Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Manx timburke@*******.com.au
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 23:55:25 +1000
Hi all,

I thought that it was time to bring this pain in the
ass question to the list for some fresh adjudication.

This problem has been the bane of my Cat Shaman's
existence for some time now. It revolves around the
interpretation of the 'Improved Invisibility' spell.

One of the players in my game (who was our
_former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
this spell effects only visible light and as such
that thermographic vision does not utilise the
normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
every dumb turd with thermo can see me
when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.

I counter in that I see Improved Invisibility as
an Indirect Illusion Spell, in that it actually
manipulates energy to fool the senses, in
this case hiding my image. I would imagine
that the spell would work across the entire
light spectrum and not just the part visible
to MetaHumanity. Especially considering
that different Metatypes have access to
different parts of the spectrum. And when
I get really pissed off with him I just say
"What the fuck is the point of a spell that
will fool technological devices but not
any Dwarf, Troll or cheapshit radioshack
thermo camera. If that is the case then
why isn't _every_ camera fitted with thermo?"

In any case detecting invisible mages/shaman
is the work of Ultrasound IMHO.

Could people offer me any opinions/comments
or page references.

__________________________________
Manx // timburke@*******.com.au // #950
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt
and then it's just hilarious." - Faith No More
__________________________________
Message no. 2
From: 00DNA mcmanus@******.albany.edu
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:18:19 -0400
At 11:55 PM 7/15/99 +1000, Manx wrote:
<<snip...can thermographic vision see through 'Improved Invisibility>>

I believe this has come up before, and I believe that the rule is actually
that Thermographic Vision can see through Invisibility. I think it might
even say that in the SR3 book.

However, for my opinion...I agree with you. I play it as Improved
Invisibility works against Vision. (that's a pronounced period btw) Of
course you can still be detected by sound, smell, astral vision, etc...so I
haven't ever had it be a problem.


--00DNA
"...user connection terminated."
Message no. 3
From: Manx timburke@*******.com.au
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 00:50:26 +1000
At 10:18 15/07/99 -0400 00DNA wrote
>At 11:55 PM 7/15/99 +1000, Manx wrote:
><<snip...can thermographic vision see through 'Improved Invisibility>>
>
>I believe this has come up before, and I believe that the rule is actually
>that Thermographic Vision can see through Invisibility. I think it might
>even say that in the SR3 book.

Sorry to have to invoke "rules laywer" mode but I can't find
any reference to it in SR3 nor MitS. A page number, other
than p.XX would be much appreciated.

>However, for my opinion...I agree with you. I play it as Improved
>Invisibility works against Vision. (that's a pronounced period btw) Of
>course you can still be detected by sound, smell, astral vision, etc...so I
>haven't ever had it be a problem.
>--00DNA

I agree. The spirit of the rule is that illusions like
Improved Invisibility are single-sense illusions
and that they effect only ONE sense, i.e. sight.
They should have the ability to effect mongyboy's
street sam's eyes as he has paid essence for
them. He should NOT get an edge over magic
JUST because he purchased cyberware. By
virtue of the argument that he HAS paid essence
for the cybereyes with Thermo then they are
IMO considered normal vision for the interpretation
of the Improved Invisibility spell.

__________________________________
Manx // timburke@*******.com.au // #950
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt
and then it's just hilarious." - Faith No More
__________________________________
Message no. 4
From: Ulrich Haupt sandman@****.uni-oldenburg.de
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 17:20:28 +0200
Manx wrote:
<sbip>
> It revolves around the
> interpretation of the 'Improved Invisibility' spell.

> One of the players in my game (who was our
> _former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
> with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
> Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
> this spell effects only visible light and as such
> that thermographic vision does not utilise the
> normal spectrum of human vision.

This topic has been discussed often but I'll say what (I
think) I know:
Three answers ...
1) By the book:
In SR2 your player is right. It was clearly said in the
spell description. Invisibility (normal and improved)
doesn't work against thermo. In SR3 it is not so clear
anymore. The spell description leaves room for
interpretation for it only mentions that invisibility works
only against _normal_(whatever it is) vision and improved I.
works also against cameras and other technical devices.It
can means both that it works against thermo or not.

2) One listmember (I don't recognize who it was) forwarded
an answer from DLoH(M.M.) who said that any invisibility
doesn't work against any thermo vision (except if you design
a spell for that purpose). That's what your player claims.

3) I have the same opinion you have. Invisibility should
work against thermo vision because - as you said -
invisibility is not of much use otherwise. In our gaming
group Invisibility makes really invisible independent from
the wavelength! There are enough pressure alarms and
watchers and elementals and ultrasight and monowires and a
lot of other toys.

Important it that you can arrange an agreement with your
player and both of you have fun playing Shadowrun. If he
doesn't want to change his view but you can then make
invisibility useless or convince him that your option is
more what invisibility is ment to do. You only have a
problem if you and your player don't come to an agrement.

Sandman
Message no. 5
From: Bai Shen baishen@**********.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:27:45 -0400
> ><<snip...can thermographic vision see through 'Improved
Invisibility>>
> >However, for my opinion...I agree with you. I play it as Improved
> >Invisibility works against Vision. (that's a pronounced period btw) Of
> >course you can still be detected by sound, smell, astral vision, etc...so I
> >haven't ever had it be a problem.
> I agree. The spirit of the rule is that illusions like
> Improved Invisibility are single-sense illusions
> and that they effect only ONE sense, i.e. sight.
> They should have the ability to effect mongyboy's
> street sam's eyes as he has paid essence for
> them. He should NOT get an edge over magic
> JUST because he purchased cyberware. By
> virtue of the argument that he HAS paid essence
> for the cybereyes with Thermo then they are
> IMO considered normal vision for the interpretation
> of the Improved Invisibility spell.

So would that mean he could see through it using Thermo goggles?

Bai Shen
Message no. 6
From: Number Ten Ox number_10_ox@**********.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
---00DNA <mcmanus@******.albany.edu> wrote:
>
> At 11:55 PM 7/15/99 +1000, Manx wrote:
> <<snip...can thermographic vision see through 'Improved Invisibility>>
>
> I believe this has come up before, and I believe that the rule is actually
> that Thermographic Vision can see through Invisibility. I think it might
> even say that in the SR3 book.

Nope. It was a rule in SR1, and *possibly* (memory is hazy) in SR2.
SR3 got *rid* of that rule.

==--Number 10 Ox.
"It's a big yellow rubber ducky."
"Is it rigger-driven?"

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 7
From: kawaii kawaii@********.org
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:38:38 -0400 (EDT)
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, Bai Shen wrote:

> > ><<snip...can thermographic vision see through 'Improved
Invisibility>>
> > >However, for my opinion...I agree with you. I play it as Improved
> > >Invisibility works against Vision. (that's a pronounced period btw) Of
> > >course you can still be detected by sound, smell, astral vision, etc...so I
> > >haven't ever had it be a problem.
> > I agree. The spirit of the rule is that illusions like
> > Improved Invisibility are single-sense illusions
> > and that they effect only ONE sense, i.e. sight.
> > They should have the ability to effect mongyboy's
> > street sam's eyes as he has paid essence for
> > them. He should NOT get an edge over magic
> > JUST because he purchased cyberware. By
> > virtue of the argument that he HAS paid essence
> > for the cybereyes with Thermo then they are
> > IMO considered normal vision for the interpretation
> > of the Improved Invisibility spell.
>
> So would that mean he could see through it using Thermo goggles?
>
> Bai Shen
>
>

In theory, no, since those goggles are technically mechanical and Imp
Invis is a physical bending of light, therefore the goggles won't pick the
person up. HOwever, thermo is also technically supposed to see through the
invis spells.. So. In the end, it would be GM's opinion. I personally
would rule it depending on how many success the caster got on his spell
roll. Either base it on the more success, the better hidden you are or use
the # of succ as the TN for a roll by the rating of the equipment.

Ever lovable and always scrappy,
kawaii
Message no. 8
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:48:29 -0700
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:27:45 Bai Shen wrote:

>> ><<snip...can thermographic vision see through 'Improved
Invisibility>>
>> >However, for my opinion...I agree with you. I play it as Improved
>> >Invisibility works against Vision. (that's a pronounced period btw) Of
>> >course you can still be detected by sound, smell, astral vision, etc...so I
>> >haven't ever had it be a problem.
>> I agree. The spirit of the rule is that illusions like
>> Improved Invisibility are single-sense illusions
>> and that they effect only ONE sense, i.e. sight.
>> They should have the ability to effect mongyboy's
>> street sam's eyes as he has paid essence for
>> them. He should NOT get an edge over magic
>> JUST because he purchased cyberware. By
>> virtue of the argument that he HAS paid essence
>> for the cybereyes with Thermo then they are
>> IMO considered normal vision for the interpretation
>> of the Improved Invisibility spell.

>So would that mean he could see through it using Thermo goggles?

If you rule (as I do) that Thermographic vision is affected by the Invisibility and
Improved Invisibility spells, then with the standard Invisibility spell, yes, goggles
would see through it. However, Improved Invisibility would still fool such devices.
That's the difference between standard and Improved Invisibility - Improved affects
technological devices, whereas standard only affects living beings.

>Bai Shen

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Message no. 9
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 15:36:04 EDT
In a message dated 7/15/99 10:09:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
timburke@*******.com.au writes:

> One of the players in my game (who was our
> _former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
> with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
> Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
> this spell effects only visible light and as such
> that thermographic vision does not utilise the
> normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
> every dumb turd with thermo can see me
> when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.


The way I read the Invisibility spells is that they affect the minds of the
targets, not actually their eyes. So it isn't so much that your shaman turns
clear, as she doesn't register in the minds of those present. This should
even be so with the basic Invisibility, since the Improved is only a Physical
spell meant to work over tech like closed camera security systems.
Now there is the problem of the story at the front of Dreamchipper,
in which a sec guard spots a magician using invisibility.
Yet, there is a logic behind my first paragraph in coordination with
SR3 rules. If Invisibility really turned the character invisible, there
would be no point in Resisting it with Intelligence. Afterall, when was the
last time you could see air just because you were really, really intelligent?
(Dust motes shifting in the air wouldn't count here, since that would be a
perception test to notice the effects of the invisible property on other
matter, not to see the air itself.) This seems to suggest that Invisibility
is truly just an Illusion in the minds of the targets. So Thermo shouldn't
work against Invisibility spells period. Now Ultrasound scanners should,
since they work like the dust motes I mentioned, and let you see the magician
through points of cancellation.






-Twist
Message no. 10
From: Michael & Linda Frankl mlfrankl@*****.msn.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 17:59:39 -0400
Manx queried:
>One of the players in my game (who was our
>_former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
>with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
>Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
>this spell effects only visible light and as such
>that thermographic vision does not utilise the
>normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
>every dumb turd with thermo can see me
>when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.


As I read the spell, the improved invisibility works against technological
sensing devices. That's a pretty broad description and should give enough
lattitude to say that you cannot use Thermo/Ultrasound. If he really bitches
then whack him over the head with the SOTA concept (magic improves just like
technology) and point out that if such spells were so easily overcome then
new versions of the spell would be made that did work. After all if they can
make a spell that enhances cybered attributes then they surely can make one
that beats thermo/ultrasound.

The basic invisibility just affects visible light. Tell the metal monster
that there wouldn't be two spells if the effect were the same.

Secondly, magic does not have to conform to the laws of physics. They should
have some reason or personal logic behind them, but not quantum theory.

Finally, invoke the "spirit of the rule" and point out that the spell is
meant to have a desired effect within certain guidelines and create balance
between character abilities and powers.

Personally, I wouldn't whine if I were him. I played a Street Samurai whose
waxed three invisible magic users over the years. If your boy is built right
he should be able to smell or sense the guy without visual aid and still put
a round through him (smell/hearing related sensing should not be covered by
invisibility otherwise no one would have come up with the silence spell).

Mike, aka Smilin' Jack
-------------------------------
<<<Bang>>> "Invisible, not invulnerable.", Smilin' Jack.
Message no. 11
From: Jyster Cap jyster007@*****.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 18:49:24 -0400 (EDT)
--- Twist0059@***.com wrote:
> In a message dated 7/15/99 10:09:27 AM Eastern
> Daylight Time,
> timburke@*******.com.au writes:
>
> > One of the players in my game (who was our
> > _former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
> > with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
> > Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
> > this spell effects only visible light and as such
> > that thermographic vision does not utilise the
> > normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
> > every dumb turd with thermo can see me
> > when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.

In 2nd or 3rd edition, people with thermographic
vision can see someone who is invisible. Invisibility
makes it so people cant see you with normal vision, it does not lower
your body temperature.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 12
From: Rori Steel cullyn@*****.com.au
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 03:28:49 +0000 (GMT)
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 23:55:25 +1000, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>This problem has been the bane of my Cat Shaman's
>existence for some time now. It revolves around the
>interpretation of the 'Improved Invisibility' spell.
>Manx // timburke@*******.com.au // #950

<SNIPPED Good even if irrelevant arguement>

Hell.. i think that the spell should work on Thermo's.. but here is
the end of your problem..

MAKE ANOTHER DAMN SPELL!
hehe..

IIRC You can design spells, and the like, as you see fit. All you
have to do is get the GM to authorise it.

Eg. Ultra Invisibility (Works as Improved Invis BUT includes Therom)
D/Code: (f/2) +2S

Easy.

Once again.. it wont work for other senses... but it will make the
street sam worry ;>

Another option (Thanks Barbie) is to go to the Shadowrun Archive Magic
section or straight there ----->
http://shadowrun.html.com/archive/ArchiveShowCategory.php3?category=Magic&ok.x"&ok.y=6
) and get one of the spells people have sent in.

Have a good day.

Cullyn
cullyn@*****.com.au
Message no. 13
From: Aaron Binns sparrow@***.net.au
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:58:15 +1000
> >One of the players in my game (who was our
> >_former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
> >with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
> >Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
> >this spell effects only visible light and as such
> >that thermographic vision does not utilise the
> >normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
> >every dumb turd with thermo can see me
> >when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.

Ok.. I dont have FOF on me - but it is either in FOF or Street Sam 2 in the
section on ultrasonics.

Ultrasonics can detect invisible beings because being invisible is fine.. but
youre still there and the sound waves still come bouncing back off you. thats
what youd use silence for.

thermo is affected. A: its an illusion spell so it affects the persons mind. B:
its an improved version so it would also affect the technology in goggles.

Important note: if the person was using cyber eyes.. they paid essence for them
so the improved version of the spell isnt required. Use the normal version. the
normal version works just find on cybered characters. this is the only good
thing about goggles I know.. that they require the improved version to be
affected - guess it makes up for the poorer bonuses to cyber. (from a SAM's
perspectve anyway).

C: ultrasound section basically says that it is the only way to see invisible
drek otehr than resisting the spell.

Now.. SR# doesnt have the rule that invisible characters can be seen by thermo.

you need the improved version to fool goggles and any remote sensors.

I think MANX (the character) is in the clear.

GreyWolf
Message no. 14
From: DV8 gyro@********.co.za
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 09:23:49 +0200
-----Original Message-----
From: Manx <timburke@*******.com.au>
To: shadowrn@*********.org <shadowrn@*********.org>
Date: 15 July 1999 04:04
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question


>Hi all,
>
>I thought that it was time to bring this pain in the
>ass question to the list for some fresh adjudication.
>
>This problem has been the bane of my Cat Shaman's
>existence for some time now. It revolves around the
>interpretation of the 'Improved Invisibility' spell.
>
>One of the players in my game (who was our
>_former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
>with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
>Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
>this spell effects only visible light and as such
>that thermographic vision does not utilise the
>normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
>every dumb turd with thermo can see me
>when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.
>In any case detecting invisible mages/shaman
>is the work of Ultrasound IMHO.
>globalsnippage<


Buy cyberboy an bigassed shotgun with an ultrasound sight for his
birthday?
That oughta shut him up :)

- - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za>

<hard@****>
Message no. 15
From: Manx timburke@*******.com.au
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:14:59 +1000
At 18:49 15/07/99 -0400 Jyster Cap responds
>>>
>> > One of the players in my game (who was our
>> > _former_ SR2 GM) insists that his street sam
>> > with thermo cybereyes can see me when I cast
>> > Improved Invisibility on myself. He claims that
>> > this spell effects only visible light and as such
>> > that thermographic vision does not utilise the
>> > normal spectrum of human vision. As it stands
>> > every dumb turd with thermo can see me
>> > when I use the spell. It defeats the purpose.
>
>In 2nd or 3rd edition, people with thermographic
>vision can see someone who is invisible. Invisibility
>makes it so people cant see you with normal vision, it does not lower
>your body temperature.
>_________________________________________________________

Sure invisibility _doesn't_ lower your body temperature
but it DOES effect the mind of the viewer. My argument
is that as thermo vision relies on the infra-red spectrum
and humans with thermo cybereyes can see the
infrared spectrum _because_ they have paid essence
for their eyes. In doing so the thermo is considered to be
normal vision. If it's not considered normal vision
then how does a mage with cybereyes target a line
of sight spell?

Getting back to my reply to you as II is a indirect illusion
spell and not a physical manipulation it makes
the viewer's mind perceive that nothing is there as opposed
to actually bending the light. If this is the case then it
should also effect thermo as well.

In any case I note with interest that the description of
ImpInvis in SR2 and in SR3 is different. I think that the
decision by FASA to remove the sentence that clearly
states that Thermo is unaffected from SR2 to SR3 says
it all IMO.

Sorry I'm edgy but I've got a game session starting
in about 15 minutes and I'm collating the replies
to this thread to show my GM.

__________________________________
Manx // timburke@*******.com.au // #950
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt
and then it's just hilarious." - Faith No More
__________________________________
Message no. 16
From: Darrell L. Bowman darrell@******.dhr.state.nc.us
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:05:53 -0400
On 15 Jul 99, at 18:49, Jyster Cap wrote:

> In 2nd or 3rd edition, people with thermographic
> vision can see someone who is invisible. Invisibility
> makes it so people cant see you with normal vision, it does not lower your
> body temperature.

Hmm,... I've always just agreed with my GM on this one
(Mike, Smilin' Jack). But now I'm starting to wonder. I re-read
the spell description before responding to this. The spell
invisibility says that it "makes the subject invisible to normal
vision." So, does that mean that a dwarf or troll can see an
invisible person with thermo?

Improved invisibility "affects technological sensors as well."

I'm up in the air about this now. Define "normal vision." If
thermo is not considered normal, then I don't know why a
sensor with themo wouldn't pick up someone who was under
an improved invisibility spell.


---
Are you with us Kareena?
Of course I'm with you, you quaalz-headed fool! The
Horror's going to eat our brains. You know that, don't you?
-- Kareena, Dwarf Swordmaster and Delain, Human
Troubadour from Kaer Moar.
_Lost Kaer_, by Nigel Findley


Nightshade, Human Racoon Shaman
or
Raven, Elven Irish Rigger with an attitude.

Darrell Bowman
darrell@******.dhr.state.nc.us
Message no. 17
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 09:54:33 -0700
On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:05:53 Darrell L. Bowman wrote:

>Improved invisibility "affects technological sensors as well."
>
>I'm up in the air about this now. Define "normal vision." If
>thermo is not considered normal, then I don't know why a
>sensor with themo wouldn't pick up someone who was under
>an improved invisibility spell.

The differences between Invisibility and Improved Invisibility are a) drain and b)
Improved Invisibility affects technological devices as well as living beings.

How you define "normal vision" is up to you. Personally, I include
thermographic in that definition. YMMV.

>Darrell Bowman

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Message no. 18
From: Darrell L. Bowman darrell@******.dhr.state.nc.us
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:47:32 -0400
On 16 Jul 99, at 19:14, Manx wrote:

> normal vision. If it's not considered normal vision
> then how does a mage with cybereyes target a line
> of sight spell?

I'd say he couldn't unless it was optical mag. Electronic mag
is out. Why else would he need cybereyes? I don't believe that
he can use IR or Thermo for LOS because it's not natural.
Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just what I think.


---
Dahhh, E=MC. . .Foooooooood.
-- Ziggy the Troll.


Nightshade, Human Racoon Shaman
or
Raven, Elven Irish Rigger with an attitude.

Darrell Bowman
darrell@******.dhr.state.nc.us
Message no. 19
From: Michael & Linda Frankl mlfrankl@*****.msn.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 20:46:43 -0400
Nightshade inquired:
>Hmm,... I've always just agreed with my GM on this one
>(Mike, Smilin' Jack). But now I'm starting to wonder. I re-read
>the spell description before responding to this. The spell
>invisibility says that it "makes the subject invisible to normal
>vision." So, does that mean that a dwarf or troll can see an
>invisible person with thermo?
>
>Improved invisibility "affects technological sensors as well."


In my book Invisibility is basically there to stop people from seeing you.
Any method that involves the eyes (except Astral) should eventually be
affected as the SOTA with magic changes (which allows every GM to make his
own call on the issue, ain't it grand). Plus I like the spirit of the spell.

I originally allowed ultrasonic to see magic users, which really sucked the
enjoyment out of the game for magic users (so I dumped it and upped the
SOTA). And for those of you who are going to scream "BUT, BUT, BUT", magic
doesn't have to bow to the laws of physics. Ultrasonics could be worked into
the spell too.

I'm in it for the fun not the technical accuracy (though I am a technical
fellow by profession). If I could pass on one piece of advice to all GM's:
Keep the game fun and the players will beat down your door. Don't beat them
up over technicalities. My last Shadowrun campaign ran for 5 years non-stop
and only paused for a year to give me a break. Now it's back in full steam.

;)

Smilin' Jack
Message no. 20
From: Ken Ken@********.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 20:52:26 -0400
<snip>
> On 16 Jul 99, at 19:14, Manx wrote:
>
> > normal vision. If it's not considered normal vision
> > then how does a mage with cybereyes target a line
> > of sight spell?
>
> I'd say he couldn't unless it was optical mag. Electronic mag
> is out. Why else would he need cybereyes? I don't believe that
> he can use IR or Thermo for LOS because it's not natural.
> Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just what I think.
<snip>
I would think that if the spell was cast using what the GM would assign a
Normal Range of vision...Something like a range that a normal unaltered pair
of eyes would be able to see under the given circumstances/environment. If
the target is beyond that range or if the mage is using IR or Ultrasound to
target, there should be a Target modifier assigned for casting.
Message no. 21
From: Adam .. ruckus@********.rr.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 23:01:55 -0400
actually the way i always understood it was that when you get cybereyes,
they effectively become part of your body and aura...therefore, even though
you have cybereyes, they are now "assimilated" into your aura and you can
therefore use cybernetic vision (elcectornic magnifiation or no) to cast
LOS spells...as for Thermo or IR, i'm not sure about that...

>> > normal vision. If it's not considered normal vision
>> > then how does a mage with cybereyes target a line
>> > of sight spell?
>>
>> I'd say he couldn't unless it was optical mag. Electronic mag
>> is out. Why else would he need cybereyes? I don't believe that
>> he can use IR or Thermo for LOS because it's not natural.
>> Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just what I think.
><snip>
>I would think that if the spell was cast using what the GM would assign a
>Normal Range of vision...Something like a range that a normal unaltered pair
>of eyes would be able to see under the given circumstances/environment. If
>the target is beyond that range or if the mage is using IR or Ultrasound to
>target, there should be a Target modifier assigned for casting.
>
"The day was very different from the night. The night
belonged to me and my droogs and all the rest of the
nadsats, and the starry bourgeois lurked indoors drinking
in the gloopy worldcasts, but the day was for the starry
ones, and there always seemed to be more rozzes or
millicents about during the day, too."
--Anthony Burgess "A Clockwork Orange"
Message no. 22
From: Jeremy Baker meroeandjeremy@*******.com.au
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 21:49:40 +1000
>>> > normal vision. If it's not considered normal vision
>>> > then how does a mage with cybereyes target a line
>>> > of sight spell?
>>>
>>> I'd say he couldn't unless it was optical mag. Electronic mag
>>> is out. Why else would he need cybereyes? I don't believe that
>>> he can use IR or Thermo for LOS because it's not natural.
>>> Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just what I think.


>actually the way i always understood it was that when you get cybereyes,
>they effectively become part of your body and aura...therefore, even though
>you have cybereyes, they are now "assimilated" into your aura and you can
>therefore use cybernetic vision (elcectornic magnifiation or no) to cast
>LOS spells...as for Thermo or IR, i'm not sure about that...


This is certainly how I understand it to work. I am sure I can
remember reading somewhere a statement about how the mage having paid
essence (and lost magic) for the new eyes, they are in effect his natural
eyes. This includes any and all enhancements that the eyes contain, they can
increased the essence cost after all. I can not tell you where I read it,
but it was most likely SR1or2
or G1or2.

JB.
Message no. 23
From: Ignacio De Lucas morrisjila@*******.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 15:46:04 GMT
>From: "Jeremy Baker" <meroeandjeremy@*******.com.au>
>Reply-To: shadowrn@*********.org
>To: <shadowrn@*********.org>
>Subject: Re: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
>Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 21:49:40 +1000
>
> >>> > normal vision. If it's not considered normal vision
> >>> > then how does a mage with cybereyes target a line
> >>> > of sight spell?
> >>>
> >>> I'd say he couldn't unless it was optical mag. Electronic mag
> >>> is out. Why else would he need cybereyes? I don't believe that
> >>> he can use IR or Thermo for LOS because it's not natural.
> >>> Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just what I think.
>
>
> >actually the way i always understood it was that when you get cybereyes,
> >they effectively become part of your body and aura...therefore, even
>though
> >you have cybereyes, they are now "assimilated" into your aura and you
can
> >therefore use cybernetic vision (elcectornic magnifiation or no) to cast
> >LOS spells...as for Thermo or IR, i'm not sure about that...
>
>
> This is certainly how I understand it to work. I am sure I can
>remember reading somewhere a statement about how the mage having paid
>essence (and lost magic) for the new eyes, they are in effect his natural
>eyes. This includes any and all enhancements that the eyes contain, they
>can
>increased the essence cost after all. I can not tell you where I read it,
>but it was most likely SR1or2
>or G1or2.


As far as I undrestood the essense cost paid for any cyberware made it part
of the persons body, for example the invisibility spell doens´t works
against non tecnological devises, but cybereyes are decevede by the illution
because they now they are a part of the person who owns them.

ATTE el MORRIS


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 24
From: Airwasp@***.com Airwasp@***.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 09:34:20 EDT
In a message dated 7/27/99 10:47:19 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
morrisjila@*******.com writes:

> As far as I undrestood the essense cost paid for any cyberware made it part
> of the persons body, for example the invisibility spell doens´t works
> against non tecnological devises, but cybereyes are decevede by the
illution
>
> because they now they are a part of the person who owns them.

Okay, my thoughts (and yes, it has been a while since I last sent anything
out at all) ..

Invisibility does not work against technological devices because it only
exists within the person's mind.

A person with a cybereye can still be affected by an invisibility spell as
the spell is mana based.

Here is the kicker then. Some smart-ass decker reprograms his smartlink to
also have a visual component linked to the cybereye. The smartlink
programming is to recognize all objects in the line of sight of the viewer.
The decker choses that the smartlink is to query him on all targets that it
can see. He sets it so that he can turn this option off when he feels safe,
otherwise it is only a simple action for him to acknowledge to the smartlink
that the person is really there.

Now then, some unfortunate soul comes along with invisibility cast on them
happens to go after this decker, and decides to get him from in front of him
... although the decker may not be able to see person due to the spell, the
modified smartlink recognition programming does notice the individual and
does inform the decker that the person is there. When the decker takes a
second to notice if the person is there and sees nothing, then the guy under
the invisibility is in for one frag of a surprise.

What do you guys think?
-Mike B.
Message no. 25
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Desperate Pathetic Magic Question
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 12:11:26 EDT
In a message dated 7/28/1999 8:35:42 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
Airwasp@***.com writes:

<snip decker/programmed rewrite of the Smartlink vs. Invisibility Spells.>
> What do you guys think?


Sounds familiar actually, as long as everyone remembers it isn't something
particularly successful against Improved Invisibility.

-K

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Desperate Pathetic Magic Question, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!