Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Concealment vs guns
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
chazuli
Here's the scene: PCs and NPCs are engaged in a firefight. A few of the PCs are hidden, but most are out in the open, guns blazing away. Mage (who is hidden) commands a force 8 spirit to conceal everyone in party.

Of course the concealment will make it hard to spot the hidden mage, but what about the guys who are out there in the open already? Will those perception modifiers apply as targeting modifiers as well? I'm inclined to say no for someone out in the open. But what if someone say steps behind a screen to break line of sight, thus using infiltration to hide, and then steps out in the open again? Am I being too harsh saying the concealment power doesn't apply to people standing there right out in the open?

Best,
Chazuli
Mistwalker
I would say that the ones out in the open do get concealed.

A gust of wind could blow some papers around the heads of the opposition; sun could glint off the side of a vehicle or building partially blinding the opposition; etc...
Zen Shooter01
Concealment is called Concealment, not Invisibility. I play it so that Conceal only helps characters who would already need a Perception test to be spotted. Otherwise Concealment becomes a gamebreaker.
djinni
QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)
Concealment is called Concealment, not Invisibility. I play it so that Conceal only helps characters who would already need a Perception test to be spotted. Otherwise Concealment becomes a gamebreaker.

it conceals everything. even targets out in the open.
they require a perception test to see the guys out in the open but their threshold will be lower due to no perception test modifiers.
I'd allow a "perceive in detail" for free against people out in the open as well./
chazuli
OK, assuming I set the threshold to spot the PCs under concealment at 1 (for something obvious), and give the folks looking for the concealed +5 dice (+3 for actively looking, and +2 for target standing out in the open). Lets say the bad guy makes his Perception test and notices where the PC is.

Does Concealment provide a visibility modifier to the attack test?

Best,
Chazuli
hyzmarca
Conceament provides modifiers to perception tests. That is all that it does.
Big D
So if you put Concealment up and jump behind a dumpster, there's a good chance if it's high enough that they'll walk past the dumpster and not see you, thinking that you dropped II or something, especially if you have camo.

But if you just stand in the open and don't do anything that forces a perception roll, they don't even really notice any difference. Correct?
djinni
QUOTE (Big D)
But if you just stand in the open and don't do anything that forces a perception roll, they don't even really notice any difference. Correct?

as has been already suggested, it doesn't really matter why a modifier is taken into account, it just is. see below
QUOTE (mistwalker)
A gust of wind could blow some papers around the heads of the opposition; sun could glint off the side of a vehicle or building partially blinding the opposition; etc...
Big D
But if you're standing in the open, and have already been spotted, is there even a perception roll to begin with?

I mean, if somebody is standing in front of you, you don't roll perception every turn just to see if you can see them.

So for Concealment to have an effect, you have to do something that forces a new perception roll, right?
Serbitar
Technically speaking, you are constantly rolling perception. But the threshold for very obvious things is 0, so that you automatically get the information.
Mistwalker
Big D,

That is why, in my examples, I had things that obscured the vision/perception of those trying to target people under concealment. The Spirit has enough powers to make changes in the environment, none big, but enough to make it harder for you to see those under it's concealment power.

If you suddenly have the sun reflected into your eyes, even with flare compensation, you are going to lose the ability to see in a certain direction, and, most likely, flinch a little too, messing up the alignment between your weapon and the target.

Or, debris flies in front of you, a spread out newspaper page, wrapping paper, flyer for the latest Humanis rally, etc...

Just small things that make it harder for you to see your target. None of them would normally even register on your concious, as they happen all the time. Just this time, it is the Spirit that is helping have it happen to screw up anyone seeing/noticing those under it's power.
Charon
I don't buy it.

QUOTE (Chazuli)
Will those perception modifiers apply as targeting modifiers as well?


IMO, never.

In this specific example, this would make no sense.

It would mean applying -8 (the force of the spirit) as a targeting modifier when full invisibility only results in a -6 modifier.

This should make it obvious right there that it's not how it is supposed to work.

Logically, if because of the concealement power the opposition is unable to see the runner, then you can consider him invisible (or fully concealed) but in no circumstance can you start applying the concealment modifier as an automatic modifier to targeting.

If the shooters sees the PC (succeeds on his perception test) then he sees him and that's all there is to it.

---

How I would personnally handle a PC in the open suddenly getting the benefit of a concealment power while standing in the open in a firefight :

On their action, the shooters would (individually) have to make a perception test, threshold of 1. If he succeeds, he doesn't need to try again until the PC manage to actually hide.

I wouldn't normally allow an infiltration roll because the PC is standing in the open with no real opportunity to hide instantaneously. If the ground is rough enough and the PC is camouflaged I could accept an opposed infiltration roll considering the possibility of the PC dropping to the ground and effectively hiding.

Since the shooters know exactly what they are looking for, if they take a simple action to observe they get the benefit of the +3 to perception test (p.117).

Either way they get the benefit of the +2 because the target stands out (A guy in the open with presumably a weapon).

Finally, the last paragraph of using perception means that as far as I'm concerned if the concealed character opens fire he is automatically seen anyway because that would qualify as "Immediately noticeable (p.117)" and I don't use perception for that (using a silencer would force me to improvise a bit, using judgement calls).
ShadowDragon
I agree with Charon, if a character fires an unsilenced gun out in the open even with concealment, no perception roll is needed. This isn't the same as the invisibility spell.
Serbitar
So when exactly is a perception test needed and when not?
Charon
When I say so.
Fresno Bob
When they're partially hidden?
Kremlin KOA
QUOTE (ShadowDragon)
I agree with Charon, if a character fires an unsilenced gun out in the open even with concealment, no perception roll is needed. This isn't the same as the invisibility spell.

No it isn't, after all it is easier to find a hiding person with hte invisibility spell than with concealment at the same force
Mistwalker
Ah, but does it count as partial hidden, when it is a dust devil in front of your face, flinging dust, dirt, papers, wrappers, etc..?

Sorry boys, but just having a shot fired, does not automatically locate the target for you. Specially if there is something blocking, or partially blocking line of sight. At least, that has been my experience.

Even if they are out in the open, if they get concealment, they still have a chance of doing something to not be where you expect them to be (move, run, drop prone, levitate, etc...)

I wasn't talking about applying the concealment modifier as a penalty to fire at the target. You can always blind fire, or do suppression fire, or use grenades in the general area.

The concealment modifier only applies to you being able to notice/see them. If you "know" they are in a particular area, you can still do things to try and take them out.
Jaid
QUOTE (Mistwalker)
Ah, but does it count as partial hidden, when it is a dust devil in front of your face, flinging dust, dirt, papers, wrappers, etc..?

Sorry boys, but just having a shot fired, does not automatically locate the target for you. Specially if there is something blocking, or partially blocking line of sight. At least, that has been my experience.

for lack of a better way to put it, some things have a perception threshold of 0. these things do not require a roll. you do not, generally speaking, need a perception test to see the sky, for example (or whatever may be covering it). similarly, you don't need a perception test to see someone standing right in front of you with an MMG loaded with tracer fire shooting at your position. you automatically notice them, because the threshold to notice them is effectively 0, so even if you roll 0 dice, you *still* notice them.

in those situations, i would not allow concealment to apply. or rather, concealment would apply, but would be irrelevant.

now, if that same person had an MMG and was firing from behind a bush or something like that, i would most certainly require a perception test, and concealment would certainly apply.
Charon
QUOTE (Mistwalker @ Dec 10 2006, 11:16 PM)
Ah, but does it count as partial hidden, when it is a dust devil in front of your face, flinging dust, dirt, papers, wrappers, etc..?


It's not about dust devil in your face and what not. That's just your interpretation.

All it says in the book is that it "mystically hide" stuff. And the mechanic for "mystically" hiding with this power is substracting perception dice.

Fine. But if you are spotted nonetheless, there is nothing whatseover in the description of the spell that implies you are still partially hidden from the observer.

It's a lot like the invisibility spell ; if the power has been beaten, that's the end of it.

QUOTE
Sorry boys, but just having a shot fired, does not automatically locate the target for you. Specially if there is something blocking, or partially blocking line of sight. At least, that has been my experience.


No (though it make you a helluva easier to locate in any scenario), but that's not what I described. I was talking about a target standing in the open. Implied in my description were observers aware of you at the moment the power went into effect.

A target standing in the open and shooting at you would qualify as "immediately noticeable"

Gamemasters should limit their uses of perception tests, only calling for them when something is not immediately noticeable. p.117

If there's no perception test, the whole point is moot. They see the character, the power doesn't work.

It could be argued that even if they didn't shoot they would be immediateley noticeable and that the power could only kick in when they find a legitimate hiding occasion.

It's really a judgement call on the part of the GM but I think the wording of the rule indicate that you shouldn't even make a perception test until the situation makes it possible that the target wouldn't be noticed. And if there's no perception roll, a -8 won't change anything.

QUOTE
Even if they are out in the open, if they get concealment, they still have a chance of doing something to not be where you expect them to be (move, run, drop prone, levitate, etc...)


No, you don't unless you are invisible. If I'm looking straight at you and you are in the open, you can unexpectedly start doing backflip, I'll still see you just as well.

You seem to want this power to become invisibility. It ain't, accoding to the description. And it shoudln't be, otherwise why would there even be an invisibility spell?

QUOTE
I wasn't talking about applying the concealment modifier as a penalty to fire at the target. You can always blind fire, or do suppression fire, or use grenades in the general area.


If you are not talking about that, what are we talking about? This is exactly what the OP wondered and this is what I'm adressing.
Crusher Bob
Yes, but the concealment power is equivalent to 'magically summoning' a bush. So the guy firing the MMG from behind a bush might be something like -2 for the bush +8 for the autofire. This means that having the spirit (force cool.gif concealing him means that he has a net -2.

If he was standing in the open, his net modifier to be noticed would still be 0 (i.e. he is still noticed automatically). However, the moment he stops shooting everything in sight, his perception modifier to be seen would then drop back to -8 . If he were doing something slightly less obvious than shooting everything in sight, he would get a net negative modifier to be seen.
Garrowolf
Actually the Mystically hide part could mean that it is clouding your mind. It could be less about invisiblity and more a command to ignore this. Then it would matter what else you were doing to see it the power would make it hard to focus on.
ShadowDragon
QUOTE
Yes, but the concealment power is equivalent to 'magicall summoning' a bush. So the guy firing the MMG from behind a bush might be something like -2 for the bush +8 for the autofire. This means that having the spirit (force cool.gif concealing him means that he has a net -2.


QUOTE
Ah, but does it count as partial hidden, when it is a dust devil in front of your face, flinging dust, dirt, papers, wrappers, etc..?


I don't know where you guys are getting this kind of interpritation from. The text in no way suggests that the power puts stuff between you and the enemy. All it says is that it has the ability to "mystically hide" itself or others. I see it more akin to what the chameleon suit does, personally, since the modifer works in the same way. If it summoned a bush or flung dust in the enemy's eyes it would say that.

At any rate, I think this is a good question to add to the FAQ.
Kremlin KOA
QUOTE (Charon)


You seem to want this power to become invisibility. It ain't, accoding to the description. And it shoudln't be, otherwise why would there even be an invisibility spell?


Actually Concealment is better than invisibility, it works on all 6 senses. Astral perception included

Obvious things require a threshold 1 test

Ever had an occasion where you could not see somthing that was right in front of you? Same thing. It is not right there anymore it is hidden. Threshold 1 to see an obvious thing under this effect... but if you have no dice...

If you rule that wayu for concealment then I expect invisibility and chamelion suits to be the same
Charon
QUOTE (Kremlin KOA @ Dec 11 2006, 02:32 AM)
Obvious things require a threshold 1 test

Obvious things require no test. I quoted the passage supporting it. If it's immediately noticeable you don't make perception test unless the GM the situation is so hectic as to warrant it (p.117).

QUOTE
If you rule that wayu for concealment then I expect invisibility and chamelion suits to be the same


What's that supposed to mean? Why would I treat Invisibility the same?

If you don't resist the spell, you don't see the subject. He could be mooning you from three feet away, you wouldn't see it. That's the whole point of the spell! Being able to waltz right past a guard as long as you can move silently.

But if the subject of a concelament power is mooning you from three feet away under the concealment power, it's immediately noticeable and so there is no need for a perception test, making the modifiers moot.

Kremlin KOA
QUOTE (Charon @ Dec 11 2006, 04:39 PM)
QUOTE (Kremlin KOA @ Dec 11 2006, 02:32 AM)
Obvious things require a threshold 1 test

Obvious things require no test. I quoted the passage supporting it. If it's immediately noticeable you don't make perception test unless the GM the situation is so hectic as to warrant it (p.117).

QUOTE ("SR4 page 117")
Item/Event Is:            Threshold        Examples
Obvious/Large/Loud          1          Neon sign, running crowd, yelling, gunfire


SOrry but you seem to have missed an obvious part of the book... failed perception check maybe?

Also your guideline was mentioned, apparently, to stop GMs from forcing dice rolls every RL minute
Charon
Didn't miss it.

Gamemasters should limit their use of perception tests, only calling for them when something is not immediately noticeable, or when a situation is so hectic that certain things might be overlooked.

A check for a neon sign or a gunshot is for when the sitation is hectic.

I mean, if Johnson get up and leave in the middle of negociations, do you ask for a perception test? The runner with intuition 3 and no perception could easily critically glitch and keep talking to the wall!

You don't roll for everything. The very list you quoted imply that are some reason to make the check. If a crowd was running toward a PC and was 30 meter away from him would you really be asinine enough to ask a perception check because running crowd is listed on the threshold 1 list? What if the guy next to him shoot his gun? Or if a woman 10 meter away starts screaming?

Of course you wouldn't (Well, I hope).

It's for when you are racing through a screaming crowd and a gunshot goes off 30 meter away from you. Yeah, perhaps you could miss that. Probably not but perhaps. Let's make an easy threshold 1 check to see, shall we? But when someone fire a gun in the same room as a PC, you'd be a complete ass of a GM to ask for a perception check threshold 1 just because it is listed on the table. Some common sense (and some reading of text that accompanies the table), please.

QUOTE
Also your guideline was mentioned, apparently, to stop GMs from forcing dice rolls every RL minute


Yes, they are. Which is exactly what would happen if you suggest that the table has to be applied for every gunshot, running crowd, yelling and neon sign.

And what common sense guideline could be used to avoid that? Oh yes. No perception check when it is immediately noticeable.

Like a guy mooning you from three feet away. No check.
Kremlin KOA
QUOTE
Didn't miss it.

Gamemasters should limit their use of perception tests, only calling for them when something is not immediately noticeable, or when a situation is so hectic that certain things might be overlooked.

A check for a neon sign or a gunshot is for when the sitation is hectic.


A firefight maybe?

Or that a m,agical force is making thew subject harder to notice? would that make such circumstances?

QUOTE
I mean, if Johnson get up and leave in the middle of negociations, do you ask for a perception test? The runner with intuition 3 and no perception could easily critically glitch and keep talking to the wall!


hmm int 3 per 0 = dice pool of 2... -2 dice for being distracted (listed as when not using actions to observe in detail = no dice

Translation it is entirely reasonable that the runner in question was buys looking into his beer when that happened. which is why most runners get the contacts and earplugs that improve perception checks

but if the char had said he was watching the J it would not need a check... remember most sammies and hackers can play Mario while the face negotiates

QUOTE

You don't roll for everything. The very list you quoted imply that are some reason to make the check. If a crowd was running toward a PC and was 30 meter away from him would you really be asinine enough to ask a perception check because running crowd is listed on the threshold 1 list? What if the guy next to him shoot his gun? Or if a woman 10 meter away starts screaming?


in order,
yes: the number of successes determines how close the crowd is before it is noticed
No:
Yes: You can miss a scream 10 meters away. In a NY rave club a man was shot 8 times. The body was discovered after the rave was over. Nobody noticed the shooting, including the people so close to him thay their press of bodies had kept him standing for a minute or so. after he fell, they still did not notice the wounds and assumes he had just taken too much of whatever substance he used, so they avoided dancing too near.


Crusher Bob
Yes, my interpretation of what concealment does is that it add perception penalties. For example, you can hear a gunshot right next to you, but can you hear one inside a building across the street? probably. How about inside a building down the block? and so on. So what the concealment power does is esentially add a 'down the block from here' type modifier. The problem is that there aren't any real positive modifiers on a perception test. For example, a guy standing a few feed away is noticable. If the starts shouting and waving his arms, he becomes more noticable.
Mistwalker
Hmm, on more than one occasion, someone has said that this isn't the invisibility spell. Yes, you are right. It is the spirit power that is much improved over invisibility, as it does more than one sense, does groups, and has no sustaining penalty to the mage.

Kremlin KOA suggested that it is like a chameleon suit. That is one way of looking at it.
My descriptions were/are another way.
They are in game explanations for how/why the power works.

Shadowdragon is correct in that this may be a good question for the FAQ.

Until TPTB rule on it, it will appear that there are two camps on this issue.

One, that if the power is used after the target is seen, that it doesn't affect until they get some cover.

The other side is that it works immediately. Either you have blindfire possibility, or you made your perception check and can fire without penalties.
TBRMInsanity
I would treat the situation as blind fire for the people shooting at the party. It won't stop the bullets but it will make it harder to hit them.
Fortune
QUOTE (Mistwalker)
The other side is that it works immediately. Either you have blindfire possibility, or you made your perception check and can fire without penalties.

Pitching my tent. biggrin.gif
Crusher Bob
The beaten zone of your artillery barrage it not effected by concealment. biggrin.gif If you can't afford some 60mm mortars, then arm several airborne drones with rapid fire grenade launchers and then you can at least get some fire support. Keep the drones at long range so that they hopefully won't get all shot up in the process.
cx2
I'd go with the interprretation that it takes some kind of check to find out exactly where the team members are, even though the general area is known. Even if not maybe a -1 or -2 penalty to fire from the enemy would be nice from the distraction.

After all it's nice to fit the way spirit powers work to their element or general theme. Air elementals can whip up the rubbish as mentioned, nature spirits can make something bush like appear perhaps or other plants like vines, fire spirits could use smoke, water could use fog which is water vapour after all... It's very much a fluff thing rather than a mechanic, but sometimes the fluff is the only guide we have.
toturi
QUOTE (chazuli)
Here's the scene: PCs and NPCs are engaged in a firefight. A few of the PCs are hidden, but most are out in the open, guns blazing away. Mage (who is hidden) commands a force 8 spirit to conceal everyone in party.

Of course the concealment will make it hard to spot the hidden mage, but what about the guys who are out there in the open already? Will those perception modifiers apply as targeting modifiers as well? I'm inclined to say no for someone out in the open. But what if someone say steps behind a screen to break line of sight, thus using infiltration to hide, and then steps out in the open again? Am I being too harsh saying the concealment power doesn't apply to people standing there right out in the open?

Best,
Chazuli

The most relevant question therefore is: Is someone out in the open shooting at you 1)immediately noticeable or is the situation so hectic that the person shooting at you may be overlooked and is that person just 2)obvious/loud?

As I see it, it is a GM call to differentiate between immediately noticeable and obvious. However, my call as a GM is this: 1) Immediately noticeable - some motherf--ker is shooting at you 2)If you fail your perception check, you do not spot that shooter standing in the open and you'd have to spray and pray(blind fire).

How I explain it as fluff: As you raise your head and peek out from cover, there seems to be a heat shimmer or a mirage of some sort on the road and although bullets are gouging holes in the plascrete around you, it seems to be strangely quiet as if the very air is frozen.
toturi
Don't forget: Concealment doesn't just mean that the person is concealed only from your eyes. It does the same to your ears, nose, touch/etc.
Zen Shooter01
When a Perception test is necessary is largely at the GM's judgement. But I treat Concealment as inflicting a negative dice pool modifier on Perception tests to see the concealed. If no Perception test was necessary in the first place, then Concealment doesn't help.

If you treat Concealment as requiring a Perception test, at a negative modifier, to detect the subject of the power regardless of whether or not the subject is hiding, then Concealment becomes a gamebreaker. You could stand three meters away from a guy in broad daylight, blasting away with a shotgun, and he'd still have to roll Perception at -6 to even notice you.
Mr. Unpronounceable
Actually, - (force).
And only (force) people can be concealed.
And 1 success on the perception test means it has absolutely no effect.
Worst case, you resort to blind fire (-6 dp).
Shrike30
If you insist, "Target Concealed", IIRC, is a -2 modifier. If you've already Percieved someone, you don't have to make another Perception check to see him when Concealment is cast... you just take a -2 modifier for ranged attacks directed at him. If he ducks behind something, and then comes out again a little later (that is, he manages to arrange for you to have to make another Perception check) then the penalty from Concealment applies.

Conceal isn't a group Invisibility, folks.
toturi
QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)
When a Perception test is necessary is largely at the GM's judgement. But I treat Concealment as inflicting a negative dice pool modifier on Perception tests to see the concealed. If no Perception test was necessary in the first place, then Concealment doesn't help.

If you treat Concealment as requiring a Perception test, at a negative modifier, to detect the subject of the power regardless of whether or not the subject is hiding, then Concealment becomes a gamebreaker. You could stand three meters away from a guy in broad daylight, blasting away with a shotgun, and he'd still have to roll Perception at -6 to even notice you.

QUOTE
Conceal isn't a group Invisibility, folks.


Why would you continue perceiving someone once you have already perceived him? Ever looked at one of those 3D pics, you know one of those that you need to stare cross-eyed to see? Ever seen the 3D pic and once you blink it is gone and you got to concentrate all over again?

Invisibility isn't Conceal and Conceal isn't Invisibility. Conceal is for the most parts better than Invisibility since it works on all senses(which was why I was always amused by all the Invisible mage comments in the street sam vs mage debates.) Concealment does not require a Preception Test. Something that is Obvious requires a Perception test, regardless of Concealment or not. Immediately Noticeable does not require a Perception test.

If you rule that someone shooting at you from 3m in broad daylight is Immediately Noticeable and that someone shooting at you isn't a Hectic Situation, then no Perception test is required. But I'd think being shot at is a hectic situation, unless you are Robocop or a Terminator.
Charon
QUOTE (toturi @ Dec 11 2006, 08:06 PM)
If you rule that someone shooting at you from 3m in broad daylight is Immediately Noticeable and that someone shooting at you isn't a Hectic Situation, then no Perception test is required. But I'd think being shot at is a hectic situation, unless you are Robocop or a Terminator.

Err, if the person shooting at you is the hectic situation, I kinda think it make him hard to miss...

Anyway, I always just used the concealment power to supplement stealth, never replace it.

Basically, any situation that wouldn't call for a perception check without concealment don't require one with it. But if you are legitimately hiding it helps a lot.

In one instance a mage was trying to hide in a corner from a bad guy. Not much cover but enough for me to allow for an infiltration test. A summoned spirit that was following the mage used concealment and reduced the bad guy's perception to 0 (despite the +2 bonus for the mage being fairly obvious so he obviously enough scored 0 success). But the mage had only agility 3 and no infiltration. So he rolled 0 success on 2 dice. So he was spotted (I ruled in favor of the defending character which I determined to be the one doing the passive check).

I'm quite happy with this interpretation of the concealment power.
Lord Ben
As DM I'd maybe allow it as a sort of semi-invis in certain situations. Mostly starting out the battle.

Lets say there are 3 guards watching a door. The phyad with a magical katana wants to rush them and cut them down. I'd let him run across open grounds and give the guards -x to notice him even though he's "obvious". But as soon as he cuts down the first guy then it has no effect. That'd be my way of doing it, not that the book supports it.
Zen Shooter01
I agree with Charon. That's the way I use Concealment.

Yes, the Perception test table says the threshold is 1 for things that are "obvious". But that doesn't work. Are you going to make the PCs roll Perception to notice that there is a couch in the room? A car parked in front of them? A building across the street? You'll spend the entire game session making Perception tests.
Mistwalker
Don't know if or when I will get an answer, but I emailed the question to TPTB.
Will post the question and answer once/if I get an answer.
toturi
QUOTE (Zen Shooter01)
I agree with Charon. That's the way I use Concealment.

Yes, the Perception test table says the threshold is 1 for things that are "obvious". But that doesn't work. Are you going to make the PCs roll Perception to notice that there is a couch in the room? A car parked in front of them? A building across the street? You'll spend the entire game session making Perception tests.

No, those things that you describe are Immediately Noticeable and if you are not in combat, things are not hectic, therefore no roll is needed.

But if you are in combat, and there's a big hole in the floor(something that is normally Immediately Noticeable and there would no need to roll is things aren't hectic), you might just fall in! And that hole isn't even Concealed and right there in plain sight! Don't laugh, I had a platoon mate fall through a hole because the guy was too busy changing mags that he forgot that there was a hole in front of him.

QUOTE
Err, if the person shooting at you is the hectic situation, I kinda think it make him hard to miss...


I'd say that the fact that someone/something is shooting at you is hard to miss, but knowing where that person is requires some effort.
Charon
QUOTE (toturi @ Dec 11 2006, 09:20 PM)
I'd say that the fact that someone/something is shooting at you is hard to miss, but knowing where that person is requires some effort.

not if that person is immediately noticeable to start with.

We're not talking about a sniper here.

Think about it. You are arguing that a person that should be immediately noticeable to you under normal circumstances could escape your notice if he starts shooting at you because then it will be hectic! Think about it!

How does your head not explode as you are making these statements?!
toturi
QUOTE (Charon @ Dec 12 2006, 10:33 AM)
QUOTE (toturi @ Dec 11 2006, 09:20 PM)
I'd say that the fact that someone/something is shooting at you is hard to miss, but knowing where that person is requires some effort.

not if that person is immediately noticeable.

We're not talking about a sniper here.

The guy may be immediately noticeable but the situation is also hectic, especially, if he is shooting at you.

If guy A is in the center of the road, Concealment or not, he shoots at B, B is in a hectic situation, so he needs to make a Perception check with threshold 1 for Obvious to find out who is shooting at him.

But guy C, who isn't being shot at, he doesn't need to make the Perception check even if that guy has Concealment because he isn't in a hectic situation and the shooter is immediately noticeable.

No, because that is the way Perception works in the game. That is how the rules work. There is room for interpretation, but I personally would rule that being shot at is hectic and so by the RAW, a Perception check is required. You can rule that being immediately noticeable is enough and being shot at isn't hectic and so the Perception check isn't required.

Normally, I can see that guy over there. But if he shoots at me, I'd be trying to duck/flinch/roll with the hit, my priorities go from noting where that bugger is to staying alive. When I pop my head around the cover, I might do so too fast to actually see him, or my heart is going so fast that I am tunnel visioned. There is a hundred and one things that can mess up your situation awareness in combat.

QUOTE
How does your head not explode as you are making these statements?!


Read my sig. You must have failed your perception check. You wouldn't have if things weren't so hectic.
Lord Ben
QUOTE (toturi @ Dec 11 2006, 09:20 PM)
But if you are in combat, and there's a big hole in the floor(something that is normally Immediately Noticeable and there would no need to roll is things aren't hectic), you might just fall in! And that hole isn't even Concealed and right there in plain sight! Don't laugh, I had a platoon mate fall through a hole because the guy was too busy changing mags that he forgot that there was a hole in front of him.

That's a glitch on the test to quickly reload a mag, not a failed perception test! smile.gif
toturi
QUOTE (Lord Ben)
QUOTE (toturi @ Dec 11 2006, 09:20 PM)
But if you are in combat, and there's a big hole in the floor(something that is normally Immediately Noticeable and there would no need to roll is things aren't hectic), you might just fall in! And that hole isn't even Concealed and right there in plain sight! Don't laugh, I had a platoon mate fall through a hole because the guy was too busy changing mags that he forgot that there was a hole in front of him.

That's a glitch on the test to quickly reload a mag, not a failed perception test! smile.gif

Maybe, but changing mags do not require skill checks. biggrin.gif
Fortune
There's a Reload test now?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012