Attacking Whilst Invisible, How it works and how it should work. Options

[Neurosis]

This is an offshoot of the "Concealment Power in Combat Thread" below.

The assumption is that the invisibility spell provides Blind Fire penalties in combat or at least the same penalties it provides (based on hits) to Perception tests.

The question is:

If a character who is invisible opens fire with a weapon, attacks in melee, or does something else blatantly unsubtle, is the invisibility effect canceled?

I am aware that at the core of this discussion is what is, for me, a kind of foggy gray area between RAW, RAI, and House Rules. When I am GMing, I generally make it so that--like in D&D, a game system I am not even fond of--attacking while 'Cloaked' immediately 'Uncloaks' you. I know that this may technically be a House Rule. But my reason for enforcing this while GMing has to do with the fact that I think that, somewhere, there is evidence that supports this as the intention of the rules, even if I can't find them. Without this or something like it, the problem I feel is that Invisibility is disproportionately good. The fact that it lets you semi-reliably avoid detection is very powerful as-is. When you also have it impose a -6 PENALTY to all incoming attacks it becomes an all-around-better spell than things like Combat Sense because it also makes it so that you are incredibly difficult to hit.

So, I ask of you, GMs: at what level, if any, do you consider the PCs actions to be unsubtle enough that invisibility either goes away or is a wash? Please try to answer the question on an RAW level, an RAI level, and a how you you actually play level.

Side-Note: I read in an FAQ somewhere that Thermographic and other types of vision don't allow you to see Invisible characters. What about Astral Perception?

Even more tangenitally: Is there anything that anyone can do to conceal themselves on the astral plane i.e. while projecting? Does Invisibility, Concealment, or stealth work there at all?

[deek]

As long as the spell is up, they get the benefits of invisibility. BUT, each attack, I'd give everyone that can see or perceive the invisible dude's actions another chance to see through the spell (which is what, just another perception test?).

[Yerameyahu]

Invisibility definitely stays up regardless. Concealment is a whole different thing. Astral Perception certainly works on Invisibility. Thermo doesn't, because it's a 'normal visual sense', along with Low-Light (incidentally, I don't think this is in the FAQ; it's right there in the spell).

Concealment works on astral for dual-natured critters using the power. So, no, not while projecting, and you have to be a critter that has the power.

You should have radar, ultrasound, etc. if you're concerned about regularly defeating invisible enemies.

[Neurosis]

Could you go into more detail about how Radar and Ultrasound interact with Invisibility and the dice pool penalties for targeting invisible characters? Same goes with Astral Perception.

[Yerameyahu]

AFAIK, the book specifically says attacking invisible target uses the -6 Blind Fire penalty. Astral Perception is 100% as normal (typically, that means -2 for shooting a gun while Astral Perceiving). Radar and Ultrasound (again, AFAIK, and in SR4) work as normal; in SR3, essence-paid ultrasound actually lost to invisibility. In SR4, the invisibility spell specifically says it negates 'normal visual spectrum senses', and lists: normal vision, thermo, low-light.

[Neurosis]

Getting into the subjective here, but what if you're, say, shooting a gun where an astrally perceiving mage is pointing...what kind of penalties does that impose?

[Yerameyahu]

Oh, jeez. Well, there are no rules for manually-directed ranged combat (however, there *is* Info-Guided, see Arsenal p162). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) What you should do (ideally) is Suppressive Fire in that direction. If that's not an option, then that's the definition of Blind Fire. After all, if you don't even have a pretty good idea of the direction, you're at way more than a -6. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Suppressive Fire in general goes on the list of anti-Invisibility, along with ultrasound and radar (UWB, of course). Technically, motion sensors work also, but their capabilities are kinda wonky. AFAIK, they're more for triggering alarms.

[SleepIncarnate]

Doesn't improved invisibility beat just about everything, even radar and ultrasound? I know regular invisibility only works on fleshie eyes (so even looking through a camera lets you see the mage, probably cybereyes too), but improved beats all the types of sensors as well, right?

[Yerameyahu]

It's still only 'normal visual spectrum' stuff, regardless. Improved works against visual/low-light/thermo cameras. Yeah, in 2070, non-Improved Invisibility has limited use; everyone has super-goggles.

This is SR4, so things worked differently in other editions. IIRC, Invisibility was more like a 'I don't exist to you' field in the past.

[Glyph]

Invisibility never worked like an "I don't see you" field, although it was very often house-ruled that way. Some people think it does more than it does, just because it is a mind-affecting illusion. It still only affects a single sense, and only in the visible light spectrum (normal, thermo), not the full electromagnetic spectrum (x-rays, ultrasound, radar).

Remember that the invisibility itself is resisted - you are only invisible if you have enough net successes. Remember the movie Erik the Viking, where the guy had the invisibility thingie that only worked on "some people"? Invisibility in Shadowrun is kind of like that. You never know when you're going to run into someone who beats the threshold of the spell's successes.

Once you have gotten that one good sneak attack (although you still need to make a stealth roll, since they could possibly hear you, smell you, etc.), enemies can generally target the invisible being at that -6 penalty, possibly mitigated if the enemy's other senses are heightened, and negated altogether for astral perception, ultrasound, or radar.

It still remains one of the best spells, though, and extremely useful both offensively and defensively. But although it is very useful, remember that it has been around for decades, so most security should have some countermeasures in place for it.

[Brainpiercing7.6...]

Invis has gotten more balanced in SR4, because you need to cast it at a high force to really be invisible to everything. You need 6 hits to be invisible to drones (with the 20A update to OR), for instance, already quite hard to even roll. That and the wider availability of other sensors makes it less powerful than before. In SR3 I used to roll Force 1-3 invis with a gazillion dice, and NOONE could have enough willpower to resist that.

And in astral you stick out like a sore thumb anyway, so you probably won't be able to use it to infiltrate a well-secured compound with some astral security. I find invis is actually stronger as a pure combat spell by now - you kill them while they can't see you, but at that point subtlety is lost anyway.

Naturally once a few initiations come rolling your way this all might change.

Indirect fire is actually a good way of dealing with invisible people: The spotter who scans the astral makes a ranged attack test (but with what skill it somehow doesn't say) to direct indirect fire, and the actual shooter then shoots with only a single remaining penalty, I think only -4 for indirect fire. That and gas grenades (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) .

[Medicineman]

As long as the spell is up, they get the benefits of invisibility. BUT, each attack, I'd give everyone that can see or perceive the invisible dude's actions another chance to see through the spell (which is what, just another perception test?).

INT (not WIL 'cause its an Illusion) Test versus Netto Hits of Spell

Getting into the subjective here, but what if you're, say, shooting a gun where an astrally perceiving mage is pointing...what kind of penalties does that impose?

ImO -4 'cause its Indirect Fire ( but better than -6 Blind Fire)

Doesn't improved invisibility beat just about everything, even radar and ultrasound?

No it fools only the Camera Lense (Visual Sensors) but the OR is 3 or 5 (3/5 Hits to become Invisible to Cameras IIRC)
Invisibilty doesn't help vs Radar or Ultrasound


with some Rulesdances
Medicineman

[Yerameyahu]

AFAIK, 'pointing' does not count as Info-Guided Indirect Fire. You have to use a smartgun or something (which that mage could easily have, of course). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Semerkhet]

It's still only 'normal visual spectrum' stuff, regardless. Improved works against visual/low-light/thermo cameras. Yeah, in 2070, non-Improved Invisibility has limited use; everyone has super-goggles.

This is SR4, so things worked differently in other editions. IIRC, Invisibility was more like a 'I don't exist to you' field in the past.

There was quite a discussion on this topic last year some time. I remember arguing at the time that "normal visual spectrum" was hopelessly subjective. I won't repeat the arguments but I found it silly to include the near-IR spectrum but exclude the microwave part of the spectrum, i.e. radar. It's all electro-magnetic waves of pretty similar energy levels; either the spell is manipulating photons or it isn't. Ultrasound and low-light aren't different 'visual spectrums' since one is sound waves and the other simply indicates a greater light-gathering ability of the eye (or sensor).

Basically, my conclusion was that even if you don't accept that the vanilla spell covers radar, you could certainly design an Improved Invisibility spell that *did* cover the wavelengths used by radar. If you want it to cover sound as well you up the drain for multiple senses.

All of this still leaves you vulnerable to astral detection, which is just one of the several reasons Concealment is the superior option.

[Yerameyahu]

I agree, it's a funny rule. But, we do know basically what it means. Magic is magic, and it follows formulaic and arbitrarily crazy rules. The rule for this spell is 'visible light, IR, low-light' (stupid to even mention low-light, I agree).

If you made an anti-radar spell, it would be a whole different spell, yes. Invisibility is Single-Sense. Honestly, it shouldn't even work on thermo, but I assume that it does because thermo is 'the normal visual sense' for parts of metahumanity.

[deek]

Does "astral" count as a sense? If so, couldn't your single sense be invisibility to astral perception? I think that would be a valid interpretation and pretty nice against astral baddies. Wouldn't affect dual natured, cause they'd still see you in the physical, but it would be kind of cool, especially if you opt for multi-sense.

For me, I've always interpreted single-sense as, well, a single sense. So any sort of "perception" coming from your eyes, would be affected by Invisibility (Sight).

[Yerameyahu]

Astral is a special exception, basically. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It's not really a 'sight' anyway, because it's the crazy 'astral sense unlike any other sense'.

As for 'sight' being one sense, it basically is: vision/thermo/low-light. Ultrasound, radar, etc. are not 'sight', and they're not coming out of your eyes. Either you're looking at a screen (crappy, lo-tech method) or they're piped straight into your brain (trodes, jack, etc.); another option is Image Link, but that's closer to option 2. Even if they're implanted (Essence-paid, but much more likely Capacity-paid), they're still not eyeware.

[Semerkhet]

Astral is a special exception, basically. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It's not really a 'sight' anyway, because it's the crazy 'astral sense unlike any other sense'.

I'd be more on-board with this explanation if Concealment didn't work on astral perception. Then again, low-force Concealment isn't exactly invisibility while at high force it is effectively invisibility. I think I'd let the mage in my group design an Astral Invisibility spell; but why should he when he's got spirits with Concealment?

The rules for both Invisibility and Concealment are among the more ambiguous that I know of; or at least the most prominent ambiguous rules because they cover abilities that are so incredibly useful to SR characters.

[Yerameyahu]

I agree: Concealment shouldn't work on Astral, or (perhaps) as Self-Only. But yes, Concealment isn't an illusion, it's a vague 'you don't notice me' field. It is indeed very messy.

That wasn't even an explanation. I was just stating that AFAIK astral *is* a (totally arbitrary) special exception that you can't choose as your Singe-Sense (or one of your Multi-Senses). Now, I don't have too much problem with it being arbitrary, because it *is* unlike all other senses (except Detection spells, perhaps). It's magic. You can't even record Astral Perception with simsense. Presumably, it's some kind of 'higher' sense that known magic can't directly touch.

[pbangarth]

Even if Invisibility did work in the astral, or you created an astral version of Invisibility, the spell caster may be 'out of sight', but the aura of the spell itself would still be perceivable. Now, if you had Extended Masking, that would help. If Invisibility worked on the astral. Which it doesn't.

[TheScrivener]

I wouldn't say it's unrealistic for an Invisibility spell to eliminate thermo/near-IR/visible/ultraviolet light, say 300 terahertz to 10 Petahertz, just to throw out an example, but not to block much, much lower frequency gigahertz-to-terahertz range frequencies that radar and cyberware scanners use. After all, if it magically made all electromagnetic frequencies not work you'd be invisible to MAD, really strange things would happen with magnets, and you'd do weird effects to electronics on your person.

Then again, it is magic, and applying logic is a fool's game. Excluding ultrasound is definitely the way to go, though. Light =/= sound.

[Yerameyahu]

I think that's an important point: magic is fundamentally arbitrary in some ways. If your spell is 'anti-sight', then it's not anti-radar. *shrug* In the end, it depends on the devs' decision, and then on your table's rulings. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) If you want more 'physics-ical' magic, you can do that.

[TheScrivener]

My fallback for almost all invisibility-in-combat stuff in RPGs has got to be its treatment in Ghost in the Shell. If you're properly prepared you can catch it, account for it, but it's always going to have some use. In that universe pretty much everyone made use of some level of active camouflage, but through pressure plates, better optic sensors, or just fouling it up through dropping broken glass everywhere (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) its surprise advantage could be nullified. Whether it's chameleon suits or Concealability powers, my usual plan is to apply an appropriate penalty (-2 to -4) once surprise is lost, and eliminate the penalty completely if ultrasound is used or someone Super Squirts the area with quick-drying paint.

[Yerameyahu]

I wonder if the paint actually works against the spell. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I heard once that the fluff is personal items are attuned to you, so they go with the spell, but honestly… you'd think anything you're 'wearing', and small portable gear (guns), would also be invisible. On there other hand, there's plenty of precedent for floating carried objects, and the old 'spray a liquid' trick.

There is the 'Active Looking' Perception bonus to be freely applied, and some of the preparations you mention could certainly help. The important thing is to let players get an advantage when they (a) work for it/invest in it, and (b) it's dramatic and cool. So, invulnerability every combat is not dramatic or cool, but a player's spell/expensive Ruthenium shouldn't be negated all the time either. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[TheScrivener]

Absolutely. Invisibility or active camo is great for my players to have - as long as they don't use it as a crutch, or an excuse to get sloppy. As soon as they start waving their hands around in front of security guards' faces, the GloWand goes off or they step on the white tiles, and hsssssss.... Fire retardant foam has so many uses to a security spider, after all...