Re: drwoning/blue fields

["Kris Ames" <kris@cioe.com>]

That's why my explanation involved a mass requirement and the fact that
the blue fielded object must be below you (automatically implying some
presence of gravity I realize).

-Kris

----------
> From: Wright Frazier <khelek@ns1.cioe.com>
> To: Greg Mowczko <mooch@ns1.cioe.com>
> Cc: gmlist@cioe.com; kklumb@expert.cc.purdue.edu
> Subject: Re: drwoning/blue fields
> Date: Thursday, November 05, 1998 7:30 AM
> 
> 
> You refute your own argument.  You say in one point that you define
> what it will remain relative too.  In this case a boat.  However in
> another place you say that you can't define it relative to something
> else.  The definition of relativity to another object should be
> an unconcious thing.  Its just part of the spell's effect that is
> done automatically, no thought involved.  Otherwise you leave the
> door wide open for people to carry around thousands of bluefielded
> spell effects.
> 
> Wright
> 
> > 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
> > 
>