Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Mutable Form and Realistic Form
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Steampunk
Just a little something I noticed... A free spirit with Mutable and Realistic Form would make the perfect invisible spellcaster. He can appear as anything - a toaster for example - and people probably wouldn't even notice he's there without magical help. Are there any restrictions I missed?
hyzmarca
When a toaster starts casting spells at you, it's pretty obvious that something is off. It's great for infiltration, if you have a sufficient Disguise skill to pull off impersonating someone who should be there.
Steampunk
If it's a toaster, do you REALIZE that it starts casting spells or critter powers at you? What does it do? Throw out toasts to form a mystical sigil?
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Steampunk @ Sep 21 2008, 11:08 AM) *
If it's a toaster, do you REALIZE that it starts casting spells or critter powers at you? What does it do? Throw out toasts to form a mystical sigil?


The threshold for noticing a spell being cast is 6-Force. For spells of a decent Force, it isn't very difficult at all.
Steampunk
QUOTE
The gamemaster should apply additional modifiers as appropriate,


What wouzld apropriate modifiers be for "Doesn't move at all" (because it's a toaster) or "Doesn't say anything" (again: because it's a toaster)? smile.gif Imho, the rules assume a (meta-)human mage here and not something without arms or lips. It's not about noticing the magic, but the act of spellcasting...
hyzmarca
Metahuman magicians also don't move or say anything when casting spells, excepting those with geasa or Centering.
Steampunk
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Sep 21 2008, 06:19 PM) *
Metahuman magicians also don't move or say anything when casting spells, excepting those with geasa or Centering.


The rules talk explicitly about words or gestures:

QUOTE
An observer has to notice the magician’s intense look of concentration, whispered incantations, and small gestures.


And the rules say, that...

QUOTE
most spells and spirits have little, if any, visible effect in the physical world
Tarantula
QUOTE (Steampunk @ Sep 21 2008, 10:40 AM) *
The rules talk explicitly about words or gestures:


And the rules say, that...


The rules also don't force a magician to move or speak to cast a spell. So its still applicable.
psychophipps
One rule that I have always enforced is that cast spells aren't invisible unless this fact is mentioned in the spells description. This comes from the picture on the front cover of SR1 with the mage chica and the native gunbunny which is the prime mental picture I get when I think about SR to this day.

Makes sense from that perspective, keeps the twinktastic actions down a lot, and forces the players to think a bit more before they just start tossing that old time magic around.
Ol' Scratch
Sort of destroys the full usefulness of a lot of spells for a lot of concepts, though. For example, Control Mind/Actions. It also brings up a bunch of WTF? moments with numerous combat spells such as how that Powerbolt shot through all those windows without destroying any of them.
Mr. Unpronounceable
Er...powerbolt is a direct combat spell, yeah? So, there's nothing to hit the window, except a "sense" that the spell came from that guy over there...spells aren't material unless they're indirect.
Ol' Scratch
See the post above mine.
Mr. Unpronounceable
What about it? Just because some folks like to imagine all spells making huge glowy tracer-round paths directly to the mage doesn't make it canon. It's often just a more subtle way of saying "screw the mage."

I lump the (6-force) threshold to detect spellcasting into the same category as the test to tell when an astral form passes through you. Everybody in SR is at least somewhat sensitive to magic.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 22 2008, 09:15 AM) *
I lump the (6-force) threshold to detect spellcasting into the same category as the test to tell when an astral form passes through you. Everybody in SR is at least somewhat sensitive to magic.


Perfect explanation.
psychophipps
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 22 2008, 09:15 AM) *
What about it? Just because some folks like to imagine all spells making huge glowy tracer-round paths directly to the mage doesn't make it canon. It's often just a more subtle way of saying "screw the mage."

I lump the (6-force) threshold to detect spellcasting into the same category as the test to tell when an astral form passes through you. Everybody in SR is at least somewhat sensitive to magic.


I'm not saying that there is a long holoneon tracer saying, "I R teh ROXOR mage dat castorz dat spell!" that stays up forever. I'm saying that as they cast there is some vocation and/or motions going on (again, these are based upon a lot of SR artwork), a brief flash is visible as the energy is released and as the effect goes off in a directly visible but strangely non-illuminating light. I do it because I got tired of the "I look at a guy and out of the blue my spell blows them out without any warning at all despite 50 people staring right at us". Needless to say, Initiates can take an ability that removes this restriction at the higher levels.

If you need to point everything else at someone at range to get something going, I fail to see why mages shouldn't pay the same price as the sammie pointing a gun at someone as they fire.
Tarantula
The mage looks at them. Thats the aiming. Sorry psychophipps, but your interpretation has no founding in the rules at all under SR4. Previously, I think some spells took gestures to cast (I'm thinking 1st-2nd ed here) but I'm not sure. I know in 3rd, if you took geas you could add restrictions of needing to move/speak. 4th is the same. I agree that its just a feeling of magic unless the spell explicitly says otherwise, (a good example is the armor spell, says specifically that the armor glows).
Steampunk
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 22 2008, 06:15 PM) *
I lump the (6-force) threshold to detect spellcasting into the same category as the test to tell when an astral form passes through you. Everybody in SR is at least somewhat sensitive to magic.


I like that, thanks.
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Sep 22 2008, 10:15 AM) *
What about it? Just because some folks like to imagine all spells making huge glowy tracer-round paths directly to the mage doesn't make it canon. It's often just a more subtle way of saying "screw the mage."

I wasn't saying it was canon. I made that pretty clear in my post. I was saying that if that was his house rule, it ruins the utility of quite a few spells and adds a bunch of "wtf?"ness to others.
Mr. Unpronounceable
Ah, completely misunderstood your post then, sorry.
Falconer
I point people to read p169, noticing magic.

It's fairly clear that the test is to notice that someone is using magic. It doesn't require somatic or verbal gestures unless you're using something like centering or have taken a geas restricting your magic use. But there's still signs of concentration on your face and such. (I disagree a little with it, but thems the rules as written).

That much said, I'd probably force a secret perception test at -2 for distracted, -whatever to notice the toaster on the counter in the first place. This is directly analogous to how a spellcaster being protected by a spirits concealment power would work. (you get enough negatives and glitches on the perception tests can get fun!). And in the case of an improved invis caster no check... except to notice a spell went off in your vicinity (you can't see him to see the signs, and he doesn't need to make noise to cast).

You don't notice him before he starts casting, so how do you see him cast the spell. The big thing then is sensing that a spell went off in your vicinity. (EG: I'd allow the perception check to notice that someone cast a high force spell in your vicinity, I wouldn't necessarily tell them it's control thoughts on the street sam).

A lot of it comes down to just GM common sense IMO. Can they see or percieve the caster... yes, then what are the visibility mods... okay... roll the dice. If they can't see him, well then make the check just to see if they get goosebumps as the spell goes off.
Cabral
QUOTE (Tarantula @ Sep 22 2008, 11:43 AM) *
The mage looks at them. Thats the aiming. Sorry psychophipps, but your interpretation has no founding in the rules at all under SR4. Previously, I think some spells took gestures to cast (I'm thinking 1st-2nd ed here) but I'm not sure. I know in 3rd, if you took geas you could add restrictions of needing to move/speak. 4th is the same. I agree that its just a feeling of magic unless the spell explicitly says otherwise, (a good example is the armor spell, says specifically that the armor glows).

IIRC, SR3 had a section on the mages defining the appearances of their spells. I think a giant neon corkscrew or drill was used as an example. So, his concept is not entirely without basis.

Falconer,
I'd say this is a special circumstance. What intense look? What gestures? What Incantations? There's nothing to notice. Your hackles might raise and know a spell is being cast. You look in the toasters direction and see ... a toaster on a countertop next to a blender and a microwave. You think ... invisible mage! Deploy FAB! The toaster Voorps into the metaplanes and you tell your story on Ghost Hunters ...

Edit: Omitted "corkscrew or drill" and removed extra text ... oops. SR4 isn't the only thing getting errata-ed biggrin.gif
Ol' Scratch
I always interpretted those rules as being more akin to knowing a storm was coming. Smelling the ozone in the air, getting that heeby-jeeby feeling, and that sort of thing. Basically, a sixth sense of sorts. And if the test is successful, you just know. It's always worked as a good comprimise for me; it doesn't require the magician to be doing anything overtly obvious, but it doesn't leave the victims completely powerless regarding who or where an effect originated from.
Riley37
Of course the art shows magic as glowy. The artist with a pen, pencil, or colored pixels has no way to convey "the people around the mage are getting heeby-jeebies and a wierd intuition that the mage in particular, not anyone else, is violating the laws of nature". The artist has a lot more fun drawing great splotches of bright color.

Similar for possession. As I interpret the rules, a photograph of a possessed person looks just the same as a photo of a non-possessed person (unless the photo happens to show bullets bouncing off the Immunity to Normal Weapons). But if a vooduin is possessed by an F6 spirit, any living being with LOS gets a Threshold 0 test to know that a spirit's in the house. (I was gonna say "anyone", but "anyone" could include AIs, and they lack magic sense, right?)

I'm more interested in the story told with the spoken or written word, with the art as an accessory, than vice versa.

The Jopp
I'm with Cabral in this.

A perception to notice magic is perfectly allright and I would say that the MINIMUM treshold is always 1 as you never auto-succeed in this game, you might as well botch the roll...

Sure, you notice that magic is being cast but there is nothing in the rules that say:
A: You know WHO cast the spell
B: What the magic is

It says just that - You Notice Magic

Very much like i can make a perception test to notice a fire by smelling for smoke...

Yes, a spell was cast in the area but nothing tells you WHO or WHAT did it.

Sniping toasters will NOT be the first thing you look for when spell is cast at you.
Blog
I think most people (even mundanes in SR) feel the need to make it flashy. Since the magic manifests from this imagination it often carries sterotypes. Sure NONE of the spells need those words, motions, throwing of pixie dust. Some choose to do it as a geas, some choose to do it cause fun, some choose to do it for other reasons.

My mage would often do some of these actions for spells, for example when I used Lazer I would point my gun at the target. It actually got some "oh crap thats some new high tech weapon". Why? Cause it was fun. Did i need to? nope

My manabolts/stunbolts had no such things. All the surrounding spectators could see was that 'something magical happend to cause that guy to colapse' but they dont have any idea where it came from. This is often why the public FEARS mages.
Tarantula
I would argue that having multiple hits on the perception test would allow more detail, such as how big a spell, or who cast it.
noonesshowmonkey
I have always had more than a slight disagreement with the idea that a mage can essentially make a face like he is constipated / farting and just make the whole world explode and that there would be a huge chance that the vast majority of people would be left wondering whodunnit.

In any case the rules clearly contradict my opinion on the matter. I have had two players who play mages literally every game in the past 10 years. One typically takes gaes every game and the other just enjoys screwing with every mundane he meets. To each their own. At one point, however, it was discussed to house rule that the Full Mage and Aspected Mage have, in addition to their BP costs (or priority in SR-3), the Gaes ability that must be bought off. If bought off at character creation the cost to buy the ability of is twice the BP gain of the Gaes flaw.

This seemed a good plan and was adopted by my players and I signed off on it as it generally made things make a lot more sense to us. It is an easy house rule and allows for good character development as mages grow since they 'show' less and less and can accomplish more and more by sheer force of will and accumulated skill.
Mr. Unpronounceable
If they were casting at force 6 or more, then pretty much anyone who doesn't glitch their perception test can ID them as the mage that cast that spell. No need to go all Dragonball-Z just to give mundanes a chance.

It was more of a problem in earlier editions because of the lack of a link between force and deadliness of the spells.

A force 2(D) manabolt was just as difficult to notice as a force 2 influence spell, and the mage could typically have enough successes to prevent the victim from being able to stage it down at all.

This is yet another improvement in SR4 - a spell strong enough to take someone down is either immediately obvious (force 5 minimum for a body/willpower 1 target,) or cost a point of edge to exceed the net success limit.
psychophipps
QUOTE (noonesshowmonkey @ Sep 23 2008, 07:29 AM) *
I have always had more than a slight disagreement with the idea that a mage can essentially make a face like he is constipated / farting and just make the whole world explode and that there would be a huge chance that the vast majority of people would be left wondering whodunnit.

In any case the rules clearly contradict my opinion on the matter. I have had two players who play mages literally every game in the past 10 years. One typically takes gaes every game and the other just enjoys screwing with every mundane he meets. To each their own. At one point, however, it was discussed to house rule that the Full Mage and Aspected Mage have, in addition to their BP costs (or priority in SR-3), the Gaes ability that must be bought off. If bought off at character creation the cost to buy the ability of is twice the BP gain of the Gaes flaw.

This seemed a good plan and was adopted by my players and I signed off on it as it generally made things make a lot more sense to us. It is an easy house rule and allows for good character development as mages grow since they 'show' less and less and can accomplish more and more by sheer force of will and accumulated skill.


I do something similar. They can cast without talking and/or gestures at -2 dice each. You want to gut out that stunbolt just by eye-screwing the guy? No problem but you're throwing four less dice in my game.
Magic is already pretty damn buff and making it a :look at target ---> lighting people on fire: without having to do anything else at all is a bit much. Hell, if it was that easy than every single megacorp chairperson or political figure that cheesed off anyone with power would be deader than Elvis. Grab a rifle scope of 3-9 power, have your homie tell you which figure the target is of the group on the podium from the live video feed they're watching on the trid at home and you're popping nuggets from miles and miles on out looking at fuzzy gray blobs in your scope.

"Slay CEO" anyone? It's not damage so armor doesn't help and a decent Edge roll means you got one less person fighting your project in the board room, even if they put a rating 5 ward up.
Tarantula
And thats why fancy CEOs have magical security. Hell, one of the mages job is probably just to keep an astral mana barrier sustained with the CEO in its area, and counterspell him. That right there is -6 to the mage casting (cause of the mana barrier) and then the counterspelling. Chances are, CEO will be fine, especially if you throw a few spirits with magical guard in the mix.
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