[ikarinokami]

for the purposes of this rule would you consider these spells to be attacks?

1. chaotic world
2. mana bind, net bind, bind. mana net
3. hot potato
4. mind control, mob mind
5. ice sheet
6. mana static

[Whiskeyjack]

I'm not sure in what way you're saying these rules are supposed to interact? What's the circumstance?

[ikarinokami]

I'm not sure in what way you're saying these rules are supposed to interact? What's the circumstance?

you reckless spellcast and combine an obvious combat spell ie blast, ball lighting, against the same target/group that will be a target of the above listed spells.

[happybjorn]

This is question best handled by your GM, since it could be situation dependent.  For example, a healing spell could be considered an attack if used to heal a minimal amount (to prevent further healing) or to stabilize someone in order to cause future harm (those naughty corps, or players, who ignore concepts like minimal standards for prisoner treatment).

I'd say every one of those could be considered an attack spell, but hey, maybe someone wants to light their smokes with a Flamethrower spell.  That could be stylish (and possibly stupid) and not an attack... or it could be an attack as well (maybe it was part of an attempt to intimidate).

[PiXeL01]

Any spell that is harmful to the target or directly targets them with a disadvantage should be considered an attack. 5 and 6 from your list might be debatable as they manipulate the environment, but that is more up to your GM (though I would probably allow them).
A heal spell would only prevent first aid not more heal spells, wouldn't it?

[Rooks]

Aoe vs single target spells those spells target an area like a grenade indiscriminate of friend or foe where as if you shoot a gun twice or cast a spell at two different targets using fast casting you picking individual targets

[Whiskeyjack]

I'm not sure in what way you're saying these rules are supposed to interact? What's the circumstance?

you reckless spellcast and combine an obvious combat spell ie blast, ball lighting, against the same target/group that will be a target of the above listed spells.

I'd say it's allowable as the above spells aren't targeted. It's different than reckless casting 2 Lightning Bolts at the same person.

[ikarinokami]

I'm not sure in what way you're saying these rules are supposed to interact? What's the circumstance?

you reckless spellcast and combine an obvious combat spell ie blast, ball lighting, against the same target/group that will be a target of the above listed spells.

I'd say it's allowable as the above spells aren't targeted. It's different than reckless casting 2 Lightning Bolts at the same person.

by the missions faq there is no distinction between single targets and AOE's. the same person isn't allowed to throw two grenades at the same target, or cast two blast spells at the same target

[Whiskeyjack]

I'm not sure in what way you're saying these rules are supposed to interact? What's the circumstance?

you reckless spellcast and combine an obvious combat spell ie blast, ball lighting, against the same target/group that will be a target of the above listed spells.

I'd say it's allowable as the above spells aren't targeted. It's different than reckless casting 2 Lightning Bolts at the same person.

by the missions faq there is no distinction between single targets and AOE's. the same person isn't allowed to throw two grenades at the same target, or cast two blast spells at the same target

Is there a distinction between a damage effect and a debuff effect?

Also you certainly could throw two grenades at slightly different pieces of ground and hurt the same enemy. Which would be the thing to do, because aiming a grenade at a thing that can dodge is hilariously dumb under these rules.

Same thing applies to AOE spells. You drop them in an area, and if a person in that area is affected by more than 1, it's because they're under the template, as it were, not because they were targeted.

Can you even use two grenades in the same pass? I'm not sure the analogy works.

[ikarinokami]

well I suppose that is the question is a debuff an attack?

[happybjorn]

Is there a distinction between a damage effect and a debuff effect?

Also you certainly could throw two grenades at slightly different pieces of ground and hurt the same enemy. Which would be the thing to do, because aiming a grenade at a thing that can dodge is hilariously dumb under these rules.

Same thing applies to AOE spells. You drop them in an area, and if a person in that area is affected by more than 1, it's because they're under the template, as it were, not because they were targeted.

Can you even use two grenades in the same pass? I'm not sure the analogy works.

Some games make the distinction, I haven't noticed that SR5 does.  Even if it did it would be problematic, since sustaining anything is a status effect (you couldn't reckless a sustained buff spell on yourself and a ball lightning, as you'd be attacking yourself by that definition).

The real problem is that attack action isn't defined.  I sincerely doubt a targeted vs. not targeted distinction would hold up to scrutiny (not saying that others necessarily would), but it is a possible interpretation (and can be made to work).

Are the grenades used with a Throw Weapon action?  If so, you can potentially throw... more than 2...

[Whiskeyjack]

well I suppose that is the question is a debuff an attack?

I don't think it is any more than targeting the ground next to someone with two grenades constitutes two attacks on the same person.

It's weird, because you don't roll to dodge debuffs (single target or AOE), you roll to resist their effects if you're the target or in the AOE.

[PiXeL01]

The easy answer would be to say that yes, debuffs are attacks as they hamper your targets' abilities.
Saying you are attacking the ground instead of the person is just circumventing the rules in my book and I wouldn't allow that either.
As RAW you cannot attack the same person twice during the same action. Putting an enemy within two damaging or debugging AoEs would count as attacking that person twice, so nope you can't do that.

[ikarinokami]

The easy answer would be to say that yes, debuffs are attacks as they hamper your targets' abilities.
Saying you are attacking the ground instead of the person is just circumventing the rules in my book and I wouldn't allow that either.
As RAW you cannot attack the same person twice during the same action. Putting an enemy within two damaging or debugging AoEs would count as attacking that person twice, so nope you can't do that.

I think that's probably correct.

how about something like mana static , ice sheet or a smoke grenade, where the debuff is largely incidental, and the effect is actually localized to an area and persists even whether or not a target/or targets are present?

[ScytheKnight]

The simple answer to all this...

RG1: NO ACTION PHASE
ATTACK LIMIT
The idea of keeping the attacks to one Simple Action
per Action Phase was based on keeping the action
spread out across all the players and keeping combat
moving. If a gamemaster wants to increase the number
of shots a character can take on their turn, and thus the
number of rolls and amount of table time they get to
use, this rule option can be used to ignore the “One Attack
action per Action Phase” attached to most ranged
attack tests. This optional rule eliminates the limitations
on the Simple Actions that can be taken. It’s highly recommended
that if this option is taken, Cumulative Recoil
should be given extra attention, as the modifiers
will add up fast and act as a balance to nonstop shooting.
This rule has no effect on melee combat, as melee
attacks require Complex Actions