Ally Spirit's and Damage Options

[Bearclaw]

So how wide is the cone of sight? How many guys can you hit with a stunball? Does your field of vision really spread 12 meters wide from 6 meters away? It seems like the whole idea get's needlessly complicated if you do it that way. Doing it your way, you will have to determine an arc, then measure that arc.

Right now, I can look at the guys across the lab from me, about 15 meters. THere's 2 of them, about 4 meters apart. Although they are in my line of sight, I can't really look at both at the same time. If I focus enough to tell what color shirt one is wearing, I can't really see the other at all. This is anecdotal rather than empirical, but I think you'll find the same if you repeat my experiment.

I really hate the whole idea.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

So how wide is the cone of sight? How many guys can you hit with a stunball? Does your field of vision really spread 12 meters wide from 6 meters away? It seems like the whole idea get's needlessly complicated if you do it that way. Doing it your way, you will have to determine an arc, then measure that arc.

Right now, I can look at the guys across the lab from me, about 15 meters. THere's 2 of them, about 4 meters apart. Although they are in my line of sight, I can't really look at both at the same time. If I focus enough to tell what color shirt one is wearing, I can't really see the other at all. This is anecdotal rather than empirical, but I think you'll find the same if you repeat my experiment.

I really hate the whole idea.

Interesting...
I LIKE the idea, because it keeps magicians from having even more overpowered [Brazilian] shennanigans. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Yerameyahu]

I'm not saying it's good, I'm just telling you what the rules are as I know them. You have to actually *see* the target: nothing behind you, behind your outstretched hand, invisible, etc.

In most cases, you don't have to worry about the complications you suggest.

[Bearclaw]

The whole thing sounds like Kids In The Hall play Shadowrun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9ucJAV3rVU

[phlapjack77]

Right now, I can look at the guys across the lab from me, about 15 meters. THere's 2 of them, about 4 meters apart. Although they are in my line of sight, I can't really look at both at the same time. If I focus enough to tell what color shirt one is wearing, I can't really see the other at all. This is anecdotal rather than empirical, but I think you'll find the same if you repeat my experiment.

It seems you're needlessly complicating this, though. You don't have to be able to tell what color shirt someone is wearing to target them with a spell. I'll agree that at certain edge cases, these ideas get kind of fuzzy ("what if you can only see someone's shoe tip?"), but in general, the idea of direct spells is not about details, it's about targeting the aura of the person, which doesn't need to know the color of their shirt. And since the idea of an "aura" is so magical and un-scientific-y, you don't have to try to apply real-world science to it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) That's why there's also the idea that the aura being targeted extends a few cm past clothing, so you can still target a person wearing a full-body suit and so on.

[Brazilian] shennanigans. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

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

[Dakka Dakka]

I'll agree that at certain edge cases, these ideas get kind of fuzzy ("what if you can only see someone's shoe tip?")

It's not really an edge case. The rules are quite clear. The target gets the defense modifier Target in Good Cover.

[Midas]

Then hackers had best not be allowed to use the edit software to remove or modify images from security cameras in real time, as its basically the same technology, only the glasses would be easier, as you don't need to replace the obscured image of your allies with anything.

Certainly not in a combat situation, no. People move unpredictably and you couldn't airbrush them out fast enough. I always figure the hacking the security cameras thing involves the tried and trusted vidoe loop of an empty corridor, anyway.

[phlapjack77]

It's not really an edge case. The rules are quite clear. The target gets the defense modifier Target in Good Cover.

Maybe not the best example, but the quickest one off the top of my head (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Although if it's a direct spell, there's no defense modifier I believe? Unless the GM has the mage make a Perception test before being able to target the shoe-tip?

[Midas]

Not a new argument, Irion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It's not *substituting*. I'm not even sure what 'electronic binoculars' are, but the distinction is very simple: if any information is added electronically, it can't be used (Vision Enhancement, zoom, whatever; no bonus can be gained from it). But information can be removed from an otherwise purely optical view.

Except that your arguement is not logical, as there must be a pixel overlay over the entire line of sight. Just because some pixels are blacked out and some aren't doesn't necessarily matter for Irion's book quote to hold true: there *are* pixels over the mage's entire line of sight, and it could be argued that this would affect magic. Certainly does on my table, although as I previously stated I understand this is a house rule.

[Midas]

Although if it's a direct spell, there's no defense modifier I believe? Unless the GM has the mage make a Perception test before being able to target the shoe-tip?

Visibility modifiers still affect the mage's DP for direct spells.

[phlapjack77]

Visibility modifiers still affect the mage's DP for direct spells.

Found it - thanks!

[Mordinvan]

Certainly does on my table, although as I previously stated I understand this is a house rule.

With all due respect while 'at my table' may be an effort to help make sense of the rules, it is not a justification to insert non-printed material into a general rules discussion. This is a fault I'm at least as guilty of as most, so imagine I'm saying this in a mirror as much as I'm saying it to you.

[Neraph]

Nitpick



"Spirit's" is not plural, that's possessive. That ally spirit owns an "and damage." Whatever that is. And this thread is about that "and damage."

I was trying to resist this myself.

[KarmaInferno]

Except that your arguement is not logical, as there must be a pixel overlay over the entire line of sight. Just because some pixels are blacked out and some aren't doesn't necessarily matter for Irion's book quote to hold true: there *are* pixels over the mage's entire line of sight, and it could be argued that this would affect magic. Certainly does on my table, although as I previously stated I understand this is a house rule.

As much as I don't like the idea of selectively blocking people out to avoid hitting them with a spell...

If a pixel in an LCD screen is transparent, it's no different than glass. Light passes through unimpeded, and is not being affected by the screen in any way that matters.

In a very real sense, LCDs are electromechanical, not electronic. Light passing through them is not being edited electronically, processed, or otherwise modified in any way. A photon has come from a light source, bounced off the target, and passed unaltered through the LCD screen to hit your eyeball.

Imagine a window covered with a bunch of mechanical shutters, spring loaded so they're normally shut. Each shutter can be pulled open via an attached cable. Pull the cables, and you can see through the window. Let them go, and your view is blocked. In this setup, I don't think anyone can claim the view through the window is being electronically processed.

Now imagine these shutters are so small that hundreds fit into a pinhead.

An LCD is just that, a mass of tiny shutters suspended in liquid. Send an electrical charge through them, and they line up so light can pass through. Stop the current, and they fall back to their normal random orientations, rendering the area opaque.

In any case, I get the very strong impression that when the authors say "technological visual aids that substitute themselves for the character’s own visual senses", they mean something that has taken in visual data, converted it into electronic impulses, and then recreated the imagery on a screen or image link. Like a camera recording digital video, passing it through a cable, and playing it back on a display.

Black spots on a pair of glasses aren't really the same thing.



-k

[Midas]

With all due respect while 'at my table' may be an effort to help make sense of the rules, it is not a justification to insert non-printed material into a general rules discussion. This is a fault I'm at least as guilty of as most, so imagine I'm saying this in a mirror as much as I'm saying it to you.

My understanding is that it is fine on this forum to share house rules on any topic under discussion as long as they are clearly labeled as such. I shared my house rule, and gave my game world logic reason for it. What's the beef?

[Midas]

As much as I don't like the idea of selectively blocking people out to avoid hitting them with a spell...
If a pixel in an LCD screen is transparent, it's no different than glass. Light passes through unimpeded, and is not being affected by the screen in any way that matters.
<Snip>
-k

I didn't think spells could be targeted through glass, or was that just opaque glass?

[Irion]

@KarmaInferno

If a pixel in an LCD screen is transparent, it's no different than glass. Light passes through unimpeded, and is not being affected by the screen in any way that matters.

While true, it does not matter.
It is not about transperancy, light or whatever. Electronic helpers are a NO-GO unless implantet. This are the rules.
And if they are implantet you would need a very specific way to block them. Image recognition would not work, because the image would need to be analysed and thus becomes unusable for LOS.

[darthmord]

I didn't think spells could be targeted through glass, or was that just opaque glass?

You can target through glass so long as you can see the target through the glass. Otherwise, fiber optics would not work. Magesight goggles?

The sticking point is that supposedly/apparently clear/transparent glass is opaque on the Astral and therefore, not suitable for establishing LOS while on the Astral / using Astral Perception.


**Thanks Neraph for catching that**

[Neraph]

The sticking point is that supposedly/apparently clear/transparent glass is opaque on the Astral and therefore, not suitable for establishing LOS.

Using Astral sight.

[darthmord]

@KarmaInferno

While true, it does not matter.
It is not about transperancy, light or whatever. Electronic helpers are a NO-GO unless implantet. This are the rules.
And if they are implantet you would need a very specific way to block them. Image recognition would not work, because the image would need to be analysed and thus becomes unusable for LOS.

Irion, you fail at comprehension. He was very clear that the electronic aid was NOT processing vision and re-displaying it. You cannot use a camera to establish LOS for spell casting. That camera takes the image, processes it (this is the key point), and then outputs the image on a screen.

Under his example, the glasses/goggles have a clear LCD lens that can be seen through without any image processing. Thus they can be used while casting spells on the Physical. They are given a command by software to darken certain portions of the lens. It does. The program (if it did any image processing) simply puts blocks in front of the people you did not wish to target. With those spots darkened, certain people are not targeted.

The net result is that the darkened spots are electronically controlled blocks in an optical set of glasses/goggles.

I would allow such in my game if the players asked for it. They'd pay a pretty penny though. Limited customer base and all that.

[Halinn]

Would you allow mages to block targets by blocking them from their sights with their fingers?

[Yerameyahu]

It doesn't matter if electronics were involved in placing the *physical* pixels between the eyes and the non-targets, Irion. All that matters is if there's a *substitute* for the real vision (watching a display, viewing simsense, etc.).

[KarmaInferno]

@KarmaInferno

While true, it does not matter.
It is not about transperancy, light or whatever. Electronic helpers are a NO-GO unless implantet. This are the rules.
And if they are implantet you would need a very specific way to block them. Image recognition would not work, because the image would need to be analysed and thus becomes unusable for LOS.

It does matter.

The exact quote is "technological visual aids that substitute themselves for the character’s own visual senses"

NOT just any old "electronic helpers".

It means the "technological visual aid" must be of the type that REPLACES direct visual input with electronically rendered data.

Like, as I said, a digital camera streaming the image through a data cable to a screen.

A pair of LCD glasses, in fact, does not "help" or "aid" the incoming image in any way in the areas that are transparent. They do not substitute the wearer's visual senses.

Visuals converted to digital data = Not usable for targeting spells.

Visuals passing through without being altered = Usable for targeting spells.



-k

[Irion]

@KarmaInferno
So? The image is replaced with an image where parts are blacked out. This is done by electronical means. Thus you can't cast spells...

[KarmaInferno]

No.

There is no replacing going on.

It's no different than painting black dots on a pair of normal glasses.

The image has not been converted to data and back into an image. It has passed through unaltered. The photons coming off the target are the same photons that are hitting the wearer's eyes.

Consider this: If all it took was an LCD overlay to block targeting of spells, corporations could make all their troops immune to being targeted by spell simply by coating their armor with the stuff. A transparent riot shield with such a coating would make anyone behind it immune. 99% of windows would block targeting because by the 2070s nearly all windows have some sort of electronics, even if it's just to darken as a sunshade.

To be a substitute, it has to completely remove the image and replace it with something else. Not merely overlay it.



-k