I have linguist+mnemonic enhancer+something else.

I get the first language for free, and +4 to all my linguistic rolls.

Can't complain about that...

When the thread degrades to "nuh-uh, my guy is better because <insert cherry picked scenario here>" I get to cherry pick my own scenarios too, and in mine I left no trace. Even if I did, I still win the "whose imaginary testicles are bigger" battle before the corporate court comes after me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)



I believe the answer is "enough." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) IIRC it's in WAR!, but I don't have it handy. If that's not enough, I nuked instead (and bought the GM dinner so he'd let it go off). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Basically, arguments like this are pointless exercises in cherry picking scenarios and ego one-ups-manship. Eventually the GM wins by telling everyone to shut up and dropping anti-cty weaponry on them to make sure it happens. That is, if these scenarios ever came up in a real game, which they don't.

It is in the Errata for Arsenal. Yes, they have an Errata for Arsenal.



You could always go to a 7, at least in one skill. Legendary is hard to beat.

I think it's "if you're within 200m: dead. Beyond 200m it has a base value of (130?) -1 DV/100m"

I believe that Concealment does not hide your commlink's Signal Rating, you'd have a Signal Rating if you were the commlink.

I do think that Concealment hides from Radar - so long as it uses the Perception skill, Concealment works against that. While Radar ignores Improved Invis which only affects vision, it would not and should not ignore a similar multi-sensory Illusion spell.

Thank You... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)



Not sure that I would agree here. Again, YOU ARE STILL there... therfore you have a radar reflection. That is one of the reasons that Invisibility does not work, because of the Radar Reflection. Could you design a Spell to be invisible to Radar? Sure, but one does not exist yet in canon, as far as I can remember.

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein

Same is true for light, sound, smell, etc. etc.

And yet, that Invisibility does not work against Radar, now does it? Because Light is not Radar Waves... Duh... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Nor does it work against Sound, Smell, or anything else...

Invisibility != Concealment

Invisibility does not work against radar because it specifically states that it works against visual senses and radar ain't one of 'em.

Concealment applies a penalty to all Perception rolls. If the radar is using Perception, it is affected. A house rule certainly isn't unwarranted. Concelament as written is very powerful, too powerful for some campaigns. But the RAW is very clear.

I get it, Really, I do... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

Concealment is TOO powerful for Most if not ALL games when your average Mage has a Magic of 15+ (That stupidly epic 2000 Karma Game mentioned somewhere above comes to mind).

In Sane games, it is not so bad. Concealment is never really a problem in any game I have played. I still have issues with it, however, because purely mechanical devices should not be affected by it, much like the aforementioned Radar. High Powerd Mage Magic does not work against it, why should Pixie Magic do so? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Additionally, The way it is worded seems to imply that it is no good unless the user is actively being stealthy. Your Mileage may Vary, of course.

Anyways.

High powered mage magic should, when appropriate (multisensory spell, normal Concealment), work against it, so why should pixie magic not do so?

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein

Silent does not work against visiual perception. So invisibility should not work against visiual perception.


Or a camera or a microphone.


With a chamelion suite and magic 6 it just adds up to 10 dices. (And in a "normal" game not everyone is going to have around 20 dices for perception)

By Canon, it does not, as there is no spell that does so. You could, of course, add one in for that purpose. Concealment IS the Pixie magic to which I referred. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

It's just a pet peeve of mine, that's all...

Anyways...

It is so stupidly easy to get a high Perception Dice Pool that I often have to consiously work to not go that route. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)
As for the reference to my character, it made sense, in that normal game, to have such a high dice pool. A Cyberlogician is nothing but observant. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

By canon, there is no multisensory Illusion spell that does what Imp Invis does for vision based Perception, yes. But by canon also, Concealment does work against radar, as long as the skill being used is Perception. Concealment isn't a multisensory version of Improved Invis, just because Improved Invis doesn't work against radar and no canon spell fulfills this specific function doesn't mean that Concealment doesn't work against radar.

I agree with what you wrote. I disagree with the rationale for it however. Besides, Drones do not roll perception, they roll a Sensor Check which is Pilot + Sensor. So Purely Mechanical Devices should not be fooled by Concealment. Which is what I said earlier.

I would not go down that road. I guess if you follow through to the and drones wouldn't be able to see anything. (Because to see something you have to make a Perception test, a Perception test ist defined by having perception as part of the dice pool (your axiom), drones do not have perception so they don't see anything.)

Obviously, Common Sense is not. There is Perception, and then there is perception. Drones do not have the Skill, but they can still perceive. They just use different abilities. So your argument fails, since teh books say to use Pilot + Sensor to make that roll, not Perception + Sensor (which is what a Rigger would use if HE was perceiving). Ergo, Since Concealment only applies to Perception Rolls (The Skill), Machines are immune to it. Pretty simple really.

Do I buy that line of reaasoning? Maybe. It makes a good argument, and brings Concealment into line with the rest of the magic system. Afterall, even Ruthenium Polymers and Sneak Suits, which Concealment is magically mimicing, can be seen with Radar. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
My argument was meant to fail. Out of the same reason yours fails. You do not need perception to make a perception test.


Well, radar is something I dislike a bit anyway because there are no visibility rules. (So it is not even said a pixie can be picked up with rader)

I disagree. Concealment only subtracts from Perception Tests (Note the Capitalization). It Does not subtract from Sensor Tests.

Sorry that you dislike them, but why would they not? They are corporeal. Therefore they have a Radar Return. Thus they can be seen. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

I don't know about anyone else, but the majority of my characters are unplayable out of chargen. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Well radar ain't radar. Different radars have totally different properties.

Irrelevant. Per the game, they work. Don't really care about yhte differing vagaries of the differing Radar Systems. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)
And we both know we are discussing Ultra-Wide band Radar, and the Vehicle Radar.

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Well, you have to at some point.
Is it possible to tell female from male? Is it possible to tell strong from fat? Is it possible to tell human from orc? Is it possible to tell pidgeon from pixie. I would go with no to every question. But how is it supposed to be?