Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Devs please help us out on the definition of some rules
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
masterofm
Ok so I have noticed that there are quite a few topics that go off topic on a rules debate (mainly dealing with rules that are not so clearly defined) so I propose that people bring up all the little small things that need a finer interpretation on what the rule was intended to do to prevent topic derailment.

I would love to have this one settled once and for all because I'm tired of arguing it.

Does the illusion spell invisibility or improved invisibility truly make things invisible so as to use it as a way to get around LOS issues?

Can mages chose to fail to see through their own spell?

example: I cast improved invisibility on a metal box I am hiding behind. I cast a stunball at the enemies charging at me because I now have LOS. Is this valid?

If that works then the mage casting would have had to fail against their own spell to be able to gain LOS. Can the mage choose not to resist the spell that they cast on the metal box or is this just not an option? Can you see the person and still not gain LOS on the target in the same way that you could see someone with radar vision but still be unable to target them?


It would be nice if other people could come up with similar loosely defined rules, or arguments on other topics so that hopefully we can all gain some clarity and allow for a single topic where devs can chime in and help us all out.
Blade
How does the defaulting in the Matrix work? (when rolling skill+program)
masterofm
How obvious is movement. If a person takes a single step does it actually translate into them taking five steps so that then take one very long blurry step, or can a person just pump their legs faster and takes five steps for every one instead? What does a person or anything with legs look like when movemented?
Tarantula
Nitpick... you don't "see" people with radar, which is why you can't cast on them with it.
HappyDaze
QUOTE
Nitpick... you don't "see" people with radar, which is why you can't cast on them with it.

I really think that all of the problems could be cleared up if the only way to target spells was with Astral Perception. Just give it to the Mystic Adept, and everything else will work out fine.
Kurious
Kudos masterofm for starting this thread.

/hoping for 'official' clarity to some very interpretable situations.)
wind_in_the_stones
QUOTE (masterofm @ Sep 10 2008, 02:47 AM) *
Does the illusion spell invisibility or improved invisibility truly make things invisible so as to use it as a way to get around LOS issues?

As much as I would love to see many issues cleared up by the authors, answering this one probably won't count. I, for one, refuse to believe that an illusion spell can reveal something that the caster is unaware of. I would categorically refuse to play by that rule. And I'm sure there are others that feel the opposite (and no, you don't have to tell me about it). It's probably better left to the imaginations of the players. Most groups tend to come to some sort of agreement about this sort of thing.
ShadeRavnos
I would think that with both Invis spells it would dwpwnd on how they exactly worked. Do they remove the object from the viewers perception or actually bend light around the object. Find out that answer and the problem's solved(I hope)
Stahlseele
regular invisibility in shadowrun basically tells you:"you can't SEE it!"
improved invisibility somehwere actually had the part about beinding light around said objects written into the description . . i think in one of the 3rd ed books . .
toturi
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Sep 11 2008, 05:49 PM) *
regular invisibility in shadowrun basically tells you:"you can't SEE it!"
improved invisibility somehwere actually had the part about beinding light around said objects written into the description . . i think in one of the 3rd ed books . .

4th Ed had the "warping of light" description in Improved Invisibility. 3rd Ed was fine.

In either edition, there was never a "bending" of light.
Stahlseele
warping, bending, same difference <.< . .
bigger problem than that would be the old: if i pick up that stone over yonder and put it into my bag while invisible, will the stone become invisible too?
toturi
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Sep 11 2008, 06:10 PM) *
warping, bending, same difference <.< . .
bigger problem than that would be the old: if i pick up that stone over yonder and put it into my bag while invisible, will the stone become invisible too?

The difference is that the statement can be taken to mean that literally, the light around the subject is warped such that there is the illusion of the subject being invisible. Using "bend", then the more likely inference is that the light rays are bent around the subject.
Stahlseele
if the warping only made it appear as if the object WERE invisible, then cameras and the such would still pick it up?
and if the light rays were bent around the object it would not be illusion but physical manipulation, but as the light rays don't hit the object any more and thus are not reflected, the object itself would become invisible, even to cameras.
in both cases, radar and ultrasound and other such nonsense still picks it up.

i still wanna know about my pet rock O.o
Hasimir
Just my personal take on it...but...

If the "invisibility" is caused by an ILLUSION, then no...you can't "see through".
Your mind refuses to register the presence of the invisible thing, but you don't see past it or inside it...it is not "transparent", it is just out of your perception.
So, the mage hiding behind an invisible door will be invisible too...the stone placed inside an invisible bag will vanish from perception...etc.
The improved version is just so powerful and complex that it has the same effect on machines, it basically causes a "glitch" in the hardware/software...or it warps the target's conditions so that it become unperceptible...but that's all.
You can bend the light all you want, but you still won't be able to see INSIDE a closed box.

It basically works like the discipline of Obfuscate from the game Vampire.

But...someone could create a MANIPULATION based Invisibility spell that makes the phisical body of the subject turn "transparent".
THIS will allow LOS.
THIS will allow to see inside the box.
THIS will make you invisible to cameras from the very start (but other sensors may not be fooled, like Thermo-sensors, Ultrasound, etc)

There are Pros and Cons:
- the Illusion masks your presence working on the other's MIND...they won't walk into you, for example; they will just subconciously avoid you.
- the Manipulation instead alters your physical status...in the example above, people may happen to accidentally stumble on you.

Say, you are fighting and decide to flee using an Invisibility spell.
With the Illusion you can stand still in the place you were just a moment ago, and your opponent will NOT be able to blindly hit you...you are simply "gone" and if he tryes to hit something in your general direction, his mind will make him hit AROUND you.
With the Manipulation instead you are simply not-visible...so unless you MOVE AWAY your opponent could succesfully hit you...the situation only calls for modifiers relative to a sort of "total cover" or maybe "blind fighting".

A middle-ground option would be a spell that summons a sort of "mirage" doing the light-bending thing.
You don't affect minds or senses...you are just not-visible.
So you ARE there, you block LOS, you are not see-through, you can get stumbled upon, you can be blindly attacked...you can be smelled and touched and heard and "seen" with thermo-vision and radar and anything that doesn't involve light-perception.

...

ILLUSION has to be defined.
Does the effect take place on the viewer's mind, through mental suggestion?
Or does the effect take place in the physical world, through the projection of faux perceptive stimuli? (creating a mirage)
Wakshaani
Yeah, it'd kinda HAVE to block LOS, in order to keep teh world from breaking. Otherwise, cast invisibility on, say, a wall and clobber the people behind it, or a car to blast those inside, or or or...

Tinted windows stop magic. Been around for decades. Why bother if teh mage can just turn the *window* invisible and mind control you to come outside?

Gotta say I'm down with the "Nice try, but nuh-uh." crowd.
Kurious
The debate on invisibility on objects (and all the related questions that spring from it) is completely interpretable... and quite divisive.

Worse, just like a couple other threads that I have seen, I have a funny feeling even if the Devs answer the question, half of the poster here will not accept the answer and will continue to insist that their logic is correct, or insist that 'the book doesn't say that' so the Devs are wrong.

~I for one would love the clarification regardless...~

(Also, players, keep in mind... if you bend the rules to get an unfair advantage over your enemies- you in turn set precedence for the same tactics to be used against you. Do this at your own risk wink.gif ).
toturi
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Sep 11 2008, 06:24 PM) *
if the warping only made it appear as if the object WERE invisible, then cameras and the such would still pick it up?
and if the light rays were bent around the object it would not be illusion but physical manipulation, but as the light rays don't hit the object any more and thus are not reflected, the object itself would become invisible, even to cameras.
in both cases, radar and ultrasound and other such nonsense still picks it up.

i still wanna know about my pet rock O.o

If the warping made it appear as if the object was invisible, then cameras and such would not be able to pick it up; because even to the cameras, it would also appear to be invisible.

Your pet rock should become invisible insofar that it does not break your invisibility/improved invisibility.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Wakshaani @ Sep 11 2008, 06:56 AM) *
Yeah, it'd kinda HAVE to block LOS, in order to keep teh world from breaking. Otherwise, cast invisibility on, say, a wall and clobber the people behind it, or a car to blast those inside, or or or...

Tinted windows stop magic. Been around for decades. Why bother if teh mage can just turn the *window* invisible and mind control you to come outside?

Gotta say I'm down with the "Nice try, but nuh-uh." crowd.

Tinted windows stop magic. Been around for decades. Why bother if teh mage can just powerbolt the *window* to smithereens and mind control you to come outside?

QUOTE (Kurious @ Sep 11 2008, 08:30 AM) *
The debate on invisibility on objects (and all the related questions that spring from it) is completely interpretable... and quite divisive.

Worse, just like a couple other threads that I have seen, I have a funny feeling even if the Devs answer the question, half of the poster here will not accept the answer and will continue to insist that their logic is correct, or insist that 'the book doesn't say that' so the Devs are wrong.

~I for one would love the clarification regardless...~

(Also, players, keep in mind... if you bend the rules to get an unfair advantage over your enemies- you in turn set precedence for the same tactics to be used against you. Do this at your own risk wink.gif ).


All I have ever said, is that if the Devs clarify something and contradict the books, either the devs should correct their statement to match the books, or they should have the books corrected to match their statement.
Wasabi
What is the difference between an Agent and IC?

Do emulated Complex Forms (Skillsofts used in the 'Biowire' echo) follow all of the rules of Complex forms?
[Per the July dev chat the answer is basically 'yes for now and we devs are making a faq entry to further clarify how it should work']

When a character with the Indebted negative quality pays off the debt must he sell back the negative quality?
[Two players in two different games asked me so I'm posting it here... its not something I could do and still sleep at night]
Mr. Unpronounceable
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 11 2008, 04:04 PM) *
Tinted windows stop magic. Been around for decades. Why bother if teh mage can just powerbolt the *window* to smithereens and mind control you to come outside?

Tinted windows don't stop magic anymore. See the "astral shadows" discussion awhile back. You would have to switch to astral perception though.
Stahlseele
QUOTE
What is the difference between an Agent and IC?

i don't really know my way around that special corner of shadowrun, but compare it to a cruise missle and a mine . . the ic is more or less locally fixated untill something tips it off(like a mine) and an agetn can get sent to do any task anywhere and react to certain stimuli to tip it off(like a crusing missle)
Tarantula
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 11 2008, 02:56 PM) *
Tinted windows don't stop magic anymore. See the "astral shadows" discussion awhile back. You would have to switch to astral perception though.


Yes, they do. You can't see in normally, you also can't see in astrally. Same opaqueness.
Mr. Unpronounceable
Debatable.

Street Magic specifically notes that mirrored glass is simply an astral shadow through which astral perception works...whether or not that extends to tinted glass is going to depend on the GM.

If one is effective and the other isn't, it would be beyond bizarre, though.
MaxMahem
QUOTE (wind_in_the_stones @ Sep 10 2008, 11:21 PM) *
As much as I would love to see many issues cleared up by the authors, answering this one probably won't count. I, for one, refuse to believe that an illusion spell can reveal something that the caster is unaware of. I would categorically refuse to play by that rule. And I'm sure there are others that feel the opposite (and no, you don't have to tell me about it). It's probably better left to the imaginations of the players. Most groups tend to come to some sort of agreement about this sort of thing.


I don't see why you have a problem with it. I mean, it is magic after all.

---

An easy way to avoid the potential abuses of a player using invisibility to turn walls and/or other objects invisible is to simply state that the spell only works on people.

Frankly I don't see allowing it to be used on objects as that big of a deal. I mean, casting it on an unattended object means you have to pass its object threshold, which means the illusion will be easier to resist. A player turning a car or greande or something invisible to gain the advantage is the kind of creativity I want to encourage.

As for using it to turn walls and such invisible to see through them, my response is to fold:
First I argue that magic (especially single target spells like illusion) doesn't work on discrete bits, but rather the target as a whole. So you can't turn a section of wall invisible (its not a discrete target) but you can turn the whole building invisible if you like (though I might justly bump the threshold WAY up in this case). This is for the same reason you can't simply decide to powerbolt your opponents eye or something. You have to target the target as a whole.

Secondly I would argue for an object like a door (which you might argue is a discrete target within a building, and I might agree) you don't have enough LOS to truly target it. Since at least half of it is obstructed from your view.
Da9iel
QUOTE (MaxMahem @ Sep 11 2008, 08:26 PM) *
Secondly I would argue for an object like a door (which you might argue is a discrete target within a building, and I might agree) you don't have enough LOS to truly target it. Since at least half of it is obstructed from your view.

I agree with everything up to this last paragraph. By that argument half of everything is obstructed from your view. You can't see my back when I'm facing toward you; you can't see my front when I'm facing away from you.

Interesting that there are no Dev replies that I can see yet.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 11 2008, 05:14 PM) *
Debatable.

Street Magic specifically notes that mirrored glass is simply an astral shadow through which astral perception works...whether or not that extends to tinted glass is going to depend on the GM.

If one is effective and the other isn't, it would be beyond bizarre, though.


Mind throwing out a quote? I never caught this tidbit before.
Wasabi
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Sep 11 2008, 05:19 PM) *
i don't really know my way around that special corner of shadowrun, but compare it to a cruise missle and a mine . . the ic is more or less locally fixated untill something tips it off(like a mine) and an agetn can get sent to do any task anywhere and react to certain stimuli to tip it off(like a crusing missle)


You mention intent and I'm speaking of mechanics. By RAW IC and Agents are identical in every way making IC a waste of nuyen when a cloned agent is exactly the same thing.
Tarantula
Heres one for the devs: How do you target air for the Clean [element] air spell to clean it? Air isn't "seen" typically, so how can you target it if you can't see it?
Wesley Street
You can see air. You're not consciously aware of it unless it changes. Go to places where air is thin (like the top of K2) and objects at a distance become much sharper as atmospheric distortion starts to minimize. Atmospheric distortion is the reason for Hubble-type space telescopes. Also, "dirty" air is very noticeable as it's filled with pollutant particulate. Ask anyone living in L.A. or Shanghai and they will tell you on bad smog days the air looks orange or brown.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Wesley Street @ Sep 12 2008, 09:32 AM) *
You can see air. You're not consciously aware of it unless it changes. Go to places where air is thin (like the top of K2) and objects at a distance become much sharper as atmospheric distortion starts to minimize. Atmospheric distortion is the reason for Hubble-type space telescopes. Also, "dirty" air is very noticeable as it's filled with pollutant particulate. Ask anyone living in L.A. or Shanghai and they will tell you on bad smog days the air looks orange or brown.


And what about dirty air when filled with a colorless nerve gas? Still clear, but still not a good plan to breathe.

How exactly do you "see" air? How would it be any different than "seeing" someone with improved invis?
Wesley Street
QUOTE (Da9iel @ Sep 11 2008, 10:42 PM) *
Interesting that there are no Dev replies that I can see yet.

Given the amount of bile some recent threads have generated (hence Bull's anti-venom sticky) I'm not surprised. They may be taking a break from us until we cool out. Poor Ancient History (Bobby Derie) got dog-piled on about Sasquatch communication and he wrote the section in Runner's Companion.
Mr. Unpronounceable
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 03:46 AM) *
Mind throwing out a quote? I never caught this tidbit before.


QUOTE (Street Magic p.114)
Items that are transparent or mirrored in the real world (like a car window) simply impair visibility as astral shadows.


The debate comes in that SR's tinting and mirroring is supposed to be more complete than is legal nowadays...but still it looks to me that the intention seems to be: if transparent one way normally, it's an astral shadow both ways.
Wesley Street
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 11:39 AM) *
And what about dirty air when filled with a colorless nerve gas? Still clear, but still not a good plan to breathe.

Then a mage is probably screwed.

QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 11:39 AM) *
How exactly do you "see" air? How would it be any different than "seeing" someone with improved invis?

You don't see people with improved invisibility as the spell tricks your vision centers and electronic sensors into believing nothing is there. An improved invisibility-cloaked mage could kick a soda can and a theoretical second mage would know he was there but, as he has nothing for his eyes to lock onto, he couldn't cast a spell on him.

How do you see air? I dunno. I guess just cross your eyes or don't concentrate on any one thing on the ground. Just cast "up and around" into the air that you can perceive with your eyes. Which might actually work for the nerve gas thing if you knew what was happening before it was too late.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 12 2008, 09:44 AM) *
The debate comes in that SR's tinting and mirroring is supposed to be more complete than is legal nowadays...but still it looks to me that the intention seems to be: if transparent one way normally, it's an astral shadow both ways.


I disagree. I think the example was used thinking of current day car windows, not the can't see in one way windows of shadowrun. Its hard to guess at intentions though, and I"ll just say I don't think that mages should be able to cast through car windows, astrally perceiving or not.

QUOTE (Wesley Street @ Sep 12 2008, 09:51 AM) *
Then a mage is probably screwed.


You don't see people with improved invisibility as the spell tricks your vision centers and electronic sensors into believing nothing is there. An improved invisibility-cloaked mage could kick a soda can and a theoretical second mage would know he was there but, as he has nothing for his eyes to lock onto, he couldn't cast a spell on him.

How do you see air? I dunno. I guess just cross your eyes or don't concentrate on any one thing on the ground. Just cast "up and around" into the air that you can perceive with your eyes. Which might actually work for the nerve gas thing if you knew what was happening before it was too late.


Nothing is there? No light? No air? Nothing? So, you'd avoid the bubble of nothing so you didn't suffocate?

I still don't think air is visible, as the light isn't reflecting off it at all. Unless we go back to the imp invis description again, which says warping light around the subject, in which case, they're an equally valid target as the air which isn't reflected off of.

I think a dev needs to clear up how you can target air, as the books don't really mesh well with it.
Kurious
Ummm, you do realize 'Clean' is a area effect spell right? You target an area that you want to 'Clean'; so, if the air is toxic in the room you are standing in, you would 'target the room' with the intent of 'cleaning the air'.
Mr. Unpronounceable
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 05:13 PM) *
I disagree. I think the example was used thinking of current day car windows, not the can't see in one way windows of shadowrun. Its hard to guess at intentions though, and I"ll just say I don't think that mages should be able to cast through car windows, astrally perceiving or not.

It hasn't come up in my group - we've been playing for up to all 4 iterations of the system, and have a LOT of old half-remembered preconceptions about how things are supposed to work. Fortunately, that tends to solve more problems than it starts.

Still, it's physically impossible to get something 100% opaque in one direction only - that's why observation rooms with one way mirrors have such an enormous lighting difference between sides. There's always going to be some degree of light going the "wrong" way.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Kurious @ Sep 12 2008, 11:00 AM) *
Ummm, you do realize 'Clean' is a area effect spell right? You target an area that you want to 'Clean'; so, if the air is toxic in the room you are standing in, you would 'target the room' with the intent of 'cleaning the air'.


So, if theres an imp invis guy in a 6 meter room, and you know hes there. Would you let your mage stunball the room and hit him?
ArkonC
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 07:19 PM) *
So, if theres an imp invis guy in a 6 meter room, and you know hes there. Would you let your mage stunball the room and hit him?

No, but would you let the mage cast a fireball and hit him?
Kurious
Trick question.

Stunball is a direct combat spell... the rules say explicitly that you cannot target what you cannot see with direct combat spells- even with AE.

However, a fireball (indirect combat spell) or grenade... yes. Assuming the blast radius is enough to hit the target, being invisible does not protect you.

Your point?
Tarantula
QUOTE (ArkonC @ Sep 12 2008, 11:25 AM) *
No, but would you let the mage cast a fireball and hit him?


Elemental manipulation area combat spells explicitly allow hitting of targets the mage cannot see. So yes.

The clean [element] spell does not have that exemption.
Kurious
It is also not a direct combat spell.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Kurious @ Sep 12 2008, 10:40 AM) *
It is also not a direct combat spell.


Direct combat spells use the same targetting rules as all other spells, and it is the indirect elemental manipulation spells that have special ones. A direct combat spell would have the same valid targets in an area as the Clean [element] spell. Though, stunball is M, so lets go with powerball instead.
Kurious
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 06:44 PM) *
Direct combat spells use the same targetting rules as all other spells, and it is the indirect elemental manipulation spells that have special ones. A direct combat spell would have the same valid targets in an area as the Clean [element] spell. Though, stunball is M, so lets go with powerball instead.


I think you answered your own question.

Again, Clean is an area affect [elemental] spell, you target an area and 'clean it up'.

Why is this so difficult for you?
Tarantula
QUOTE (Kurious @ Sep 12 2008, 11:53 AM) *
I think you answered your own question.

Again, Clean is an area affect [elemental] spell, you target an area and 'clean it up'.

Why is this so difficult for you?


Actually, Clean [Element] is an Environmental and Area spell.

Fireball is an Indirect, Elemental, and Area spell.

They are not valid comparisons.
Kurious
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 12 2008, 06:58 PM) *
Actually, Clean [Element] is an Environmental and Area spell.


Still answering your own questions.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Kurious @ Sep 12 2008, 12:01 PM) *
Still answering your own questions.


Environmental spells make no change of the spellcasting rules that you must have LOS to affect something.
Kurious
You are affecting the environment of an area. The LOS is the area which you are targeting. So, you target the room- designating the area that you can see- and command the spell to 'cleanse the air' in said area.

Not rocket science here buddy.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Kurious @ Sep 12 2008, 12:11 PM) *
You are affecting the environment of an area. The LOS is the area which you are targeting. So, you target the room- designating the area that you can see- and command the spell to 'cleanse the air' in said area.

Not rocket science here buddy.


Actually, when learned, the spell would be merely Clean Air.

And again, yes, it affects an area, much like powerbolt. You target the area. Now, you cannot see the air in the area, much like you cannot see our invisible guy in the area, are they affected by the spells?

If so? Why?

If not? Why Not?
Kurious
I am going to (futilely) try this one last time.

Imagine you are a mage, looking in a room; you know that the room is fulled with toxic gas, and also has several people in the room with environmental suit on. You need the datachip on the desk.

First you cast Powerball. It is a direct combat spell, so every person you can see within the area each gets hit- while the mana is 'erupting from within', you are directing that mana- hence you need LOS.

The guys fall down.

Now, the air is toxic still, you cannot enter the room... so you visualize the entire room (which you are strong enough to affect with your magic) and 'clean' it. You are directing the mana throughout the entire room with the command to remove the toxins so you can enter. It might take a few turns, but afterwards you walk in the room safely and take the datachip.

(To bad there was an invisible mage also in the room that you did not account for, and he manabolted you dead).

Now, if you insist on being so anal that you have to 'see' the toxin... I guess in your games you can only clean really bad, dark toxins. So be it. Logic is clearly lost on you... unless it supports your argument, of course.
Cain
QUOTE
Tinted windows stop magic. Been around for decades. Why bother if teh mage can just powerbolt the *window* to smithereens and mind control you to come outside?

IIRC, you cannot use a powerbolt (or any Direct combat spell) to hit part of an object. You have to hit the whole thing as a unit. You could use a Lightning bolt to blast it out, though.
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