Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Cthulhudreams Jun 7 2008, 04:27 PM

So, due to a player in a game that is kicking off on the forums wanting to play a backwoods shamanistic type who shapechanges into a jaugar and rips peoples face off, I had to read the shapechange rules.

Wow, turning into a supercharged great cat is rather powerful. Shame you don't have a gun or armour, but it is still cool because it gives you a 2nd IP and sets all your stats to big numbers.

So I was thinking about it a bit more and eventually thought

"So why don't I like turn into a gorilla. Troll jackets and armoured clothes might even still fit, and I can probably get a gun customised for gorilla hands. Aiming and firing might be a problem" I'd read 'Hell Island' recently were the US army had modified a bunch of gorillas to use guns so that had spurred my thinking

So gorillas with assault rifles, viable, cheese tastic or what?

Posted by: Zak Jun 7 2008, 04:29 PM

Reminds me of druids in the game you shall not talk about, abusing the sizing of gear to fit it for their statistically superior animal forms.

Go Legendary Ape.

Posted by: crizh Jun 7 2008, 04:46 PM

*cough*

Fashion.

*cough*

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 7 2008, 04:59 PM

shapeshift a troll or an ork and you won't even have that much difference to fight with. .

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 7 2008, 05:01 PM

Its your game do as you wish/what your group allows.
In my game you would regret your choice however.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 7 2008, 05:19 PM

Augmentation biodrone rules allow the opposition to have an army of rigged gorillas with miniguns. If you don't mind your GM throwing such an army at you, I see no problem with it.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 7 2008, 05:19 PM

Augmentation biodrone rules allow the opposition to have an army of rigged gorillas with miniguns. If you don't mind your GM throwing such an army at you, I see no problem with it.

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 7 2008, 06:00 PM

Ok so regardless of what a horrible idea it would be to do to anyone, especially to a shadowrunner, do you think it's possible to implant the stirrup interface into a shape shifted human?

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 7 2008, 06:31 PM

other question: can the gorilla still talk?

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 7 2008, 06:48 PM

nope. They physically lack the ability to vocalize well enough to use human language. That's why we teach them to sign. Trodes and speakers though ought to let you fake it well enough. While it's not spelled out explicitly in the books, I'm sure that humans wouldn't be the first primates we developed datajacks for. Now finding non-human DNI drives might be a fun secondary objective for a run on research facility.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 7 2008, 07:33 PM

the target keeps his non physical attributes, meaning he is still thinking like himself . . one COULD argue that trodes should work like usual

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 7 2008, 08:09 PM

IMO the there are only two options for the fine anatomy of a shape shifted individual. Either it now works exactly like the animal in question, or it is that nebulus anti science state like oricalcum. So either you need the chimp DNI drivers, or you can't do it at all

Posted by: crizh Jun 7 2008, 08:16 PM

This was being discussed in the other Shapechange thread a couple of days ago and the consensus was that implanted cyberware, that had been paid for with Essence, molded seamlessly into the new form and continued to function.

So, a simple datajack would be all you needed to get around any communication problems.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 7 2008, 09:36 PM

ah, yes, an ork shifted into a green tiger that talks . . heelloo battlecat *g*

Posted by: toturi Jun 7 2008, 10:17 PM

And you have the power too.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 7 2008, 10:24 PM

just why the heck do all of those things more or less work out in SR anyway? @.@
that can't be a coincidink! . . well, they could all have been on something good when writing the books *g*
and yes, being the mage and being able to own a weapon-focus sword and a focus that keeps up an STR Buff Spell you can, indeed, have the power o.O

Posted by: Glyph Jun 8 2008, 08:05 AM

An opinion from one poster is hardly a "consensus". If cyberware has been paid for with Essense, it melds into the shapechange as opposed to violently being ripped out of the shapechanger's body. But someone changed into a completely different form does NOT get the benefit of cybereyes, etc. There is nothing in the rules to support this, and it doesn't make sense in the context of a spell that changes you into a critter.


As far as communication goes, the increased use of augmented guard animals and biodrones would make finding communications gear for a dog, ape, etc. more feasible than it would have been in previous editions. And spells such as mindlink would still work.

I generally assume that the shapechange spell includes enough of the critter's basic instincts to do things such as flying for birds, climbing trees for apes, etc. I am not sure how human skills would translate, though. A human martial artist turned into an ape would have a completely different center of gravity, reach, sensory spectrum, and so on. So I have a hard time seeing a maxed-out martial arts skill smoothly translating to the new form.

Posted by: crizh Jun 8 2008, 08:34 AM

When there is no dissenting opinion it's a consensus.

There is nothing in the rules to support your opinion either. Which was why it was being discussed. Simply bolding the word 'not' does 'not' make it so.

Shapechange is one of those spells with so much going on under the surface that it is probably best to hand wave most of it. I don't see any good reason to design a spell that is capable of mysteriously creating or destroying mass and not design it to integrate any cyber/medical implants the target may have. Equipment I can see leaving out because OR's vary and it could be complicated to successfully cast.

Posted by: Glyph Jun 8 2008, 12:37 PM

I think it would be overly complicated, and not even that feasible, for a spell that only turns someone into critter form to alter artificial enhancements to work in that new form. But you are right, SR4 is vague on this where SR3 spelled it out more explicitly ("Cyberware, paid for with Essense, is transformed into the critter form but cannot be used in that form" - MITS, pg. 148). Hopefully this will be added to the FAQ someday - "What happens to cyberware when someone is shapechanged?"

Posted by: ornot Jun 8 2008, 12:48 PM

I've always liked the use of shapechange as an offensive spell. That way you can 'Sheep' aggressors; or better yet, get a dog collar sustaining focus, cast Chihuahua Form on your mortal enemy, and you have a pet for life

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 8 2008, 02:14 PM

untill he runs through a ward or something like that . . . and don't forget, it's the difference between target and new critter body that makes the spell so hard to cast . .

Posted by: Screamin Demon Jun 9 2008, 05:32 AM

My opinion (As long as we are all posting out opinions) is that mages with cybernetics would not be able to use them as the spell targets them and not the highly technological objects (Object Resistance, anyone? Just because you paid for it with essence doesn't mean its not high tech metal and wires... Right?) stuck in them. I am considering house ruling that mages with cybernetics shouldn't be allowed to shape change at all...

In any case, how are human cybereyes going to work in any other form? Where does your bone lacing go when you turn into an invertebrate? It just won't work.

I could see someone inventing a higher drain version(Cyber Shapeshift or something), but you would be rolling against the object resistance (4+) of they cyberware that you are subtly shifting along with you as so it still functions.

Screamin Demon
Best opinion ever.

Posted by: crizh Jun 9 2008, 08:29 AM

Where does your spine go for that matter?

Posted by: Apathy Jun 9 2008, 03:37 PM

Since SR3 spelled it out explicitly, and SR4 doesn't list any rules or fluff that states or implies any deviation from the prior ruling, it seems to me that it's reasonable to interpret that the ruling does not change. So shapechanging from a human with +4 strength from muscle aug to a rat, your rat form won't get to keep it's +4 strength.

I'd imagine that this could create some interesting situations, like being contacted by a mage who is shapechanged into something for a run, and is now afraid to change back because his pissed off employer might have triggered his kink bomb.

Posted by: Dayhawk Jun 9 2008, 04:25 PM

The mage in my game runs around as a chimp with the multi sense illusion going, to appear human.

Personally I think it's complete cheese. But everyone voted and figured it was ok.

Posted by: ornot Jun 9 2008, 05:20 PM

I'd have thought the -4 dice sustaining penalty would put paid to such behaviour, but I guess he could have loaded up on foci.

But then I like to have 'things man was not meant to wot of' being attracted to obvious magic users.

Posted by: Dayhawk Jun 9 2008, 05:59 PM

The shapeshifting is quickened.

The illusion is a focus item.

So a human could shapeshift into a troll provided they have the min body to do so?

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 9 2008, 06:02 PM

is that allowed?
i thought only CRITTERS?

Posted by: crizh Jun 9 2008, 08:12 PM

No, it's not.

Trolls are Paranormal Critters however you choose to slice it...

Posted by: Jaid Jun 9 2008, 08:57 PM

in that case, it'll last roughly until he has to pass the first ward. which shouldn't be very long. after that either the quickened effect is lost and security is on it's way, or the quickened effect is not lost (and security is on it's way).

not exactly useful for a shadowrunner.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 9 2008, 09:21 PM

racist pig ._.
trolls is people too! ;_;

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 9 2008, 11:29 PM

You could potentially pull a Clarence Beeks on the character some time.

Posted by: Spike Jun 10 2008, 12:00 AM

I thought they were talking about actual Shapeshifters, not folks changing shape with a spell, right?

And if that was the case, I thought it was, at least at one point, canon impossible for a shapeshifter to have cyberware of any sort. Not because of the changing shape or the essence loss, or the fact that they were just really smart animals that could look like people...

... no, because their natural healing/regeneration would revert their body to its original state (cyberware free) regardless of essence paid, in minutes anyway.


Or has that, like grounding spells through focii, gone the way of the dodo?

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 10 2008, 12:06 AM

no, original SHAPESHIFTER who start out as animals with regeneration still get that problem . . but right now, talk is about metahuman characters being morphed from metahuman to xxx

Posted by: Glyph Jun 10 2008, 02:08 AM

Remember that chimps can't talk, and that wards are fairly common, and that sustained/quickened spells are fairly obvious to astral sight. And that people will get resistance tests against the illusion every time.

His armor will also need to be custom-made. It's doubtful that a mere fashion spell would work, unless the mage casting it actually had some knowledge of armor design, and maybe chimp biology while we're at it. We're talking about a primate with fur (making clothing hotter and more uncomfortable), and joints that are quite a bit different than a human's.

Posted by: Apathy Jun 10 2008, 02:13 AM

So, infirm human (Body 1) can shapechange to standard human (Body 3). When using 12 dice to cast, they average 4 successes, and so will get to add 4 to all their physical attributes, for B/A/R/S scores of 7/7/7/7.

Posted by: RunnerPaul Jun 10 2008, 02:20 AM

But they're very Thor afterwards.

Posted by: Fortune Jun 10 2008, 02:21 AM

As long as the Spell has a Force of 4 or more.

Posted by: Squinky Jun 10 2008, 03:33 AM

My reading of the shapechange spell states that it can only turn you into normal critters....Pretty sure people aren't critters...

Posted by: Fortune Jun 10 2008, 03:54 AM

And yet a ghoul is considered a 'critter', and it is merely a metahuman with a disease. I don't really see the problem.

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 10 2008, 03:57 AM

IMO:
critter = animal
para-critter = awakened animal

human = type of animal
meta human = type of awakened animal

Posted by: Fortune Jun 10 2008, 04:06 AM

I have a problem with the description of all metahumans as being 'awakened'.

Posted by: Apathy Jun 10 2008, 04:15 AM

The BBB does not list (meta)humans in their Critters list. However, they don't list most of the rest of the fauna of the world either. If going by the critter list in BBB, the only normal animals which you are allowed to shapechange into would be:

• Dog
• Great Cat (tiger, etc)
• Horse
• Shark
• Wolf

If you want a more extensive list, you have to go back to the SR3 Critters book which (on page 19) lists a table of normal critters plus 'Metahuman Averages'. For me, this is sufficiently close to justify treating them as valid shapechange targets. YMMV

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 10 2008, 04:23 AM

valid, that is a fairly reserved term. How would you refer to things that resulted from the awakening?

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 10 2008, 07:25 AM

I would just call them metahumans.
Awakened creatures would be those which can actively tap into mana somehow, as opposed to those which simply exist because its around.
The BBB doesn't call all meta's awakened, but only adepts, mages, or something with the capacity to tap mana.

Posted by: stormcrow Jun 10 2008, 08:18 AM

I wouldn't call Metahumans paracritters, either, and not just because i'd have to duck a lot. There are metavariants of critters that are not Awakened or paracritters. The spell wouldn't convey any additional magic powers (ie. hellhound breath or bandersnatch camo or drake breath), but you also don't lose any you have (as long as you aren't in a snake form when you need to use finger gestures and chanting to spellcast.) Being a troll doesn't give you magical powers (like fiery breath or invulnerability to normal weapons.) If you can go for a bat or dolphin with sonar or a poisonous snake, why not a bigger, rougher-hewn version of yourself with some big lower canines and pointy ears? Or for that matter, if you can do a shark, alligator or lyre bird, why not a dwarf? Maybe make it a higher drain spell to turn into specific metahuman/human, requiring a tissue sample (blood, hair, saliva, etc.) Hmmmmm. Just my 0.02 of a drachma.
stormcrow

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 10 2008, 01:53 PM

The intent of the wording is self evident, the Devs are trying to stop the, "I change into a specific person or para critter"
by stopping changing into metahumans or para critters.
In addition to this it is a return to a more direct interpretation of shape changeing spell from folklore.

Now the conjecture that metahumanity is just an evolved animal, though logical, is also a wilful perversion of the spirit of the wording. By people that know their doing it to.

Ultimatly everyone will run things their way in their games but really why lie to yourselves?
If you want a meta human shape shifting spell just make one up.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 10 2008, 03:24 PM

No I don't think it is. Critter = animal, meta = animal, therefore critter = meta. The book never refered to them as awakened.
Also spells like physical mask exist which provide the ilusion of looking like someone else, so having a manipultion spell which changes you to actually BE someone else shouldn't be that big a stretch.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 10 2008, 04:27 PM

Critters also include plants, spirits, and bacteria colonies. The term is basically a catch-all for any potential opposition that isn't metahuman or machine.

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 10 2008, 04:47 PM

The intent of the use critter here however is clear. Namely a non meta human/ non paracritter animal. I agree if you should want a spell to shape shift to a metahuman by all means make one.
However it is not shapechange per the book.

For example by your rational a power focus in the shape of a weapon must be a weapon focus.
By the rules of the game, abstract as they are, this is not the case. The lable here has the intent of specifing a limiting factor that is being willful ingored to get more out of the spell.
Am all for realism in game but guys, to quote a friend of mine, "Don't piss on my back and tell me its raining."

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 10 2008, 04:50 PM

i can't believe people still mention realism in a discussion concerning magics . .
other question: would one be able to shapeshift critters into metahumans? or just into other critters?
PC: "i cast shapechange on the tiger!"
GM: "what do you want to turn the tiger into?"
PC: "A Pony!"

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 10 2008, 05:06 PM

Silly is it not. But the entire concept of roleplaying is about the creation and maintainence of game world with its own consistant rules, that from a perspective is logical.
Magic has to make sense from within its own internal logic. Devil's in the detail and all that.

It is fun to sometime say magic can do anything! But it aint shadowrun.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 10 2008, 05:27 PM

All normal animals, plants, and even many which are the result of mana returning to the world are 'critters'. Humans/metahumans are just other examples of normal animals. There is no definition I'm aware of which would remove metahumanity from the animal kingdom, or place it in a seperate category which would exclude it from what I understand the 'critter' definition to be. Can you find a clear definition of critter in the BBB or any other 4th ed suplement which excluded metahumans, as the current one INCLUDES ghouls?


No it wouldn't the two are clearly defined, in terms of fuction, and are easily understood as seperate entities. Now you could make a focus which combined the two fuctions however.


Again, show me the rule which says metahuman /= critter
If I don't know its there I CAN NOT by definition willfully ignore it.

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 10 2008, 06:38 PM

Your argument is, prove that metahuman does not mean critter. The obvious retort is, prove that it is the same.
This is a cyclical arguement.
My last word on the matter is in terms of description.
As such animal and (meta)human mean very different concepts in the manner of speech.
Critter is another word for animal. Ergo as descriptions go it has clear intent.

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 10 2008, 07:16 PM

Yes, if I was to say "I'm an animal rights activist" you should assume I mean "animal" in the sense of cows, chickens, pigs, dogs, cat, fish, etc, and not Humans, Spongiozoa, and Protozoa. However if you were to read about a bacteria that would spread from any animal to any animal you should also assume that you could get it from your dog. It's always a matter of context. IMO in an RPG system it is valid to take a systematic approach and think of humans as a subset of animal, unless there is a game term (such as name-giver) that set them apart.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 10 2008, 09:06 PM

It seems all forms an animals are critter. Humans are in fact a kind of animal called primates, and as such until I'm told
metahuman =/ animal it will.


Ghoul = critter
Ghoul = metahuman + virus
so someone with a cold gets a whole new classification in the animal kingdom? that makes no sense

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 10 2008, 09:14 PM

"Critter" is defined in relation to the player characters. It is analogous to the D&D "monster" Any NPC that isn't a member of a core playable race is a "critter" (AIs excepted).

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 10 2008, 09:18 PM

maybe not, but in the SR World there are several strains of MMVV and several kinds of "Ghouls" too . .
the classification of SR is difficult to say the least, but for magic it is Meta-Human-Race) and "Everything-Else=Critter" . . i'd probably explain it with the mind of the magician . . i would only allow a totally racist psychotic probably toxic mage to view metahuman subraces as critters

Posted by: WeaverMount Jun 10 2008, 09:23 PM

I always though of "critter" as a game term, and meaningless to characters. It's fascinating think about it IC.

Posted by: Muspellsheimr Jun 10 2008, 09:36 PM

By RAW, Shapechange cannot turn someone into a Metahuman.

On the subject of what makes a critter paranormal, the book classifies them as awakened critters. Being awakened means you have a Magic attribute, and the single thing all the listed paracritters have in common is a Magic of at least 1.


EDIT: I just noticed that by RAW, you also cannot change into anything that has the same Body as you, or 1 point greater or less...

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 10 2008, 10:12 PM

we can attribute that one to word-count i'd say . . it's probably meant to be of at least 2 points below and up to a maximum of 2 points above

Posted by: Fortune Jun 10 2008, 10:21 PM

Actually probably should say 'at most'.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 10 2008, 10:39 PM

Well, looks like you seem to have some good points.... guess I'll just have to tack 1 onto the drain attribute, and allow meta humans, or take one off the drain attribute and allow only metahumans. Either works I guess.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 10 2008, 10:50 PM

But now I ask the question, what happens if you cast a spell which changes you into a meta human, you get infected with HMVV cause the spells sustained with a focus or by someone else, and then change back? Are you still infected?

Posted by: crizh Jun 10 2008, 10:51 PM

This is a caveat.

In this instance it admits to the truisms that, while almost all critters are non-human, that some non-zero percentage of critters are, technically, human and similarly humans are, technically, critters.

Posted by: Sweaty Hippo Jun 10 2008, 11:18 PM

But it's not fun when one player character can use magic and the other can't, or magic evolves beyond a plot device and into a tool that anybody can use with proper training. Not to mention that I like Shadowrun in the sense that technology can beat magic in many ways, unlike some other RPGs.

Posted by: stormcrow Jun 11 2008, 12:59 AM

So, dropping the range to touch and including (for flava) a requirement of a sample of the intended form (ie. Hair, blood, nail clipping, horn chip etc,) I present to you Specific Metahuman Form—Manipulation, Physical, Touch Range (both sample and target), Restricted Target (Voluntary), Sustained, with a Success Test. Drain is (F/2) [base] + 1 [physical] – 2 [touch range, instead of ShapeChange's LOS] – 1 [Restricted Target, Voluntary] + 0 [Sustained] + 0 [Phys Manipulation] +2 [Major Change] for a total drain of F/2. Even resisted the urge to twink with the additional -1 [Restricted Effect, requires sample]. I also dropped the 2 greater or lesser bit and nerfed the Phys Attribute adds by halfing them.


Specific Metahuman Form (Physical Manipulation)
Type: P Range: Touch Duration: S DV: F/2 Threshhold: 2
Specific Metahuman Form physically transforms a voluntary subject into a specific metahuman, though the subject retains their own mental attributes. A sample of the specific intended form is required, be it hair, nail clipping, saliva, horn chip, blood, skin sample, etc. Add 1 to the form's Base attribute Ratings for every 2 hits above Threshhold 2 that the caster generates. The target's Mental attributes remain unchanged.
This spell does not transform clothing and equipment. Magicians can still cast spells. The target's DNA, fingerprints, blood etc will test identical to that of the original metahuman. Attempts to imitate the original's voice receive a bonus equal to the net hits. Note that cyberware and bioware present in the original will not be replicated, regardless of success, though geneware may be, at the GM's discretion. At 2 successes, the duplication is close, but there are small differences in appearance noticeable to casual acquaintances. At 3 successes, only close acquaintances might notice. At 4 successes, the only differences are behavioral.

Enjoy! Now if only our campaign was an episodic drama with lots of downtime rather than a perpetually racing action movie! How the f*$(ing h%^ am i going to get 3 months of downtime to develop it? We've been playing once a week for over a year and game time has advanced less than 2 months.

I better get crackin' on it. At least i get a totem mod and a bound spirit mod to develop it. Pax,
stormcrow

PS. Alternately, one could limit the body to Target's +/- successes and drop the Threshhold 2.

Posted by: samuelbeckett Jun 11 2008, 01:58 PM

Hmmm, same quotes, different spin

Could be interpreted according to your definitions as shapechange will allow you to turn into any of the metahumans, but not into a human.

Given that all of the various interpretations involve some breaking of common sense, from the RAW approach (Critter is a specific SR4 term! You can only shapechange into the Critters listed in the SR4 canon rules!) to the anything goes approach (Human = Animal = Critter, you can shapechange into a buff human and up your stats!), just pick the one you and your table are most comfortable with.

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 11 2008, 04:58 PM

Am sorry what? You quote one line out of the entire post out of context, not on topic and making what point?
Are you trying to up your post count?

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 11 2008, 05:01 PM

I'm actually just curious if any of the dev's out there who had a hand in the creation of this spell could tell us if the intent was to allow for you to change into metahuman or not.

Posted by: Fortune Jun 11 2008, 09:43 PM

Well, although not totally official, we can always look to the mock Runner's Companion preview, with the Dragons needing to use the Shapechange spell to appear in metahuman form.

Posted by: crizh Jun 11 2008, 09:46 PM

Shhhhhhh,,,,

Don't bring that up again, we'll never hear the end of it.

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 11 2008, 09:51 PM

does that even work?
if they make it like that, it will be the new ghoul as PC and ghouls as npc/critter issue . .

Posted by: Screamin Demon Jun 12 2008, 04:48 AM

Your spine is part of what is magicaly effected to turn into critter meat, dork
The same magic could not target your cybernetic components without bypassing their inherent technological resistance first. Right? I'm not trying to inject non-awakened logic into the equation...

Are there any other opinions on tis leg of the thread?

Posted by: Cthulhudreams Jun 12 2008, 04:55 AM

So I'm totally working on my proof of concept guerrilla mage (ho ho ho) with shapeshift, physical mask and a HMG, adapted to be fireable via smartlink in a gyromount, which is I think the keystones of what you need, aside from some goggles so you can smartlink it up, and some armoured long johns in XXXXL

However, I need gorilla stats. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Posted by: crizh Jun 12 2008, 08:08 AM

Firstly, your too kind. Dweeb.

Secondly, IANA Biologist, but...

Your skeleton is 70% rock. Hydroxylapatite to be precise. It is deposited by living cells that make up the other 30% of bone. It's inorganic and at a microscopic level dead. It's no more alive than your cyberware, but it's part of you, not an object, your cyber implant stopped being an object, in game terms, when you paid Essence for it, when you invested a part of your spirit in it.

And no, it doesn't have to overcome OR. It only has to overcome OR if the spell says so. Several spells that target objects do not have to overcome OR, it depends on what they do and how they are worded.

Posted by: ornot Jun 12 2008, 06:44 PM

I am a biologist, and I'd argue that your skeleton was alive, even though it is inorganic in a strictly chemical sense. But then again, defining life is actually a philosophical sticking point, so there's little point going there.

Personally I'm in the "can't apply logic to magic" camp. Frankly, it's beyond our understanding, and so long as it's balanced and doesn't break the game I'm prepared to accept that it does weird shit. Hence, Shapechange or Critter Form does effectively convert 'ware into living tissue. Although this may have logical implications for how other spells work, or what happens to 'ware implanted into a metahuman while under the effect of a shapechange spell or any number of other things, I think it's pretty clear that the spell is inspired by stories of witches assuming the form of cats or wolves or whatever, and thus it should permit this function.

You could argue that, given the above assumption that 'ware is absorbed into living tissue, 'ware implanted while in a shapechanged form would revert into living tissue when the spell was ended. Since the 'ware does not impact on the original body's integrity, it thus could be argued that it has no essence cost. Hence a mage could arrange for a shed-load of 'ware being implanted into his tiger form, without it causing magic loss for his human form, yet be available when he casts his Tiger Form spell. This is stupid, and if you're a GM and your players are fucking with you like that they need to be hit with the 'tard bat. The same thing goes for most of the stupid shit that isn't explicitly covered in the rules.

In the end the extent to which any spell description can be interpreted in a given game is up to GM fiat, and if you're a player and you don't like the way your GM runs things, talk to them about it and/or find a new group.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 12 2008, 11:01 PM

Your cyberware is a part of you. Anything that it is paid for with essence is. The spell could no more change you without changing your 'ware than it could change you without changing your skin.

Posted by: crizh Jun 12 2008, 11:17 PM

However the spell is extremely variable in effect. The extent to which it changes your skin and it's function is entirely up to the caster and varies from casting to casting.

Which leads onto my next discourse about Shapechange. What limits are there on the forms you can take? Magicians are not Zoologists. Is there any reason you cannot take the form of creatures of your own invention? So long as you stick to what is biologically possible why not? Are you limited to extant forms? Or can you use extinct forms?

Velociraptor anyone?

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 12 2008, 11:24 PM

can you start and stop the change at will?
can you change so only part of you gets changed?
fangs, claws, eyes, ears etc . . can i make a magical catgirl? O.o

Posted by: Jaid Jun 13 2008, 12:29 AM

no
no
yes... but not with shapechange. you could certainly make a version that allows the form of catgirl. not sure i'd allow you to become something that has never existed, but i would probably allow you to become something that has existed at one point or another using shapechange. so, no catgirls or cthulhu... but you could shapechange into a dinosaur imo. provided the GM feels like coming up with stats for one, and it's within the appropriate body range, that is.

Posted by: Apathy Jun 13 2008, 04:56 AM

Canon says catgirls do exist, post Haley's comet and surge.

Posted by: Pendaric Jun 13 2008, 08:40 AM

Guess they count as metahuman. See heated debate above.

Posted by: Jaid Jun 13 2008, 08:22 PM

my point was that catgirls are not a race. if a catgirl who had surged was to have a baby from a catboy father, the child is not necessarily going to be a catgirl/boy, or even necessarily to have SURGEd at all.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 13 2008, 09:15 PM

true, but if shapechange "can" turn you into an orc, a catgirl should not be beyond its ability.

Posted by: Screamin Demon Jun 14 2008, 05:53 PM

Shapechange is a little bit broken if it lets you shapeshift into any metatype. It just becomes an 'Increase all physical attributes' spell for way to little drain. Especially if it stacks with cyberware.

In response to the whole 'bones are dead' argument, it doesn't really matter, because the stickler is the OR of complex technological cyberware. The OR of your own naturally crafted hydroxylapatite bones is non-existent. Make those bones processed metal though and suddenly magic is not so easy. I know the spell doesn't specify OR, but in my own games I am definitely going to rule it myself, otherwise an excellent spell is suddenly just way too good.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 14 2008, 06:35 PM

I honestly can not see how it would stack with cyber. It remakes the target into whatever shape the caster intends, and that would include any cyber/bio. It gives the target base line stats for that creature, and the spell description makes no reference to including cyber into its calculations.
So yes a human with a body 4+ might be able to change into an orc, but they would keep none of their cyberware. It still has the body +-2 restriction.
Also as has been noted there is a bit of debate about whether meta humans are viable alternate forms, I see no reason by not, if a chimp is a viable form humans and metahumans should be too as we're all primates.

So then any human with ANY cyberware at all suddenly has an OR of 4 or higher? Thats really quite a bad move, and not the intention of the spell at all. If that cyberware was paid for with essence then its part of the person and OR is not a factor. You 'might' be able to argue docking the mage 1 die per point of essence lost when casting it someone but I'm pretty sure thats only for 'health' spells and NOT manipulation spells.

Posted by: Glyph Jun 14 2008, 07:45 PM

The shapechange spell is obviously not designed to allow shifting into metahumans. Turning into an ape (to use human gear and maybe even armor) or a parrot (to be able to speak) are messing with what were intended to be limitations of the spell, but are still allowable. Turning into an ork or troll? No. Like Screaming Demon said, that just turns it into an "increase all physical Attributes" spell.

And why would it affect cyberware when petrify and turn to goo don't?

Posted by: crizh Jun 14 2008, 07:57 PM

Because both those spells explicitly target only living tissue.

As I was trying to point out above, bone is not living tissue. It is a mineral excretion of living tissue, very similar to a pearl.

Assume for a moment that Shapechange does not result in a number of pre-determined codified forms but that the Magician merely sculpts his body into any form mundane tissue can take and integrate any non-living structure a mundane critter is capable of forming as part of it's phenotype.

If he can take the skeleton he already possesses and alter it to fit the new form and retain almost all of it's functionality why not the cyber-eyes or data-jack he has spent Essence on?

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 14 2008, 09:11 PM

I'd guess because magic is really bad to messing with technology in the first place (see the concept of OR) and even worse at making functional high tech objects. Its entirely possible a encepholon can simply not be made small enough to fit in the skull of a house cat by a skilled technician let alone a magician who would need to pass an OR 4 test to break it letalone make it using magic. It makes more sense to simply treat the cyberware are 'part' of the person and have it turn into whatever X kind of flesh that portion of their anatomy is going to consist of when the spell active.

Posted by: crizh Jun 14 2008, 09:16 PM

It's not an object, it's part of a living creature, it does not suffer from OR.

Surely it makes more sense to reduce the amount that the spell alters the implant if it's technological nature impedes such a transformation.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 14 2008, 09:24 PM

Just look at cyber like wired reflexes or skill wires, that is going to have to be altered substantially to make it fit inside of anything other then the current owner. I just don't think magic would know how to do this and keep the device working. Malfunctioning cyberware linked into your nervous system to that degree is likely going to be crippling > fatal, so its easiest to rule it just turns it into part of the creature you're becoming.

Posted by: crizh Jun 15 2008, 07:44 AM

Just look at a pulmonary or lymphatic system, that is going to have to be altered substantially to make it fit inside of anything other than a man-sized primate.

The spell doesn't know how to keep these systems working when you Shapechange into a Spider Crab.

(The spell doesn't know anything according to the spell design rules...)

These biological systems are substantially more complicated than Cyberware and are a perfect example of why Shapechange in particular needs a metric shit ton of Handwavium injected into it to stand up to anything more than cursory scrutiny.

Magic should follow the path of least resistance. The difficulty of transforming cyberware into flesh and bone is substantial compared to simply reshaping it.

The main reason I continue to argue this point is that I have always admired SR's magic system for it's elegance and realism. Obviously there are bits of I don't like, the whole OR thing is game-balance bull-crap, but generally it's the sort of thing that one could reasonably envisage turning out to be true in three years time.

This whole discussion has suspicious similarities to nerfing that occurred to a certain 'shapechangey' spell in a certain 'other' system. It saddens me to see that mind-set creep into SR. OMG Magicians are massively powerful!!

No shit Sherlock.

Just envision what you could achieve with even the most minor of these abilities. The world would be your mollusc of choice.

We shouldn't be scrambling around de-powering Magicians, we should be having fun exploring the possibilities of what could be achieved with creative use of these powers.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 15 2008, 07:53 AM

I'm not argueing high or low powered for anything. I'm just saying my understanding of SR magic is it would be easier for it to work with flesh then metal. So for ease of use it would turn the metal into flesh.
If the system didn't have OR I would be far more inclined to agree with you.

Posted by: hyzmarca Jun 15 2008, 08:09 AM

Shapechange had always been very limited. It turns the subject into a single non-mtahuman non-magical animal of the spellcaster's choice - cyberware and bioware are transformed as well and do not function as such in the new form. It has always been that way. The nerfing is in the Body difference limitation. Previously, it was difficult to turn a Body 1 character into an elephant but not impossible.

Posted by: crizh Jun 15 2008, 08:09 AM

Actually, certain metals would be easier to work than flesh. Raw Gold in a stream-bed or still embedded in rock ought to be substantially easier to affect with magic than flesh, flesh gets a resistance roll after all.

I certainly can't agree that it is in any way easy to turn Highly processed goods into flesh. If you absolutely must conclude, either that a particular piece of cyberware is incompatible with a particular form or that cyberware cannot be retained at all while Shapechanged, then it would be much easier to say that it has disappeared into the Biro-Zone along with all your excess mass and other inconvenient stuff your new form does not possess.

As to OR that's a rant for another day.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 15 2008, 08:12 AM

Mostly how I feel about it, and yes I DO HATE the concept of OR.

Posted by: Glyph Jun 15 2008, 08:40 AM

I feel the same way. Even if cyberware were retained, I don't see the spell re-working all of that nano-implanted micro circuitry so that the golden retriever that you have turned into has functioning cybereyes. Either the spell affects the cyberware, in which case it is changed with everything else when the new form is assumed, or it doesn't, in which case the character is seriously fragged up. Since the former interpretation is more in line with how the spell has always been treated before, it's the one I would use.

Posted by: stormcrow Jun 15 2008, 04:36 PM

As mentioned before, isn't Shapechange what dragons use to take metahuman form? And can't they, in fact, take on different metahuman forms?

Posted by: Stahlseele Jun 15 2008, 04:48 PM

no, for certain dragons there was HUMANOID FORM which was a dragon only kinda critter power . .

Posted by: Fortune Jun 15 2008, 04:49 PM

I beg to differ. There has never been, to my knowledge, any specific ruling against taking metahuman shape. Indeed, previous editions included standard metahumans on the Critter table itself.

Posted by: Mordinvan Jun 15 2008, 06:20 PM

Which is how I feel the spell would work in SR. In a game world where magic actually could interact with technology something different might pop up.