Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Rules and such => Topic started by: Tyrs13 on <11-17-10/2002:09>
-
Ok me and my friends are relatively new to shadow run ... and i have alot of questions about my Mage and my Friends Adept.
1) What is considered a Material Link for finding someone? Street magic was listing tables of items they "Owned". Is this just an Astral Tracking check?
2) Reading the Warding/mana barrier rules it only tells me what i need to do to create a ward ... how do i create a mana barrier?
3) Ritual magic ... what is it?
4) Summoning? .... you can include the Search power in there as well.
5) What can spirits do?
6) Astral Signatures: What can one do with one?
7) Overall what to watch out for as being a mage.
8) Masking + Flexible signature = You cant tell i am a Mage?
9) Camouflaged individuals and Astral Perceiving. There was some assassin with some crazy camouflaged armor in a dark room. Can i use Astral Sight to see him (Life Forms Glow) and cast spells at him (In same room starring at him just Astrally). Based on what me and my GM read we went with it but was it right?
10) How does casting on multiple Initiative passes work? Post are confusing me by splitting dice pool ... how does that work?
Over i am pretty much over looked which is cool but i would like a challenge. I guess i am 2 careful being a mage ... but i think that we just dont know what to do with mages in general compared to the rest of the party.
Ready for the Adept :P
1) We read somewhere in street magic about a rule to substute Meta Magic for Power points. Is this 2 ... i will say Dangerous by mean OP?
2) Elemental attack + killing hands + smoke = Lethal Damage that bypasses Armor?
-
1) What is considered a Material Link for finding someone? Street magic was listing tables of items they "Owned". Is this just an Astral Tracking check?
2) Reading the Warding/mana barrier rules it only tells me what i need to do to create a ward ... how do i create a mana barrier?
3) Ritual magic ... what is it?
4) Summoning? .... you can include the Search power in there as well.
5) What can spirits do?
6) Astral Signatures: What can one do with one?
7) Overall what to watch out for as being a mage.
8) Masking + Flexible signature = You cant tell i am a Mage?
9) Camouflaged individuals and Astral Perceiving. There was some assassin with some crazy camouflaged armor in a dark room. Can i use Astral Sight to see him (Life Forms Glow) and cast spells at him (In same room starring at him just Astrally). Based on what me and my GM read we went with it but was it right?
10) How does casting on multiple Initiative passes work? Post are confusing me by splitting dice pool ... how does that work?
Order of operations in the below is important, do not skip steps or attempt this in a different order. This is the basics, understand this, then, if you have specific questions, ask away.
1. Street Magic, pg. 28 and 29.
2. SR4A, pg. 194, 211
3. SR4A, pg. 185, Street Magic, pg. 28, 29
4. SR4A, pg. 186 - 188, 297
5. SR4A, pg. 186 - 190, 302, 303, Street Magic pg. 89 - 110
6. SR4A, pg. 192 - 194
7. SR4A, Street Magic, Running Wild
8. Yeah, pretty much. SR4A, pg. 198, Street Magic, pg. 60, item 6, again.
9. No. Item 6. SR4A, pg. 183 (Step 3)
10. Casting a spell is a complex action, each Initiative Pass (IP) on which you have a Pass, you can cast a spell. You only split your Dice Pool (DP) if you want to cast multiple spells with a single complex action, on a single IP. SR4A, pg. 192 - 183.
Adept will be adressed later.
-
What Chaemera said^^. He's spot on. I would like to provide a few short notes on the adept bits.
...
Ready for the Adept :P
1) We read somewhere in street magic about a rule to substute Meta Magic for Power points. Is this 2 ... i will say Dangerous by mean OP?
2) Elemental attack + killing hands + smoke = Lethal Damage that bypasses Armor?
1. Many many people use this optional rule, I wouldn't say it is Overpowered, however, it is very dependent on your particular game and power curve of your gaming table. I would say either A) give it a try, and if it doesn't work out - either retire the character, or do some math and back pedal a bit on the power points he gained; or B) dont allow it, and if/when the adept is trailing far behind the power curve and feels useless, grant him however many extra power points he would have gotten if you were using the rule; or C) try 0.5 Power points per initiation rank. ;) In my experience, it is not OP.
2. That seems to be the consensus - yes. However, I'll wait for someone else to confirm or deny that one, because I doubt that is the intent of said rules, but by RAW it seems valid. :o
-
Onward to the adept!
1) We read somewhere in street magic about a rule to substute Meta Magic for Power points. Is this 2 ... i will say Dangerous by mean OP?
2) Elemental attack + killing hands + smoke = Lethal Damage that bypasses Armor?
1. You'll find the optional rule you're talking about in Street Magic, pg. 31, "Tweaking the Rules" sidebar. I've played with this as a thought experiment b/c I looked at the metamagics and said "meh". If I were a player with an adept and didn't have this optional rule, I'd probably wonder why I didn't go cyber/bio and play a street sam instead. That being said, I've not had a heavily initiated adept in a party sporting more power points than he has magic, so maybe it ends up getting top heavy the 3rd or 4th time he initiates.
2. Um. . . . looks that way, sadly. If you chose smoke as your "element". I'll re-iterate what I said here (http://forums.shadowrun4.com/index.php?topic=1367.msg15365#msg15365), smoke is not an element, don't make me hurt you. Then again, like many GM's, I often take the approach of "sure, you can use the cheese, just remember, I know the cheese, too". I find it brings the amount of cheese down to an acceptable level, even if I disagree with the very idea of smoke = element.
-
At least it's not as bad as old AD&D.
Vacuum elementals. I kid you not.
-
At least it's not as bad as old AD&D.
Vacuum elementals. I kid you not.
Were they in the Fiend Folio? MM2? LOL! I don't remember them, but that doesn't mean they weren't there!
-
I think they popped up in one of the Dragon or Dungeon magazines, but honestly I couldn't say. I didn't run the critter, I just stared agape at it.
-
Oh okay. I played back in the AD&D days, still have most of those books in a box somewhere I think too. Along with some old Dragon magazines and modules. Was wracking my brain trying to remember that one and why I didn't use it!
-
Vacuum elemental.
Seriously? Seriously!
A guy used one to destroy the planet his group was on (no, he wasn't the DM).
-
I think they popped up in one of the Dragon or Dungeon magazines, but honestly I couldn't say. I didn't run the critter, I just stared agape at it.
Back in the days where Dragon and Dungeon magazines were third party rather than owned by the D&D IP owners. Stuff out of those magazines had a rather large tendency to be crazy OP. Now that both magazines are online publications of WoTC its a LITTLE better, no earth destroying elementals, but still the occasional "what the hell were they thinking" moment.
-
Want Vacuum Elementals? Wait for Equinox. ;P
-
I think they popped up in one of the Dragon or Dungeon magazines, but honestly I couldn't say. I didn't run the critter, I just stared agape at it.
Back in the days where Dragon and Dungeon magazines were third party rather than owned by the D&D IP owners. Stuff out of those magazines had a rather large tendency to be crazy OP. Now that both magazines are online publications of WoTC its a LITTLE better, no earth destroying elementals, but still the occasional "what the hell were they thinking" moment.
Wait. What?
Dungeon & Dragon were always owned by TSR/WotC. Paizo only took over publication for the magazines from 2002 to 2007 after WotC let the Periodicals department go from the company, allowing them to form Paizo as an outside company. They still had to answer to WotC on articles and material printed since they were only leasing the IP from WotC.
-
I think he's referring to the 3rd party contributors. (I hope he's referring to the 3rd party contributors.)
-
Still, even the third party contributors were hired to write the articles for the magazines. They weren't in the habit of publishing anything without looking at it. Everything was reviewed by the hire ups prior to publishing because the magazines MADE the subject of the article official in the D&D rules/content.
-
If that's true of world crushing elementals then someone dropped the ball somewhere. And it seemed to happen much more back in the day.
-
The elementals didn't kill the world. It's what the guy did with them (evacuated a magic tube then hyper-accelerated a stoneskin protected stone to significant percentages of C before leaving the plane and allowing it to smash into the planet, destroying the ecosystem).
-
There are so many problems with that idea I think I'll stick with the obvious one: "and the DM let this work?"
-
And the answer is "yes".
I've heard too many stories of GMs/DMs simply accepting the insanely random not to just shrug and accept it every time someone tells me about the "really cool time" someone "did something completely stupid and broken". It's SOP for most RP groups.
-
Vacuum Elementals Suck!
someone had to do it... :-[
-
Heh!
Anyway the DM didn't see it coming. He didn't figure out what the guy was doing until he ported to another plane and let the object strike the planet. Which he had calculated would strike at a speed of about 0.1 C when he left.
I think it pierced to the mantle.
-
Vacuum elementals...when AD&D had all its Inner and Outer planes and their interactions, they were from a spot where the Plane of Air brushed up against the Negative Material Plane, pretty sure.
There were other mixes, and para-elementals, and stuff. Magma, ash, salt, dust, mud, steam...the mixes of different planes, and the Positive and Negative planes too.
Terrible, terrible good times.
-
9) Camouflaged individuals and Astral Perceiving. There was some assassin with some crazy camouflaged armor in a dark room. Can i use Astral Sight to see him (Life Forms Glow) and cast spells at him (In same room starring at him just Astrally). Based on what me and my GM read we went with it but was it right?
9. No. Item 6. SR4A, pg. 183 (Step 3)
I have to disagree with the answer for no. 9 (unless I am misreading it). It states in step three of pg. 183. SR4A "An astrally perceiving (or otherwise dual-natured) magician can cast spells on a target in either the physical world or in astral space." So in the situation that he gives he would be able to cast the spell on the camouflaged assassin, but visibility modifiers would apply, etc.
-
The camoflaged guy is camoflaged on the physical plane. His living aura shines like a beacon on the astral plane. Unless he has some serious masking going on, he can be seen and attacked with astral perception (albeit with a -2 penalty).
-
@Mordoyh
Read the line immediately before the one you quoted:
Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted).
Emphasis mine.
So, you can see his aura, but you can't target his aura with a spell from the astral, in other words, you know where he is, but don't have meat line of sight.
Also:
A metahuman spellcaster can target anyone or anything she can see directly with her natural vision.
You have to see the target on the plane you are attacking him on. This is necessary to create the mystical link.
However, knowing where he is using astral perception, you could cast an indirect spell in the meat (-2 penalty) at a point in space where his aura says he should be (-6 for firing at what you can't see) for a total -8 die pool. Which, perhaps, is what the OP meant. However, it's a very bad solution to the problem. Just gas the room.
-
The camoflaged guy is camoflaged on the physical plane. His living aura shines like a beacon on the astral plane. Unless he has some serious masking going on, he can be seen and attacked with astral perception (albeit with a -2 penalty).
-8 penalty, you can't see him (just his aura) so you have the -2 (physical action while astrally perceiving) and -6 blind-fire (you don't see him).
But yes, my original answer is not 100% accurate, assuming you are talking about an indirect spell. Direct spell must be have a mystic link established via line of sight (unless it's a touch spell) on the plane you're casting.
-
Incorrect. You see his aura just fine. You are using astral perception not astral projection. Astral perception keeps you on the same plane (the physical) but gives you some nifty extra senses. Trying to sync those senses up with the physical produces some difficulties (literally, the -2).
He can fire away, but also, since the mage is using astral perception, he can't use the physical bonuses he might have had. Namely things like smartlink or laser sights, as they have no astral counterpart (none visible enough to count, anyway).
EDIT: Also, the mage can't use indirect sensing means, such as full goggles that replace vision (like those nifty night vision goggles the spec ops guys always seem to wear).
-
Incorrect. You see his aura just fine. You are using astral perception not astral projection. Astral perception keeps you on the same plane (the physical) but gives you some nifty extra senses. Trying to sync those senses up with the physical produces some difficulties (literally, the -2).
He can fire away, but also, since the mage is using astral perception, he can't use the physical bonuses he might have had. Namely things like smartlink or laser sights, as they have no astral counterpart (none visible enough to count, anyway).
EDIT: Also, the mage can't use indirect sensing means, such as full goggles that replace vision (like those nifty night vision goggles the spec ops guys always seem to wear).
The Blind Fire modifier applies when the attacker attempts to hit a target that is completely obscured by cover, total darkness, or undetectable by sight.
Astral perception is not sight, it is a separate sense, the blind fire penalty applies.
I have already laid out, repeatedly, the rules for targeting a spell via an aura with a direct spell (you cannot do it). An astrally perceiving character is dual natured, his senses on the astral apply to targeting spells on the astral. His senses in the meat apply to targeting spells in the meat. Otherwise, they wouldn't say "you cannot target an astral aura". I'm not going to site that one because I already have multiple times.
When you find a line that says "Though you cannot target an astral aura, you may use an astral aura to establish LOS in the physical world for targeting a direct spell", get back to me.
It states in step three of pg. 183. SR4A "An astrally perceiving (or otherwise dual-natured) magician can cast spells on a target in either the physical world or in astral space." So in the situation that he gives he would be able to cast the spell on the camouflaged assassin, but visibility modifiers would apply, etc.
Yes, a dual-natured magician can target astrally or physically, but he has to have a valid mystic link via line of sight or touch. Astral auras are specifically sited as something that cannot be targeted, in other words, they do not provide a valid line of sight in the meat.
-
So how about casting an indirect spell with area effect just on a point near the astrally perceived aura? Maybe a point the mage can see?
-
So how about casting an indirect spell with area effect just on a point near the astrally perceived aura? Maybe a point the mage can see?
He actually illustrated that scenario; -2 for assensing, -6 for blind fire. I see Chaemera's point.
So really, they should be me. I'm shapeshifter, dual-natured (no -2 for assensing), and I have natural low-light vision. And for those special situations of "pitch black" I carry a low-light flash light. Of course, I'm also fond of casting touch spells, so I'd just close on the guy....maybe bite him just for fun. :P
-
And Chaemera is still wrong. Spell casting requires one to see the aura of the target. While casting, the mage briefly makes contact with the astral in order to sync up his aura with his target(s) and the spell jumps from mage to target(s). Astral perception allows direct view of the aura, modified by things like cover, as normal, but a living aura glows brightly. This allows a mage to cast even in pitch black darkness.
The mage simply has to perceive his target, not see it (blind fire pertains to physical attacks). If blindfolded, the mage can target anything or anyone he is touching, for example, because he knows the target is there. He does not incur a "blind fire" penalty, because he isn't using physical sight. One could grant a penalty based upon how much is touching, similar to visibility modifiers.
-
Um, Gun Nut, he may not be wrong:
Line of Sight (LOS): The spell can target anything the caster can physically see or assense, regardless of the distance (see p. 173, SR4). The caster may not target anything that is completely behind cover or otherwise obscured. Since the caster only needs to see part of the target, a Perception Test may be necessary to see if the caster can spot enough of the target to cast. Visibility modifiers apply to the Spellcasting Test. Note that full body armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them from being targeted.
-
I say dust off and nuke them all from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
-
And Chaemera is still wrong. Spell casting requires one to see the aura of the target. While casting, the mage briefly makes contact with the astral in order to sync up his aura with his target(s) and the spell jumps from mage to target(s). Astral perception allows direct view of the aura, modified by things like cover, as normal, but a living aura glows brightly. This allows a mage to cast even in pitch black darkness.
The mage simply has to perceive his target, not see it (blind fire pertains to physical attacks). If blindfolded, the mage can target anything or anyone he is touching, for example, because he knows the target is there. He does not incur a "blind fire" penalty, because he isn't using physical sight. One could grant a penalty based upon how much is touching, similar to visibility modifiers.
Gun Nut, when you find a rule that countermands the blatant statement:
though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted
You must visual / assensing perception of either their body or their astral form.
I don't mean to be rude, but you need to provide direct quote to a rule that says you can target via an aura. I'm not willing to accept your word that the RAW doesn't say what it says in the quote above. Provide the rules that support your claim, don't call me wrong until you do. If you can find them, you have my apologies, but until then, the only RAW we have to go by is what I quoted above.
-
Guys, let's keep it professional.
As for the spell targeting rules, i'm going to use Earthdawn rules for astral conduit as guidelines. Those are good enough - you need to see the target, or have other means of accurate pinpointing his location - like touching him in pitch-black darkness. There's a neat ED rule that also states, that you can place a AoE spell's center on your fingertips. And Smelling/Hearing/Sensing with radar/echolocation/other kind of indirect sense is not allowed - you only smell the molecule trail, hear the sounds generated, and such. You can try casting a physical AoE spell, and hope it will be enough, but not any other kind, as you only make a guess where your target is.
But i would allow to target someone'a aura using Astral Perception (not projection), if the target is hiding in darkness, or soft, non-solid cover (camo net). But only if the mage detects him with a successfull Perception test...
-
Well, this is a case of new rules blatantly changing how the setting works from one edition to the next. For nigh 20 years, all a caster needed was the aura of the target, since that was what he was targetting in the first place, and not the physical body, with direct spells. This was even commented and utilized ad infinitum in all the magic supplements (Magic in the Shadows, Awakenings, and what not). Hell, this idea is even still supported by touch spells; all one needs to do is connect the auras for the touch to work.
So, why the change now? And one that doesn't make a lot of sense given the way spells connect in the first place (aura to aura)? This also trashes the notion of direct spells bypassing armor in the first place, since they ground themselves into the aura of the target to do damage. It's also why mana spells have no effect on non-living things, as they have no aura to be ground into, and physical spells have to overcome the inherrent resistance of the object.
Why on earth would anyone reverse the metaphysics of how their magic system works, when it worked just fine (and made a modicum of sense) for two decades?
-
Let's take a look:
In choosing a target or targets, the magician can cast a spell at anyone he can see. Binoculars, glasses, and other devices can enhance his vision, as can magic or technology that penetrates darkness. A magician cannot, however, cast spells at invisible beings or characters in Astral Space [except] by using enhanced vision or Astral Perception.
Spell Targeting
In choosing a target or targets, the magician can choose anything within sight. Sight is the key concept. Magicians cannot directly affect what they cannot see. Binoculars, glasses, telescopes, and other devices can enhance vision for spellcasting, as can any magic or technology that penetrates darkness. A magician cannot, however, cast spells directly at invisible beings or beings in astral space except by using enhanced vision or astral perception, as appropriate. Remote vision, such as through a telecom screen, security camera, or a remote-sensing spell like clairvoyance are also useless for casting spells. A good rule of thumb is that magicians must be able to see their targets with their own eyes or a natural extension of those eyes. The image of the target must be the original image; nothing that translates the image into another medium works. So, optical binoculars work fine for spellcasting, but electronic binoculars that digitize the light from the image and computer-enhance it would not work.
Mirrors work fine, and transparent glass is no hindrance, but unless the mage is on the "see-through" side of a one-way mirror, that would not work either. Cybereyes work because the magician has paid Essense for them. The remote cameras of a drone, however, would not work. See Combat Spells (p. 151), Spells and Astral Space (p. 149), and Manipulation Spells (p. 156) for further discussions of vision and spell targeting.
First, obviously, the magician chooses the spell to be cast and chooses a target. Regardless of the nature of the spell, the target must be within direct line-of-sight of the spellcaster. Combat spells, and most others (except manipulation spells) affect only targets within the caster's vision. If, for example, two characters were standing within a meter of each other, but one was blocked from the magician's view, only the visible character could be affect by the spell even though the second character might be within the area-affect of the spell.
Why is this?
The reason has to do with how a spell works. As a spell is being cast, the magician's senses are opened up partially to the astral plane. The magician, because of the working of the astral forces that power the spell, is able to see the aura of the target. This allows him to align or synchronize his aura with that of the target, permitting the astral energy shaped by the caster to leap between them, through astral space, much as a spark of electricity jumps between two properly polarized points. The spell leaps from the caster, crosses the distance to the target in astral space, and strikes.
Spell Targeting
With spellcasting, the caster must be able to see the target and must be present on the same plan (physical or astral) as the target.<snip>
A physical spellcaster can cast a spell at any physical thing he can see unaided by imaging technology. However, optical lenses, mirrors and fiber optics can enhance line of sight, as can cybernetic vision enhancements (they have been paid for with Essence). Metahuman vision abilities can also enhance line of sight, but not spells like Clairvoyance or any other spells which alter vision. Anything modifying the original image of the target before it reaches the caster, such as digital imaging equipment or simsense, prevents the caster from casting spells on the target.
Concealed targets gain cover modifiers, which increase the difficulty of spellcasting. If the caster's line of sight is in question, the gamemaster may call for a Perception Test to determine if the caster can see a particular target.
Step 3: Choose the Target(s)
The next thing a magician must do when casting a spell is choose her target(s). A metahuman spellcaster can target anyone or anything she can see directly with her natural vision. Physical cyber- or bio-enhancements paid for with Essence can be used to spot targets, but any technological visual aids that substitute themselves for the character’s own visual senses—cameras, electronic binoculars, Matrix feeds, etc.—cannot be used. Some spells can only be cast on targets that the caster touches—these targets do not need to be seen, but the caster must succeed in an unarmed attack to touch an unwilling target of such a spell.
The act of choosing a target establishes a mystic link between caster and target. It is through this “targeting link” which the mana of a spell construct is channeled to produce a spell effect. Under the basic Shadowrun rules, such a link requires line of sight or touch. Line of sight can even be established using reflective surfaces and through transparent objects, and is subject to normal visibility and lighting modifiers. As noted above, sighting through an electronic vision-enhancing device or other technological rendering of the target does not establish the necessary link.
A magician in the physical world can only cast spells on targets that are in the physical world. Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted). An astrally perceiving (or otherwise dual-natured) magician can cast spells on a target in either the physical world or in astral space. An astral target can only be affected by mana spells—even if the magician is in the physical world astrally perceiving—as it has no physical presence.
So, 1st and 3rd edition really didn't touch on the nature of the link between caster and target. 2nd edition described it, but I have a feeling it got a bit abused since it made it sound like a magician was astrally perceiving every time he cast a spell. Of course, this doesn't really resolve the overall question, but at least we have reference points from all the editions.
-
And second edition is the one I ran and played the most. First edition was mostly my college roommate running, I ran a few things right before 2nd edition came out. Then 2nd ed. came and I ran it exclusively for many years (played a few times, as mages as it were). Then 3rd ed. came out and my gaming group changed, along with the preferences I was used to. Played quite a bit more than I ran those years, and we played WoD mostly (a few Shadowrun games here and there). Then 4th ed. came out, I moved, and got a new group and we played that a bit, but mostly d20 and similar fantasy.
I got them interested in SR and ED, and we've played that off and on along with some d20 and Pathfinder, with the occasional Exalted thrown into the mix.
Looking back on it now, most of my information, as well as my source material, is 2nd edition with a smattering of the other editions thrown in. Guess I'm biased.
-
2nd edition described it, but I have a feeling it got a bit abused since it made it sound like a magician was astrally perceiving every time he cast a spell.
My explanation: if we take ED rules into question, he does. He forms an astral conduit between himself, and the target, because he can see him. This works like sympathetic spell, but without any components or other hindrances. Spells wit touch range need that conduit to be formed even more directly, by linking the caster's and target's aura. That would also explain why it's impossible to cast from astral, even with auras being visible...
Looking back on it now, most of my information, as well as my source material, is 2nd edition with a smattering of the other editions thrown in. Guess I'm biased.
It's just that you have outdated data. :P
-
And second edition is the one I ran and played the most. First edition was mostly my college roommate running, I ran a few things right before 2nd edition came out. Then 2nd ed. came and I ran it exclusively for many years (played a few times, as mages as it were). Then 3rd ed. came out and my gaming group changed, along with the preferences I was used to. Played quite a bit more than I ran those years, and we played WoD mostly (a few Shadowrun games here and there). Then 4th ed. came out, I moved, and got a new group and we played that a bit, but mostly d20 and similar fantasy.
I got them interested in SR and ED, and we've played that off and on along with some d20 and Pathfinder, with the occasional Exalted thrown into the mix.
Looking back on it now, most of my information, as well as my source material, is 2nd edition with a smattering of the other editions thrown in. Guess I'm biased.
Nothin' wrong with that! ;)
-
@Mordoyh
Read the line immediately before the one you quoted:
Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted).
I got into an argument over this once on Dumpshock. After scouring the core book, I could not find a quote to support my position. Later, I learned that the rules had been altered/expanded in Street Magic, where I had gotten my original position from.
I do not recall if I simply misinterpreted it initially, or if I was correct all along. As I don't have access to that book at the moment, I will rely on FastJack's quote:
Line of Sight (LOS): The spell can target anything the caster can physically see or assense, regardless of the distance (see p. 173, SR4). The caster may not target anything that is completely behind cover or otherwise obscured. Since the caster only needs to see part of the target, a Perception Test may be necessary to see if the caster can spot enough of the target to cast. Visibility modifiers apply to the Spellcasting Test. Note that full body armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them from being targeted.
To cast a spell on a target, two requirements must be met:
First, you must establish Line of Sight. This can be accomplished through visual Perception or Assensing - if you can see the target physically, or Assense the target, you have met this requirement. Note that despite what the core rules say about targeting, an aura is sufficient for Assensing, & thus does fulfill this requirement (this is something they really should have fixed in the core rules with the Anniversary update).
Second, you must be active on the same plane as the target - Physical or Astral. A non-perceiving, non-projecting magician is active on the Physical. An Astrally Projecting magician is active on the Astral. An Astrally Perceiving magician is active on both. The first cannot use Assensing, and so cannot target spells through it. The second can do so, but cannot cast spells on the Physical plane, & thus cannot affect physical targets. The third can use Assensing to target a spell, and can cast on either the Physical or Astral, allowing for Assensing to target against living beings, regardless of if they have an astral form or not.
Keep in mind that non-living objects do not possess an aura or astral form (excepting Foci or similar magically active objects), and so cannot be targeted through Assensing ever.
However, knowing where he is using astral perception, you could cast an indirect spell in the meat (-2 penalty) at a point in space where his aura says he should be (-6 for firing at what you can't see) for a total -8 die pool. Which, perhaps, is what the OP meant. However, it's a very bad solution to the problem. Just gas the room.
Incorrect (kind of). As I established above, you can use Astral Perception to target the spell against a mundane target. However, Indirect Combat Spells must still have a target (yes, even AoE spells). They cannot be cast through the Blind Fire rules. This is, of course, something I have House Ruled against.
The camoflaged guy is camoflaged on the physical plane. His living aura shines like a beacon on the astral plane. Unless he has some serious masking going on, he can be seen and attacked with astral perception (albeit with a -2 penalty).
The -4 penalty from Ruthenium Polymer only applies to visual Perception, correct. However, if the character is using the Infiltration skill, you must still win an opposed (Astral) Perception vs. Infiltration to see the character. If successful, then you are right (although the -2 penalty only applies to physical actions/attacks, not spellcasting).
-
Sight isn't the only way to establish a mystic link. Per the core rulebook, you can also use touch to target any spell (including LOS spells). Per the FAQ, you can also use astral perception, or any other integral sense at the GM's discretion. When you use an alternate sense, you should first make an appropriate perception test to establish the mystic link; for astral targeting, you should probably require an Assensing test.
I'm not sure when exactly you should use the blind fire penalty. As an educated guess, I'd say you should probably use it when establishing the mystic link with a non-targeting sense (e.g., normal hearing) but not when using a precise sense like echolocation or astral perception. In those cases, use visibility modifiers for physical senses or the -2 penalty for astral perception. That makes astral perception slightly better than thermo or ultrasound in complete darkness, which seems reasonable to me, given the risks it opens you up to.
-
First, you must establish Line of Sight. This can be accomplished through visual Perception or Assensing - if you can see the target physically, or Assense the target, you have met this requirement. Note that despite what the core rules say about targeting, an aura is sufficient for Assensing, & thus does fulfill this requirement (this is something they really should have fixed in the core rules with the Anniversary update).
Second, you must be active on the same plane as the target - Physical or Astral. A non-perceiving, non-projecting magician is active on the Physical. An Astrally Projecting magician is active on the Astral. An Astrally Perceiving magician is active on both. The first cannot use Assensing, and so cannot target spells through it. The second can do so, but cannot cast spells on the Physical plane, & thus cannot affect physical targets. The third can use Assensing to target a spell, and can cast on either the Physical or Astral, allowing for Assensing to target against living beings, regardless of if they have an astral form or not.
Keep in mind that non-living objects do not possess an aura or astral form (excepting Foci or similar magically active objects), and so cannot be targeted through Assensing ever.
You have to assense the target, agreed?
Is the aura the person?
Living things that are not active still cast a reflection of themselves there, called an aura.
Emphasis mine.
Aura /= person who's aura it is. You can't target someone through their shadow, and as the rules on page 183 and 191 of SR4A make perfectly clear, that's exactly how to treat an aura, an astral "shadow" of the person, not the person. The line on page 160 of Street Magic is referencing the core rule on 183 regarding targeting an astral form (assensing is action of observing something on the astral plane).
When you assense an aura, you assense the "vibes" and "reflection" of the being who owns the aura. You aren't actually looking at the person.
Show me where you find a rule that an aura is sufficient for targeting and I'll buy it. Page 160 of Street Magic simply says assensing can work, it doesn't say that assensing an aura can work. Specific trumps general and the specific is "aura is not enough", until you find something that actually says otherwise.
FAQ has been repeatedly established as not being an errata, and therefore, if there is a conflict between the RAW and the FAQ, the RAW is correct.
Also, Bradd, the core rulebook states the following:
A metahuman spellcaster can target anyone or anything she can see directly with her natural vision. . . Some spells can only be cast on targets that the caster touches - these targets do not need to be seen, but the caster must succeed in an unarmed attack to touch an unwilling target of such a spell.
Emphasis mine.
All spells have a range at which they can be cast. For most spells, the range is line of sight (LOS). If the caster can see the target, regardless of distance, it can be affected.
Some spells, particularly health spells, require the cast to touch the intended target in order for the spell to work.
Maybe I'm missing something, if so, please give me a reference and page #. Short of that, LOS requires sight in the physical, or assensing of an astral form in the astral (see previous quotes from the RAW on this, no RAW has been presented which suggests anything less than an astral form is permissible). Touch spells are the only spells that can be (and must be) cast by touching someone.
Please, if I'm wrong, provide a direct quote from the RAW which demonstrates your point. If your contention is that specific doesn't trump general, or that the FAQ is official errata, then we'll simply agree to disagree.
EDITED
To add line breaks for clarity.
-
Incorrect.
A metahuman spellcaster can target anyone or anything
she can see directly with her natural vision. Physical cyber- or bioenhancements
paid for with Essence can be used to spot targets, but
any technological visual aids that substitute themselves for the character’s
own visual senses—cameras, electronic binoculars, Matrix feeds,
etc.—cannot be used. Some spells can only be cast on targets that the
caster touches—these targets do not need to be seen, but the caster
must succeed in an unarmed attack to touch an unwilling target of
such a spell.
The targeting range (mystical link requirement) is determined by the spell - Touch or Line of Sight.
At no point is it supported that you may use one to cast a spell requiring the other. You cannot use Touch to target a LoS spell. This is clearly marked in the rules somewhere, but I cannot recall where & don't have the time to look for it at the moment.
Further, Blind Fire can never be used to target a spell. Per my House Rules, Indirect Combat spells can be cast using the Blind Fire rules.
-
Some spells can only be cast on targets that the
caster touches—these targets do not need to be seen, but the caster
must succeed in an unarmed attack to touch an unwilling target of
such a spell.
The act of choosing a target establishes a mystic link between
caster and target. It is through this “targeting link” which the mana
of a spell construct is channeled to produce a spell effect. Under the
basic Shadowrun rules, such a link requires line of sight or touch.
Emphasis mine. I read this as saying: General rule, you can use line of sight or touch for any spell; specific rule, some spells allow only touch. I can see how you are interpreting that differently, but there is no similar rule that says you can only target LOS spells by sight. It merely says that you can target them at range by sight.
I agree that the FAQ is not errata, and should be ignored where it contradicts the rules. However, the FAQ is a reasonable source for clarifying ambiguous rules, and this is such a case.
-
If you can touch someone, he's usually in your LoS. Unless you can't see even your own fingers. ;P
As for the Assensing, that would work on Earthdawn rules (if Aura is the same as Astral Reflection, and it should be). So for the sake of bringing the two together and unifying magic theory i'm going to use that. Even if it's against standard rules.
-
@Bradd, the way I read that section is different. mostly because you left out the sentence preceding your quote which syas "A metahuman spellcaster can target anyone or anything she can see directly with her natural vision". And you also left out the definition of line of sight spells on page 203 which says "If the caster can see the target, regardless of distance, it can be affected". Nothing in LOS spells says you can use touch in lieu of sight for casting them.
The last sentence you quote merely reiterates the combination of options. It doesn't say "LOS can be cast via touch", it says a link is created via either link or touch. They could have expanded and said "depending on whether it is a LOS or touch spell". However, the specific rules on page 203 for range (and even the previous paragraph) make it perfectly clear that LOS isn't cast via touching, but rather, by sight.
This is further reinforced by Street Magic, page 160:
Line of Sight (LOS): The spell can target anything the caster can physically see or assense, regardless of the distance (see p. 173, SR4). The caster may not target anything that is completely behind cover or otherwise obscured. Since the caster only needs to see part of the target, a Perception Test may be necessary to see if the caster can spot enough of the target to cast. Visibility modifiers apply to the Spellcasting Test. Note that full body armor does not “conceal” the person within and prevent them from being targeted.
It specifically says your options are physical vision or astral assensing. Short of something that says "LOS spells may freely be cast as touch spells", the specific rules are pretty clear, LOS requires you see (or assense) a valid target (i.e., see them, or assense their astral form).
-
Well as Kot points out, if you can touch somebody you can almost certainly see them, barring situations like complete darkness or blindness. And frankly, I don't see how actual physical contact with your target could fail to establish a mystic link.
Like I said, I see how you're reading it differently. I just don't think of the touch as being in lieu of line of sight. I think the intent of the rules is that touch is more restrictive than sight, not that they're mutually exclusive. They didn't lay it out explicitly, but they didn't contradict it either, so I think the FAQ interpretation is fine.
-
Well as Kot points out, if you can touch somebody you can almost certainly see them, barring situations like complete darkness or blindness. And frankly, I don't see how actual physical contact with your target could fail to establish a mystic link.
Like I said, I see how you're reading it differently. I just don't think of the touch as being in lieu of line of sight. I think the intent of the rules is that touch is more restrictive than sight, not that they're mutually exclusive. They didn't lay it out explicitly, but they didn't contradict it either, so I think the FAQ interpretation is fine.
Touch: You have to physically touch the person, but don't have to see them.
LOS: You don't have to physically touch the person, but must physically see them or astrally assense their astral form.
This makes them exclusive, in the sense that, yes, you could touch a person before casting a LOS spell on them, but if you can't see/astrally percieve them, you can't cast an LOS spell on them, regardless of touching them.
-
Yes, I totally understand how you're reading it, no need to repeat yourself. I just think the rules are ambiguous, whereas you don't. Furthermore, I think the way that the FAQ & Kot & I resolve the ambiguity makes more sense.
-
To address the original post about A dark room and Camouflage.
This example of seeing that someone is present in a dark alley or room is used in Street Magic, p. 114, Astral Visibility, but the idea of targeting them with a spell is not explicitly called out initially.
but it does go further to say...
Since there are no ranged weapons on the astral plane and spell targeting depends on seeing your target, hiding behind physical shadows works as well as hiding behind a vibrant aura.
For me it IS made clear cut with...
Assencing is the skill of learning information from auras, astral forms and astral signatures.
Not Astral Shadows in the core RAW (but it is alluded to in Street Mage by example, as astral shadows can hide a target in the astral).
So, Assencing includes discerning auras, astral forms and astral signatures.
The spell can target anything the caster can physically see or assence...
So, Anything that you can assence you can target.
So for me one would have to find anything in RAW that says Assencing does NOT let you target portions of what you see in the Astral. (Clearly a pure Astral entity or manifestation would require a Mana spell, e.g. no physical spell could target an astral signature). But a Physical spell targeting a samurai in a dark room, easily with a -2 for performing aphysical action via astral sight. But a Mana spell would work with no penalty, unless the Astral Visibility modifiers kicked in (Street Magic, p. 114)
EDIT:
FYI - I do not allow touching to qualify for LOS spell targeting. So my hypothetical blind shaman has to astrally perceive (ultimate darkness) to target a git he's holding in his hands.
-
LOS is simply a step up from touch, and is inclusive of the previous range (touch).
Doing it the other way starts bordering on chicanery like the "keyhole single-man fireball."
-
Yes, I totally understand how you're reading it, no need to repeat yourself. I just think the rules are ambiguous, whereas you don't. Furthermore, I think the way that the FAQ & Kot & I resolve the ambiguity makes more sense.
This is the point. Rules were witten by people who are not Blind. If you have Blind magician, LOS spells (read: most of combat spells) are useles...unless mage can find another way to targer. If he is capable of perceiving Astrally, I couldnt see the argument that would denny him to use this spells. Otherwise, he would have to target what..LOA (Line of audience ;) What about Ghoul mages. They are alsmost or totaly blinded and can use only Astral perception to see the target. And they do cast bolts and whatsoever...
So I vote for Astraly Perceived/assensed = LOS for physicaly present mage.
-
I have another question, thought.
For making a Ward you should only be Awakened with astral perception? There is no skill needed to create the ward? To make an anchor? Do I read it right? With no skill you should create any ward listed in rules? Really?
-
LOS is simply a step up from touch, and is inclusive of the previous range (touch).
Wait a minute... does this mean you think that any LOS(A) spell can be cast as LOS, which therefore means it can be cast as Touch?
Because, that's what you said. Since ranges go Touch -> LOS -> LOS(A), and you're arguing that LOS, being one higher on the totem pole, can be cast as Touch, that only makes sense if you include LOS(A) going down the totem pole, too.
For making a Ward you should only be Awakened with astral perception? There is no skill needed to create the ward? To make an anchor? Do I read it right? With no skill you should create any ward listed in rules? Really?
Correct:
Wards are a temporary form of dual-natured mana barrier that can be created by any Awakened being with astral perception (including spirits and adepts with the Astral Perception power).
-
hmmm
I just dont like that idea...
At least there should be enchanting test or something to create the anchor...
otherwise any ghoul in Lagos would have his hut warded...but then againn...it makes sense for dualnatured beeing.hmhmhm...no...I dont like it...thats what they have shamans for.
-
Help!!! I am now more confused than ever. I have read and re-read this thread and just when I think I understand, it eludes me.
I really need a summary of this thread, what its trying to say and what everyone has agree is correct.
The key issue seems to be direct combat spells and LOS in astral, if you can target an aura or not (but living things active on the astral don't have aura, they have astral forms!)
page 191, Auras and Astral Forms
While researching this, I came across this reference; SR4 page 191, paragrapg 7 :
While astrally preceiving, a magician can cast mana spells at astral opponents.
What am i missing here? what is the big debat about? I am sooooooo lost!
-
Ok, so maybe I answered my own question:
Living things, that are NOT magically active on the astral have auras, and cannot be targeted by direct combat spells. So, I cannot attack a street Samurai, while using astral preception, when using a direct combat spell? right? Mage, Shaman, dual natured critter no problem, but mundane no way? Is that the jist of this thread?
-
LOS is simply a step up from touch, and is inclusive of the previous range (touch).
Wait a minute... does this mean you think that any LOS(A) spell can be cast as LOS, which therefore means it can be cast as Touch?
<snip>
What followed was a really good straw man argument based upon things I never said.
What the Touch or LOS ranges (or even LOS(A), as you put it) really boil down to is whether or not you can perceive your target. If a blind caster could, for example, touch multiple people, then, yes, the LOS(A) might just work. Touch is a substitute for LOS because the caster can directly perceive the target via touching him (or his aura, if you want to nitpick). Touch is the fallback for all casting, although it comes with some penalties (not being able to see hampers casters).
-
Help!!! I am now more confused than ever. I have read and re-read this thread and just when I think I understand, it eludes me.
I really need a summary of this thread, what its trying to say and what everyone has agree is correct.
The key issue seems to be direct combat spells and LOS in astral, if you can target an aura or not (but living things active on the astral don't have aura, they have astral forms!)
page 191, Auras and Astral Forms
While researching this, I came across this reference; SR4 page 191, paragrapg 7 :
While astrally preceiving, a magician can cast mana spells at astral opponents.
What am i missing here? what is the big debat about? I am sooooooo lost!
That means, that if you are astraly perceiving, you should atack astral forms withg mana spells (physical spells didnt work in astral)
This sentence says nothing about targeting auras etc.
So I stand for this.
Yes, I totally understand how you're reading it, no need to repeat yourself. I just think the rules are ambiguous, whereas you don't. Furthermore, I think the way that the FAQ & Kot & I resolve the ambiguity makes more sense.
This is the point. Rules were witten by people who are not Blind. If you have Blind magician, LOS spells (read: most of combat spells) are useles...unless mage can find another way to targer. If he is capable of perceiving Astrally, I couldnt see the argument that would denny him to use this spells. Otherwise, he would have to target what..LOA (Line of audience ;) What about Ghoul mages. They are alsmost or totaly blinded and can use only Astral perception to see the target. And they do cast bolts and whatsoever...
So I vote for Astraly Perceived/assensed = LOS for physicaly present mage.
-
LOS is simply a step up from touch, and is inclusive of the previous range (touch).
Wait a minute... does this mean you think that any LOS(A) spell can be cast as LOS, which therefore means it can be cast as Touch?
<snip>
What followed was a really good straw man argument based upon things I never said.
What the Touch or LOS ranges (or even LOS(A), as you put it) really boil down to is whether or not you can perceive your target. If a blind caster could, for example, touch multiple people, then, yes, the LOS(A) might just work. Touch is a substitute for LOS because the caster can directly perceive the target via touching him (or his aura, if you want to nitpick). Touch is the fallback for all casting, although it comes with some penalties (not being able to see hampers casters).
1. Never said you said any of it, I posed a "if-then" logical extension of the theory. Namely, exactly what it would mean if LOS allows the Touch, since Touch, LOS and LOS(A) are merely the three tiers of range. If range can be "stepped down" from LOS to Touch, then I see no reason why it would not follow that LOS(A) wouldn't be "stepped down" to either LOS or Touch. It's called consistency.
2. Show me the rule that says "a LOS spell may be cast as a Touch spell". I want book name, page number, and clarity.
Example:
Under the basic Shadowrun rules, such a link requires line of sight or touch.
Doesn't mean anything in this context, since it is countermanded by:
The spell can target anything the caster can physically see or assense, regardless of distance
Which is further limited by this:
though auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted
So, barring a rule saying "LOS spells can be cast at Touch range", a LOS spell can target anything the mage see with his eyes, or an Astral Form that he can assense, but not things he cannot see, having no Astral Form to assense, which he happens to be touching.
-
Ok, so maybe I answered my own question:
Living things, that are NOT magically active on the astral have auras, and cannot be targeted by direct combat spells. So, I cannot attack a street Samurai, while using astral preception, when using a direct combat spell? right? Mage, Shaman, dual natured critter no problem, but mundane no way? Is that the jist of this thread?
Don't think in terms of Direct Combat Spells. You have to think in terms of the type of spell, either Mana or Physical:
A magician in the physical world can only cast spells on targets that are in the physical world. Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted). An astrally perceiving (or otherwise dual-natured) magician can cast spells on a target in either the physical world or in astral space. An astral target can only be affected by mana spells—even if the magician is in the physical world astrally perceiving—as it has no physical presence.
Auras and Astral Forms
Living things that are not active on the astral plane still cast a reflection of themselves there, called an aura. Any non-living objects appear as faded semblances of their physical selves, gray and lifeless, while the auras of living things are vibrant and colorful.
Anything active on the astral plane has a tangible astral form—projecting magicians, spirits, dual-natured beings, and so on. Astral forms are more colorful and brighter than auras, as they are astrally “real.” The Earth has an astral form, and many regard this as proof that the planet is a living entity apart from the creatures that inhabit its surface.
Type
Spell Type is either mana (M) or physical (P). Mana spells affect their targets through the mana that permeates the astral and physical planes—affecting the target in a magical and spiritual manner that is only effectively resisted by the Willpower of a living or magical being. Physical spells directly target the body; resistance relies on the target’s Body attribute. Only mana spells can affect astral forms. Either type of spell may be used in the physical world, but mana spells cannot affect non-living targets.
Note that in the first quote, "a magician in astral space" means that the magician is Astrally Projecting.
-
LOS is simply a step up from touch, and is inclusive of the previous range (touch).
Wait a minute... does this mean you think that any LOS(A) spell can be cast as LOS, which therefore means it can be cast as Touch?
<snip>
What followed was a really good straw man argument based upon things I never said.
What the Touch or LOS ranges (or even LOS(A), as you put it) really boil down to is whether or not you can perceive your target. If a blind caster could, for example, touch multiple people, then, yes, the LOS(A) might just work. Touch is a substitute for LOS because the caster can directly perceive the target via touching him (or his aura, if you want to nitpick). Touch is the fallback for all casting, although it comes with some penalties (not being able to see hampers casters).
1. Never said you said any of it, I posed a "if-then" logical extension of the theory. Namely, exactly what it would mean if LOS allows the Touch, since Touch, LOS and LOS(A) are merely the three tiers of range. If range can be "stepped down" from LOS to Touch, then I see no reason why it would not follow that LOS(A) wouldn't be "stepped down" to either LOS or Touch. It's called consistency.
2. Show me the rule that says "a LOS spell may be cast as a Touch spell". I want book name, page number, and clarity.
Example:
Under the basic Shadowrun rules, such a link requires line of sight or touch.
Doesn't mean anything in this context, since it is countermanded by:
The spell can target anything the caster can physically see or assense, regardless of distance
Which is further limited by this:
though auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted
So, barring a rule saying "LOS spells can be cast at Touch range", a LOS spell can target anything the mage see with his eyes, or an Astral Form that he can assense, but not things he cannot see, having no Astral Form to assense, which he happens to be touching.
Just step out of a box a think about that blind Ghoul shamans. He is perceiving and he is physicaly present. No matter what YOU think, I`ll play it this way ;)
-
So, basically, Chaem is saying that ghouls, spirits, or any other creature that cannot physically see the target cannot affect it with spells.
Right.
-
So, basically, Chaem is saying that ghouls, spirits, or any other creature that cannot physically see the target cannot affect it with spells.
Right.
Now who's putting words in whose mouth?
Sight does not need to come from a physical organ, spirits are stated as being perfectly capable of "seeing" on the physical plane, as opposed to relying on astral perception.
When observing an object, a spirit sees the auras and shadows first and the physical characteristics second.
A ghoul magician is quite capable of casting a touch spell (and given his physical prowess, this is likely the preference). Additionally, what's to stop the ghoul magician from casting Thermographic Vision or Night Vision (both SM, pg 168) on himself? Now he can cast spells just like everyone else.
Where is the rule that says LOS = Touch + LOS?
-
Where is the rule that says LOS = Touch + LOS?
Nowhere. That's logic. If you can touch someone, you can see him, except for full darkness and blindness conditions. But even then, you do have a sensory connection. LoS is there, because most people rely on their most important sense.
I know that's not in the rules in SR, but Earthdawn clarified this in the Astral Conduit rules (sensory contact via touch or sight equals astral contact with the target aura is possible).
-
Even without referencing another (albeit related) game, like Kot says, it's simple logic. Adherence to the rules is important for establishing a good relationship with your players. Blind adherence to the rules (pun intended, cause it's funny), OTOH, can be detrimental both to the game and group relations.
I did as much word putting as you did, Chaemera. And did so to call attention to the issue, not to try to tear down another person. Like here, (emphasis mine):
LOS is simply a step up from touch, and is inclusive of the previous range (touch).
Wait a minute... does this mean you think that any LOS(A) spell can be cast as LOS, which therefore means it can be cast as Touch?
Because, that's what you said. Since ranges go Touch -> LOS -> LOS(A), and you're arguing that LOS, being one higher on the totem pole, can be cast as Touch, that only makes sense if you include LOS(A) going down the totem pole, too.
<snip>
I only said what I said, and did not state, imply, or dance around the other issue you spoke of.
Aside from all this chatter, Touch range has a special relationship with the rules. Simply because the caster isn't touching the target, but the target's aura. This introduces some interesting rules, such as only needing to get a tie on the attack/defense test as well as granting a small bonus to hit for the toucher. Also, the target can't really do anything but dodge, otherwise contact occurs. I don't think this is explicitly stated in the rules, but it is an important point to consider.
-
Chill on the attitudes, boyos, or warnings will be handed out.
-
So, basically, Chaem is saying that ghouls, spirits, or any other creature that cannot physically see the target cannot affect it with spells.
Right.
Now who's putting words in whose mouth?
Sight does not need to come from a physical organ, spirits are stated as being perfectly capable of "seeing" on the physical plane, as opposed to relying on astral perception.
When observing an object, a spirit sees the auras and shadows first and the physical characteristics second.
Sees auras and may target them - IMHO Astral Perception works the same way
[/quote]
A ghoul magician is quite capable of casting a touch spell (and given his physical prowess, this is likely the preference). Additionally, what's to stop the ghoul magician from casting Thermographic Vision or Night Vision (both SM, pg 168) on himself? Now he can cast spells just like everyone else.
[/quote]
It doesnt make sense that born-to-be Dual natured entity, magical from its core nature, have to cast spell to be able to cast spells...
This would be strange disadvantage against metas, who are basicaly anchored to physical realm and are only beginning to understand what Magic means...
-
There is one thing that the Touch spells have, and LoS don't - significantly lower Drain. So when you use a LoS spell at Touch range, you still get the LoS Drain, and you still have to hit the target in a +2 unarmed attack. I think that's enough, game-balance-wise.
-
Ah, ya, drain is significantly lower for Touch. While I would use LOS spells in touch range, in a pinch, I'd prefer to use Touch spells for their drain. That way I could pump up the damage without too much worry.
Hmmm...a mystic adept in close combat is sounding nastier and nastier.
-
Especially with some points into Improved Ability (Unarmed), and a proper specialty. A good Close-Combat specialist that does have other strong points (healing, for example).
-
One thing to consider is the game is pretty loose about what it considers "sight" – it includes includes infrared, radio, and sonic detection, so long as the sense is natural, magical, or paid by Essence. It's clear that "sight" isn't restricted to natural eyesight. Touch is just "sight" with a different sense organ, and we even refer to it as such in idioms like, "the blind see with their hands." It's special in that it has no range, but otherwise it's just as precise and discerning as RADAR, which is definitely in the game's "sight" category.