My Assistant
Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)
  |
 How to beat a levitating invisible dead horse, Invisible vehicles. |
 Oct 10 2006, 04:03 PM
Post
#26
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 834 Joined: 30-June 03 Member No.: 4,832  |
I like that description of invisibility alot, thanks |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:08 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Old Man Jones Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 |
I've always viewed the Invisibility spells like this:
Let's say you cast Imp Invis on a security guard to make him believe the wall he's guarding is transparent. Okay, he believes the illusion, which means he sees whatever he remembers being on the other side. Or whatever he believes should be on the other side. If he doesn't know, his mind will make something up to maintain the belief. What he will NOT see, however, is the runner sneaking by on the other side of the wall, unless he somehow has some means of knowing the runner is there. It's an mental illusion, not a transparent wall. -karma |
|
|
|
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:18 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,898 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Just a terminology nitpick: it doesn't matter what the guard believes. If he's affected by the spell he may believe the wall has vanished, or he may believe that the wall has been affected by illusion magic, but he still won't see the wall. Likewise, if the spell didn't affect him (but was successfully cast), even if for some reason he was expecting to see the wall vanish, he sees… an ordinary wall.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:19 PM
Post
#29
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
Except for improved invisibility which is a physical illusion. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:21 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,898 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
But still not a transparent wall.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have an illusionary door to walk through… ~J |
|
|
|
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:27 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Physical Illusions, in SR3, are the same as mental illusions except that they operate on senseor input interpertation devices (including the eyes and brain) physically, rather thn just the "mind", which allows them to also fool cameras and technological sensors.
However, belief doesnt matter because a camera will show the exact same thing that the guard sees. Rather, the spell does make the subject apparently transparent (not actually transparent since it can be resisted) but the difference between apparently and actually transparent is pretty much nill. Except for the ability to resist one may as well be the other. However, I must disagree with the FAQ interpertation on LOS, as this leads to American magicians making the Earth invisible to manabolt a guy in China and vica versa. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:31 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,898 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
So to be clear, what does the camera see? What does the guard see?
And let me open a new can of worms I've been forgetting to post since late May: Phil, cyberphotographer extraordinaire, is taking a picture of his four good mage friends (Alice, Bob, Chuck, and Desiree) with his internal eyecam. They're all tricksters, though, and have cast Invisibility on themselves. Alice has Invisibility cast with five successes, Bob has it with two, Chuck has Improved Invisibility cast with five successes, and Desiree has it cast with two. On every test, Phil rolls three successes. They line up, he takes the picture and prints it out to see… Who? ~J |
|
|
|
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:39 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
This depends on how they are lined up.
However, it is quite easy to say that he will see only Bob and Desiree while the picture will include Alice and Bob certainly and possible Chuck and Desiree depending on what force the spell was cast at and only depending on the force. Since Successes are usually capped by force Chuck is casting at force 5 in the least so he will be invisible to the camera with Desiree may or may not be. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 11 2006, 11:41 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 104 Joined: 12-July 05 From: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Member No.: 7,496 |
** my head hurts ** :spin:
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 01:16 AM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 256 Joined: 24-October 04 Member No.: 6,784 |
You are EVIL Kage.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 01:24 AM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,898 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
So what if Phil routes the picture into his imagelink? Does he get shown a picture of Bob? What if he does this sixty times per second? ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 12 2006, 02:01 AM
Post
#37
|
|||||
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Yep, but he can't target spells through it nor would I allow smartlink bonuses through such a setup. Also, since the camera does not get to resist Improved Invisibility he would not get to resist it. In other words, he could not possible see any person with Force 4 invisibility and 1 success using this setup. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 12 2006, 02:28 AM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,898 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Why wouldn't you allow smartlink bonuses?
Also, what if he uses a semitransparent overlay instead of totally replacing his natural vision? Perhaps more importantly, why does this differ from a cybereye? ~J |
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 03:12 AM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 24 Joined: 17-June 06 Member No.: 8,728 |
Y'know, it never ceases to amaze me...
Why the hell do people cast invisibility on vehicles? Moving vehicles that they're IN? Seriously, do you know what happens if you try that on the highway? You BETTER have a rigger driving, or Mister Mack Truck is going to fuckin' run you over. Mr. Wageslave is gonna rear end you, the go-gang is gonna try to drive through you... On deserted streets or barrens, sure. Invis away. On the highways, or busy streets? Dumbass, you just crashed. G'bye... |
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 03:18 AM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Data processing. The cybereye does not process any data, it simply sends signals directly to the brain in response to light just as a normal eye does. On the other hand, a cybereye camera transforms those signals into a digital image and the imagelink transforms them back.
As for no smartlink bonuses, mostly due to the fact that the imagelink is in use by the camera and the smartlink must use the imagelink to display the reticle. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 03:38 AM
Post
#41
|
|||||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 16,898 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
In my experience, people generally cast it because they aren't on the highway.
In my experience, people also frequently have a rigger driving. Hyzmarca: it needs to process light into ion movement, at minimum. There's no getting around the fact that at some stage in the process it needs a dump of the sensors, whether that dump is sampled on-demand or at a specified refresh rate. As for the imagelink issue, nothing says the imagelink can only accept date from one source, but even if we assume it can't take a second source there's always the limited imagelink that a Smartlink normally comes with (you don't need to use the already-installed full imagelink). ~J |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 12 2006, 04:09 AM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 256 Joined: 24-October 04 Member No.: 6,784 |
hyzmarca, so what? I'd fall back to the 'paid for with essence=natural' excuse. If mr cybereye has enough successes to pierce improved invisibility's illusion but not regular illusion, the eyecam pic relayed through an imagelink won't overcome it either, mr cybereye is still under the effect of the invis spell and rerouting the image to the opticam/imagelink and back to the optic nerve are for all intents and purposes exactly the same as natural functions.
It gets REALLY wonky if Mr Cybereye is attached to a radio or telephone and pipes the captured image to someone else outside the range of the mages effect. Roleplay THAT misdirection to your players sometime. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 04:54 AM
Post
#43
|
|||
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
True, but it does not need to do anything more than what the human eye naturally does. Light hits a photoreceptor and is transformed into ions and transmitted to the brain. The eye is not acting on the data in any way and the data is not directly computer readable. It is really little different from having a natrual or bioware eye. With an imagelink, like electronic magnification, the eye converts the data into a machine readable format first, edits it, and then converts it into a brain readable format. Because of this, the character is not looking at the person but is looking at an image of the person captured by the eye camera. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 12 2006, 05:28 AM
Post
#44
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 104 Joined: 12-July 05 From: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Member No.: 7,496 |
The setup: Chicago, August 22, 2055. late at night. The whole group is sitting tight in the rigger´s van, going north in the Chicago Skwy. To add some chaos to the scene, i´ve decided to add blockades all along the 94, leading to a massive gridlock in the lower city and a completely deserted highway. They decided to ram some of the blockades and try their luck in the highway. The sky, on the other hand, is patrolled with some drones and helicopters from the national guard, who just arrived from a nearby headquarters. (Oh, and some bugs too, but who cares ? ) So, in an effort to avoid detection while speeding thru the empty highway, they used a combo of chaotic world and Imp Invisibility, and here we are. And no, they haven´t managed to escape. Even though it´s easier to do it before the wall goes up, they would have to break a blood oath they did to Don O´Toole himself. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 12 2006, 09:15 AM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
Improved Invisibility is a physical spell and therefore of no use on the astral plane. Not enough to break out of the Chicago containment zone...
Basic invisibility has some logical fallacies due to only your brain being fooled. The cybereye-issue is only an apparent one. What about infrared goggles that overlay their input on your shades? I´d count both at technical device (albeit one being paid for with essence), making basic invisibility rather useless on the material plane. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 10:58 AM
Post
#46
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 533 Joined: 23-July 03 From: outside America Member No.: 5,015 |
I understand why they wrote that, but I have never liked it. I reckon cybereyes 'should' not get to roll resistance tests, like other technological sensors, whereas bioeyes and those eyes 'my mother gave me' should.
For the deepest layer of cells, the photoreceptors furthest from the pupil, that is correct, no processing - but those are not the cells that communicate with the brain. All the interneurons and ganglion cells in the retina that lie in about 12 strata ontop of those photoreceptors do a vast amount of integration and comparison and other calculation before sending parallel heavily processed data down the optic tract. For example this page says:
This page has diagrams and a simple step-by-step guide to the way different cells in the eye respond when light falls on part of the retina. Suffice to say it's not a simple case of sending two unadulterated snapshots of the outside world to the visual cortex and getting the brain to do all the processing from there. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Oct 12 2006, 01:40 PM
Post
#47
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 104 Joined: 12-July 05 From: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Member No.: 7,496 |
As i said, they were trying this in August 22. Formally speaking, there´s no CZ yet. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 12 2006, 02:06 PM
Post
#48
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Dumpshock: Taking the fun out of games since <insert date here>.
;) |
|
|
|
|
Oct 12 2006, 02:51 PM
Post
#49
|
|||
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,546 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760 |
Actually, no. Absolutely nothing interesting well happen except maybe for some very low tech mo-peds running into you. Reread the manual. Rating 0 sensors include rangefinders, as well as ultrasound and laser proximity detectors (none of which are affected by invis). Rating 1 sensors include all the above plus basic radar (which is not affected by invis). (This is on page 135, if you're looking for it.) As for the invisibility question... Maybe SR3R should just drop improved invisibility and be done with this mess. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 12 2006, 02:55 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 72 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Oak Ridge, TN, CAS Member No.: 407 |
So don't cast Invisibility. Get an SEP-field generator. :twirl:
That should solve everything. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th April 2022 - 08:54 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.