A third sense type

[dstarfire]

Currently hero has 2 sense types: passive, which simply receives sensory information produced by the 'target' (or the target's interaction with it's environment); and active which broadcasts some sort of signal and senses how that signal is reflected/refracted by the surrounding environment.

There's a variation of active that isn't very well addressed in the rules: active, with an independent transmitter.

A perfect example of this is sight. In most cases, the sensory information gathered via sight isn't directly produced by the target, but rather how the target reflects/refracts that light. Another good example would be a tracking device (the transmitter is attached to the device you're tracking, and the receiver is carried by yourself). I'm sure we could come up with dozens more.

Has anybody ever come up with some rules for building an active sense that has the receiver seperate from the transmitter?

On a side note, this is why 'create light' effects are built with Images, rather than Change Environment, or some such.

[ghost-angel]

It could be argued that all senses have that....

A Percievable something is defined as both a Transmitter and a Receiver. Without one you don't have the other, and thus nothing to Sense.

But anyways... to address the idea of something outside the character producing the signal:

Focus is a good way to go.

[bigdamnhero]

Focus is a good way to go.
You could even wind up with multiple Foci; for example, a pair of infrared goggles and an infrared flashlight. Tho now that I think about it, I might be more inclined to build the former as Enhanced Senses with Limitation: Requires IR light source, and the IR flashlight as some type of Images that is only visible to IR vision. (Hmm... is the later an Adv or a Lim, depending on the campaign?)

[ghost-angel]

yes.

I know we've used Images: UV Light (basically UV Flashlights) to allow UV Vision to work. No Limitation on the Vision since it's simply understood there are some places your powers down work: like where there is no UV Light source.

[David Johnston]

Currently hero has 2 sense types: passive, which simply receives sensory information produced by the 'target' (or the target's interaction with it's environment); and active which broadcasts some sort of signal and senses how that signal is reflected/refracted by the surrounding environment.

There's a variation of active that isn't very well addressed in the rules: active, with an independent transmitter.


That's because if there's an independant transmitter, that's a "passive" sense in the first place.

[ghost-angel]

That's because if there's an independant transmitter, that's a "passive" sense in the first place.
good point!

If you're not transmitting, but are receiving, you're using a passive sense.

[Frenchman]

I always found the active sense rules to be funny - if you can just define a sense as active (for less points that a passive one, to boot) then you essentially gain the advantage of the transmit adder for nothing!
I feel they could be better described with two parts: transmitting and receiving.
The receiving part of a sense could be either active or passive - either you have to 'turn it on' or it is 'always on'
The transmitting part is not one that every character has - most can't transmit any sensory information other than (maybe, if I understand the rules correctly) sound.
So you could have a sense that passivly recieves ambient information, such as human vision, or you could have one that actively recieves it, such as a mystic 'aura sight' which can be turned on by concentrating.
Alternatly, you could have either a passive or an active sense with transmit. A passive sense with transmit is kinda like a person with a flashlight, or one of those fish that have glowing organs beneath their eyes. You can just recieve the ambient sensory information, but if there isn't enough of it, you can turn on the flashlight to create your own source of sensory info. An active sense is similar, except that you have to turn on the reception as well as the transmission.

[prestidigitator]

Huh. For that matter, why do we use either Images or Change Environment for creating light? Why not a Naked Transmit Adder for the Sight Group (or a particular sense like Normal Sight) with a bonus to the Perception roll bought as if it were a normal Sense (Group) to make it brighter and in rare cases also the Area of Effect Advantage? Hmm.... :think:

[David Johnston]

I always found the active sense rules to be funny - if you can just define a sense as active (for less points that a passive one, to boot) then you essentially gain the advantage of the transmit adder for nothing!


Only if you have the Power skill and a working knowledge of Morse Code.

[prestidigitator]

Only if you have the Power skill and a working knowledge of Morse Code.
Right. The point being, basically, that the Transmit Adder is typically used for communication, not just flooding an area with energy that can be used to detect the environment with an appropriate sense.

With that point in mind, scratch what I said above about using the Transmit Adder for Light. Instead, buy an Active Sense (see the section in 5ER on senses and buying them back as Disadvantages to determine the appropriate cost for a normal Sense or Sense Group) with a Limitation Broadcast Only (-2) to represent that it cannot itself be used to directly detect anything (another Active Sense must be used for that); buy Per bonuses and possibly Area of Effect for it as I said above, though. I rather like that idea.

[Dust Raven]

good point!

If you're not transmitting, but are receiving, you're using a passive sense.

That's just what I'm thinking. Sight is passive because you are not generating the light used to see by. An interesting thought would be what would happen if you just define your sight as an active sense. Would that give you a flashlight? It's definately a different take on the idea and I'm not sure how you'd build it except to buy a second Sight sense for the character. And would it be too abusive to let everyone else suddenly see just because your own sense is active (thus providing the element other character's passive Sight requires).

[prestidigitator]

And would it be too abusive to let everyone else suddenly see just because your own sense is active (thus providing the element other character's passive Sight requires).
Would it? It's going to let your enemies see too (and see you particularly well as the source of the light, for that matter).

[Dust Raven]

Would it? It's going to let your enemies see too (and see you particularly well as the source of the light, for that matter).

Well, given it's a nigh universal default sense, I guess it does balance nicely. It'd be easier to write up than a funky Images too. The only trick would be in handling it in game. Only things the character sees (well, in the character's 120 degree arc of perception in the direction he's facing) will be visible, and of course the character himself with that beam of light pouring out of him.

[Dust Raven]

Would it? It's going to let your enemies see too (and see you particularly well as the source of the light, for that matter).

Well, given it's a nigh universal default sense, I guess it does balance nicely. It'd be easier to write up than a funky Images too. The only trick would be in handling it in game. Only things the character sees (well, in the character's 120 degree arc of perception in the direction he's facing) will be visible, and of course the character himself with that beam of light pouring out of him.

And of course the entire time I'm think through this all I can picture is a guy with flashlight eyes like the typical giant robot spot light effect.

[Phil]

And would it be too abusive to let everyone else suddenly see just because your own sense is active (thus providing the element other character's passive Sight requires).

Sounds right to me. As a minimum, active use of the sense broadcasts the sensors location. However, depending on the sensitivity of the sense (e.g. for normal sight, the number of photons being shot out) they may as a side-effect make sight possible for others.

It certainly makes about a million times more 'sense' to build a flashlight like this than as images.

[Lxndr]

I think I'd require the Transmit adder for other people to be able to see using your sense (though an Active sight would probably alert people to the fact that you're seeing). Because you are communicating something with the sense - namely, whatever it is you're seeing. It's not really a language thing (so probably it would have a limitation 'only what I see') but is still a communication to others.

[gojira]

Yeah, I was also going to going to add that the thrid mode proposed by the OP really isn't necessary. Requiring an external transmitter is really just passive and interacting with the environment. The environment is lit, or it isn't. There is a light source available for the target to reflect, or the target generates light, or something, or your sight is usless.

Ditto with sound. The sound needs a medium to transmit through. Ears don't work in a vacuum. You don't have to buy a planet with an atmosphere when you buy some hearing related power. Tha'd be silly.

Etc. So I don't see that the third type of sense is needed. There are different types of passive receivers, based on how often they are used. Sight and sound are really common, and light sources are available everywhere, so sight is pretty expensive. Seing by radio waves or somehthing is much trickier than using light, so it's a little cheaper 'cause it's harder and less common. Etc.

[ghost-angel]

Lxndr has my feelings on it as well.

If your sight is Active others can't use it to see, just you, but others do know you're using something to see with.

If you put Transmit on your Sight you can let others see what you're seeing. If anything.

[Dust Raven]

I think I'd require the Transmit adder for other people to be able to see using your sense (though an Active sight would probably alert people to the fact that you're seeing). Because you are communicating something with the sense - namely, whatever it is you're seeing. It's not really a language thing (so probably it would have a limitation 'only what I see') but is still a communication to others.

I see the Transmit Adder as giving the character a choice if he shares/communicates the information or not. In the example of a Flashlight, there is no choice involved. Either everybody sees, or nobody sees (and only those in visual range of the area lit up can see it, with their visual range depending on their own Normal Sight, not the character with the flashlight).

[David Johnston]

I think I'd require the Transmit adder for other people to be able to see using your sense (though an Active sight would probably alert people to the fact that you're seeing). Because you are communicating something with the sense - namely, whatever it is you're seeing. It's not really a language thing (so probably it would have a limitation 'only what I see') but is still a communication to others.

They aren't using your sense. They're using their senses. You simply happen to be emitting what they use to percieve.

[dstarfire]

They aren't using your sense. They're using their senses. You simply happen to be emitting what they use to percieve.

This argument brings us back to the original point: How do you build an active sense where the transmitter is seperate from the receiver?

One of the problems with a passive sense is that it cannot detect obfuscation. If something blocks the flow of information (light, RF, etc.) from transmitter to receiver, it'll be detected, even if it is totally undetectable otherwise. This is one of the core benefits of an active sense: the perceiver's actions determine the effectiveness of their senses, not the object being perceived.

Only with an active sense is the lack of sensory input (i.e. the absence of a return signal) information. No radar return means open space, a spot of black means something. What does silence mean when there's no noise? What does tasteless mean when you're not licking something? What does an odorless gas smell like?

[ghost-angel]

This argument brings us back to the original point: How do you build an active sense where the transmitter is seperate from the receiver?

One of the problems with a passive sense is that it cannot detect obfuscation. If something blocks the flow of information (light, RF, etc.) from transmitter to receiver, it'll be detected, even if it is totally undetectable otherwise. This is one of the core benefits of an active sense: the perceiver's actions determine the effectiveness of their senses, not the object being perceived.

Only with an active sense is the lack of sensory input (i.e. the absence of a return signal) information. No radar return means open space, a spot of black means something. What does silence mean when there's no noise? What does tasteless mean when you're not licking something? What does an odorless gas smell like?
I still can't help but come back to you describing a passive sense.

If you aren't transmitting to recieve and are just receiving then you're a passive receiver.

You have two choices:
Wait for return. (passive)
Ping and wait for return. (active)

At the very least what you're describing is the special effects of creating an Active Sense through a Focus:
My sight is passive, i must have light.
There is no light here, I must create light. But I do not want others to utilize it.
I will create Thing to create light so that only I may utilize it, and others who understand what Thing is.

Thus you have changed Passive Sight to Active Sight.

[PhilFleischmann]

This argument brings us back to the original point: How do you build an active sense where the transmitter is seperate from the receiver?
If the transmitter is separate from the receiver, then by definition it's a passive sense.


One of the problems with a passive sense is that it cannot detect obfuscation. ....
Only with an active sense is the lack of sensory input (i.e. the absence of a return signal) information.
That's not quite right. If I open my eyes in the middle of the night, I can tell that it's night. If I turn the key and I don't hear anything, I know my battery is dead. If it doesn't look like a duck, and it doesn't quack like a duck, then it isn't a duck.

It's part of the reason I've always been a little confused why active senses cost the same as passive senses. I don't see what disadvantage a passive sense has to compare to the disadvantage of broadcasting your location does with an active sense. If two senses provide the same information, but one emits an active ping, why should they cost the same?

[Lxndr]

Because the passive sense is dependent on a transmitter?

[David Johnston]

This argument brings us back to the original point: How do you build an active sense where the transmitter is seperate from the receiver?


Any such sense is passive, not active.

Only with an active sense is the lack of sensory input (i.e. the absence of a return signal) information.

Not true. If you know that there are radio transmitters in range of your passive radio sense, then being unable to receive them tells you that you are in some kind of radio dead zone.

[David Johnston]

If the transmitter is separate from the receiver, then by definition it's a passive sense.


That's not quite right. If I open my eyes in the middle of the night, I can tell that it's night. If I turn the key and I don't hear anything, I know my battery is dead. If it doesn't look like a duck, and it doesn't quack like a duck, then it isn't a duck.

It's part of the reason I've always been a little confused why active senses cost the same as passive senses. I don't see what disadvantage a passive sense has to compare to the disadvantage of broadcasting your location does with an active sense. If two senses provide the same information, but one emits an active ping, why should they cost the same?

Because a passive radio sense, for example, only works if in fact there are ambient radio waves. If you see by passive radio but you are in an area where there are no radio emissions worth mention, then you are blind.

[ghost-angel]

Or in the dark....

[PhilFleischmann]

Because a passive radio sense, for example, only works if in fact there are ambient radio waves. If you see by passive radio but you are in an area where there are no radio emissions worth mention, then you are blind.
I don't understand. Are you talking about sight or radio sense? I've never heard of passive radar. A passive sonar sense lets you sense solid objects around you just like an active sonar. Other than the pings, what's the difference?

Hmmm... Starting thought process over...

Normal (passive) sight can see things if there is light. If there isn't light, you can see that there isn't light, but you can't see the things.
Active sight lets you see things even if there is no other source of light. Your eyes emit light - at least enough for you to see, even if it isn't enough to be useful to those around you. That is, it doesn't illuminate the area for others to see the things. But it does enit enough light for you to be seen.

OK, I think I've got it now.

[Armitage]

I don't understand. Are you talking about sight or radio sense? I've never heard of passive radar.

A sensor that detects emitted or reflected radar waves without generating them itself. Passive Radar Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radar)
A radar detector would qualify, detecting vehicles by their own navigational radar. Or detectors using someone else's radar as the signal source, like they used in World War II.
There are also systems that can detect aircraft using reflected ambient TV, FM radio and cellular phone signals.

[PhilFleischmann]

A sensor that detects emitted or reflected radar waves without generating them itself.
Yes. But as I understand it, the purpose is to detect radar emitters, not to detect physical objects like terrain features and non-radar-emitting vehicles. IOW, active and passive radar are used for two very different purposes. And they would be built as two different senses in HERO:

Radar: detect solid objects (season to taste), Active.
Passive Radar: detect radar emissions, Passive.

[prestidigitator]

Yes. But as I understand it, the purpose is to detect radar emitters, not to detect physical objects like terrain features and non-radar-emitting vehicles. IOW, active and passive radar are used for two very different purposes. And they would be built as two different senses in HERO:

Radar: detect solid objects (season to taste), Active.
Passive Radar: detect radar emissions, Passive.
.

Or detectors using someone else's radar as the signal source, like they used in World War II.