 Concealment vs guns, Can spirits protect you from bullets? |
 Dec 9 2006, 05:33 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Target  Group: Members Posts: 28 Joined: 18-January 06 Member No.: 8,178  |
Here's the scene: PCs and NPCs are engaged in a firefight. A few of the PCs are hidden, but most are out in the open, guns blazing away. Mage (who is hidden) commands a force 8 spirit to conceal everyone in party.
Of course the concealment will make it hard to spot the hidden mage, but what about the guys who are out there in the open already? Will those perception modifiers apply as targeting modifiers as well? I'm inclined to say no for someone out in the open. But what if someone say steps behind a screen to break line of sight, thus using infiltration to hide, and then steps out in the open again? Am I being too harsh saying the concealment power doesn't apply to people standing there right out in the open? Best, Chazuli |
 |
 
|
 |
Replies
(1 - 24)
|
Dec 9 2006, 05:44 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
I would say that the ones out in the open do get concealed.
A gust of wind could blow some papers around the heads of the opposition; sun could glint off the side of a vehicle or building partially blinding the opposition; etc... |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 06:00 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
Concealment is called Concealment, not Invisibility. I play it so that Conceal only helps characters who would already need a Perception test to be spotted. Otherwise Concealment becomes a gamebreaker.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 06:32 PM
Post
#4
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 777 Joined: 22-November 06 Member No.: 9,934 |
it conceals everything. even targets out in the open. they require a perception test to see the guys out in the open but their threshold will be lower due to no perception test modifiers. I'd allow a "perceive in detail" for free against people out in the open as well./ |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 9 2006, 07:22 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 28 Joined: 18-January 06 Member No.: 8,178 |
OK, assuming I set the threshold to spot the PCs under concealment at 1 (for something obvious), and give the folks looking for the concealed +5 dice (+3 for actively looking, and +2 for target standing out in the open). Lets say the bad guy makes his Perception test and notices where the PC is.
Does Concealment provide a visibility modifier to the attack test? Best, Chazuli |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 07:29 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Conceament provides modifiers to perception tests. That is all that it does.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 08:44 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 524 Joined: 12-April 06 Member No.: 8,455 |
So if you put Concealment up and jump behind a dumpster, there's a good chance if it's high enough that they'll walk past the dumpster and not see you, thinking that you dropped II or something, especially if you have camo.
But if you just stand in the open and don't do anything that forces a perception roll, they don't even really notice any difference. Correct? |
|
|
|
|
Dec 9 2006, 08:51 PM
Post
#8
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 777 Joined: 22-November 06 Member No.: 9,934 |
as has been already suggested, it doesn't really matter why a modifier is taken into account, it just is. see below
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 10 2006, 05:41 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 524 Joined: 12-April 06 Member No.: 8,455 |
But if you're standing in the open, and have already been spotted, is there even a perception roll to begin with?
I mean, if somebody is standing in front of you, you don't roll perception every turn just to see if you can see them. So for Concealment to have an effect, you have to do something that forces a new perception roll, right? |
|
|
|
|
Dec 10 2006, 05:45 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Technically speaking, you are constantly rolling perception. But the threshold for very obvious things is 0, so that you automatically get the information.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 10 2006, 06:38 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
Big D,
That is why, in my examples, I had things that obscured the vision/perception of those trying to target people under concealment. The Spirit has enough powers to make changes in the environment, none big, but enough to make it harder for you to see those under it's concealment power. If you suddenly have the sun reflected into your eyes, even with flare compensation, you are going to lose the ability to see in a certain direction, and, most likely, flinch a little too, messing up the alignment between your weapon and the target. Or, debris flies in front of you, a spread out newspaper page, wrapping paper, flyer for the latest Humanis rally, etc... Just small things that make it harder for you to see your target. None of them would normally even register on your concious, as they happen all the time. Just this time, it is the Spirit that is helping have it happen to screw up anyone seeing/noticing those under it's power. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 10 2006, 07:12 PM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
I don't buy it.
IMO, never. In this specific example, this would make no sense. It would mean applying -8 (the force of the spirit) as a targeting modifier when full invisibility only results in a -6 modifier. This should make it obvious right there that it's not how it is supposed to work. Logically, if because of the concealement power the opposition is unable to see the runner, then you can consider him invisible (or fully concealed) but in no circumstance can you start applying the concealment modifier as an automatic modifier to targeting. If the shooters sees the PC (succeeds on his perception test) then he sees him and that's all there is to it. --- How I would personnally handle a PC in the open suddenly getting the benefit of a concealment power while standing in the open in a firefight : On their action, the shooters would (individually) have to make a perception test, threshold of 1. If he succeeds, he doesn't need to try again until the PC manage to actually hide. I wouldn't normally allow an infiltration roll because the PC is standing in the open with no real opportunity to hide instantaneously. If the ground is rough enough and the PC is camouflaged I could accept an opposed infiltration roll considering the possibility of the PC dropping to the ground and effectively hiding. Since the shooters know exactly what they are looking for, if they take a simple action to observe they get the benefit of the +3 to perception test (p.117). Either way they get the benefit of the +2 because the target stands out (A guy in the open with presumably a weapon). Finally, the last paragraph of using perception means that as far as I'm concerned if the concealed character opens fire he is automatically seen anyway because that would qualify as "Immediately noticeable (p.117)" and I don't use perception for that (using a silencer would force me to improvise a bit, using judgement calls). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 11 2006, 01:20 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 393 Joined: 20-June 06 Member No.: 8,754 |
I agree with Charon, if a character fires an unsilenced gun out in the open even with concealment, no perception roll is needed. This isn't the same as the invisibility spell.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 01:35 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
So when exactly is a perception test needed and when not?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 02:07 AM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
When I say so.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 02:54 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,156 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Fresno, CalFree Member No.: 4,252 |
When they're partially hidden?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 04:16 AM
Post
#17
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
No it isn't, after all it is easier to find a hiding person with hte invisibility spell than with concealment at the same force |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 11 2006, 04:16 AM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
Ah, but does it count as partial hidden, when it is a dust devil in front of your face, flinging dust, dirt, papers, wrappers, etc..?
Sorry boys, but just having a shot fired, does not automatically locate the target for you. Specially if there is something blocking, or partially blocking line of sight. At least, that has been my experience. Even if they are out in the open, if they get concealment, they still have a chance of doing something to not be where you expect them to be (move, run, drop prone, levitate, etc...) I wasn't talking about applying the concealment modifier as a penalty to fire at the target. You can always blind fire, or do suppression fire, or use grenades in the general area. The concealment modifier only applies to you being able to notice/see them. If you "know" they are in a particular area, you can still do things to try and take them out. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 04:47 AM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
for lack of a better way to put it, some things have a perception threshold of 0. these things do not require a roll. you do not, generally speaking, need a perception test to see the sky, for example (or whatever may be covering it). similarly, you don't need a perception test to see someone standing right in front of you with an MMG loaded with tracer fire shooting at your position. you automatically notice them, because the threshold to notice them is effectively 0, so even if you roll 0 dice, you *still* notice them. in those situations, i would not allow concealment to apply. or rather, concealment would apply, but would be irrelevant. now, if that same person had an MMG and was firing from behind a bush or something like that, i would most certainly require a perception test, and concealment would certainly apply. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 11 2006, 05:03 AM
Post
#20
|
|||||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
It's not about dust devil in your face and what not. That's just your interpretation. All it says in the book is that it "mystically hide" stuff. And the mechanic for "mystically" hiding with this power is substracting perception dice. Fine. But if you are spotted nonetheless, there is nothing whatseover in the description of the spell that implies you are still partially hidden from the observer. It's a lot like the invisibility spell ; if the power has been beaten, that's the end of it.
No (though it make you a helluva easier to locate in any scenario), but that's not what I described. I was talking about a target standing in the open. Implied in my description were observers aware of you at the moment the power went into effect. A target standing in the open and shooting at you would qualify as "immediately noticeable" Gamemasters should limit their uses of perception tests, only calling for them when something is not immediately noticeable. p.117 If there's no perception test, the whole point is moot. They see the character, the power doesn't work. It could be argued that even if they didn't shoot they would be immediateley noticeable and that the power could only kick in when they find a legitimate hiding occasion. It's really a judgement call on the part of the GM but I think the wording of the rule indicate that you shouldn't even make a perception test until the situation makes it possible that the target wouldn't be noticed. And if there's no perception roll, a -8 won't change anything.
No, you don't unless you are invisible. If I'm looking straight at you and you are in the open, you can unexpectedly start doing backflip, I'll still see you just as well. You seem to want this power to become invisibility. It ain't, accoding to the description. And it shoudln't be, otherwise why would there even be an invisibility spell?
If you are not talking about that, what are we talking about? This is exactly what the OP wondered and this is what I'm adressing. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Dec 11 2006, 05:11 AM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
Yes, but the concealment power is equivalent to 'magically summoning' a bush. So the guy firing the MMG from behind a bush might be something like -2 for the bush +8 for the autofire. This means that having the spirit (force 8) concealing him means that he has a net -2.
If he was standing in the open, his net modifier to be noticed would still be 0 (i.e. he is still noticed automatically). However, the moment he stops shooting everything in sight, his perception modifier to be seen would then drop back to -8 . If he were doing something slightly less obvious than shooting everything in sight, he would get a net negative modifier to be seen. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 05:20 AM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 870 Joined: 2-October 06 From: Athens Ga Member No.: 9,517 |
Actually the Mystically hide part could mean that it is clouding your mind. It could be less about invisiblity and more a command to ignore this. Then it would matter what else you were doing to see it the power would make it hard to focus on.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 11 2006, 05:27 AM
Post
#23
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 393 Joined: 20-June 06 Member No.: 8,754 |
I don't know where you guys are getting this kind of interpritation from. The text in no way suggests that the power puts stuff between you and the enemy. All it says is that it has the ability to "mystically hide" itself or others. I see it more akin to what the chameleon suit does, personally, since the modifer works in the same way. If it summoned a bush or flung dust in the enemy's eyes it would say that. At any rate, I think this is a good question to add to the FAQ. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Dec 11 2006, 07:32 AM
Post
#24
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,590 Joined: 11-September 04 Member No.: 6,650 |
Actually Concealment is better than invisibility, it works on all 6 senses. Astral perception included Obvious things require a threshold 1 test Ever had an occasion where you could not see somthing that was right in front of you? Same thing. It is not right there anymore it is hidden. Threshold 1 to see an obvious thing under this effect... but if you have no dice... If you rule that wayu for concealment then I expect invisibility and chamelion suits to be the same |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 11 2006, 08:39 AM
Post
#25
|
|||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,011 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Montréal, QC, Canada Member No.: 7,087 |
Obvious things require no test. I quoted the passage supporting it. If it's immediately noticeable you don't make perception test unless the GM the situation is so hectic as to warrant it (p.117).
What's that supposed to mean? Why would I treat Invisibility the same? If you don't resist the spell, you don't see the subject. He could be mooning you from three feet away, you wouldn't see it. That's the whole point of the spell! Being able to waltz right past a guard as long as you can move silently. But if the subject of a concelament power is mooning you from three feet away under the concealment power, it's immediately noticeable and so there is no need for a perception test, making the modifiers moot. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
 |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 15th June 2025 - 01:33 AM |
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.