Unnoticeability

[hcobb]

Originally Posted by phiwum

It just struck me that Summon Dragon and Unnoticeability are both IQ 15. Summoning a dragon and making him unnoticeable would be a pretty devious thing to do, if the GM allowed it.

This is entirely legal, but very costly and of limited effectiveness.

Casting Unnoticeability on a 7-hex figure costs 21 fatigue and 7 per turn to maintain as per ITL 140.

Just create an illusion of a bear and make that unnoticeable.

[Axly Suregrip]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Just create an illusion of a bear and make that unnoticeable.

Henry,
Good point about the cost but this above statement has wondering. Does making an illusion unnoticeable effectively destroy the illusion's power?

An illusion is a mental trick that a person perceives and believes something is there to such an extent that they will allow that belief to harm themselves. If there is no such belief (unnoticeable means the illusion is no perceived), then has the wizard rendered this illusion to be completely useless?

Seems to me a GM ruling either way on this is valid. For me, I would say the unnoticeable illusion can exist but is of no effect.

[hcobb]

Originally Posted by Axly Suregrip

Seems to me a GM ruling either way on this is valid. For me, I would say the unnoticeable illusion can exist but is of no effect.

It only attacks people who notice it.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by hcobb

This is entirely legal, but very costly and of limited effectiveness.

Casting Unnoticeability on a 7-hex figure costs 21 fatigue and 7 per turn to maintain as per ITL 140.

Just create an illusion of a bear and make that unnoticeable.

Ah, thanks for that reminder. I had forgotten the extra cost for multi-hex figures.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by hcobb

It only attacks people who notice it.

Good answer.

[amenditman]

I'm definitely in the camp of any time an 'Unnoticeable' figure does something that would attract attention to itself everyone gets a roll to notice it. If it does nothing to attract attention, no additional rolls.

[timm meyers]

"...this spell makes its subject hard to notice..."
"...he is simply very easy to overlook..." (even hear, smell, etc.)
"must still make a roll to see it, even if you point. They may decide you're insane!"

To me all this implies the spell causes all 5 senses to "avoid" the enchanted target and or ignore the sensory input from the target. In essence it renders the target Ultra-invisible but gives a 4vIQ save to negate.

Magic is weird sometimes. I would tend to apply the same reactions I do with invisible subjects.
You failed your roll = gaping wounds appear on your insane friend, what do you want to do?

This is a very powerful spell as written, so for the golem example i would give players a new roll upon each separate encounter.

Makes you wonder as invisibility is only an IQ 12 spell and this is 15?

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by timm meyers

"...this spell makes its subject hard to notice..."
"...he is simply very easy to overlook..." (even hear, smell, etc.)
"must still make a roll to see it, even if you point. They may decide you're insane!"

To me all this implies the spell causes all 5 senses to "avoid" the enchanted target and or ignore the sensory input from the target. In essence it renders the target Ultra-invisible but gives a 4vIQ save to negate.

Magic is weird sometimes. I would tend to apply the same reactions I do with invisible subjects.
You failed your roll = gaping wounds appear on your insane friend, what do you want to do?

This is a very powerful spell as written, so for the golem example i would give players a new roll upon each separate encounter.

Makes you wonder as invisibility is only an IQ 12 spell and this is 15?

Yes, that makes you wonder.

Here are some benefits of Unnoticeability:
(1) Affects all five senses.
(2) Not detected automatically when adjacent to the observer's hex.

Disadvantages:
(1) Viewers get a 4/IQ roll to notice and Invisibility has no such roll.

I'm sure I've missed some differences with this short, off-the-cuff list. Unnoticeability allows you to slip right past the guards as long as they miss their initial roll, but if there are several guards, you'll likely be spotted. You can avoid animals that would detect an invisible person pretty easily.

When questions arise about what Unnoticeability includes, I think we have to keep that very high IQ requirement in mind.

[Steve Plambeck]

To further distance Unnoticeability from Invisibility, and for a bit of extra fun, I'd be tempted to implement a "sliding scale" spell cost/difficulty for the former.

The wizard is dressed in a hooded, floor length brown robe at an assembly of 50 other people in hooded, floor length brown robes. The wizard knows someone he wishes to avoid is looking for him in the crowd, so he uses Unnoticeability. He only rolls 2 vs DX, and the spell lasts an hour for only 1 ST. Anyone looking for him must roll at least 5 vs IQ to notice him. It's easiest to remain unnoticeable when you already blend in.

Same situation, but the wizard is wearing a bright read, glittering sequined gown, twirling a new years noisemaker over his head with one hand, juggling a lit torch with the other, and dancing a rambunctious jig while singing Bohemian Rhapsody at the top of his lungs. To successfully cast Unnoticeability now he must roll 5 vs DX, pay 10 ST to cast, and 3 more ST per turn to maintain. Anyone looking for him now must roll a maximum of only 3 dice vs IQ to notice him. They may roll one less die if they already hate Bohemian Rhapsody.

[JohnPaulB]

Originally Posted by phiwum

I'm thinking about golems from BOU. I think it's great that they are Unnoticeable. Seems appropriate. The following questions aren't so much about golems but about unnoticeability, especially as a permanent ability. I'm looking for how others would play this interesting effect.

I think of unnoticeability as hopped up Stealth Talent or a family member of Invisibility. They are invisible as in you don’t see them, but also not hear them, smell them, feel them…

Its almost a form of mass hypnosis in that the victims blot out what is going on. So perhaps they actually do hear the perpetrator singing Bohemian Rhapsody with a NY noisemaker going (as Plambeck suggests), but the victim actually does hear it very muffled and attributes it to something far off in distance or another person nearby. Maybe he was bumped by the perpetrator, but the victim thought he just stumbled or his muscles cramped. Maybe he smells the perpetrator’s garlic breath and thinks that the restaurant’s ragu is going to be delicious today.

Question 1:

Suppose Fred and Wilma are on the street and Fred notices the golem, but Wilma doesn't. If Fred points and hoots and hollers that there's a clay man over there, does Wilma get a second die roll? Does she get a third if he keeps it up?

I would say that Wilma blew it this encounter and if the perpetrator doesn’t do anything wild, Fred can point all he wants and Wilma will not get it. She might think that Fred is pointing out something farther down the road, or at a nearby mouse, etc.

Perhaps as much hooting as Fred is doing, Wilma might make a roll again, and if she succeeds, she may get a ‘corner of the eye’ feeling that she is missing something, but still can’t SEE it.

Question 2:

Suppose the golem attacks Fred and Wilma still hasn't noticed it. Does she notice that Fred is getting the snot stomped out of him? Or does she not notice anything at all unusual about Fred?

I think that Wilma will notice Fred getting affected by something. Fred is convulsing and perhaps there is blood spilling out. She will react to what is happening to Fred, but she won’t notice the perpetrator if she failed her roll. She might assume an invisible being is attacking him or perhaps he is getting hit from a prodd. If she goes over to help Fred and bumps into the perpetrator, she may think that she is just clumsy or hysterical at Fred’s convulsion.

Here's what I'm thinking. I think that if Wilma misses her initial throw to see the golem, then she gets a second throw (still 4/IQ) to see him when Fred tries to point out the golem. If she misses that, she doesn't get another attempt.

If Fred is in combat with an unnoticed golem, Wilma sees nothing unusual. If she tries to focus on Fred, she has trouble concentrating and just comes away with a vague feeling that nothing odd is happening, though she has no particular impression of what Fred is doing. If Fred is knocked out or killed and the combat ended, she will notice at that moment that he has suffered mysterious injuries.

Question 3:

I still have yet another question about how people play this. Suppose that after a thrashing, the golem leaves and Fred is revived. A week passes and the same golem happens by. Fred noticed the golem once. Does he notice him again "for free" or must he roll 4/IQ as usual?

I ask because ITL 30 says that once you've noticed an unnoticeable, you see him clearly. It's not clear to me whether this means you always notice the same golem in different encounters. The spell text is written for a thrown spell, not a permanent ability.

I believe the unnoticeability is per incident. I recall that the spell has a 3 to cast and plus 1 each turn it is maintained. That would be a short unnoticeable time.


What will Fred think about his failed recognition of his unnoticeable thrashing? He will know that he got a thrashing, but he won’t know how it happened. He will probably think someone sideswiped him and he couldn’t see who before he went down.


Edit: I thank Phiwum for originating this question and all the others who posted. You helped me come up with my vision of this problem.