Re: drwoning/blue fields

[Greg Mowczko <mooch>]

> From: Keith Klumb <kklumb@expert.cc.purdue.edu>
>
> I should say that we should keep the drowning issue simple (no offense
> John, I did like your write up). But that is one of the nice things about
> AQ no need for 6 manuals, and we are trying to keep it this way.
> 	The way it seems to be leaning to is that if you are in water you
> get and oppurtunity to make a swimming check (whatever it may be) and then
> you have one round to do something else. You might have been lowering
> yourself into the water off of a boat. You get into the water and realize
> you can't swim as well as you thought you could (missed check). You now
> have 1 round to either try swimming again or to grab onto the boat you
> just lowered yourself off of. If you still aren't swimming after your 1
> round and you didn't take the round to cast gills, then you begin
> drowning. You go unconsious one round later and you have x rounds till you
> are dead (b/c it is documented that if you pull someone out of the water
> within 5 minutes of them starting to drown they can still be saved, in
> RL) We'll assume you don't die immediatly after you go unconcious.
> 	Seems pretty straight forward to me.

The problem with what you just wrote is you say. "Didn't make your check?
Your unconcious." I can't go for that. In most cases where someone falls
into the water and can't swim ( actually can't get air ) they stuggle/panic/
try to get a grip and swim to where air is. There is no way after 4 seconds
of not doing what was intended you fall unconcious. That is where the HEA/2
came into play. I'm fine with increasing the difficulty of the swimming
check for any attempt after that first fail though.

> 	I'm just going to try and sum up the problems that are being run
> into with the blue field ideas. The spell essentially takes someone out of
> our frame of time. Now for sake of gaming ease the planet doesn't move
> away from them b/c (insert good reason here). Even though in theory in RL
> that's what would happen, if you are taken out of time you stay still in
> an astonomical sense.
> 	Thus this whole gravity issue seems to be everyone making up a
> reason why you still stay somewhere over the ocean b/c that's where I blue
> fielded you.
> 	So I think what the issue is is just how movable or imovable is a
> blue field?

Why you stay where you stay when blue fielded? In my mind as I cast the
spell I would think " I am bluefielding you there " and there is where
you stay. Now if "there" is on the deck of a boat you go with the boat.
If you bluefield someone on a ladder can you remove the ladder and not
them? Obviously you can pull the ladder away and I would rule they stay
there in the air. This is contrary to the other though. And this is
where all the confusion is. Stick a kitten in a bag so the cat is supporting
the bag and bluefield it. The bag should fall through it since it is
now nothing. Maybe if you can normally just move the object it can't stick
to it but if the object is not "normally" manually movable it stays stuck
to it ( ie. cart, ship ). This breaks down though quickly if Enmass is
brought into the picture. See the problems we are facing?

						Greg