Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Line of sight targeting issues/questions
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
psychopete
I have a question to throw out there.

Its accepted that if someone is in a vehicle with tinted windows you cannot target them with a spell directly, there is no line of sight to the person.
Its the same in Augmentation for cyborgs as there is no line of sight to the organic component of the body to be able to target for mana spells.

How far can you take the principle of this. While i realise that power armor would be covered under the vehicle aspect would full body armor with a tinted visor and no Organic Components ( such as leather,rubber etc) be able to break line of sight?

I guess the real question is if someone in full inorganic body armor would be able to be targeted with a mana spell, as i would read it as a not able to target as a extrapolation of the augmentation page 160 targeting and magic portion.

I may well be reading it wrong or my interpretation faulty and the GM of the game will definatly make his ruling but he suggested throwing it out there for the opinions and comments.
DocTaotsu
Welcome to DS Psychopete!

I would say that they couldn't be targeted for the same reason you can't target someone who has taken concealment behind something nice and inorganic. A person in full armor is effectively a giant wall of alloys and someone who was standing behind them couldn't be targeted so i'd assume someone standing inside couldn't either.
GryMor
You can target someone in full armor, LOS targeting technically requires (distinct) aura visibility, not flesh visibility, so stuff they are wearing doesn't prevent them from being targeted.
Ranger
QUOTE (GryMor @ Mar 17 2008, 08:46 AM) *
You can target someone in full armor, LOS targeting technically requires (distinct) aura visibility, not flesh visibility, so stuff they are wearing doesn't prevent them from being targeted.


I agree. Not only for this reason, but if you allow someone in a full suit of armor to prevent spell LOS due to no flesh being visible, then technically that same person should be considered to be in full cover against firearms and explosives. I'm pretty sure that's not the author's intent.
DocTaotsu
Oops wink.gif That makes sense.
psychopete
Thanks for the welcome

While i have no issues with it not affecting any physical spells and effects it was more the mana based ones i was considering. The examples given so far are very to the point for explosives or kinetic impacts or fire and lightning effects but what about confusion or control thoughts, is there a cover bonus for these if your hiding behind a wall with just your head showing?

I think the LOS and cover are being slightly confused here, at least as i read it in augmentation for the cyborg targeting and magic section.

My own take on the matter would be you could lightning bolt the hell out of them but not control thoughts for instance.

Even then there are physical spells which ignore armor specifically and some which call for half the impact to be taken into account.

Mana spells do not allow for any armor to be taken into account as far as i know and just have a line of sight to be completely effective.

So while i can see the point of view i feel there are gaps that should be closed and i hope what i posted helps you see the issue i am asking about.

All for a good game and if we all had the same opinion what a dull world it would be.
Slymoon
What is the limit then?

I once had a troll NPC that was, well abit like Lennie from 'Of Mice and Men'. This Lennie_troll wore a small dumpster as 'armor'. Now Lennie_troll didn't go into combat much, as his size and brashness just scared the hell out of folks, particularly when he was brandishing his dumpster armor. That and when he was fully armored up not a scrap of skin showed so he resembled a manifest Spirit of Man to mundanes.

Point being, would you consider this LoS inhibiting or is it armor?

Down the line my general rule of thumb is about Intention.
If Lennie_troll is in the dumpster hiding, then it hinders LoS.
If Lennie_troll is using the dumpster as armor, then it doesnt affect LoS.



If that sounds odd then take it a step further:

Joe Bob Snitch is standing behind a set of Theatrical curtains. Unfortunately Joe Bob Snitch doesn't realize he is pressed against them. The mage who is about to smack Joe Bob with a can of whoopass can barely see his outline, but he falls in the LoS issue. Joe Bob is 'safe' for now.

Joe Bob Snitch decides it is time to leave his hiding place and puts a curtain segment over himself. Walking away slowly he figures he can just watch the floor beneath his curtain shroud. Now the mage sees Joe Bob, but he cant target him. He is after all still hidden.

However, as per my feelings: When Joe Bob Snitch decided to actively use the curtain as an 'armor' of sorts, he is now targetable.

Of, course this has always been a grey area for SR and spell targeting.

Can't target me if I am standing behind a door. But if I walk carrying the door... So many ways to really screw that rule and it requires a ton of GM interpretation. Again, this isnt SR4 only though, it has been around since day 1.
psychopete
I would guess the limit is, if you blow a hole in the dumpster you can see lennie

If there was a kinetic or other attack causing physical damage to the person in the armor/door it would no longer be withholding LOS as there is a hole in it.

If your char has a set and doesnt get it repaired its kinda not going to work that way as well, repair costs for armor after almost every run will tend to annoy them

It seemed like a huge grey are and can you not just fireball the curtain? he's gonna look pretty silly sneaking around with a burning curtain as cover plus it wont last long, you then have LOS again cause i dont know about you but i'd throw it of and run.

Its a very situational question what seems to make you targetable and not targetable

Sorry if i'm stirring up old ground thats been covered before but i just found it a curious subject.
DireRadiant
QUOTE (psychopete @ Mar 17 2008, 10:27 AM) *
I guess the real question is if someone in full inorganic body armor would be able to be targeted with a mana spell, as i would read it as a not able to target as a extrapolation of the augmentation page 160 targeting and magic portion.


p. 160 in Augmentation is specifically the case for Cyborgs.

Otherwise p. 160 (Coincidence...?) in Street Magic.

"Note that full body armor does not “conceal� the person within and prevent them from being targeted."


Ranger
QUOTE (Slymoon @ Mar 17 2008, 11:23 AM) *
However, as per my feelings: When Joe Bob Snitch decided to actively use the curtain as an 'armor' of sorts, he is now targetable.


I agree with this entirely. The point of armor is that it's supposed to help reduce damage taken (barring any other gadgets you've added to it), and that's it in terms of game rules. It's not supposed to block LOS to the wearer; it's not supposed to make the wearer immune to effects that rely on LOS.

This is true for just about any RPG, not just SR.

It's ultimately the GM's job to figure out when a character is using something as cover, and when the character is using it as armor. What Slymoon said in his example of the curtain defines it pretty well.

Edit: I just saw DireRadiant's post right after I posted mine. Perfect answer. smile.gif
psychopete
I get Street Magic from Amazon next week so hadnt seen that.
It does indeed clarify the point very nicely.

Thanks for the response and i'll look forward to reading that book now.



DMFubar
As Psychopete's GM, Ranger I just gotta say that I made similar points that you did when he asked me the same question this morning, but your answers were much better put than mine. That being said, I suggested he put it to the masses here on Dumpshock, as I did not have my books readily available and I knew this forum would find the proper answers.
Ranger
QUOTE (DMFubar @ Mar 17 2008, 12:29 PM) *
As Psychopete's GM, Ranger I just gotta say that I made similar points that you did when he asked me the same question this morning, but your answers were much better put than mine. That being said, I suggested he put it to the masses here on Dumpshock, as I did not have my books readily available and I knew this forum would find the proper answers.


Cool deal. smile.gif But, it's also thanks to Slymoon and DireRadiant giving nice responses, too.

When I read the rules--for any RPG--I always try to think about it from what it seems likely that the authors intended, as opposed to only what the rules say literally. Of course, that's only once I'm able to get a grasp on how the game works in general. For SR4, I'm still learning the rules; I played SR2 back in the day, and just now started getting back into SR. So, I'm relearning everything. Even so, this particular rules answer is something that, as I mentioned, would hold true for any RPG. Else, you can walk around with a door held in front of you, as in Slymoon's example, and you'd be immune to a lot of attacks. That's clearly not how the game is supposed to work. You can't get free immunities in most RPGs by doing something that simple. It just leads to unmanageable abuse, and pretty soon the GM would have to start doing the same thing for the bad guys to present a good challenge. At that point, the game becomes a powergaming fest of a bunch of dudes carrying doors or wearing dumpsters, and that's plain silly. smile.gif
Larme
p.160 of Arsenal = interesting! I think essentially what it's saying is that because the CCU is encased in a drone body, you can't zap it with direct spells. It's the exact same as someone who's inside a car. So... in theory, if you made a custom anthroform vehicle that you could ride inside (i.e. a mecha) your meat body would be totally safe from spell targeting! But why does that not apply to powered military armor which is basically a vehicle? Cuz the book says so...
Ranger
QUOTE (Larme @ Mar 17 2008, 12:48 PM) *
p.160 of Arsenal = interesting! I think essentially what it's saying is that because the CCU is encased in a drone body, you can't zap it with direct spells. It's the exact same as someone who's inside a car. So... in theory, if you made a custom anthroform vehicle that you could ride inside (i.e. a mecha) your meat body would be totally safe from spell targeting! But why does that not apply to powered military armor which is basically a vehicle? Cuz the book says so...


Hmm, I'll have to go read that when I get home later. Nice when there's contradictions in the books. wink.gif
Ed_209a
So, hiding in the dumpster protects you from magic, wearing it as armor does not...

Likewise, if you could hide behind an empty suit of armor you would be safe from magic right?

Magic being magic, perhaps the intention of using an object as armor personalizes it, in a way that hiding behind it doesn't. You and the object become a "we", in the sense of "we are going into battle against our foes."

Because of that, maybe your aura extends to cover the object, when it wouldn't otherwise.
Ranger
QUOTE (Ed_209a @ Mar 17 2008, 01:01 PM) *
So, hiding in the dumpster protects you from magic, wearing it as armor does not...

Likewise, if you could hide behind an empty suit of armor you would be safe from magic right?

Magic being magic, perhaps the intention of using an object as armor personalizes it, in a way that hiding behind it doesn't. You and the object become a "we", in the sense of "we are going into battle against our foes."

Because of that, maybe your aura extends to cover the object, when it wouldn't otherwise.


You put into words what I was thinking in a round about way. That defines pretty well how I feel it works.
DTFarstar
Seems like we have been getting a lot of new blood here on DS lately. Welcome, all and happy gaming.

Also, consider game balance- obviously this was addressed in SM for full body armor, but before you allow something to block LOS for spells think about game balance. If it works to block LOS and is easy to do- then everyone would be doing it because mages- specially direct combat spell mages from the physical side- are dangerous. Sure, if it blocks LOS you could Ignite it or lightning bolt a hole in it, but if it nullifies all LOS spells that target people well... that is most of them. So, just cautioning you all to think about the balance of your game before letting something work in that manner. Mages are typically all or nothing. They are either being really useful to the party and feeling all cool and bad ass(either through stun/mana/power/lightning ball or via the right manipulation spells and buff spells at the right time) or they are feeling useless as the Adept with Magic Resistance, Spell Resistance, and a friend counterspelling ignores them completely or a background count nullifies them etc. Magic creates a fine line to walk, but if you and your GM(or your player if you are the GM) manage to wander in the general area of the line it is my opinion that mages really bring a lot of flavor to the game.

Chris
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