[Major Doom]

Going by the Perceiving Magic rules in the rulebook, page 280, I understand that an observer gets to make a Perception Test in the moment a spellslinger is casting a spell the character encounters.  But what about Sustained spells that have already been cast before an observer was even present?

For example, a spellslinger casts Detect Life on an area, to use for ambushing.  When an observer enters the area, does the character get to make a Perception Test to notice the spell and rolls to resist (Willpower + Logic, since Detect Life is an Active spell), or just rolls to resist the spell without perceiving it?

[Tecumseh]

Just rolls to resist without perceiving it. The Perception check is just for the spellcasting itself.

[El Diablo]

"Detection spells: These spells enhance the senses." I don't think you can simply notice someone using a Detection spell. You might use Astral Perception and try Assensing but that's it.

Street Grimoire, page 12: "Magic is normally an invisible process to the non-Awakened. A normal can no more discern the casting of a spell than a casual shopper can read the coding behind a sales algorithm directed against them." and a couple of spells tend to describe "invisible" when dealing with Mana spells. You can interfere that most mana spells are invisible and Detection spells are invisible.

Perception usually needs to beat a treshold or another test. You would roll to see the caster, not the spell.

[AwesomenessDog]

For most sustained spells, being able to see the presence of a spell in meat space would defeat the spells purpose, namely invisibility spells. The other ones all have some visible effects anyway, like a acid pool, and no test is needed.

[Major Doom]

Thanks all for the clarification.

Perception usually needs to beat a treshold or another test.

It's actually you need to meet or beat a threshold.

"Each time you roll the dice, you’ll be looking to get enough hits to meet or beat a threshold, which is the number of hits you need to do the thing you’re trying to do."

[El Diablo]

Thanks all for the clarification.

Perception usually needs to beat a treshold or another test.

It's actually you need to meet or beat a threshold.

"Each time you roll the dice, you’ll be looking to get enough hits to meet or beat a threshold, which is the number of hits you need to do the thing you’re trying to do."

Agreed. I explained myself incorrectly.

[Kiirnodel]

Although there are plenty of cases where meeting the threshold doesn't get you anything. First Aid for example, boxes healed is equal to hots above the threshold (2). Getting 2 hits is technically a success, but it doesn't do anything for you.

[Blue Rose]

"Detection spells: These spells enhance the senses." I don't think you can simply notice someone using a Detection spell. You might use Astral Perception and try Assensing but that's it.

Street Grimoire, page 12: "Magic is normally an invisible process to the non-Awakened. A normal can no more discern the casting of a spell than a casual shopper can read the coding behind a sales algorithm directed against them." and a couple of spells tend to describe "invisible" when dealing with Mana spells. You can interfere that most mana spells are invisible and Detection spells are invisible.

Perception usually needs to beat a treshold or another test. You would roll to see the caster, not the spell.

Which is the rules contradicting themselves again, as magic warps reality in ways that can be detected from the meat world, as noticing the casting is seeing the unnatural ripples in the world.

What, if anything, can be seen of active spell effects is dubious. Personally, I find completely undetectable magic that only affects the values of the numbers you're throwing at each other boring and flavorless.

Invisibility is one thing. Undetectable is its point. But an armor spell even less detectable than an invisible force field?  Lame.

At a low force armor spell, you shake someone's hand and they'll probably notice. Medium force and you may notice dust, debris, and rain not touching them in their protective bubble. High force?  Frag subtlety. You're in a magic glowing suit of armor.

Boosting someone's strength?  A small boost would be subtle, but if you go whole hog shooting someone up into the outright supermetahuman, they're gonna hulk out.

Case by case, omae.

And those detection spells are some of the most detectable to the trained eye. You don't even need to spot the magic. Humans are used to interacting with humans with the same basic senses. You can generally tell when someone is focusing on any given sense. Sight, hearing, smell. Unless you actively hide noticing something (an opposed skill roll), you have tells. For magical supersenses, you still have physical tells, which are liable to be bizarre and alien compared to those with normal human senses.

[Major Doom]

Invisibility is one thing. Undetectable is its point. But an armor spell even less detectable than an invisible force field?  Lame.

At a low force armor spell, you shake someone's hand and they'll probably notice. Medium force and you may notice dust, debris, and rain not touching them in their protective bubble. High force?  Frag subtlety. You're in a magic glowing suit of armor.

Armor spell, regardless of Force, still glows:

This spell creates a glowing field of magical energy around the subject that protects against Physical Damage. It provides Armor equal to the hits scored and is cumulative with other armor.

[Reaver]

It really depends on the spell. Some have a visual clue (like Armor), and some don't.

From a strict RAW approach, you only get a perception check during the casting, and not while it is sustained.

Some GMs disagree with this.

[Blue Rose]

Oh, hey, it does glow.

In that case, at my table, it'd be way less noticeable at force 1 than at force 12.

From a strict RAW approach, you only get a perception check during the casting, and not while it is sustained.

Some GMs disagree with this.

RAW doesn't really specify whether you can detect spells while you're sustained, save in specific cases.  I'd say that's less "By RAW you don't get a check," more, "Whether or not you get a check is a grey area in the rules."  There's nothing specifying whether or not most spells have some visible indicator.

Though if someone buffs your body score, you're gonna have to get that fancy dress refitted.

[Imladir]

Why? When someone buffs your logic score, your head doubles in volume?

That increase can be just an increase in efficiency and nothing more. Increasing strength could mean you get more for what you have, rather than increase your muscles volume. It's a health spell, not a manipulation one.

[El Diablo]

Though if someone buffs your body score, you're gonna have to get that fancy dress refitted.

No. Run & Gun, 59:

When an item is Custom Fit, any changes to an individual’s Physical Attributes, whether through Karma advancement or augmentation (but not through magic), require the suit to be refit.

That means magic won't increase the size of your muscles or anything.

[Reaver]

@Blue Rose

Its the language used in the Motiving Magic section, and the way some spells work.

I agree it gets a little ambigous with the language, (Hence why I said some GMs disagree). But, for me it boils down to rational thought.

Many spells that need to be sustained are 100% useless if people get a chance to notice magic once they are up and running. (Don't confuse this with resisting the effects of said magic.)

Mask/physical mask
Invisibility/improved invisibility
Phantasm/trid phantasm
And others...


Since the resistance of the spells is tied to the force mages will be casting at a high force. Which means if you allow a noticing magic roll for these spells on top of a resistance, they will automatically be noticed - thus defeating these spells....

Now, allowing a chance to notice a mage in the act of casting these spells isn't as big a deal,but once cast....

[Blue Rose]

Hence I say case by case.

But take the spells you listed.  They have a clear and visible spell effect.  That's the point of the spell.  It's just a matter of passing it off as real.  In my book, the higher the force, the more real the spell becomes, the greater the effect on reality.  For an illusion spell, that means a more realistic illusion.

And in the case of invisibility, it has an in-written chance to resist.  That is the chance to spot the illusion.  Personally, for a physical invisibility spell, I interpret this as the spell being more like predator camouflage than actual invisibility, and if you resist, it's not that you get a perfect technicolor vision of the person who's cloaked.  Rather, you see the imperfections in that camouflage.  Because that's more interesting and thematic.