From:	Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:	Re: An Opposing View (Re: SR3 Magic Terms)
Date:	Tue, 30 Dec 1997 14:02:10 -0800

Ereskanti wrote:

> > This is an example of, ah, not thinking things out, Keith. Given that a
> > "cloaked" Magician -- one using Masking to turn his aura into a
potted
> > plant -- is 'invisible' to the mage, hooking that mage up to a ward
> > (which similarly won't pick up on the cloaked mage) affects nothing.

> I think I have figured something out (and yes, I have thought through this
> many times Mr. Breton ;) ...my use of the words "concealment" and
> "invisibility" are still using Shadowrun's definitions of the words under
> Spiritual Powers and Illusion spells.

Read grammatically, Keith, you've just figured that you're using the
words
concealment and invisibility in the same manner as SR2.

I hope this isn't your intention. Oh, by the way.. you're *not* using
them in the same manner as SR2. Neither Concealment nor Invisibility
works by changing the aura; both work on the physical (non-Astral)
presence; neither affect what the aura looks like or is.

> The success level that is obtained by
> the "masker" becomes a modifier to the "astral signature",
similar to the way
> Concealment from a Spirit works now. It remains a "sustained action", with
> it's appropriate modifiers.

And if mages were spirits (of any sort) I might be tempted to agree with
you. (Actually, I see any possible mechanics working by rather
different means.) However, this relies on extending the Perception
tests able to be altered by Concealment to the Astral, which is rather
house-rulish.

What you're describing above are the rules for Masking (Grimoire, page
sumfink-er-udder). Note that the description of Masking therein does
not allow you to actively change what your aura looks like, just whether
it's magically active or no. It's sort of like seeing something made
out of clay -- it's not important, in this instance, whether it looks
like a sculpture, or if its glazed; whatever you do with it, it's going
to remain obvious that it's made of clay. (A weak analogy, admittedly.
No, you can't paint your astral clay. This is obvious by a majority of
sources. Your house rules are welcome to vary.)

> When "stealthing" past the Ward, the test is unopposed, meaning one success
> theoretically allows the magician through. By connecting the Ward's energies
> to some that is "proactive", such as a magician or a guardian being
> (elemental, spirit, ick---watcher) allows for the test to become a resisted
> one, target number of course being the "masked" individual's current Astral
> Signature.

This is already handled in Awakenings. (See "Alarm Wards" for an
example of a "CCSS" ward.)

> > Oh, it's still a nifty idea, just not in this particular example.

> How about with those additional explanations....????

Still a nifty idea, still doesn't work.

> > "spiritual or elemental energies" is just talking around the problem:
> > the assumption so far is that the Aura *is* spiritual or elemental
> > energy, or a reflection thereon, so trying to 'uncloak' someone by
> > studying their spiritual/elemental energy is the same as trying to
> > Assense someone in the first place.

> Yes, in theory you are correct, it is. Isn't there a modifier for "doing
> something you've done before?" And no, I don't mean throw a Fireball that is
> one's favorite spell. I mean, "looking at something you've studied in detail
> previously". I wasn't attempting to talk my way around any problem. I simply
> failed to explain myself fully.

There's still no difference between assensing something (in detail) and
studying spiritual and elemental energies of an object (in detail). If
it's gonna fool you, it's gonna fool you.

As far as a modifier for routine actions, that's left to the individual
GM; I don't see how that applies here, especially as masking (or
learning how to mask because you've seen a spirit do so) is going to be
easier, rather than harder.

Sounds like you've shifted from the position that masking is going to
allow you to cast illusions about yourself, however, so I'll leave off
here.


-Mb