Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	markus.widmer@******.at (Markus Widmer)
Subject:	two rules questions
Date:	Mon, 12 May 2003 09:17:59 +0200

Message no. 1 Hi all!

During Saturday's gaming session, two rules questions came up. Maybe
you can enlighten me?

1. A mage is sustaining an invisibility spell with an elemental, and
an improve reflexes spell with a sustaining focus. Is there any
problem for that mage to perform astral projection? I'd say no, since
the mage doesn't actually sustain a spell herself. Moreover, the focus
as well as the elemental are dual being and thus present on the astral
as well as on the physical plane (at least if the elemental is
manifested).

2. Can invisible people be seen? Let's say a mage casts a really
crappy invisibility spell, force 2, 1 success. Then people with lots
of willpower should be able to see through it. I didn't find any rules
for this perception test, however. Is it only a opposed test against
the force of the spell, adding visibility modifiers? That would make
invisibility rather weak, though.

Thanks for your help!

Markus from lovely Vienna

From:	gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject:	two rules questions
Date:	Mon, 12 May 2003 11:09:03 +0200

Message no. 2 According to Markus Widmer, on Monday 12 May 2003 09:17 the word on the
street was...

> 1. A mage is sustaining an invisibility spell with an elemental, and
> an improve reflexes spell with a sustaining focus. Is there any
> problem for that mage to perform astral projection? I'd say no, since
> the mage doesn't actually sustain a spell herself. Moreover, the focus
> as well as the elemental are dual being and thus present on the astral
> as well as on the physical plane (at least if the elemental is
> manifested).

AFAIK this would work like you describe.

> 2. Can invisible people be seen? Let's say a mage casts a really
> crappy invisibility spell, force 2, 1 success. Then people with lots
> of willpower should be able to see through it. I didn't find any rules
> for this perception test, however. Is it only a opposed test against
> the force of the spell, adding visibility modifiers? That would make
> invisibility rather weak, though.

Invisibility is opposed by Intelligence; see page 195, SR3: "All indirect
illusions are resisted by Intelligence." This means it is a standard
Opposed Test for anyone with LOS to the invisible subject, so if they
cancel all the caster's successes, they will see the subject. In this
respect, Invisibility in SR3 is a boolean spell: either you can see the
subject, or you can't; it's not as if it becomes gradually more difficult
to see him or her, as it was in SR1 and SRII (where the caster's successes
added to the Perception Test TN).

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Hooligans (zn) baldadige watervogel
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	markus.widmer@******.at (Markus Widmer)
Subject:	two rules questions
Date:	Mon, 12 May 2003 22:05:01 +0200

Message no. 3 >Invisibility is opposed by Intelligence; see page 195, SR3: "All
indirect
>illusions are resisted by Intelligence." This means it is a standard
>Opposed Test for anyone with LOS to the invisible subject, so if they
>cancel all the caster's successes, they will see the subject.

Thanks for your help, Gurth. I'm glad I'm right from time to time. ;-)

Markus

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer