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