Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Casting spells on others
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
DocMortand
This was brought up in my last gaming session, and I just want to check to see if there were any rules which would come into play.

Our mage got wounded, and he offered to just stay out of the sewers and cast +3 reaction spell on both the troll and the ork, then send them down into the sewers whilst he stayed in safety.

Is this kosher? Are there rules against this? I made a GM judgement against this, but I'm curious to see if it is possible. How far can a char with a mage's spell on him go before the spell dissapates due to distance or out of line of sight, or something else? I.E. can a mage cast stealth on someone and have that guy board a plane to Abu Dabi and still have it active?
Ol' Scratch
Why wouldn't it be? Spells have no range once sustained.
GrinderTheTroll
LOS is just needed for casting (as long as it's a LOS and not touch spell like +3 reaction is), but sustaining doesn't require LOS to continue to function.
LinaInverse
Just to clarify, I was that mage. Here's some details.

We were in the sewer and I got hit with a Serious. I managed to grit through the pain and slap the 2 big meat shields (troll and orc) with Reaction +3 (yes, I touched them). But for the rest of the fight, I was basically the boxcar between the locomotive and the caboose as far as casting was concerned. My only contribution after that was just burning a Karma pt from time to time to help my meat buddies' combat rolls.

After the game, I made the comment that, for all that I contributed, I could have hit both of them with the Reaction spells before we went into the sewers and just sat back at the street level, sipping cappuccino and the battle would have mostly gone the same way. I wouldn't be at risk, and would have lost the "risk" Karma to be sure, and no, I wouldn't advocate that as a method of play. But I'm pretty sure that as far as spells work, that it would have worked that way.
Fortune
QUOTE (GrinderTheTroll)
LOS is just needed for casting (as long as it's a LOS and not touch spell like +3 reaction is), but sustaining doesn't require LOS to continue to function.

...or when it is a stated requirement of the spell itself, like with Mindlink (IIRC), where LOS must be maintained for the spell to continue to work.
Fortune
QUOTE (LinaInverse)
Just to clarify, I was that mage. Here's some details.

We were in the sewer and I got hit with a Serious. I managed to grit through the pain and slap the 2 big meat shields (troll and orc) with Reaction +3 (yes, I touched them). But for the rest of the fight, I was basically the boxcar between the locomotive and the caboose as far as casting was concerned. My only contribution after that was just burning a Karma pt from time to time to help my meat buddies' combat rolls.

After the game, I made the comment that, for all that I contributed, I could have hit both of them with the Reaction spells before we went into the sewers and just sat back at the street level, sipping cappuccino and the battle would have mostly gone the same way. I wouldn't be at risk, and would have lost the "risk" Karma to be sure, and no, I wouldn't advocate that as a method of play. But I'm pretty sure that as far as spells work, that it would have worked that way.

And you'd be right, which is what everyone has said (so far). smile.gif
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (Fortune)
...or when it is a stated requirement of the spell itself, like with Mindlink (IIRC), where LOS must be maintained for the spell to continue to work.

No, they just have to remain within the area of the spell, not LOS.
Synner
Funkenstein is correct. According to the books LOS has to be maintained to when the target of a spell is anything other than Self. The only exception is ritual magic which doesn't require LOS to function in the first place.

I assume everyone pretty much agrees that if you cast Mask on someone and he walks out of your Line Of Sight the spell stops working (for it to keep working you need a Sustaining Focus or an Anchoring). Why would it be any different with Increased Reaction?
Critias
I'll just counter that (to keep things going) by asking where, exactly, you get the idea that you need to do so with Mask, in the first place? I'm not really big up on the magic rules, but I've always wondered where people come up with the notion that you do need to maintain line of sight once a spell's been cast (and why wouldn't, for instance, turning your head to sneeze, or even blinking, 'cause a sustained spell to fizzle?).
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (Synner @ Oct 19 2004, 04:05 PM)
I assume everyone pretty much agrees that if you cast Mask on someone and he walks out of your Line Of Sight the spell stops working (for it to keep working you need a Sustaining Focus or an Anchoring). Why would it be any different with Increased Reaction?

That is not true at all. Mask, as with most every other sustainable spell, works just fine when the magician is nowhere in sight. Mindlink is an exception because it is a Detection spell that only grants its effect to others within the area of the spell, and maintains that sense only as long as you are within that area. You can leave and re-enter the area whenever you like, however, and the spell will still function as long as the mage is sustaining it.
Fortune
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein @ Oct 20 2004, 07:58 AM)
QUOTE (Fortune @ Oct 19 2004, 03:56 PM)
...or when it is a stated requirement of the spell itself, like with Mindlink (IIRC), where LOS must be maintained for the spell to continue to work.

No, they just have to remain within the area of the spell, not LOS.

My mistake. I thought there was something specific stated for this spell, over and above the normal Detection limitations.
GrinderTheTroll
QUOTE (Critias)
I'll just counter that (to keep things going) by asking where, exactly, you get the idea that you need to do so with Mask, in the first place? I'm not really big up on the magic rules, but I've always wondered where people come up with the notion that you do need to maintain line of sight once a spell's been cast (and why wouldn't, for instance, turning your head to sneeze, or even blinking, 'cause a sustained spell to fizzle?).

Sustaining magic was new concept for me when I started SR and I don't recall seeing sustained type spells in other games. It's either a throwback from it being a new concept, or maybe some goofy notion from the movies somewhere, they always seem to need to keep an eye on their targets too.
Shanshu Freeman
QUOTE (Synner)


I assume everyone pretty much agrees that if you cast Mask on someone and he walks out of your Line Of Sight the spell stops working (for it to keep working you need a Sustaining Focus or an Anchoring). Why would it be any different with Increased Reaction?

wouldn't that be like Levitate dropping the instant the mage is no longer touching the target?

Edward
It works.

As a GM I would have removed an appropriate portion of the danger karma (you already had experienced some danger so the amount would depend on the run details) given you 1 point of karma for unusual good tactics and asked you to fetch me a drink.

Edward
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (Synner)
I assume everyone pretty much agrees that if you cast Mask on someone and he walks out of your Line Of Sight the spell stops working (for it to keep working you need a Sustaining Focus or an Anchoring). Why would it be any different with Increased Reaction?

Redundant as it is at this point, where on earth did you get that assumption?

~J
Ol' Scratch
Especially since he mentioned a Sustaining Focus in the same breath.
DocMortand
QUOTE ("Synner")
Funkenstein is correct. According to the books LOS has to be maintained to when the target of a spell is anything other than Self.


Okay, after poring thru the BBB I still don't see any penalties to sipping in the cafe while your buddies go enhanced in the sewers. Where does it say this? Is it in MitS or BBB?

Also, I came up with another way of discouraging that other than the "you get 1 karma" which frankly to me is an easy way of getting karma every week. Yes, you're ducking out of the threat, but you're also earning money from the run and you do get that one or two karma. However, in BBB it says that all things astral are linked to their owner - so frankly if you are fighting spirits and they notice the people they fight are being amplified by someone else who isn't there, they are going to go track down the mage. So if the mage is sipping coffee in a coffeehouse, the mage will probably be attacked, without the support he/she would normally have, by one or more spirits.

I still would like to see the book page where Synner's quote comes from - would make all of this moot.

Doc
DocMortand
Actually, I have a related question: if you are sustaining spells can you be attacked by spirits in the astral? Or can you only be attacked if you perceive/project?
Fortune
QUOTE (DocMortand)
Actually, I have a related question: if you are sustaining spells can you be attacked by spirits in the astral? Or can you only be attacked if you perceive/project?

If you aren't actually Astrally Perceiving, you cannot be attacked by anything purely Astral. The Spirit would have to Materialize for it to have an effect on you. You could not Project while sustaining spells, as Projection is an Exclusive Action.
DocMortand
dead.gif Thought as much. Thanks...and if anyone finds out where Synner's canon source is, let me know.
Fortune
Of course, an Astral being could still try to take down your spell.
DocMortand
How does that happen? Most spirits don't have powers that can do that - unless dispelling comes naturally to spirits? What methods can be used?
Fortune
Er...ignore me. I'm probably misremembering from an earlier edition, where spells were considered entities.
DrJest
Not being up on 3rd edition, Fortune is - from my point of view - correct, in that an active spell can be attacked on the astral plane. It's an alternative to dispelling, it just doesn't work too well against high-Force spells and the mage gets plenty of warning you're doing the hinky against his mojo.
DrJest
Found the reference. 2nd ed SR pp 147-148.

Incidentally, today's trick of the day: summoned spirit/elemental in Astral Space, instruction is to defend against spells cast at the summoner. I'm a hard bastard on that one, I make every spell the spirit trashes a separate service, but it's a great way to buy yourself time against a hostile spellcaster.
RedmondLarry
An example of a sustained spell (invisibility) continuing while the caster is out of sight is on p. 16 of SR3, middle of right column.

Some previous discussions:
9/3/03 Is maintaining LOS necessary?
9/23/03 LOS in Magic
10/01/04 Maintain LOS with Invisibility

Also, Duration - Sustained, SR3.178, says that "As long as the caster concentrates on the spell it remains in effect."
Cochise
QUOTE (DrJest)
Not being up on 3rd edition, Fortune is - from my point of view - correct, in that an active spell can be attacked on the astral plane. It's an alternative to dispelling, it just doesn't work too well against high-Force spells and the mage gets plenty of warning you're doing the hinky against his mojo.

Problem is: In SR3 spells are not dual-natured, so no, a spirit cannot attack a spell in SR3 in the described manner ...
Fortune
Which I freely admitted. smile.gif
Cochise
QUOTE (Fortune)
Which I freely admitted. smile.gif

You wink.gif ... I was talking to DrJest
DrJest
Wait a minute, so you can't attack a spell in the astral any more? Jesus, this is almost like a whole new game so much has changed...

What about Quickened spells or active locks? Can I still mug those?
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (DrJest)
What about Quickened spells or active locks? Can I still mug those?

You can attack the focus itself since it's astrally-active when active, but they fight back. Quickened spells make spells self-sustaining, so I assume that means that they're either physical or astral depending on how they were originally cast. Sure, the magician has to use astral perception while Quickening the spell, but that's a requirement for the process, not the end result.
Canid13
With regards to Quickening, as far as I'm aware you can only dispell a quickened spell as normal.
DrJest
Ffs... there go half a dozen classic tactics dead.gif

I don't suppose there was so useful a thing as a summary of the changes between 2nd and 3rd ed published anywhere? I seem to keep tripping over details.
LinaInverse
See my current thread on Quickening.

The biggest disadvantage for someone with Quickened spells involves dealing with Wards. No, you can't ground an elemental spell on a mage with Quickened stuff anymore a la 2ndEd. You can attempt to Dispel such a spell, but if the Mage spent some extra Karma, that's not a trivial test to make.
Kanada Ten
The biggest disadvantage of Quickening is that everyone with astral perception can see your arsenal, and you'll never get on an airplane (or any other secure transport) unless its a private charter with a 50 grand deposit or unless you have enough Initiate levels to Mask all the force points (and once you're that powerful the Quickened karma could be better spent on more powerful spells, willpower, ect, making all but useless when compared to Anchoring).
mfb
eh, even at high levels, a quickened increased reflexes-3 spell is kinda nice to have.
Ol' Scratch
Save that a Sustaining Focus is still a better way to go with one. If you have the need to cast so many spells on yourself that putting them in foci will kill you due to Focus Addiction, you have far greater concerns than the Quickening metamagic feat will help you with anyway. smile.gif
LinaInverse
There are a ton of spells that would be extremely useful to have Quickened. And a Foci is more vulnerable to astral assault than someone who's Quickened. Both methods have advantages/disadvantages true, but come on, Cyberwear has several similar disadvantages (legal/security, harder to heal, etc) and that doesn't dissuade anyone.
Cain
QUOTE
I don't suppose there was so useful a thing as a summary of the changes between 2nd and 3rd ed published anywhere? I seem to keep tripping over details.

Grounding is gone. Initiation has been reworked, and is now graded. With the exception of Inc. Reflexes +3, the Inc. Attribute +X spells are gone, in favor of generic spells that cap out at their Force rating.

Those are the ones that immediately come to mind.
DrJest
Grounding is gone?! You mean I can't drop a manablast through an enemy mage's spell lock any more? Damn!

On the other hand, they can't do it to me either... of course, as soon as I initiated worth a damn I quickened and masked my enhancer spells (the one advantage to quickening force 1 spells).

When you say the new Improve Attribute spells max out at their force - I don't think I quite followed that, do you mean you cast Improve Willpower and count up the successes for the bonus? Sounds a bit iffy to me, you could be wandering around with +10 Willpower or some such.
Canid13
You learn Increase Willpower at Force 3 and you gain a +3 regardless of sucesses etc.
LinaInverse
Not quite Canid13. You also have to score 6 successes to get that +3 (2 success/+1). The tgt# is the target's existing stat, which for a mage, isn't a trivial one when you're talking about Willpower, but certainly still doable.

You can't ground a spell on someone, but you can attack the foci itself directly if it's active and potentially destroy the enchantment, but doing so immediately alerts the owner so you would have to assume that you'll be facing both the foci (which does fight back) and the owner if you make such an attempt.
Canid13
Really? I thought sucesses was irrelevant. I'll have to look that one up tonight as one of my players has quite a few of those kinds of spells.
RedmondLarry
QUOTE (SR3.194 @ Increase (Attribute)
Every two successes increase the Attribute by 1, up to a maximum bonus equal to the Force of the spell.
Canid13
Okay, that makes things very interesting.......

*Gets evil glint in his eye*
DrJest
I see the days of casting Force 1 Incr Attribute spells and trusting to your Masking are over. Sigh. It's not the fact that it's changed, it's how MUCH has changed. I've played SR since the week 1st Ed came out, and yet I feel like such a newbie all of a sudden...
Cain
QUOTE
I see the days of casting Force 1 Incr Attribute spells and trusting to your Masking are over. Sigh. It's not the fact that it's changed, it's how MUCH has changed. I've played SR since the week 1st Ed came out, and yet I feel like such a newbie all of a sudden...


Don't worry about it. We haven't even gotten into sustaining foci vs. spell locks, which further make that tactic impractical. Not to mention the fact that initiation itself is changes, so you no longer get all the metamagics at once. You can still pull the Increase Attribute trick off, but it's much less broken than it was before.
DocMortand
Dragging the topic back to the thread, I have one last question to ask - are there visible (in the astral) links between a sustained spell and it's caster? I don't have my books with me, so I can't check.
Ol' Scratch
Other than the caster's signature, not really.
Kanada Ten
QUOTE (SR3 @ page 177, Astral Tracking)

All existing magical things (spells, spirits, foci, circles and logded) have a link to their owner.  Following this link back to its source requires an Astral Perception (4) Test.  The base time is six hours, divided by the number of successes.

I would think wards are also included, though not mentioned. Also, a link may be hidden, or redirected, though a metaplane per MitS.
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