[X] My Assistant

[DireRadiant]

You make a perception test, you succeed. What do you see?

You see MAGIC!...

You see someone shoot someone, do we have rules in the book for exactly what you see about the gun in the hand, the bullet leaving the barrel, the explosive gases leaving the barrel, the bullet spinnng as it flies through the air, the tears int eh flsh as it strikes the target, the blood and bones being destroyed?

Or do you just tell the player, "You see so and so shoot someone?"

If the player really wants to know what the heck magic effect they noticed, I'd simply ask, "Well, what do you think magic looks like? That's what you see!"

Or we can come up with about 32 pages of magic perception rules and the neat special effects for each spell and tradition.

[toturi]

[fistandantilus4....]

A certain amount of story telling is going to have to go into describing the effects of any spell. Like the dunner said, a fireball can simply spring in to being right at it's target. It can also vary from tradition.

As an example, there's a part in one of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time books (I think book 7 or so, when the Aes Sedai are casting along side with women they foudn in the port that had all been runaways, against the Seanchan, sorry can't remember what they called he group). Anyways, the Aes Sedai, when they threew fireballs, would wind up liek they were chucking a basebasll, and throw the ball of fire. Where as the other women, who were used to having to cast in secret, just stood there while balls of fire erupted out of no where and sped at the target.

So there is no clear cut "This is what happens" because there is no preset and determined way magic works for everyone in shadowrun. It varies by tradition, it varies within tradition, it varies by force, possibly by what foci are being used. Take what suggestinos have been given here, incorporate a few of your own,and see what you can make. Make something that works with your interpretation of the world.

[Eleazar]

[mfb]

[fistandantilus4....]

Actually I thought most of the rest of the post was unecessary. If you want to discuss the issue, then discuss the issue. Don't spend a very long post saying why you're upset.

[hyzmarca]

According to the RAW, a mundane noticing a spell being cast would notice the intense look of concentration. For a big spell, this is a very big look of concentration A Force 10 stunbolt is going to produce a DBZ constipation squint or something equivalent in the vast majority of magicians because manipulating the massive amount of mana required to power a Force 10 spell takes an extraordinary amount of concentration.

I'll suggest checking out a television series called Heroes for a good example of this. The character known as Hiro has the power to teleport and stop time, but ding so requires a great deal of concentration. Although no one but him can be aware of what happens when he stops time, it is quite obvious when he is about to do so because of his intense look of concentration, a giant DBZ constipation squint, which precedes the timestop by a couple of seconds.

[Eleazar]

[fistandantilus4....]

You could also take the Final Fantasy approach if you'd like. Some aura of magic springs in to being or some such.

[apollo124]

How about a sudden feeling of dread for no apparent reason? I know this sounds like the old "shivers down the spine" thing, but I think it would work. Magic might be noticeable to a mundane by feeling a sudden, inexplicable tightness in their breathing or feeling of terror or heat, cold, static electricity. Someone might feel the spell beginning to work on their brain (illusions and mind affecting spells) or their body (calcify, levitate, treat, etc..)

[Eleazar]

[fistandantilus4....]

You can just PM me if you'd like to keep it private.

The best way to avoid an arguement, is to simply avoid an arguement.

Don't feed the fire, just move on. I know it's easier said than done at times, but please do try. That pretty much goes for everyone.

[Ravor]

Well I do remember reading in the Fluff mages going on and on about how that although most mage do make gestures, chant, ect, that it is possible to kill with a mere glance, so personally I think I'd tend towards the mundane getting a 'spidey sense', and here is why;

It is my understanding from reading about Earthdawn that as the mana levels rise everyone will awaken in one way or another, so although a mundane isn't considered awakened at the current mana levels, the gathering of mana needed for those big spells is enough to spark the deeply hidden seed of magic that is actually inside us all. At least enough to notice where the spell came from if he made his perception check.

[Thane36425]

The way I handle was that mana spells were very hard, if not impossible to see. Physical spells, slighlty more obvious. Indirect spells that require a roll to hit probably are visible, particularly since SR3 and earlier said that the spells were affected by physical barriers and the like.

So, a mage throwing a stunbolt would exhibit the look of concentration. If powerful enough, say Force 6 and up, there might be a slight distortion around the casting mage. A Powerbolt spell would be a little more noticable. Throwing a fireball would probably look like throwing a baseball as mentioned above. That presentatin could vary with tradition and personal tastes. One mage might actually throwing burning red baseballs while another threw flaming green skulls, while one with a sense of humor could throw smiley faces with slight variations for the spell in question.

[toturi]

[Rotbart van Dain...]

So you are hearing voices, then? :P

[DireRadiant]

How does a character hear a sound?
How does a character see something?
How does a character feel something?
How does a character taste something?
How does a character sense magic?

It's not described in the book!

It's a new sense for a new thing, Magic!

I can't figure out what to tell the character because I personally can't sense magic myself, so I must ask other people if they can tell me what they see when they see magic!

[Konsaki]

To my knowledge, all a mage has to do to cast a spell, barring any geas, is see/touch the area/target and concentrate.

That being said, IMO, any mundane who notices a spell has been cast would perceive the effects of the spell, but probably wouldn't know who cast the spell unless it was plainly obvious. (IE the mage is the only one there or the mage touched the target)
The inderect combat spells just say the effect happens at the target and nothing about having the effect start at the caster and run to the target. Here is a quote from the Flamethrower and Fireball spells.

[knasser]

[Kenshi]

I love threads like this!

Bottomline: You can't make a rule for absolutely everything. It all comes down to GM discretion. There are a lot of great suggestions in this thread but in the end, it's up to how you want to interpret the rules. Do you want to have mundanes be able to see magic? There's no reason to get upset because you're not getting the answer you want.

[Thane36425]

[Spike]

Well, I'm going to have to do some reading in order to really sink my teeth into this, but I'll weigh in with opinion to get my hat in the ring.

To me it's reasonably sensible. While Geasa and such are necessary if you have them, that isn't to say they don't exist for mages who don't have them.

If a simple perception check can show a mundane who has just cast a spell, even one that is techically 'invisible' then obviously there is something to see other than 'squinty face'.

Mages naturally will make hand gestures, maybe get a bit of mana-glow or some such, even may say something, without thinking about it. Casting magic without doing any of these things is possible, certainly. Cue debates on how hard/easy it should be for a bound and gagged mage to cast their mojo about.

But it's not natural or easy to do 'nothing' when summoning all that mojo and forcing it into shape. It would be impossible to actually do it while carrying on a normal conversation. The perception check means the mage DID do something distinctly magelike, and the guy that rolled noticed it. Doesn't matter if the mage was trying to do 'nothing obvious'. They started focusing on their magic and lost track of 'keeping hands steady and 'not chanting the third lay of fuck a brutha up' and the rest is history.

[eidolon]

Interesting take. I tend along the "subtle ripples of mana cause your hair to stand up on end" or some such than anything physical on the caster's part. Really though, all that matters mechanically is that there is something to notice and that you can notice it. The whats and hows are GM purview and immaterial to the fact IMO. Fill it in with what you like and move on to other things. Like the whats and hows of how you're going to geek the mage you just noticed casting. :D

[Mistwalker]

Ah, but that is part of the issue.

You notice something, but do you notice "who" just cast the spell, or just that a spell was cast?

I think I will go with noticing the spell, but not necessarilty knowing who cast it.

[Konsaki]

I would just say that you know that a spell was cast and maybe who was the target of the spell based on a shimmer. I wouldn't give away who cast the spell unless there was a geas involved or it's just plainly obvious that no one else could have casted it. (IE the mage is the only one there in the room with you)