inside wasn't due to the magic of the spell. I thought that was implied by my wording in the first post but perhaps I should have clarified...

[Killer Cyborg]

Technically there is no reason I can think of why it wouldn't work, other than that the caster isn't likely to be familiar with the location of "5 miles up".
But that would just limit whether the armor get to that location, not whether it is actually teleported.

[Thinyser]

Technically there is no reason I can think of why it wouldn't work, other than that the caster isn't likely to be familiar with the location of "5 miles up".
But that would just limit whether the armor get to that location, not whether it is actually teleported.

I allow line of sight for the purpose of "knowing" a location and unless there is something blocking the line of sight (celing, trees, clouds, etc.) the average person can see more than 5 miles so this would be allowable by my interpretation of "known". This is handy for the "I cast CoA on that gliterboy and then t-port this fusion block onto its chest" tactic, as you are probably not familiar with the chest of the glitterboy in question but you can see your desired t-port stopping location.

[Swift-13]

In order to prevent that sort of thing, a cop-out to me, I give items in possession by another person a base saving throw, no bonuses unless there's something exceptional about it (extremely high tech, magical item, ect). While it might seem unfair, the trick works both ways: if a player can do it, an enemy can do it.

[RainOfSteel]

Ok has this one ever happened to anyone here? [...]

What I am curious about is:
1. Has anyone else had this happen?
2. If so how did you handle it? Allow it or not and why?

I cannot see that it is against the RUE wording of the spell.

Remember, if the PCs are doing it, someone, somewhere else, is probably at it as well.

[cornholioprime]

The player grappled with the bandit, I guess I should have mentioned that part. With the new rules given to us in the RUE regarding magic, it now only take one melee action to cast that lvl of spell. As for the range, like I said, 5 miles straight up, meaning the player had his character simply look up and since they were outside he could see that far and thus...POOF. There goes the bandits nice MDC armor.

The bonus was a few minutes later when it came back down again, after brushing off the dirt it was a fully intact suit of MDC armor for the players to use/sell.

I hate to house rules things for the sole purpose of hurting creativity, rather I like to reward such original thinking.

I tried but I can't see why you couldn't work it the way that you did. Seems COMPLETELY legal -and damned funny -to me.

God bless Human (Roleplayer) Creativity!!!!

[Toc Rat]

The player grappled with the bandit, I guess I should have mentioned that part. With the new rules given to us in the RUE regarding magic, it now only take one melee action to cast that lvl of spell. As for the range, like I said, 5 miles straight up, meaning the player had his character simply look up and since they were outside he could see that far and thus...POOF. There goes the bandits nice MDC armor.

The bonus was a few minutes later when it came back down again, after brushing off the dirt it was a fully intact suit of MDC armor for the players to use/sell.

I hate to house rules things for the sole purpose of hurting creativity, rather I like to reward such original thinking.

I tried but I can't see why you couldn't work it the way that you did. Seems COMPLETELY legal -and damned funny -to me.

God bless Human (Roleplayer) Creativity!!!!

Thanks!

[Nekira Sudacne]

well remember guys, you have to actually keep touching the item for 2 full melee rounds before you can teleport it

[Thinyser]

well remember guys, you have to actually keep touching the item for 2 full melee rounds before you can teleport it

not if you go by RUE or use the PPE chaneling method from rifter 21.

[Nekira Sudacne]

well remember guys, you have to actually keep touching the item for 2 full melee rounds before you can teleport it

not if you go by RUE or use the PPE chaneling method from rifter 21.

it's only a level 7 spell. but look at what it says.

"Duration: requires two full melees"

[Thinyser]

well remember guys, you have to actually keep touching the item for 2 full melee rounds before you can teleport it

not if you go by RUE or use the PPE chaneling method from rifter 21.

it's only a level 7 spell. but look at what it says.

"Duration: requires two full melees"

And?

[Nekira Sudacne]

well remember guys, you have to actually keep touching the item for 2 full melee rounds before you can teleport it

not if you go by RUE or use the PPE chaneling method from rifter 21.

it's only a level 7 spell. but look at what it says.

"Duration: requires two full melees"

And?

that's not how long it takes to cast. it takes the normal rules.

AFTER it's cast you need to hold on for 2 melees before it goes anywhere

[Thinyser]

well remember guys, you have to actually keep touching the item for 2 full melee rounds before you can teleport it

not if you go by RUE or use the PPE chaneling method from rifter 21.

it's only a level 7 spell. but look at what it says.

"Duration: requires two full melees"

And?

that's not how long it takes to cast. it takes the normal rules.

AFTER it's cast you need to hold on for 2 melees before it goes anywhere

That is a strange interpretation of the spell since it says the ONLY requirements are that the mage touches the object and that the destination is known to him.
The duration is listed as 2 melee, duration is not casting time. A 2 melle duration simply means it takes 2 melees to reach its destination and rematerialize.

It is not said that the mage must touch the object for 2 melees just that he has to touch it...a tap that last a quarter of a second... hell a 100th of a second is all it would take to initiate the spell, then one of two things happens....either the object disappears instantly and reappears somewhere else 30 seconds after it disappears OR it waits 30 seconds then disapperars and reappears instantly in its new location. In either secenario the object doesn't finish the journy the spell sent it on for 2 melees and then the spells duration expires.

Also there is a third option. maybe the duration is the lenght of time that the mage has the ability to t-port the same object at will. Say that a mage wanted to perform a stage show and would cast the spell on a piece of paper an audience member just signed the paper is then folded and placed in his hand he then teleports it into his hat and pull it out WOW! then he could make it seemingly disappear from sight only to reapper under the chair of an audience member (researched befor the show so that it was a known place for the mage) that new audience member brings it up to the mage and the mage t-ports it to the hand of the audinece member who signed it (he shook hands with the audince member so now that is a known location) In this manner you could t-port the object as many times as you had actions during those 2 melee and only pay the 15 PPE once.

Any of these three posibilities would be a viable intrepretation of "duration" but you are intrepreting it as part of the casting and for that reason I think your interpretation of "duration" is flawed.

[Thinyser]

I have a question. According to RUE, casting a level 6 spell counts as 2 melee actions. Teleport: Lesser is a level 6 spell.

So...doen't the spellcaster have to maintain contact with the item in question for 2 melee actions in order to teleport it? This being the case, the spellcaster is going to get beat on while he is trying to cast the spell, which would interrupt him. Thus, the spell fails.

While I love the idea, I don't think it will work. Unless the target of the attack is a complete moron and chooses not to attack the mage who is touching him.

Now, if the mage was invisible...maybe.

Nope it doesnt say that it requires touch for the whole 2 actions just thats how long it takes to cast any 6th lvl spell...also if you use ppe chaneling it only takes 15 ppe so that is doable in one action by a 3rd lvl mage
but my point is that it doesnt state that you have to manitiain contact with the target for x nember of melees or x number of actions just that you have to touch the target.

[Thinyser]

What I am curious about is:
1. Has anyone else had this happen?
2. If so how did you handle it? Allow it or not and why?

I would not allow it, but I wouldn't tell the player why; to the mage the spell just failed for some reason.

If you, the GM, tell the players why something fails all the time, then there's a greater chance of using player knowledge and the character learning what he/she shouldn't know.

My reason for not allowing it would be because you can't selectively take a container and not the entire contents. With Teleport: Greater I would allow it, because it's a more comprehensive spell.

Where does it say that?

[Thinyser]

Are we limited to ONLY what the book says we can or can't do!!!???!!!???

well of course you can rule it however you want... .... but there is no basis for this ruling in the books.

The spell has requirements and nothing amongst the spells description has the spell unable to effect a container because of its contents. I would say that it is up to the mage and his intentions for the spell.
What if the mage wanted to teleport a locked box so that the contents would remain, now free for the taking, would you not allow this either? If its the mage's intention to leave behind the contents, and transport only the box why would he not be able to?

And the reverse of this is that the mage (should he desire to) could teleport the box, contents and all, so long as they were not alive and the total to be teleported was 50 lbs or less.

(Hey this would be a good way to sterilize something just teleport it somewhere and the living things (bugs, bacteria, viruses) are all left behind and the item is now sterile.)

[Nekira Sudacne]

Are we limited to ONLY what the book says we can or can't do!!!???!!!???

if you want to play by the rules, yes

[Qev]

It always seems people want to screw over mages in Rifts. I mean, it's bad enough that the poor mage would have to physically touch his target in modern combat, and people are still trying to shoot down the tactic. Geez.

[Kalinda]

It always seems people want to screw over mages in Rifts. I mean, it's bad enough that the poor mage would have to physically touch his target in modern combat, and people are still trying to shoot down the tactic. Geez.

Yeah, if you can close with a man at arms type and keep from getting kicked in the jimmys long enough to cast the spell, more power to you...

[Killer Cyborg]

It always seems people want to screw over mages in Rifts. I mean, it's bad enough that the poor mage would have to physically touch his target in modern combat, and people are still trying to shoot down the tactic. Geez.

Yeah, if you can close with a man at arms type and keep from getting kicked in the jimmys long enough to cast the spell, more power to you...

Agreed.

[Killer Cyborg]

You guys are right...magic is tough to use!!! I'm inlclined to IGNORE the rules about spell interruprion AND not fighting while spellcasting. Try to rule that you must be able to stop the Mage in some way, not just annoy him. Thing like binding hands, gagging or putting the Mage out of commission will still work of course but, no more "I hit him and ruin his spell" BS. I'll see how it works with my group.

You have to concentrate to focus magical energy. That makes sense.
It's pretty hard to concentrate when people are shooting at you (or just plain "shooting you"). That makes sense.
So it makes sense that you can't too easily in combat.

My suggestion would be, rather than to ignore this logical rule, to do one of two things:
1. Use techno-wizardry devices.
2. When a mage gets hit, have him make some sort of savings throw. Save vs. Pain, or a ME check of some sort, to see if he can keep his concentration.

[Dr. Doom III]

As far as Doom is concerned touching someone's clothes is touching them and since the spell does not allow teleporting another person nothing would happen.

[cornholioprime]

As far as Doom is concerned touching someone's clothes is touching them and since the spell does not allow teleporting another person nothing would happen.

Dammit!!!

Doom has a point.

When one teleports, say, someboidy in Enviro Armor, does (s)he wait for the target to strip nekkid?? For that matter, does anyone here REALLY believe that you have to practically srtip-search the Body of your target for Bare Flesh before you can Teleport them, willing or no???

Nah, I didn't think so, either.

I'm going to have to amend my previous Answer in a previous Post to this Thread; namely, the Mage CANNOT selectively choose what part of the "package" (s)he'll Teleport.

Unless ANY Evidence at all that shows that a Mage CAN selectively T-port only part of a given Target, then I'd have to say that the Mage'll just T-Port the WHOLE Character/Target away.

Of course, if the direction in which they were 'ported happens to be miles UP...............

[Zer0 Kay]

What I am curious about is:
1. Has anyone else had this happen?
2. If so how did you handle it? Allow it or not and why?

I would not allow it, but I wouldn't tell the player why; to the mage the spell just failed for some reason.

If you, the GM, tell the players why something fails all the time, then there's a greater chance of using player knowledge and the character learning what he/she shouldn't know.

My reason for not allowing it would be because you can't selectively take a container and not the entire contents. With Teleport: Greater I would allow it, because it's a more comprehensive spell.

Where does it say you can't select?

[Zer0 Kay]

Are we limited to ONLY what the book says we can or can't do!!!???!!!???

You pretty much just said why you can select.

[Zer0 Kay]

Are we limited to ONLY what the book says we can or can't do!!!???!!!???

if you want to play by the rules, yes

But... But what about the PB Golden Rule?

[Zer0 Kay]

Are we limited to ONLY what the book says we can or can't do!!!???!!!???

if you want to play by the rules, yes

Rules or guidelines

I prefer to see them as guidelines. That lets the GM have more flexibility with experienced players.

By that thinking you just doomed your own argument about it not being possible to do what was suggested in the first place.

That's why I suggested to the topic poster that he decide by the rules or by opinions(AKA house rules) on the credibility of his players actions.

DAMN..... you beat me to it

[Zer0 Kay]

It always seems people want to screw over mages in Rifts. I mean, it's bad enough that the poor mage would have to physically touch his target in modern combat, and people are still trying to shoot down the tactic. Geez.

Yeah, if you can close with a man at arms type and keep from getting kicked in the jimmys long enough to cast the spell, more power to you...

I hope you aren't considering that the Pilot should be teleported with the armor? I'd think it far funnier and closer to the rules if the armor and all non-living material was teleported leaving a nude, bald, no toenailed, no fingernailed CS pilot standing there covering his Jim... oh it only a smaller case jimm... never mind still too big we'll just call it junior.

[Killer Cyborg]

You guys are right...magic is tough to use!!! I'm inlclined to IGNORE the rules about spell interruprion AND not fighting while spellcasting. Try to rule that you must be able to stop the Mage in some way, not just annoy him. Thing like binding hands, gagging or putting the Mage out of commission will still work of course but, no more "I hit him and ruin his spell" BS. I'll see how it works with my group.

You have to concentrate to focus magical energy. That makes sense.
It's pretty hard to concentrate when people are shooting at you (or just plain "shooting you"). That makes sense.
So it makes sense that you can't too easily in combat.

My suggestion would be, rather than to ignore this logical rule, to do one of two things:
1. Use techno-wizardry devices.
2. When a mage gets hit, have him make some sort of savings throw. Save vs. Pain, or a ME check of some sort, to see if he can keep his concentration.

Concentration this, concentration that...

It's assumed that whatever you are doing that you are concentrating at it. Fighting, using Psionics or using Magic. Now that the rules for casting make Magic as fast or near as fast as most other types of action taking combat, I think it's time for some changes. Nobody else get's interrupted trying to do what they do best, instinctively, let's say.

1. Nobody else instinctively has to wave around their arms for several seconds while chanting and mentally forcing powerful energies to conform to their will.
2. There is strong argument that an Aimed Shot, since it now takes 2 attacks, can be interrupted just as easily as spell casting.
3. Where does it say that a mage's first instinct is always to cast a spell?

You spent your time training to do these things first nature. So let it get accomplished. We already use a save VS pain but, you must take HP damage not just a hit. If you get bowled over etc etc, before you finish a spell, of course you lose it. What I'm saying is I'm done allowing spells to get interrupted just on the basis of being attacked or being in the middle of combat. If something TRULY significant or serious occurs in combat, it should interfere with ALL characters ability to perform their actions, not just a spellcaster's.

Getting shot at is usually significant.
Getting shot always is.

In any case, play things as you wish.
If you want to argue about this more, we should start a new thread instead of hijacking this one.

[Qev]

As far as Doom is concerned touching someone's clothes is touching them and since the spell does not allow teleporting another person nothing would happen.

For a spell that cannot target a living thing, touching someone's clothes is touching their clothes.

[Toc Rat]

Wow, this is still going? I was just curious if anyone else had a player do something similar in their games.

Of course I shouldnt be that surprised. The people of these boards DO love a good argument

[Qev]

I guess a full conversion borg's body isn't considered 'non-living', huh? Lucky for the borg.

[Killer Cyborg]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

[Dr. Doom III]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

[Kalinda]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

[Dr. Doom III]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

[Kalinda]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

Hey! I'm Mutant scum and proud of it!



Implied my furry butt...

[Dr. Doom III]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

Hey! I'm Mutant scum and proud of it!



Implied my furry butt...

What's with all this reading and writing?
Who educated you mutant?

[Zer0 Kay]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

Hey! I'm Mutant scum and proud of it!



Implied my furry butt...

What's with all this reading and writing?
Who educated you mutant?

Who said he's from this dimension anyway? Now you two stop arguing the CS surgeon general has found that arguing is bad for your health because it makes you think and if you think to much you ask questions and if you ask too many quesitons you innevitably find out something your not supposed to know and if you find out something your not supposed to know then you get taken in a tried for treason and if your tried for treason for knowing something that you shouldn't know because you asked too many questions because you were thinking too much because you were arguing your usually found guilty and executed and execution is often found detrimental to your health so... arguing is bad for your health. NOW THAT IS A RUUUUUN ON SENTENCE

[Kalinda]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

Hey! I'm Mutant scum and proud of it!



Implied my furry butt...

What's with all this reading and writing?
Who educated you mutant?

A rogue scholar! You'll never suppress the truth CS lackey!

[Kalinda]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

Hey! I'm Mutant scum and proud of it!



Implied my furry butt...

What's with all this reading and writing?
Who educated you mutant?

Who said he's from this dimension anyway? Now you two stop arguing the CS surgeon general has found that arguing is bad for your health because it makes you think and if you think to much you ask questions and if you ask too many quesitons you innevitably find out something your not supposed to know and if you find out something your not supposed to know then you get taken in a tried for treason and if your tried for treason for knowing something that you shouldn't know because you asked too many questions because you were thinking too much because you were arguing your usually found guilty and executed and execution is often found detrimental to your health so... arguing is bad for your health. NOW THAT IS A RUUUUUN ON SENTENCE

We're not arguing, we're threadjacking. get it right.

[Zer0 Kay]

The people of these boards DO love a good argument

No we don't.
Just try and prove it....

Wrong!

We do and you know it!

No we don't! and there's nothing in canon to support your claim!

It's implied you d-bee scum!

Hey! I'm Mutant scum and proud of it!



Implied my furry butt...

What's with all this reading and writing?
Who educated you mutant?

Who said he's from this dimension anyway? Now you two stop arguing the CS surgeon general has found that arguing is bad for your health because it makes you think and if you think to much you ask questions and if you ask too many quesitons you innevitably find out something your not supposed to know and if you find out something your not supposed to know then you get taken in a tried for treason and if your tried for treason for knowing something that you shouldn't know because you asked too many questions because you were thinking too much because you were arguing your usually found guilty and executed and execution is often found detrimental to your health so... arguing is bad for your health. NOW THAT IS A RUUUUUN ON SENTENCE

We're not arguing, we're threadjacking. get it right.

Oh I'm sorry... well in that case let it die so we can perform some Thread Necromancy maybe with a few circles... lets see there is oO0 Q can't find any other ones on my keyboard... oh wait 8 that's two right?