Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Specifics of the Magician's Trade
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
KurenaiYami
Greetings and salutations, my fellow Dumpshockers. I come to you with a few questions that came up in my last session when the player wished to use some spells in a manner I'm not sure they cover. For the record, all I have is the BBB, so anything outside of that is not kosher in my campaign until I get my hands on it.

First, Physical Barrier. The exact mechanics of what this wall is elude me. At one point, the player wanted to move the barrier with him, so as to have protection from something chasing him. At another point, he used it to support his weight and walk over a mine field without setting anything off. I have trouble seeing this spell being mobile at one point, yet afixed in space enough so that it hovers and supports weight. Maybe that's just me.

My first instinct is to treat it as an actual wall, with weight and the like, and leaving it immobile, but...I'm not sure about it, and very open to suggestions.

Now, onto the second spell, Stunball, though this question goes for pretty much any area Combat spell. How specific do you allow targetting to be of area spells? The player wanted to catch a vampire on the very edge of the spell, while his prey (who was in physical contact with the vampire) remained unharmed. In my mind, I see this like like trying to catch somebody in the very edge of a grenade blast, but perhaps I'm overthinking it. Thoughts?

Now, this one is probably more straightforward and I'm probably blind for not being able to find this rule in the BBB, but how does one "hide" from somebody trying to detect them via Astral Projection? Do they have to make perception tests that you can hide from? Can they see your aura on the other side of a wall, or do they have to pass through it to see the glow?

The specific case I'm talking about had a highly trained...we'll call him an assassin (a Superior Prime Runner) tracking the PCs and the gentleman and lady under their protection through a forest. Life is abound, so he is but one aura in a sea of life. He is also trained specifically to counter spellcasters and, through various methods and a few slip ups on the PC's part on a previous run, knows the general capabilities of the party's mage, and is actively hiding from him.

On top of this, should the mage find the aura of the Prime Runner, the data gathered from Assensing is apparently based on hits, not net hits, so no matter how much he's trying to hide what he is, he's an open book to anybody with Assensing. Or am I reading that too literally?

To sum up, as I was a bit more verbose than I intended to be:

1. How exactly do you handle Physical Barrier, in regards to its reacting to the various laws of Physics?

2. How accurately do you allow your players to target with area spells?

3. How do you hide from an astrally projecting mage?

4. Is there a way to make yourself harder to detect?

Thank you for taking the time to read my post, and I'd appreciate any suggestions you can give or any rule citations that I can't seem to find in relation to these queries.
nezumi
QUOTE (KurenaiYami @ Mar 21 2008, 05:42 AM) *
First, Physical Barrier. The exact mechanics of what this wall is elude me. At one point, the player wanted to move the barrier with him, so as to have protection from something chasing him. At another point, he used it to support his weight and walk over a mine field without setting anything off. I have trouble seeing this spell being mobile at one point, yet afixed in space enough so that it hovers and supports weight. Maybe that's just me.

My first instinct is to treat it as an actual wall, with weight and the like, and leaving it immobile, but...I'm not sure about it, and very open to suggestions.


Hmm... I don't see a lot on this, so it's GM's choice. However you rule it is right.

I personally would say that the barrier has no weight, but is immobile (otherwise if you hit it, the barrier would just fly away!) So he can make a barrier bridge floating in space, but it won't move. He wants Armor for that.

QUOTE
Now, onto the second spell, Stunball, though this question goes for pretty much any area Combat spell. How specific do you allow targetting to be of area spells? The player wanted to catch a vampire on the very edge of the spell, while his prey (who was in physical contact with the vampire) remained unharmed.


If the two are a meter apart, I allow it. The rules are pretty clear, there's a line of full power, then a line of no power, unlike a grenade where the power drops off with distance. If I were feeling mean, I'd require he do some mental calculations to properly judge distance, but I generally don't. It's a cheap trick, but I like my players and the opportunities for them to use it are rare.

If the two are in close combat, or especially if the vampire is currently feeding, I wouldn't allow it, however. They aren't THAT good at judging distance.

QUOTE
Now, this one is probably more straightforward and I'm probably blind for not being able to find this rule in the BBB, but how does one "hide" from somebody trying to detect them via Astral Projection? Do they have to make perception tests that you can hide from? Can they see your aura on the other side of a wall, or do they have to pass through it to see the glow?


It's just a normal stealth/perception check. I believe there's a specialization of stealth for hiding on the astral. The book isn't nearly as specific as it should be, but I give bonuses if there's lots of cover (life or magic), penalties if it's a pretty lifeless area, and penalties if the person hiding can't see on the astral himself (since he doesn't know what to look for so much).

No, auras do not bleed through walls. While the aura glows, it doesn't extend very far at all, just barely beyond the clothes. I think it would be reasonable to argue that if there was something akin to power armor or an elemental from Mechwarrior, that would be sufficient to hide the person inside from targeting with spells.

QUOTE
On top of this, should the mage find the aura of the Prime Runner, the data gathered from Assensing is apparently based on hits, not net hits, so no matter how much he's trying to hide what he is, he's an open book to anybody with Assensing. Or am I reading that too literally?


IF the mage finds him, yes. You can't really change or lie on your aura. Technically, assensing tests are also the best lie detectors as well. There might be a magical solution to this, but non-mages need not apply.


bibliophile20
I treat Barrier spells like force fields as presented in Star Trek: a thin but strong wall of pure force that can support weight but has no friction. My personal opinions on the situations that you presented would be that, yes, he can move it, but he has to essentially recast it at half the original Force and reresist half the drain ever so often while its in motion. As for walking across it... it has no friction! Agility+Reaction (3) test to walk across at half normal speed across it without slipping and landing on his ass; getting back to his feet would be neigh impossible. And I suppose that he could give it an incline and slide across it, he'd hardly be in control of his own motion by the time he exited his homemade luge.
KurenaiYami
Thank you, Nezumi, for taking the time to answer all the questions. Your answers were most helpful. Though in light of this information, I should probably let the Mage tweak his character. He wanted to focus on Assensing, but...he has no Perception. Unless taking the simple action to Observe in Detail, he has a dice pool of 0.

And bibliophile20, your answer was amusing, as the mage asked in the last session if he'd be able to use his barriers to travel in a manner similar to Ice Man, and by your ruling, with enough skill...he could. I may have to take him seriously, now.
WeaverMount
About moving the the barrier RAW says it takes a complex action and may things that happen often in combat can break the magician's concentration.
QUOTE
If an area-effect spell is sustained [such as Physical Barrier], the affected area may be
moved with a Complex Action, as long as it remains within line of
sight. Characters who “drop out� of the affected area are no longer
affected by the spell; characters who are “enveloped� by the area
must defend against the effects of the spell as appropriate.
If the gamemaster chooses, certain circumstances may
threaten to break a magician’s concentration while she is sustaining
a spell, such as taking damage, full defense, dropping prone,
and so on. If a magician’s concentration is disrupted while sustaining
a spell, she must make a Willpower + Spellcasting (2)
Test to avoid dropping the sustained spell (note that the sustaining
modifier does not apply to this test).


About the targeting spells extremely precisely, IMO I actually think that software can handle it. DNI and/or Cyber Eyes, should be able to tell what point you are focused on visually. I'm pretty sure every tradition focus visually where they are casting. Spells have a very predictable AoE. A program uses your target point, the AoE, to paint a sphere of a given size and style on your Image Link. Given the sophistication of AR (and the libraries and IDEs that drive it) in SR4 you could likely write this applet in 20 minuets with no skill but a tutorial. It's up to you exactly what level of precision you think such a system would allow, or if you even like the feel, but by RAW it seems easy and inevitable to me
Ravor
And remember that any Mage worth her salt will have cybereyes and a datajack anyways. cyber.gif
WeaverMount
you know it cyber.gif
Larme
QUOTE (KurenaiYami @ Mar 21 2008, 05:42 AM) *
1. How exactly do you handle Physical Barrier, in regards to its reacting to the various laws of Physics?


The book says either it's a dome, or it's a wall. Both of these suggest that they're anchored to the ground. They wouldn't have said wall to refer to something that floats, would they? Last I checked, walls don't do that. And they didn't intend to let you make a floating horizontal wall to protect you from above, that's what the dome is for. Now, I don't think there's any problem with letting the "wall" be a floor, but it would be a floor touching the ground. But it's a force field with no weight, so it wouldn't set off landmines. And because it has a barrier rating, it can bear your weight, you could walk across the force field without setting off mines (unless your feet when through the barrier, like if you made a melee attack and made a hole in it). So I don't think your player should have been able to make a floating barrier, but he still could have walked across that minefield, so no biggie. I think the spell could also make a bridge, so long as it had solid ground to rest on at either end.

QUOTE
2. How accurately do you allow your players to target with area spells?


If someone wants to know "about" how far apart two people are, that's an obvious observation that doesn't require a perception test. If they're a meter apart, they'll get "pretty close, within a meter or two." If they're ten meters apart, they'll get "not that close, maybe 5-15 meters," or something like that. Making a careful observation would require a Perception check and an Observe In Detail action. The more hits on the test, the more accurately they can judge the distance. If they have a smartlink, it will still take an Observe In Detail as they take two sightings with the range finder and tell the software to triangulate distance. But the reading they get back will be accurate without needing a roll. In no case may a person perfectly target a spell's area without somehow figuring out the distances involved. Whether that's a matter of dead reckoning or lucky guessing, players can't know distances automatically. Those are something the GM should keep under his hat, since IRL people don't have an implicit understanding of how far apart things are from other things... Some people are great at eyeballing, but they still have to take a look and make a guess, it's not automatic.

QUOTE
3. How do you hide from an astrally projecting mage?


You use Infiltration. There is no spec for astral hiding. The spec depends on your environment, and applies equally to astral and meat hiding. That's because everything you can hide behind on the meat plane still conceals you on the astral. The only difference is that the visibility modifiers are different. On the astral, there are no normal visibility mods. But there are special astral visibility mods in Street Magic, like if a place is crawling with life forms (i.e. a crowded or densely foliated area) that imposes a pretty big penalty.

The only real difference that I can see is that very often, astral forms will be floating reasonably high above the ground when searching for something. If someone is hiding physically and is not thinking about the astral (or anything detecting them from above) they will leave themselves open to aerial detection. So a guy might be perfectly invisible from the street when hiding in a dumpster, but the astral spotter hovering above would have a pretty hefty bonus to his dice pool to find him if the lid isn't closed. Similarly, you could hide behind a car and be hard to spot from the street, but you would almost be *not* hiding from above. It's important to determine whether the person is expecting aerial detection when figuring out stealth with regards to a soaring astral mage.

QUOTE
4. Is there a way to make yourself harder to detect?


I think the astral grenade in Arsenal creates a modifier to astral perception. Hiding in a bunch of plants, or in a big crowd would impose the astral visibility modifiers from Street Magic. And obviously magical means, like illusion spells and the Concealment spirit power, would still work on the Astral.
fool
there was a post on the faq about using physical barrier as a bridge and it was ruled out as a possibility. Basically it can stop stuff but can't support weight. I'd have no problem whatsoever of allowing it to be floating in the air, however. It's magic so it doesn't need the support of a solid ground to stay in place.
if two people are in melee combat, or actually touching each other, it is harder to justify exactly targeting one and not the other. However, I would probably allow it in the close melee but not touching *(vampire feeding example). If you need to you can explain it as the mana of the one being a conductor and causing the spell to effect the other. The other thing to remember is that it effects everything in a los sphere centered on a specific point so if another ally is in the area there is no way to make pockets of protected areas for them
as to hiding on the astral simply go into a solid object.
Jhaiisiin
Just went through the FAQ and couldn't find any ruling like you mentioned, unless I'm blind and missed it. If barriers worked the way you mentioned though, it would make them more like the shield technology from dune rather than actual wall-style barriers. Fast hits don't get through, slow motions move right past with little to no resistance. That would completely change the dynamic of how they're used though.

As for the anchoring issue, a "wall" to me is a flat surface usually serving to enclose an area, be it angled or not. Not sure I'd rule "floor" as a "wall." If however, the game intended this as a more freeform version of wall to mean a flat, rectangular barrier erected anywhere within caster LOS, then that would be different. Could be overhead, under foot, or wherever else he needed.
Larme
QUOTE (fool @ Mar 23 2008, 03:54 PM) *
there was a post on the faq about using physical barrier as a bridge and it was ruled out as a possibility.


You could make that interpretation, but I don't find any support for it in the RAW. We're not talking about a bullet barrier spell, it's a barrier to everything. If a barrier couldn't support weight, someone would just need to push on it instead of whacking it and they'd sink right through. Unless you made the spell distinguish between people walking on it and pushing on it... That wouldn't make a lot of sense though IMO.

The RAW based interpretation would be that the barrier can only make a wall, not a floor. It can be vertical, or a dome. I don't think that's strictly required by the RAW, but it's definitely reasonable. And it's something you might want to make if you had a character wanting to use physical barrier to walk over every single floor everywhere, making all floor traps ineffective and also making the game feel kind of cheesy.
KurenaiYami
QUOTE (fool @ Mar 23 2008, 12:54 PM) *
as to hiding on the astral simply go into a solid object.

The person in question is not on the Astral, so should he attempt to go into a solid object, either his head or the object would likely suffer some damage.

To all who have posted, thank you. I feel as though I have a reasonable pool of opinions and rule citings to start to craft some rulings for my game.

For Physical Barrier, I'll have it support weight and be affected by gravity (so no more of his floating disc nonsense without Levitate). I'm not sure whether or not it was designed to work as a floor, but I can't think of a reason the spell should be restricted to two dimensions...but for game balance...I guess I'll go with the "only wall" interpretation.

As for specific border targeting, should the targets be within one meter of eachother, I'll make the character use Perception to figure out if it's a safe shot. Once they get to be physically touching, I'll either make it impossible or make an extremely high perception test to do partial damage (as the target won't be fully enveloped) without harming the hostage. I'll have to think a bit more on that one.

The Astral hiding thing has been well covered. Thank you all.
Jhaiisiin
I KNEW I forgot to mention the targeting thing. In our group, we have people make a logic+perception roll to see if the character is able to figure out on the fly exactly where to target that darned stunball.
nezumi
The faq is terrible. If the faq says you can't use the barrier as a bridge probably means that the most reasonable explanation is you CAN use it as a bridge.

edit: Changed correct saying wall where I meant bridge.
Whipstitch
I'm not a fan of the Logic+Perception idea at all. It already costs 3 bps to know the spell and another 4-24 points spent on Spellcasting skills to know how to use your talents as it is, plus it seems to be boning Charisma and Intuition traditions that don't emphasize Logic for no particular reason but to give them another point of failure. Targeting your spell properly is a spellcasting check, and it's already required; arbitrarily jerking around the radius and location should be glitch territory-- Heck, considering how disastrous a miscalculation could be, it could very well be critical glitch territory.
Larme
QUOTE (nezumi @ Mar 23 2008, 09:05 PM) *
The faq is terrible. If the faq says you can't use the barrier as a wall probably means that the most reasonable explanation is you CAN use it as a bridge.


First of all, the FAQ doesn't say that at all. And the fact that the FAQ says something is not a logical reason for doing the opposite. The FAQ is terrible, therefore it's wrong is an ad hominem logical fallacy, except of course that the FAQ is not a people. But the principle is the same.
Method
QUOTE (WeaverMount @ Mar 21 2008, 09:52 PM) *
About the targeting spells extremely precisely, IMO I actually think that software can handle it. DNI and/or Cyber Eyes, should be able to tell what point you are focused on visually. I'm pretty sure every tradition focus visually where they are casting. Spells have a very predictable AoE. A program uses your target point, the AoE, to paint a sphere of a given size and style on your Image Link. Given the sophistication of AR...
I would agree except that the magician probably doesn't think in terms of "force = diameter" when casting a spell. That strikes me as a little metagamey. The problem is that the magician has to estimate how much of his power to use, and could very easily misjudge the amount of juice he needs to put into a spell to get the radius he wants. It would be like trying to throw a baseball at a certain speed or rolling a bowling ball just hard enough to knock down the first pin only. While theoretically possible I think it would be very difficult to do.
Whipstitch
In fact, I bet it's so difficult to do you need some skill called Spellcasting for it. Oh, wait.
Method
I just don't think that a magician has that finite control over his power regardless of skill and especially while casting an AoE spell. I wouldn't allow it. If you want it to work that way in your game then have at it.
Whipstitch
Yeah, I was just pointing out that things were getting out into houserule territory here. I play by the RAW, for the most part, so mages can and do have fine control of their powers, it's just difficult. I let people withhold dice from their spellcasting tests to expand or reduce the radius and everything. The more you tinker, the more likely you are to glitch or have the spell resisted.
WeaverMount
QUOTE (Method @ Mar 23 2008, 08:47 PM) *
I would agree except that the magician probably doesn't think in terms of "force = diameter" when casting a spell. That strikes me as a little metagamey. The problem is that the magician has to estimate how much of his power to use, and could very easily misjudge the amount of juice he needs to put into a spell to get the radius he wants. It would be like trying to throw a baseball at a certain speed or rolling a bowling ball just hard enough to knock down the first pin only. While theoretically possible I think it would be very difficult to do.



Here is the thing AoE spells have very measurable step function. Each force is 2 whole meters of difference. That is a whole person's length of difference. I'm pretty sure that in the last 59 years the boys at MITT noticed this pattern. You can have spells be smooth gradients at your table, but that is soundly a house rule. Whipstich already pointed out saying magicians can't pick there exact force is house rules nerf justified by your conception of SR spell casting. There is one point that I'm certain that all magicians know beyound all doubt: the point they start overcasting.
Method
QUOTE (WeaverMount @ Mar 23 2008, 07:35 PM) *
Whipstich already pointed out saying magicians can't pick there exact force is house rules nerf justified by your conception of SR spell casting.
Thats exactly what I'm getting at though- the *magician* doesn't pick their exact force because force is a metagame construct. The *player* chooses the force. So yes, in the game of SR there is a "very measurable step function" but it is an artifact of a rules system. The magian doesn't necessarily think in those terms- he gauges the power of the spell by his level of exertion. Again, its just like in baseball- we can measure a pitch accurately in MPH but the pitcher just throws the ball faster or slower. Asking him to throw it at exactly 83.5 MPH is unrealistic. And to be clear, I use the RAW when it comes to AoE. I just don't think the character perceives the SR world in term of the rules.


QUOTE (WeaverMount @ Mar 23 2008, 07:35 PM) *
There is one point that I'm certain that all magicians know beyound all doubt: the point they start overcasting.
I completely agree. But again, I don't think the character's thought process is "Okay, well my Magic attribute is a 4, but I really need to nuke this guy, so I'll cast at a Force 6..."


[edit] And again, let me reiterate that I agree the technology is there. In fact I think your idea of an AR overlay of the spells AoE is actually a cool idea. I just think that the hard part would be for a magician to accurately fill that area exactly to the edge without going over.
magi
Well, I would say that physical barrier could be used to put stuff on, move around on, whatever - it's a wall of force created to a size and sturdiness of the caster's choosing, shaped like a flat surface, e.g. wall, or a dome. doesn't have to be anchored, but does have to maintain that shape.

Of course, when using it to "fly" you have to take a complex action, which limits your IPs by 1 (can be bad if you don't have Increase Reflexes on a sustaining focus). You also can only move at your normal walking rate, or use a free action to move at your run rate. The most notable issue is the fact that if someone DESTROYS the wall under your feet, you fall to the ground - I could see this ending badly.

For all uses that require you moving somewhere, Levitate is the better option. Period. You fly your magic x # of hits for free (unlike using the wall, there is no action required; this could, at 4 hits at magic 6, give you 24 meters per combat turn, which is 1 less than a human at a run and does not incur the run penalty), can move at angles a plane or dome would not allow, and can't be shot out from underneath you. It also happens to have a total DV of 2 less than physical barrier no matter what force it is cast at.

Maybe physical barrier would be more useful if you were helping an army move across a ravine, but in most circumstances, Levitate is better. Your player is screwing himself for not spending the Karma to learn it.

The other two, I think, were adequately covered. I would only like to comment on the idea of hitting the vamp with the stun ball:

I would say he can hit the vamp precisely, unless the vamp and whatever he is interacting with occupy practically the same space (then it might be call-worthy). My thought is, he is hurting himself by using stunball like that, instead of using stunbolt. Things that could impede the caster would be things like not being able to see the point of spell origin (like it says in RAW, you can hit a target that you can't see with an area effect spell as long as you can see the point of origin for the spell - this works both ways), and not being able to hit something in the middle of a combat because they are surrounded by friendlies. It also has a higher DV, which is not as economical when the spell is used on a single target. In the case of the vamp, your player's pc got lucky. Don't let him get lucky a second time.
Jhaiisiin
The thing is that RAW doesn't say anything at all about targeting AOE spells, except that it's "over there." It doesn't go into the nitty gritty. I make them make the perception roll because they have to calculate on the fly precicely where to put that amount of energy to only hurt the badguys. The spellcasting test makes sure they don't over or underjuice the spell in the casting. It's an on the fly math problem, hence logic. If you don't like it, cool, don't use it in your games. We use it in ourse to keep people from willy-nilly fine-targeting AOE spells to only hit that one guard amidst a bunch of friendlies when it should be bloody difficult to figure out exactly where to center your blast to get that effect.
fool
now that i think about it it may have been a faq for sr3
another idea I had on the targetting issue is to allow for some scatter. possibly 1d3 m with a reduction of 1m/ take aim action. I know it always bogged down combat to have the mages sitting there trying to figure out the perfect point to place their aoe spells
Larme
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Mar 23 2008, 09:05 PM) *
I'm not a fan of the Logic+Perception idea at all. It already costs 3 bps to know the spell and another 4-24 points spent on Spellcasting skills to know how to use your talents as it is, plus it seems to be boning Charisma and Intuition traditions that don't emphasize Logic for no particular reason but to give them another point of failure. Targeting your spell properly is a spellcasting check, and it's already required; arbitrarily jerking around the radius and location should be glitch territory-- Heck, considering how disastrous a miscalculation could be, it could very well be critical glitch territory.


I don't know where anyone would get logic from. But judging the distance between two points is definitely a Perception check.

I don't think your argument holds up that Spellcasting is the skill used to accurately target an area spell. If that was true, then success on the Spellcasting test would effect whether you hit only the people you wanted to, or whether it was everyone. As it is, the spellcasting test itself has nothing to do with the area of the spell, no matter how well or poorly you do on it, the area will be the same.

The fact is, mages have accurate control over spell area to the meter. What they are not able to know implicitly, however, is exactly which one they should use. It's the exact same issue that a sammie faces when tossing a grenade. He knows the radius of his HE grenade, and of his AP Grenade, but which one should he use? Are you going to tell me that throwing a grenade in the exact right spot so it doesn't (before scatter) kill you is incorporated into the Throwing test, or into the Heavy Weapons test when shooting a grenade launcher? The simple fact is that those skills affect your accuracy, but they do not tell you where to throw. You must first figure out where to throw and only then throw at that point. It's the same for magic. The only difference is that sammies are highly likely to bring range finders, while that might be something that a mage forgets about.
Whipstitch
Those use different mechanics, and the fact of the matter is enough hits by the samurai will reduce scatter to the point the attack goes right where it is supposed to go. In fact, you can start staging the damage up after a certain point. The difference here is different degrees of success. A samurai can put the grenade where he wants, but he has to roll well enough. A mage can put a spell where he wants it to go, but he has to increase his degree of difficulty to do so by affecting the size of the spell in some cases. And for what it's worth, spellcasting CAN affect the radius of the spell. You can withhold dice from your Spellcasting test to affect the AoE. You make things too hard on yourself and don't get a spell when you fail the test or it is resisted. You manage to succeed at the spell but glitch? It might get targeted somewhere you don't want. As far as the accuracy thing goes, note how the game never tells explicity tells us why you miss. Maybe you DID just misjudge the distance. When you reduced scatter to zero you certainly must have done a better job than usual somewhere.
Jhaiisiin
QUOTE (Larme)
I don't know where anyone would get logic from. But judging the distance between two points is definitely a Perception check.


Well, logic is your ability to discern, calculate and analyze. I simply replaced intuition with logic for the purpose of the test. It's not uncommon for our group to do that with varied tests. Intuition + Firearms to figure out what weapon that gunshot came from. Logic + stealth to calculate how long it'll take you to sneak from point A to point B. Body + Athletics for an endurance run. Reaction + Metahuman Physiology to avoid Bubba the Love Troll's attempted penetration. You get the idea. It may not be RAW, but sometimes you need a different stat to match up with the skill to appropriately reflect the required situation.
Ravor
QUOTE (magi)
... Things that could impede the caster would be things like not being able to see the point of spell origin (like it says in RAW, you can hit a target that you can't see with an area effect spell as long as you can see the point of origin for the spell - this works both ways), and not being able to hit something in the middle of a combat because they are surrounded by friendlies. ...


I'm not quite sure that I understand what you are saying, but AOE spells can only hit people that aren't in the Mage's LOS if they are indirect spells like fireball. Also I wouldn't allow a Mage to set off a spell's point of origin at a spot that he didn't have LOS to.
Larme
QUOTE (Whipstitch @ Mar 24 2008, 02:49 PM) *
Those use different mechanics, and the fact of the matter is enough hits by the samurai will reduce scatter to the point the attack goes right where it is supposed to go.


You misunderstand my entire point. The question isn't whether it goes where the sam wants it to go, the question is whether the sam knows where it should go in the first place. You can't say "I want to launch my grenade so that it hits the enemy and not me." That requires your character to know two things: a) the radius of the grenade, b) his position relative to his target. One he probably knows, the second he must figure out somehow. He can't just make the roll, and have the GM place the grenade for him. Grenades must be aimed at a particular point, otherwise scatter would be meaningless. You have to say "10m in front of me, in the direction of the troll," or "right where the troll is standing." That's how you get a point to determine scatter from. That point is not set by the GM, the player must decide it. If his opponent is 5m in front of him, and he wants to overshoot by 5m so the 10m radius catches the enemy but not him, he needs to figure out where exactly 10m away is. The good news is that he's a sammy and has a range finder, unless he's an idiot, so it's no problem to do that.

Mages are not exempt from this. They cannot choose where to throw their spell abstractly. If they want precision targeting with an area of effect, they need to know ranges. This can be done with a smartlink or a range finder very quickly. Though calculating the distance between two points, instead of just from yourself to a point, would still take Observe in Detail. If you lack any technological assistance, you need a regular Perception check, and your accuracy will be based on your hits.

I don't agree that Logic should be used, however, because guessing ranges is really an intuitive function. You can't logically deduce how far two things are from each other, unless you have two of the sides and the angle, and you just need to do some trigonometry... I myself am a wargamer, and I commonly guess ranges. I don't logically deduce where 12" is, I just eyeball it and guess. I know a carpenter who can guess distances in inches with a single glance, nothing logical about it, he just knows.
Jhaiisiin
I'd day logic covers "just knowing." He has worked enough that he can accurately gauge distances with a glance. My grandfather was like that. He could tell the size of a nut from 6 feet away down to the exact size ("That's 5/8" right there!"). I could see it being intuition as well. Honestly, I could go either way with it. I would still require the test in varied circumstances though.
fool
if you were to do a scatter for aoe spells, I'd probably do something like 1d3 m with an intuition test; each hit reducing the scatter by 1 m. mostly because perception is related to intuitions. Logic seems more like aclculation something which i suppose you could do like a take aim action.
Method
I think if you were going by the common usage, Logic would make the most sense (being the foundation of mathematics), but the SR definitions are just vague enough that Logic or Intuition could work. Both are valid depending on how you interpret the RAW on page 61.

But I think a lot of these awkward house rules could be avoided altogether simply by agreeing that you can't use grenades or AoE spells for precision targeting, because thats not what they are designed for, which was my point before. I just wouldn't allow it to begin with.
Stahlseele
scatter for AOE?
but only elemental combat spells right?
they get resolved like ranged fighthing, so if one were to go from grenade throwing instead of shooting it'd fit . .
not the mana-kind?
those go:"i can see it, i cast there, everything in the vincinity drops!"
and i don't think either one of those let's you chose not to affect vertain targets, or am i thinking not straight(HULK STRAIGHT) here?
fool
actually i was thinking it might be useful for all aoe spelss because the mage doesn't have time to sit there and figure out the exact spot that would get all his enemies and leave his buddies untouched. If your pc's don't sit there and metagame trying to find the best r=x circle then it's not so much of an issue.
In short the problem is figuring out which "there" is best
Larme
QUOTE (Jhaiisiin @ Mar 25 2008, 03:43 PM) *
I'd day logic covers "just knowing." He has worked enough that he can accurately gauge distances with a glance. My grandfather was like that. He could tell the size of a nut from 6 feet away down to the exact size ("That's 5/8" right there!"). I could see it being intuition as well. Honestly, I could go either way with it. I would still require the test in varied circumstances though.


"Just knowing" is the very definition of intuition. Logic requires reasoning. You can use logic to judge distances if, say, you know some landmarks. i.e. one point is 10m away, another point is 5m away, and so the point between them must be 7.5m away. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about eyeballing a distance in one quick look. There really is no argument that logic would apply. Especially because that goes against the RAW. The RAW say that Perception is linked to intuition. Without a compelling, non-misguided reason for changing it, you shouldn't.
Jhaiisiin
So you're saying you should *never* link a completely different attribute to a skill if the situation warrants? Alright then, we see this from differing points of view. You could reason however that you know that it's 6.5 meters to that person because the shipping crate over there is a standard 1m/side shipping crate, the badguy's sword is a standard katana measuring X inches, etc. You can make judgements based on items in your field of vision. I did already concede the intuition bit though, so really, this is all moot.

I'm also fully aware the RAW doesn't state that you can or should link skills to differing attributes if the situation warrants. That's a shortcoming of the situation I think, as Logic + Firearms works beautifully for identifying guns, and that's only one of dozens of examples I could come up with if pressed.
Whipstitch
Identifying guns is an Armorer check or perhaps a Knowledge skill, if you're going by RAW precedents. biggrin.gif


...I'm sorry, I just feel like being a pain in the ass today.
Larme
QUOTE (Jhaiisiin @ Mar 25 2008, 10:37 PM) *
So you're saying you should *never* link a completely different attribute to a skill if the situation warrants? Alright then, we see this from differing points of view. You could reason however that you know that it's 6.5 meters to that person because the shipping crate over there is a standard 1m/side shipping crate, the badguy's sword is a standard katana measuring X inches, etc. You can make judgements based on items in your field of vision. I did already concede the intuition bit though, so really, this is all moot.

I'm also fully aware the RAW doesn't state that you can or should link skills to differing attributes if the situation warrants. That's a shortcoming of the situation I think, as Logic + Firearms works beautifully for identifying guns, and that's only one of dozens of examples I could come up with if pressed.


I'm not saying never. Just not here, because it doesn't make sense. Most cases, there will be a skill/attribute combination to cover what you want to do. If there isn't, go ahead and make one up. Just make sure that you're not making things up that are blatantly wrong wink.gif
Stahlseele
QUOTE (fool @ Mar 26 2008, 01:34 AM) *
actually i was thinking it might be useful for all aoe spelss because the mage doesn't have time to sit there and figure out the exact spot that would get all his enemies and leave his buddies untouched. If your pc's don't sit there and metagame trying to find the best r=x circle then it's not so much of an issue.
In short the problem is figuring out which "there" is best

AOE-spells are basically magical grenades, so does the sammy get this for his grenades too?
Jhaiisiin
Indirect AOE spells are more like magical grenades, and even then that's a poor comparison. Direct are very explicit, fixed radius areas of effect. That's why you can fine tune target a spell, while a grenade, if fine tuned, won't do damage to anyone. AOE spells are at full damage right up to their edge of effect then they go poof, down to zero. Grenades don't do that.
Raij
QUOTE
And obviously magical means, like illusion spells and the Concealment spirit power, would still work on the Astral.


Small correction that came up in another thread, Concealment is a physical power, meaning it has no effect over the astral plane. Also while the illusion spell may hide the user, the spell itself still creates a visible effect on the astral plane.
fool
In our campaigns we've always ruled that illusion spells don't hide you on the astral plane at all.
And Sammies already have the means of reducing the scatter on their grenades. Like I said if your pc mages don't sit there and try to figure out the exact best spot to toss off their spell, then you probably don't need to have aoe spells have any type of scatter, if they do then you might want to consider the idea. My reasoning is that it shouldn't take the player longer than a combat phase to decide what he's going to do and where the spell is going to go off. If your sammies are doing the same thing, sorry that's not my department.
Jhaiisiin
Mages when tossing spells just pick a point, and the spell manifests there. No scatter. Only thing you have to worry about is whether or not your friends are in the radius.
Tarantula
I'd have to say, if they're going so far as to try to hit one character who is in contact with another, without harming one of them, then it comes down to a dice roll. If the player continues to argue that its very easy, I'd give him 3 seconds, point at a chair, and ask him to locate the point thats between 6 and 7 meters away from it. Then get a tape measure, and see if hes right. However much he is off, is how off his character is. Why? Because, if he doesn't agree to a dice roll to represent his character figuring it out, I'll give him the option of proving how easy he claims it is. If he does that, then I'd be more lax about it in the future, if he screws it up horribly, then I'd tell him to use the dice rolls.
fool
that's kinda what I was saying. I wouldn't use a scatter roll on every aoe spell, just when the situation warrented. I.E. if the mage was trying to hit specific peopple and not others or the player was sitting there metagaming trying to calculate the best possible center for the spell.
In my view the spell casting skill has less to do with being able to calculate an appropriate center for a radius and more to do with learning how to successfully channel more and more mana.
nathanross
QUOTE (KurenaiYami @ Mar 21 2008, 05:42 AM) *
1. How exactly do you handle Physical Barrier, in regards to its reacting to the various laws of Physics?

First off, let's see the spell's description:
QUOTE (SR4 BBB @ p. 204)
Physical Barrier (Environmental, Area)
Type: P Range: LOS(A) Duration: S DV: (F / 2) + 3
Barrier spells create glowing, translucent force-fields with both 1 point of Armor and Structure rating per hit (see Barriers, p. 157). The caster can form the barrier as dome with a radius and height equal to the spell’s normal radius. The caster can also form a wall with a height and length equal to the caster’s Force. The caster can adjust size of the barrier the same as the radius of an area spell (p. 173).

Physical Barrier creates a physical wall. Anything the size of a molecule (or less) can pass through the barrier, including air or other gases. Anything bigger treats the barrier as a normal physical wall. Attacks directed through a barrier have a –1 dice pool visibility penalty. The barrier does not impede spells. The barrier can be brought down by physical attacks, but as long as it is sustained it regenerates damage quickly—any reductions in Structure Rating are restored at the beginning of the next Combat Turn. If the barrier is penetrated, however, it collapses and the spell ends. Physical Barrier cannot be used on the astral plane.

WeaverMount already quoted RAW for how to "move" the spell, but to reiterate:

QUOTE (SR4 BBB @ p. 174, Step 7: Ongoing Effects)
If an area-effect spell is sustained, the affected area may be moved with a Complex Action, as long as it remains within line of sight. Characters who “drop out� of the affected area are no longer affected by the spell; characters who are “enveloped� by the area must defend against the effects of the spell as appropriate.

If the gamemaster chooses, certain circumstances may threaten to break a magician’s concentration while she is sustaining a spell, such as taking damage, full defense, dropping prone, and so on. If a magician’s concentration is disrupted while sustaining a spell, she must make a Willpower + Spellcasting (2) Test to avoid dropping the sustained spell (note that the sustaining modifier does not apply to this test).

As for supporting weight, I feel that there is no reason why it should be able to. It resists a Force trying to break through it, but there is nothing in the spell description that says it can support an object above the ground. Of course, since it can act as a sphere (though no mention of friction is made) and since it will not allow any physical object through itself, you could say that it can support something above the ground. Also, there is room within the spell description to question the definition of a "wall". Is the "wall" that the spell creates vertical or can it be horizontal. Since you could define it as an object separating volumes of space, then a floor can also be considered a wall. This then opens the can of worms as to whether the barrier must be touching the ground or not. I believe this is 100% up to the GM, though I personally take it as limited to a vertical wall or sphere projecting from the ground.

As for treating this as a real wall, that is not true. If you want to make a spell that creates a Permanent wall, then devise a new spell, it is clear from the description that this is a sustained spell.

QUOTE (KurenaiYami @ Mar 21 2008, 05:42 AM) *
2. How accurately do you allow your players to target with area spells?

In general, to have a good idea about the distances involved, make an Intuition + Perception test (not Logic, as Intuition is the linked Attribute for Perception) to determine how far away the targets are from each other. Then if you want to limit the radius:

QUOTE (SR4 BBB @ p. 174, Step 3: Choose the Target(s))
Area Spells: Some spells target areas or points in space; in this case the caster must be able to see the center of the area affected. All visible targets within the area are affected; area spells can affect more than one target at a time. The base radius for all area spells is the Force in meters. Area spells affect all valid targets within the radius of effect, friend and foe alike (including the caster). For this reason, spellcasters often choose to vary the radius of area spells. This is done by withholding dice from the Spellcasting Test. The caster can reduce or expand the base radius by 1 meter for every die withheld from the Spellcasting Test. Dice expended to change the radius of effect cannot be used in any related test, such as resisting Drain for that spell.

There is also the issue of indirect vs. direct combat spells. Direct combat spells (the one in question) must be grounded through a target, after which they hit all other targets within (Force) meters. As stated above you can remove dice from the spellcasting and drain tests to increase/decrease the radius. How you interpret the rules in this particular instance (less than 1m between who you want to hit, and who you don't) is completely up to you.

I personally would allow the mage to limit the radius of stunball to only the one person at a -DP equal to the full force of the spell (reducing radius to 0). I feel this is balanced primarily due to the loss of die on the drain test. -4DP to drain is no laughing matter, -5+ is a serious liability, and could easily kill the caster.

QUOTE (KurenaiYami @ Mar 21 2008, 05:42 AM) *
3. How do you hide from an astrally projecting mage?

4. Is there a way to make yourself harder to detect?

In RAW, the only way to "mask" is through the Masking metamagic:

QUOTE (SR4 BBB @ p. 190)
Masking: A character who learns masking can change the appearance of her aura/astral form to do the following: look mundane, look as though her Magic is higher or lower than it is (+/– your grade of initiation), or look as though she is a different type of astral creature. When someone attempts to assense the aura of an initiate using masking, make an Assensing + Intuition Opposed Test against the initiate’s Intuition + Magic + initiate grade. If they get fewer hits, they see only the false aura. If they get more hits, they will see both the illusory aura she provided and her true aura. To disguise her astral form to look like a spirit or other astrally active creature, the character must be capable of astral projection.

Though it doesn't say that you can change your aura to look like some "non-astral creature", I say it can. Also, as far as I know, you never use perception on the Astral plane, only Assensing, so it really doesn't matter how low their Perception pool is (though I am curious why they only have 0 when defaulting to intuition, as this would imply that their Intuition attribute is 1, which seems strange for a Assensing specialist, as it is the Assensing linked att).

As for mundane ways to hide, you could houserule the Magic Resistance quality to provide something of an astral chameleon quality as well. Or this anti-magic expert (who would have a decent knowledge of magic even though he is mundane) would know that the easiest way to hide is to dig a hole and bury himself. If he covered himself almost completely with plant life, the GM should give at least a -4DP to assense him, as there are many auras in close proximity. If he was wearing a plant suit, I'd even allow an infiltration test to be made.






Larme
QUOTE (nathanross @ Mar 26 2008, 05:13 PM) *
As for supporting weight, I feel that there is no reason why it should be able to. It resists a Force trying to break through it, but there is nothing in the spell description that says it can support an object above the ground. Of course, since it can act as a sphere (though no mention of friction is made) and since it will not allow any physical object through itself, you could say that it can support something above the ground. Also, there is room within the spell description to question the definition of a "wall". Is the "wall" that the spell creates vertical or can it be horizontal. Since you could define it as an object separating volumes of space, then a floor can also be considered a wall. This then opens the can of worms as to whether the barrier must be touching the ground or not. I believe this is 100% up to the GM, though I personally take it as limited to a vertical wall or sphere projecting from the ground.


I think that your interpretation of it being a wall or sphere anchored to the ground, is correct. It just says "dome" and "wall," it doesn't say "floor" or "flat surface." And that language solves the entire problem that we're trying to address. It can, like any barrier, support weight, but it can't be abused as an Ice Man flying bridge because it only makes walls and domes. That's 100% within the RAW, and it also doesn't invite abuse.
Tarantula
The spell says the caster can also form a wall with a height and length equal to the spell's force (assuming in meters). They can adjust the Size of it, the same as area spells. So, couldn't they withold 6 dice on a force 6 wall, and have it be 0 meters tall, but 6 meters long, and thus get a "floor"?
Larme
LOL no. Something 6 feet long and 0 meters tall would not convert itself to a floor. A floor still has a length and a width, floors are not one dimensional. Something 6 meters long and 0 meters tall would be a one dimensional, horizontal line rotfl.gif
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