The "fix the game if it's broken" rule is a rule. It's written. Thus it's a "rule as written." You guys can ignore that all you like, but the hypocrisy is yours to deal with, not mine. Especially over asinine things like this garbage.

... Wait, what? This entire post is contradictory to your last couple posts.

Anyways. Ghouls have eyes. They just have <insert fluff>. The actual hard rules state that ghouls have Reduced Sense (Blind), which states, and I quote:



So, at worst, ghouls casting at people, using Assensing to "see" them, do so at a -6 dicepool penalty.

There's a big difference. One is pointing to the rules and showing you how they're extrapolated to a situation. Then there's ignoring the whole extrapolation part and adhering to the exact lettering regardless of how fucking stupid it is (go look in the toxins thread where Toturi was going on that cars should be affected by toxins). Using the previous example, they assume a dual-natured spellcaster isn't blind in the given rules. Those same rules also account for the situation of someone who can only perceive the astral plane. The extrapolation is backed up by the rules.

You also just quoted the negative quality. Ghouls are "blind," period. The game also uses the same general rules for any kind of blindness, be it just being in the dark, having your eyes closed, piss-poor eyesight, or no eyes at all. It's all covered in an abstract -6 penalty which reflects you relying on your other senses. Which doesn't help one iota with spellcasting since a mystical link has to be established through either line of sight, touch, or a sympathetic link.

I was adhering to the exact lettering of the rules, it was simply that there were additional rules to consider, no extrapolation needed. And I was right by the rules, unless you choose use that one rule to alter the others.

Really? Because that's not what the rules for Ghouls on page 80 of Runner's Companion says about them.

(emphasis added)

In which case it becomes a house rule. Exactly the point I was trying to make.

Hmm? What is the house rule?

If you choose to use that one rule to alter the other, that other rule becomes a house rule. Which I did not do.

Ruling that vehicles are not affected by toxins would be a house rule. Ruling that ghouls cannot cast spells at targets on the physical plane would also be a house rule.

As I've shown, ghouls can, although they take a -6 penalty for actions purely relying on physical sight. But, as Dr. Funk showed us, you can target either/or when dual-natured/astrally perceiving, so it's not casting purely on physical sight either.

I agree.

Unless one rule directly contradicts another, there is no need to make assumptions and no need to decide which rule overrules the other. In this case, unless a rule states explicitly that a blind character/vehicle/etc does not have LOS, then he has LOS like any other person. Blind in the case of the rules does not remove the ability to gain LOS, it just imposes a penalty to sighted activity. The point in contention here is that a blind person has no LOS, does the rules actually say that?

However setting aside strict rules, I would ask: does a sighted person lose LOS if he is in total darkness? Or can he still cast that spell, but with a large penalty?

Common sense is assumed. Whether people want to accept that fact or not really isn't any of my concern.

If people keep up with that level of Stupid™, then vehicles not only are vulnerable to toxins, but they're vulnerable to all sorts of other effects that are full of even more Stupid™. It all stems from the fact that vehicles have skin. This is a rule as written. It's found in Arsenal on page 145. "For riggers, controlling a vehicle often gives them the illusion of using the vehicle’s skin as their own." Rutroh! SR4A p. 254 details how Contact-vector toxins work thusly: "Contact toxins (in liquid or gas form) must be applied to the target’s skin."

Thus they're vulnerable to Contact vectors. Look ma, I can be a pedantic idiot, too! Say goodbye to AV ammo, say hello to Ringu Capsule Rounds!

Incidently, as previously pointed out, if that "common sense" thing doesn't step in this also means vehicles are prone to disorientation, nausea, and any and all other side effects contact-vector toxins, drugs and compounds have since there's absolutely no rules that say vehicles don't suffer from them. They even use the ambiguous term "target" when referring to the mechanics thereof. Case in point, SR4A p. 254: "Disorientation: The target suffers a –2 dice pool modifier to all actions due to confusion and disorientation for 10 minutes." Additionally, since there's no rules that directly say vehicles don't have a heart, nerves, muscles, or other biological systems, they do as based upon any contact-vector toxin that mentions them affecting those systems.

I'm sorry, but anyone who adheres and follows the rules blindly is a fucking moron. Especially when they're doing so just to be an obnoxious dumbass.

Yes, vehicles are vulnerable to contact toxins and other such things that use similar rules. But are they vulnerable to specific contact toxins as per the description in each such toxin? Are there such rules that say that vehicles have biological systems? Are there rules that say that they don't have biological systems? Are there rules that say that vehicles are comprise of non-biological systems instead? Without Immunity to Toxins, vehicles are vulnerable to contact toxins, so long as there isn't a rule or similar description that contradicts that. What you presented is not Stupid but an intelligent reading of the rules insofar as those particular rules are concerned.

I'm sorry too but anyone who only adhere to those rules that makes sense to them is a fucking obnoxious dumbass moron as well. Especially when they choose to do so just to be a closeminded fool. Particularly if they are presenting the assumption of common sense as fact.

It is undeniable, as I have shown, that Reduced Sense (Blind) is not "no LOS" blind. Ghouls would suffer a -6 penalty for casting purely with their sight, but they aren't casting purely with their sight - they are using astral sight in conjunction with their Dual-Natured.. nature, in order to cast without penalty, as per the rule that Dr. Funk brought up.

FYI, one of my old martial arts instructers is legally blind. He has 20/350 vision (20/100 is legally blind). He "makes all tests with a -6 dice pool penalty," as it were. He would kill you in a real fight. He's in the Martial Arts Hall of Fame, and only recently lost his first sparring match. His blindness is the result of Macular Degeneration, and even though he is legally blind, he can make out colors and shapes.

Ghouls are noted as having cataracts. Cataracts are not the complete loss of eyes: they are clouded lenses in the eyes, kind of permanently looking through foggy glasses. You can still see, just not well enough, and as such you are considered "legally blind." But this is not true blindness, as in completely unfunctioning or missing eyes.

EDIT: PS: Using Oxygenated Flourocarbons in DMSO capsule rounds would be more effective for destroying vehicles, IMHO.

This is the correct interpretation as it's in-line with previous editions. The whole point of Masking & Extended masking was to be able to disguise yourself & stuff on the Astral. The disguise can be to look like something else Astral (critters, spirits, other mages, etc) all the way to looking like you were totally mundane.

Remember, ALL living things have an astral copy, even mundanes. That's why you can use Astral Perception to see someone's aura so you can cast a spell at them on the Physical. But since they aren't active on the Astral, their aura isn't present on the Astral (like yours would be since you are either Projecting or Dual-Natured).

Seeing a mundane via Astral Perception is much like the Magician ability to Manifest. A projecting Mage can manifest on the Physical but cannot be harmed on the Physical. A Mundane has an image of themselves on the Astral and cannot be harmed on the Astral... sort of like seen but not heard.

Thus you can use Masking & Extended Masking to make your aura look just like a Mundane's aura would on the Astral. That would mean you can hide your magical abilities and foci by standing in a crowd of mundanes and use Masking & Extended Masking.

You can also use Masking to hide the fact you are an initiate. I do recall that little gem from earlier editions. Useful if you are trying to lure something into attacking you.

Its related to this that I'd like to point out that if you have Magic 6, you need to be a 6th level initiate (max Magic 12) to "appear mundane."

Actually, "look mundane" and "look as though her Magic is higher or lower than it is" are two separate effects. A mere 1st level initiate could look mundane, but if, say, his Magic was 6, then he could only make it seem like it is 5 or 7. A 6th level initiate could make it look anything from 0 to 12.

I figure you can make an astral form look like an aura, as they would be occupying the same space.
So IF you are astrally projecting and use masking, you could look like an unattached aura, which could be note worthy

You're right, my mistake.

Someone got a page cite for your Initiate rank determining the effectiveness of Masking / Extended Masking? I don't recall ever seeing that anywhere.

o.O

It's in the basic description of 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."