Would it be completely out of the question to make a spell that targets awakened characters or those of a certian tradition/religion? I see rival magic circles ritually spellcasting Slaughter Wiccan or Slaughter Awakened at each other. Obviously edging on forbidden magic, and I'd only allow such a thing for the twisted NPCs in my game.

BTW, I know the description of the One Less [metatype/species] and similar spells specify that it is a biological distinction. Just wondering if this type of thing has been considered and why it shouldn't be used. Besides being a little sick

I'm not really sure where the line should be drawn, i.e. if it should be Slaughter Awakened or Slaughter [Tradition], but flavorwise it seems really cool, and I see no reason why it would be particularly broken. I like it.

tradition is pretty gray... is it ok to use spells to learn information about people in such indirect ways? If I can cast Detect Shaman, can I cast Detect Homosexual? Detect Cop? Awakened at least is something written into your genes.

Good point. I agree with 2bit. Go with Slaughter Awakened.

I'd allow it to detect anything that a person considers a fundamental part of their being.

I assume the detect is based on Auras. Auras seem to be at least somewhat based on self-image.

So Detect Fathers would find the dad of a newborn, but not the guy that had a kid 12 years ago, and doesn't even know where it is....

See, at first I thought that anything that can be defined during an Assensing should be allowed, as a spell could be designed to seek out those astral characteristics. But The spells in SM and the core book seek out species and metatypes. That same "indirect detection" comment could be directed towards Slaughter Dragons to determine if anyone in the room is a Dragon in disguise. Actually, that's a great idea for a paranoid character

If metatype and species can be "detected" through using exsisting spells, tradition, awakened status, or even emotional temperment should be allowed.

After all, metatype isn't really genetic, is it? It is, by virtue of the name given to it (Unexplained Genetic Expression), undetectable through examination of the genes. It is most likely a mana based characteristic.

The example chart for Detect Life in the SR4 book lists pretty detailed information on 4 hits. Metatype, health and even what situation the living beings are in (one being chased by the others). It even gives specific info one WHO one of the people are. If that sort of thing can be detected by such a general spell, Slaughter Shaman isn't that far of a stretch.

It's not abuse of detection either. If I want to detect Shaman's in the next room with Slaughter Shaman, I better not want to talk to any of them, cause they're dead or pissed. A quick Assenssing test will reveal that I'm the jerk who did it. Such a spell is very limited in scope.

Considering all that, what do you think?

oops. Wrote all that before considering Lorechaser's post.

Still, if you had a Ork Humanis goon that's blind and always thought he was human, would Detect Orks work on him? I'd say yes, regardless of how he considers himself. Or consider this, Detect Individual is based on your observations of the person, not his own self-image. An anorexic woman is going to think of her outward appearance differently than you would, but if you met her you could still detect her with Detect Individual. Your very limited first-impressions have no bearing on whether the spell works or not. Just that you have a first hand impression at all.

Slay (Awakened)?

As a general rule, I try to restrict detection spells to what you could normally perceive. I know this conflicts with certain existing spells (like detct enemies), but that's my guideline and I bend from there.

Let them have Slay(Awakened), but make it touch range, and area effect...

Well, I'd say you couldn't make a Slay (sexual orientation) spell unless you've concluded that by 2070, it's been proven that sexuality is genetic. You'd need to be able to pinpoint that to be able to write the spell formula for it (to define what the spell is looking for).

Otherwise, it's like Slay People Who Like Chocolate Ice Cream.

Best to keep it to boolean biological distinctions, readily identifiable characteristics ("people wearing hats", "people holding guns") and things readable in auras: emotions, presence of cyber, etc. I would like to think sexual preference is more complex than a boolean straight/bi/gay so I'm using that excuse to disallow it.

(I guess boolean isnt the right word when there's three things... whatever)

Next question: does Masking your aura as a mundane protect you from Slay Magician? (answer: yes)

Slay Homo is now Slay Creature of Same Gender Currently Aroused By Me.

Slay Gay People If I'm They're Type, Or The Occasional Straight Guy Who's Kinda Drunk If I'm Kind Of Androgynous sounds like a great spell

Okay, maybe tradition is too far. But there are spells out there that are really weird. They detect characteristics that aren't detectable through any other means. Masking isn't even factored into whether a spell hits, like Detect Individual.

When meeting a person pretending to be another, does your Detect Individual spell detect the faker, the owner of the assumed identity, or no one at all?

Regardless, for now I'll keep spells I introduce to our games limited to characteristics that can be seen with mundane senses, assensing tests, and scientific analysis.

I can't think of any Detect [SMAM!] spells that detect anything other what can be perceived via mundane senses or with one, maybe two hits on an assensing test. I think that's a good guideline for new Detect spells.

I'd like a Detect Very Hot Chick That's Looking For Someone To Sleep With And Will Take Anyone At This Point (-1 Threshold if alcohol is involved on her part)

Masking only seems to effect assensing and nothing else. But since you've got counterspelling and shielding dice to resist detection spells, it's hardly a big vulnerability.