Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Machiavelli Jul 6 2011, 06:07 PM

During our last session a rigger placed 2 rotordrones into my mages flat and started shooting at me. I didn´t have an energybolt and i thought i would toast myself with an fireball. So i have chosen to flee and jump right through a window...but is it really that way? I have a LOT of spells, but none of them seemed to fit to this situation. Imp. Invis. didn´t work because they had a sensor package including radar, levitation caused no real effect and if these spells don´t work...please what is left for a mage? Is there no real way to f**ck these buggers?

Posted by: sabs Jul 6 2011, 06:10 PM

firebolt, lightning bolt, fireball.
Indirect Spells are your only choice.
Invisibility would work, if you could beat the OR on the drone.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 6 2011, 06:12 PM

Fireball. Use some hits to alter its radius (downward).



Invisibility, being a mental spell, has no effect on drones.

Posted by: Rubic Jul 6 2011, 06:18 PM

One of the Illusion spells can fool sensors. Chaos can jam sensors (the raspberry). Silence will dampen sonar. Analyze Device can, potentially, give you bonus dice for returning fire one way or another.

Posted by: DamienKnight Jul 6 2011, 06:18 PM

Trid Phantasm affects visual and audio, which would fool ultrasound sensors. I would think being a complete illusion, it could fool Radar too, but that is up to your game master.

You could make one drone see the other drone as YOU. Takes care of half your problem, assuming the drone isnt going to torch your apartment for good measure.

Posted by: Summerstorm Jul 6 2011, 06:30 PM

Eh physical barrier. Let them make the crashtest / ramming damage thing. Note that the barriers ARE pretty easy to ram through, but still... depending on how fast the damn thing is: BOOM.

EDIT: ah, and if you can't crack their OR... maybe you could crack the OR of something else in the vicinity and use it against them? For example levitating a heavy old cast iron stove into them?

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 6 2011, 06:35 PM

*Improved* Invisibility absolutely affects machines. That's why it exists.

Posted by: Mäx Jul 6 2011, 07:26 PM

Yes it does affect machines, but it does jack shit against radar

Posted by: sabs Jul 6 2011, 07:29 PM

radar is a sensor
improved invisibility works against sensors.

The sensor rules are pretty fucked up.
And radars are too big to fit in most drones.
A Small drone could have a radar, and nothing else (not even a camera)
A medium Drone could have a radar and 1 camera.
You need at least a Large drone to fit a radar, and other useful sensors.

You're not targeting without minuses with just radar. I also would probably only allow wide bursts, or suppression fire with radar only targeting.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 6 2011, 07:47 PM

That's true, Mäx, but not really what I was addressing. I didn't want anyone confused by the statement that 'invisibility doesn't affect machines'; it's a sneaky little technicality that could certainly mislead.

Posted by: Doc Byte Jul 6 2011, 07:58 PM

Try the "Wreck (Drones)" spell. It has only F/2 drain and may be overcast if required.

Posted by: sabs Jul 6 2011, 08:00 PM

It has to be overcast for most people.

You need 7 hits to have 1 net hit to hit a drone.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 6 2011, 08:02 PM

You're wrong on two counts.

1) It's a threshold test. Meaning you only need to match the threshold.
2) It's an OR of 5. If you're seeing a 6 in the PDF, you're looking at the wrong thing. That 6+ was lowered to a 5+ after the uproar on dumpshock before the book went to the press.

Posted by: Ryu Jul 6 2011, 08:04 PM

Oversummon an appropiate spirit and order it to attack the drones in close combat. Natural weapon on a force 9 is nice for drone hunting...

Posted by: sabs Jul 6 2011, 08:07 PM

1) it's a success test, it says you have to BEAT the object's Object Resistance. That implies needing a net success. Though the table does refer to Threshold.
2) Not my fault CGL sucks. It's the version I have.

The rules on page 183 are worded differently than on page 204 to make it more confusing.

Not to mention, the table says 6+ (or 5+ in different printings)
So, as a GM I can take more SOTA smaller, more minituarized drones and make them have a higher OR than the bare minimum for their type.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 6 2011, 08:13 PM

1) Well, it's not an opposed test...
2) No, it's not your fault. But the PDF is out of date in a number of ways. This particular one is very well documented on the forums.

Posted by: sabs Jul 6 2011, 08:17 PM

You'd have to know to search for it

It's not like someone is going to read every post ever, and searching for OR isn't going to do jack for you, because it's too short a word.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 6 2011, 08:31 PM

While this may be true, it's still fairly common knowledge that the PDF and the physical book don't match.

(By the way http://old.shadowrun4.com/resources/sr4a/sr4a_changes.pdf)

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 6 2011, 08:46 PM

I second summoning spirits. Elemental aura will own most hardened armor, Accident will crash rotodrones, and a sufficient force natural weapon will also toast them.

Posted by: StevenAngier Jul 6 2011, 09:06 PM

Should I cut hell loose by saying that it's only 3 to fool the drones sensors?

Posted by: Aerospider Jul 6 2011, 09:30 PM

lmao

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 6 2011, 10:26 PM

PowerBolt (or Wreck Drone) works out just fine, as long as you can beat OR5...

Posted by: Headshot_Joe Jul 6 2011, 10:41 PM

And what's wrong with Levitate-ing them into the ceiling? If they're moving fast enough already, won't that be a crash test? Seems to me that most drone enemies can be defeated with proper application of the Levitate spell in combination with crash damage or fall damage (though it's all crash damage if you look at it the right way).

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 01:02 AM

The last thread about this discussed that idea, StevenAngier. The consensus, IIRC, was that it's all one unit; this is more or less a basic tenet of SR magic.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 01:56 AM

It Was NOT a Consensus Yerameyahu, It is definitely a Table Ruling... It is plain as day in the rules. Sensors are OR 3. Anything else is a Table Ruling...

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 7 2011, 02:16 AM

That'd be fine, except you're not affecting the sensor. You're affecting the drone. Is the argument, anyway. I don't care, because it doesn't really affect the game.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 02:25 AM

No need to go back into the aruments again... It never gets solved.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 7 2011, 05:06 AM

I have a tendency as a player to build assuming the most conservative interpretation in mind.

So, if I have a character that is likely to be throwing spells at drones, I'll build him with enough dice pool to compensate for a 5-6 Threshold.*

So if I'm wrong in how the rule will be interpreted, I'm going to be at worst pleasantly surprised.





-k

* - This also has a nice side effect of being really useful against stuff that doesn't have a threshold.

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 7 2011, 05:10 AM

Radar uses sound. Improved Invisibility bends light.

Posted by: Rubic Jul 7 2011, 05:15 AM

Radar uses radio waves (electro-magnetic). Sonar uses sound. And sharks use frickin' laser beams!

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 7 2011, 05:17 AM

I appreciate the faith in crash tests, but the drone would need to be moving at supersonic speed to die from one crash test. For example, a medium drone would need to move in excess of 200 meters per second (600 meters per turn) to score 12 DV on that test. This results in a reasonable chance of one-hitting it. For certainty, you would need it to move at 2000 meters per turn (about double the speed of sound).

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 7 2011, 05:21 AM

Derp. Got me. Luckily there's still ultrasound (Somewhere).

Posted by: Rubic Jul 7 2011, 05:24 AM

easy enough mistake to make; they work off similar principles, and it's not as if nobody's countered anything I've brought up in forums. Oversights are the work of the devil, and friends distracting you, and lack of sleep, and poor reading comprehension... and stuff...

Posted by: CanRay Jul 7 2011, 05:40 AM

And tinfoil can be used to foil both of them.

Posted by: Headshot_Joe Jul 7 2011, 05:52 AM

So you just have to Levitate them really, really fast.

Posted by: Mayhem_2006 Jul 7 2011, 06:03 AM

Which is just another frequency of light.

Posted by: Fikealox Jul 7 2011, 06:07 AM

I'm no scientist, but I think it might be more correct to say that both light and radio waves are electromagnetic energy, differentiated by frequency. In any case, radio waves are not part of the visible spectrum (as understood in a post-metahuman world), and are therefore not affected by Invisibility. 'Invisibility makes the subject more difficult to detect by normal visible senses (including low-light, thermographic, and other senses that rely on the visible spectrum).'

Posted by: Aerospider Jul 7 2011, 06:59 AM

Which, for 600 metres per turn, would require something like Force and net hits to be in the mid-twenties!

Two things I now notice about Levitate - it doesn't seem to use OR where one would assume it should and there is an opposed test for (unwilling) living targets which means a drone gets no opposing roll. Oh how I hate this spell.

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 7 2011, 07:14 AM

Which was his point.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 7 2011, 07:27 AM

And this is why the BEST thing you can do for your Imp Invis spells is Street Magic Spell Design it to Multi-Sense.
Problem solved.

Also, the humble Ice Sheet spell forces crash tests and doesn't need to bother with object resistance. Drones don't tend to have the best dice pools for that. And a rigger can only rig one at a time.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 7 2011, 07:47 AM

Pilot 6 + Maneuver 4 + Tacnet 3 + Fuzzy Logic 2 = 15 dice to crash test.





-k

Posted by: Headshot_Joe Jul 7 2011, 07:50 AM

I didn't say you wouldn't have to be a dragon...

Posted by: Hound Jul 7 2011, 08:59 AM

doesn't ice sheet only work on a surface? How would this help against a rotordrone? (the OP's example.)

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 7 2011, 09:10 AM

A pilot isn't going to get the fuzzy logic, because it likely won't have a readied action to make use of it. Fuzzy logic isn't free dice, remember? It takes actions to power.

For comparison, the starting limit on pilot is 4 - thats availability 12. A maneuver autosoft only goes up to rating 4, but most drones only come with a pilot of 3.
So that is 6-10 dice before a tacnet.
If they don't have a maneuverability autosoft, they can't make the test.

Thats a pretty crappy dice pool to be betting against the hits of a decent mage's spellcasting pool. And, unlike a drone, the mage has edge.


The ice can be created over an area - it doesn't have to be a a flat surface, only within the area of effect(Force in Meters, per Area Spell). Presumably, you could use it to ice up gunports, sensors, moving parts. Not sure how that applies to a rotodrone, specifically, within the rules, but aircraft icing is a pretty standard weather obstacle for airlines, isn't it?

Posted by: LurkerOutThere Jul 7 2011, 09:43 AM

Ice sheet creates an ice sheet on a surface, it is not ice object.

Posted by: PoliteMan Jul 7 2011, 10:22 AM

Let me back this up a bit,

You're having a hard time dealing with drones. That's good, mages are supposed to have a hard time with drones. Mages have a ton of advantages but if there's one thing mages should have a problem dealing with, it's highly technological remote controlled robots. You can't win at everything and drones are (and should be IMO) one of those things.

What should you do? Ask the hacker to help you out, he should be able to shred their firewall and take control. Your hacker is probably really good at that. Call your Street Sam friend with the big gun. He should be shooting something big enough to wreck their armor without too much trouble. He's probably really good at shooting big guns.

So use some teamwork. When you get attacked by drones, call your teammates to help you out. Then when you have to fight spirits or mages, things you're good at, your friends will need you to help them.

Posted by: Psikerlord Jul 7 2011, 11:26 AM

this is why I was thinking of researching my "crusher" spell ... to try and take care of drones. It's the clout spell but physical damage, ie an indirect combat spell that causes physical damage, single target, but without the extra drain you get from an elemental effect ... drain being F/2+1. Should be a pretty good drone killer, in the scheme of things... Course summoning a bad ass spirit works too! I also agree with PM above however that mages should have trouble with drones.

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 7 2011, 11:30 AM

Well, they do still have problems. All of the spell and spirit summoning solutions advocate F6+ vs lowly, non-milspec rotodrones (I guess Ford LEBD?), which is like smacking a fly with a rocket launcher.

Posted by: StevenAngier Jul 7 2011, 11:40 AM

nope. This physics bogus with Imp. Invisibility bending light is gone. It just affects nonliving objects in addition to living objects. No Predator stealth mode.
And I appreciate the Crush spell (even for simplicities sake I dubbed it "Improved Clout" for my character).

Posted by: Irion Jul 7 2011, 11:41 AM

Mhm, kind of tricky since there is no spirit with the combination of elemental aura and natural weapon. Making it hard for spirits to hurt drones.
You could go with elemental attack. Or augment the spirit with an elemental aura(spell).
Or just go with the electric elemental aura and hope for a lucky roll.

Posted by: StevenAngier Jul 7 2011, 11:43 AM

Btw regarding OR 3 (Sensors) vs OR 5 (Drones). You have to fool the drones sensors, not the drone to appear invisible for it. IF you want to cast invisibility on the drone it would be OR 5. That's the consensus most often found. Besides that it's still a hot topic at most tables.

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 7 2011, 11:48 AM

Rotodrones have either hardened armor 9 or 12, so F5 or F6 with Elemental Aura (other than electricity) should do the trick.

Posted by: Irion Jul 7 2011, 12:03 PM

@Elfenlied
You are doing stun damage as melee fighter...

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 7 2011, 12:10 PM

Only if the element is stun damage. Certain elements are always physical damage.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 7 2011, 12:56 PM

Also a melee attack isn't necessarily an unarmed attack. In SR all close combat is called melee. So you could make a flaming attack with your nodachi.

Posted by: Irion Jul 7 2011, 12:59 PM

@Dakka Dakka
The one of a spirit is, unless natural weapon power.

@Elfenlied

I do not recall any.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 7 2011, 01:06 PM

Spirits can wield weapons (melee and ranged), especially guardian spirits.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 01:12 PM

Ice Sheet does not work so well for those Drones that Fly...
Besides, any competent Rigger will always make his Crash Tests. So they are generally a waste of time on your part to try an inflict them.
Spirits using Accident are generally a better Option, due to the Negative to the Dice pool that is inflicted.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 01:17 PM

Ummmmm... Rotodrones have an Armor of 2... You should really look at the Rotodrone's Stats...

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 7 2011, 01:21 PM

I guess he is assuming the worst case - drones with maximized armor. the LEBD is BOD 3 so maximum 9 armor, the Dalmatian with BOD 4 can have 12 armor.

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 7 2011, 01:29 PM

Yeah, by Rotodrones I meant the LEBD and the Nimrod.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 01:34 PM

And yet, none of those have that high of an armor unless you mod them that way. These mods are not a given, due to the low Body ratings involved. Why would you spend money on a Drone that is designed to be replaceable (Well, admittedly, the Nimrod isn't, but it is not a Rotodrone either). It often costs as much money for the amor as the Drone is worth. There are so many more options than just armor.

But no worries. Just remember, APDS or AV rounds are your friend when it comes to vehicles.

Posted by: Irion Jul 7 2011, 01:36 PM

@Dakka Dakka
The question is, if it applys. It is quite questionable if the damage code of the elemental section overrides the original ones.
Lightning would always be stun damage, but there is the lightning spell having physical damage.

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 7 2011, 01:44 PM

@Tymeaus: It's mostly out of habit, I guess. Every rigger I've played with or against, be they NPCs or PCs, always maximized all armor on their combat drones, to fully utilize hardened armor. Then again, armor is cheap, and if it helps to keep your drone and its attached weapon alive, why not?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 02:12 PM

Understood. It does help with survivability, to be sure. But with a Limited number of slots to mod Drones with, Armor is often the last thing that I think of. Drones are so cheap that they are easy to replace (Unless they are a Nimrod Drone). Hardening them a little tends to not help all that much. As I said, AV or APDS rounds make mincemeat of almost any drone out there. Not to mention any Spells that deal with them easily enough.

Of course, My philosophy on Drone usage may be a factor here. Rarely do I utilize Combat Drones with Weapons. These are the last resort. Information is much more of a commodity on a battlefield, and most of the drones my character uses are geared for information acquisition. I only field a few actual combat drones. Think I have a few Predators (Anti-Air Assets), a Few Rotodrones (Anti-Personnel), and a Tower with a load of Heimdals (Anti-Vehicle Assets). The other 50 or so drones are various versions of Elint-Capable Drones.

Posted by: Rubic Jul 7 2011, 02:36 PM

Also, it's cheaper and easier for a corp to write off the drone as an expense and send in another. The listing in the book is what you're paying after mark-ups. The corps who build them spend less, and build them en mass. I'd even posit that modding more than a handful of specialty drones would be more costly to the corp (resources and manpower) than just building a fleet of them to put on racks until needed. If they REALLY wanted that rotodrone with obscene amounts of armor all of the time, then they'd simply make a line with that armor as a standard load-out, PLUS modification slots.

Posted by: Mäx Jul 7 2011, 08:15 PM

Well the Lone Star Strato-9 might only cost 3,5k and as such be easy to replace.
But the 11k medium gatling gun or 20k Fleche Hail Barrage Rocket Launcher its armed with, not so much

Posted by: Ryu Jul 7 2011, 08:42 PM

The information-gathering drones are often the ones easily replaced due to their small size, deploying a bunch of medium drones is not that easy. The price of unavailable replacements does not really matter.

Rotordrones are my heavy-duty combat drones, and armoring them to the max makes them immune to most small arms fire. It is the first thing I do to those. Improved Sensor Array is also a must.

Posted by: whatevs Jul 8 2011, 12:14 AM

I took a look at some of the illusion spells in sm, and couldn't flak or chaff handle the sensors? And then an indirect combat spell of choice i guess, but indirect targeting allows for a dodge roll. Is it likely the op would even hit?

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 8 2011, 01:45 AM

I don't see any amendments to this in the errata.

Posted by: Makki Jul 8 2011, 01:59 AM

Rock<Paper<Scissors
Sam<Mage<Rigger

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 8 2011, 02:29 AM

Physical vs Mana spells. Learn the difference.

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 8 2011, 02:38 AM

Wow, a physical spell that effects physical light? What will they think of next?
Just be satisfied with the fact that improved invisibility will foil most technological vision enhancements.

Posted by: Fikealox Jul 8 2011, 02:48 AM

Unless you were agreeing with Longbow in a strangely belligerent way, I don't understand what you were trying to say. Learning the difference between physical and mana spells (in this case illusions, see p. 208 SR4A) precisely backs up Longbow. Invisibility = mana spell = affects the mind/senses directly; Improved Invisibility = physical spell = creates actual images or alters physical properties such as light or sound.

Posted by: Hayate Jul 8 2011, 02:43 PM

I know some folks here detest the spell from what I have read, but what about Ignite? Is the threshold too steep?

Posted by: Fikealox Jul 8 2011, 02:52 PM

I don't think Ignite would be a great option in most combat situations, due to the OR threshold, combined with the delay while you make the spell permanent.

Posted by: longbowrocks Jul 8 2011, 02:52 PM

Only a combat butler would wish to ignite drones.

Posted by: Hayate Jul 8 2011, 02:58 PM

Would the possibility of setting off drone ordinance make it any better?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 8 2011, 03:14 PM

Ignite is great when you can prepare for it. It is also awesome to use as a distraction/trap, as things can be set to blow up after you have passed them...

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 8 2011, 06:18 PM

I actually used Ignite in a game, but it was Spell Designed with the Gm's permission
Basically it had the Hot Potato (street magic) effect incorporated into the spell for increased drain. I think it worked out to f/2+1, working with both spells as the starting base.
Basically, something actually got really hot(instead of illusionarily hot), and THEN exploded into flames.
It actually worked out rather well, because I also had Control Element: Fire. Its a good way to ramp up the damage, IF your mage doesn't get geeked for a few Combat Turns. Also good because its an area spell, and you can use it on other sources of fire - such as the ones your Fire elementals cause. I was going for a pyromancer theme.

The main purpose of ignite, really, ISNT in combat. Its to burn anything you want GONE within a few seconds.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 8 2011, 06:22 PM

Yep, anything will burn if it gets hot enough, and that is Ignite's primary function...

Posted by: Rubic Jul 8 2011, 06:25 PM

I thought that's what a den of feral ghouls was for...

Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 8 2011, 06:45 PM

We had a mage use it to get through the lockdown-doors. Had to survive the firefight while the Ignite warmed up. I think it's a cool spell.

Posted by: darthmord Jul 8 2011, 06:51 PM

I could also see an Elemental Manipulation that created a heavy fog or mist, obscuring your visibility to the drones.

Or a spirit to use Concealment on you. A mid to high end spirit (Force 3-6) will help you avoid being seen / detected by a drone to a significant degree.

If I'm a mage being attacked by drones, my first thought is to ensure I survive the initial engagement and then concern myself with fighting back.

Posted by: Makki Jul 8 2011, 06:56 PM

Like the Shadow or the Mist spell?

[Element] Wall impedes visibility completely, unless you happen to know Air Wall
I don't know, how Electricity Wall would look like, but I guess no Rigger wants to find out its Force by flying through it. High drain though -.-

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 8 2011, 06:57 PM

Yup. The OR mechanic makes the spell pretty weird though. It is easier to have a rock (OR 1) burst into flames than gasoline (OR 2). It's Magic.

BTW how quickly does ignite consume an inanimate object?

Posted by: Hayate Jul 8 2011, 08:32 PM

That makes a lot of sense. Trid Phantasm sounds like it might be good for that purpose.

Posted by: whatevs Jul 8 2011, 08:39 PM

I generally believe in a survive first, then win philosophy also. And I like Trid Phantasm. I think the op mentioned that the drones were using radar.

Does Trid Phantasm work against radar though? I checked <sr4a208> and I suppose OR of 3 to affect sensors...

Posted by: Hayate Jul 8 2011, 08:51 PM

Does Trid Phantasm, as multi-sense, include touch? If so, it seems like it would fool radar. If not, no idea.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 8 2011, 09:32 PM

Uh.
Yes, multi-sense includes touch.

Posted by: Hayate Jul 8 2011, 10:40 PM

Then it stands to reason that a physical (non-mana) spell simulating enough substance to fool touch would also fool radar as it should have enough substance to reflect radar. It also stands to reason that it would fool any echolocation sensors if the same logic applies. Of course I am applying some semblance of real-world physics to a system that may "just work" or "just not work" that way depending on a game master's ruling.

Posted by: Randomonioum Jul 9 2011, 12:33 AM

I always assumed it means it stimulates the touch receptors, not actually creating a physical manifestation. Hence why its a illusion.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 9 2011, 01:03 AM

Illusions aren't illusions in the D&D sense.

The steriotypical 'mind effecting' illusions are the Mana Spell Type illusions, while Physical illusions, yes, DO create real sensations and things to interact with. Which is why Special Effects mages are so desirable in hollywood/simsense productions.

But yeah. Basically, everyone in this thread needs to open up their core rule books, and look at the description of illusion spells. So much confusion and making sense of a spell would be saved if people bothered to READ the relevant stuff instead of spouting off their version of 'i think it works, or should work this way'.

Specificlally Mana Illusions(208), Physical Illusions(208), Obvious Illusions and Realistic Illusions(also on 208), Single-Sense and Multisense(208 AGAIN.)

Supplementing this is street magic 103: Spell Design.
The above keywords - Obvious, Realistic, Multisense, Single-sense - can be applied to any given spell for an adjustment in the drain code.

This is the reason I suggested that, pages ago, people Spell Design their Improved Invisibility to Multi-Sense from Single-sense. Doing so makes it significantly better, and basically removes any need for stealth spells relating to sound. Or radar. Or other sensors. Because physical illusions spells specifically work against technology.
On the flipside, because its a Mana illusion, Regular Invisibility works on the astral. Against spirits.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 02:00 AM

Except that's awful. Make the mages even more unstoppable… except by other mages.

It doesn't work on astral, because it's not 'vision' on astral.

Posted by: CanRay Jul 9 2011, 02:09 AM

A mage *MIGHT* be able to see a much-loved and restored '39 Ford Coupe in Astral... But certainly not a freshly made drone.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 9 2011, 02:25 AM

100% doesn't work on the astral. The spell is highly visible on the astral (1 hit on an assensing test).

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 02:29 AM

Now, there are those who propose an *astral sense* version of it. I still don't think that works, but at least it'd be the correct sense.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 9 2011, 02:30 AM

It's called Concealment.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 9 2011, 02:35 AM

Not specifically true.

The AURA is visible. Specifically, the spell is visible, not its target.

If you have a means to cloak the spells aura - such as Extended Masking - then you're golden.


And yeah, astral perception is definitely a Sense in rules terms, given that it can be borrowed with Borrow Sense, and similar related spells, like passenger.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 9 2011, 02:37 AM

"That's odd. There's an Invisibility spell over there. I wonder what I can't see. Eh"
*Hits the area with Force 6 Fireball*

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 9 2011, 02:40 AM

Pretty much this.

However, like i said, extended masking hides the spell, the spell hides you.

Which Turns your strawman example into

"Thats odd. I don't see ANYTHING on the astral."


Just because any given conclusion is reached, doesn't invalidate the steps taken to get there - which is expecially relevant when things happen and change before the end.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 02:53 AM

If that works, it still requires a custom 'Astral Sense Cloak' spell.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 9 2011, 03:24 AM

Why, exactly?

We already know that Astral Perception is a Sense that can be affected by existing spells that let spellcasters borrow senses from others.(borrow sense/animal sense/eyes of the pack/passenger We even know that Astral Perception is a type of Perception test, and recieves bonuses from things that add to it (perceptive, reception enhancer), despite not rolling the Perception skill for it.

Multisense Illusions work on all Senses.

Seems pretty cut and dried to me: Spell hides a target from astral sight, but not itself.

A seperate trick, unrelated to the spell's composition, is used to hide the spell.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 03:28 AM

Because invisibility is for optical light vision only. Unless the masking is already hiding your astral presence entirely? I thought the premise was that the spell is hiding your astral presence, and your masking is hiding the spell. I don't deal with mages that much, so I could have misunderstood you; did you mean that the goal is combo astral/physical hiding?

Posted by: Fikealox Jul 9 2011, 03:37 AM

Unless I'm mistaken, Yerameyahu was saying that you were mistaken in saying that 'regular' Invisibility should hide its subject from Astral Perception, since it is a single-sense spell (and the single sense it affects isn't Astral Perception). He's saying that you still need a custom spell: either a multi-sense mana invisibility or a single-sense mana invisibility targeting Astral Perception.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 9 2011, 03:37 AM

Try to keep up, I've been suggesting Multi-Sense spell designed Illusion Spells for several pages now.


Normally you are right.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 03:41 AM

Psh, I've specifically commented on your custom spell three times. People keep saying 'Invisibility', so I'm re-pointing out that it's *not* Invisibility. It's one that affects Astral Sense. I guess I was responding for Draco18s' benefit, though you said this:

Posted by: Fikealox Jul 9 2011, 03:43 AM

Sure, but you weren't talking about multi-sense spells when you said:



"Regular Invisibility" isn't a multi-sense illusion, and it isn't a single-sense illusion targeted to Astral Perception. Yerameyahu's point, if I followed it correctly, was that Regular Invisibility therefore doesn't work against Astrally Perceiving spirits.

Also, must you always post in such a hostile and condescending tone?

Posted by: Summerstorm Jul 9 2011, 03:45 AM

I will just enter this conversation here.

I am almost always on the side of "What is reasonable within the rules and description".

So yes, it SHOULD be possible to have a spell passively cloak you in the astral space. I am also thouroughly against it. I am also absolutely against a spell which makes you absolutely undetectable for all physical means.

Such a spell(s) would elevate every one last magician who can build up a few net hits in that test into "Can never be beaten" category. It is INSANE. Even normal invisbility+silence is harsh enough. But if NO one on the street can detect you... the only way to beat you is grenading everything around you and hope for the best. And the ONLY way to stop you is a closed door (which has to stay closed).

The game would really not be fun anymore if your infiltration team is just four mages, while all others (the technomancer) waits in the car.

I always go in my games with: To have a spell affect something, you need to completely understand it. Must be somehow able to experience it, somehow. Which blocks them at least from fooling radar and millimeter scans. (But somehow allows them to block thermo-vision... ah well). And since the astral world is not "natural" to you - eh... just ignore the dual-natureed ones *g*- you can't cloak yourself from it either. This is of course all complete bullshit and totally a crumbling wall for me. But the balance just NEEDS that.

Posted by: Udoshi Jul 9 2011, 03:46 AM

I'd also like to step in here and chime in:

Masking always get an opposed Assensing test. It is by no means foolproof.

Posted by: Whipstitch Jul 9 2011, 03:52 AM

I think it's these statements that is throwing people off:

I say that because the book says this:



Which leads me to think that if "her" is meant to signify that the aura of of the spell rather than the aura of the subject of the spell than frankly it takes the cake for the most tortured sentence I've yet seen in SR4, which is saying something. I simply haven't read anything here that convinces me that a vanilla Invisibility spell is hiding the subject's aura while simultaneously blowing its cover. Which, frankly, hits me as kind of a wacky scenario.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 03:56 AM

Actually, both the character's aura and the spell's aura are visible on the astral. Spells have their own auras. Invisibility (the visual illusion) certainly does not block astral sense (your aura).

The specific premise here (if I have it correct now) is that you can custom-design a spell that cloaks you from *Astral Sense*, and then use Extended Masking to mask the spell's aura. If the GM lets you make an Astral-Sense-cloaking illusion, then that'd work.

I think it perhaps should be impossible for balance reasons, but there's not particular reason it isn't possible by RAW (whatever *that's* worth, heh).

Posted by: Whipstitch Jul 9 2011, 04:00 AM

I understand the multi-sense argument. What I don't understand is how "regular invisibility" is supposed to work against Spirits unless you mean that they can't "see" you but they can still assense you, at which point I'm not sure why people even bothered bringing it up, since at that point you're merely saying that the spell is happily chugging along on its merry useless way and have muddied the waters for nothing.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Jul 9 2011, 04:20 AM

I think in a situation like that you don;t need to adhere to rules that closely. Context is appropriate to add in. A roto-drone in a confined space which gets levitated into the ceiling should have a bad day. Its blades just got shoved into the roof, I don;t think a pure speed/damage test really fits.



Yeah I kind of think while the spell creation rules are cool for guidelines anytime the perfect spell seems to be created especially obvious things like multi-sense invisibility I probably wont allow them. They weren't in the base game for a reason IMO. Some spells are designed with flaws with a reason, just removing the flaws via the spell creation rules breaks a lot of spells.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 04:30 AM

Responding to Shinobi's quotation: (I wasn't aware that Crash/Ram damage scaled up after the 200+ m/t category (Body*3)?) In any case, yes. Crashing isn't usually fatal, and drones in particular have relatively excellent Body:Armor ratios, and they don't tend to be moving very fast. On the other hand, that low Body means they're very easily forced to make Crash tests. *shrug*

I can certainly see the GM dramatically fudging things a little, but you probably don't want to make crashes massively lethal. Drones are powerful now, but that would be a major balance change.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Jul 9 2011, 04:50 AM

True, but I kind of think if you decide to fly a roto-drone(they are pretty big after all, I'm not sure I'd let one go through a window anyways) through someones window into a apartment you kind of accepted a high risk maneuver. I might not destroy the drone, but I may ground it by having it get stuck and need minor repairs.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 9 2011, 04:55 AM

Sure, depending. I feel like I might more make it lose a turn (righting itself), or damage the rotors (reduce speed/etc.). Of course, we *are* talking about magic (Levitate), so things are more flexible.

Posted by: Hayate Jul 9 2011, 12:29 PM

Dare I ask if one can crash a drone into a Trid Phantasm? For example, a wall made by Trid Phantasm?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 9 2011, 12:40 PM

No. The drone will perceive the wall and try to stop. if it does not stop in time, the drone will register a crash and shortly afterwards that nothing has been damaged. You could however box a drone in. Unless it has been programmed to try to ram every wall that impedes its progress, the drone won't move.

Posted by: whatevs Jul 9 2011, 01:44 PM

Clever. Me likee.

Maybe someone can riddle me this: If a rigger was jumped into said drone from the example above at the time, what would the test(s) be like? One to beat OR of the drone's sensors, and then an Intuition + Counterspelling <sr4a208> for the rigger to be 'affected' by the illusion of being stuck in a wall/box all of a sudden?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 9 2011, 01:55 PM

The rigger shouldn't get a perception test, but he could still act as he wanted. All he can perceive is the senor output from his drone. For the drone it appears real and so it does to him too.
Walls appearing out of nowhere reek of magic. He doesn't know however whether a real wall (shape element for example) or an illusionary wall (trid phantasm) was created, unless it was was a brick wall or similarly complex structure and he knew more than average Joe about magic.

Posted by: Mayhem_2006 Jul 9 2011, 02:26 PM

If they were actually rotordrones, then levitating a blacnket or throw into their rotors ought to be enough to screw them up.

Or even if the rotors are ducted and grilled, draping a blanket over a drone will screw many of its sensors.

Posted by: Lantzer Jul 9 2011, 04:27 PM

To be honest, although the OP didn't much care for his chosen action in that circumstance, he still did the wisest thing.

If someone dislikes you enough and knows you well enough to send rotodrones into your apartment, get the heck out of there. Staying and fighting, even if you win, just gives your opponent more time to do something that _will_ get you.

Posted by: whatevs Jul 9 2011, 11:34 PM

Agreed. Great little scenario to discuss though. I have new respect for trid phantasm.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Jul 10 2011, 05:32 PM

Just curious has anyone used the chaff spells in play. I've never taken them but theoretically this is what they are there for. The sensor rating drops by 1 for each hit over the OR threshold of the device. Now assuming you use the OR threshold of 3 you have to be a decent mage for this spell to do anything. Kind of off I guess if you get enough hits for it to really do anything you are probably better off with a high force powerbolt.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Jul 10 2011, 05:38 PM

Honestly, a jammer is a lot more effective. :/ Hm.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 10 2011, 06:22 PM

Has anyone considered a house rule that spells specifically designed to effect objects (particularly computers) reduce the OR threshold by 1?
Eg. Chaff, Wreck, Trid-Phatasm, Improved Invisibility, etc

Posted by: Ryu Jul 10 2011, 06:23 PM

True, another advantage to fighting by proxy. No need to stay around yourself.

Taking a lesson from the Trid Phantasm Idea, I think that Concealment might be a better use for a Force 9 spirit than an attack task. It works against whatever else is around, too.

Posted by: HunterHerne Jul 11 2011, 01:18 AM

I agree. Especially if you have reason to believe the opposing rigger may have a mage friend.

Posted by: Machiavelli Jul 11 2011, 01:38 PM

If you can summon a force 9 spirit, you are so mighty that don´t have enemies left. ^^

Posted by: Rubic Jul 11 2011, 05:44 PM

My upcoming character can summon force 9 spirits. Gonna be a hell of a drain roll, but it's possible.

Posted by: Irion Jul 11 2011, 06:30 PM

Which is not that hard.
You need:
Magic 5+.
The spirt will role 9 dices so you need a bit more.
Drain will be between 0 and 18, avarage 6.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 11 2011, 06:45 PM

And you need 12+ dice in MAG+Summoning to get a single service most of the time.

Posted by: DamienKnight Jul 11 2011, 07:26 PM

If they only roll 9 dice against your summon test, why do you need 12? Honestly, 6 dice with edge added would do the trick most of the time.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 11 2011, 07:34 PM

The "on average, one hit more." At 9 vs. 9 it's even odds. Half the time the summoner will do better, half the time the spirit will (on average, 0 net hits). At 12 dice, the summoner does better more often.

Posted by: Ryu Jul 11 2011, 08:00 PM

Settle for a force 7 if need be.

The summoning part is easy, Magic 5 + Summoning 4 (favourite spirit +2) is already 11 dice before Edge. The tricky part is avoiding the physical drain. Still, a few boxes of drain is way better than being shot by two medium combat drones.

Posted by: LurkerOutThere Jul 11 2011, 10:51 PM

If you edge the spirit might well reciprocate and it's edge is a lot more disposable then yours (stupid fourth edition).

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 12 2011, 12:26 AM

If by "more disposable" you mean "the only critter in the game that can have more than 6"¹ then you're right.

¹7 if you're human or a pixie or have a Spethial Feath, or 8 if you're one of those and have the Spethial Feat that gives you another. But nothing gets more than that. Except spirits of a force 9 and higher.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 12 2011, 05:31 AM

Or he just assumes that spirits always start with full Edge, whereas the summoner may have already used some of his.

Posted by: Irion Jul 12 2011, 07:12 AM

@LurkerOutThere
If spirits start to use edge, even a Force 6 spirit is hard to summon.
Binding a Force 5 spirit is likly going to kill you.
Not saying this would be a bad thing!

But you need to establish a base line here.
RAW spirits only spend edge if you tend to abuse them. Since letting the fight and die for you does not count...
If spirits tend to spend edge more freely on the matirial plane there is not reason not to spend it, if they get shot too.
All I am saying, you open a can of worms here. That is a plane in desprate need for clear (house)-ruling.



In general: It is good to remember that a force 9 spirt (make it guardian) is quite hard to stop.
The only thing i can think of is banishing and very heavy weapons. The first buts an equal toll on the opposite mage the later might be quite hard to get and not that usefull depending on the situation and the GM.

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 12 2011, 08:42 AM

My house rule on Spirits & Edge is this:
-Summoning a Spirit with Force>your magic rating, the spirit edges to resist. Can be mitigated depending on certain external factors, e.g. BC, special reason for spirit to fight (e.g. a christian fire spirit defending a church)
-Summoning a Spirit with the appropriate spirit bane, the spirit edges to resist
-Summoning a Spirit whom you have abused, the spirit edges to resist
-Only certain extreme acts, e.g. letting a spirit take your drain, pumping it up with drugs, or cannibalizing it count as abuse. Summoning, Binding and combat explicitly do not count.
-The summoner freely controls how the spirit spends edge otherwise. However, he needs to expend one point of his own edge whenever he wants his spirit to edge.

I found this houserule to work well at our table. Starting characters can still get reasonably strong spirits, and it prevents a lot of the arbitrary use of edge.

Posted by: Machiavelli Jul 12 2011, 10:35 AM

There are a lot of assumptions here. The most important one was, that you survive the summoning a spirit rating 9. We are talking about physical drain here. Even with average successes he cause 6 points of damage. If you are talking about "i summon this spirit and stay at home for the next few days to cure the wounds" THEN you are right. But i don´t talk about "i am able to survive this action", i am talking about "i am able to summon AND to be healthy enough to go on with the run".^^

Posted by: Elfenlied Jul 12 2011, 10:47 AM

Well, if you can somehow ensure that the spirit doesn't edge, it's rather easy to pull off. Assuming you have Summoning 5+Magic 6+Focus 2+Spec 2+Mentor Spirit 2+Aspected Domain 2, you've got a DP of 19, easy enough to get a success or two. Your average DP is probably ~14 (Logic 7/Charisma 7+Willpower 5+Aspected Domain 2), meaning you soak about 4 damage, while the spirit causes ~6 Drain. If need be, edge on the drain roll, because the spirit can't edge against that.

Posted by: Mäx Jul 12 2011, 11:44 AM

That 6 points of damage can be first aided away quite fast.

Posted by: Seth Jul 12 2011, 11:59 AM

One interesting things about shadowrun is the high variance on the die rolls. As an example with "fudge" you "usually" get your skill: over 30% of the time you roll exactly average. With shadowrun you get much more variability, so although you will only get a service say half the time, you are quite likely to get a few services, whereas with a much flatter variance, even if you succeeded you would probably only get one.

I have done quite a lot of "spirit wrangling", and I enjoy it. But even if I have high drain die roll, I roll those resistance die with trepidation. If I summon a rank 6 for example, I have had on occasion 10 drain to soak: very very unpleasant.



Summoned Spirits don't last that long.

Summoned spirits and Edge
I think its clear in the rules that the spirits "might use edge if you have abused spirits in the past". Don't abuse the spirits then that won't happen. As others have pointed out "what is abuse varies from tradition to tradition". I play a psionic whose spirits are her materialised thoughts, and a Voodoo houngan who has names and characters for each spirit that he summons.
In both of them draining their force permanently would constitute abuse. Fighting along side them to defeat a threat wouldn't be (even if the spirit was disrupted). But sending a voodoo spirit in alone with the knowledge that it would be probably defeated would be abuse, while it wouldn't with the thoughtform. However I can see almost no circumstance in which the thoughtform would spend edge, while the voodoo spirits are "just like people" and are much more likely to.
I leave the decisions as to whether the spirit spends edge or not to the GM.

Posted by: Machiavelli Jul 12 2011, 05:45 PM

Of course spirits don´t last that long. That was not the question nor did i imply that meaning.

Let´s get it straight: the situation that "caused" this topic was "i got surprised by drones and didn´t find a proper way to fight them...with magic". It was not "i was sitting around in an aspected domain pumped up with combat drugs, armed and armored to the teeth waiting for somebody stepping into my trap". So calculation-examples are fine, but they have nothing to do with the reality (if you want to accept for a moment, that SR is some kind of "reality"). A highly spezialized mage has commonly around 12-14 dice for summoning and the same amount for drain resistance. Even if you maxed out magic, summoning force 9 spirits is usually 6 points of physical drain. Sometimes you get away with absolutely no wound, but most of the time you get your ass kicked. So summoning mighty spirits is nothing for "i am in serious trouble"-situations, because you cannot guarantee to knock yourself out and make the job for the assassin easier as it has to be..

Mr.J: did you finish the job?
Assassin: no, he killed himself, i just looked at him and suddenly he dropped dead

Hmmm...maybe this could be THE way to get rid of mages. Simply look like somebody that makes them think only rating 9+ spirits can hurt him, and wait if they survive.^^

Posted by: Ryu Jul 12 2011, 06:25 PM

Use a force that you can Summon, Force 9 is for the pros.

And yes, you can. Logic based tradition, augmented with Cerebral Booster and Trauma Damper, Logic 5(7)+Willpower 5 = dp 12 for drain resistance. Summoning 5 (Beast Spirits +2), Mentor Wolf (Beast Spirits +2) + Magic 5 + Power Focus 4 = 18 dice. Logic 8 + First Aid 4 + Medkit 6 = 18 dice to treat the drain.

The scenario has yourself caught flat-footed in your own territory with the equivalent of two high-grade enemy samurai within a few meters. I would be willing to take a bit of drain to get out.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 12 2011, 06:30 PM

In order to not fall unconscious, the spirit would need to roll no more than...


Drain dice is 12, average hits is 4.
Say, body 3, you're average. So your physical track is 10. Maximum boxes after resisting is 9 (to stay conscious).
9 + 4 = 13.

So, the spirit could not get more than 6 hits on [Force * 2] (12 DV). At Force 9, that's 18 dice.

6 hits on 18 dice is average. So half the time the spirit's throwing more damage at you than you can survive on average. And each hit on the spirit's 18 dice is worth additional 2 DV you need to mitigate (2 additional hits) with your 12 dice (the spirit has better odds to roll well and doesn't need to roll spectacularly well to knock you out, either).

Those aren't good odds, chummer.

Sure you can repair yourself afterwards, but only if you're still conscious.

Posted by: Ryu Jul 12 2011, 06:46 PM

The spirit uses Force to resist being summoned, generating 3 hits on average, maybe 5 if things turn bad. Not nice at all, but surviveable.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Jul 12 2011, 06:53 PM

Am I missing something? Are you trying to bind a Force 9 spirit? Only then does the spirit roll 18 dice. To summon a spirit the spirit only gets Force dice but the DV is hits*2.

Posted by: Rubic Jul 12 2011, 06:57 PM

The original situation was somebody dealing with a surprise drone. Not necessary to bind a spirit if you're just summoning it quickly. Hell, if you're being attacked by a drone, then I doubt you have time to gather resources and bind the spirit. If you want to pre-bind it, then you should have plenty of time beforehand to recover from the drain.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 12 2011, 07:42 PM

Unless, of course, the Spirit Spends Edge to resist the Summons, which a Force 9 Spirit is likely to do.

Posted by: Draco18s Jul 12 2011, 07:42 PM

Oops, my bad. I'm at work and obviously not thinking strait.

Posted by: Ryu Jul 13 2011, 05:48 AM

The truth of that statement depends on your table consensus.

Posted by: HunterHerne Jul 13 2011, 11:24 AM

At my table, it`ll depend on the spirit, and the magician. And is also why I sadle most of my summoning NPC`s with Spirit Affinity for whatever spirit they are most likely to summon often. Gives me a (point spent) reason to not bother making them resist the edge if I feel the PC`s are controlling the situation a little too well...

Posted by: nicktheviking Jul 16 2011, 12:22 AM

Do Powerball and Powerbolt not affect drones?

Posted by: HunterHerne Jul 16 2011, 12:37 AM

Only if you beat the OR first. They are Direct spells

Posted by: Mayhem_2006 Jul 16 2011, 09:30 PM

Just occured to me that maybe it would be possible to levitate them into an electrical light fitting, which might screw them up.

Posted by: HunterHerne Jul 16 2011, 10:07 PM

Barely, I say. The amount of current in there might be worth an effective 3 damage (or an effective threshold of 3 for the body+armour test, if that), before a combat drone mows you down with it's likely firearm.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 16 2011, 11:27 PM

Electrical shielding sees to be pretty popular on the drones I've seen in SR games.




-k

Posted by: HunterHerne Jul 17 2011, 12:24 AM

Which is another good reason not to try it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 17 2011, 01:49 AM

Yeah, I prefer an Inferno Missile/Rocket Warhead myself. Really hard to miss with one of those, and the 1/2 Armor rating is awesome. Damage isn't too bad either. "Now your cooking with... Napalm."

Posted by: Mayhem_2006 Jul 17 2011, 07:27 AM

Yeah, I forgot you guys have to manage with a wimpy 110 volts.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Jul 17 2011, 01:52 PM

Same basic amperage.





-k