Re: Blue Fields and Physics

[Greg Mowczko <mooch>]

See that is good spew. The "blue" field is not the object just a visual
representation of a place holder. Hence no solidity.

Argument though does totally step around the concept of what defines where
the place holder stays.

In Johns last post he listed the three types and the differences. I will
now tell you what brought the changes ( as I recall )

Type I  Solid and Movable
	Changed so armor and other indetructable things could not be made

Type II Solid and Immobile
	Changed to prevent the creation of Indestructable stuctures such
	as castle walls and stairways to heaven

Type III Immaterial and Immovable (?)
	The current form. The question is it is obvious without a doubt
	that these do move, our star sytem is going x fast through the
	Universe and when you blue field something it doesn't zip away
	at the speed of our star system.

Previous rulings have had individuals on a vessel stay where they were
while the vessel moves away. But it has also been ruled that when in
space the blue field stays with the space faring vessel.

My opinion says if I blue field something flying it stops in the air.
You BF something walking it stops where it was.  You BF someone in/on
a boat they stay with the boat but cannot be moved off the boat. The
concept of blue fielding a boat's crew and having the boat move on
crewless sounds bad. But the problem is how small of a vehicle do
you need to still be able to have the field move with the vehicle?

The reason for blue fields not being movable is not we don't want them
moveable we didn't want them to serve another purpose ( such as the
armor ). If they are intangible you still can't move them directly
anyhow. If you put someone on a stationary obect and blue fielded them
they should stay there when you move the object. If you put them on
a moving object they should move. Maybe once movement stops the spell
"attaches" to a stationary position? Dunno. Nuff spew.

						Greg