So I was spending karma and I came across the searching specialization. The book doesn't say when you would us it, and if it stacks with other sense bonus (visual enhancement, spatial recognizer, ect). A strong case could be made that if you're using a sense you're searching for something, so wouldn't you want that specialization over individual senses?

To me a lot of perception is unintentional and/or not targeted. You may have to roll to notice something you weren't looking for. You may have to roll to hear someone behind that door talking (you didn't know there was anyone). You may try to recognize a smell, but I doubt you're searching for it. Roll to notice that magic was used, don't tell me you are actually searching for it. This goes on and on. I don't see how searching covers everything at all.

One could even make the case that searching implies a skill use and thus a simple action spent.

By that logic, you'd always get the bonus for actively looking. You don't, because most perception is passive.

I think it's active vs passive. If you're actively using a sense, you get the search bonus regardless of sense. The sight/hearing/scent/touch/taste bonuses work actively and passively, but only with the relevant sense.

"I search the treeline from where snipers could be" Visual perception test yes, Search test, maybe. Would I have to have to use the "Observe in detail" simple action to use search instead (netting me +5 dice)

using perception


I usually specialize for visual, but it seems like "search" is almost the same thing, except it could be applied to other sense.

If you're declaring the use of Perception, it's automatically an Observe in Detail action.

Reference? Not doubting you, but would like to see it in writing.

p 135

As for why Search is not the same as Visual, Visual applies to passive perception - like when the GM just calls for a Perception Test while you're just walking down the street.

so just to be clear on the line of thought, gm calls for a visual test, I get my Perception (vision specialization) + Int + vision mods. I say I want to observe I roll Perception (plus either a specific sense or search) + Int + vision mods + Observe in detail (for +3)>

I would not equate an "Observe in Detail" Action to asking if the character may make a Perception Roll. They are not synonymous, at least not in my book. One is Active, while the other may be either an active roll or a passive one.

How could you ask for a perception roll if your character is not doing anything different than usual? It's up to the GM to call for passive perception rolls, usually. And these can happen at any time.

It comes up in our games, from time to time... I can ask to make a direct Perception Check (Observe in Detail)... or I can ask if my character may make a perception roll to help twig him to something that he is not actually trying to perceive (passive, Hairs on the back of the neck situations where I am not really wanting to spend an actual action perceiving, but think there may be something there I might pick up on - May actually be nothing there, but my GM won't tell me that. On the other hand, there MAY be something there that I just might pick up on). I agree that if I am asking to Observe in Detail, it is definitely "Searching."

Here's my understanding of the rules:

GM calls for a Perception Test while you are moving down the hallway (Perception + Intuition -2 for Distraction)
Player says "I look around" taking Observe in Detail action (Perception + Intuition)
Player says "I'm looking for snipers in the treeline" takes the Observe in Detail action (Perception + Intuition + 3 Actively looking for it) "It" being the specific thing, rather than other details. As a GM, since they are looking just for the snipers, I'd roll a separate Perception test for them with the distracted modifier to see if they notice other things while they are looking.

Augmentations and Specializations then apply.

Searching is something that takes time. It's not looking at the desk for a key. It's moving stuff around, opening drawers, feeling underneath them for something taped to the bottom.

If someone says "Yeah, I looked around the room, it's clean" there's a very different connotation than "I searched the room for contraband, it's clean."

YMMV.

Indeed...

It seems odd to me that a person moving down a hallway would always be distracted.

Some people use the distraction modifier for everything.

Shemhazai--the character is distracted if they are doing anything else at the time. Since movement doesn't take an action (unless Sprinting), they can say that they are looking around and thus not be distracted. Otherwise, they may be walking down the hallway, focused on the conversation that they're having or the curve of jeans for the guy/gal in front of them, etc.

But the assumption that they are distracted is an annoyance, and is highly situational.

Just for my perspective:

The distraction modifier would come in if you're doing something else at the time. You don't get hit with it to notice the car careening down the street when you're out for a stroll. You would if you were texting your buddy at the time...or if you were Actively Searching for something else (say, that restaurant you just heard about and can't find).

Likewise the "actively looking" modifier. Walking down the street isn't going to get you that bonus, but you would if you're crossing the street and "looking both ways first."
(So yes: actively looking would be "I'm looking for snipers in the treeline" not ""I'm looking around." "Looking around" would be the active use, not taking the -2 distraction, that you can do as an action, after the GM already asked for a roll--not if you fail of course, unless you have some reason to be suspicious, e.g. 'one hit' with a threshold of 'two' and you get the sense that "something fishy is going on." You can't actively search for "something fishy" but you can "look around" and get another roll).