Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Immunity to Normal Weapons

Posted by: Stormdrake Jan 16 2008, 04:58 PM

In the Game level thread some one mentioned that the critter power "Immunity to Normal Weapons" had been updated. Can any one confirm this as I have not found any errata on the power. As it appears in the original hard copy SR4 main book it simply says that the power grants an immunity equal to twice its magic rating. That weapon DV's that come in below this do no harm. It says nothing about adding in extra successes or modifiers for burst or full auto. Any help would be appreciated.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jan 16 2008, 05:17 PM

Well, the Immunity entry tells us that ItNW works like Hardened Armor, the entry for which tells us to use the modified DV. So really what we're looking for is the section where it says the modifications to DV from burst/auto fire don't count towards the modified DV. I'm looking for that part.

Posted by: Demerzel Jan 16 2008, 05:17 PM

There appears to be no errata for the Immunity Power.

Errata 1.5 (the latest) is available here:
http://www.shadowrun4.com/wordpress/?p=157

Ther Immunity power appears on p.288 and spills over to p.289, and there is errata for Dual Natured on p287, then Psychokinesis on p290, so there appears to be no errata as of the most recent errata.

So the text in your book should be correct. Are you looking for a specific clarification? Can you give an example situation to interpret?

Posted by: FrankTrollman Jan 16 2008, 05:19 PM

QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)

That would be on page 143 in the autofire rules.

QUOTE

Note that his DV modifier does not apply when comparing the DV to the armor rating.

-Frank

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jan 16 2008, 05:21 PM

Right. There it is. Thanks Frank!

Stormdrake: All sorted out?

Posted by: lunchbox311 Jan 16 2008, 05:33 PM

slight derail:

Our group found the hardened armor rules to be too wonky... the all or nothing approach did not do well.

We instead proposed this idea:

when something has hardened armor it gets a number of automatic hits applied to the damage resistance test equal to 1/2 its rating (round UP) the other half of the dice are rolled as normal

So far this has worked well for us, vehicles and the like are very tough but do not need rocket launchers (or gunslinger adepts) to scare. Spirits are still a little tough but then again a high force spirit is supposed to be scary.

Example:

[ Spoiler ]

This has led to a more consistent damage soak in our games and does not create those strange variables where when the hardened armor is just exceeded that the vehicle (or whatever) suddenly falls apart into a heap of crap.

Thoughts?

Edit: spelling

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jan 16 2008, 05:44 PM

QUOTE (lunchbox311)

Thoughts?

Hardened Armor is another thing that breaks at the high-end. I think your fix is more or less exactly how it should've worked in the first place.
It leaves the armor impervious to weak attacks. It makes the armor less impervious to moderate attacks. It makes the armor more effective against strong attacks. So it nicely smooths the destroyed-or-nothing effect which occurs for high hardened armor values.

Posted by: Stormdrake Jan 16 2008, 07:15 PM

Just a follow up to this. I ask it because my players will, lol. If the DV + successes are greater than the critters hardened armor rating is the armor then negated or does the critter still get to add all the dice from the hardened armor into its damage resistance rolls? I can't see why it would be negated but figured I would ask.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jan 16 2008, 07:20 PM

Yeah, if (base DV+net hits) is greater than the hardened armor rating, then the hardened armor is treated exactly like normal armor, and is rolled along with Body to resist (base DV+net hits+autofire modifiers)

edit: Unless you're doing it lunchbox311's way. I think his/her way is a good way and I'll probably start using it, but as with all house rules I recommend you do it "right" and see how it goes before you go fiddling with things.

Posted by: Demerzel Jan 16 2008, 07:20 PM

They still get Body + Armor for resistance tests.

Posted by: Dashifen Jan 16 2008, 07:21 PM

The critter still gets to roll its armor even if the DV is greater than it. In fact, if the armor is hardened, that's the only time that the critter needs to roll as the hardened armor will, otherwise, negate the attack!

@lunchbox311
I like that. My way was always to subtract the hardened armor rating from the DV and roll it all making vehicles and hardened critters very, very dangerous, but I think I might play around with your method for a bit and see if I like it better.

Posted by: lunchbox311 Jan 16 2008, 07:34 PM

QUOTE (Dashifen)

@lunchbox311
I like that. My way was always to subtract the hardened armor rating from the DV and roll it all making vehicles and hardened critters very, very dangerous, but I think I might play around with your method for a bit and see if I like it better.

We tried the whole hardened armor value as automatic hits during a session but it was crazy. It happened to be a higher end run with the runners dealing with multiple Citymasters. They had access to AV rockets but those still make very small dents in the vehicles (took 3-4 rockets per Citymaster)

After that session we decided to use half automatic and half rolled.

It is really nice and does not add much overhead to the table (especially if you buy your hits with the leftover dicepool.)

@Moon-Hawk: HIS way

Posted by: deek Jan 16 2008, 07:55 PM

I like it...I have spent way too much time scratching my head as my players shot up an armored vehicle. Thinking that 10 hardened armor was safe and then them turning it to swiss cheese in a single IP...the all or nothing aspect really does suck.

Posted by: FrankTrollman Jan 16 2008, 08:45 PM

I've been doing it like lunchbox's for some time, but not rolling the other half. Made AP very very good, and seemed to work rather well.

But I do like lunchbox's suggestion, seems like it'll make spirits poof a bit less when exposed to high end weaponry.

-Frank

Posted by: Ryu Jan 16 2008, 08:49 PM

I like it, too. Nice approch, though we shall wait for what Arsenal brings right now.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 16 2008, 08:55 PM

So, for lunchbox's rules (or those who use a variant) ...

What figure do you use as a base to see if the attack actually bounced?

For example, assuming a Force 5 Spirit, would you use 10 (double Force, as in the rules), 5 (its Force, and the base use for 'auto-hits'), or 5 + net hits from the other 5 dice (which I think would be interesting, in that it inserts an unknown element into the equation)?

Posted by: Ryu Jan 16 2008, 08:57 PM

I would have used the first, but the last is definitly more interesting.

Posted by: Dashifen Jan 16 2008, 09:14 PM

I've always used the first option as well (double Force) mostly because it is indicated in the rules thusly.

Posted by: Glyph Jan 17 2008, 03:40 AM

One thing to remember about spirits and their Immunity to Normal Weapons is that it works like hardened armor against normal attacks, but is negated by magical attacks. So an adept attacking an air spirit with a weapon focus, for example, will do normal damage, and in addition, the air spirit doesn't get any of that "armor" to roll to resist the attack with.

Posted by: Dashifen Jan 17 2008, 04:07 AM

Are you sure? I always just assumed that by negating Hardened Armor, it became just "normal" armored.

Posted by: Glyph Jan 17 2008, 05:25 AM

Yeah. Immunities are pretty strictly limited. Immunity to fire doesn't do a thing against electrical attacks, so immunity to normal weapons shouldn't do anything to stop magical attacks. Relevant quote from pg. 288, with emphasis:

QUOTE

this immunity applies to all weapons that are not magical (weapon foci, spells, adept or critter powers).

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 17 2008, 08:01 AM

...so this means if the Short One (#99) whacks at a spirit with her WF Katana, it only gets to roll it's effective Body to soak the damage?

Posted by: Cardul Jan 17 2008, 08:02 AM

QUOTE (Glyph)

QUOTE

this immunity applies to all weapons that are not magical (weapon foci, spells, adept or critter powers).

OOoooooo....Here is a neat little loophole with that: If I have bonelacing, and I punch something with immunity to normal weapons, then, it does not get its immunity, because my hand while, sure, is hitting harder because it has metal nt bone in there, is not a weapon!

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 08:12 AM

QUOTE (Cardul @ Jan 17 2008, 06:02 PM)

If I have bonelacing, and I punch something with immunity to normal weapons, then, it does not get its immunity, because my hand while, sure, is hitting harder because it has metal nt bone in there, is not a weapon!

Only if you also possess Killing Hands. A fist, even a fist lined with bone lacing, is still considered a normal weapon, just like it would be if it were a cyberlimb or packing brass knuckles.

I think you may have missed the part where it mentions that ItNW applies to pretty much everything non-magical.

Posted by: FrankTrollman Jan 17 2008, 10:36 AM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

...so this means if the Short One (#99) whacks at a spirit with her WF Katana, it only gets to roll it's effective Body to soak the damage?

Yes, exactly.

Now you get to ask: Why would people have Weapon Focus Katanas? And honestly I still can't answer that. Weapon Foci bypass Immunity to Normal Weapons and Regeneration and I still don't care.

-Frank

Posted by: GentlemanLoser Jan 17 2008, 11:00 AM

WF are brilliant! Adding thier Force as dice to your attack, which should result in extra damage.

The Astral stuff and being able to wack creatures on the Astral Plane with one when perceiving is just gravy.

It's all about the extra dice to hit!

Posted by: Cardul Jan 17 2008, 11:17 AM

QUOTE (Fortune)

QUOTE (Cardul @ Jan 17 2008, 06:02 PM)

Well, you see...one CAN tend to go with the literal approach. Simple fact is: I can go on a plane and keep my hands(for now), so they are not weapons.

Also, considering that your hands are living, while a weapon is not...I think if could actually be cool to face something that you shoot multiple times, and it shrugs off, but Bob the Troll gives it a massive uppercut, and you hear bones crack...

Admittedly, there is also the simple fact that the things that have Immunity to Normal Weapons are not things you would be engaging in hand-to-hand unless you were a Physical Adept in mst cases...because, well them against mundane fists=Runner becomes kibble...but, I could still see that. And, of course, if you don't have something libe bone density or bone-lacing, it will take a lout of pounding to take something down, anyway...

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 11:23 AM

QUOTE

I think if could actually be cool to face something that you shoot multiple times, and it shrugs off, but Bob the Troll gives it a massive uppercut, and you hear bones crack...

allways been like that, will allways be like that . . and it is good that way ^^

Posted by: Cardul Jan 17 2008, 12:26 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

QUOTE

I think if could actually be cool to face something that you shoot multiple times, and it shrugs off, but Bob the Troll gives it a massive uppercut, and you hear bones crack...

allways been like that, will allways be like that . . and it is good that way ^^

Exactly. Which is why I do not consider fists or feet to be "weapons", especially since naturally, they only deal stun damage. My GM might disagree..we will see waht she says after re-reading the rules on Immunity to Normal Weapons, but...I still think it is a cool image..

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 12:32 PM

it IS a cool image . . but only adepts with killing hands get to do that to ghosts, everybody else does attack of will or however that is called.
that uses i think willpower for strength or something like that.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 01:43 PM

QUOTE (Cardul @ Jan 17 2008, 09:17 PM)

Simple fact is: I can go on a plane and keep my hands(for now), so they are not weapons.

Until you use them (or even threatened to use them) in an act of assault or violence of some kind. The same argument could be made for a bottle, or a table leg, or even another metahuman body. The fact remains that if something is used as a weapon in Shadowrun, then it is considered a weapon according to the rules. Fists (and even fists with bone lacing) have a listed damage base in the rules, and the is no mention of bone lacing (or any other normal implant) being inherently magical in nature. If that weapon is non-magical in nature, then ItNW applies.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 02:15 PM

in fact, if you are a Boxer or Karate-Ka or Judo-Ka or any such thing, your Hands and feet at least, if not your whole body, are actually considered a lethal weapon . . if you happen to get involved in a brawl you're in deep shit if there's no proof of you acting in pure self defense . . i know a barkeeper, he's been a price boxer once and is big and strong and still training . . he does not defend himself because once when he did that he got into more trouble than the guy who attacked him exactly for that reason . .

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 17 2008, 03:59 PM

QUOTE (FrankTrollman)

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid @ Jan 17 2008, 03:01 AM)

...so this means if the Short One (#99) whacks at a spirit with her WF Katana, it only gets to roll it's effective Body to soak the damage?

....yikes, Short Stuff (#100, yay, the century mark) just became a whole lot nastier, even when using her Killing Hands.

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

n fact, if you are a Boxer or Karate-Ka or Judo-Ka or any such thing, your Hands and feet at least, if not your whole body, are actually considered a lethal weapon . . if you happen to get involved in a brawl you're in deep shit if there's no proof of you acting in pure self defense . . i know a barkeeper, he's been a price boxer once and is big and strong and still training . . he does not defend himself because once when he did that he got into more trouble than the guy who attacked him exactly for that reason .

...I know, the law is pretty twisted in that way. Where I live, If I shoot and possibly kill someone who is breaking into my place & threatening me, It's considered self defence. If I say whack him in the hand or leg with my Louisville Slugger or my fighting staff (with which I am trained) I'm up for assault and he's the victim even though I was not necessarily using lethal force. In my book, he gave up his rights to have me prosecuted by the nature of his act. However, let's not get into a lengthy derail about this here.
[/derail]

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 04:02 PM

yes, let's end this with the words:"your hands are not magical weapons, your hands are usual weapons . . at least if you are not an adept with killing hands or something similar . . and you know why? 'cause the books say so!" *g*

Posted by: lunchbox311 Jan 17 2008, 04:06 PM

QUOTE (Fortune)

We use the 5+5
Force 5 spirit has 5 auto hits meaning ANY attack doing 5 or less does no damage.
Since the spirit gets 5 more dice to doll it can possibly shrug off a couple more, (statistically almost 2 more,) meaning there is a neat level of unknown potential for a situation.

@Frank: I concur that these rules do make AP weapons VERY usefull. They are now in high demand in my game like they should be, (and are justified in their extreme cost.)

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 17 2008, 04:19 PM

...makes that PJSS with EXEX (or APDS, if you can get it) a lot more worth the cost.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 04:43 PM

QUOTE (lunchbox311)

Thanks. That's probably the direction I would be leaning, should I use these rules.

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 17 2008, 06:29 PM

My players will be fighting spirits this Saturday, I think I'm going to try this new rule. Not that it's needed, really. Freaking crazy troll adept.

Chris

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 06:36 PM

QUOTE

Freaking crazy troll adept

it's what they are there for, quit complaining *g*

hrm . . would power-throw bei considered as being magical enough to work against spirits and the such? probably not huh?

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 17 2008, 06:43 PM

...I would think if an adept also had Missile Mastery it would.

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jan 17 2008, 06:45 PM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

...I would think if an adept also had Missile Mastery it would.

Whoa, wait.....what?
Would it?
This would be HUGE in my gaming group. Does Missile Mastery make a thrown object non-normal, with respect to ItNW? Does power throw?
Granted most thrower builds have both, but does it?

Posted by: pbangarth Jan 17 2008, 06:53 PM

I don't see anything that says Missile Mastery or Power Throw do anything by themselves or in concert to overcome ItNW.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 07:16 PM

wasn't missle mastery the ability to snatch thrown things out of thin air? or was that missle parry? @.@
but yeah, think about it, this one power imbued the projectile with some energy from the adept to raise the damage von light to moderate in SR3 for example . . i think that would be a valid question O.o

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 17 2008, 07:27 PM

...don't have my sourcebook PDFs with me at the moment, but I thought there was something about items thrown by someone with Missile Mastery affecting targets with immunity to normal weapons. I could be in error.

As for Power throw, that just increases the DV of the attack the same as Critical Strike does for unarmed melee.

Posted by: Limited Infinity Jan 17 2008, 07:29 PM

There's a perfectly fluff reason why hands are normal weapons. It's the mojo or will behind the attack that makes not normal. So your hands aren't actually doing the damage to a spirit. Yes you take your hands with you to astral, but you replace your strength with charisma. If you are not projecting then you make the force of will attack, but not strength.

I would not allow missile mastery to get past immunity.

A) most magic is severed once an item leaves the person. (see enchanting firearms)

B) I would see missile mastery more as a velocity, angle, trajectory than an enhanced missile.

Posted by: Adarael Jan 17 2008, 07:45 PM

Power Throw + Missile Mastery + High Strength will generally penetrade ITNW just based on the gross level of damage a thrown weapon will inflict.

Posted by: Sponge Jan 17 2008, 09:56 PM

QUOTE (lunchbox311)

Our group found the hardened armor rules to be too wonky... the all or nothing approach did not do well.

Thoughts?

Personally I think the Hardened Armor rule works very well for, well, armored targets such as military vehicles and the like. Take for example a tank: small arms and small-caliber cannon fire and the like simply do nothing - they bounce off, explode harmlessly on the armor, etc. If a shot is big enough and powerful enough to penetrate the armor, it's probably going to "kill" the tank, as whatever solid bits get through the armor are going to destroy whatever is behind it, whether that's the engine, ammunition, crew, or whatever.

Whether Spirits, supernatural critters, cyberzombies, and the like should really be using Hardened Armor or not is, to me, a different question (and I don't have an opinion on it as I'm not familiar with how those things work out in actual play).

DS

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 10:20 PM

QUOTE

I would not allow missile mastery to get past immunity.

A) most magic is severed once an item leaves the person. (see enchanting firearms)

B) I would see missile mastery more as a velocity, angle, trajectory than an enhanced missile.

i pretty much only agree with you on point B, up untill then i would ask why the thrown weapon does more damage if any magical effects just simply stop when the thrown object is leaving the hand of throwing adept . .

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 10:25 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Jan 18 2008, 08:20 AM)

... i would ask why the thrown weapon does more damage if any magical effects just simply stop when the thrown object is leaving the hand of throwing adept . .

Because the Adept's magic affects his aim and ability with the weapon. It does not make the throwing weapon magic in and of itself. Ranged magical weapons do not work in Shadowrun. It is one of the core foundations of the magic system. You could have a Weapon Focus dagger, which works just fine in your hand. The moment you throw it though, it loses any bonuses for being a Weapon Focus, reverting back to what is effectively a non-magical weapon until such time as it comes back into contact with the person to which it is Bonded (or is re-Bonded, whichever comes first).

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 10:28 PM

QUOTE (Fortune)

QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Jan 18 2008, 08:20 AM)

... i would ask why the thrown weapon does more damage if any magical effects just simply stop when the thrown object is leaving the hand of throwing adept . .

Because the Adept's magic affects his aim and ability with the weapon. It does not make the throwing weapon magic in and of itself. Ranged magical weapons do not exist in Shadowrun. It is one of the core foundations of the magic system.

i know that bit about there not being any magical weapons in SR of course . . i'd just think that to improve his aim and ability with said weapons would come from improved attribute(whatever is used with throwing) and improved skill(throwing weapon) . . so what exactly does missle mastery DO?

Posted by: Moon-Hawk Jan 17 2008, 10:29 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

QUOTE (Fortune @ Jan 17 2008, 05:25 PM)

QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Jan 18 2008, 08:20 AM)

... i would ask why the thrown weapon does more damage if any magical effects just simply stop when the thrown object is leaving the hand of throwing adept . .

It enhances the adepts ability to throw, it does not enhance the object being thrown.
In other words: It's all in the wrist.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 10:30 PM

Allows you to throw non-weapons with the same type of skill. As an added bonus, it also grants a damage bonus for those thrown objects that are already considered missile weapons.

Also ... see my edit above.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 10:33 PM

ok, because it would be out of context forget about me asking WHAT and imagine i edited it to say HOW does it do that you nitpicks *grumbles*

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 10:38 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Jan 18 2008, 08:33 AM)

ok, because it would be out of context forget about me asking WHAT and imagine i edited it to say HOW does it do that you nitpicks *grumbles*

Ok.

As Moon-Hawk said, basically it's all in the Adept's wrist (or arm, or whatever). Missile Mastery mainly allows the Adept to get the best possible aerodynamics out of a given object, allowing him to actually do damage with something that would normally not be considered a deadly weapon. Because of his magical ability to use aerodynamics in this manner, he also makes weapons actually perform better in flight, granting a slight increase to their damage potential.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 10:54 PM

and again, i'd say that that was what attribute and skill/training and experience are supposed to do . .

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 11:01 PM

What skill training allows you to consistently pick up pretty much any portable object and effectively use it as a weapon ... every single time? We are talking about anything from a paper clip to a playing card to a tooth brush to a bowling ball ... every single time.

Missile Mastery is on top of any skill involved with throwing normal weaponry.

I understand that there are people in the real world that can do this type of thing with one or two, or even four or five different objects, but an Adept with Missile Mastery can pick up anything and use it as effectively as a mundane person trained to a similar level of skill uses a throwing knife.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 17 2008, 11:11 PM

i'm probably just arguing to be arguing and arguing semantics . . but shouldn't power-throw be the thing that makes things just do more ouchies when thrown by you?
anyone can pick up basically anything to use as a weapon . . yes, the street-samurai can actually do that too . . so he is using a hair-ping . . if he is that frigging good he can stab you in the heart or something with it . . there's rules for the improvised weapons somwehere as far as i remember . . let's say power-throw does the thing about ballistics and aerodynamics to add just more oomph to the thrown object than you would get out of it purely by skill and attribute . . then what/how does missle mastery actually do to let it do even more ouchies without actually changing anything at all?

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 11:50 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

i'm probably just arguing to be arguing and arguing semantics . . but shouldn't power-throw be the thing that makes things just do more ouchies when thrown by you?

Technically, yes. Power Throw magically increases your Strength in order to inflict more damage with a thrown weapon (only). It doesn't affect accuracy.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2008, 11:57 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

anyone can pick up basically anything to use as a weapon . . yes, the street-samurai can actually do that too . . so he is using a hair-ping . . if he is that frigging good he can stab you in the heart or something with it . . there's rules for the improvised weapons somwehere as far as i remember . . let's say power-throw does the thing about ballistics and aerodynamics to add just more oomph to the thrown object than you would get out of it purely by skill and attribute . . then what/how does missle mastery actually do to let it do even more ouchies without actually changing anything at all?

Because not anyone can do that type of thing with any given object at all times. An Adept though, is able to use his magic to throw any object at any time to maximum effectiveness.

I'm not going round and round on this. The rules state (and reflect) that the Missile Mastery Power is distinct from the Improved Throwing Weapons Power and the Power Throw ability, and each affect thrown combat in a different manner. None of these Powers grants the thrown missile any magical qualities in and of itself.

Posted by: Apathy Jan 18 2008, 12:17 AM

I think that ultimately we don't really know what missle mastery does. It's not well described and anything we say (using aerodynamics, incredible skill, etc.) is just conjecture on our part. So we can't say definitively if this is magical in nature or not. I've been unable to find any related texts that support the idea that MM imparts magical properties on a projectile. There is circumstantial evidence supporting the idea that the projectiles are not magical, in the statements about weapons foci, etc.

Depending on whether you're a strict constructionist (nothing allowed unless expressly stated) or a loose constructionist (everything allowed unless expressly forbidden) you might see this as a loop-hole to hand-wave that these projectiles are magical and therefore bypass immunity. In my mind (and my game, if I had one), the projectiles would not be treated this way.

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 18 2008, 02:46 AM

I have always assumed that Missile Mastery was basically like an extended distance strike in that it basically punched outward and negated friction for an object. Because if you could negate air resistance, then you could throw any object of a given size just as well as any other given that it fit in your hand well.

Improved Thrown Weapons would allow you to plot trajectory and Power Throw is basically magic velocity boost.

That is the only way I can think of it working and not make my head hurt.

Chris

Posted by: Fortune Jan 18 2008, 03:00 AM

Really doesn't make a difference how the magic works (It's Magic!). It is only important to know (in this discussion anyway) that none of the Adept Powers would instill any sort of magical nature or power to the actual weapon itself. The thrown weapon, regardless of powers used, will always be non-magical.

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 18 2008, 05:57 AM

I know, Fortune, but as a scientist at heart, it kills me to leave something unexplained if I can figure something out.

Chris

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 18 2008, 08:48 AM

now i wonder if the electric elemental effect one can chose for his hands would work through a weapon that consists of a good conductor such as metal O.o

Posted by: Fortune Jan 18 2008, 08:55 AM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

now i wonder if the electric elemental effect one can chose for his hands would work through a weapon that consists of a good conductor such as metal

I would think not (caveat later

), because the fluff describes the effect as wreathing the Adepts hands and/or feet, and because of the the fact that it can't be projected in any way, as seen by it's incompatibility with Distance Strike.

Caveat: I would rule that things like hardliner gloves and brass knuckles (or any other non-technical unarmed combat weapon, if any) would work just fine in combination with Elemental Effect.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 18 2008, 09:02 AM

so swords, lead-pipe-clubs, knives, daggers, metal-chain-whips and pole-arms ? O.o
that's what i meant *g*
and just to irk you and because i have no idea of physics other than the ouchies going away from me . . metal thingies that get thrown? *runs*

Posted by: Fortune Jan 18 2008, 09:11 AM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

so swords, lead-pipe-clubs, knives, daggers, metal-chain-whips and pole-arms ? O.o
that's what i meant

I know what you meant. I thought I had answered that very thing.

No, although it is not specifically delineated in canon, I do not thing that the Elemental Effect Power would be compatible with any melee weapons other than those weapons actually usable with unarmed combat, and would rule this way in my games.

QUOTE

and just to irk you and because i have no idea of physics other than the ouchies going away from me . . metal thingies that get thrown? *runs*

You knew my answer before you asked this. No, this would definitely not work, as precedent against this type of thing is set with an Adept's inability to project that effect in any way, even via Distance Strike.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 18 2008, 05:01 PM

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

I know, Fortune, but as a scientist at heart, it kills me to leave something unexplained if I can figure something out.

Chris

...you and me both. Got into a really heated debate a while back on the subject of Spirit movement on Orbital and suborbital vehicles. iIve studied aerodynamics and aerospace science and was frustrated at getting the "its magic" handwave in response.

Posted by: Ryu Jan 18 2008, 05:07 PM

I´ve ruled that the "unarmed weapons" work, because the player in question wanted a weapon focus.

Based on that experience I strongly suggest keeping the ban of real weapons from a game balance POV. Unless you want WH40k style power swords to go with your Arsenal powered armor. Max. strength, Elemental Attack(Electricity), weapon-focused Combat Axe...

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 18 2008, 05:09 PM

QUOTE (Ryu)

don't tell me that that does not sound kind of awesome *g*

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 18 2008, 05:42 PM

@KK - That has actually come up before, and while my grasp of the subject is probably much weaker than yours as it was just an academic curiosity that I satisfied at one point, the basic ruling I came up with is that for a spirit on an orbital or sub-orbital flight using it's movement power one point of force has to be used in stabilizing/centrifigal motion for every point of Force used to speed the shuttle forward. It's not great... but it's better than sub-orbital flights exceeding the speed needed to leave earth's gravitic field. It also neatly takes care of the "Why doesn't it fly off into space at the higher speed?" question by making it basically accelerate the motion due to gravity by the same factor it accelerates the forward motion.

Chris

EDIT: Have I ever mentioned I can derail any thread with little to no effort? How the hell did we get here?

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 18 2008, 05:52 PM

...I think I threw the piece of rebar on the track first.

I'm sticking to the real physics when it comes to space in my campaigns. One of the few places where I don't have to deal with magic screwing with an elegant system. Damn, us hard science minded types need a little haven from the improbable once in a while.

[/derail]

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 18 2008, 06:13 PM

QUOTE

Damn, us hard science minded types need a little haven from the improbable once in a while

you forgot the e in heaven *g*

Posted by: Tarantula Jan 18 2008, 06:25 PM

Just to throw in my 2 cents, its magic, who cares how the magic works, it just does. We don't talk about how mages are able to cast a lightning bolt, so why care about how an adept is able to throw packing peanuts for damage. It works, the end. And since the weapons merely are stated as doing (str/2)P then they aren't magical, since it doesn't say they are.

Posted by: Carver Jan 18 2008, 06:27 PM

QUOTE (Tarantula)

I now want to make a throwing adept that carries around a bag of cotton balls...

Posted by: bibliophile20 Jan 18 2008, 06:59 PM

QUOTE (Carver)

I now want to make a throwing adept that carries around a bag of cotton balls...

Toothpicks. Have his cover be a caterer and it won't look suspicious in the slightest if he carries around those little toothpicks that they use for fingerfoods.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 18 2008, 07:07 PM

make a female and have it look like an old granny so she can carry hair-pins and knitting needles around O.o

Posted by: CircuitBoyBlue Jan 18 2008, 07:08 PM

Make a huge troll with a filthy dredlocked beard that has colonies of bugs living in it, and throw them.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 18 2008, 07:13 PM

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

QUOTE

Damn, us hard science minded types need a little haven from the improbable once in a while

you forgot the e in heaven *g*

...did not

Haven n.

1. A harbor or anchorage; a port.
2. A place of refuge or rest; a sanctuary.

Posted by: DTFarstar Jan 18 2008, 07:14 PM

QUOTE (Tarantula)

Actually, I do explain that. I seriously will figure out an explanation for anything that happens in my games. I can't deal with it otherwise.

Chris

Posted by: Stahlseele Jan 18 2008, 07:34 PM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

QUOTE (Stahlseele)

QUOTE

Damn, us hard science minded types need a little haven from the improbable once in a while

you forgot the e in heaven *g*

...did not

Haven n.

1. A harbor or anchorage; a port.
2. A place of refuge or rest; a sanctuary.

the poor joke! you killed him! ;_;

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 18 2008, 07:41 PM

...I'm known to be ruthless sometimes.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 18 2008, 09:18 PM

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid @ Jan 19 2008, 03:01 AM)

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

I know, Fortune, but as a scientist at heart, it kills me to leave something unexplained if I can figure something out.

Chris

That's not really fair!

I have attempted on numerous occasions to give a couple of explanations for how the power works in this thread. The problem is, it is Magic!. Any explanation cannot solely be based on Physics or Anatomy or any other science as we know it today. All we can do is work with the results, which are detailed for us in the book. And the fact remains that how it works is not really important in the context of how the results of the power (which are quantified without our need to know how) interact with other powers.

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 18 2008, 09:35 PM

...it's just that I've heard the phrase used so many times (not only here on DS) that it has come to the point of it becoming somewhat cliché. When it is applied in the context of dealing with a natural physical effect (not in this thread so much) the empirical part of me winces sometimes.

Posted by: Limited Infinity Jan 18 2008, 09:40 PM

QUOTE (DTFarstar)

This works fine with me. You could possibly add noticing and exploitation of weak points to mastery.

Why is it hard to accept magic enhancement of skill or body for these powers when their are powers like distance strike (with killing hands, makes a very effective ranged attack vs. INW) or elemental strike that completely break physics?

Posted by: Jhaiisiin Jan 18 2008, 09:57 PM

You could of course rule that the Spirit movement power works on orbital items by focusing all available ions/energy into a thrust vector, causing the vehicle to speed up, rather than having the wasted energy bleed off in other ways. It could also magically enhance the output of the engine, causing the speed increase, though of course that one relies on the age old "it's magic!" to function...

Posted by: Kyoto Kid Jan 18 2008, 10:47 PM

...let's not go there again, at least not in this thread. My thermal shielding is still in cool down mode from the last time this topic was discussed.

[/derail]

Posted by: Zhan Shi Jan 21 2008, 03:37 AM

Does Immunity to Normal Weapons protect from falling damage, or damage from a vehicle crash?

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 05:40 AM

Not that I know of, as neither of those are considered to be weapons.

Posted by: Cardul Jan 21 2008, 07:15 AM

QUOTE (Zhan Shi)

Does Immunity to Normal Weapons protect from falling damage, or damage from a vehicle crash?

As someone put up above, it seems to be the intent that makes something a weapon..so: If you levitated someone WAY up in the air and dropped them, you are using the ground as a weapon. If you crashed into someone with the intent of causing them harm, then the car has become a weapon. So, in situations where the intent is to cause harm with a fall or a crash, then, yes, they do get those. Where they are completely accidental, though? No, they don't since there is no intent to cause harm behind them.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 07:21 AM

I agree with that. For me, intent is the key in this type of situation.

Posted by: Fortinbras Jan 21 2008, 09:23 AM

Poppycock. The creature's immunity can't distinguish intent.
Creatures are given immunity from natural weapons because they are not of this world and, as such, have immunity to all but the most dreadful of trauma because this world does not affect them as it does us.

Why would a creature's immunity from natural weapons not apply in a car crash, but apply if an adversary was driving that car?

When you start getting into semantics about the most literal of translations rather than putting yourself into the world and asking "why?" it begins a long, slow decent into the world of rule whoredom.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 09:34 AM

I don't care. Intent works fine for me, and you'd have to work hard to find an example that would make me question it.

Here's a question. Jakkie is an Adept that has Killing Hands, which neatly bypasses a Spirit's ItNW. Just before he gets a chance to attack a big old nasty Spirit that is bothering him, Killjoy the troll Tank scoops him up and swings him bodily at the Spirit. Does Killjoy benefit from Jakkie's Killing Hands and bypass the Spirit's ItNW?

Posted by: Fortinbras Jan 21 2008, 09:57 AM

If Jakkie is focusing and using his Adapt powers, then yes, of course. I'd probably have them use some sort of co-ordinated attack.

However, if Jakkie is as caught off guard as the spirit, then of course not. Just as if Jakkie were unconscious it wouldn't apply either. Melee combat, especially for the most martial arts of inclined Adepts, is not just "I hit you, you hit me" as the BBB states, but it is a ballet of moves, feints and counter maneuvers. That is where Killing Hands apply. It isn't enough that Jakkie spent the points on the power and so his hands are forever killing, but it is that he has learned how to internalize his magic so as to use it to make his punches pass through his opponents guard and armor.

Adepts are as Awakened as any mage, they just turn their magical energies inwards. Subsequently, when they fight they are not like the chromed sammies whose titanium bones and dermal plating are secondary to the attack at hand, but rather are cognizant of everything that is going on with their bodies. That is the nature of an internal, magical discipline.

Once again, that is not thinking about the fight as a fight, but rather as a set of numbers to be manipulated. It is the difference between playing a role and playing a character sheet.

To give an example of intent being called into play, I'll use the one I gave above: If a spirit is along for a ride with his mage and gets into a car accident, his ItNW doesn't apply. But, if that mage is possessed by a rival shaman, or kicked out of the car by a skilled combat monster or a rigger takes control of the car, and they get into the same accident, it would apply?

That implies the creature's ability can read minds or judge unnoticed intent, or that the talent is not based upon the physics of the Sixth World, but rather on intellectual indeterminants, or, more likely, not wanting your players to cheat at the game.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 10:19 AM

Thanks for the lesson.

If Killjoy (a mundane) is making the attack, it doesn't matter how aware Jakkie is, the attack is based on Killjoy's efforts and abilities alone. The metahuman body is no more magical in a mundane's hands than a can of tomato soup. Just as Killjoy could not pick up and use (to full magical effect) a Weapon Focus, he would gain no bonus from swinging an Adept wildly about the place.

Now, if it were indeed a coordinated effort, whereby Jakkie himself was making the attack, the his Killing Hands would apply.

As to your comments on 'intent'. See my last post. I don't care if it is extra effort. It wouldn't come up often enough to bother me, and I like the idea of 'intent' as I see it.

You'll also note that at no time did I state that I use this rule in my games. I very well might, but if that were the case it would be discussed with my Players. I don't play with Players that cheat, so I guess I don['t have to worry about that kind of stuff.

Posted by: Fortinbras Jan 21 2008, 10:36 AM

QUOTE (Fortune)

I couldn't agree with you more.

But if you don't care, why are you commenting on it? We all care, at least a little bit, about some of the minutia of Shadowrun, else we wouldn't be talking about it to strangers. No one's calling anyone out or trying to put themselves over. We're all nerds here, discussing a pretend game. Cavalierness does not suit us.

My point was that to judge whether ItNW applies to falling or crash damage based on intent is not in keeping with the spirit of the game, but rather in keeping with the literal translation of the word "weapon".
Rather than asking why would falling or crash damage apply to ItNW, let us ask why wouldn't they. They are mundane items(gravity and acceleration do not effect the astral realm as I understand it) so they should effect the recipient of the danger as mundane attacks.
While this may come up very rarely in most games, it doesn't hurt to have a myriad of opinions for when it does.

And perhaps my use of the word "cheat" was too harsh. I apologize. Rules whore is more appropriate. It is better to create rules based upon the spirit and physics of the Sixth World rather than one to stop your players from rules whoring.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 10:44 AM

QUOTE (Fortinbras)

But if you don't care, why are you commenting on it?

As I said, I don't care about the extra little bit of effort that would be required to adjudicate whether there was intent to harm the Spirit or not. It is trivial to me to do so, and so I commented on it because you made it part of your case against the idea.

QUOTE

And perhaps my use of the word "cheat" was too harsh. I apologize. Rules whore is more appropriate. It is better to create rules based upon the spirit and physics of the Sixth World rather than one to stop your players from rules whoring.

Even if this were a factor in most games, can you give me an example of when it would happen with this specific ruling? I am having trouble picturing a time when the Players could intentionally benefit from this, whether by cheating or otherwise.

Oh, and please excuse my earlier tone. It was not really my intent to be so um ... intense.

Posted by: Fortinbras Jan 21 2008, 11:15 AM

QUOTE (Fortune)

It's all good in your particular hood. As I said, we're all nerds here, so we don't have a whole lot of moral high ground to stand on.

While I agree that knowing every little bitty thing about every little situation can send a gamers mind into overdose, especially about something so minute, we have all experienced the time where that one in a million chance came up and GM's wished they didn't have to make it up on the fly and players wished they had some resource for which to backup their argument for why their awesome idea wasn't counter intuitive to the rules. This forum provides that. So while it may not come up in your game, odds are in may come up in mine, and I'd like your input.

That being said, an example of a specific ruling:

Frustrated GM: Okay, so the Spirit of Man has materialized and bites you.

Rules Whore, of the Hill People: But my armor is so thick his bite shouldn't get through!!!

FGM: (sigh) Look, a bite is it's attack and it hit you with it's roll. Lets just say it's teeth are really long...

RWotHP: But it used Charisma to intimidate a guard two rounds ago. If it's teeth were long it should have gotten a penalty!

FGM: It's hits you and does 4P damage!

RWotHP: (angry grumble) Fine I grab it and throw it into the street!

(Rolling occurs)

FGM: You succeed in throwing it into the street.

Unassuming Rigger: I continue driving my van to rescue the nuns at the orphanage...

RWotHP: And then you hit the Spirit!

UR: What?

RWotHP: I threw him into the street knowing your van was coming to rescue those stupid orphans and hit him.

FGM: True. Good thinking. The van does (X) damage, modified for Immunity to Normal Weapons...

RWotHP: Hell No!!! The Rigger had no intent of hitting the Spirit, so crash and falling damage shouldn't apply to Immunity. He had no intent!!!
(Fin)

Again, this is rare, and most likely will not happen. But Rules Whore, of the Hill People, is a tricky beast and will quote the Dumpshock forums to better suite his asinine argument. This is someone who doesn't want to play Shadowrun, he wants to WIN Shadowrun. In this case it is better to have a precedent that all mundane forms of damage effect materialized spirits because of the difference in anatomy of the spirit and not based on whether or not the instrument of that damage could be considered a weapon.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 12:57 PM

QUOTE (Fortinbras)

Unassuming Rigger: I continue driving my van to rescue the nuns at the orphanage...

RWotHP: And then you hit the Spirit!

UR: What?

RWotHP: I threw him into the street knowing your van was coming to rescue those stupid orphans and hit him.

FGM: True. Good thinking. The van does (X) damage, modified for Immunity to Normal Weapons...

RWotHP: Hell No!!! The Rigger had no intent of hitting the Spirit, so crash and falling damage shouldn't apply to Immunity. He had no intent!!!

Intent! It is the intent of the person or thing initiating the attack that is the relevant factor. RulesWhore used the truck as a weapon, in the same way he would use a giant shredder if there were one available in which to throw the Spirit. Or a blast furnace. Or the fall from being thrown from a zeppelin. Or any other object or situation that would intentionally cause injury. The operator of that object (if any) is immaterial if the attack was initiated from an outside source (in this case, RulesWhore), with the intent of that outside source to use that object to cause harm.

Makes sense to me anyway.

Posted by: ixombie Jan 21 2008, 01:04 PM

I don't think the intent rule is the best way to resolve the situation. It creates too many unanswerable questions. Like if I intend to crush a spirit with a car crusher, is the crusher a weapon? If I intend to dump a big load of rocks on top of the spirit, are the rocks weapons? If I intend to burn down a building with a spirit inside of it, is the fire a weapon? Is the burning building a weapon?

It also gives too much room for playing whining. What will you do when your players decide to activate the car crusher "for no reason," thus trying to make it kill the spirit without intent and not become a weapon? If they dump rocks on the ground "just because" are you going to want to argue with them that they're actually intending to kill the spirit?

I think the wording of the rule is pretty clear: it applies to weapons, not non-weapons you intend to use as weapons. It's easy to adopt a clear, rules-based definition for this: if something has a damage code in the book, and it isn't magical, it's definitely a normal weapon.

Beyond that, you should simply use common sense. Is a 2x4 with a nail in it a weapon? Sure. Is a claw hammer a weapon when you hit someone with it? Of course. A shovel? Again, yes. But what about a car? No, that's a vehicle. And a car crusher is a vehicle crusher, not a weapon. A load of rocks is a load of rocks, it doesn't make sense to classify a whole truckload of them dumped at the same time as weapons... Maybe if you threw a rock or bashed someone with it, you could count it as a weapon, but there is simply no room in the word "weapon" for impromptu objects that cannot be wielded.

Using this rule, a tank's cannon is always a weapon because it has a damage code, and a tank's treads are not a weapon. Under the intent rule, someone could fire the cannon at random, and it would ignore spirit immunity because they weren't actually intended to hurt the spirit. Or worse, they could target something behind the spirit, saying that the intend to shoot a building, so the tank cannon is not intended as a weapon against the spirit, so it ignores immunity... It also allows the incongruous result of the spirit surviving being hit by the tank when the driver intends to kill it, but if the driver hits the spirit by accident when backing up, the spirit gets no immunity. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense IMO.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 01:13 PM

QUOTE (ixombie @ Jan 21 2008, 11:04 PM)

I don't see the unanswerable questions. Anything used with the intent to cause harm counts as a 'weapon'. Basically it boils down to the Spirit only losing its ItNW in cases of a true accident with no premeditation.

As I said above, I don't really mind that I have to handwave it as 'magic', or that I might, once every 100 games or so, have to rule that a random Spirit was run over in a traffic accident.

Posted by: GentlemanLoser Jan 21 2008, 03:39 PM

I'd agree 100%. But I don't think Intent is needed.

Anything that causes harm is a weapon. Regardless of intent or usage.

Engine falls off a passing plane and hits a spirit, it gets ItNW. Rigger forces the engine to blow to drop it on a spirit, it gets ItNW.

Anything that isn't magical in nature, that causes harm to a spirit is effected by ItNW. Including car crushers.

Posted by: Ryu Jan 21 2008, 03:41 PM

Why is the accident different? I see it more as an immunity to "natural damage", regardless of the cause. If an armor rating would apply, so does the immunity. What the Gentleman said.

Posted by: Ravor Jan 21 2008, 05:40 PM

Thirded.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 08:08 PM

QUOTE (GentlemanLoser)

I'd agree 100%. But I don't think Intent is needed.

You're right. It isn't necessary. I was merely trying to explain how this type of variation on the rules (suggested by Cardul) would be no real trouble to implement or adjudicate.

Posted by: Fortinbras Jan 21 2008, 08:44 PM

If it causes damage, it has a damage code and is therefore a weapon.
Moreover, in Manslaughter cases, even in the case of accidental death the implement is still called a weapon, regardless of intent.

All of that is moot, however, if you ask yourself why a creature's ability would be based off of another character's state of mind. Now we are arguing semantics rather than trying to determine the nature of spirits and their powers.

While it wouldn't be too terribly trying to make rules variants(which I abhor) for something like that, it just seems counter-intuitive to common sense, which should be the default rule when in doubt.

Posted by: Fortune Jan 21 2008, 09:34 PM

QUOTE (Fortinbras)

All of that is moot, however, if you ask yourself why a creature's ability would be based off of another character's state of mind. Now we are arguing semantics rather than trying to determine the nature of spirits and their powers.

But that isn't the only viable explanation. ItNW is a form of magic, and therefore the magic itself could work off intent (for lack of a better word). Magic has precedence for being able to detect intent, as illustrated in things like the Detect Enemies spell. ItNW might be said to work in a similar manner, if someone chose to use this rule variant, and if they felt the need to explain it.

An appeal to common sense (alone) is not necessarily a fair argument when dealing with magical phenomena.

But we could keep arguing semantics on this all day though.

Posted by: GentlemanLoser Jan 22 2008, 08:44 AM

QUOTE (Fortune)

QUOTE (GentlemanLoser @ Jan 22 2008, 01:39 AM)

I'd agree 100%. But I don't think Intent is needed.

You're right. It isn't necessary. I was merely trying to explain how this type of variation on the rules (suggested by Cardul) would be no real trouble to implement or adjudicate.

Ah! My bad.

As for the nature of a Spirits ItNW, I'm pressuming for manifesting Spirits its a by product of how they build a physical body from the Astral plane. Plus the fact they don't really have any internal workings to damage.

How this would transfer over to a inhabited Spirit, I've no idea apart from copping out with it's magic!