CLOK BBS

Aeromancers and hydromancers will likely be thrilled to learn that they can now receive lessons on how to employ the new Compression Pattern.

----------

We really hope it makes sense.

An awesome pattern, very appreciated by this seaman who dabbles in hydromancy.

Noted a bug about this... Sorry >.>

If I may ask, will you explain why this will not work on higher forms of Geomancy?

The second- and third-tier geobolts are stronger of form and denser than the first (which is just relatively soft dirt), so the pattern won't have any noticeable effect on them.

Rather than just denser, don't you think you a compression pattern would not make the hole stone denser but make it angular, by keeping a pressure on its shape until it meets resistance? The result would not be increased damage but changing it to a piercing damage rather than crushing as it focuses the stone's contact point to a reduced surface area.

An idea, seeing as fire as been left out for so long, why not add in fire but rather than doing more direct damage give fire a burning effect that chimes in for the next three rounds doing heat damage from the pain of the burns?

I don't think fire should have a compression pattern. How do you compress fire? You can certainly suffocate it, but not compress it. Continued fire damage when someone isn't burning isn't realistic either.

Compression of flames lowers the area the flames are but does not reduce the energy given off, this in the end increased the heat of the flames. I thought to request a burning bonus rather than blanket damage as it would give fire, like geomancy, damage comparable to two channels even though only one channel is maintained.

Why would the temperature increase just because you decreased the space. It seems to me that you would A) choke the flame (depriving them of oxygen) and B) not change the heat at all. Physics-wise it doesn't make sense but it could always go with the magic doesn't have to be logical argument (I think the GMs prefer to avoid this though).

Smaller flame would probably provide less of a chance of catching something on fire too (especially if you're contraining it).

Not necessarily. Reducing the area of the flame would not choke it of oxygen. Compression would compress the area of the flame which compresses the area given energy, feeding the area of the flames the same amount of energy that a wider area of flames would normally have. Unlike physical flames which consume fuel at a certain rate to give off the energy in the form of heat, Elemency flames are given energy directly. The amount of energy is not is not reduced at all, only the area the flames use the energy is. In a real world example, the flame is given a smaller area to work within but the fuel it is given is from a richer source.

So how exactly does pyromancy work? Are you providing a fuel source or just directing energy to sustain it?

If energy alone (i.e. the fire is made out of nothing and not actually undergoing combustion), why would a smaller ball of flame do more damage than a somewhat larger one? The energy transfer would be the same. More surface area to combust something with for the larger ball as well.

If you're providing a fuel source, once you no longer maintain contact with the condensed fire, wouldn't it burn through it's fuel extremely quickly and lose energy?

Compressed fire just doesn't make sense to me. What exactly is being compressed? Spacially, the ionized particles and particulates aren't going to conform very well and you have very little mass to actually compress.

Fire, like all elements, are created solely from the Elemancer. Energy transfer would not be the same in all cases, there is no reason for it to be always constant. Can you tell me what gave you that idea? Energy transfers differs a lot, especially when you use different combinations based on the easy the concept of the end result is, not just what elements are being manipulated. This is why a Nova costs different than a master level spells, which costs different then lesser combinations of different elements.

Why would a 3 channel fire that's not compressed hurt any more than a 3 channel fire that's "compressed." Why would your energy output be any different? The strength of a spell is dependent on the number of channels running (this determines how much energy is being pumped in doesn't it?). If you could just pump more energy in without adding more channels then what would be the point of elemental masteries? A one channel pyromancer would be able to add as much energy as a three channel pyromancer. That's how I get that the enrgy output must be relatively constant.

Also, I'm still not exactly clear on what your fire actually is. Are the ionized particles produced by the elemancer? Once it leaves your hand are you still teleporting magical elemancer fuel into it?

The strength of a spell is also augmented by what patterns the channels are being bound by. One channel and three channels add in different amount of energy. The energy of a Elemancer's spell is maintained regardless of what element it is.

Masteries are not simply about adding more energy, they are adding more energy in a controlled state. Compression does not add more energy, it uses the energy is a smaller area. A fire that takes up 3 cubic feet who's heat is concentrated to a 1 cubic foot, increases the flame's temperature. How does this not make sense?

First, the temperature of a flame is entirely dependent on the fuel source not the total energy in the system. Unless this adding of energy is the equivalent to changing your fuel source (resulting in a more exothermic reaction) which I doubt, adding more of the same type of fuel doesn't make your flame hotter. For the same reason, adding more total energy into the system (assuming this magical energy is what is fueling the flame) isn't going to make your flame hotter. This is hypothetical however as we're talking about magical flames sustained by nothing.

As adding more energy in game does in fact increase your damage, the easiest explanation would be that the actual size of the blast covers a much wider area (i.e. more flames instead of hotter flames).

Let move on to compression. Usually an increase in pressure DOES increase temperature if volume is held constant for gases (solids and liquids have the same sort of relationship but the equations are more complex). So for a gas, temperature would be dependent on pressure, volume, and amount of material. As far as pressure and volume, the change is proportional and in the opposite direction (Who knows if this applies to flame since flame really can't be compressed). So if all you do is compress the flames, you'll see no change in temperature.

Time for physics 101 in case that wasn't clear-
Lets use the case of a gas and go to the ideal gas law (even though this does not entirely apply to flame, it gives us a good idea of what to expect if we could compress them):

Pressure*Volume=(Amount of Gas)*gas constant*temperature

If you compress a gas, the volume is decreasing and the pressure is increasing proportionately. The amount of gas and gas constant obviously remain the same. This means that the temperature also remains the same (as you have opposite impact from pressure and volume).

If you kept the volume the same and increased pressure, then you would see an increase in temperature. If you increased volume while keeping pressure the same, the temperature would increase.

To clarify in case this comes up as a counterargument, by compressing something there's no real way to increase pressure to a degree higher than you decrease the volume (To do this you would then have to be adjusting the amount of the substance). In a compression pattern I don't think that you're adding "more flames." It's the same amount of flames with a smaller volume and higher pressure (so same temp).

In summary, for a compression pattern, volume and pressure cancel each other out so temperature does not change. Good enough explanation?

Because repetition helps: A) You're not changing the fuel source so temperature is not changing and B) compressing flames doesn't make sense in the first place nor would it increase their temperature.

This has been a fascinating discussion, and by all means continue. I just wanted to point out that it's by design that Compression Pattern is incompatible with fire. I did much less research, but came to the conclusion that "compressing" fire simply wouldn't work, and that was what I was hoping for. This pattern's purpose is to help the lower-damage or non-damage elements (water and air) gain a little more pure combat viability, at the expense of having to learn an extra ability.

Pyromancers can be smugly content in the fact that they didn't have to use up an ability point on Compression Pattern in order to attain a decent damage output with their chosen element.

Thank you, Rias. As I've stated above, your conclusion is well supported by science!

EDIT: Also, it's things like this that make me want to figure out the physical properties of some of the less well defined substances/channels (like nether and cryomancy)... Knowing how they act and placing them into a physical framework could really help to define a lot of things and make them more interesting.

If it were possible to compress flame (I know, it isn't) I would think that the flame would be more controllable and with that, wouldn't it be possible to increase accuracy and maybe add another ability that helps elemancers light people on fire.