Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Aura Thickness

Posted by: Lilt Aug 18 2003, 07:05 PM

If someone is wearing a rapid-transit heavy jumpsuit; is their aura still visible? What about hardened military grade armour? Is it visible if someone is on the other side of a thin wall (think office cubicle separator)?

Just some points to ponder.

Posted by: last_of_the_great_mikeys Aug 18 2003, 07:12 PM

I tend to think that clothes (like jumpsuits) which generaly form to the wearer to some degree are considered a part of the person wearing them, thus not hiding your aura at all. As long as your humanoid shape is recognizable, your aura shows. That's why being behind a car's tinted glass blocks mana spells while normal glass doesn't. And I base this on absolutely nothing.

Posted by: Spookymonster Aug 18 2003, 07:51 PM

SR2 used to have rules about aura visibility (back when seeing an aura was a pre-req to spellcasting). According to those rules, only the thickest milspec armor offered any obstacle to aura visibility. IIRC, it didn't prevent targetting outright, but created a target number modifier instead, i.e., partial cover.
SR3 stripped this out of the rules, so it's really up to the GM's interpretation.

Posted by: Atrox Aug 18 2003, 07:59 PM

QUOTE (last_of_the_great_mikeys)

That's why being behind a car's tinted glass blocks mana spells while normal glass doesn't. And I base this on absolutely nothing.

Huh? I understood the rules to say that any solid obstacle, even if see-through in the real world, blocks astral perception, which is what Lilt asked.

Now if you're talking about targeting a spell, that's something else, as anything that blocks LOS makes it impossible to target the spell.

SR2 required aura perception to cast a directed spell? You mean the mage has to be astrally perceiving at the time he casts? And accept the +2 modifier associated with that? I don't think so.

Posted by: Person 404 Aug 18 2003, 08:09 PM

QUOTE

SR2 required aura perception to cast a directed spell? You mean the mage has to be astrally perceiving at the time he casts? And accept the +2 modifier associated with that? I don't think so.

The +2 only applies to mundane tasks, not magical ones. Casting spells or summoning spirits while perceiving doesn't incur the penalty, nor does, say, assensing or removing spell traces.

Posted by: Spookymonster Aug 19 2003, 02:49 AM

QUOTE (Atrox)

SR2 required aura perception to cast a directed spell? You mean the mage has to be astrally perceiving at the time he casts? And accept the +2 modifier associated with that? I don't think so.

No. All I said was that you had to be able to see the aura, i.e., you possessed the power of astral perception. Again, that was because all magic flowed between auras. Therefore, if you couldn't see auras, you couldn't cast spells.
SRII, P.149:

QUOTE

As a spell is being cast, the magician's senses are opened up partially to the astral plane. The magician, because of the working of the astral forces that power the spell, is able to see the aura of the target. This allows him to align or synchronize his aura with that of the target, permitting the astral energy shaped by the caster to leap between them, through astral space, much as a spark of electricity jumps between two properly polarized points. the spell leaps from the caster, crosses the distance to the target in astral space, and strikes.

From the same page, regarding armor:

QUOTE

The line-of-sight restriction is still a powerful one for these types of spells. If the target's aura cannot be seen, it cannot be hit. Some frightening possibilities are circumvented because a living aura radiates a short distance from the being: enemies in sealed combat armor, with no part of the body showing, can still be attacked because the aura extends past the armor. Seeing only a piece of an aura is not enough for targeting though, so that enemy lurking right at the edge of the corner, with it's aura leaking into view is still safe. An astrally perceiving viewer might spot the aura, but it is safe from targetting.

[EDIT]Spelling[/EDIT]

Posted by: Lilt Aug 19 2003, 09:22 AM

Ah. Thanks for those quotes. Any chance of a vague description of the effect different armors had on casting TN?

Posted by: Ronin Soul Aug 19 2003, 09:30 AM

As one who can see auras (yeah, yeah, call me a kook if you want) I can say that the thickness of clothes does not diminish the size of your aura to sight. The aura surrounds you irrespective of how thick you are.
However you have to see the person to see their aura. I can see the aura of someone through a screen door but not through a normal door.

Heh, basing rules on the personal experience of a weirdo...

Posted by: Crazy Elf Aug 19 2003, 02:02 PM

Bung.

Posted by: Crazy Elf Aug 19 2003, 02:03 PM

If you really wanted to get technical about these things, you should also note that an aura would fluctuate in size due to emotional states, as well as magical power and state of health. The aura will always be visible past clothing and armor, but there would be various stages of visability.

If you want to get really jabby about it, it would probably be harder to see someone's aura with an essence of 0.1, than it would be to see someone with the full 6. At six you're more alive, and more able to interface with the astral world.

Food for thought.

Posted by: Zazen Aug 19 2003, 02:23 PM

QUOTE (Ronin Soul)

As one who can see auras (yeah, yeah, call me a kook if you want) I can say that the thickness of clothes does not diminish the size of your aura to sight.

I can see auras too (for only 7-14 hours at a time, and depending on availability), and I can say that there are no hard and fast rules. Sometimes a bright piece of clothing gets in the way, sometimes it detaches itself and comes and kisses you on the forehead, sometimes the creature walks through a wall.