Topic: How to avoid magical scrying/detection in RM2

[kyussopeth]

Other than unpresence & non-detection which are available to Mystics & Illusionists, what spells/spell lists can be used to avoid being magically detected & spied upon? My campaign is not an RM2 campaign it's a hybrid of AD&D (heavily house ruled) with the RM2 spell lists.

It seems to me that the scriers, detectors, & diviners have all the advantages over all professions, but Mystics & Illusionist.

If I am not seeing something obvious please explain it to me as one would a child. Also if this is a common complaint/misconception please point me in the right direction for other useful posts here or elsewhere. My weak Google Fu found nothing.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

The Warlock and the Seer have one base list dedicated to protection vs. scrying in the RoCoII, whilst the Alchemist has a list in the RoCoV allowing him to build buildings protected vs. scrying. (the list is given to the Theocratist in the Al.Co. and, for my part, I give it to the RuneMaster as well, as I feel it fits him pretty well).

[yammahoper]

Castle and Ruins and the  Mentalism Companion have rules and spell list covering scrying. They are RM2 compatible.

[Peter R]

I have allowed PCs to research anti-detection spells as a part of detection mastery and detecting ways.

[kyussopeth]

Thanks for the replies.

I'm glad to see I did not miss something. I think the main way the spells like Presence, Awareness, Detect Ambush, as well as Finding, Conveyance & Vision Behind are avoided is that they cannot be active at all times. Am I right?

Also are the targets allowed a RR on any of the above spells? I don't seem to see any evidence that they are, unless there is a note in the RM2/RMC rules somewhere.

Here is how I use the spells in my game. I understand that there is a die roll every time a spell is cast in RM. Since D&D doesn't do this I only have die rolls (level checks or attack rolls) by casters when they cast spells like Firebolt & when casting divination spells. Everything else is handled with saving throws by the target.

For info gathering spells like Presence I have the caster roll a simple level check (d20+character level) if it equals or exceeds the taget's level (HD) then the spell works on the target. If the caster's roll exceeds by 11 or more the target is not automatically aware of the spell.

Does that sound like I'm making info gathering spells too strong or too weak?

[Peter R]

The Presnce spell is type 'Im' which means it is an Information spell AND a mental attack so I allow resistance rolls against them.

[kyussopeth]

The Presnce spell is type 'Im' which means it is an Information spell AND a mental attack so I allow resistance rolls against them.

I should have noticed this in the effort of converting the spells I lost sight of that. I may have to add saving throws onto Presence spells. However they aren't free (i.e. they cost PP's) in my game.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Also are the targets allowed a RR on any of the above spells? I don't seem to see any evidence that they are, unless there is a note in the RM2/RMC rules somewhere.

Peter R partially answered your question: whether an RR is allowed is defined by the spell's type, e.g. no RR for E spells, RR for F spells, RR for M spells, etc.
That being said, Presence is P in RM2 whilst U in RMSS...

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Does that sound like I'm making info gathering spells too strong or too weak?

Too weak, IMO. In a nutshell, you're complaining that "some" people are able to spy on other through radars, microphones, bugs, cameras or whatever, that not everyone are able to be protected against it, and only "some" people with the money and technological means may have ECM against it, so it's unfair and such everyone should be able to resist such devices. Well, IMO, it's how it works: if you want protection against such spying devices, you put the money and means into it.
In your case, spells against scrying exist. If you want to be protected against scrying, either you learn them or you buy items that do/hire people who do. It's not more unfair than the previous RL example.

Sometimes, I wonder why people complain about how some spells are "unfair" and want to fix them, even though such exact situations happen IRL (although with technological items rather than magical ones/spells) and no one "complains" the same about it.

[jdale]

Also are the targets allowed a RR on any of the above spells? I don't seem to see any evidence that they are, unless there is a note in the RM2/RMC rules somewhere.

Peter R partially answered your question: whether an RR is allowed is defined by the spell's type, e.g. no RR for E spells, RR for F spells, RR for M spells, etc.
That being said, Presence is P in RM2 whilst U in RMSS...

And type U gets no resistance roll. The other mental detection spells in RMSS are mostly type Pm, which means they are Passive and cannot be stopped by resistance, but if you make a successful RR you will at least be aware that the spell has occurred.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

And type U gets no resistance roll. The other mental detection spells in RMSS are mostly type Pm, which means they are Passive and cannot be stopped by resistance, but if you make a successful RR you will at least be aware that the spell has occurred.

But the little "m" subclasses them as "Mental Attack spell. These spells affect the target’s mind and are subject to mental defenses." thus RR would occur twice, once against the "P" type to see whether the target detects he's subjected to such a spell, and one against the "m" subtype to see whether he actually resists it.

To be honest, U is weird. RMSS defines such spells as "These spells only affect the caster, a willing target, or a target incapable of resistance. (...) Most healing spells are of this type." Why were Presence spells changed from P to U?

[jdale]

That's not how I read it. The "m" indicates it's mental, so mental defenses apply, but "m" does not inherently grant a RR. Otherwise in the case of Fm spells, you would get two RRs. So, I conclude Pm means you get a single RR, with the outcome of the RR defined by the P, which means you don't stop the spell but only detect it.

I think Presence as U is reasonable. You are only getting a count (though some give more info), and since the spell costs no PP you cast it a lot. If you had to roll a RR for every person in the radius every time, that would be unwieldy.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

That's not how I read it. The "m" indicates it's mental, so mental defenses apply, but "m" does not inherently grant a RR. Otherwise in the case of Fm spells, you would get two RRs. So, I conclude Pm means you get a single RR, with the outcome of the RR defined by the P, which means you don't stop the spell but only detect it.

Ah, but how would you play out the "mental defenses apply" without a RR then, since most "mental defense" spells merely add a RR bonus?

I think Presence as U is reasonable. You are only getting a count (though some give more info), and since the spell costs no PP you cast it a lot. If you had to roll a RR for every person in the radius every time, that would be unwieldy.

P only allows RR for the target to detect whether he's subjected to such a spell, though, at GM's discretion, so, really, that wouldn't be unwieldy to leave it as P, as most targets wouldn't actually pay attention to whether they're being scryed on or not, or it's not important enough to bother. OTOH, in case it matters, well, a RR is allowed by the rules.
My main problem with defining Presence as U, though, is that it breaks the definition for U: spells that "only affect the caster, a willing target, or a target incapable of resistance". Uh?

[kyussopeth]

Does that sound like I'm making info gathering spells too strong or too weak?

Too weak, IMO. In a nutshell, you're complaining that "some" people are able to spy on other through radars, microphones, bugs, cameras or whatever, that not everyone are able to be protected against it, and only "some" people with the money and technological means may have ECM against it, so it's unfair and such everyone should be able to resist such devices. Well, IMO, it's how it works: if you want protection against such spying devices, you put the money and means into it.
In your case, spells against scrying exist. If you want to be protected against scrying, either you learn them or you buy items that do/hire people who do. It's not more unfair than the previous RL example.

Sometimes, I wonder why people complain about how some spells are "unfair" and want to fix them, even though such exact situations happen IRL (although with technological items rather than magical ones/spells) and no one "complains" the same about it.

You misread me then.

I am not complaining. My PC's are finding that higher level beings are continually able to locate & find them & they cannot consistently reciprocate. I am using RM spells because they are better than D&D spells (especially in this area). I just don't have that much experience (with RM) & am trying to learn from people who use these rules more than me. In my experience GM's have all kinds of power I've always tried to give my players good experiences & an even break. I let the chips fall where they may (& the dice) therefore as the GM I must hold myself responsible for not overwhelming them by making rulings that are fair to them.

[rafmeister]

Various defense spells would permit a bonus to RR roll allowed to notice the detection in a Pm spell. In short, players would be more likely to notice someone reading their mind. It would not PREVENT the reading, but the awareness might permit players to react and think about making carrot juice instead of focusing on details about their next heist.

Compare this to Cancel Mentalism, available on Spell Defense (Open Channeling), Spell Wall (Open Essence), Dispelling Ways (Closed Essence), and on Spell Resistance (Open Mentalism). Cancel Mentalism may require concentration, but it can flat out negate presence spells from a Mentalist. A low level bard might sit in his room at the inn, practice his concentration skills, and indirectly shield a group from some sorts of detection simply by being in the radius of effect!