IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Special Senses & Targeting Spells, Is the use of a radar/ultrasound seing?
Warentester
post Feb 2 2009, 06:35 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 31-January 09
From: SEG
Member No.: 16,829



The question arose in a different thread, but I think it is worth discussing in more detail:

If a character implants specific cyber- or bioware, that gives him additional senses then the question arises, which of those can be counted as "seing".

Example 1:
The character can hear the guard in total darkness in front of him, but he cannot see him. Sound waves created by the steps of the guard travel towards him, hit his eardrum, and as a consequence he hears the guard. He can shoot in this direction, but he cannot cast a direct spell on him.
If we add spatial recognizer the principle of hearing stays the same but he can already shoot the guard with decent probability to hit him, but he can still not cast a spell.
But what if he has ultrasound now? O.k. he emits sound waves, that hit the guard, are reflected back and from there on it will be the very same as before, i.e. he hears the guard. Nevertheless Ultrasound usually is being counted as seing. That is fine for ranged combat.

But the question is: Does ultrasound constitute seing - in the sense of seing something to make the percept an eligible target for a direct combat spell?

Obviously the information enters the system via the ear. Hair cells sends information to the corresponding areas in the brain, to the cochlear nucleus, superior olivary complex, inferior colliculi, medial geniculate nucleus of the thalamus and finally primary auditory cortex. Right? Or will the ultrasound system be connected to the visual cortex? Probably, as the percept is described in visual terms. But does this mean he is seing? Is information in the visual cortex sufficient for a visual percept?

Example 2:
The character cannot see the guard, because it is to dark. So he cannot cast a spell on him. In seing usually photons hit his retina then the information is send to lateral geniculate nucleus of the thalamus and to the primary visual cortex.
Now we add infrared vision to the system: The character now becomes sensitive to a different spectrum of photons (still electromagnetic waves), and the processing stays just the same. We would say the character sees the guard, he can cast a spell on him.
Now it gets even more complicated when we add radar "vision", or the electromagnetic sense. As vision itself they are is based on electromagnetic waves or fields (just of a different wavelength), but there is neither a natural receiver nor a corresponding system in the brain that usually deals with radar and is used to interpret these signals. Thus: where will it be interpreted in the brain? Probably preprocessed by the implant and then send to visual cortex probably, but we don't know for sure.

In addition, the cortex couldn't process several different inputs at the same time, so this seems to suggest, that several senses are processed in different brain areas (but where?).


So far it seems, that information in the visual cortex seems sufficient to constitute seeing (this is plausible, because the percept would be "as seen" - somehow similar to an visual impression)


But now lets put one problem on top: Spirits see, yes, but different (as they cannot read computer screens, right?) But how? They neither posses real eyes, nor a visual cortex, nor any brain at all. They can target spells.
Or critters, that do not even possess vision. Can they target their powers, yes, they can. What is vision-like in them?

To conclude:
1. What constitues seeing then? Under which conditions can we speak of "seing" in the sense, that it allows us to target a spell with it?
2. If information in the visual cortex/pathway is sufficient to define seing? Why don't we then just add a synesthetic-implant to "see sound"? The technology obviously exists (e.g. within the ultrasound system). That would be coarse, but better than nothing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 2 2009, 06:50 PM
Post #2


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



That's a very good question, and one I'm sadly not qualified to answer. I will, however, be subscribing to the thread to see what other people say (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Muspellsheimr
post Feb 2 2009, 06:58 PM
Post #3


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,336
Joined: 24-February 08
From: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Member No.: 15,706



Use the goddamn search. The answer is No.

I am not going through this shit again; I will not bother to explain why or even look at this damn thread again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 2 2009, 06:59 PM
Post #4


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Feb 2 2009, 10:58 AM) *
Use the goddamn search. The answer is No.

I am not going through this shit again; I will not bother to explain why or even look at this damn thread again.

In his defense, he put it better than others I've seen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Warentester
post Feb 2 2009, 07:06 PM
Post #5


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 31-January 09
From: SEG
Member No.: 16,829



QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Feb 2 2009, 07:58 PM) *
Use the goddamn search. The answer is No.

I am not going through this shit again; I will not bother to explain why or even look at this damn thread again.


Nice, the answer is NO, but to which question exactly did you answer?

Well, maybe someone else would be so kind to tell me where to find this thread Muspellheimr is talking about (as he is not going to look at this thread again (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ) because I did use the search and could not finde a thread with a fitting topic name.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 2 2009, 07:10 PM
Post #6


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



QUOTE (Warentester @ Feb 2 2009, 11:06 AM) *
Nice, the answer is NO, but to which question exactly did you answer?

Well, maybe someone else would be so kind to tell me where to find this thread Muspellheimr is talking about (as he is not going to look at this thread again (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ) because I did use the search and could not finde a thread with a fitting topic name.

Seconded.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
yukongil
post Feb 2 2009, 07:14 PM
Post #7


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 28
Joined: 27-January 09
Member No.: 16,818



it's the truly helpful posters here that make Dump Shock live up to the first word of it's name. Spare us the baby-monkey tantrum.

as to the OP, I'd say go with whatever makes sense to you as GM and that you don't feel is game-breaking. Personally I can't see a in-game reason why it wouldn't work as the rule seems to exist largely for game-balance reasons.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ornot
post Feb 2 2009, 07:27 PM
Post #8


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 3-June 06
From: UK
Member No.: 8,638



QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Feb 2 2009, 06:58 PM) *
Use the goddamn search. The answer is No.

I am not going through this shit again; I will not bother to explain why or even look at this damn thread again.


Gee. Thanks.

I have to say I've searched and come up with nowt (perhaps because the search does not allow me to search for LOS or line of sight due to restrictions on number of characters).

I'm less bothered by using implanted tech to find LOS, but how does a ghoul mage target anything physical, seeing as he's blind. I'm running a canon game from the missions, with a powerful ghoul mage NPC, but unless he can actually target the PCs there's not a great deal that he can do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
yukongil
post Feb 2 2009, 07:29 PM
Post #9


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 28
Joined: 27-January 09
Member No.: 16,818



if you are blind physically, are you blind astrally? Cause as Dual-Natured, that would be the ghouls way around that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ornot
post Feb 2 2009, 07:33 PM
Post #10


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,266
Joined: 3-June 06
From: UK
Member No.: 8,638



Ghouls have non-functional eyes, but may astrally perceive normally, so they don't bump into stuff, and at a pinch could shoot towards auras. But for spellcasting that doesn't work, since you could only target stuff on the same plane one was perceiving upon... Fair enough, but it does rather hose the NPC I'm using.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Warentester
post Feb 2 2009, 07:38 PM
Post #11


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 31-January 09
From: SEG
Member No.: 16,829



The thread that made Muspellheimr so emotional is this one: Jump here for any further discussion that are about ECHOLOCATION/ULTRASOUND/RADAR and targeting spells.

The bottom line of that thread is, that vision is defined as requiring electromagnetic waves of the spectrum that are from the range of meta-human vision (i.e. visible light and infra red). This is based on a direct quote of Synner, one of the authors of the Rulebooks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BishopMcQ
post Feb 2 2009, 07:41 PM
Post #12


The back-up plan
**********

Group: Retired Admins
Posts: 8,423
Joined: 15-January 03
From: San Diego
Member No.: 3,910



Astral Perception is a psychic sense and does not impact normal senses. Someone blind or deaf on the physical can see or hear on the astral.

Re: Ultrasound et al--Synner has weighed in and said no to non-visual targetting. I believe THIS is the thread in question. If it's not the one Synner posted to, then it is linked to his answer. It does discuss echolocation (ultrasound) as a method for targeting and then strolls into several other methods.

QUOTE (Ornot)
Ghouls have non-functional eyes, but may astrally perceive normally, so they don't bump into stuff, and at a pinch could shoot towards auras. But for spellcasting that doesn't work, since you could only target stuff on the same plane one was perceiving upon... Fair enough, but it does rather hose the NPC I'm using.
With Astral Perception, you are on both planes of existence and can target with astral sight on a physical being because your meat is still there. If you project, you cannot target the physical plane because you left your meat behind. Thus a ghoul can use his astral sight to target a person who he would not normally be able to see.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Warentester
post Feb 2 2009, 07:48 PM
Post #13


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 31-January 09
From: SEG
Member No.: 16,829



Under the restrictions from Synner I would still allow UV vision for targeting spells, though. But this is purely academic because this augmentation does not exist. Thanks to anyone who was willing to help a newbie in the forum.

@Admins:
Can this thread be closed, please? It is redundand.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GrinderTheTroll
post Feb 2 2009, 07:53 PM
Post #14


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,754
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Modesto, CA
Member No.: 6,465



QUOTE (Warentester @ Feb 2 2009, 11:06 AM) *
Nice, the answer is NO, but to which question exactly did you answer?

Well, maybe someone else would be so kind to tell me where to find this thread Muspellheimr is talking about (as he is not going to look at this thread again (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ) because I did use the search and could not finde a thread with a fitting topic name.

This is an old argument and keep in mind SR (any version) is a *sci-fi fantasy* RPG, it's not intended to be a 100% model of the real world.

The short answer is, you can only cast using technology if you've paid essence for it (cybereyes, etc) otherwise no. If you can't "see" the target then you can't cast at it.

The shorter answer is, if you want to argue physics then your going to come to the conclusion that you'll need to decide how you handle these things in your games.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dunsany
post Feb 2 2009, 09:07 PM
Post #15


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 86
Joined: 7-January 09
Member No.: 16,745



QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll @ Feb 2 2009, 02:53 PM) *
This is an old argument and keep in mind SR (any version) is a *sci-fi fantasy* RPG, it's not intended to be a 100% model of the real world.

The short answer is, you can only cast using technology if you've paid essence for it (cybereyes, etc) otherwise no. If you can't "see" the target then you can't cast at it.


While this is an old argument I am not surprised that the question keeps coming up despite the other threads. The conclusions you can draw from these other threads is not, in fact, what you have stated above. I believe it's a perfectly valid interpretation of those threads and of the rules, but it's not actually the consensus or clear answer.

QUOTE
A spellcaster can target anyone or anything she can see directly with her natural vision. Physical cyber- or bio-enhancements paid for with Essence can be used to spot targets, but any technological visual aids that substitute themselves for the character’s own visual senses—cameras, electronic binoculars, Matrix feeds, etc.—cannot be used.


The previous threads have established that things like echolocation are not visual, or at least that the process "substitutes" the character's own visual senses. They have not established that any technology that aids natural vision (but does not substitute for that vision) are not usable by a mage attempting to target something. So, in short, these threads are sorely lacking in whether or not someone could use things like "low-light" or "thermographic" visual enhancement to target something. While technological they do not substitute for the character's vision. If they are in cybereyes that are paid for with essence they clearly work, but do they work if you are just using glasses with these enhancements? Keep in mind that vision magnification specifically states that there are two types (electronic and optical) and that the optical version works for mage visual targeting.

While the technology needed for these visual enhancements are currently available, it's not clear to me how these enhancements are done in the Shadowrun future. Nor do I really care as I'm not interested in a simulationist game concerning future technological advances. But I would have liked examples of what sort of technology *could* be used in either the paragraph quoted above or within the specific visual enhancements. But alas, not all rules systems can cover every possible question that may arise. I am a little disappointed that neither the errata nor faq have clear examples of what can and cannot be used given how often this particular question seems to come up.

I believe that an interpretation that says none of these work is perfectly valid. My opposing argument is that while the text says "natural vision," the vision magnification modification, as long as it is optical, is explicitly allowed. This leads me to believe that the second sentence is not simply distinguishing between modifications that are paid for with essence that are usable or not. But, that the word "substitute" is meant to aid us in determining what technological means are valid and which are not. And so my conclusion would be that optical (as opposed to electronic) enhancements are valid even if not paid for with essence.

So, as you can see, while the previous discussions are quite long and heated, and while some might be tired of this discussion, there are still questions that could be asked by reasonable people with differences of opinion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 2 2009, 10:00 PM
Post #16


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



Hear, hear. Keep in mind that ultrasound is pretty limited for targeting, though; invisible folks can usually be seen with thermo vision, and if you always use the better of the two for a given situation, thermo + low light is as good as or better than ultrasound in every situation but a) detecting invisible enemies that don't shed heat and b) detecting motion detectors (which you can do with high-frequency hearing anyway).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Feb 3 2009, 12:32 AM
Post #17


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



Invisibility works against thermographic vision as well. As for how exactly it does this, don't ask, it's magic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gawdzilla
post Feb 3 2009, 12:53 AM
Post #18


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 43
Joined: 2-February 09
Member No.: 16,833



QUOTE (Crusher Bob @ Feb 2 2009, 04:32 PM) *
Invisibility works against thermographic vision as well. As for how exactly it does this, don't ask, it's magic.


This makes perfect sense if you consider that thermovision IS just like normal vision at a slightly longer wavelength.
It is called thermographic vision because humans usually experience infrared light as heat; we cannot directly perceive it.
However, it is still a light wave, which is why trolls can see it, and why invisibility works against it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 3 2009, 01:02 AM
Post #19


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



Okay, point. I was confusing it with heat vision.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RedeemerofOgar
post Feb 5 2009, 09:01 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 150
Joined: 5-April 04
Member No.: 6,219



QUOTE (Tyro @ Feb 2 2009, 09:02 PM) *
Okay, point. I was confusing it with heat vision.


Heat vision is what Superman uses to do spot-welding.

[img]http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i171/thedailynow/heat_vision1.jpg[/img]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 5 2009, 09:06 PM
Post #21


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



QUOTE (RedeemerofOgar @ Feb 5 2009, 01:01 PM) *
Heat vision is what Superman uses to do spot-welding.

[img]http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i171/thedailynow/heat_vision1.jpg[/img]

Funny that he uses Celcius in that picture - doesn't the "American Way" include obsolete measurements based on a system its original creators no longer use? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jhaiisiin
post Feb 5 2009, 11:29 PM
Post #22


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,416
Joined: 4-March 06
From: Albuquerque
Member No.: 8,334



Bah! Our wonky oddball measurement system is inferior to your silly, consistent metric system, thereby making ours far more preferable for the mindless masses!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 6 2009, 09:23 PM
Post #23


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



For the record, I live in the US *points to left*. I just think the metric makes more sense!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gawdzilla
post Feb 6 2009, 09:49 PM
Post #24


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 43
Joined: 2-February 09
Member No.: 16,833



QUOTE (Tyro @ Feb 2 2009, 05:02 PM) *
Okay, point. I was confusing it with heat vision.


Actually, that's kinda what I meant... heat vision and thermographic vision are the same thing.
One of the ways to measure how hot something is, is by measuring how much infrared light it emits.
This is, in essence, what "heat vision" does. It "sees" in the IR spectrum, where brightness is correlated with temperature.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tyro
post Feb 6 2009, 09:51 PM
Post #25


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,768
Joined: 31-October 08
From: Redmond (Yes, really)
Member No.: 16,558



Physics never was my strong suit (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sarcastic.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th May 2024 - 03:59 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.