Sneaking vs. Magic, The plight of a ninja Shadowrunner Options

[DireRadiant]

First off, show me where it says this, i am curious.
Though i am not arguing i might have missed something, as i am a person, and people
are full of failure.
Also, i am not arguing that the mage can target the aura with spells...
we are still talking about astral perception vs. stealth, remember?

You are entitled to your interpretation, regardless.
as this is a game, and, the most important rule-
have fun.

I just hope some people are not forgetting this rule.

P. 160 Street Magic, under LOS targeting rules

"Note that full body
armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them
from being targeted."

[Orcus Blackweath...]

I just thought of another example.

Instead of sneaking, lets say I'm shooting someone. Again this is an opposed test. It really does not matter whether my target is aware that I am shooting at him. His awareness affects whether he gets a dodge roll, but I do not get bonus dice if he is unaware, and I do not lose dice if he is. I might get bonus dice for shooting under certain circumstances, such as point blank range. I might lose dice if my target is moving. In either case, the dice modifiers are unaffected by the knowledge or lack thereof of the target. Similarly, if the target is a spirit who is materialized, I do not lose dice for my attempt to shoot him.

[tagz]

P. 160 Street Magic, under LOS targeting rules

"Note that full body
armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them
from being targeted."

To be specific, this doesn't mention auras or forms whatsoever. Just that armor doesn't prevent spellcasting LOS targeting from working.

[DireRadiant]

To be specific, this doesn't mention auras or forms whatsoever. Just that armor doesn't prevent spellcasting LOS targeting from working.

Which you need to do for mana spells.

[tagz]

Which you need to do for mana spells.

Not arguing that.

Just saying that a rule lawyer can point out that it doesn't say that auras are visible through it, only that it doesn't prevent LOS casting. I don't necessarily agree with it, but the argument could be made that it blocks an aura.

You cannot spell target an aura anyhow. You spell target an astral form while on the astral. I've always used the idea that an astral form basicly mirrors the real one, clothes and all. Mostly so I don't have games with the astral being one giant nudest colony. So in my games the clothing is just as much a part of their form as they are. Your game may differ.

I agree with the idea that an aura/form should be visible via LOS except when covered in something INTENDED to cover it, like a GM created magic compound or whatnot. I think that's what the RAI is of what you quoted. Just pointing out the limitations given it's choice of vocabulary.

[DireRadiant]

Context helps. That statement is within the part of the rules explaining targeting, which in turn is in the context of mana and physical spells.

If you require that context and all items are explicitly stated in each single rule statement you are going to end up with a rather large document.

[Falconer]

Incorrect tagz...

If the mage is PERCEIVING (not projecting). He's active on the physical plane.

In order to target a spell using astral perception, he must be able to see his target's aura. The logical conclusion, is if even the most bulky and concealing armor like MOPP gear will not conceal the aura from being seen and targetted. (though unanswered in this is now I'm curious if it would stop normal LOS casting while not perceiving).

If he was projecting, he wouldn't be able to for one reason for sure. Spells cannot cross the astral/physical boundary. I don't think it stops him from targetting the mundane w/ the mana spell... only it has no effect. You can target a masking magician while he's percieving, even though you can only see his aura and not his astral form.

Here's a practical implication of this... you have a ghoul/vamp other awakened critter. It's masking you know he's in the crowd but you don't know where. As a mage you can cast an astral plane mana-ball targetting all the auras in it. Most people won't notice anything, however since the ghoul is dual-natured and active on the astral (though hidden)... he would be the only one to take damage from it. (or another astrally percieving mage in the crowd if you're unlucky).

[tagz]

I'm not saying this is wrong, I'm saying it's got room for interpretation.

You cannot target an aura on the astral. You target an astral form on the astral.

p183 SR4A
...
A magician in the physical world may only cast spells on targets that are there in the physical world. Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted).
...

I'm not discussing about forms. I'm talking about seeing auras through armor. Maybe you've been saying auras when you meant forms. If you've been confusing those two, it might be why you're not seeing my point.

I've been saying, there is room in the interpretation for the rule:
P. 160 Street Magic, under LOS targeting rules

"Note that full body
armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them
from being targeted."

By context, as Dire pointed out, we can assume this includes both physical, astral, and metaplanar spellcasting. As we can target a FORM in the astral we can assume that all forms are included in this rule, and by inference we can say you can see an astral FORM despite the heaviest of armor.

What we can't assume is auras. Since you cannot target by an aura this rule doesn't have anything to do with them as this is a targeting rule, not a vision rule. It's a bigger leap. Not necessarily the wrong leap, but still, room for interpretation.

Also consider the wording in p112 under Auras
...
While clothes and other non-living objects are often outshone by the brightness of the wearer's armor,
...

It uses the word "often" instead of "always". This means that there are times that the aura might NOT be brighter then the shadows of the clothing and also that the shadows of the clothing might be as bright as the aura itself.


Personally, I agree for the most part that armor shouldn't block auras, I'd only allow such a thing in a fully enclosed suit with armor 16 or higher. I don't think it would make much difference anyhow. First off, you can't spell target an aura, so no change there. Second, I don't see anywhere in the text it mentioning that aura's are EASIER to see then a shadow, just that an aura is CLEARER, as in you can see the details. I see contrast between auras and shadows helping the test, but nothing saying the spirit gets more dice for looking for an aura or less for seeing a shadow. A moving shadow shouldn't be any harder to see then a moving aura, just lacking detail but retaining the humanoid shape. I'd think that would be suspicious to a spirit since humanoid's tend to have auras.

I don't see letting heavy armor block an aura as having any real tangible benefits other then hurting an assessing test to learn info about a target. That's not much. And I'd totally allow a projecting mage to stick his head into the helm and see the aura that way, so even that isn't much if you go by that reasoning.

[forgarn]

Here I would have to disagree. You quoted ""Note that full body armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them from being targeted." I would have to say that if the armor blocked the aura, then it is concealing the person.

Also on seeing auras vs. shadows,

Living things that are not active on the astral plane still cast a reflection of themselves there, called an aura. Any non-living objects appear as faded semblances of their physical selves, gray and lifeless, while the auras of living things are vibrant and colorful.

So I would have to conclude that since shadows are gray and auras are vibrant and colorful, then they would be easier to see than shadows.

[tagz]

But you're hiding something that can't be targeted anyhow, so this need not apply. It SHOULD by all logic, but we're making an assumption based on nothing more then ANOTHER assumption that anytime you could see a form for you would HAVE to see the aura for if it left the astral plane. I've never encountered anything that said this is a necessity, just the norm.

As for the second part, in terms of sneaking, there is no dicepool difference inherent with observing a shadow and an aura. That was what I was getting at. A GM may decide different, but by RAW there's nothing saying that shadows are hard to see.

BTW, it's fun being Devil's Advocate n_n

* several edits for atrocious spelling

[Falconer]

I'll have to re-read some of that...

Though tagz... I'd submit that you may be reading too much into that one line.


While clothes and other non-living items are often outshone by the ... aura.

I can think of examples where a non-living item would outshine. It is somehow magical. A high force magical item could very well outshine a living entity (especially if it's an artifact). By definition, non-living items don't 'shine/glow' on the astral at all unless they're somehow magical or living. IE: someone wearing some wierd living plant outfit, or who has had their clothes possessed by a spirit.

All it takes is to turn an always into an often (or nearly always)... is to think of a single exception like the above.

Maybe if someone is in overflow on death's door... their aura is very weak and hard to make out.

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

Here I would have to disagree. You quoted ""Note that full body armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them from being targeted." I would have to say that if the armor blocked the aura, then it is concealing the person.

Also on seeing auras vs. shadows, So I would have to conclude that since shadows are gray and auras are vibrant and colorful, then they would be easier to see than shadows.

Yeah, but the whole point of discussion is:

A- Objects provide cover on both physical and astral planes.
B- Full armor does not provide total cover to you aura.
C- Which begs the question, how far does you have to be from an object so you aura won't "overlap" it?

Because if even a thin glass can block astral beings from seeing you, how far do you have to be from it for this to happen?

Basically if I can make myself unseen hinding inside of a cardboard box, why cant I be unseen using a full body armor or suit?

[tagz]

Though tagz... I'd submit that you may be reading too much into that one line.

I know. I've been saying I'm doing that. n_n

I find it fun to exercise creative rule interpretation. I'm having a ball discussing this with you.

[tagz]

B- Full armor does not provide total cover to you aura.

Nope, we know it doesn't prevent LOS spellcasting and you can't LOS spellcast at an aura. So, doesn't mean it can't hide an aura since it's not included. n_n

You can use an aura to "spot" a location for an area spell, etc, but you can't target via an aura.

[Brazilian_Shinob...]

Nope, we know it doesn't prevent LOS spellcasting and you can't LOS spellcast at an aura. So, doesn't mean it can't hide an aura since it's not included. n_n

You can use an aura to "spot" a location for an area spell, etc, but you can't target via an aura.

So? Does it mean that full body suits and armors hide/conceal someone's aura?

[tagz]

Doesn't mean it does, doesn't mean it doesn't. The ruling on this is likely going to come down to a GM judgment call. n_n

[CanadianWolverin...]

If I was the GM, I would rule unless your non-living material completely provides cover to all living material, the aura can be spotted and also mentioned would be something on the astral sticking its perception through the non-living material/shadow to see if there is anything living inside. Just saying, if LoS is what you are after, complete cover should prevent it:

So, ghillie suit with mask? Biohazard/radiation suit? Full body armor? Full body camoflage suit? Full body Diving suit with full respirator mask?

In other words, not normal clothing in that normal clothing doesn't go for a full seal, correct?

I would say how well your stuff covers you is a Disguise test. Good enough perception recognizes the shadow shape or where you missed a bit of skin.

---

But in regards to Infiltration, I had a thought when I remembered someone mentioned before auras get all their fluctuating colors from the meta-humans' moods and thoughts, correct? Would anyone allow, that someone's aura might be different when they are trying to be all stealthy than when they are not?

I would let someone of a high enough skill and talent if their roll was good enough to describe it like they try to keep their aura shining not quite so bright even if they do have a break in their cover, like controlling their heart beat, breathing and keeping their thoughts focused on the task at hand in a particularly steady mood, thus harder to perceive from among the shadows (I say among because if they have 100% cover, the observer doesn't even have a chance to see it because no LoS) for the astral observer.

---

I am still getting the sense, part of the confusion behind this is the confusion between the separation and overlap of Infiltration and Disguise.

So I am thinking, if I ever make a ninja, burglar, or sniper, I better make sure they are good at Infiltration and Disguise, as they seem to be synergistic for a game of Hide & Seek. Hmm, better throw Perception in there too, then some athletic stuff insertion stuff and lock bypass stuff ... then some knowledge of enviroments, structural or natural... *starts pondering the SR various versions of SR assassin again...*

[Falconer]

Just me, but I'd say your astral aura extends probably 6"-12" from your body... Generally I'd say anything non-bulky which doesn't impede you for wearing it won't cover it up.

So if that cardboard box is a refrigator box, sure... otherwise... not really.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Just put a cardbox in a cardbox with cardbox spacers.