[Black]

Sorry, my searching skills are lacking today.  I asked a similar question a month or two ago, and this was the explanation given.  As for citing a book, why?  You're already ignoring the book, so why would citing more help?  The book says full armor doesn't prevent spell targeting.  I offered up a way for you to rationalize it.

Because your rationalization is crap. A thing doesn't make sense, so you give an answer. Answers are nice, usually. But when the answer is wrong, with zero source, with zero backup, no proof, and for all I am able to tell incorrect with the exception that the rules simply tell me that you may target a person who is effectively invisible from you, your answer is a bad answer. It would be like telling a researcher who spent his time attempting to figure out exactly how a digestive system works that it works because of magic, or that god intended it to work. Yeah, it's an answer technically, but it doesn't actually DO anything as an answer. It doesn't really answer the question.

Ninja, just because you don't like an answer doesn't make it wrong.  MtFeeny quoted the RAW.  Anything else are houserules, which your entitled to use to your heart's content.

Also, wearing something is not the same as being in a vehilce or a building.  Aura's (a magical fictional concept which obeys its own rules) extend to include your cyberware and what you are wearing.  Now would it extend to include somesort of mecha-style armour?  Not sure, probably not.  But it wouldn't extend to include something your sitting in or the building your in.  So then, once you accept that what your wearing doesn't block line of sight, everything becomes so much more straight forward.  Can you see the person? Yes, you can target them (keeping in mind that cover saves etc may apply).  Can't see them?  Can't target them.

Edit- Like RHat explanation much better.

[KarmaInferno]

Remember mana magic targets living auras.

It's a little abstract, but think of it this way. Putting on a suit of armor is making it a part of your essential 'me'-ness. Standing behind a piece of paper does not, nor does getting into a car. The spell targets your essential 'me'-ness, your living aura.


-k

[Ninja137]

Sorry, my searching skills are lacking today.  I asked a similar question a month or two ago, and this was the explanation given.  As for citing a book, why?  You're already ignoring the book, so why would citing more help?  The book says full armor doesn't prevent spell targeting.  I offered up a way for you to rationalize it.

Because your rationalization is crap. A thing doesn't make sense, so you give an answer. Answers are nice, usually. But when the answer is wrong, with zero source, with zero backup, no proof, and for all I am able to tell incorrect with the exception that the rules simply tell me that you may target a person who is effectively invisible from you, your answer is a bad answer. It would be like telling a researcher who spent his time attempting to figure out exactly how a digestive system works that it works because of magic, or that god intended it to work. Yeah, it's an answer technically, but it doesn't actually DO anything as an answer. It doesn't really answer the question.

Ninja, just because you don't like an answer doesn't make it wrong.  MtFeeny quoted the RAW.  Anything else are houserules, which your entitled to use to your heart's content.

Also, wearing something is not the same as being in a vehilce or a building.  Aura's (a magical fictional concept which obeys its own rules) extend to include your cyberware and what you are wearing.  Now would it extend to include somesort of mecha-style armour?  Not sure, probably not.  But it wouldn't extend to include something your sitting in or the building your in.  So then, once you accept that what your wearing doesn't block line of sight, everything becomes so much more straight forward.  Can you see the person? Yes, you can target them (keeping in mind that cover saves etc may apply).  Can't see them?  Can't target them.

Edit- Like RHat explanation much better.

You pay for Cyberware with Essence. It is literally a part of you, connected to you rather thoroughly both physically and spiritually. It is literally an extension of your body.

I'm not talking about the RAW of the issue at this point, and as I already said I am fully aware of that fact. I'm talking about what it is that could potentially give a legitimate reason for WHY it works as it does, and RHat does a fairly good job of that. Personal perception plays a rather large role in magic, and the mages perception that the armor is a part of you makes a good amount of sense. But if that is the case, I propose this situation.

You have a Mage, specializing in medicine, augmentations, and all sort of other medical/'ware related topics. He helps to turn someone into a Cyborg, and hooks their brain up to a Steel Lynx. To that cyborg, that Drone is his body for the moment. It is a part of him, and he moves it with his thoughts. To the mage, the same applies. He looks at it like a Street Sam using a piece of 'ware. He fully believes that the drone is effectively a part of that person.

Can he target Cyborg-Brain piloting the drone, housed in the drone, and which he believes to be a part of the drone, with a Manabolt?

[Ninja137]

Remember mana magic targets living auras.

It's a little abstract, but think of it this way. Putting on a suit of armor is making it a part of your essential 'me'-ness. Standing behind a piece of paper does not, nor does getting into a car. The spell targets your essential 'me'-ness, your living aura.


-k

If this is the case, why am I unable to wear a pair of glasses which are required by prescription and I've worn my entire life, and have a thermographic sensor in them, and use them to target someone with their thermal signature behind said sheet of paper? Yet I can do so same with a pair of Cybereyes I spent Essence on. Unless I'm mistaken, in which case I suppose I'm talking out of my ass. I'll go check that right now to make sure.

SPELLCASTING

Can you cast spells if blind?

Sight is the most common means of establishing a connection with a target (hence the range “Line of Sight”), but by no means the only one. If you physically see, astrally perceive, or touch the target, you can cast the spell.

In situations where the player wishes for their character to use another sense (hearing, smell, echolocation, etc.) to cast a spell, it’s up to the gamemaster to decide if that is possible. At the very least, a Perception Test involving the sense in question is called for, with appropriate modifiers (Using Perception, pp.135-136, SR4A). In the case of enhanced senses, the enhanced sense must be integral to the character (i.e., cyberears with audio enhancement would work, but earplugs with audio enhancement would not). Naturally, this works better for Indirect Combat Spells than others.

It would appear that yes, installing a Cyberware Scanner into a pair of Cybereyes/Ears/Whatever else and using it to spot someones cyberarm through a wall would infact allow you to target them through a wall. Yet that same sensore, even with a close personal attachment, cannot be done without Essence being paid.

[mtfeeney = Baron]

You can't do that, either.

[RHat]

The CCU is a separate unit from the drone - a CCU and a drone are not perceived to be a single entity; the drone is more like a car to it.

[Ninja137]

You can't do that, either.

Oh, I can't? Is the FAQ wrong on this matter? Look at the edited post above, with a direct quote from the FAQ.

[Ninja137]

The CCU is a separate unit from the drone - a CCU and a drone are not perceived to be a single entity; the drone is more like a car to it.

OOC, I am fully aware of this fact. IC, why would this be any different than a mage believing their targets armor is a part of them? If anything, the Cyborg would have a more direct and strong connection to their drone-body than a random ganger shoved into Milspec Armor, a Hazmat Suit, or any other form of armor that fully blocks line of sight to their actual body.

[mtfeeney = Baron]

It doesn't say you can do it.  It says if you insist on trying to do it without sight and your GM is willing to let you try, it'll have a minimum of a huge perception penalty.

[Ninja137]

It doesn't say you can do it.  It says if you insist on trying to do it without sight and your GM is willing to let you try, it'll have a minimum of a huge perception penalty.

It does say you can do it. It says you may require a Perception Check in order to be capable of doing so, but simply because you have a possiblity to fail that check does not mean the act itself is impossible.

[RHat]

The CCU is a separate unit from the drone - a CCU and a drone are not perceived to be a single entity; the drone is more like a car to it.

OOC, I am fully aware of this fact. IC, why would this be any different than a mage believing their targets armor is a part of them? If anything, the Cyborg would have a more direct and strong connection to their drone-body than a random ganger shoved into Milspec Armor, a Hazmat Suit, or any other form of armor that fully blocks line of sight to their actual body.

The cyborg's connection to the vehicle is approximately the same as that of a jumped in rigger.  The drone body is simply a vehicle to them, and that is how characters would perceive it.

And the FAQ, which is a questionable source at the best of times, simply makes it a matter of GM discretion.

[mtfeeney = Baron]

"In situations where the player wishes for their character to use another sense (hearing, smell, echolocation, etc.) to cast a spell, it’s up to the gamemaster to decide if that is possible." means you can't normally do it but your GM may allow it if he wants to.

[KarmaInferno]

Meaning it's gone into "GM making up stuff" time, and outside of the standard rules.


-k

[CanRay]

Damnit, now I'm doing it!

Was the sheep in full-body armor?

[Ninja137]

Just a bit of a note. I'm not saying that people would be immune to magic simply by wearing full-body armor. I'm saying that they wouldn't be able to be targetted for things such as Manabolt or Control Thougths/Emotions and such. Targetting the armor would still be entirely feasible with Firebolt/Ball or such spells, as they make actual physical effects which could mess someone up just as well as the normal versions would.