Okay, right, a few more questions.
1. With Clairvoyance and Clairaudience, where can this be cast? I'm not sure if I can cast it anywhere within Force X Magic Rating, and then see/hear from that position, or if you can pick any location anywhere and then from that position hear/see to a range of Force X Magic, or what have you. How does this work?
2. With Analyze Truth, what happens if I get more than one sucess? Does it tell me what the truth is every time the target lies?
3. If I cast Detect Object, does that object get to make a resistance test?
4. Where does it say what the range is for Area of Effect spells?
Thanks in advance.
JaronK
Full Version: More Magic Fun
1. Clairvoyance and Clairaudience, like almost all of the other Detection spells, are actually touch-range spells, and are cast on the person to receive the new sense. The subject can then use the sense to see/hear anywhere within the (Force × Magic) meter range.
2. Nothing special happens if you get more than one success. Multiple successes make the spell harder to resist, though... an involuntary target gets to resist with Willpower vs. the Force of the spell, and if you don't get more successes than they do, the spell doesn't work on them. Analyze Truth won't tell you what the truth is if the target lies; just that they're lying. (And even then, only if they know that they're lying. It won't detect false statements that the speaker believes to be true.)
3. No. Inanimate objects very seldom get to resist magic.
4. Base effect radius for most AE spells is equal to Magic in meters. It can be expanded or reduced by withholding dice from the Sorcery test, though. It's on... um... -checks- ... SR3 p.181.
2. Nothing special happens if you get more than one success. Multiple successes make the spell harder to resist, though... an involuntary target gets to resist with Willpower vs. the Force of the spell, and if you don't get more successes than they do, the spell doesn't work on them. Analyze Truth won't tell you what the truth is if the target lies; just that they're lying. (And even then, only if they know that they're lying. It won't detect false statements that the speaker believes to be true.)
3. No. Inanimate objects very seldom get to resist magic.
4. Base effect radius for most AE spells is equal to Magic in meters. It can be expanded or reduced by withholding dice from the Sorcery test, though. It's on... um... -checks- ... SR3 p.181.
2. The number of successes decides how accurately you determine the lies from the truth.
1 net success: Something there is false
2 net successes: Degree of falseness
4 net successes: Number of false statements
6 net successes: What parts are false
4. Range is almost always LOS for AoE spells, though you could make some Touch range.
1 net success: Something there is false
2 net successes: Degree of falseness
4 net successes: Number of false statements
6 net successes: What parts are false
4. Range is almost always LOS for AoE spells, though you could make some Touch range.
Hmm. Makes Clairvoyance rather odd then... I've got it at force 3, but 18 meters doesn't seem all that useful, especially when you could just go astral and take a peek.
JaronK
JaronK
You can make an extended range version of it with an increased drain of plus one level and a distance of F*M*10. But your really thinking too limited on Clairvoyance. For one, you can cast it on anyone. For two, you can read things. For three your not vulnerable to astral attacks. Plus, you don't have to be able to projects.
How do you get an increased range version? Or is that in another book?
JaronK
JaronK
Rules for spell design are in MitS and they include the Extended Range option.
Man, it isn't easy to make this character without that book. Is it just +1 Damage level on drain for *10 range on all detection spells?
JaronK
JaronK
Yes, Drain changes only by increasing the Damage Level by plus one. If the Drain is raised above Deadly then the Power is increased by +2.
Check this out: Dvixen's Spell Designer. But remember, it is not a replacement for MitS.
Check this out: Dvixen's Spell Designer. But remember, it is not a replacement for MitS.
Thanks kindly.
JaronK
JaronK
I just had a thought. All of those area detection spells are actually area spells, aren't they? Then couldn't you just withhold one die from the Sorcery test to increase the area, and thus the range of the effect? Of course, detection spells have a much wider base area than other area effect spells (Force*Magic in meters as opposed to Magic in meters), so personally I'd rule that you get an extra (Force) in meters for every die withheld, rather than just one meter. What do you guys think?
Fine. I'd allow it.
Thats strange though as it makes clairvoyance less usefull than a set of binos. I'd always assumed that because it affected sight and was a line of sight spell, if you could see it, then you could see it really well...
The spell isn't cast on the object being viewed, it's cast on the person doing the viewing if you can see what I mean?
The same with clairaudience.
The spell isn't cast on the object being viewed, it's cast on the person doing the viewing if you can see what I mean?
The same with clairaudience.
Zephania, I don't follow.
Almost all Detection Spells are cast on a subject who is then granted the hypersense. Clairvoyance allows the spell's subject to see past walls, underground, in the locked box, and so on. Having the range of LOS means that the caster can make anyone in his or her field of view the spell's subject.
MitS expressly states that Detection Spell subjects must be voluntary (though they could do the same for Illusion Spells that have separate subjects and targets, they didn't). One could even make a voluntary Detect Life spell that would have lower drain but only detect people and living creatures that wanted to be found (such as those trapped under rubble).
Am I missing your point?
Almost all Detection Spells are cast on a subject who is then granted the hypersense. Clairvoyance allows the spell's subject to see past walls, underground, in the locked box, and so on. Having the range of LOS means that the caster can make anyone in his or her field of view the spell's subject.
MitS expressly states that Detection Spell subjects must be voluntary (though they could do the same for Illusion Spells that have separate subjects and targets, they didn't). One could even make a voluntary Detect Life spell that would have lower drain but only detect people and living creatures that wanted to be found (such as those trapped under rubble).
Am I missing your point?
Everyone I've played with has said that for clair___, you specify any point in your LOS, and it gives you the field of sences for the given area rating from that point. This allows you to cast it in a hallway to see around a corner, through a keyhole to give you a better view of the room, etc.
Well, being a detection spell, it's both stronger and weaker than you suggest. Think of it for a moment as creating a magical "eye" of sorts that you can see out of. This eye can travel literally anywhere in the spell's area of effect (base radius = Force*Magic Att. in meters). This means that you are not limited by LOS--that is, you can look/hear through walls, around corners, underground, whatever, and you can use your natural and cybernetic vision/hearing mods through it, *but* you are limited in range.
Actually, Clairvoyance is limited to sight only, as Clairvoyance is limited to sounds only. The range is good enough for the primary purpose of the spell - to do things like read a page on an open book halfway across the room on the Yakuza boss's desk, to peek behind that steel vault door leading to the restricted area, to see if any guards are lurking behind the ferroconcrete wall your team is preparing to climb over, and so on. Used properly, it is a very viable part of a spellcaster's arsenal, one that doesn't leave you as vulnerable as astral projection does.
You do want it at a high Force, because, like most Detection spells, it is resisted by anyone who is potentially a target of it. So, for example, a Force: 1 Clairvoyance spell might see into the guardroom but not see any of the four guards in it.
You do want it at a high Force, because, like most Detection spells, it is resisted by anyone who is potentially a target of it. So, for example, a Force: 1 Clairvoyance spell might see into the guardroom but not see any of the four guards in it.
| QUOTE (Glyph) |
| You do want it at a high Force, because, like most Detection spells, it is resisted by anyone who is potentially a target of it. So, for example, a Force: 1 Clairvoyance spell might see into the guardroom but not see any of the four guards in it. |
Does this mean that every potential target gets a resistance test? So in the example above there could be a guard sat on a stool reading a book - the book and stool could pass the resistance tests and the guard fail - you see a guy sitting in mid-air with his hands out.
Hope you don't want to read something off a computer screen (technological item). The resistance test kind of makes the spell useless as you've no idea whether what you're seeing is in any way accurate.
| QUOTE (Glyph) |
| Actually, Clairvoyance is limited to sight only, as Clairvoyance is limited to sounds only. The range is good enough for the primary purpose of the spell - to do things like read a page on an open book halfway across the room on the Yakuza boss's desk, to peek behind that steel vault door leading to the restricted area, to see if any guards are lurking behind the ferroconcrete wall your team is preparing to climb over, and so on. Used properly, it is a very viable part of a spellcaster's arsenal, one that doesn't leave you as vulnerable as astral projection does. |
Nowhere in the spell description, nor anywhere elve, does it say that Clairvoyance is limited to line of sight, nor is Clairaudiance limited to "line of hearing," whatever that may be. They're kinda gimpy spells if that's so, anyway.
| QUOTE |
| You do want it at a high Force, because, like most Detection spells, it is resisted by anyone who is potentially a target of it. So, for example, a Force: 1 Clairvoyance spell might see into the guardroom but not see any of the four guards in it. |
That's not true at all. See, like nearly all Detection spells, Clairvoyance/audience is cast on a willing target--the person gaining the sense. You are not casting the spell on anyone/everyone the target sees; only the person gaining the sense. Since the people/objects under surveilence aren't actually being targeted by the spell, they don't get a Spell Resistence test. It's rather like the difference between active and passive sensors; you can detect and attempt to block an active sensor because the sensor is emitting something, like radio waves, for you to detect. Passive sensors don't. *Most* Detection spells--Clairvoyance/audience included--are generally passive spells, in the same way.
Of course, you still want it at a high Force, because it bounds the area in which you can make the "virtual sensor" of sorts.
| QUOTE (Eyeless Blond @ May 26 2004, 05:03 AM) |
| That's not true at all. See, like nearly all Detection spells, Clairvoyance/audience is cast on a willing target--the person gaining the sense. You are not casting the spell on anyone/everyone the target sees; only the person gaining the sense. Since the people/objects under surveilence aren't actually being targeted by the spell, they don't get a Spell Resistence test. |
They do, actually. I posted this over in the Cataloguing thread, but I think it bears repeating over here:
Detection spells have separate subjects and targets. The subject is person who does the detecting, and upon whom the spell is cast (and who does not have to be the caster). The target is the person or thing being detected. The caster has to have LoS, minimum (almost all of the Detection spells are actually touch-range... I think Mindlink is the only exception) to the subject of the spell. The subject has to be willing, so Resistance Tests for the subject are irrelevant. The target gets a Resistance Test, though, if they are capable of making one (inanimate objects aren't and don't). And, as you correctly point out, neither the caster nor the subject has to have LoS to the target.
Yeah, I noticed. That is quite possibly the dumbest rule I've ever seen; because of it I don't think I'm ever going to bother using a Detection spell other than maybe Catalog. Most of them were pathetically gimped to begin with, most requiring either three to four successes to even be reliable or only giving you a +1 bonus per 2 successes. Being resisted spells, particularly with such high base TNs, makes them all practically useless.
(Edit): No, wait, Catalog is pretty much useless too. You need 3 successes against a base TN of 6 to use it without fear of the GM glesully feeding you misleading information anyway. That means at least 18 dice to gaurontee a ~60% chance of the GM not immediately trying to screw you over with false info. No thanks.
(Edit): No, wait, Catalog is pretty much useless too. You need 3 successes against a base TN of 6 to use it without fear of the GM glesully feeding you misleading information anyway. That means at least 18 dice to gaurontee a ~60% chance of the GM not immediately trying to screw you over with false info. No thanks.
| QUOTE (Eyeless Blond) |
| (Edit): No, wait, Catalog is pretty much useless too. You need 3 successes against a base TN of 6 to use it without fear of the GM glesully feeding you misleading information anyway. That means at least 18 dice to gaurontee a ~60% chance of the GM not immediately trying to screw you over with false info. No thanks. |
Since when does a successful spell give you false information?
Er yeah, spells that would give you information with 100% accuracy would be a heinous advantage. Information is king.
| QUOTE (Eyeless Blond) |
Nowhere in the spell description, nor anywhere elve, does it say that Clairvoyance is limited to line of sight, nor is Clairaudiance limited to "line of hearing," whatever that may be. They're kinda gimpy spells if that's so, anyway. |
Eyeless if you are implying that because in the spell description it doesn't say you can't hear things with clairvoyance or you can't see things with clairaudience, so that means you can. I think you have missed it. Clairvoyance only describes things that have to do with vision and clairaudience only talks about things that have to do with hearing. Not to mention 2 seperate spells should imply one is for hearing things far away and the other for seeing things far away.
Definition of clairvoyance
Definition of clairaudience
Quiet easily understood, 2 seplls, 2 diferent efffects.
Why do some people insist every thing must be written you can do X or you can't do Y, if it not written out exactly it means I can do it? Use a little thought. Not trying to sound harh, but 2 seperate spells right next to each other with 2 different descriptions and the names of the spells so easily searchable in a dictionary should let you know what they are. Not to mention detection generally only offer one new sense, especially for a Moderate drain.
I didn't realise that clairvoyance allowed you to see through walls or round corners, I just understood it as magical binoculars.
Can someone clear this up because if it does what Kanada Ten says then it's awsome and top of my shopping list.
Can someone clear this up because if it does what Kanada Ten says then it's awsome and top of my shopping list.
It would stink if it were just binoculars... you can buy those, at better quality, on character creation, cheap!
JaronK
JaronK
| QUOTE (Zephania) |
| I didn't realise that clairvoyance allowed you to see through walls or round corners, I just understood it as magical binoculars. Can someone clear this up because if it does what Kanada Ten says then it's awsome and top of my shopping list. |
Kanada's right. The caster needs to be able to touch the subject of the spell, but the subject is the person who does the detecting, not the person or thing being detected. In the case of Clairvoyance, the subject is the person that you want to become clairvoyant. The subject can then detect any target within the spell effect radius (Force × Magic meters), even if neither he nor the caster has line of sight to it. With Clairvoyance, this means that the subject can see on the other side of walls or around corners or inside boxes or whatever, as long as it's within the effect radius.
| QUOTE (BitBasher) |
| Er yeah, spells that would give you information with 100% accuracy would be a heinous advantage. Information is king. |
By that logic drones with video cameras are unbalanced because the people being viewed without their knowledge don't get a Resistance Test. 
That's how, up until this point, I've been imagining Clairvoyance anyway: the equivalent of a drone with a camera. [Edit]: The difference, as I saw it, lay in the different limitations: the drone is a physical entity that can be detected, while the spell has a very limited range.[/edit] You're not creating any kind of connection to the viewing object, any more than the passive sensors of a drone do. In fact, the spell makes sure to note this: you can't cast Line-of-Sight spells at creatures you view/hear through clairvoyance/clairaudiance. Why then, if you're not affecting the target in any way, does the target get a Willpower test to resist what you're not doing to them?
OTOH, it seems that Stealth, visibility modifiers, white noise, and all other methods of escaping visual/auditory detection do not apply to Clairvoyance/audiance. This could be easily fixed by requiring a Perception Test to see what the new "sense" actually lets you sense, but with the tough Spellcasting TNs and the Spell Resistance tests you're already missing most of the important information. It's almost cruel to impose *another* restriction on the spells.
That's how, up until this point, I've been imagining Clairvoyance anyway: the equivalent of a drone with a camera. [Edit]: The difference, as I saw it, lay in the different limitations: the drone is a physical entity that can be detected, while the spell has a very limited range.[/edit] You're not creating any kind of connection to the viewing object, any more than the passive sensors of a drone do. In fact, the spell makes sure to note this: you can't cast Line-of-Sight spells at creatures you view/hear through clairvoyance/clairaudiance. Why then, if you're not affecting the target in any way, does the target get a Willpower test to resist what you're not doing to them? OTOH, it seems that Stealth, visibility modifiers, white noise, and all other methods of escaping visual/auditory detection do not apply to Clairvoyance/audiance. This could be easily fixed by requiring a Perception Test to see what the new "sense" actually lets you sense, but with the tough Spellcasting TNs and the Spell Resistance tests you're already missing most of the important information. It's almost cruel to impose *another* restriction on the spells.
| QUOTE (Frag-o Delux) |
| Eyeless if you are implying that because in the spell description it doesn't say you can't hear things with clairvoyance or you can't see things with clairaudience, so that means you can. I think you have missed it. |
Heh, it's not *me* that missed it.
Actually all I was doing was stating what Kanada had said before me, but it was a lot later than his post because I got called away in the middle of writing it. Sorry, no flame for you. 
| QUOTE |
| That's how, up until this point, I've been imagining Clairvoyance anyway: the equivalent of a drone with a camera. |
But see, that's your flawed assumption (especially since an ally spirit with Sense Link is the correct analogy to a spy drone). That has no bearing on how the spell functions in the game. All it demonstrates is that you never realized you were treating and perceiving it wrong, and now that that thought process is shattered, you're a bit disgruntled by it.
| QUOTE |
| In fact, the spell makes sure to note this: you can't cast Line-of-Sight spells at creatures you view/hear through clairvoyance/clairaudiance. Why then, if you're not affecting the target in any way, does the target get a Willpower test to resist what you're not doing to them? |
Because the two are wholly unrelated and your assumptions are still getting in the way. I can't directly cast a spell on a Stealth-hidden target affected by an Improved Invisibility spell I cast... yet he's still gets to resist the effects of my illusion. It's the same thing with Clairvoyance. Clairvoyance *is* very much affecting him, albeit passively, and if the spell fails to affect him, well, it fails to affect him. Due to the nature of the spell, that means he's invisible to you since you *aren't* really there, hence the lack of an ability to cast spells through the effect.
| QUOTE |
| OTOH, it seems that Stealth, visibility modifiers, white noise, and all other methods of escaping visual/auditory detection do not apply to Clairvoyance/audiance. This could be easily fixed by requiring a Perception Test to see what the new "sense" actually lets you sense, but with the tough Spellcasting TNs and the Spell Resistance tests you're already missing most of the important information. It's almost cruel to impose *another* restriction on the spells. |
See, there goes your assumptions again. That's exactly how the spell works now. Just because the spell gives you the ability to see an area as if you were actually there, that doesn't mean you automatically see everything there. It's a two-fold problem; you're relying not only on magic to extend your senses, but you also have to rely on your actual senses as well. If someone is hiding, you still have to make a Perception Test to spot them. Visibility modifiers still apply, hence the note that cybernetic visual modifications work through the spell. etc.
If you don't want to deal with the limitations of the spell, astrally project and deal with those limitations. Don't like those either? Create an ally spirit with Sense Link and go for broke.
| QUOTE (Eyeless Blond) | ||
Nowhere in the spell description, nor anywhere elve, does it say that Clairvoyance is limited to line of sight, nor is Clairaudiance limited to "line of hearing," whatever that may be. They're kinda gimpy spells if that's so, anyway. |
This is the qoute I am talking about, no where do I see Kanada or Glyph say that, what I was asking you about. You were the one saying that because in the spell description it does not explicitly say clairvoyance does not allow hearing you can hear things wth that spell. Further reinforceing what you said with the statement.
| QUOTE |
| They're kinda gimpy spells if that's so, anyway. |
If you thought that was a flame I don't know what to tell you. It was not written with any malice or bad intentions, I just can't seem to figure out why you and a lot of other people here think if the book doesn't spell out the rules the way a lawyer would write a contract then that gives you carte blanche to run over the percieved loop hole. All I was stateing was there are two seperate spells, two seperate spell descriptions, and the names of the spells are so easily reaserched it boggles my mind that you would interreput the lack of words specifically stateing clairvoyance doesn't allow hearing or that clairaudience doesn't allow seeing. It is not just in this instance, but look in the Armor Camo thread, people in there seem to think if SR does not have somethng in the gear list then it could not possibly be in the SR universe. When you can easily explain a ordinary suit of BDUs as ordinary clothing 50
. To finish up this post that turned out longer then I was intending, this was not to single you out, I was not intending it to be a flame and I wrote it this morning after working all night.
The combination of Clairvoyance and Eyes of the Pack with a few Grades for Masking can make a perfect mundane mole able to enter areas normally restricted to a mage or other outsider. Cast on a janitor, one could see a great deal even in areas the janitor does not directly visit. Sure, they don't let her clean the 13th floor, but she sure does clean the 12th and 14th. With Extended Clairvoyance at even Force 1 one can see 60 meters around the subject! Hardly a gimped spell.
Eyes of the pack is a voluntary target spell. isn't it? Just curious if you had a Janitor on the payroll. 
| QUOTE |
| Just curious if you had a Janitor on the payroll. |
That or Physical Mask. It need not be the janitor, anyone reasonably mundane and nonchalant (the Face) should be able to take a tour...
Because Eyes of the Pack and Clairvoyance are Mana spells one could cast them on a Watcher or other spirit.
Makes me wonder what happens to sustained spells when the spirit departs... They must be broken or we'd know the answers to the question of whether spirits created or called. But it would be neat to see life on the Metaplane from a spirit's perspective... Which one could accomplish by bringing a spirit on the Quest with you and then using Eyes of the Pack... Why does the idea of Clairvoyance used on the Metaplane strike fear into my cold heart? Of course spells don't necessarily work or manifest as normal on the Metaplanes; there Clairvoyance might just be a pair of binoculars or a go-go gadget head.
I wonder if anyone else (the game developers) thought about eyes of the pack on a spirit when all his services gone. That would sovle the are spirits sommoned or created debate.
Not really. At most it would just demonstrate that once created, a spirit exists until destroyed even if it no longer serves the goals of its creator.
| QUOTE (Frag-o Delux) | ||||
This is the qoute I am talking about, no where do I see Kanada or Glyph say that, what I was asking you about. You were the one saying that because in the spell description it does not explicitly say clairvoyance does not allow hearing you can hear things wth that spell. Further reinforceing what you said with the statement.
|
I thought I just explainned this. Okay, let's try this one more time: I'm not trying to use Clairvoyance to hear, nor Clairaudiance to see! That's not what I was trying to say, and I'm wholly surprised that you can possibly interpret that statement as such. The point was the same as Kanada's: that 1) the Clairvoyance sensor can "see" anywhere within the spell area, and is not limited to just to the places you can see with your meat-eyes, and 2) the Clairaudiance sensor can "hear" anywhere within the spell area, and is not limited to just to the places you can hear with your meat-ears. The emphasis on that statement was on "line", as in "line of sight", rather than the specific sense; I guess I made the rash assumption that Clairvoyance had nothing to do with hearing, nor Clairaudience with sight, and that noone would ever bother trying to confuse the two. Guess I was wrong. Is that clearer to you?
As for the anti-flame thing, that was a joke. Let's just chalk that up to another time where I'm not being clear.
| QUOTE (A Robent...) |
| But see, that's your flawed assumption [...] That has no bearing on how the spell functions in the game. All it demonstrates is that you never realized you were treating and perceiving it wrong, and now that that thought process is shattered, you're a bit disgruntled by it. |
Thank God, someone understands me!
Yes, that's it exactly; the rules as I now understand them make no sense to my own limited version of logic. This is why I made the comment in the first place, so someone more experienced and intelligent than I can tell me how I *should* be thinking, hopefully without resorting to the tired excuse of: "It's magic. It makes no sense. Deal with it."| QUOTE |
| Clairvoyance *is* very much affecting him, albeit passively, and if the spell fails to affect him, well, it fails to affect him. Due to the nature of the spell, that means he's invisible to you since you *aren't* really there, hence the lack of an ability to cast spells through the effect. |
And here's where my little logic-bug comes to bite me again. As far as I can tell, you're not affecting the object of the spell at all. Rather, you are enhancing the target of the spell, by giving him an extra (magical) sense. Allowing a Spell Resistance test for the use of that sense sounds as odd to me as if you allowed someone being shot a Spell Resistance test against the shooter's Increased Reflexes spell.
| QUOTE |
| See, there goes your assumptions again. That's exactly how the spell works now. Just because the spell gives you the ability to see an area as if you were actually there, that doesn't mean you automatically see everything there. It's a two-fold problem; you're relying not only on magic to extend your senses, but you also have to rely on your actual senses as well. If someone is hiding, you still have to make a Perception Test to spot them. Visibility modifiers still apply, hence the note that cybernetic visual modifications work through the spell. etc. |
Yeesh, you have to roll Perception too? Yikes, what a crappy spell. Let me see if I have this right:
1) You need at least 3 net successes to ensure that you get accurate, if not necessarily detailed, information.
2) Your Spellcasting TN is 6, so to have a good chance of getting 3 successes you need to throw about 18 dice at this test.
3) Everyone you want to view gets a Spell Resistance test. With a Willpower of 3 you have about a fifty percent chance of getting one success against a Force 6 spell; it goes up by a lot for lower Force spells. Since you want at least 3 net successes to ensure the spell itself doesn't hit you with misleading information, you need to throw even more dice at the Spellcasting Test in 2).
4) All of the above merely sets an upper limit on what you can notice with your Perception Test, which has other modifiers and a different TN. The Perception Test tells you what you actually see; the spell itself just tells you whether or not the Perception Test will get you anything worthwhile or not. And with the high number of dice required to get a decent result on the Spellcasting Test, that isn't likely.
Is that really how Detection spells work?
| QUOTE |
| As far as I can tell, you're not affecting the object of the spell at all. Rather, you are enhancing the target of the spell, by giving him an extra (magical) sense. Allowing a Spell Resistance test for the use of that sense sounds as odd to me as if you allowed someone being shot a Spell Resistance test against the shooter's Increased Reflexes spell. |
Your confusing terms here. The target of the spell is what Clairvoyance lets you see. The subject of the spell is who is granted the power. Detection spell do not affect the target, they affect the subject. However, I don't think Clairvoyance gives people resistance tests anymore than Night Vision would. Detect Life, Detect Truth, Detect Enemies all grant the target a resistance test, but Night Vision (and IMO Clairvoyance) should not.
By default they do. It's a limitation of Detection Spells. The same is true of Enhance Aim and any other target-enhancing sensory spells.
Interesting. But with Clairvoyance there are other ques one could use to see resisted targets, such as the carpet bent away, the book/phone/ect in their hands, the keyboard keys moving away, and so on, perhaps even their reflection.
However, and this may be a house rule but, anytime a Detection spell requires a separate Perception test, the targets shall not resist the spell itself.
However, and this may be a house rule but, anytime a Detection spell requires a separate Perception test, the targets shall not resist the spell itself.
Hmm... well me personally, I'd say that the Clair spells, since they say "as if Physically there" aren't resisted as normal. Plus there's the 'duh' factor of if you have a magically created sensor that detects light or sound, you just don't not see a person just because. Its the Detect (Whatever) spells that are resisted in this way and since the Clair- spells are really just a refined "Detect Light/Sound" spells nothing really resists except the light and sound. And we all know how stubborn those things can be huh? (Also, the same can be said for a spell that gives you additional senses.)
Another example is Combat sense. Its specifically says nothing resists it. And its an area. Its a spell that gives you a "sixth sense" and its detecting danger. Not Enemies but Danger.
Then theres the Enhance Aim spell.... I don't know what to say about this (other than "what where they thinking?") as I'd like to argue that its not resisted since its really just a magical smart link. However, for game balance I'd say it is, since reducing the T# by that much takes away from technology's advantage with weapons.
As for the line of sight... I had actually figured it was line of sight/hearing, but now that I think about it, since it IS creating a magical sensor it could move to places your meat body can't see/hear.
If you disagree for rules lawyer reasons, all I have to say is; fine, whatever. Me, I like it simple like this (as simple as magic gets in Shadowrun, anyway) and it makes the Detection spells fun to use as well as a multitude more uses for them than the other way. (Although it does allow for magical peeping toms next door... hmm... oh well...)
Xenith
"Thats nice. However, with a mouth like that I feel better that I'm about to donate your organs to charity. We need to feed all those starving ghoul kids after all."
Another example is Combat sense. Its specifically says nothing resists it. And its an area. Its a spell that gives you a "sixth sense" and its detecting danger. Not Enemies but Danger.
Then theres the Enhance Aim spell.... I don't know what to say about this (other than "what where they thinking?") as I'd like to argue that its not resisted since its really just a magical smart link. However, for game balance I'd say it is, since reducing the T# by that much takes away from technology's advantage with weapons.
As for the line of sight... I had actually figured it was line of sight/hearing, but now that I think about it, since it IS creating a magical sensor it could move to places your meat body can't see/hear.
If you disagree for rules lawyer reasons, all I have to say is; fine, whatever. Me, I like it simple like this (as simple as magic gets in Shadowrun, anyway) and it makes the Detection spells fun to use as well as a multitude more uses for them than the other way. (Although it does allow for magical peeping toms next door... hmm... oh well...)
Xenith
"Thats nice. However, with a mouth like that I feel better that I'm about to donate your organs to charity. We need to feed all those starving ghoul kids after all."
Call it a wash or what ever. The way I read or mis read your post was when you qouted Glyph it looked like you were saying those spells did not specifically rule out certain things. Sorry but the way the qoutes ran into each other I got a different interreptation then you obvisouly ment.
Ok this is how I'm gonna run it in my games from now on:
Cast the spell on any one in the spellcasters line of sight.
They now have clairvoyance and can see anywhere within F x M in meters around them, including under beds, around corners, inside boxes etc.
They can use any of their naturally occuring or essence bought vision abilities with this, eg thermo, low light.
Anybody in the area being viewed does NOT get a resistance test, however the number of successes achieved when the spell was cast will determine if you notice people that are activly hiding ie camoflaged in an ambush position etc.
Does anyone have a big problem with any of this?
Cast the spell on any one in the spellcasters line of sight.
They now have clairvoyance and can see anywhere within F x M in meters around them, including under beds, around corners, inside boxes etc.
They can use any of their naturally occuring or essence bought vision abilities with this, eg thermo, low light.
Anybody in the area being viewed does NOT get a resistance test, however the number of successes achieved when the spell was cast will determine if you notice people that are activly hiding ie camoflaged in an ambush position etc.
Does anyone have a big problem with any of this?
Just limit the number of dice that can be used in a perception check to the number of successes (up to the spell's force).
This keeps it hard to spot the ruthenium hidden sniper when you only got one success on the sorcery.
This keeps it hard to spot the ruthenium hidden sniper when you only got one success on the sorcery.
Note that Combat Sense specifically states that it is not resisted, since it affects only the subject. So someone arguing that Enhance Aim or Night Vision should not be resisted does have a precedent. Now, with Enhance Aim, you could argue that you are affecting the target, but you could also argue that about Combat Sense, since the subject's enhanced Combat Pool could result in him or her winning a melee against someone else.
Clairaudience and clairvoyance don't really fall into this grey area, but I don't blame people for house ruling otherwise. A spell that lets you see through a wall, but only see half, or none, of the people there, seems... counterintuitive. Personally, I think both Detection and Illusion spells are needlessly complicated.
Clairaudience and clairvoyance don't really fall into this grey area, but I don't blame people for house ruling otherwise. A spell that lets you see through a wall, but only see half, or none, of the people there, seems... counterintuitive. Personally, I think both Detection and Illusion spells are needlessly complicated.
Personally I like the idea of limiting the dice for perception to int or successes on sorcerery, whichever is lower. Definately keeps it from getting too crazy.
I'd just use Enhance Aim that way for game balance. Otherwise I do it the same way as combat sense. Higher force and skill Enhance Aim make caster's with a gun fetish insanely powerful. *blam blam* Two down. Who's next? (Ghost forbid if they use the spell that ups your initiative dice. I can see it now. Six shots and he's already given that Great fraggin Dragon a moderate wound at least... **shutter**)
Xenith
"Oh. Excuse me. Is this your arm?"
I'd just use Enhance Aim that way for game balance. Otherwise I do it the same way as combat sense. Higher force and skill Enhance Aim make caster's with a gun fetish insanely powerful. *blam blam* Two down. Who's next? (Ghost forbid if they use the spell that ups your initiative dice. I can see it now. Six shots and he's already given that Great fraggin Dragon a moderate wound at least... **shutter**)
Xenith
"Oh. Excuse me. Is this your arm?"
Note my many many grammatic and spelling errors. I'm on a roll. Yay 
Xenith
Xenith
I'm pretty sure this hasn't been covered in any sourcebooks, so this may be one of those times when the final decision is up to the GM, but here it goes:
Suppose you want to spy on a meeting, but since the people holding the meeting have read the "Limitations of astral projection" thread, they have hired a few dual-natured guards to make sure there aren't any astral eavesdroppers. Luckily, you have a clairvoyance / audience spell at your disposal, so you plop down somewhere and cast it.
Neither your physical nor your astral body enter the room, and the spell, which is cast on you, stays with your body as well - so there's really nothing that actively "goes into" the room. Or is there? The description says the spell merely extends your natural senses of hearing and sight.
My question is, would the people at the meeting be able to detect the spy? From a gamebalance point I'd say "Hell Yes!", but what would you say from a game-mechanics point of view?
Suppose you want to spy on a meeting, but since the people holding the meeting have read the "Limitations of astral projection" thread, they have hired a few dual-natured guards to make sure there aren't any astral eavesdroppers. Luckily, you have a clairvoyance / audience spell at your disposal, so you plop down somewhere and cast it.
Neither your physical nor your astral body enter the room, and the spell, which is cast on you, stays with your body as well - so there's really nothing that actively "goes into" the room. Or is there? The description says the spell merely extends your natural senses of hearing and sight.
My question is, would the people at the meeting be able to detect the spy? From a gamebalance point I'd say "Hell Yes!", but what would you say from a game-mechanics point of view?
I can't find anything canon, yet, I don't have all my books. But I think if you want, try useing the Ritual Sorcery detection test. Basically a mundane will make a persception test vs. 10 a awakened person will roll vs. 8. If th emundane feels something then he just feels uncomfortable, maybe do something like check outside or let a mage in on his feelings. A mage or something might notice something th eastral to tip him off to start looking around for something.
Yeah. Thats a good point. Hmmm... I'd have to agree with the perception tests along those lines. Although if astral signatures tended to cover the entire area of the spell a percieving Awakened would probably spot it no prob. Hard to make a decision actually... hmmm... (then again if those mages are worth their salt they definatly have watcher spirits patrolling the area to help them.)
Xenith
-Your Awakened Freindly Nieghborhood Pain Upgrade
Xenith
-Your Awakened Freindly Nieghborhood Pain Upgrade
The GM could always do a hidden perception test, TN 6 with a certain number of successes needed. The Magic background skill could be used as complimentary dice
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.