[Senko]

I prefer just to houserule a no myself allowing for common sense/quality. If the mage is chanting/casting then you can notice that, if a giant fireball has appeared you'll need to be really out of it to miss that, other spells that create a visible effect you can notice that depending on its nature. However you wont notice magic if the spirits on the astral plane you wont be aware of it, if its a subtle spell e.g. invisbility you wont notice it and so on.

Now the exception is if you take my magic sensative quality a mere 4 karma and that gives you the ability to feel the ghostly chills/hair on the back of your neck, perception checks mentioned in this thread for subtle spells. It gives non-magic pc's a way to sense magic and allows for judicious use of magic sensative people at high security locations. You walk past a rentcop at a low level government building using invisiblity you're pretty much guaranteed to be safe as he wont notice if you're dancing along doing invisible rabbit ears behind him on his rounds. On the other hand that elite corpsec guard on a black facility will either have mage support or have been carefully selected to be someone with magic sensativity and trained so if he does get that "someone walked over my grave" feeling he hits the alarm just in case. Then with the response there'll be a proper mage to actually check if it was a false positive or there was something going on.

I'm honestly not sure about the cost for this given its limited nature I may drop it to 2 or 3 and maybe take on a GM approval required to simulate its only a small part of the population say 1% like magic users.

EDIT
Oh and before anyone asks you can notice your own mind being influenced (not necessarily will but can) and you may notice excessive changes in other people's behaviour like oh say the by the book officer suddenly lunging for the emergency fire all tube button. You wont necessarily know its magic but you can notice significant and sudden behaviour changes in others.

[ShadowcatX]

Given that your interpretation of the rule invalidates 1/6th of all spellcasting, I'd hesitate to call someone else's interpretation weak.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

Given that your interpretation of the rule invalidates 1/6th of all spellcasting, I'd hesitate to call someone else's interpretation weak.

Which sixth is that? the aforementioned straw man assertion that Illusion magic is worthless if someone might be able to detect that there's some kind of unspecified magic nearby?

And yeah, it's objectively a weak argument to say that the F-6 rule applies only to Wards on the basis of Wards being the example given for such a time F-6 applies.

[ShadowcatX]

Not a strawman at all. It is significantly neutered if not entirely useless.

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

I'll agree that using sneaking skill becomes a lot more attractive than just solely relying on invisibility, but A) that's a good thing for game balance and B) we'll just have to agree to disagree that being tipped off that something "magic" is apparently going on nearby makes invisibility useless.  Where a malicious GM might use what you're calling "my interpretation" to screw over a player, I'm not prepared to agree that's a premise we should be using. 

For one, a malicious GM can just kill a runner at any time via the "Rocks Fall, you all Die" method or by something much more mundane like an undetectable sniper from hundreds of meters away dealing an undodgeable hit of sufficient DV that the runner won't be able to soak it all.  If a GM wants to screw a player over, how you read the rules on 280-281 are in practical terms irrelevant.  And for two: let's go ahead and presume that GMs are operating under the intended playstyle that they should be objective AND that the runners are "supposed to win".    Ergo, under "fair or reasonable GMing" even when mundanes might detect the proximity of magic a probable worst case scenario is a mook is trained to go hit a button and report he had bad mojo vibes.  A security mage comes on out to investigate, and if your invisible shadowrunners are still there when he arrives or are unable to handle the appearance of an astral security element your infiltration plan sucked anyway.

[Senko]

I just want to point out in regards to your sneaking skill/game balance argument a mage is already a very heavy karma cost character to play without adding in extra skills that have to be extremely higher (going by usual recommended dice pools on this site).

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

I just want to point out in regards to your sneaking skill/game balance argument a mage is already a very heavy karma cost character to play without adding in extra skills that have to be extremely higher (going by usual recommended dice pools on this site).

What I was getting at is the mundane characters benefit when magic suffers.   If mages do everything best, isn't that obviously a game balance issue?  Is it really for the best if someone with Invisibility out-sneaks the Covert Ops Specialist? Someone with Manipulation spells out Face's the Face?

Noticing magic is actually a pretty fair (IMO) mechanic that makes mundanes more competitive/compelling to play.

[Reaver]

Xenon!

Good to see you back on the forums again! You have been missed.



As always guys, the rules are there as a template for you to use (or abuse) at your leisure. A strict, narrow view of the rules is only needed (perhaps) for tournament play.

And even then, I think context would matter as to if a test was needed. While some sustained and quickened spells would be obvious (armor), others could be very subtle (improved Charisma). Where does the NPCs get to test? Or the players? (Good for the goose is good for the gander, remember?).


I know where and when I apply this rule at my table, and I follow where MY GM uses this rule at his.

[Marcus]

Good lord you guys are busy. Can't a guy have a nice dinner party without the thread going ever where.

I'm think I'm reasonably experienced as a GM and as a player, I can see a fair amount of the immediate effects of changing the interpretation of the magic perceptions rules. But I won't pretend that i have clue what over all effect could be, other then I believe it will be far reaching.

I can tell you right now the illusion change is not a strawman, it will seriously directly weaken any and all subtle application of magic in a very real and serous way. It will negate the usefulness of at-least one full meta-magic tree and maybe more. We have for a very long time always recommend invisibility/improved as one best practice spell, and will render that spell utterly useless. Those are all very serous changes to the game. If you think otherwise you are kidding yourself.

You guys argue this complex, it's really not, this is a binary question. You ether agree that without other rare interference, you cannot detect spells except when they are being cast, based up on the RAW use of performing. Or go the other direction and then it will get very complex, if you don't then it's business as usual.
 
So make your choice Runners. If you go for the way Xenon, Sphinx and SSDR, have recommended then figure out how your gonna handle the longer term ramifications of that choice.  I do think the aura contact work around is your best bet, but you will have find a range figure that will work.

[Xenon]

Xenon!

Good to see you back on the forums again! You have been missed.

Thank you!

Doesn't seem as if the topics changed much for the last 4 years ;-)

So make your choice Runners. If you go for the way Xenon...

I am still neutral in this topic and just cited RAW. Please don't confuse that with what I personally believe (or not) or how we treat things at our table. This is the second time I am telling you.

I agree that each table have to decide for themselves since the book seem to be ambiguous on the matter. The options in this topic seem to be:

you cannot detect spells except when they are being cast

1. That you are only allowed to take the Perception + Intuition (Skill rating - Force) [Mental] Test to notice twitchy fingers when someone is actually casting a spell (because of the word "Performing").

It is clear that the victim of a subtle manipulation spell can notice it...
It is clear that you in this edition can notice magic that is being cast...

2. That you can take the Perception + Intuition (Skill rating - Force) [Mental] Test to not only notice "twitchy fingers" when someone is casting a spell but also to Notice Magic (or the the "Bad Vibes") you get when "you are the victim of a manipulation spell" (because both cases are explicitly described in SR5).

This is a strict reading of RAW.

Mundanes get a Perception Test to notice magic in the same room with them, or within about 10 meters in a large space or outdoors.

You get a #2 if the ghosting spirit comes "close" to the observer, however "close" is defined.

3. That you should take the Perception + Intuition (Skill rating - Force) [Mental] Test to not only notice "twitchy fingers" when someone is casting a spell but also at any time when "your aura get in close contact with Magic when there is a Magic Skill involved" (because "physical beings may sense when an astral form passes through their aura" and because "people have reported feeling chills, dread, or other unnatural sensations they can’t quite put their finger on when magic is in the area" and because in cases where a Magic Skill is not involved the book state that you should use (6 - Force) instead).

While I like this reading, it have to be supplemented with house rules for distance and that you can sense magic that does not necessarily have an astral form (which is fine as long as one don't advertise it as RAW).

It should be noted that the test you take for "noticing magic" (not only "noticing magic as it is being cast") is just a regular perception test (p. 135)

I think context would matter as to if a test was needed.

4. Or that you can take the Perception + Intuition (Skill rating - Force) [Mental] Test to notice magic "when a Magic Skill is involved" whenever the GM tell you to (because according to the book this is a perception test mundanes can take to "notice magic" in general, not a limited test to only notice "twitchy fingers").

Depending on your reading this is also RAW.

[Marcus]

So make your choice Runners. If you go for the way Xenon...

I am still neutral in this topic and just cited RAW. Please don't confuse that with what I personally believe (or not) or how we treat things at our table. This is the second time I am telling you.

I asked you, you answered in something like three paragraphs that it was so complex you apparently couldn't answer. Which given that the question was binary I found to pretty amusing. So unless you want to change your position and give a up or down answer, I think your response already made it pretty clear where you stand.

So claim neutrality, lack of opinion, or whatever you feel like calling it.  I already said everything I needed too on this topic. I'm confident the vast majority will stick the traditional interpretation, and I hope those poor few who ultimately go the other way come up with workable solutions for their tables.  I have a couple theories on how that will ultimately go, and I suspect the result will actually be fairly tragic, I think people will end up just forcing the perception Target to be 6 and casting whatever they feel with even less restraint then we have now. But as that will cost reagents and involve a high point quality I could easily be wrong. 

[mbisber]

So, I've looked through the posts twice on this topic. While the F-6 equation (p.280) was, no doubt, well-intended, it's wording and description is unfortunate.

Like some such equations in SR, it's a generality for flavor. In the first place, what's so sacrosanct about F-6 in a Magic context!? Why not F-5 or F-7? Is it just arbitrary or is there an explanation? If it is arbitrary, then GMs should just house-rule their sentiments in one way or another, up or down. If there is an explanation, then let's have it!

While it may be comforting to have arbitrary rules in RPGs, I am playing Shadowrun rather than D&D, because I like rules to make more sense rather than less.

Then there are words like obvious, noticing, performing, spotting, etc. All of these terms are mostly visual. Please explain to me how smell, hearing, touch, and taste are all related to F-6?

It is not my purpose to go through the posts here, idea by idea, or even limit addressing Perception to visual. If one looks at Concealment, p.395, it subtracts dice for all senses. So, the equation on p.280 is, as I say, unfortunate.

Like many equations in SR, there are words/variables often left out, which may be found elsewhere. Sometimes 'Counterspelling' appears in spell equations and  sometimes it does not; but it is almost always implicit.

I'm sure that there are other words/variables missing in SR equations elsewhere as well. But, in my opinion, if Magic causes shimmer, chills, dread, etc. then why do we have something called Assensing?

[Marcus]

Some very good points MB. Sadly i doubt your logical will make will give the other side pause.
I fear as with many topics the question may have become more Ideological then Logical.

[Xenon]

Why not F-5 or F-7? Is it just arbitrary or is there an explanation?

As with all perception tests (this is really just a perception test) the GM decide on a threshold to notice some small detail or something interesting.

Higher force make it more obvious for the character that something is not right (the sensation is pretty vague though... twitchy fingers, shimmer in the air, bad vibes etc... we are not talking about neon signs or spotlights - we are not talking about astral perception or astral projection).

If you are asking about the number 6 specifically you have to ask the author, but: Getting strange vibes or notice the markings when you entering a ward with force 2 (or if an astral form pass through your aura) will be as hard to notice as a secret door, needle in a haystack or subvocal speech. A force 3 will be as hard to notice as an item dropped under table, contact lens or whispering. A force 4 would be rather easy to spot - such as a street sign, pedestrian, conversation or silenced gunfire. A force 5 or higher ward will be very easy to notice, even for a mundane. Magic in this edition is rarely subtle.

Then there are words like obvious, noticing, performing, spotting, etc. All of these terms are mostly visual.

Actually when noticing magic they are mostly using words such slightly breathless, chills, dread, tingling sensation, "bad vibes" or other unnatural sensations.

The two exceptions that the above that seem to be related to sight and not a "feeling that something is wrong" are:
1. "twitchy fingers" when a magician is casting a spell and
2. "cause the air to shimmer" from spirits in the astral.

why do we have something called Assensing?

While a character with only normal perception can get a vague feeling of slight breathless or chills or whatever when an astral form pass through their aura (if they are successful with a threshold 4 perception test) an awakened character can use astral perception and clearly "see" Astral Forms (without taking a test at all).

In addition to this Assensing can also be used to Observe auras in Detail to find out the emotional state, class of spells, force, magic rating, essence rating and presence of implants, diseases or toxins etc.

Normal Perception getting "Bad Vibes" when magic is in the area does not really replace Astral Perception...

[Stainless Steel Devil Rat]

So, I've looked through the posts twice on this topic. While the F-6 equation (p.280) was, no doubt, well-intended, it's wording and description is unfortunate.

Like some such equations in SR, it's a generality for flavor. In the first place, what's so sacrosanct about F-6 in a Magic context!? Why not F-5 or F-7? Is it just arbitrary or is there an explanation? If it is arbitrary, then GMs should just house-rule their sentiments in one way or another, up or down. If there is an explanation, then let's have it!

While it may be comforting to have arbitrary rules in RPGs, I am playing Shadowrun rather than D&D, because I like rules to make more sense rather than less.

Then there are words like obvious, noticing, performing, spotting, etc. All of these terms are mostly visual. Please explain to me how smell, hearing, touch, and taste are all related to F-6?

It is not my purpose to go through the posts here, idea by idea, or even limit addressing Perception to visual. If one looks at Concealment, p.395, it subtracts dice for all senses. So, the equation on p.280 is, as I say, unfortunate.

Like many equations in SR, there are words/variables often left out, which may be found elsewhere. Sometimes 'Counterspelling' appears in spell equations and  sometimes it does not; but it is almost always implicit.

You have your opinions and you're entitled to them.  They don't change what the rules say, though.

I'm sure that there are other words/variables missing in SR equations elsewhere as well. But, in my opinion, if Magic causes shimmer, chills, dread, etc. then why do we have something called Assensing?

Kind of a tangent, but Assensing isn't a duplication of Perception for the Astral.

This skill allows practitioners
to learn information by reading astral auras.

Ergo, if something is hidden/hard to see you'd still use Perception to see it.  The Numinous specialization of Perception would be relevant for spotting hidden Magicky things, btw (SR5 pg 314.  Also note this citation is also directly referring the relevancy to the rules on pg 280-281).  THEN you'd use Assensing to "read" what it is/means.   It's just that most living and magical things are hard to hide in astral, but sometimes you can indeed hide an elephant amid other elephants.