Erm, I would have the two differant types of earthquakes, linear and circular, as seperate spells. And give the linear quake a much shorter casting time.
Describe the differant levels, how it improves or changes with each level. The spell's template should have something to the effect of...
Level 8: .....
Level 9: .....
Level 10: ......
and so on.
For the reagent, any spacific kind of stone? And having to grind most rocks less then fifteen minutes away combined with the spell's range makes it almost useless, unless one could use weakened sandstone or something of that sort.
The endowment process is in-the-works now, even the theory is.
The problem with it is to create ice from water (ice=water endowed with earth) you would need to add earth car'all to the water's car'all structure. Two problems here. 1. only an earth mage can manipulate earth car'all and 2. adding car'all to an item is a third sphere spell. So to effectively turn water into ice under that system you would need to be a ninth or above level earth mage. I doubt that'll go over very well with anyone, and I highly doubt art wanted it that way ^_^
And yes, an earth mage could simply expand the pre-existing earth oun in the water's car'all structure, but that would not be endowing it, unless if have that term wrongly defined.
Hi silfer! Know why all of us are dumb about magic? Because people like you don't EXPLAIN YOUR FRUPPING SELF.
"Two, this entry contradicts the magic principles as I see them (And don't you shove whatever you agreed on at the magical discussion thread at me, for we didnt agree on anything)"
That's wonderful, but if you just write that, NOONE CARES AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO BE IGNORANT. How about telling is HOW it contradicts the magic principals so that we can DO SOMETHING about it.
pardon my throwing a hissy fit here, it just gets real old having people say "that's wrong, that's not right, that sucks, you know nothing" and not saying what's wrong.
Contradicts the magic principles? Wonderful, care to explain a little?
Tell me, if someone comes here saying they want a magician that raises the dead to do their bidding, and nobody knew what it was called, would you flame the person who said the word "Necromancer." I don't know what bringing up my mentioning a geomancer (note: if you actually read that whole post you'd realize that I said geomancers were impossible because of this magic system) is supposed to accomplish aside from using it as an excuse (albeit a very poor one) to ignore my parts in this entry.
You wanna know why we just don't get the magic system here? Because, and this mostly falls on your shoulders, certain people who will remain nameless tell us that our entries are wrong but they DON'T TELL US WHAT'S WRONG SO WE DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES TWICE.
No, very little casting time should be required if the enchantment doesn't last long. A mage forced into melee combat should only need and will onlyl have a few seconds to ready his weapon.
But the enchantment should last only as long as he keeps the weapon in hand. Afterwards the enchantment should fade rapidly. A mage would still be able to enchant an arrow or throwing knife or blowdart and have almost the full effect when it hits, but anything more then an arrows flight and the enchantment would nearly be gone.
Also, the enchantment will drain the mage's fatigue (stealing the term from morrowind) and exhaust him quickly if he keeps it alive for too long. Perhaps add one minute tops per level.
The mage should be restricted from casting while he uses this spell (No firing air-enchanted arrows while your insubstantial sheild protects your invisable body). To use a differant spell the enchantment must be removed, but it can quickly be re-enstated.
Level six should be the level the enchantments start becoming damaging. The ice enchantment will cause frost in the area the weapon strikes, the fire enchantment will light flammable things on fire, etc.
At level eight, a mage should be able to keep an item enchanted indefinitely so long as he keeps contact with it, and should also be able to enchant multiple objects, at the cost of more drain to himself (A mage cannot keep multiple objects enchanted indefinitely).
At level ten or so, the contact rule should be removed, allowing a mage of this level to enchant ally's weapons. I could see an archmage enchanting an entire unit of archers with fire or freezing arrows, coz he is an archmage after all ^_^
::sends his hordes of necromanced skeletons after rayne..... just cause he can!::
I still think that the elemental enchantments should be extremely temporary. It makes sense because the caster cannot create links between the car'all and the object, he can only manipulate the car'all.
::stuffs a gag in rayne's mouth, strips her, and shoves her in a casserole dish in the oven::
A mage weilds a staff and manipulates the car'all around it so there is a whirlwind near it. The target is an object and the mage is altering the car'all around the object to achieve the effect of the whirlwind. Or am I missing something here o.O
Rayne, I totally agree with you about the summoning thing. Breaking the links around the creature's surroundings might make it easier for an Xeua mage to summon, but there is no way it would actually bring it to the caster's position. But perhaps there should be some creatures that must have their links broken to be successfully summoned, requiring both an Xeua and an Ecua mage.
Redone definition of an enchantment
Any spell in which the caster promts a change of the car'all possessed by a "thing," be it a person, item, place, or otherwise, thereby altering the "thing's" attributes.