Oi Chums,

We always have magical back up in our teams, otherwise I would not be alive to make this post, but I have some questions regarding the spirit power concealment and its uses. When are you no longer concealed. I mean the Orc Street Sammie is concealed with a spirit power then goes and unloads his mini-grenade launcher into a squad of Sec-Guards. Is he still concealed. Rules wise I guess I would use perception modifers to allow the security to at least locate the team but would they still be "Invisible"?

Let me know what you think.

Concealment isn't invisibility any how. And yes the concealment would still be in effect and to locate the firer they would have to roll perception. All the team would know is explosions occurring.

The spirit power Concealment is NOT invisibility. Rather, it is a modifier to the perception pool of opposition who tries to locate the team. If the concealment power reduces the Opposing Force's perception pool below 1, then they cannot perceive the team.

So if the street samurai fires his grenade launcher from within the protection of the concealment power, make a perception test for the OpFor to locate the team, and grant bonuses and penalties as appropriate.

Once, the players used a force 8 spirit concealment to hide their get-away on a boat while EVO was looking for them on another boat. One of the players took cover at the back of the boat and held up a flash-pak, basicly alerting EVO where they players were.

Had EVO roll perception to spot the players, gave them a bonus for the flash-pak alerting them, while took away for the concealment. Worked out to be about even, so they rolled normal and spotted the players.

Since it's a modifier to the perception roll, Concealment Power only matters if there is normally a perception roll.

There's one for locating where a shot came from. Its normally not used as its kind of easy to tell when the guy down the hall has shot at you but its in the rules in fact by RAW you should probs roll it every time.

I agree with Dire. If no roll is needed to perceive something then the concealment shouldn't work.

So for instance, that troll firing grenades. If he's doing it from an alley then yeah, they need to perceive him. If he waltzed out into the middle of the street and shouted, "HERE PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY!", at the sec guards, then they should know he's there, no contest as the GM could easily rule he is obvious.

Depends upon the bonus you get to spot the guy shooting. If after the concealment the guy has 4 dice (which can buy a success) I'd say don't worry about rolling it.

This is true but my team doesn't abuse force 7 spirits to fire out of the hide, they just walk wherever they want with 7 dice penalty of impunity. And they all have at least 2 levels in the Stealth Group.

Aren't those just modifiers? As long as the troll's player says,"I waltz stealthily into the middle of the street and shouted, 'HERE PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY!' in a disorienting manner at the sec guards to confuse them as to my position" and makes his Infiltration roll, they still need to roll to know he is there. Something Obvious still requires 1 hit on the Perception test.

From what I remember of the Rules Toturi, OBVIOUS things require no roll whatsoever, that is why they are OBVIOUS...

Keep the Faith

You need to ask yourselves... If there wasn't the spirits Concealment Power, would a Perception Test have been asked for?

The Concealment Power by itself does not bring into existence a Perception Test. It doesn't make you roll dice. Shooting people makes dice rolls happen, but the existence of Concealment does not.

However, engaging in Infiltration when you may not normally have done so, that might bring the Concealment power into play, but it's some other action that allows Concealment to work, not the Power on it's own.

Concealment Power is still very useful and subject to abuses.

Err, the problem with that theory is that Concealment includes the act of hiding into the effect. And unlike most forms of hiding, it works if you're standing in the middle of an open field. Infiltration rolls and the like only improve the effect; they're not required for Concealment to do what it does. It basically means you have to make a Perception (0) Test in order to spot someone, with the test modified by the power's effect.

From what I remember of the Rules, Tymeaus Jalynsfein, Obvious things require 1 success on the Perception test. Immediately noticeable things do not require a roll.

A couple of things:

First, the Concealment power works on (Magic) number of targets, so not everyone in a crowd would be scammed by it. Second, according to the Perception Table on p. 136 of SR4A, even gunfire or a neon sign has a Perception Test threshold of 1. So, modifiers such as the Concealment power could in fact hide the guy out in the field. If a neon sign that is not trying to hide can be missed, so can he.

My Mistake... Immediately Noticeable things that I would include are the idiot yelling "Here PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY" and firing a gun at you... Sorry, in my opinion this is immediately noticeable and draws attention to yourself...

Now, Just taking fire while in a crowd, that is not immediately noticeable, unless the attacker is right next to you... so in this case, I have to imagine that our definitions of what is Immediately noticeable and Obvious differ a lot... also notice that the book (SR4A) recommends not over using the mechanic for perception rolls... Depending upon what your interpretation of Obvious vs. Immediatly Noticeable is, things may not need rolls at all... (I tend to take the tack that the guy down the hall shooting at me is something that is Immedaitely Noticeable, whereas you may think that it is only obvious)...

Now, that being said, Someone that is trying to be a bit stealthy is not going to be in the position of being Immediately Noticeable, and thus a roll should be made... But in your previous example, the fact that the Idiot was yelling "HERE PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY" sort of removes the element of stealth, regardless of whether he is at the mouth of an alley or not...

Different Strokes for Different Folks...
No Worries...


Keep the Faith

Which is why he "waltz stealthily into the middle of the street and shouted, 'HERE PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY!' in a disorienting manner at the sec guards to confuse them as to my position".

No, that's how many people can be concealed at once, not how many people are indirectly affected by the concealment. Concealment doesn't do jack squat to anyone observing the effect, it simply blends the targets into the environment like camouflage on crack.

Ah, forgive me. The power description uses the words 'target' and 'subject' interchangeably. Silly me, I thought they meant different things.

I don't know, Being under concealment generally implies that whatever the character's doing isn't immediately obvious because he's pretty damn near unsensible while doing it. If you had a force 6 spirit dong the concealing, that's the equivalent of having the PCs who are trying to see the character be deaf, blind, and whatever the other nouns for the lack of your other senses are. It doesn't matter how loud the bullhorn you blow into the deaf man's ear is, he'll still never be able to hear you.

What. D:

Was that player an idiot, or was he working for EVO?

OI Chums,

Thanks for the Info. I understand that Concealment is not Invisibility, hence the quotation marks, but for ease of posting I used that simple term to describe it. I recall concealment being a bad thing from other editions. You felt like that guy in "It's a Wonderfull Life" as if you never even existed. Kind of a living nightmare where the world was oblivious to your existence but you were right there screaming "Somebody Notice ME." Any thoughts on why it was changed? My guess is players ignored the peril and pain of the original concealment and went ahead and used the power on themselves any way. My players tried...."Tried" muwhahahaha

That'd be an interesting concept for a PC. Someone who asked a free spirit to conceal him so that no one could ever see him again, and then realized that no one could ever see him again. Or hear him. Or feel him. He'd be like a ghost, no one would be able to tell that he was there, they could only sense him indirectly through his actions. Might be fun for a little while, but I'd imagine he'd get tired of messing with people after a while.

Away from books at the moment, but if memory serves, Perception works as follows.

Perceiver Distracted (not Observing in Detail): -2 dice pool
Stands Out In Some Way (Flashing Neon Sign): +2 dice pool
Concealment Power: -Magic
Active Enhancements: Variable (usually +3 & dependent on sense used)
To notice something, you must acheive 1 (net) Hit. Additional hits give additional information (metahuman -> Ork -> female Ork -> ~20 years old)


If your dice pool is reduced to 0, you cannot succeed. Generally, a moderate to high Force spirit is more than enough to make a character "invisible". Upper level security with active enhancements will have a chance to notice a concealed character that is not infiltrating, but are probably shit outa luck against a concealed infiltrator. Against a talented perceiver, concealment is probably only useful if it suppliments infiltration.

Oi Chum,

Now that is an answer. Thanks. My players use the infiltration along with the Concealment power so grunts and thugs usally losse out in the end. On the off chance that they did spot the PCs what would they see? Would they see right through the Concealment or maybe just a shadow or a glimpse of some some movement? With higher end security that have active enhancements and a much better chance to see the team I ask the same question. What would they see if they did succed in their perception tests to notice the sneaky, Spirit backed, Shadowrunners?

It's not so much that they would "see" the runners as they would "notice" them. Concealment doesn't make a character invisible, it makes them unnoticeable, so if someone saw through the concealment, they would go "Ah! Where'd you come from?" and depening on where they were might begin shooting.

EDIT: I just thought up a question. There might be rules for this already, and I know that drone sensors get the perception penalty for concealment just like anyone else but what if you recorded a concealed character? Its not like the character's invisible, he still shows up on video, so if you had a security camera recording a bank vault, could you have a situation where police see a man waltz into a bank room, take all the money, and walk out with a security guard standing there as if nothing's happening? Or would the concealment apply through the recording?

I'd wager that the character shows up just like any other, though I'm not sure on the exact ruling at the moment. If so, it'd also make simrig recording quite valuable as anything under Concealment will show up on a playback.

I kinda viewed the Concealment power to something like a "Somebody Else's Problem" as far as the storyline effect was on people and drones and such. My gaming group has never been much into spirits, or magic for that matter, so I've never actually seen it much in action for game effects.

Please explain to me, Toturi, how you yell in a Disorienting manner... Because that makes absolutely no sense at all...
Usually, in my experience, yelling at someone actually tends to draw their attention...

Keep the Faith

Ventriloquism.

Sorry, But I don't Buy It...

Keep the Faith

Hm, how about, "Hey, guys, look over there, it's a Roach Spirit mounting Mickey Mouse!" ?

Well, it would certainly disorient me...

Not to mention, Mickey!

You don't have to, the declared intent of the character is to disorientate the guards with his yelling so that his true position can remain undetected. It can backfire on him (if you so choose to impose penalties because you think it shouldn't work) but it remains the character's intent to stay stealthy, just that he is going about it the "wrong" way. But however he chooses to do it, it means to me that he gets to roll the appropriate Stealth Group skill.

Now that I don't buy. A character's intention when wearing the clearly latex face mask of Richard Nixon may be to con people into thinking the president's returned from the dead but that doesn't mean the GM should allow a Con roll.

Well, the GM could assign a suitably high Threshold, making the attempt next to impossible to succeed. "Yeah, give it your best shot, buddy. Threshold of 10." If he makes it, everybody (players and GM) gets a laugh and wins.

"I am not a crook."


Why not? You'd give him somewhere in the realm of 'holy shit that's a lot of penalties' but if he somehow managed to score 15+ hits, why not?

All right, so from a standpoint of "ridiculousness" or "fun" it's ok, but what if the player's trying to do something more annoying, like convincing the president he's just met to assassinate all of his cabinet members and then blow himself up in the senate building? Would you still allow a test even then?

Indeed... Outright Stupidity generally fails in this regard...



And obviously the character is somewhat incapable of realizing that he is drawing attention to himself... his intent fails automatically (No ROll Required) with regards to his actions... It is not my responsibility to correct him and his stupidity... he takes the actions, he pays the consequences...

Keep the Faith

Presumably in such a situation there are situational modifiers that make the attempt ludicrously difficult. The NPCs burn Edge just in case.

Look, I see your point. Sometimes there just should be no test. GM knows it, players know it, everybody's OK when the GM says "It ain't gonna happen. Try something else." I can live with that. GM wants to open up the possibility and have the player waste Edge, I can go with that, too.

No, there are modifiers for drawing attention to oneself. You can declare as the GM that you are ruling the intent/action autofails but it does not mean that, by the rules, the action will. That is why you make the rolls and compare the results. If you want to autofail things that you think should not succeed, you can house rule it that way.

Obviously you are somewhat incapable of understanding this. However, if the GM is unable to reconcile the circumstances of the actions with the intent of the actions themselves, it is not the player's responsiblity to help the GM to overcome his limitations. The player/character takes the actions and he makes the rolls, if he has the successes, he succeeds, if not, he fails.

The player says, "I want to stealth my way over there and open fire on the guards. I want to stealth there in certain ways." Those "certain ways" could impose modifiers. If the modifiers are negative and reduces the dice pool to a small number, then then success becomes difficult. But it does not mean that a very skilled and talented individual could not pull off a stunt like that.

Me choosing to tell a player that he is being idiotic and should rethink his actions is not a houserule... in the situation you provided, there is NO WAY that the action is going to be stealthy... in the least... as such, he becomes "Immediately Noticeable" and per the RAW, NO ROLL IS EVEN NEEDED... any thing that the GM thinks is Immediately Noticeable is an automatic success for the "observing" party... so tell me, how is that not RAW? I even have a page number for you if you like (SR4A, Page 135-136... if you prefer an older version: SR4, Page 117)...

There is a vast difference between something that makes sense, and something that is ludicrous...

EDIT: Removed Comments that were Probably out of place...

So, in this regard... Saying that you wish to sneak over to a location (say the corner of the Alley wall) that would give you a good chance of remainign hidden (using the cover of the Dumpster located there), and then you will open up on the security guard to eliminate him... Makes a Lot of Sense

But syaing that you are going to sneak over there, all the while yelling at the top of your lungs (in your example "HERE PIGGY PIGGY PIGGY"), in the vain hope that it will somehow disorient the guard so that you can get the drop on him so that you can shoot him... Makes absolutely no sense at all and will end up in the character getting filled full of holes from the guard whose duty it is to fill intruders full of holes...

That is so completely ludicrous that you have to wonder why the character took that particular method of suicide into account...

That being said, the ususal caveat from the GM of "Are you sure you want to do that?" should suffice for the player to realize that the end result is going to not favor him in the least, and if he still chooses to perform the ludicrous action, then he deserves what he is about to get...


Keep the Faith

Concealment is a mix of invisibility, camouflage, and just plain old good fortune. Well, not invisibility as per the common use in RPGs so much as its literal use of "not visible", but the power is capable of a wide array of effects. It's a Physical effect; it's actually concealing you, not merely fooling people into thinking you're not there. Plants may shuffle around to hide you along a chosen path, sensors may find themselves pointed in the wrong direction at the right time (since, effectively, they have to make the Perception Test to spot you, too), a bird may fly down and perch in front of a camera lens, some distraction may grab everything's attention and cause them to look elsewhere, etc. Those distractions and concealment would and should carry over to any video feeds, causing observers later on to suffer the same penalty -- the power is affecting the concealed characters, not the observers. It's like asking what happens if someone in camouflage is caught on camera?

That's the point. By declaring the action as an Infiltration roll, the player is forcing a roll! By the rules, the Perceiving character now has to beat the character's Infiltration success (if any). Immediately Noticeable is applicable if the character simply states he is going to shout at the guards and attract their attention - no argument there, it is a straight threshold test even if he wasn't Immediately Noticeable. But if he is going about it in a stealthy manner, while the specific actions may have adverse effects on his overall actions, it does not mean that he cannot pull it off.

Just because the player stacks the odds against his own character(deliberately or otherwise), it does not mean that the character cannot pull it off.

If you want to short circuit such stealth skills, it is your perogative as a GM.

Just some normal guy - (IIRC) Perception Threshold 1 or 2
Same guy but now stealthing around, no matter what factors are in his favor or against him - Threshold equal to Infiltration roll

GM sees the player rolling more than 2 successes on his Infiltration, and points to the table and says, "Your character is a normal guy, the guard's Perception Threshold is 2, too bad." Or worse, "Your character has negative modifiers. He is immediately noticeable, sucks to be you!"

If you say,"Your character has certain factors that impose negative modifiers. I don't think he should be able to make an Infiltration roll." As much as I think it is not according to the rules, if it is applied consistently, I will admit that it is fair to the player.

Certain spirits, such as Hearth Spirits, had a power similar to concealment in 2nd edition (I just checked that book, not sure about 1st or 3rd) called Alienation. It was similar to Concealment, but was an offensive version. It basically cut you off from the world and made you unable to interact with it. People just didn't notice you, no matter what you did. They would try to walk through you, cars wouldn't stop, etc. My old GM loved that power, and used it to nasty effect on numerous occasions.

Bull

EDIT: It looks like you Ninja Edited while I was replying, so some of the below may not apply...

The problem here is that you cannot be stealthy and continue to shout out craziness... they are mutually exclusive actions...

I am perfectly in my right to say that there is NO WAY for you to be stealthy while running and screaming... so no, no roll is actually forced at all... The player/character is trying to do something that is entirely impossible for him to accomplish, given the situation you described...

Much like trying to say that you can infiltrate stealthily down a completely barren corrider, painted in White and harshly lit with a guard at the other end of the Hallway watching you approach... or are you going to argue that because the character says he is doing it STEALTHILY, he should get a roll? I am sorry, but there are some things that are impossible to accomplish... A Marching Band can hardly remain unseen while playing ... this is essentially what you are trying to allow with the "The character is forcing a roll" argument...

Something that draws attention to itself is not intending to hide (It is drawing attention to itself), and therefore cannot hide...

Here is a good example... one that actually came up in a game within the last month or so...

Our team was infiltrating a highly secure facility... the Team took all of the precautions, and we performed fairly well... unforutnately, teh technomancer rolled pretty badly on his infiltration roll and was spotted not only by the patrolling aerial drones (with Heavy machineguns to boot), but by a team of HTR Goons... instead of trying to get around the corner and break Line of sight to the team, he decided to remain still and trust in his handy dandy Chameleon Suit...

The Goons kept Line of sight, never lost contact and decided that they would fulfill their mandate and shoot the poor technomancer... So 2 of them took a knee, and at a range of about 20 meters, proceeded to aim and then fire their Assault Rifles a Long Narrow Burst each... Now, the GM asked the player if he was sure that he did not want to move, or perform any other action, even though it was pretty obvious to all of us that he had been compromised... he chose to remain still (so no Dodge) and he took the brunt of the attack, which reduced him to overflow damage and the rules for bleeding out... Bad Choice....

The Technomancer's Player used the same logic that you were using, that he should have not been seen, as he was against the wall and that the chameleon suit should have provided sufficient "cover" as to render him unseen... unfortunately, for him, however, the guards never even had to roll beyond their initial perception roll, even though he had stopped moving... their radar systems and tac-net (of which the overhead drone was a part of) had already penetrated his stealth attempts and they were never forced to re-acquire their target... bad luck for him... once he became "Immediately Noticeable", through no fault of his own, he lost the ability to reattempt that stealth (because he refused to take any actions that would have given him a roll, like sliding around the corner of the building)...

This was a valid decision by the GM... there was absolutely no other action the GM could have taken within the confines of the circumstance... In fact, any other decision would have cheapened the experience for the rest of the team. In the end, the character was pulled to cover and stabilized, but it was a learning experience that he would not forget, I am sure...

At the end of the day, the point is that should the GM declare something Impossible, the character needs to find a different approach... If the character still tries to perform the impossible, he should reap the consequences of that action... Actions that are contradictory to each other are doomed to failure from the get go...

I probably rambled on a bit, but oh well, it is getting a bit late anyways and I am feeling a bit loopy... Hopefully I made some sense in there somewhere...

Keep the Faith

Wait, what? Since when does Concealment affect your environment? I don't know how exactly Concealment works, but I'm pretty sure plants have nothing to do with it. That said, you may be right about Concealment working through a camera, it is a physical effect after all, I'm just having a little trouble imagining it.



No. You are blatantly wrong. The player has no right to decide which skills he uses in which situation, that is the decision of either common sense or the GM. In order for a character to succeed at any skill check he must perform actions in accordance with that skill, and he must do so with the GM's approval. A player can't stick a sword into a wall, vault over it, and call it a Blades check and a player can't shout "HEY! LOOK AT ME!" and begin running past a guard and call it an Infiltration check. The GM is certainly free to do either of these things, but a player can't decide on his own. In your original example of the Troll trying to disorient a guard by shouting something, unless you can give me a good reason why the guard wouldn't just turn towards the origin of the sound and start shooting then you don't get to make an infiltration roll, you blew it by giving away your cover. There's a difference between a character being under conditions that impede his stealth abilities and impose a modifier and a character not actually infiltrating, no matter what the player says his "intentions" are.

I disagree with you. Just because you cannot imagine a way for someone to infiltrate under such circumstances doesn't mean it cannot be done. I disagree that attracting attention and infiltration are mutually exclusive, shouting may be detrimental to infiltration but it is not mutually exclusive to infiltration.

Thus yes, you should be able to at least try to infiltrate stealthily down a completely barren corrider, painted in White and harshly lit with a guard at the other end of the Hallway trying to find you as you approach. If you have the requisite dice pool to overcome the negative situational modifiers, then you should succeed. You are so superhumanly stealthy that you are able to do the above. Your statement of "watching you as you approach" assumes the guard has already spotted the infiltrator. The guard could have just come on duty and is alert and watchful, but it does not mean that he autosucceeds at finding you. He might have substantially more dice to roll but he still needs to make that roll.

Your GM was right. The technomancer was already spotted due to his poor roll.

Because the yelling is so disorienting the guard is unable to tell where the sound is originating from thus allowing the troll to sneak pass.

There's little difference between a character being under conditions that impede his stealth abilities and impose a modifier and a character taking actions that will impede his stealth abilities and impose a modifier. One is likely that such conditions are externally imposed while the other is self-imposed, mechanically however there should be no difference.

If the GM wants to decide which skill a player character should use in any given situation, he can jolly well write his own novel and leave his players out of it because that character has become an NPC.

Sorry but I don't see how you can yell so as to disorient someone like that unless you can do so at over 110 decibels.

That situation, I might tend to agree with you that all of those things are situational modifiers. I'd give the guard something like +30 to the roll because there's really no way for him not to see you, but if you scrunch up against the wall and he looks at the exact wrong spot then I suppose it's possible for him not to see you. It would represent a miracle of dice rolling but it could happen.

However, if I as the GM said that the guard would get to roll perception and could only fail in that situation on a critical glitch, then you as the player have no right to question my decision, no matter what your interpretation of the rules. A GM is God at his table, if you don't like it then you don't have to show up to the games.

Edit: and yes, a GM should be able to decide which skill a player gets to use in a given situation. Otherwise, a player could just use his strongest skill in all situations. Need to convince that NPC your here on legitimate business? Blades. Need to swim over to that oil tanker in stormy waters? Blades. Need to pirouette over a burning bush while singing a Buddhist hymn in Latin while impersonating the Dali Lama? Blades, blades, and blades.