How do you 'clean' a vehicle?, RFID chips are a massive pain in the carjacker's ass. Options

[Yerameyahu]

Again, 'metahuman' and 'non-metahuman' just seem to contradict the examples given in the books (Slay Elf, Demolish Metal). (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I agree that the rules are as vague as possible on this. Presumably, the GM can alow anything. *shrug*

Regardless, I don't see how that would let you target RFIDs and not the materials directly surrounding them, with or without Detect RFIDs (which I believe Janessa mentioned?).

Aside: Janessa, is there anything else you/your chars passionately hate (besides Infected and RFIDs)? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[bibliophile20]

I'm looking at the Detect RFID Tags and Demolish RFID Tags and wondering why I haven't thought of them before. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) However, given the nature of RFID tags as somewhere between electronic equipment and computers, I will say that a high object resistance is a given for the damn things, minimum of 4-5, possibly 6--and for things like security tags and stealth tags, I can totally see corps using that "redundant processing" option to increase the OR, especially if somebody went to the effort to publish those spells on the Matrix...

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

No, silly, it's an Astronomical Object, so it gets 'Astronomical Object Resistance'. Duh.

Heh... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[The Jopp]

I will say that a high object resistance is a given for the damn things, minimum of 4-5, possibly 6

I would definitely rate them as highly processed electronics and rate them depending on cost.

RFID: 4+
Stealth Tag: 5+
Security Tag: 6+

I would say that the force of the spell should NOT limit net hits since we roll against OR it is exceptional punishment already but I would say that Force gives us the maximum amount of tags that can be found in one casting.

So, casting a F6 detect RFID ona car and getting X3 successes gives you 3 tags.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Would this spell require LOS to the chip in question or would it be enought to see the object it is hidden inside? I'd imagine all it would take is to put a restriction to a powerball spell.

I did that to a Pixies powerball with the restriction "Non-Living". She blasted the clothes and equipment away from people but didnt harm them.

I wouldnt be surprised if there was a modification to detect enemies into detect RFID spell as well.

You could just use a version of the Demolish (RFID) as an Indirect Spell; Moving it from Direct to Indirect. Or even a Restricted Version of Blast (Only RFID's). Easy Peasy.

And yes, I have seen a Character with A "Detect RFID" Spell. You don't need to modify a Detect Enemies Spell, just use the Detect [Object] Spell.

[kzt]

The bit about object resistance reminds me. You are talking about Aztechnology. The obvious way for an organization full of ritual mages to find a vehicle is via ritual magic. Assume that they do something like take a wheel stud or bolt off the tractor and appropriately store it for later use.

How big a magical ward do they have the truck in?

[Lantzer]

I'd imagine that the RFID chips themselves are an integral part of any object which might house them, so you only need to draw LOS to that.

I'd disagree. If a direct combat spell is distinguishing the tag from its housing for applying damage, it should also distinguish for targeting. If the spell targets the item as a whole, then it has to affect the item as a whole. It's the same way you don't shoot out the tires of a car with a powerbolt by aiming at the car. The spell attacks the whole car (tires, frame, armor, engine, leather bucket seats, cupholder) as an entity. And why someone's cyberware is considered part of them for shapechange.

For the tires example, you could make an AoE Demolish (Tires) spell, that would attack tires only, but it would only affect the tires you have LOS to - so the trunk spare will probably be fine, as might one on the other side of the car.

So a Demolish (RFID) would probably be pointless, since the little buggers are never in LOS.

[Lantzer]

You could just use a version of the Demolish (RFID) as an Indirect Spell; Moving it from Direct to Indirect. Or even a Restricted Version of Blast (Only RFID's). Easy Peasy.

And yes, I have seen a Character with A "Detect RFID" Spell. You don't need to modify a Detect Enemies Spell, just use the Detect [Object] Spell.

Wouldn't an indirect version have to blow through the housing to get the RFID? Indirect spells need line of effect, not line of sight. That's why paper walls interfere with powerballs and glass walls interfere with fireballs, but not vice versa.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Wouldn't an indirect version have to blow through the housing to get the RFID? Indirect spells need line of effect, not line of sight. That's why paper walls interfere with powerballs and glass walls interfere with fireballs, but not vice versa.

I would say No, just like you cannot actually see damage on the iside of a person, but a Heal Spell will still Heal that damage. You are targeting the "Damaged areas" of the individual, just as you would be targeting the RFID's of the Object. Or possibly an even better explanation is how you can target an Eye for a Special Effect other than Damage . In this case you are targeting a General piece of Equipment (The Car) and looking for a Special Effect (Destroying the RFID's).

Obviously, there is an ongoing debate about this.

[Yerameyahu]

Heal doesn't seem to be a good example. Different category, different abstract effect. You don't get to just define RFIDs as 'damaged areas'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[CanRay]

The bit about object resistance reminds me. You are talking about Aztechnology. The obvious way for an organization full of ritual mages to find a vehicle is via ritual magic. Assume that they do something like take a wheel stud or bolt off the tractor and appropriately store it for later use.

I thought they were talking about Stuffer Shack, a subsidiary of Aztechnology.

Also, how long until that "Ritual Sample" of the truck no longer considers itself a part of that truck? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[JanessaVR]

Aside: Janessa, is there anything else you/your chars passionately hate (besides Infected and RFIDs)? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Yes - Lofwyr, Sticks, and Clockwork. Would love to kill all 3 of them, but probably only have a chance on 2 out of 3. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Heal doesn't seem to be a good example. Different category, different abstract effect. You don't get to just define RFIDs as 'damaged areas'. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Maybe not the best example, I can agree. But the comparison holds up I think. I don't actually see an issue with an Indirect Blast effect limited to RFID's. But then again, I never really had an issue with the Demolish (RFID) Spell either. It is very very niche spell, and you will hardly ever see anyone take it; at least in my experience. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Yerameyahu]

It's a question of magical theory, not gameplay. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I'm fine either way (magic is arbitrary), I'm just asking which is 'true'.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

It's a question of magical theory, not gameplay. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

I'm fine either way (magic is arbitrary), I'm just asking which is 'true'.

Well, for Game Truth, I think the Restricted Blast works better (Fewer Questions I think), where the Demolish (RFID) is more questionable. As you say, though, either "Works." (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[ShadowDragon8685]

The bit about object resistance reminds me. You are talking about Aztechnology. The obvious way for an organization full of ritual mages to find a vehicle is via ritual magic. Assume that they do something like take a wheel stud or bolt off the tractor and appropriately store it for later use.

How big a magical ward do they have the truck in?

Assuming they even thought about that - and honestly, I'd say that you'd have to have a whole vehicle together for at least half a year before you can take a part off for a material link, otherwise it's just one of a billion identical interchangeable nuts - then they're not going to be using Ritual Magic to track down a stolen Stuffer Shack big rig. A main battle tank, maybe, but not a big rig.

Also, how long until that "Ritual Sample" of the truck no longer considers itself a part of that truck? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Probably not long. It is, after all, a nameless, faceless, utterly unspectacular, unremarkable, non-unique piece of interchangeable equipment. Now, it might work if you had an artisan hand-carve a hood ornament for the truck, let it sit on the truck in a warehouse for six months and then detach the ornament, kind of like a sailing ship's figurehead, but at that point it's "how long until the truck no longer considers itself that same truck."

So make two identical, unique handcrafted figureheads for the truck, let 'em sink in for a while, then snap off one as a ritual link.


That's waaaay the hell too much trouble to go to for anything costing under a million (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif)

I'd disagree. If a direct combat spell is distinguishing the tag from its housing for applying damage, it should also distinguish for targeting. If the spell targets the item as a whole, then it has to affect the item as a whole. It's the same way you don't shoot out the tires of a car with a powerbolt by aiming at the car. The spell attacks the whole car (tires, frame, armor, engine, leather bucket seats, cupholder) as an entity. And why someone's cyberware is considered part of them for shapechange.

For the tires example, you could make an AoE Demolish (Tires) spell, that would attack tires only, but it would only affect the tires you have LOS to - so the trunk spare will probably be fine, as might one on the other side of the car.

So a Demolish (RFID) would probably be pointless, since the little buggers are never in LOS.

And the difference is that Demolish (Tires) is something you can use to mobility-kill a vehicle in the middle of a fight, and Demolish (RFID Chip) is pretty much strictly a utility spell so wizkids without the major technological ability to do this kind of shit can secure themselves and their property from damnable annoying RFIDs in every goddamn thing.

And I'd let Demolish (Cupholder) work simply because it's a hilarious way to dump piping-hot steaming Stuffer Shack soycaf in some asshole road-hog's lap. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Yerameyahu]

It's not really a SR4 principle, but 'how funny is it' is theoretically as valid a magical principle as anything else. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Pretty impossible to operationalize, though; depends too much on specific context!

[Udoshi]

I thought they were talking about Stuffer Shack, a subsidiary of Aztechnology.

Also, how long until that "Ritual Sample" of the truck no longer considers itself a part of that truck? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Ritual magic is a good example, though. Per the core book, ritual magic can be cast on ANY target and doesn't require line of sight. Specifically so.

Driving a car into your magical lodge (or use a spotter spirit), and then casting demolish RFID should work.

[kzt]

Ritual magic is a good example, though. Per the core book, ritual magic can be cast on ANY target and doesn't require line of sight. Specifically so.

Driving a car into your magical lodge (or use a spotter spirit), and then casting demolish RFID should work.

Yup. That should work.

[Lantzer]

Ritual magic is a good example, though. Per the core book, ritual magic can be cast on ANY target and doesn't require line of sight. Specifically so.

Driving a car into your magical lodge (or use a spotter spirit), and then casting demolish RFID should work.

This might actually work, if you can pull it off. Be a pain in the butt, but possibly doable.

Hmm. wait. Ritual magic still needs a spotter with LOS, doesn't it? You still run into the problem of needing LOS to the chips. The spells don't change, the ritual just makes your LOS come from the spotter rather than your group.

Right? I'll have to look this up. I'm uncertain. It's so seldom used in my games, since there is almost never enough mages of similiar traditions to make it possible.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

This might actually work, if you can pull it off. Be a pain in the butt, but possibly doable.

Hmm. wait. Ritual magic still needs a spotter with LOS, doesn't it? You still run into the problem of needing LOS to the chips. The spells don't change, the ritual just makes your LOS come from the spotter rather than your group.

Right? I'll have to look this up. I'm uncertain. It's so seldom used in my games, since there is almost never enough mages of similiar traditions to make it possible.

Depends...
You could always use a Material Link to the Car Itself to get around the spotter. But how long those actually last is very fluid. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
I don't see the Demolish [RFID] spell as a real issue, personally, but others might. Hell, Catalog will tell you it is there. DOn't even need a special spell like Detect [RFID]. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Udoshi]

I don't think what kind of link you use really matters if you have physical possession of the car and are sitting next to it as you cast. Its not like you're trying to nuke it from halfway around the world.

[Yerameyahu]

The link/spotter discussion (ritual magic to find the truck) is unrelated to the RFID discussion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Indeed... The issue is whether you can use a Direct Spell (Deomolish RFID) to remove the RFID's since you cannot actually see them throughout the frame of the car, or whether you would need an Indirect Spell (An RFID Limited Blast, perhaps) to Remove them, since Indirect does not need LOS. Unfortunately, you get into other areas with the Indirect, like how would that interact with a sealed compartment that contained the RFID?

My Simple answer is this. Either will work, because if the player spent the 5 Karma to learn such a spell, it should have some utility. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Mundanely, the chop shop should be able to take care of it with minimal issue, becuase they are a Chop Shop. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

The question becomes: How difficult is it for the Non-Chop Shop, or the PC caster, to remove RFID's that are not wipeable (Security Tags, and possibly Stealth Tags)? In my opinion, It should not take all that much effort. Tag Eraser, Vehicle Tag Eraser, or Spell should all work equally well in this regard. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Udoshi]

I'm fairly sure a direct spell would handle it just fine. Direct spells are spelled out as damaging things from within, and bypassing armor because of it.

I know there are specific rules text that don't allow full body armor to block direct combat spells, even if you can't see the person.
Its the same arguement with the car.

'you can't stunbolt me, my armor is in the way and you can't see me!'
'you can't stunbolt my rfid, my armor is in the way, you can't see it!'
same arguement. the answer is it works anyway.

Or even 'you can't damage my car because the window is up!'