Glamour Power

[ways and means]

A few question about Glamours or more exactly veils, you can obviously ambush an opponent with veils but does doing this bring down the veil or can you remain hidden after attacking?

Second can you ambush the same enemy mulitple times in an exchange with veils, if they can't see you it makes sense they could be ambushed but it seems very powerful?

Is veiling a suplemental or a full action, the description seems to imply a  supplemental (you don't need to roll to bring it up and it mentions a moments effort)?

Can veils or seemings be used as defense the 'hitting thin air' trick?

[Bruce Coulson]

Letting an opponent continue to attack while under cover of the veil strikes me as very unsatisfying, story wise.  I'd allow the first attack as a surprise, but after that, no Veil.

Veiling is supplemental, but does require some concentration.  Which is another reason why I don't think a continuously invisible opponent should exist.

As a block, certainly; roll Deceit (usually) to see how well you misled your opponent.

[zenten]

I allow the first attack as a surprise, with a free tag on "hidden" or some similar aspect, and after that you still have the aspect, but you have to spend Fate on it as normal.  This is assuming that the Deceit roll isn't beaten.

[EdgeOfDreams]

Veiling is supplemental

Is there a specific source for this?  I always thought veiling with Glamours would be similar to any casting with Channeling/Evocation, i.e. a standard action.

[Bruce Coulson]

Ummm...because that's the way I've been running it?

I don't have the books with me atm, and we're generally too busy playing to look up specific rules.  So, I've just let the one Changeling with Glamours use it pretty freely.

So, I could be completely wrong about that one.  But I'm still against multiple stealth attacks.

[ways and means]

As a rule of thumb standard actions require rolls and veils does not require a roll to form it puts it into the supplemental catergory for me.

[EdgeOfDreams]

As a rule of thumb standard actions require rolls and veils does not require a roll to form it puts it into the supplemental catergory for me.

But it requires a Deceit or Discipline roll to determine the difficulty of seeing through the veil.

[ways and means]

No you only use your deceit or discipline to oppose attempts at detection, so as long as no one is actively looking for a veiled threat you don't have to roll. It does not work like a block at your roll strength you get to roll against everyones attempt to find you so a different roll for you each time. Those rolls are defensive actions so free.

[zenten]

I require a standard action to change the glamour, but that's a game balance thing instead of a RAW thing.

[Belial666]

Do note that we have seen not-people attack under continious veils. (the skinwalker, for one)

In that case, the first attack might be a surprise. Then the attacker attacks normally but can use the veil as defense to avoid reprisal. (that's how I am running it, not RAW. By RAW a veil is pierced neither when the deceit roll is beaten nor when you attack)

[devonapple]

I haven't had a chance to really use this power in-game, so any tips or hints would be appreciated.

[wyvern]

I'd require a standard action to do anything with a glamour that corresponds to a game-mechanic standard action.  So a veil (block vs. perception) is a standard action to create - for a veil from the glamours power, that's still either a deception or discipline roll.  A personal illusion might require a standard action to gain an aspect - say, "bland and forgettable", or "not quite as big as I look".  Maintaining such a glamour is a non-action, however - it will simply remain present until broken (typically end of scene (or when you attack or otherwise take obvious action) for veils, or sunrise for seemings).

On the other hand, if you want to create an illusory placard with some pithy slogan on it, or change your hair color without creating an actual aspect for it - those would be free actions.

I am, however, firmly of the opinion that a veil should break if you attack (though Belial's ruling of having it not reduce defense to zero after the first hit is also a decent option).  While we've seen one exception to this, I feel that's a creature with a specific additional power, and, more importantly, it is (as Bruce mentions) a singularly unsatisfying combat tactic.

[ways and means]

Glamours Veils aren't a block against alertness though, glamour veils are a state of invisibilty in which if someone is attempts to find you (so hundreds of the most eagle eyed cops will not see you if they are not looking for you) they maker an opposed roll (not the block mechanic with a stationary block strength) which if they succeed they spot signs you are there.  

[zenten]

Is there anywhere in the book that actually says invisible opponents means a 0 on the defence roll?  I thought that was only for surprise attacks.

[BumblingBear]

Is there anywhere in the book that actually says invisible opponents means a 0 on the defence roll?  I thought that was only for surprise attacks.

It doesn't get much more surprising than something you can't see.