IPB
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Force-independent spells
mfb
post Oct 31 2003, 04:26 AM
Post #26


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 11,410
Joined: 1-October 03
From: Pittsburgh
Member No.: 5,670



hmm. the subject of an invis spell can still see himself, right? i assume so, since there's no penalty for being invisible (not being able to see your hands, your gunsights, etc). so, i wonder how feasible it'd be to kill someone by casting invis on them in a situation where not being seen would be a bad thing--crossing the street is the only example that springs to mind. it'd have to be improved inivs, in that case, or a vehicle's sensors might cause the autopilot to swerve around the subject.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kanada Ten
post Oct 31 2003, 04:30 AM
Post #27


Beetle Eater
********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 4,797
Joined: 3-June 02
From: Oblivion City
Member No.: 2,826



IIRC, The rules for Invisibility (or Indirect Illusions in general) require a voluntary "Subject" meaning one can't do this by the rules.

However, I rule that one is aware that they are invisible (the world seems different, phased in color, no shadow, ect) and do not require voluntary subjects. Manipulation spells can duplicate them anyway.

This post has been edited by Kanada Ten: Oct 31 2003, 04:31 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tisoz
post Oct 31 2003, 07:12 AM
Post #28


Free Spirit
*******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,928
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920



QUOTE (Kanada Ten)
IIRC, The rules for Invisibility (or Indirect Illusions in general) require a voluntary "Subject" meaning one can't do this by the rules.

I don't see this in the BBB, only any target within LOS.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Vanguard
post Oct 31 2003, 09:18 AM
Post #29


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 20-October 03
Member No.: 5,741



QUOTE (mfb)
so, i wonder how feasible it'd be to kill someone by casting invis on them in a situation where not being seen would be a bad thing--crossing the street is the only example that springs to mind.

Yup, my group has done this.

The guy was already unconsious (or dead, can't remember), then they cast invis on him and put him in the street. Right before a car hits him, they dropped the spell, the idea being that it now looks like the guy was killed by the car.

"I don't know what happened, officer! One minute the street is clear, and then all the sudden there was a guy in the road! I couldn't stop in time."

(Officer rolls his eyes and gets out his Blood Alcohol analyzer)

My group is scary like that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spookymonster
post Oct 31 2003, 12:40 PM
Post #30


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 22-April 02
Member No.: 2,638



QUOTE (Kanada Ten @ Oct 30 2003, 11:43 PM)
MitS makes it clear that those "observing" an indirect illusion spell are the "targets", and thus resist the effects of the spell.

Exactly. Directed Illusions are mental illusions - it's all in the heads of the target. There is no physical manifestation. No one sees anything but the target(s). Indirect Illusions, however, do have physical manifestations; they cast/reflect light, make noise, smell funny, taste salty, and feel slimy (whatever). Anyone who can see/hear/smell/etc. the target (or, more accurately, locus) of the spell may be affected. The resistance test is for them, not the locus, whether it is an Invisibility spell cast on a troll, or a Silence spell cast on 10kg of C-4.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 12th April 2022 - 09:49 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.