Bindings Worldbuilding Info

[Kappa]

The first place my brain goes is "Object has colour properties -> Some of them are not blue -> Change all those to blue", but I'm not sure that makes as much sense out of my head as in it.

[DanielH]

That makes sense, but seems too simple. Maybe that really is almost everything necessary (but you still need to keep color texture, and what kind of blue, and in what incident light), but I’m not sure. For one thing, it doesn’t distinguish between “make this object appear blue while the spell is active” and “make this object actually be blue as a stable state” (although it is obviously not a hex that makes an object stay blue whatever happens to it).

[Kappa]

"Change to" was meant to imply a one-time alteration rather than a continuous effect.

[Bluelantern]

I wasn't sure if you needed to define what blue *is* or if you need to specify if a brighter color would turn into bright blue, or if it is a single hue of blue.

Also, transparent or reflexive objects would still retain those properties but become blue-ish?

[DanielH]

Ok, this seems more like a reasonable number of edge cases given what we’ve seen. I could try to make a mock chart at this level.

[Bluelantern]

*also* do you have to define what an "object" is? what if it has separate parts? Is there are mass or area limit?

[DanielH]

It's solar midnight in the location where you bound your familiar. If you move a long distance you could get your spells at a weird time and freak people out.

Does this mean spells take more/less than a day to renew if you’re under time dilation, to the limit of “no new spells in Milliways”? If you bound a familiar on a different planet, or on no planet, how would that affect things? If unbound spirit animals can enter Milliways, would I be correct in assuming unpredictable results for any familiar bound there?

[Alicorn]

Yes, no can do, yes.

[DanielH]

“No can do”? Does the familiar-binding process require you be on that specific planet? Being on some planet makes sense as a potential requirement, but not that specific one. Is it impossible to attempt it on another planet, or would it just do nothing?

On a different note, I’m not going to draw up a flowchart, but does this pseudocode make sense for a spell to turn something blue? This specific version isn’t permanent, but presumably I could change it somewhat to refer to ttt “material” being blue instead of the “appearance”.

Turning an object blue, a spell with one target.
If the target is not a physical object or the target is invisible, abort.
Otherwise, the target object has an appearance.

If the appearance does not have at least one associated color, abort.
Otherwise, for point in the appearance of the target object:
if this point does not have an associated color, do nothing with it.
Otherwise,
Set the hue of the color of this point in the appearance of the target object
To the hue of this dot: ●
Leaving the transparency, refraction, reflectivity, luminescence, saturation, and brightness the same.

EDIT: I assume I can specify a color this way, because it’s something that the specific person has to understand, and this is the best way of making a person understand a color. I’m using “abort” to mean “the spell fails and the slot is retained”; I’m not sure that’s a valid thing for a spell to do. I’m treating “target”, “object”, “hue” (as separate from other parts of a color), and the various things listed on the last line as primitives.

[Alicorn]

That looks at least loosely like a spellchart to me.