Again, 'metahuman' and 'non-metahuman' just seem to contradict the examples given in the books (Slay Elf, Demolish Metal). I agree that the rules are as vague as possible on this. Presumably, the GM can alow anything. *shrug*

Regardless, I don't see how that would let you target RFIDs and not the materials directly surrounding them, with or without Detect RFIDs (which I believe Janessa mentioned?).

Aside: Janessa, is there anything else you/your chars passionately hate (besides Infected and RFIDs)?

I'm looking at the Detect RFID Tags and Demolish RFID Tags and wondering why I haven't thought of them before. However, given the nature of RFID tags as somewhere between electronic equipment and computers, I will say that a high object resistance is a given for the damn things, minimum of 4-5, possibly 6--and for things like security tags and stealth tags, I can totally see corps using that "redundant processing" option to increase the OR, especially if somebody went to the effort to publish those spells on the Matrix...

Heh...

I would definitely rate them as highly processed electronics and rate them depending on cost.

RFID: 4+
Stealth Tag: 5+
Security Tag: 6+

I would say that the force of the spell should NOT limit net hits since we roll against OR it is exceptional punishment already but I would say that Force gives us the maximum amount of tags that can be found in one casting.

So, casting a F6 detect RFID ona car and getting X3 successes gives you 3 tags.

You could just use a version of the Demolish (RFID) as an Indirect Spell; Moving it from Direct to Indirect. Or even a Restricted Version of Blast (Only RFID's). Easy Peasy.

And yes, I have seen a Character with A "Detect RFID" Spell. You don't need to modify a Detect Enemies Spell, just use the Detect [Object] Spell.

The bit about object resistance reminds me. You are talking about Aztechnology. The obvious way for an organization full of ritual mages to find a vehicle is via ritual magic. Assume that they do something like take a wheel stud or bolt off the tractor and appropriately store it for later use.

How big a magical ward do they have the truck in?

I'd disagree. If a direct combat spell is distinguishing the tag from its housing for applying damage, it should also distinguish for targeting. If the spell targets the item as a whole, then it has to affect the item as a whole. It's the same way you don't shoot out the tires of a car with a powerbolt by aiming at the car. The spell attacks the whole car (tires, frame, armor, engine, leather bucket seats, cupholder) as an entity. And why someone's cyberware is considered part of them for shapechange.

For the tires example, you could make an AoE Demolish (Tires) spell, that would attack tires only, but it would only affect the tires you have LOS to - so the trunk spare will probably be fine, as might one on the other side of the car.

So a Demolish (RFID) would probably be pointless, since the little buggers are never in LOS.

Wouldn't an indirect version have to blow through the housing to get the RFID? Indirect spells need line of effect, not line of sight. That's why paper walls interfere with powerballs and glass walls interfere with fireballs, but not vice versa.

I would say No, just like you cannot actually see damage on the iside of a person, but a Heal Spell will still Heal that damage. You are targeting the "Damaged areas" of the individual, just as you would be targeting the RFID's of the Object. Or possibly an even better explanation is how you can target an Eye for a Special Effect other than Damage . In this case you are targeting a General piece of Equipment (The Car) and looking for a Special Effect (Destroying the RFID's).

Obviously, there is an ongoing debate about this.

Heal doesn't seem to be a good example. Different category, different abstract effect. You don't get to just define RFIDs as 'damaged areas'.

I thought they were talking about Stuffer Shack, a subsidiary of Aztechnology.

Also, how long until that "Ritual Sample" of the truck no longer considers itself a part of that truck?

Yes - Lofwyr, Sticks, and Clockwork. Would love to kill all 3 of them, but probably only have a chance on 2 out of 3.

Maybe not the best example, I can agree. But the comparison holds up I think. I don't actually see an issue with an Indirect Blast effect limited to RFID's. But then again, I never really had an issue with the Demolish (RFID) Spell either. It is very very niche spell, and you will hardly ever see anyone take it; at least in my experience.

It's a question of magical theory, not gameplay.

I'm fine either way (magic is arbitrary), I'm just asking which is 'true'.

Well, for Game Truth, I think the Restricted Blast works better (Fewer Questions I think), where the Demolish (RFID) is more questionable. As you say, though, either "Works."

Assuming they even thought about that - and honestly, I'd say that you'd have to have a whole vehicle together for at least half a year before you can take a part off for a material link, otherwise it's just one of a billion identical interchangeable nuts - then they're not going to be using Ritual Magic to track down a stolen Stuffer Shack big rig. A main battle tank, maybe, but not a big rig.



Probably not long. It is, after all, a nameless, faceless, utterly unspectacular, unremarkable, non-unique piece of interchangeable equipment. Now, it might work if you had an artisan hand-carve a hood ornament for the truck, let it sit on the truck in a warehouse for six months and then detach the ornament, kind of like a sailing ship's figurehead, but at that point it's "how long until the truck no longer considers itself that same truck."

So make two identical, unique handcrafted figureheads for the truck, let 'em sink in for a while, then snap off one as a ritual link.


That's waaaay the hell too much trouble to go to for anything costing under a million



And the difference is that Demolish (Tires) is something you can use to mobility-kill a vehicle in the middle of a fight, and Demolish (RFID Chip) is pretty much strictly a utility spell so wizkids without the major technological ability to do this kind of shit can secure themselves and their property from damnable annoying RFIDs in every goddamn thing.

And I'd let Demolish (Cupholder) work simply because it's a hilarious way to dump piping-hot steaming Stuffer Shack soycaf in some asshole road-hog's lap.

It's not really a SR4 principle, but 'how funny is it' is theoretically as valid a magical principle as anything else. Pretty impossible to operationalize, though; depends too much on specific context!

Ritual magic is a good example, though. Per the core book, ritual magic can be cast on ANY target and doesn't require line of sight. Specifically so.

Driving a car into your magical lodge (or use a spotter spirit), and then casting demolish RFID should work.

Yup. That should work.

This might actually work, if you can pull it off. Be a pain in the butt, but possibly doable.

Hmm. wait. Ritual magic still needs a spotter with LOS, doesn't it? You still run into the problem of needing LOS to the chips. The spells don't change, the ritual just makes your LOS come from the spotter rather than your group.

Right? I'll have to look this up. I'm uncertain. It's so seldom used in my games, since there is almost never enough mages of similiar traditions to make it possible.

Depends...
You could always use a Material Link to the Car Itself to get around the spotter. But how long those actually last is very fluid.
I don't see the Demolish [RFID] spell as a real issue, personally, but others might. Hell, Catalog will tell you it is there. DOn't even need a special spell like Detect [RFID].

I don't think what kind of link you use really matters if you have physical possession of the car and are sitting next to it as you cast. Its not like you're trying to nuke it from halfway around the world.

The link/spotter discussion (ritual magic to find the truck) is unrelated to the RFID discussion.

Indeed... The issue is whether you can use a Direct Spell (Deomolish RFID) to remove the RFID's since you cannot actually see them throughout the frame of the car, or whether you would need an Indirect Spell (An RFID Limited Blast, perhaps) to Remove them, since Indirect does not need LOS. Unfortunately, you get into other areas with the Indirect, like how would that interact with a sealed compartment that contained the RFID?

My Simple answer is this. Either will work, because if the player spent the 5 Karma to learn such a spell, it should have some utility.

Mundanely, the chop shop should be able to take care of it with minimal issue, becuase they are a Chop Shop.

The question becomes: How difficult is it for the Non-Chop Shop, or the PC caster, to remove RFID's that are not wipeable (Security Tags, and possibly Stealth Tags)? In my opinion, It should not take all that much effort. Tag Eraser, Vehicle Tag Eraser, or Spell should all work equally well in this regard.

I'm fairly sure a direct spell would handle it just fine. Direct spells are spelled out as damaging things from within, and bypassing armor because of it.

I know there are specific rules text that don't allow full body armor to block direct combat spells, even if you can't see the person.
Its the same arguement with the car.

'you can't stunbolt me, my armor is in the way and you can't see me!'
'you can't stunbolt my rfid, my armor is in the way, you can't see it!'
same arguement. the answer is it works anyway.

Or even 'you can't damage my car because the window is up!'

It's not the same issue at all. The crucial point is that you're trying to damage a part of the whole (assuming they're even 'part' of the car), and without LOS. So, yes, you *can't* powerbolt my implanted focus. You *can't* stunbolt my RFID (… why would you want to?) under my armor. You also can't powerbolt a specific something in the car through the side; you can't see it.

Personally, I don't see how Demolish [RFID] could work on RFIDs you couldn't see, any more than Demolish [Light Switch] should let you destroy a light switch on the far side of a wall you can't see through, just on the basis that it's "part of the house." If it's a living thing, and has an aura, the whole can be affected by a part, but I don't see how you can beat LOS with assemblies.


This should only work because the target has an aura, which is what you're actually targeting. You're not seeing something that's outside of LOS, because you can see the target's aura. Are there Direct spells that affect non-living things? [Sorry, books not with me at the moment.] There shouldn't be. Says me, anyway!

Power Bolt is the Primary Example of a Direct Spell that affects Non-Living Material. Generally used to destroy vehicles, assuming you can get beyond the OR.

Okay, so there's a good example: can you use Power Bolt to, say, destroy the door handle of the car, even though you can't see it, because it's part of the aura of the car? Or when you Power Bolt the car, are you targeting the part of it you're seeing, using LOS?

See this is a terrible arguement. Your same arguement applied to the person under the armor(assuming its fully enclosing) says that they can't be hurt, because they can't be seen. For it to be true, it has to hold water in all situations - and also not break the rules.

(I wasn't talking about stunbolting through a window. I was saying its a dumb idea that you can't stunbolt the whole car because the window is opaque)

See, if you powerbolt a car, and you powerbolt it hard enough to instakill it to the tune of 14 or so damage.....
well, you can blow up the whole damn thing, from the inside out(direct spells specifically work like this; its why they ignore armor), and its not just the side of the car that happens to be facing you - its kind of the whole thing, because its whole condition monitor is now filled.
With that in mind, you should probably know that the Demolish line of spells is specifically a variant of the powerbolt line of spells. This means its handled exactly like a powerbolt, except with the added restriction.

You can cast powerbolt on anything you like. You can cast wreck on anything you like. The key distinction is that wreck does nothing if its not a matching target.
In the same circumstance, a 14 damage powerbolt: wreck RFID's deals 14 damage to the car from the inside out, wrecking everything th

Basically everyone is taking the 'if you can't see it it can't be hurt' mechanic a little too far. Mages do NOT have to view the entirety of an object to affect it - if they did, they would have to have a mirror to see the whole of their target. They only need to see part of it to affect the whole of it. Kind of like a magical eye gun.
No, I'm serious. Vision penalties apply to spells - so does Cover. If you can partially see a target, (say, half a car in Partial Cover) you can still blow the crap out of it. You get a penality, but its not rendered impossible.

Someone was arguing that if Restricted target elemental spell would work? The thing is, if you run Shatter/Powerbolt/Powerball through the spell design rules, and add the Restricted Target(drain -1) effect, you get exactly the Ram/Wreck/Demolish line of spells. Its basically exactly what you want already.

See, that is a situational application. I would allow you to Power Bolt a Door Handle if your Intent is to destroy the lock so that you could open it. The problem is one of applied damage. How do you rate the damage of a Lock on a vehicle door? *Shrug*

But then Again, I have no Issue with Demolish [RFID], so maybe I am not the one to ask.

No, because there's a (silly, sure) principle that clothing is somehow excluded, or perhaps 'mixed with your aura'. It's not *my* principle. But that's still not the point (and it's not what I said). You can stunbolt the *whole* person; you cannot stunbolt part of them, especially if you can't see it.

I don't even understand the window example; if someone said something like that to you, they were just gibbering. It doesn't affect *my* examples, though.

3278, you are indeed powerbolting the whole car… probably. What you're definitely not doing is powerbolting an *invisible* part or content of the car.

You are wrong and confusing Mana, Physical, Direct and Indirect spells.
I know its confusing when you have a direct spell that deals physical damage but isn't physical targeting, so its important to understand what you're talking about so you know whether you can manabolt a spirit or not.

Called shots exist for precisely this purpose. So do penalties for targets you know are there but are impaired from seeing.

But here's the thing. Direct spells bypass armor. They get underneath it and blow things up from the inside out. This is a specific example about how the entire magic system works. Its a given, there is no debate about it. Its on 203.

When you're powerbolting a tank, you are ALREADY damaging parts of it you can't see, just by sheer virtue of blowing up parts of it that are concealed beneath armor plating.
So yeah, powerbolting the innards of a car without being able to see them are *exactly* what you are *already* doing, each and every time you throw a powerbolt.

For me there is really no distinction between being able to magically microwave someone's innards from the inside, and being able magically microwave specific parts of those innards that you already have access to.

Also, if Assensing can pick out Nanotech from within an aura(an unliving thing specifically designed to be so small you can't see it), it can probably do the same thing for RFID tags - which have a nearly identical function - They are hidden within something and can't be see, neither effect your essence at all, and both are very small.

There are two possibilities at the moment: RFIDs are 'part of the truck', or they're separate things embedded inside it. If it's the latter, then clearly a powerbolt (limited or not) can't affect them; there's no LOS.

If they *are* 'part of the truck', then we have a different question: does Demolish affect *parts*, or does it affect *targets*? As I said before, you can't powerbolt a specific something inside a car by targeting the car, no matter what *restriction* is on your powerbolt spell. And the area affect version only gives you additional *targets*, not an actual area of effect; you can't target a car with 'Demolish Squishies' and expect to kill the passengers.

Called Shots have nothing to do with this. Neither does Assensing, particularly. It can also detect 'ware, but you can't directly attack someone's cybercommlink or their bioliver.
For SR4 magic theory, there is.

This.

Powerbolt, etc, must have a line of sight to what it is trying to affect. Casting at at a human, you are targeting the entire human regardless of the effects. Same thing with Heal - you don't target the wounds per se, you target the entire being to restore it to a holistic state.

If you could target 'restricted' parts of something that you can't see, every combat mage out there would use spells like 'Bust Heart' or 'Melt brain'. It won't take much damage to a character's heart before he stops working properly, and I can't imagine that the heart itself has a very high body - or willpower - to resist with. Same goes for the brain, really - just a few boxes physical damage to the brain itself and you start severely hampering an individual, and the brain won't have much in the way of body to resist with either. What's the condition monitor of a heart anyway? 1? 2? Or maybe just 'Mass Paralyse Heart (extended area)' as a sustained spell...
Why would anyone cast a spell at an entire vehicle if all you needed was 'demolish fuel line'? Less drain, less Object Resistance, and better results.

What you're failing to comprehend is this: being able to hit things you can't see that are right next to/underneath things you can see is a function of Direct spells(yes, the entire category of spells), not of Restricted Target(the spell design) or limitations on a specific spell.

Given that RFIDs are available as Mods, and are built into things instead of listed as accessories.(though slap-on rfids exist too), I'm inclined to say they are a part of the truck. As much so as other things built into it, like Tires and the presence or lack of Armor mods.

Also, I'm 100% sure you're talking out of your ass and making shit up about Area spells. Force in meters buddy, affects all valid targets within the radius of effect. Break out your book first, next time - unless you're doing it on purpose, in which case, just knock it off.

There is one thing you are right about, though - I believe called shots only work for Indirect spells, because those are handled like a ranged attack. Blind fire, though, is an exceptionally relevant modifier for shooting magical rays at things you can't see, but are allowed to effect because of your spell. Or it would be, but isn't for the same reason called shots aren't.

So what you're saying is that you can powerbolt the bumper off a car, but you can't powerbolt the bumper sticker?
Again, you're confusing 'restricted' parts and 'restricted targets' with Direct Combat Spells.


Your spiel about specialized spells sounds cool in common-sense/practice, but falls apart when applied to the system as a whole: a melt brain spell doesn't actaully give brain damage in the form of debuffs or penalties typically associated with *brain damage*. Its just regular old damage on the condition monitor, exactly the same as the original spell its based off of - in fact, you resist it exactly the same way.
There aren't any spells which really do the kind of abusive things you are suggesting anyway, so even if the possibility exists, you can't really get them.

A more fair example is to compare an Area spell to Explosives, which also effect everything within a given radius. The major difference is that instead of a high explosive or a frag or an EMP, its a magical microwave ray. Still, they both have a point of origin that the effect spreads out from.

What Yerameyahu is suggesting is that if you put rfid's in the trunk of a car, and then emp the car's trunk, the rfid's wont be affected.
Yes, you CAN center your area off effect in the boot without being able to see the entirety of the trunk(if, say, the light is off)
now just replace 'emp' with 'magical bomb', and you're kind of getting the idea of how Area spells work.


I don't see how you can rationalize valid targets in the AOE not being effected by a spell. Whether they are loose and dangling around in the AOE or whether they stuck to something that is also in the AOE, they are still in the AOE.

I dunno what the hostility is, Udoshi. I can go looking for book references if you really want, but I'm not saying anything controversial. For example, regarding area effect, you said this: "affects all valid targets". … Yes. All valid targets; not integral subparts of valid targets. This is specifically what I just said, and the same wording I used.

You'll also notice the book says this: "All visible targets within the area are affected;" right next to the bit you're quoting. This would only be relevant if we assumed RFIDs were *not* integral subparts, of course.

My consistent position is that you can't powerbolt the bumper *or* the sticker off, except remember that we're talking about *invisible* subparts (slightly different).

As much as I'm enjoying the debate, if what you are saying turns out to be true, I'm making a mage designed around abusing Area spells, Invisibility Spells, and Multicasting.

Didn't you ever see people talking about using Nullifier AR software to safely cast stunball (etc.) in friendly crowds? If you can't see them, they can't be targets.

So: if RFIDs are separate parts, you can't target what you can't see; if RFIDs are integral parts, you can't target parts of a whole. Either way.

Personally, I'd probably allow something like an EMP *indirect* area spell; Demolish-type are direct, right? I think this is what TJ suggested earlier.

That's how I see it, as well. You either need LOS to whatever you're affecting; in the case of hitting someone with a Direct spell, you're targeting their aura, which you can see through their armor. In the case of hitting a door control behind a wall [or car door], you can't target it because you can't see it, and it doesn't have an aura you can see through the wall/door.


Well, I can promise I'm not confusing the types of spells, but I can't promise I'm not wrong. Perhaps if you explained what you perceive to be the flaw in my reasoning, rather than incorrectly assuming ignorance or confusion on my part, we could find out if there's even a right or wrong to be had as regards this issue. Like others, I'd prefer to have the conversation less the attitude, though.


This. Also, "Why would anyone cast a spell at an entire vehicle if all you needed was 'demolish fuel line'? Less drain, less Object Resistance, and better results." +1 with a cherry on top.

By that reasoning, targeting the RFID inside the car by targeting the car will also be 'just regular old damage on the condition monitor'; meaning that you need to destroy tyhe car to destroy the RFID...

Also, there are rules of a sort for brain damage and the like - Augmentation pg. 121. Granted, they aren't very precise and fleshed out, but they're there. At the very least, a spell that targets brain matter or heart tissue should be treated as if it was a called shot to do more damage. You can't expect a Force 6 Powerbolt with 6 successes that targets just the heart to not have more grave consequences than a Powerbolt that targets an entire person...


Okay, bringing out the books:


Emphasis mine.


Emphasis mine.

Indirect combat spells create an effect that is resolved through a ranged combat test, though. But if tyou want to destroy an RFID with those (or a brain) you have to succeed in destroying whatever surrounds the RFID (or brain) first. If your indirect combat spell only affects RFIDs (or brains) you are s.o.l. if the items are encased. Indirect combat spells are stopped by physical objects, and if they can't damage that object to get through they won't damage whatever's on the inside.

Unless, perhaps, you can create some kind of indirect elemental effect like radiation, that passes through the case (the 'EMP spell'). Theoretically, this is possible (I guess?), but man do I hate the 'new' magic elements.

Just use Sound, if you want to stick to SM.

Then again, a case could be made for disallowing resitricted target on indirect combat spells - after all, they create a damaging elemental effect that may or may not hit the target. I'm not sure how you'd explain the creation of a fire that only burns orks, for instance. Or cars. But hey...

Indeed, the selectivity effect seems like magic. And an 'EMP spell' wouldn't *need* to specifically target RFIDs, because that'd be its natural effect. I was just trying to be helpful for these crazy people.

Oh yeah, an EMP spell could work fine...that's a whole other ball-game =)

There's always EMP shielding though...


(BTW, I'm fine with selectivity in direct spells, since it's all about intent. It's harder to convey that intent to something physical that you created, though, imo. "No, no, no...I want the sound waves I create to only register to microphones - nothing else should pick them up.")

Anyway, assuming such a thing could work, we're back to just using EMP grenades/HERF/etc.

Yup.

Hmm...resistricted indirect spells got me thinking.

A smoke cloud that can only be seen/felt by humans, a flash of light that can only be seen by cameras, fire that only burns clothes...

Sadly(?), there is precedence for such spells in Street Magic...

...and here my players thought 'Demolish Guns' was cheesy!

Well, sounds like that's the answer here - some people allow for RFID cleaning at their tables, and some do not.