[Social Engineering] Why can't Observation be used to covertly judge approachability?

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by Dragondog

I think Kromm answered that question nicely.

I don't think he did, which is why it lead to further questioning, in post 9.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by Kromm

... The "not being seen" part is completely incidental to this...

And yet, the not being seen part appears as an operative phrase in the very first sentence of the skill description, even before it goes into the kinds of information you might obtain.

To me, that goes beyond 'clarification' and constitutes rule change.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

Why do you need to do either of those things? Isn't it enough to change what the target perceives from say "man in a bar, staring at me!" to "man in a bar."

Observation only guarantees that if it works, it won't compromise existing concealment or deception arrived at via other means. "Other means" could be Acting, Camouflage, Disguise, Electronics Operation, Fast-Talk, Shadowing, Stealth, etc. The specific additional protection granted by Observation is knowledge of covert intelligence-gathering methods to use once you get into place. The clearest example is the "glint from binoculars" case: If I've hidden myself with Camouflage or Stealth in order to use Observation, then successful Observation means that I don't screw up Camouflage or Stealth by watching the target in a way that reflects light in his face. However, it can also apply in situations where you've used Acting, Carousing, or Streetwise to fit in at a bar, in which case it doesn't cover the "fitting in" part, only the "not craning your head over the partition or exposing the microphone in your lapel" element.

To compare it to another skill, consider Holdout. It doesn't let you conceal your identity or motives, only your possessions. It can let you hide a weapon (for instance) so that your Acting, Disguise, and Fast-Talk rolls aren't at a penalty – or made automatic failures – for a big, honking gun. But merely concealing the gun isn't enough to let you pass as "not a detective" or "not a gangster" if those you're trying to fool are on alert for detectives or gangsters. You still need to fit in, which demands other skills.

Both skills are ways to keep particular methods and equipment from messing with your attempt to keep a low profile. They aren't the primary means through which you attain a low profile, however.

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

I don't think he did, which is why it lead to further questioning, in post 9.

Post 9 hadn't been posted yet when I started reading this thread, so I hadn't seen it when I posted.

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

Why do you need to do either of those things? Isn't it enough to change what the target perceives from say "man in a bar, staring at me!" to "man in a bar."

I'd say that doing that would be Acting rather than Observation.

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Observation only guarantees that if it works, it won't compromise existing concealment or deception arrived at via other means. "Other means" could be Acting, Camouflage, Disguise, Electronics Operation, Fast-Talk, Shadowing, Stealth, etc. The specific additional protection granted by Observation is knowledge of covert intelligence-gathering methods to use once you get into place. The clearest example is the "glint from binoculars" case: If I've hidden myself with Camouflage or Stealth in order to use Observation, then successful Observation means that I don't screw up Camouflage or Stealth by watching the target in a way that reflects light in his face. However, it can also apply in situations where you've used Acting, Carousing, or Streetwise to fit in at a bar, in which case it doesn't cover the "fitting in" part, only the "not craning your head over the partition or exposing the microphone in your lapel" element.

To compare it to another skill, consider Holdout. It doesn't let you conceal your identity or motives, only your possessions. It can let you hide a weapon (for instance) so that your Acting, Disguise, and Fast-Talk rolls aren't at a penalty – or made automatic failures – for a big, honking gun. But merely concealing the gun isn't enough to let you pass as "not a detective" or "not a gangster" if those you're trying to fool are on alert for detectives or gangsters. You still need to fit in, which demands other skills.

Both skills are ways to keep particular methods and equipment from messing with your attempt to keep a low profile. They aren't the primary means through which you attain a low profile, however.

So, just to clarify, you're saying that Observation can only ever be used if you have previously made a roll for one of Acting, Camouflage, Disguise, Electronics Operation, Fast-Talk, Shadowing, Stealth, etc. That it's just the skill of not breaking cover?

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

And yet, the not being seen part appears as an operative phrase in the very first sentence of the skill description, even before it goes into the kinds of information you might obtain.

To me, that goes beyond 'clarification' and constitutes rule change.

Not at all. Please review the verbs:

This is the talent of observing dangerous or "interesting" situations without letting others know that you are watching.

This is the talent of observing dangerous or "interesting" situations without letting others know that you are present.

The former addresses the act of watching, which literally means the act of pointing your binoculars or microphone, or otherwise actively gathering data. The latter addresses the act of hiding. The rules specify the former, not the latter. You can use Stealth to disguise your presence, but without Observation, watching rather than simply hiding will screw this up. You can use Observation to disguise your intent, but without Stealth, you're not hidden and so it doesn't matter. It's quite possible to be good at Observation but not Stealth if you use means that don't allow the other person a Sense roll; e.g., a telescope from 1,000 yards. It's equally possible to be good at Stealth but not Observation. That's why the skills are separate.

[Lord Carnifex]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Observation only guarantees that if it works, it won't compromise existing concealment or deception arrived at via other means. "Other means" could be Acting, Camouflage, Disguise, Electronics Operation, Fast-Talk, Shadowing, Stealth, etc. The specific additional protection granted by Observation is knowledge of covert intelligence-gathering methods to use once you get into place. The clearest example is the "glint from binoculars" case: If I've hidden myself with Camouflage or Stealth in order to use Observation, then successful Observation means that I don't screw up Camouflage or Stealth by watching the target in a way that reflects light in his face. However, it can also apply in situations where you've used Acting, Carousing, or Streetwise to fit in at a bar, in which case it doesn't cover the "fitting in" part, only the "not craning your head over the partition or exposing the microphone in your lapel" element.

Okay, let me posit a scenario to see if I'm understanding this correctly.

A guy is in a bar, scoping the local women. He uses Acting to convey "I'm just hanging out with my drink," instead of "I'm looking at you." He then makes a successful Observation role to notice that the young woman he's looking at doesn't have a ring on her left hand. The successful Observation roll also allows him to not do a spit take or otherwise blow his cover due to his observation.

Am I on the right track?

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

So, just to clarify, you're saying that Observation can only ever be used if you have previously made a roll for one of Acting, Camouflage, Disguise, Electronics Operation, Fast-Talk, Shadowing, Stealth, etc. That it's just the skill of not breaking cover?

It's the skill of not breaking cover while gathering useful intelligence. The "gathering useful intelligence" part is the essence of the skill, and what everything past the opening sentence discusses.

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by Kromm

It's the skill of not breaking cover while gathering useful intelligence. The "gathering useful intelligence" part is the essence of the skill, and what everything past the opening sentence discusses.

In which case shouldn't the sequence of rolls go something like:

1. Roll Acting, Savoir-Faire or Streetwise to blend in.
2. Roll Observation to not break cover when gathering intelligence, while blending in.
3. Roll Per-based roll against a relevant skill to gather intelligence.

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

In which case shouldn't the sequence of rolls go something like:

1. Roll Acting, Savoir-Faire or Streetwise to blend in.
2. Roll Observation to not break cover when gathering intelligence, while blending in.
3. Roll Per-based roll against a relevant skill to gather intelligence.

The Observation roll "lets you gather information that's not specifically hidden." So in that case you don't need 3. If you're so far away that you don't need to blend in, as no one can see you anyway, you don't need 1.