NEWS

Magic and Vehicles

  • 19 Replies
  • 8356 Views

ZeConster

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2557
« Reply #15 on: <07-08-14/0845:08> »
In the podcast, the HiddenGrid, the GM deemed that the Force of the spell has to equal the vehicles Body.
That seems a bit overkill for a spell that doesn't actually affect the vehicle, just everyone's perception of it, especially since Body can vary wildly for vehicles in the same category.

Mirikon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8986
  • "Everybody lies." --House
« Reply #16 on: <07-08-14/0901:04> »
Before adding in any of these requirements, first ask whether they are actually needed? In most cases where there are size/Force requirements to a spell, it is because you are affecting the actual object. By this standard, why would you need to add things in? For most people posting here, it seems that they just get squicky with the idea of the mage being able to 'cloak' the rigger's van temporarily. Never mind that making any vehicle invisible inside a city is in itself an inherently dangerous way to do business. Think about how many vehicles, drones, aircraft, and all manner of obstructions there are in a city. Now picture if none of those things could see you coming. Sure, they might not intentionally turn in front of you, but they can't see you, so they're going to make that left-hand turn across your lane, and so on. And outside the sprawl, Invisibility doesn't do anything to you kicking up a dust cloud. Using this spell on a vehicle for anything more than emergency measures is like casting Wish in D&D. Your GM's eyes should tear up in glee.

To further prove my point, look at Vehicle Mask in Street Grimoire. No Force or size requirements, other than the fact that you can't make a Bulldog look like a Scorpion.
Greataxe - Apply directly to source of problem, repeat as needed.

My Characters

Ishmell

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 55
  • Don't be silly, everything has a melting point.
« Reply #17 on: <07-09-14/0110:07> »
So, one could cast Invs or Imp Invs with a car (or anything living or non-living) as a target without anything further needed? Shouldn't it be more draining to cast it on a car than a person, due to size? If I misunderstood or am not getting something would you, please, provide an example?
Yes, you could simply cast Invisibilty or Improved Invisibility on a car without anything further needed. No, it isn't more draining to cast it on a car than a person, size or no. For spells that physically affect the vehicle (Increase Body, Levitate, etc.) you would need to get a higher Force to affect it. For illusion spells, you wouldn't have to, for the same reason you don't have to beat the car's OR, but the OR of any cameras trying to view the car. You aren't actually changing the car at all, you're wrapping it in a field that is the same as pulling up a sheet and saying "You can't see me." And, if you roll well enough, they can't.

By this logic could you turn a building invisible?

"Dude wheres my house?" --Top grossing movie of 2045
Majored in mechanics at law school.

Mirikon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8986
  • "Everybody lies." --House
« Reply #18 on: <07-09-14/0800:47> »
Technically, yes. But remember that buildings don't move (usually). But it would be phenomenally stupid to do, since the building doesn't move, and the spell doesn't remove the knowledge that the building exists. The local security provider will get a free PR piece once they bring in a mage to counterspell it. In a sprawl, that's a public nuisance at best. The only use for something like that would be to make a black research facility out in country literally disappear, probably with a Quickened version of the spell. The problem being, though, that it would be immediately obvious on the astral or through other senses that something was up, like how you know a strike is incoming when someone sets up jamming.

There is no good way to conceal an entire building in the middle of a sprawl. In the Barrens or in rural areas (or even a park, if you wanted) an illusion that changed the entrance to a building to be something else would be your best bet. Likely a static version of Trid Phantasm. Say there was an underground bunker under the park. Put a Quickened Trid Phantasm to make the entrance look like a rock formation (bonus points if it really is shaped like a rock formation, and you are disguising the presence of a door). In a rural area, a wide-area illusion could change the terrain so that the compound looks to be part of the forest. However, again that will make it even more noticeable on the astral. Hiding it behind a ward would also tell astral viewers that something was there, but not what. However, you do it in an area with few spellcasters, and most people would never know the facility was there, except rumors when people see black helicopters disappearing into the woods.
Greataxe - Apply directly to source of problem, repeat as needed.

My Characters

Voxel

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 1
« Reply #19 on: <07-09-14/1234:28> »
Maybe I'm looking at this from the wrong angle, but if object resistance is indeed a factor for casting spells on vehicles/drones/random guy's smg, why cast the spell on the object when you can make a preparation that acts as the spell anchor and completely avoids having to do anything directly to the 'target' itself?  Then again, I could be just trying to find more reasons to use enchanting.
'It turns out I'm an elf instead of a human.  That means I have crazy good looks, excellent motor skills, and an indefinite lifespan.  I plan on stretching that last one out awhile.  These immortal assholes need some perspective.'