Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 16:02:10 +1000
I was just reading through the Magic Section of Second Edition and I found
the following on page 127, under Sorcery. In the third paragraph, it says
'Some physical activity accompanies the spell...'. It goes on to say that
it's not much compared to the work he mage's mind is doing, but it is still
there. This paragraph was talking about mages, not shamans, but under the
shamans, it mentions them singing and dancing. I'm aware that there is no
way that a shaman is _required_ to sing and dance, but I think, either way,
there is some physical activity required to cast a spell, and, as I've
said, I think that that is what you are noticing when you try and notice
spellcasting. So looks alone, can't kill. If you cast a normal spell,
people may or may not notice what you are up to. If you take a gesture or
incantation Geas, the physical activity required is such, that is cannot be
mistaken as anything but spellcasting.

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 2
From: Steve Kenson <TalonMail@***.COM>
Subject: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 09:51:59 -0400
<lots of stuff about the need for gestures and incantations for spellcasting
snipped>

IMHO, magicians in SR do not NEED to do anything other than fulfill their
geasa to cast a spell. A magician can just concentrate and the spell happens.
I tend to impose slight (+1) TN penalties if the magician is REALLY
restricted for some reason (ie, bound and gagged, or does not wish to speak
or move at all for some reason). Many magicians choose to speak or gesture
while casting spells because it aids their concentration (and because "it's
traditional") but it is not required.

Hope that helps,
Steve K.
Message no. 3
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 10:12:11 +0000
On 23 Apr 97 at 16:02, Ray & Tamara wrote:

> try and notice spellcasting. So looks alone, can't kill. If you
> cast a normal spell, people may or may not notice what you are up
> to. If you take a gesture or incantation Geas, the physical
> activity required is such, that is cannot be mistaken as anything
> but spellcasting.

Then please explain why the target number for noticing
spellcasting increases with the Force of the spell. Are your saying
that mages go into convulsions when they cast higher force spells?

#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
# DREKHEAD - drekhead@***.net, drekhead@***.com - Tim Kerby #
#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
# --- http://users.aol.com/drekhead/home.html --- #
#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot
stomping on a human face...forever. -George Orwell
Message no. 4
From: Brett Borger <SwiftOne@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 00:14:02 GMT
>IMHO, magicians in SR do not NEED to do anything other than fulfill their
>geasa to cast a spell. A magician can just concentrate and the spell happens.
>I tend to impose slight (+1) TN penalties if the magician is REALLY
>restricted for some reason (ie, bound and gagged, or does not wish to speak
>or move at all for some reason). Many magicians choose to speak or gesture
>while casting spells because it aids their concentration (and because "it's
>traditional") but it is not required.

This reminds me....

A few weeks ago I asked if anyone made mages roll to maintain a spell when
they got shot or otherwise distracted. The majority of you said no, the +2
was sufficient. While going through the rulebook (I read this thing like a
Nun reads the Bible....I am so sad.) I noticed that a mage dropping Prone
must make a willpower[2] test to continue to sustain spells. This implies that:

1)Yes, distractions do require tests (although who would bother with a
Will[2] test?)

And maybe:

2) The degree of distraction decides the difficulty (dropping prone=2,
serious wound=8)

Comments?

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 5
From: TEGTMEBC@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 21:21:56 -0500
> A few weeks ago I asked if anyone made mages roll to maintain a spell when
> they got shot or otherwise distracted. The majority of you said no, the +2
> was sufficient. While going through the rulebook (I read this thing like a
> Nun reads the Bible....I am so sad.) I noticed that a mage dropping Prone
> must make a willpower[2] test to continue to sustain spells. This implies that:

> 1)Yes, distractions do require tests (although who would bother with a
> Will[2] test?)

> And maybe:

> 2) The degree of distraction decides the difficulty (dropping prone=2,
> serious wound=8)

If you were going to do this, I'd suggest using the modifiers from the
damage they took. If you get a target of 2 for dropping prone, maybe just add
the modifier onto the 2? The only problem I see with this is that taking damage
from a bullet or otherwise life threatening stimuli is going to be a hell of a
jolt to someone. That said, you might also consider doubling the modifiers, and
then adding it to the 2 form dropping prone. The second method I just suggested
gives you the same modifier when taking a serious wound, and might be more to
your liking. (Come to think of it, is that how you came up with the target
number you used?)

-The Immortal Mental
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:25:38 +0100
Brett Borger said on 0:14/24 Apr 97...

> A few weeks ago I asked if anyone made mages roll to maintain a spell when
> they got shot or otherwise distracted. The majority of you said no, the +2
> was sufficient. While going through the rulebook (I read this thing like a
> Nun reads the Bible....I am so sad.) I noticed that a mage dropping Prone
> must make a willpower[2] test to continue to sustain spells. This implies that:
>
> 1)Yes, distractions do require tests (although who would bother with a
> Will[2] test?)

Not many would, except if you add in the wound modifiers -- dropping prone
while you have a Serious wound would make it a TN of 5, a lot less likely
to succeed. In the first few SRII games I ran, I made magicians roll
this test when they got wounded as well (I think because I mis-remembered
it) but I might start using it again, if I get a PC magician in the
group...

> And maybe:
>
> 2) The degree of distraction decides the difficulty (dropping prone=2,
> serious wound=8)

A lot easier is to add the wound modifier, like to all other tests.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I'm happy just to watch them all and laugh.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 16:56:25 +1000
> > try and notice spellcasting. So looks alone, can't kill. If you
> > cast a normal spell, people may or may not notice what you are up
> > to. If you take a gesture or incantation Geas, the physical
> > activity required is such, that is cannot be mistaken as anything
> > but spellcasting.
>
> Then please explain why the target number for noticing
> spellcasting increases with the Force of the spell. Are your saying
> that mages go into convulsions when they cast higher force spells?

I don't know. But it was pretty clear that the rules say that there is
some physical activity required. Maybe the higher force spells require
more concentration, or whatever, and the telltale signs are easier to spot.

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 8
From: Brett Borger <SwiftOne@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 14:56:27 GMT
>> 2) The degree of distraction decides the difficulty (dropping prone=2,
>> serious wound=8)

>then adding it to the 2 form dropping prone. The second method I just suggested
>gives you the same modifier when taking a serious wound, and might be more to
>your liking. (Come to think of it, is that how you came up with the target
>number you used?)

Umm...sure. Yeah, it was scientifically calculated and arrived at. Yeah,
that's it.

Actually, I just said to myself: "Self, a Serious wound is a nasty
fragger....whats a tough difficulty that still reflects a seasoned runner's
ability to concentrate?". And my Self replied, repleat with confidence
after 7+ years of fudging targets on the spur of the moment: "Why, and 8
dear sir."

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 9
From: Jose Vicente Mondejar Brell <jomonbre@***.UPV.ES>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 17:00:01 +0000
<snip>
> A few weeks ago I asked if anyone made mages roll to maintain a spell when
> they got shot or otherwise distracted. The majority of you said no, the +2
> was sufficient. While going through the rulebook (I read this thing like a
> Nun reads the Bible....I am so sad.) I noticed that a mage dropping Prone
> must make a willpower[2] test to continue to sustain spells. This implies that:
>
> 1)Yes, distractions do require tests (although who would bother with a
> Will[2] test?)
>
> And maybe:
>
> 2) The degree of distraction decides the difficulty (dropping prone=2,
> serious wound=8)
>
> Comments?

Willpower( 2 + wounds modifier) Test ?

Or is this too restrictive?

--
Monde, thinking about playtesting this one too
Message no. 10
From: Sascha Pabst <Sascha.Pabst@**********.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 05:16:55 +0000
On 24 Apr 97 at 0:14, Brett Borger wrote:
[snip great rule reference]
> 2) The degree of distraction decides the difficulty (dropping prone=2,
> serious wound=8)
a) Thanks for this hint. I think someone will be surprised tonight :-)
b) No need for that... Will(2) still gets the +3 TN for wound
modifiers, so you automagically come to a Will(5) test. Should do the
job, is consitent within the SR rules...

Sascha
--
+---___---------+------------------------------------+------------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |Things that try to look |
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@ | like things often do |
| \___ __/ | Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.de | look more like things |
|==== \_/ ======|*Wearing hats is just a way of life*| than things. Well known|
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | fact. - E.Weatherwax |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 11
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 01:26:14 -0400
Jose Vicente Mondejar Brell once dared to write,

>Willpower( 2 + wounds modifier) Test ?
>
>Or is this too restrictive?

Sounds good to me. Possibly give the option of using Body instead so
it would be treated just like recovering stun.

- MC23, who originally replied only to Monde on this post -
Message no. 12
From: Tim P Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 05:31:27 EDT
On Thu, 24 Apr 1997 17:00:01 +0000 Jose Vicente Mondejar Brell
<jomonbre@***.upv.es> writes:

[snip]

>
>Willpower( 2 + wounds modifier) Test ?
>
>Or is this too restrictive?

Naw... works fine.

Hey, anybody remember the time that Bandit hits some heavy corp sec. mage
with a "Stink" spell just as he's pulling together a huge (and obviously
detrimental to the rest of the groups health) spell? As I recall the
sec. mage dropped the spell mid-cast (he was too busy covering his
expensive corporate shoes with his lunch)....

Any comments on the tactic of "Offensive Distractions"?

~Tim (who wonders if burying a mage in garbage would distrupt his spell
casting..)
Message no. 13
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 12:28:54 +0100
Drekhead said on 8:54/24 Apr 97...

> > In the SRII book. Page 127. "Some physical activity accompanies
> > the spell".
>
> "Accompanies the spell" not the spellcasting. This is probably in
> reference to the shimmering or air distortions that accompany a
> spell.

That's what I wanted to say too, until I read the paragraph. Ray is right,
in that the next sentence talks about minor gestures, speaking a few
words, or holding symbolic materials.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I'm happy just to watch them all and laugh.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 14
From: Gossamer <jrsnyder@********.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:03:13 -0500
>Any comments on the tactic of "Offensive Distractions"?

I have found that Offensive distractions are only advantageous
when a couple of things are true:

First, you seek to avoid killing.

Second, you have serious mojo on your side. Like more
than one mage to cover your butt while you cast.

Third, your team expects it.

I have found that a Light Staged, AE spell, cast at high
Force, and backed up by lots of Magick Pool dice is very
effective in wasting one's opponents.

I sometimes use Sleep for this purpose also, and then
I spend 1 (or 3) point(s) of Karma Pool Karma to reroll
any unsuccessful dice (maybe twice) can waste lots of
bad guys.

For example:
an exclusive Sleep spell Force 6(8) with 6 dice from
the Magick Pool, and maybe another 4 dice from Foci
is 20 dice to roll, and for 1 point of Karma, you
get to reroll all non-success dice... For an additional
2 Karma from your, or the Team, Pool, you can reroll
again. So, if your average guy has a 3 WIL, and is
behind cover for +4TN, you get (on average) 4 successes
with the first roll, 3 more with the second roll, and
maybe 2 or 3 with the third roll.

Oh, and you resist 2M Drain... Only rarely will a
WIL 6 mage take any Drain...

Getting to roll 3 dice vs TN8 might net 1 success, but
even if it nets 2, that stages the average damage to
Light or Moderate Physical Damage after being knocked
out.

The mage on the other side is going to probably use
his Spell Defense dice to save her own skin, and that
leaves her standing in the middle of X number of her
unconscious comrades. And odds are good that she's
taken a Moderate Stun wound.

If your character is an Initiate, and has a Sleep
Spell of Force 9 (exclusive), and has a couple of
Foci... Well, let's just say it takes a *lot* of
Karma to get that good, and so if you believe that
an opponent has those capabilities... draw your own
conclusions.

Note: THIS TACTIC DOESN'T WORK IF YOUR STUPID
TEAMMATES (and you know who you are) HAVE AS
THEIR FIRST RESPONSE "I CHARGE INTO BATTLE!"

I'M SO TEMPTED JUST TO BLAST THEM TO HELL!!!!

I ALWAYS TELL THEM BEFORE HAND, 'FIRE SUPRESSIVE
BURSTS, LET ME GET ONE SPELL OFF, AND *THEN*
CHARGE IN TO FINISH THEM OFF!!!' BUT NOOOOOOOO,
'I'M A BIG CYBER-TROLL AND I FEAR NOOOO COMBAT!!'
OR 'I'M A MYSTICAL PHYS-AD AND I CAN DODGE
EVERYTHING AND KILL ALLLLLLLLL!!!!' OR 'I'M
THE ORK MERCENARY AND I'M A KILLING MACHINE!!!'

Oh, I'm sorry...

<rant>
Insert that stuff up there
</rant>

Gossamer
Message no. 15
From: Tim P Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:07:17 EDT
On Fri, 25 Apr 1997 08:03:13 -0500 Gossamer <jrsnyder@********.WISC.EDU>
writes:
>>Any comments on the tactic of "Offensive Distractions"?
>
>I have found that Offensive distractions are only advantageous
>when a couple of things are true:
>
>First, you seek to avoid killing.

:-) Duh!...Otherwise just jam a flame bomb down their throats... Isn't
being engulfed in flames and set of fire considered a distraction? :)

>
>Second, you have serious mojo on your side. Like more
>than one mage to cover your butt while you cast.

Why? I don't see why this has to be necessary... in most cases the fact
that you're using a lesser, distracting spell would require a lower
degree of power. (And of course you don't cast something like that while
standing in plain view in the middle of a roaring gun fight)

>
>Third, your team expects it.

Again, why?

>I have found that a Light Staged, AE spell, cast at high
>Force, and backed up by lots of Magick Pool dice is very
>effective in wasting one's opponents.

Again we are talking DISTRACTIONS not WASTING.

>I sometimes use Sleep for this purpose also, and then
>I spend 1 (or 3) point(s) of Karma Pool Karma to reroll
>any unsuccessful dice (maybe twice) can waste lots of
>bad guys.

[snip big example]

That's great, but Sleep isn't an "offensive distraction" it's a flat out
offensive spell.

I'm talking about using things like Stimulation, Poltergeist, or Stink or
some "conjure a cloud of flies to bother the big nasty troll with the
mini-gun" type spells. More specifically ways to use distracting spells
to screw up other mages/shamans.

~Tim (who had a shaman who liked to summon flocks of birds... then slip
away in the ensuing confusion.)
Message no. 16
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 14:08:13 +1000
I sort of lost all the messages that were I downloaded this morning. Did
anyone have anything to say in this thread that was addressed to me, that I
should know about (in the last 24-48 hours anyway).

Thanks,

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 17
From: "Darrell L. Bowman" <bowmandl@*****.DHR.STATE.NC.US>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 17:31:50 +0000
On 23 Apr 97 at 16:02, Ray & Tamara wrote:

> I was just reading through the Magic Section of Second Edition and I found
> the following on page 127, under Sorcery. In the third paragraph, it says
> 'Some physical activity accompanies the spell...'. It goes on to say that
> it's not much compared to the work he mage's mind is doing, but it is still
> there. This paragraph was talking about mages, not shamans, but under the
> shamans, it mentions them singing and dancing. I'm aware that there is no
> way that a shaman is _required_ to sing and dance, but I think, either way,
> there is some physical activity required to cast a spell, and, as I've
> said, I think that that is what you are noticing when you try and notice
> spellcasting. So looks alone, can't kill. If you cast a normal spell,
> people may or may not notice what you are up to. If you take a gesture or
> incantation Geas, the physical activity required is such, that is cannot be
> mistaken as anything but spellcasting.

Ray, you better re-read that section on the Shaman again... it
states a few sentences later that those gestures and such are
purely voluntary.


Excalibur
Darrell Bowman
bowmandl@*****.dhr.state.nc.us
Message no. 18
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 18:03:05 -0400
Darrell L. Bowman once dared to write,

>Ray, you better re-read that section on the Shaman again... it
>states a few sentences later that those gestures and such are
>purely voluntary.

You're just reading what you want to see. Go back and reread sorcery
again carefully. For both Magicians and Shamans, SRII talks about _MOST_
of the gesturing and spoken words are voluntary, NOT ALL.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 19
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 10:35:08 +1000
I think I've figured out why some of use don't want spelcasting to
require physical actions (myself included) - the Anti-AD&D syndrome,
where you had to wave your arms around and yell if you were a mage.
"Hey look, I'm a target!"

One of the things I loved when I first started Shadowrun was that my
mage didn't have to do that.

I can well understand the appeal of the "looks can kill" school of
reality, and I can also understand those who wish to stick to the
rulebooks.

So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
use it in their games are perfectly justified?

I know that when I'm GMing, looks will kill.


Lady Jestyr

-----------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect in a world full of icebergs
-----------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-----------------------------------------------
Now a Geocities Times Square Community Leader!
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 20
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 11:02:19 +1000
> Ray, you better re-read that section on the Shaman again... it
> states a few sentences later that those gestures and such are
> purely voluntary.

The word was mostly, not purely. ie for the shaman, _most_ of the singing
and dancing is not required, but he still has to do something.

I think you had better re-read it.

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 21
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 11:04:44 +1000
> I think I've figured out why some of use don't want spelcasting to
> require physical actions (myself included) - the Anti-AD&D syndrome,
> where you had to wave your arms around and yell if you were a mage.
> "Hey look, I'm a target!"
>
> One of the things I loved when I first started Shadowrun was that my
> mage didn't have to do that.
>
> I can well understand the appeal of the "looks can kill" school of
> reality, and I can also understand those who wish to stick to the
> rulebooks.
>
> So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
> gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
> use it in their games are perfectly justified?
>
> I know that when I'm GMing, looks will kill.

That's the way things mostly work isn't it. We just argue points of view,
but people will still do what they want to do.

Be careful that you don't bastardise the rules too much though. :).
(Sorry, I just had to say that).

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 22
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:13:56 -0500
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.6189A9A0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I've been watching this discussion and it seems to me that the following =
conclusions can be drawn from the book(s):

* Spellcasting does require some gestures. The gestures however are not =
easy to notice.
* Noticing spellcasting would, from my understanding, require a =
perception test (Observe in detail) to notice. I believe that it might, =
depending on how noticeable a GM wants spellcasting, fall under the =
category "Action not obvious" and therefore require a target number of =
8, or if the spellcaster doesn't say he's trying not to be noticed a 4. =
These number could be changed to T#4 and obvious if the GM desire to =
make for "obvious" magic.
* Spellcasters under a Gesture Geas would be required to make their =
actions "obvious" therefore, they couldn't hide it (use the higher T#'s =
above) or, were always easily noticed (a.k.a. no perception test). =
Again, this depends on the GM.
* All spellcasters require some gestures so, when under the effects of =
paralysation(sp?) or when properly restrained. For example, a magician =
with handcuffs no would be able to do the required gestures (since they =
are small - unless under Gesture Geas, then they are too big) but, with =
his arms bound behind his back he couldn't.
* Some may say that since you are in a coma (or at least your physical =
body is) when in astral space, you couldn't make gestures at all. =
However, I would say that your Astral body, A magician's "real essence", =
could make the gestures and therefore cast spells. This would mean =
however, that a mage could "go astral" when bound, and still cast =
spells. I would allow that, as it does make sense, and to cast spells =
over to "real space" they require a bridge anyway.

Well, this is my 2¢. I'll be glad to accept any flames etc. that may =
come with it.

Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/


-----Original Message-----
From: Lady Jestyr [SMTP:jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 7:35 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Noticing Spellcasting

I think I've figured out why some of use don't want spelcasting to
require physical actions (myself included) - the Anti-AD&D syndrome,
where you had to wave your arms around and yell if you were a mage.
"Hey look, I'm a target!"

One of the things I loved when I first started Shadowrun was that my
mage didn't have to do that.

I can well understand the appeal of the "looks can kill" school of
reality, and I can also understand those who wish to stick to the
rulebooks.

So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
use it in their games are perfectly justified?

I know that when I'm GMing, looks will kill.


Lady Jestyr

-----------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect in a world full of icebergs
-----------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-----------------------------------------------
Now a Geocities Times Square Community Leader!
-----------------------------------------------

------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.6189A9A0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.6189A9A0--
Message no. 23
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 21:27:02 -0400
Lady Jestyr once dared to write,

>So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
>gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
>use it in their games are perfectly justified?

The rule book doesn't imply, it states it, just not that well
apparently. How it is run though, will always vary from GM to GM, like
all rules.

>I know that when I'm GMing, looks will kill.

I would be fond of using a penalty for it, if I allowed it. Although
I would go with a +2 target modifier as opposed to Kenson's +1.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 24
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:16:49 -0500
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.C6ECDCE0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Agreed, most not all are required. You still have to do something =
though. Casting "by thought" could only be done on manna spells, if at =
all. And the rulebook does state that you can't.
Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/


-----Original Message-----
From: Ray & Tamara [SMTP:macey@*******.COM.AU]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 8:02 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

> states a few sentences later that those gestures and such are
> purely voluntary.

The word was mostly, not purely. ie for the shaman, _most_ of the =
singing
and dancing is not required, but he still has to do something.


------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.C6ECDCE0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.C6ECDCE0--
Message no. 25
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 21:38:43 -0400
Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr. once dared to write,

>I've been watching this discussion and it seems to me that the following
>conclusions can be drawn from the book(s):

<snip>

The target number for noticing spell casting is twice the =
difference between the force of the spell being cast and the magic =
rating of the spell caster. Otherwise you'vr got it down pat.

>Well, this is my 2¢. I'll be glad to accept any flames etc. that may =
come
>with it.

The only possible flames off your post would be about sending =
attatchments.
Gee, without Spike around this is becoming more frequent.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><=
>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal =
names more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect =
themselves, they answered to another name, because if another =
discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 26
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:55:18 -0500
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC5284.280E0760
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for the info. Now that you've mentioned it I do remember seeing =
that rule in SR2. As for attachments I didn't attach any that I know of. =
I'm not sure exactly what it is. I'm using Outlook '97 if that might be =
part of the culprit. Is there some rule about not sending attachments? I =
know there is some FAQ that I could read for the ground rules for this =
group but, I don't remember any message mentioning them. Does anyone =
know how I can get it?

Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/


-----Original Message-----
From: MC23 [SMTP:mc23@**********.COM]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 8:39 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

The target number for noticing spell casting is twice the difference =
between the force of the spell being cast and the magic rating of the =
spell caster. Otherwise you'vr got it down pat.

The only possible flames off your post would be about sending =
attatchments.
Gee, without Spike around this is becoming more frequent.


------ =_NextPart_000_01BC5284.280E0760
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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------ =_NextPart_000_01BC5284.280E0760--
Message no. 27
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:29:29 -0400
Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr. once dared to write,

>Thanks for the info. Now that you've mentioned it I do remember seeing
>that rule in SR2. As for attachments I didn't attach any that I know of.
>I'm not sure exactly what it is. I'm using Outlook '97 if that might be
>part of the culprit.
Possibly. I keep getting mime attachments. They just sit around on
my hard drive until I trash them.
>Is there some rule about not sending attachments?
I beleive so. Attachments should be sent directly to interested
members and not through the list. As far as Mime goes, we just hate it.
Ettiquette also requests that you only quote import parts of other
people's posts.
>I know there is some FAQ that I could read for the ground rules for this
>group but, I don't remember any message mentioning them. Does anyone know
>how I can get it?
I'll send you what I have directly.

- MC23, who is actually being nice tonight -
Message no. 28
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:29:03 EDT
On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:16:49 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
>------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.C6ECDCE0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>Agreed, most not all are required. You still have to do something
>though. Casting "by thought" could only be done on manna spells, if at
>all. And the rulebook does state that you can't.

Why? I don't own a copy of the rulebook, but it seems to me that there
should be no differentiation between the casting of a mana spell and a
physical spell until (or just before) it hits the target's aura. At which
point, it grounds into the physical plane and does its damage that way,
rather than simply grounding into the target's aura. I've never
understood the differentiation between the spells that way, it just
doesn't make sense to me.

Two, where does the rulebook _explicitly_ say that you cannot cast by a
single thought or thoughts. The fact is that spellcasting is more placed
in the mind than in the body. I'd go with Steve Kenson's suggestion
before saying that the act of casting with but a thought is impossible.
I'd say that the various gestures, whispers or similar actions that
_tend_ to accompany spellcasting are unconcious reflexes that the
magician does, not because they need to, but because they are habits they
picked up during their magical training, probably habits they picked up
believing them necessary for spellcasting or influenced by stories of
magicians who used such practices for centering. They were probably
instructed otherwise before such things became geasa. I'd say they'd
probably have to make a concious effort to _not_ make those kinds of
movements, but that they could still cast spells despite this. Like what
Steve Kenson was saying.

Finally, I don't think all magicians would even have these kinds of
habits. If those habits were caught early enough, or simply weren't
picked up, they may not have them at all.
<diatribe=off>

>Twinkie
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ray & Tamara [SMTP:macey@*******.COM.AU]
>Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 8:02 PM
>To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
>Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
<snip>

Twinkie? Could you put your replies _after_ the message you're replying
to? Thanks. And snip .sigs. It will save you trouble when Spike gets
back.

>------ =_NextPart_000_01BC527E.C6ECDCE0
>Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
<snip attached crap>

Guys? Please, NO MORE ATTACHMENTS. I'm pretty sure this is in the list
FAQ, so please go back and read it. An occasional slip-up I can
understand, but please read the FAQ before posting, if only for
formatting reasons.

--
-Canthros (filling in for Spike)
If any man wishes peace, canthros1@***.com
let him prepare for war. lobo1@****.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 29
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:07:58 -0400
> From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Noticing Spellcasting
> Date: Saturday, April 26, 1997 8:35 PM

<Snip>

> So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
> gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
> use it in their games are perfectly justified?

True. See, I see a contradiction in the rules. That is: a geas limits
how/when a mage/shaman can cast a spell. But here's the catch....if you're
bound and gagged, etc...what's the difference between having a gesture or
incantation geas as compared to having no geasa? See, with a gesture geas,
you would have a +2 to your target numbers (excluding drain resistance) to
cast the spell successfully. Without the geas, you shouldn't have this
penalty....but some gesturing, mumbling, etc. is required anyway....even
without a geas. See why this is confusing?
(I didn't mention LOS because that is a seperate issue...)

My vote would be to say that most mages/shamans really do like the comfort
of using some physical accompaniment when spellcasting....just because it
makes life easier for them, or whatever. However, I wouldn't *require*
this of them unless they had an applicable geas. Thus, if they wanted to
be really careful, I would say "Sure you can look at that guy and toss a
mana bolt in his direction without flinching"...I would rule that the
Noticing Spellcasting test is made to notice the energy of the spell, not
the caster gesturing, or whatever.

On a side note, I disagree that having a geas makes it obvious that the
mage/shaman is casting a spell. After all, not everyone has a magical
theory skill and wouldn't know a real mage if he fried them with a
fireball. Shadowrun is rarely a world of absolutes. Thus, I would modify
the TN for the test, but not eliminate the test completely.

There, now you have me 2 NY. :)

> I know that when I'm GMing, looks will kill.

I am with you, Lady.

> Lady Jestyr

Justin :)
Message no. 30
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:19:49 EDT
On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:13:56 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
<snipping multi-part headers>
>I've been watching this discussion and it seems to me that the following
>conclusions can be drawn from the book(s):
>
>* Spellcasting does require some gestures. The gestures however are not
>easy to notice.

Why should they be any more difficult to notice than any other gestures?
I'm betting that any gestrues or other actions needed to cast spells are
probably no more obvious than the silent mouthing of a single word. If
that obvious.

>* Noticing spellcasting would, from my understanding, require a
>perception test (Observe in detail) to notice. I believe that it might,
>depending on how noticeable a GM wants spellcasting, fall under the
>category "Action not obvious" and therefore require a target number of
>8, or if the spellcaster doesn't say he's trying not to be noticed a 4.
>These number could be changed to T#4 and obvious if the GM desire to
>make for "obvious" magic.

I believe that noticing spellcasting is covered in the main SR2 book and
is dependant upon the Force of the spell. (p132, SR2)

>* Spellcasters under a Gesture Geas would be required to make their
>actions "obvious" therefore, they couldn't hide it (use the higher T#'s
>above) or, were always easily noticed (a.k.a. no perception test).
>Again, this depends on the GM.

This is already stated, "requires the magician to gestrue visibly and
freely to make magic." (p53, GR2). Similarly, the Incantation geas
requires the magician to speak loudly. Each does state that "it is
assumed that the casting of even simple magic requires some activity on
the mage's part." (p53, GR2) This is, so far, the only quote I have seen
which indicates that any actual movement or action is required to cast
spells. And I am still more than willing to believe that no _physical_
activity is required on the magician's part for the casting of a spell.
Officially, however, spellcasting does apparently require the magician to
perform some physical action in tandem with the spellcasting.

>* All spellcasters require some gestures so, when under the effects of
>paralysation(sp?) or when properly restrained. For example, a magician
>with handcuffs no would be able to do the required gestures (since they
>are small - unless under Gesture Geas, then they are too big) but, with
>his arms bound behind his back he couldn't.

Again, I am still a bit cautious about this. I'd say that, excepting
fulfillment of geasa, the actions required by a magician are so small
that, even paralyzed, they can perform the needed 'actions'. For
instance, a person can voluntarily quicken their heart rate, raising
their rate of breath, raising their body temperature (not much, but a
little). Such may be all the action needed to cast a spell.

>* Some may say that since you are in a coma (or at least your physical
>body is) when in astral space, you couldn't make gestures at all.
>However, I would say that your Astral body, A magician's "real essence",
>could make the gestures and therefore cast spells. This would mean
>however, that a mage could "go astral" when bound, and still cast
>spells. I would allow that, as it does make sense, and to cast spells
>over to "real space" they require a bridge anyway.

Now, you're getting ridiculous. Assuming some action on the magician's
part is needed to bridge the gap between the physical plane and the
astral plane, this would not be needed on the astral because you cannot
cast spells at purely physical entities when astral projecting. Only
beings with an active astral presence are considered valid targets in
astral space. Since you don't need to bridge the barrier between the two
planes, no actions are necessary.

But that's only if you believe that those actions are necessary, which I
do not.

>Well, this is my 2¢. I'll be glad to accept any flames etc. that may
>come with it.

Well, hope that you can take what I've thrown your way.

--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, canthros1@***.com
let him prepare for war. lobo1@****.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 31
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:30:17 -0500
From: MC23 [SMTP:mc23@**********.COM]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 9:29 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr. once dared to write,

>I know there is some FAQ that I could read for the ground rules for this
>group but, I don't remember any message mentioning them. Does anyone know
>how I can get it?
I'll send you what I have directly.

I got the FAQ from our Honorable Assistant Fearless Leader, Thanx though.

- MC23, who is actually being nice tonight -


Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/

Is what I tried working?
Message no. 32
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:45:23 -0400
Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr. once dared to write,

>Is what I tried working?

Not yet young grasshopper, but you're getting there.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 33
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:57:50 -0400
L Canthros once dared to write,

>Again, I am still a bit cautious about this. I'd say that, excepting
>fulfillment of geasa, the actions required by a magician are so small
>that, even paralyzed, they can perform the needed 'actions'.
Huh? Actions can be preformed during a state of inaction?
>For instance, a person can voluntarily quicken their heart rate, raising
>their rate of breath, raising their body temperature (not much, but a
>little). Such may be all the action needed to cast a spell.
I don't buy it. I would accept an option like Steve Kenson's (target
modifier) but not an excuse like that. Shaman's had the advantage over
Magicians early on in Shadowrun history because the gestures and words do
have meaning and power in the 6th world.
>
>Now, you're getting ridiculous. Assuming some action on the magician's
>part is needed to bridge the gap between the physical plane and the
>astral plane, this would not be needed on the astral because you cannot
>cast spells at purely physical entities when astral projecting. Only
>beings with an active astral presence are considered valid targets in
>astral space. Since you don't need to bridge the barrier between the two
>planes, no actions are necessary.
Um, I think you misread what Boyd originally said. He was right.
What did you think he said?
>
>But that's only if you believe that those actions are necessary, which I
>do not.
I think the minor actions are, but As I've said before, I would
consider allowing it with a target modifier.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 34
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:58:54 -0500
From: L Canthros [SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 9:29 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:16:49 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:

>Agreed, most not all are required. You still have to do something
>though. Casting "by thought" could only be done on manna spells, if at
>all. And the rulebook does state that you can't.

Why? I don't own a copy of the rulebook, but it seems to me that there
should be no differentiation between the casting of a mana spell and a
physical spell until (or just before) it hits the target's aura. At =
which
point, it grounds into the physical plane and does its damage that way,
rather than simply grounding into the target's aura. I've never
understood the differentiation between the spells that way, it just
doesn't make sense to me.

Actually, in one section of the book it says that physical spells don't =
"synchronize" with the target's aura but, actually their physical make =
up. The reason for saying that manna spells could be cast by thought is =
because the astral plane (the only place a manna spell "exists") is =
composed of the thoughts and feelings of living creatures, therefore =
thoughts could initiate it's existence. However, Physical spells are =
active on the physical plane and must have some from of "trigger" that =
cause physical effect (a.k.a. gestures). If physical spells went through =
the astral plane and had to ground out at the target, then I can't see =
way an astral mage couldn't ground out through the target (completely =
upsetting game balance!)

Two, where does the rulebook _explicitly_ say that you cannot cast by a
single thought or thoughts. The fact is that spellcasting is more placed

I believe MC23 pointed this out but... In the Shaman section it mentions =
that most of the dancing/hollering/etc. can be avoided a mage can cast a =
spell with a whisper (small but, something) if he needs/wants to. Plus, =
as MC23 did point out to me the rulebook provides a formula (Force-Magic =
Rating, I think) for a target number to notice the spellcasting act. =
(Note: This may be interpreted differently by some people but, I believe =
it is the act of casting not the spell effect because if a fireball goes =
off close to me, I think I'd notice it!) This would lead us (or, at =
least, me) to infer that something is going on that would tip off an =
observer.
Twinkie? Could you put your replies _after_ the message you're replying
to? Thanks. And snip .sigs. It will save you trouble when Spike gets
back.

Okay, I've finally read the FAQ's guys.
Thank God this Spike guy isn't here! I'd be in trouble!

Guys? Please, NO MORE ATTACHMENTS. I'm pretty sure this is in the list
FAQ, so please go back and read it. An occasional slip-up I can
understand, but please read the FAQ before posting, if only for
formatting reasons.

I'm having problems shutting off the attachments but, I'm trying.


Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/
Message no. 35
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 00:14:07 -0400
Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr. once dared to write,

>Okay, I've finally read the FAQ's guys.
>Thank God this Spike guy isn't here! I'd be in trouble!

Yeah, but I feel lonely. He was like my list buddy or something.

>I'm having problems shutting off the attachments but, I'm trying.

No attatchments, now we just have to work on your quotes.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 36
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:26:56 -0500
From: L Canthros [SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 10:20 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:13:56 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:

>* Spellcasting does require some gestures. The gestures however are not
>easy to notice.

Why should they be any more difficult to notice than any other gestures?
I'm betting that any gestrues or other actions needed to cast spells are
probably no more obvious than the silent mouthing of a single word. If
that obvious.

Agreed, they shouldn't be obvious. Maybe instead of noticed I should =
have used "realized" You might mistake these simple or common gestures =
for something else. For example go into the word-mouthing thing, =
mouthing "alligator food" looks almost the same as "I Love You." I
sure =
that a mage can hide the gesture required to cast a spell better as it =
required less "intention" on his part to cast the spell, hence the =
book's Force-Magic Rating system of perception test checks.

>* Noticing spellcasting would, from my understanding, require a
>perception test (Observe in detail) to notice. I believe that it might,
>depending on how noticeable a GM wants spellcasting, fall under the
>category "Action not obvious" and therefore require a target number of
>8, or if the spellcaster doesn't say he's trying not to be noticed a 4.
>These number could be changed to T#4 and obvious if the GM desire to
>make for "obvious" magic.

I believe that noticing spellcasting is covered in the main SR2 book and
is dependant upon the Force of the spell. (p132, SR2)

Yes, I was mistaken about this MC23 corrected me though. I don't have =
the book (any of them) with me at this time so I couldn't check but, I =
remember it now that I'm thinking about it.

>* Spellcasters under a Gesture Geas would be required to make their
>actions "obvious" therefore, they couldn't hide it (use the higher T#'s
>above) or, were always easily noticed (a.k.a. no perception test).
>Again, this depends on the GM.

This is already stated, "requires the magician to gestrue visibly and
freely to make magic." (p53, GR2). Similarly, the Incantation geas
requires the magician to speak loudly. Each does state that "it is
assumed that the casting of even simple magic requires some activity on
the mage's part." (p53, GR2) This is, so far, the only quote I have seen
which indicates that any actual movement or action is required to cast
spells. And I am still more than willing to believe that no _physical_
activity is required on the magician's part for the casting of a spell.
Officially, however, spellcasting does apparently require the magician =
to
perform some physical action in tandem with the spellcasting.

Sorry, I don't have the Grimoire, Yet. From the wording of these =
outtakes I wouldn't ever allow a mage that had a gesture geas to hide =
his actions. They are visible. Period. It says so. That is with gesture =
geas. As for every mage I believe the quote I'm saying often in one in =
SR2 stating that "a mage may cast a spell with just a whisper if he =
needs/wants to. A whisper may be small, but it is some physical action =
and there fore can be seen and connected with spellcasting. Plus, =
casting a force 1 spell is much easier than casting a force 6 spell so, =
again you can (I would) always go back to the force-Magic Rating system =
of detection. There has to be something there to detect doesn't there?

>* All spellcasters require some gestures so, when under the effects of
>paralysation(sp?) or when properly restrained. For example, a magician
>with handcuffs no would be able to do the required gestures (since they
>are small - unless under Gesture Geas, then they are too big) but, with
>his arms bound behind his back he couldn't.

Again, I am still a bit cautious about this. I'd say that, excepting
fulfillment of geasa, the actions required by a magician are so small
that, even paralyzed, they can perform the needed 'actions'. For
instance, a person can voluntarily quicken their heart rate, raising
their rate of breath, raising their body temperature (not much, but a
little). Such may be all the action needed to cast a spell.

Yes, I understand you view on this, small actions like this can be done =
but, how hard is it to detect these actions? A 12 on the perception =
test? A 24? I don't really think you could detect these. But, there has =
to be something to detect even a mage with 13 Magic (heh.) casting a =
force 1 spell has the chance to be "caught" on a 12. It's a small chance =
(1/36) but, It's still a chance - there is something there to detect.
Plus, the paralyzation I was speaking of (when I was writing that) was =
more of a magical/AD&D paralyzation, where each sub-atomic particle of =
your existence is suspended in a stasis for the duration of the spell. =
Being a quadriplegic wouldn't completely keep you from casting spells =
but, you couldn't exert yourself enough to cast spells that were =
extremely powerful. (Going bake to Force-Magic Rating, as outlined in =
the book.)

>* Some may say that since you are in a coma (or at least your physical
>body is) when in astral space, you couldn't make gestures at all.
>However, I would say that your Astral body, A magician's "real =
essence",
>could make the gestures and therefore cast spells. This would mean
>however, that a mage could "go astral" when bound, and still cast
>spells. I would allow that, as it does make sense, and to cast spells
>over to "real space" they require a bridge anyway.

Now, you're getting ridiculous. Assuming some action on the magician's
part is needed to bridge the gap between the physical plane and the
astral plane, this would not be needed on the astral because you cannot
cast spells at purely physical entities when astral projecting. Only
beings with an active astral presence are considered valid targets in
astral space. Since you don't need to bridge the barrier between the two
planes, no actions are necessary.

Agreed, that was ridiculous, it was supposed to be. That's not how I =
interpret the rules, but I understand how someone could. You just agreed =
to all my points it that paragraph.

>Well, this is my 2=A2. I'll be glad to accept any flames etc. that =
may
>come with it.

Well, hope that you can take what I've thrown your way.

I think I kept my cool and my point.


Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/
Message no. 37
From: "Q (not from Star Trek)" <Scott.E.Meyer@*******.EDU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:30:21 -0500
On Sat, 26 Apr 1997, Justin Pinnow wrote:

> > From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
> > To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> > Subject: Noticing Spellcasting
> > Date: Saturday, April 26, 1997 8:35 PM
>
> <Snip>
>
> > So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
> > gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
> > use it in their games are perfectly justified?
>

Ok, after all this debate, I've got to get my 2Y in here. This is the way
I see the realtionship between casting and gestures. Mages are like
mathematicians. To them, spells are like complex equations which need to
be figured and factored with the right values in order to work. Now, a
mage is perfecty capable of doing this in his head, but it sometimes helps
for him to look off into space, maybe "gesture" in the air like a
mathematician working out an equation. I'm sure you've all done this.
(lesse, 8+6...carry the 1...)
Shamans are similar, but their magic is more like art. They can cast
particular spells according to what mood they're in. I'm like this when I
write. What mood i'm in often dictates how my writing comes, out, or,
more often, what type of writing I can do. Writing creative verse
requires an entirely different mood than, say, writing a scientific paper.
Shamans need to get into the right mood in order to cast the right spell.
They can do this without doind anything if they want, but it sometimes
helps to, say, recall a particular piece of music, or a certain dance, or
a painting that always seems to get you into a certain mood. Shamans may,
therefore, find themselves unconsciously humming to themselves, dancing,
or tracing a piece of artwork (possibly ceremonial) in the air.
That's my interpretation.

-QAT S0=0 S70 E1 Q0 V1 X4 &C1 &D2



---------------------------------------
I dislike Windows95 for the same reason people dislike New Coke
It tastes disgustingly like Pepsi.

Scott "Q" Meyer
Scott.E.Meyer@*******.edu
http://johnh.wheaton.edu/~smeyer
Message no. 38
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:30:35 -0500
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC5299.DB7CE2C0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From: MC23 [SMTP:mc23@**********.COM]
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 1997 10:45 PM
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr. once dared to write,

>Is what I tried working?

Not yet young grasshopper, but you're getting there.

What do my message come out as now? I think I got it fixed but, It won't work until I
logoff and back on.


Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/


------ =_NextPart_000_01BC5299.DB7CE2C0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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=

------ =_NextPart_000_01BC5299.DB7CE2C0--
Message no. 39
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 17:54:28 EDT
On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:58:54 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
<snip>

>>>Agreed, most not all are required. You still have to do something
>>>though. Casting "by thought" could only be done on manna spells, if
at
>>>all. And the rulebook does state that you can't.
>>
>>Why? I don't own a copy of the rulebook, but it seems to me that there
>>should be no differentiation between the casting of a mana spell and a
>>physical spell until (or just before) it hits the target's aura. At
which
>>point, it grounds into the physical plane and does its damage that way,
>>rather than simply grounding into the target's aura. I've never
>>understood the differentiation between the spells that way, it just
>>doesn't make sense to me.
>
>Actually, in one section of the book it says that physical spells don't
>"synchronize" with the target's aura but, actually their physical make
>up. The reason for saying that manna spells could be cast by thought is
>because the astral plane (the only place a manna spell "exists") is
>composed of the thoughts and feelings of living creatures, therefore
>thoughts could initiate it's existence. However, Physical spells are
>active on the physical plane and must have some from of "trigger" that
>cause physical effect (a.k.a. gestures). If physical spells went through
>the astral plane and had to ground out at the target, then I can't see
>way an astral mage couldn't ground out through the target (completely
>upsetting game balance!)

The astral mage cannot ground out through the purely physical target
because he [the mage] does not currently have a physical component, and,
thus, cannot create a bridge between the physical and astral planes in
order to cast spells at a target which does not have an active astral
component, like a mundane street samurai. True grounding requires both an
active astral and active physical component (like a focus, astral
perceiving mage, dual-natured critter, manifested spirit, etc). Grounding
is something of a misnomer for casting a spell at a purely physical
target, as the spell construct does not 'ground' through the target aura.
It simply transfer the mana energy into the physical plane upon reaching
the target, then using that energy to do whatever the mage 'programmed'
the spell construct to do (GR2, p110). The only type of spell which does
not transfer the energy upon interception of the target aura is the
manipulation spell, which transfers its energy in part or in whole (I
cannot remember) into the physical plane upon casting, _then_ travels to
the target(s). This is why the target of a DM receives the benefits of
armor when defending against the spell's effects, while the target of a
combat spell does not.

>>Two, where does the rulebook _explicitly_ say that you cannot cast by a
>>single thought or thoughts. The fact is that spellcasting is more
placed
>
>I believe MC23 pointed this out but... In the Shaman section it mentions
>that most of the dancing/hollering/etc. can be avoided a mage can cast a
>spell with a whisper (small but, something) if he needs/wants to. Plus,

The key words of the passage were, IIRC, "with _barely_ a whisper"
(quoted correctly, I think, but emphasis is mine). This is still open to
quite a bit of interpretation, though.

>as MC23 did point out to me the rulebook provides a formula (Force-Magic
>Rating, I think) for a target number to notice the spellcasting act.
>(Note: This may be interpreted differently by some people but, I believe
>it is the act of casting not the spell effect because if a fireball goes
>off close to me, I think I'd notice it!) This would lead us (or, at
>least, me) to infer that something is going on that would tip off an
>observer.

There are currently two ways of interpreting this rule: 1) the target
number represents the shimmer caused by the spell's travel through astral
ONLY, or 2) the target number represents _both_ the actions (if any:) of
the casting magician and spell's shimmering.

>>Twinkie? Could you put your replies _after_ the message you're replying
>>to? Thanks. And snip .sigs. It will save you trouble when Spike gets
back.
>
>Okay, I've finally read the FAQ's guys.
>Thank God this Spike guy isn't here! I'd be in trouble!

:) Yeah, you'd have really heard from him by now:)

>>Guys? Please, NO MORE ATTACHMENTS. I'm pretty sure this is in the list
>>FAQ, so please go back and read it. An occasional slip-up I can
>>understand, but please read the FAQ before posting, if only for
>>formatting reasons.
>
>I'm having problems shutting off the attachments but, I'm trying.

I didn't get any attachments or multi-part messages when you sent this
message.

--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, lobo1@****.com
let him prepare for war. canthros1@***.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 40
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 17:54:28 EDT
On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:26:56 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
>>>* Spellcasting does require some gestures. The gestures however are
not
>>>easy to notice.
>>
>>Why should they be any more difficult to notice than any other
gestures?
>>I'm betting that any gestrues or other actions needed to cast spells
are
>>probably no more obvious than the silent mouthing of a single word. If
>>that obvious.
>
>Agreed, they shouldn't be obvious. Maybe instead of noticed I should
>have used "realized" You might mistake these simple or common gestures
>for something else. For example go into the word-mouthing thing,
>mouthing "alligator food" looks almost the same as "I Love You." I
sure
>that a mage can hide the gesture required to cast a spell better as it
>required less "intention" on his part to cast the spell, hence the
>book's Force-Magic Rating system of perception test checks.

But what about the shimmering caused by the spell's travel from magician
to target? Much like a high-force spirit, this also appears during
spellcasting.

[...]
>>>* Spellcasters under a Gesture Geas would be required to make their
>>>actions "obvious" therefore, they couldn't hide it (use the higher
T#'s
>>>above) or, were always easily noticed (a.k.a. no perception test).
>>>Again, this depends on the GM.
>>
>>This is already stated, "requires the magician to gestrue visibly and
>>freely to make magic." (p53, GR2). Similarly, the Incantation geas
>>requires the magician to speak loudly. Each does state that "it is
>>assumed that the casting of even simple magic requires some activity on
>>the mage's part." (p53, GR2) This is, so far, the only quote I have
seen
>>which indicates that any actual movement or action is required to cast
>>spells. And I am still more than willing to believe that no _physical_
>>activity is required on the magician's part for the casting of a spell.
>>Officially, however, spellcasting does apparently require the magician
to
>>perform some physical action in tandem with the spellcasting.
>
>Sorry, I don't have the Grimoire, Yet. From the wording of these
>outtakes I wouldn't ever allow a mage that had a gesture geas to hide
>his actions. They are visible. Period. It says so. That is with gesture
>geas. As for every mage I believe the quote I'm saying often in one in
>SR2 stating that "a mage may cast a spell with just a whisper if he

Again, I believe the quote actually said that a shaman could cast a spell
with _barely_ a whisper, should he choose to do so.

>needs/wants to. A whisper may be small, but it is some physical action
>and there fore can be seen and connected with spellcasting. Plus,
>casting a force 1 spell is much easier than casting a force 6 spell so,
>again you can (I would) always go back to the force-Magic Rating system
>of detection. There has to be something there to detect doesn't there?

If you plan on doing much with things like geasa and initiation, the
Grimoire would be a good next buy. It's _the_ SR core magic book.

>>>* All spellcasters require some gestures so, when under the effects of
>>>paralysation(sp?) or when properly restrained. For example, a magician
>>>with handcuffs no would be able to do the required gestures (since
they
>>>are small - unless under Gesture Geas, then they are too big) but,
with
>>>his arms bound behind his back he couldn't.
>>
>>Again, I am still a bit cautious about this. I'd say that, excepting
>>fulfillment of geasa, the actions required by a magician are so small
>>that, even paralyzed, they can perform the needed 'actions'. For
>>instance, a person can voluntarily quicken their heart rate, raising
>>their rate of breath, raising their body temperature (not much, but a
>>little). Such may be all the action needed to cast a spell.
>
>Yes, I understand you view on this, small actions like this can be done
>but, how hard is it to detect these actions? A 12 on the perception
>test? A 24? I don't really think you could detect these. But, there has
>to be something to detect even a mage with 13 Magic (heh.) casting a
>force 1 spell has the chance to be "caught" on a 12. It's a small chance

>(1/36) but, It's still a chance - there is something there to detect.
>Plus, the paralyzation I was speaking of (when I was writing that) was
>more of a magical/AD&D paralyzation, where each sub-atomic particle of
>your existence is suspended in a stasis for the duration of the spell.
>Being a quadriplegic wouldn't completely keep you from casting spells
>but, you couldn't exert yourself enough to cast spells that were
>extremely powerful. (Going bake to Force-Magic Rating, as outlined in
>the book.)

The 'Paralyze' spell in Awakenings actually only freezes the _voluntary_
muscles of the target's body. He can't move his arm, he can't speak, he
can't turn his eyes or head, but, since the heart is an involuntary
muscle (that is capable of voluntary control), it could be possible for a
magician to do what I outlined above.

>>>* Some may say that since you are in a coma (or at least your physical
>>>body is) when in astral space, you couldn't make gestures at all.
>>>However, I would say that your Astral body, A magician's "real
essence",
>>>could make the gestures and therefore cast spells. This would mean
>>>however, that a mage could "go astral" when bound, and still cast
>>>spells. I would allow that, as it does make sense, and to cast spells
>>>over to "real space" they require a bridge anyway.
>>
>>Now, you're getting ridiculous. Assuming some action on the magician's
>>part is needed to bridge the gap between the physical plane and the
>>astral plane, this would not be needed on the astral because you cannot
>>cast spells at purely physical entities when astral projecting. Only
>>beings with an active astral presence are considered valid targets in
>>astral space. Since you don't need to bridge the barrier between the
two
>>planes, no actions are necessary.
>
>Agreed, that was ridiculous, it was supposed to be. That's not how I
>interpret the rules, but I understand how someone could. You just agreed
=
>to all my points it that paragraph.

I guess I goofed up. I thought you were being serious above. My mistake.

--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, lobo1@****.com
let him prepare for war. canthros1@***.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 41
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 07:58:16 +1000
> > So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
> > gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
> > use it in their games are perfectly justified?
> >
> > I know that when I'm GMing, looks will kill.
>
> That's the way things mostly work isn't it. We just argue points of view,
> but people will still do what they want to do.

There's a little nagging voice in my head now saying "so what's the list
FOR then?" but this time I'm ignoring it. Hear that, voice? (I call the
voice Dolly, as in Dolly Made Me Do It. Normally I don't ignore it -
Dolly's made me skip waaaaay too many classes this year. :) )

> Be careful that you don't bastardise the rules too much though. :).
> (Sorry, I just had to say that).

Aaagh! No! *mortally insulted* *twitch* *thrash* *flop* *whimper*

Ahhh... all better now. :)


Lady Jestyr

-----------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect in a world full of icebergs
-----------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-----------------------------------------------
Now a Geocities Times Square Community Leader!
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 42
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 17:11:56 +0100
In message <9704270308.AA17987@***.cancer.med.umich.edu>, Justin Pinnow
<vanyel@*******.NET> writes
>True. See, I see a contradiction in the rules. That is: a geas limits
>how/when a mage/shaman can cast a spell. But here's the catch....if you're
>bound and gagged, etc...what's the difference between having a gesture or
>incantation geas as compared to having no geasa?

Without a geas, you have a chance of casting a spell unobtrusively, a
discreet pointing and murmuring being all you need.

With Gesture geas, you need flamboyant and obvious gestures.

With Incantation, you have to shout "Ala Kazam! I seize your mind, and
now you are in my thrall!" as you cast, or something similar (if less
cheesy).

>On a side note, I disagree that having a geas makes it obvious that the
>mage/shaman is casting a spell.

The Grimoire disagrees. A nice blunt statement that the Gesture is
"always recognisable as spellcasting".

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 43
From: Shaun Sides <arch@****.ABTS.NET>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 18:32:45 -0500
Date: 26 Apr 97 Time: 23:07
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting

TO: Justin Pinnow

> My vote would be to say that most mages/shamans really do like the
> comfort of using some physical accompaniment when
> spellcasting....just because it makes life easier for them, or
> whatever. However, I wouldn't *require* this of them unless they
> had an applicable geas. Thus, if they wanted to

I agree with this. It's very likely that there would be a word
and/or gesture as the "default" setting, but the mage could do
without either or both if he consciously made the effort to do so.

a chaoidh teabadaich,

Shaun Sides
arch@****.net
http://www.abts.net/~arch

Morgan was born an asshole and just grew bigger.
-- Carrie Ann, from Roadhouse
Message no. 44
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 18:04:36 -0500
From: L Canthros [SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]

> On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 22:58:54 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
> <gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
>
> >Actually, in one section of the book it says that physical spells =
don't
> >"synchronize" with the target's aura but, actually their physical =
make
> >up. The reason for saying that manna spells could be cast by thought =
is
> >because the astral plane (the only place a manna spell "exists") is
> >composed of the thoughts and feelings of living creatures, therefore
> >thoughts could initiate it's existence. However, Physical spells are
> >active on the physical plane and must have some from of "trigger" =
that
> >cause physical effect (a.k.a. gestures). If physical spells went =
through
> >the astral plane and had to ground out at the target, then I can't =
see
> >way an astral mage couldn't ground out through the target (completely
> >upsetting game balance!)

> The astral mage cannot ground out through the purely physical target
> because he [the mage] does not currently have a physical component, =
and,
> thus, cannot create a bridge between the physical and astral planes in
> order to cast spells at a target which does not have an active astral
> component, like a mundane street samurai. True grounding requires both =
an
> active astral and active physical component (like a focus, astral
> perceiving mage, dual-natured critter, manifested spirit, etc). =
Grounding
> is something of a misnomer for casting a spell at a purely physical
> target, as the spell construct does not 'ground' through the target =
aura.
> It simply transfer the mana energy into the physical plane upon =
reaching
> the target, then using that energy to do whatever the mage =
'programmed'
> the spell construct to do (GR2, p110). The only type of spell which =
does
> not transfer the energy upon interception of the target aura is the
> manipulation spell, which transfers its energy in part or in whole (I
> cannot remember) into the physical plane upon casting, _then_ travels =
to
> the target(s). This is why the target of a DM receives the benefits of
> armor when defending against the spell's effects, while the target of =
a
> combat spell does not.

Now, what exactly is "purely" physical
> >as MC23 did point out to me the rulebook provides a formula =
(Force-Magic
> >Rating, I think) for a target number to notice the spellcasting act.
> >(Note: This may be interpreted differently by some people but, I =
believe
> >it is the act of casting not the spell effect because if a fireball =
goes
> >off close to me, I think I'd notice it!) This would lead us (or, at
> >least, me) to infer that something is going on that would tip off an
> >observer.

> There are currently two ways of interpreting this rule: 1) the target
> number represents the shimmer caused by the spell's travel through =
astral
> ONLY, or 2) the target number represents _both_ the actions (if any:) =
of
> the casting magician and spell's shimmering.

I had never thought of making the astral "shimmer" even slightly =
concealable, I always thoughts spells were quite flashy in astral space =
and you couldn't hide them. Also, why would the target number of the =
test be modified down the by magic rating of the mage, if at all. I =
figure a force 6 spell would be just as flashy in astral space (as it is =
just the spell in astral) when cast by a mage with magic rating 1 or by =
a mage with magic rating 247 (a little out of proportion but...)

Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/
Message no. 45
From: Tim P Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 19:56:39 EDT
On Sun, 27 Apr 1997 11:31:53 +0100 Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:

[snip all that good formatting stuff] <= See? snipping the un-important
stuff!

>5) Use common sense. (Note: this may be hard for some people :)

Experience has taught me that "common sense" isn't exactly common....

~Tim
Message no. 46
From: Tim P Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 19:56:39 EDT
On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 20:13:56 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
>* All spellcasters require some gestures so, when under the effects of
>paralysation(sp?) or when properly restrained. For example, a magician
>with handcuffs no would be able to do the required gestures (since they
=
>are small - unless under Gesture Geas, then they are too big) but, with
=
>his arms bound behind his back he couldn't.

Huh? I thought the consensus was that gesturing was for the most part
optional and any done would be to fulfill a geas, or for RP purposes..

>* Some may say that since you are in a coma (or at least your physical
>body is) when in astral space, you couldn't make gestures at all. =
>However, I would say that your Astral body, A magician's "real essence",
=
>could make the gestures and therefore cast spells. This would mean =
>however, that a mage could "go astral" when bound, and still cast =
>spells. I would allow that, as it does make sense, and to cast spells =
>over to "real space" they require a bridge anyway.

Again, Huh?
1) you CAN'T cast a spell IN ASTRAL space and have it affect anything in
the PHYSICAL plane (barring grounding). It's a fundamental SR magic
principle.

2) No offence but that's a kinda hokey excuse for why you could cast
spells in astral space. It makes more sence if you remove the
_necessity_ to make gestures at all... after all it's not by the gesture
or physical motion that a spell is cast, it's by the manipulation of
astral energy.... any motion then becomes more on the lines of a
medatative focus (a bit like low level centering or something) to aid in
concentration and provide emphasis. (Regardless of whether or not my
shaman NEEDS to make any motion, he's still gonna fling his hands out
toward who ever he's hitting with Flamethrower....)

[holy cow! Did you include the entire message you replied to? And at the
BOTTOM to boot!
That's a big list no-no... read the FAQ]

~Tim
Message no. 47
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 11:01:12 +1000
> > That's the way things mostly work isn't it. We just argue points of
view,
> > but people will still do what they want to do.
>
> There's a little nagging voice in my head now saying "so what's the list
> FOR then?" but this time I'm ignoring it. Hear that, voice? (I call the

Too convince others that they want to do what you want them to do?

> > Be careful that you don't bastardise the rules too much though. :).
> > (Sorry, I just had to say that).
>
> Aaagh! No! *mortally insulted* *twitch* *thrash* *flop* *whimper*

OK, it was fairly lame.

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 48
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 11:03:34 +1000
>> There are currently two ways of interpreting this rule: 1) the target
>> number represents the shimmer caused by the spell's travel through
astral
>> ONLY, or 2) the target number represents _both_ the actions (if any:) of
>> the casting magician and spell's shimmering.

>I had never thought of making the astral "shimmer" even slightly
concealable, I

In the astral plane it's not, but it's echo in the physical plane varies in
concealability depending on the force of the spell.

Ray.

-----------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens,|
| You will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@*******.com.au
Message no. 49
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:45:37 EDT
On Sun, 27 Apr 1997 18:04:36 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
<snip>
>Now, what exactly is "purely" physical

I used the description to indicate an entity which has a 'living' aura
(this includes items like foci) which are not dual-natured (possessed,
either temporarily or permanently, of an active presence in both physical
and astral planes) or solely astral, like a non-manifested spirit. IOW, a
being which cannot see the astral, at least for the moment.

<snip>
>I had never thought of making the astral "shimmer" even slightly
>concealable, I always thoughts spells were quite flashy in astral space
>and you couldn't hide them. Also, why would the target number of the
>test be modified down the by magic rating of the mage, if at all. I
>figure a force 6 spell would be just as flashy in astral space (as it is
>just the spell in astral) when cast by a mage with magic rating 1 or by
>a mage with magic rating 247 (a little out of proportion but...)

When you get a chance, you might re-read the section on Noticing
Spellcasting (p132, SR2) for the exact target number calculations, and
for a short description of what happens on the physical plane when a
spell is cast. As the spell travels from the caster (the wiz-mage) to the
target (unsuspecting mundane), it traverses the distance in astral space,
however, like a non-manifested spirit, it causes 'ripples' in physical
space, like the effect you get when looking through the air rising from a
hot surface and see a distorted view of what you're looking at. I don't
have an exact page ref for that, except that I know it's in the Magic
section somewhere, probably with the Noticing Spellcasting rules. What
I'm trying to say is that, yes, the spell would not be concealable in
astral space, but that I wasn't talking about the astral to begin with.

--
-Canthros (I hope I didn't just sound like a prick...)
If any man wishes peace, lobo1@****.com
let him prepare for war. canthros1@***.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 50
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 11:29:38 +0100
L Canthros said on 22:45/27 Apr 97...

> When you get a chance, you might re-read the section on Noticing
> Spellcasting (p132, SR2) for the exact target number calculations, and

And on 22:45/27 Apr 97...

> This is yet another reason I have got to get a copy of the main book for
> this game...

You must have an excellent memory, if you're quoting page numbers from a
book you don't own :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Don't tell me about the answer
'Cause then another one will come along soon
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 51
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 07:53:23 +1000
> I had never thought of making the astral "shimmer" even slightly
> concealable, I always thoughts spells were quite flashy in astral
> space and you couldn't hide them. Also, why would the target number of

This is true; the shimmering we're talking about is the astral echos on
the real plane - it would create an effect a bit like the Predator when
it's using its adaptive coloration, little ripples in air/light(/the
fabric of reality!)

In the same way that large elementals (and spirits?) can be seen in the
physical plane even if they're not manifested, that's what we're talking
about for spells as well.


Lady Jestyr

-----------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect in a world full of icebergs
-----------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
http://jestyr.home.ml.org/
-----------------------------------------------
Now a Geocities Times Square Community Leader!
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 52
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 20:08:55 EDT
On Mon, 28 Apr 1997 11:29:38 +0100 Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:
>L Canthros said on 22:45/27 Apr 97...
>
>> When you get a chance, you might re-read the section on Noticing
>> Spellcasting (p132, SR2) for the exact target number calculations, and
>
>And on 22:45/27 Apr 97...
>
>> This is yet another reason I have got to get a copy of the main book
for
>> this game...
>
>You must have an excellent memory, if you're quoting page numbers from a
>book you don't own :)

:) Wish it were that good, but the page numbers were in the Grimoire in
reference to the same thing. Heck, if my memory was _that_ good, I
wouldn't need to buy the book, I'd borrow from a friend for while and
read it:)

--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, lobo1@****.com
let him prepare for war. canthros1@***.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 53
From: "Darrell L. Bowman" <bowmandl@*****.DHR.STATE.NC.US>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 08:39:32 +0000
On 26 Apr 97 at 18:03, MC23 wrote:

> Darrell L. Bowman once dared to write,
>
> >Ray, you better re-read that section on the Shaman again... it
> >states a few sentences later that those gestures and such are
> >purely voluntary.
>
> You're just reading what you want to see. Go back and reread sorcery
> again carefully. For both Magicians and Shamans, SRII talks about _MOST_
> of the gesturing and spoken words are voluntary, NOT ALL.

Err... I didn't think so, because I went looking for the answer,
I didn't have any preconceptions about it. Of course, I loaned
my book to a buddy so I don't have it here to re-check it right
now, but I thought I pulled that last phrase right out of the
book, and I had just quoted the whole paragraph in a previous
message. I will check it again when I can.

Excalibur
Darrell Bowman
bowmandl@*****.dhr.state.nc.us
Message no. 54
From: "Darrell L. Bowman" <bowmandl@*****.DHR.STATE.NC.US>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 08:39:32 +0000
On 27 Apr 97 at 11:02, Ray & Tamara wrote:

> > Ray, you better re-read that section on the Shaman again... it
> > states a few sentences later that those gestures and such are
> > purely voluntary.
>
> The word was mostly, not purely. ie for the shaman, _most_ of the singing
> and dancing is not required, but he still has to do something.
>
> I think you had better re-read it.

I will when I get my books back,... I just messaged to someone
else though, I'd just quoted the whole paragraph, and that was
still my understanding. And, as I said earlier, I had no
preconceptions about it, I went looking for the correct answer
and thought I'd found it.
Excalibur
Darrell Bowman
bowmandl@*****.dhr.state.nc.us
Message no. 55
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 13:39:27 GMT
Justin Pinnow writes

> > So how about we agree - yes, the rulebooks seem to imply that some
> > gesturing usually accompanies spellcasting, but those who don't want to
> > use it in their games are perfectly justified?
>
> True. See, I see a contradiction in the rules. That is: a geas limits
> how/when a mage/shaman can cast a spell. But here's the catch....if you're
> bound and gagged, etc...what's the difference between having a gesture or
> incantation geas as compared to having no geasa? See, with a gesture geas,
> you would have a +2 to your target numbers (excluding drain resistance) to
> cast the spell successfully. Without the geas, you shouldn't have this
> penalty....but some gesturing, mumbling, etc. is required anyway....even
> without a geas. See why this is confusing?
> (I didn't mention LOS because that is a seperate issue...)
Yes but if you want to make subtle casting gestures in normal
conditions with the geas you get a plus 2 without you are ok. I would
add any geas penalty onto any other penalty for being tied up etc. I
don't rate having your hands tied behind your back a a normal or
comfortable position.

>
> My vote would be to say that most mages/shamans really do like the comfort
> of using some physical accompaniment when spellcasting....just because it
> makes life easier for them, or whatever. However, I wouldn't *require*
> this of them unless they had an applicable geas. Thus, if they wanted to
> be really careful, I would say "Sure you can look at that guy and toss a
> mana bolt in his direction without flinching"...I would rule that the
> Noticing Spellcasting test is made to notice the energy of the spell, not
> the caster gesturing, or whatever.
Some minor head movement, hand gesture (under the table) might be
required but is not likely to be seen.

>
> On a side note, I disagree that having a geas makes it obvious that the
> mage/shaman is casting a spell. After all, not everyone has a magical
> theory skill and wouldn't know a real mage if he fried them with a
> fireball.
If someone starts wavng thier arms about in fancy patterns for no
good reason or screaming 'by my power you will....' at the top of
thier lungs most folks are likely to assume 'mage' especially if
something strange like fireballs out of thin air follows. This does
have point though that unless the observer has a magical theory skill
they could not tell a mundane pretending to cast a spell from a mage
with a geas. Ok in the latter case they might also see flashes of
power if the spell is close in force to the casters magic attribute.
There is also the point of why would anyone near a fight want to try
and fool people into thinking they are a magician when the standing
rule for security folks is often 'geek the mage first'.

> Shadowrun is rarely a world of absolutes. Thus, I would modify
> the TN for the test, but not eliminate the test completely.
a minus could well be in order or recalculate off a base of 4 and
'action very obvious'. Sure thats a zero but if the caster is across
the room, there a raging gunfight going on, the observers hurt and
theres a troll with a polearm running his way he may well be far too
busy to link the guy scearming in latin for all he's worth with his
mates exploding brains.

Mark
Message no. 56
From: "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Noticing Spellcasting
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 21:00:51 -0500
From: L Canthros [SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]

Did anyone get a line saying who the previous message was form above =
this? If not I meant to include one, and I need to know so that I make =
sure and *not* strip the names from the rest of my replies.

> On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:26:56 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
> <gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
> >>>* Spellcasting does require some gestures. The gestures however are
> not
> >>>easy to notice.
> >>
> >>Why should they be any more difficult to notice than any other
> gestures?
> >>I'm betting that any gestrues or other actions needed to cast spells
> are
> >>probably no more obvious than the silent mouthing of a single word. =
If
> >>that obvious.
> >
> >Agreed, they shouldn't be obvious. Maybe instead of noticed I should
> >have used "realized" You might mistake these simple or common =
gestures
> >for something else. For example go into the word-mouthing thing,
> >mouthing "alligator food" looks almost the same as "I Love
You." I =
sure
> >that a mage can hide the gesture required to cast a spell better as =
it
> >required less "intention" on his part to cast the spell, hence the
> >book's Force-Magic Rating system of perception test checks.

> But what about the shimmering caused by the spell's travel from =
magician
> to target? Much like a high-force spirit, this also appears during
> spellcasting.

Shimmering is given by Force-Magic is the SRII rules. I haven't ever =
changed this (except when I was mistaken).

> [...]
> >>>* Spellcasters under a Gesture Geas would be required to make their
> >>>actions "obvious" therefore, they couldn't hide it (use the
higher
> T#'s
> >>>above) or, were always easily noticed (a.k.a. no perception test).
> >>>Again, this depends on the GM.
> >>
> >>This is already stated, "requires the magician to gestrue visibly =
and
> >>freely to make magic." (p53, GR2). Similarly, the Incantation geas
> >>requires the magician to speak loudly. Each does state that "it is
> >>assumed that the casting of even simple magic requires some activity =
on
> >>the mage's part." (p53, GR2) This is, so far, the only quote I have
> seen
> >>which indicates that any actual movement or action is required to =
cast
> >>spells. And I am still more than willing to believe that no =
_physical_
> >>activity is required on the magician's part for the casting of a =
spell.
> >>Officially, however, spellcasting does apparently require the =
magician
> to
> >>perform some physical action in tandem with the spellcasting.
> >
> >Sorry, I don't have the Grimoire, Yet. From the wording of these
> >outtakes I wouldn't ever allow a mage that had a gesture geas to hide
> >his actions. They are visible. Period. It says so. That is with =
gesture
> >geas. As for every mage I believe the quote I'm saying often in one =
in
> >SR2 stating that "a mage may cast a spell with just a whisper if he

> Again, I believe the quote actually said that a shaman could cast a =
spell
> with _barely_ a whisper, should he choose to do so.

The more and more I argue for actions while spellcasting, the more I am =
inclined to _not_ require them. I believe that I am going to say without =
a gesture geas a mage does not have to perform any visible action. And =
without incantation on audible one. However, I am going with Force-Magic =
for the astral echo and, therefore, the path the spell takes. That is =
unless the mage is surrounded you can figure out who the magic is by =
watching the astral echo.

> >needs/wants to. A whisper may be small, but it is some physical =
action
> >and there fore can be seen and connected with spellcasting. Plus,
> >casting a force 1 spell is much easier than casting a force 6 spell =
so,
> >again you can (I would) always go back to the force-Magic Rating =
system
> >of detection. There has to be something there to detect doesn't =
there?

> If you plan on doing much with things like geasa and initiation, the
> Grimoire would be a good next buy. It's _the_ SR core magic book.

Yes, I though so to. I had it ordered when I wrote that and got it =
yesterday. I now know what people are taking about with initiation and =
masking and shielding etc. The Grimoire Rocks! Must have for a campaign =
with any magic.
(OT: I would also suggest VR 2.0, I got that, and four other books, at =
the same time. Must have for high-matrix campaigns.)

> >Yes, I understand you view on this, small actions like this can be =
done
> >but, how hard is it to detect these actions? A 12 on the perception
> >test? A 24? I don't really think you could detect these. But, there =
has
> >to be something to detect even a mage with 13 Magic (heh.) casting a
> >force 1 spell has the chance to be "caught" on a 12. It's a small =
chance

> >(1/36) but, It's still a chance - there is something there to detect.
> >Plus, the paralyzation I was speaking of (when I was writing that) =
was
> >more of a magical/AD&D paralyzation, where each sub-atomic particle =
of
> >your existence is suspended in a stasis for the duration of the =
spell.
> >Being a quadriplegic wouldn't completely keep you from casting spells
> >but, you couldn't exert yourself enough to cast spells that were
> >extremely powerful. (Going bake to Force-Magic Rating, as outlined in
> >the book.)

> The 'Paralyze' spell in Awakenings actually only freezes the =
_voluntary_
> muscles of the target's body. He can't move his arm, he can't speak, =
he
> can't turn his eyes or head, but, since the heart is an involuntary
> muscle (that is capable of voluntary control), it could be possible =
for a
> magician to do what I outlined above.

Yes, I would assume so. But, if actions are required as this seems to =
state (correct me if I'm wrong) shouldn't they fall under the =
Force-Magic formula? If so, then these actions would be not enough (they =
don't warrant the detection rating therefore, shouldn't be enough to =
cast the spell) or, would be so drastic as to warrant the Force-Magic as =
when he raises his metabolism his body starts twitching or the heat of =
him becomes intense. Now, even if you players rolled their perception =
test you don't have to tell them that the mage is casting a spell. Just =
say an abnormal amount of heat is coming from the mages direction. If I =
was to do away with the Force-Magic system, I would do away with any =
sort of action. If you want to say that is only for the astral "echo" =
then my ruling is that looks *can* kill.


Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Noticing Spellcasting, 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!