Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 7 2011, 04:52 AM

Hi all.

Decided to tap the collective knowledge of DS for this character. Fairly straightforward, Magic 6 evenly split into Power Points and Spellcasting Magic. Wields two swords and has the Two Weapon Specialization from Arsenal (and has the Ambidextrous quality).

He's first and foremost a sword-swinger but he's also a spellslinger... it's just that my spell choices are all the utilitarian ones. They're quite useful, but there's going to be a full-time Mage in the game to handle most of it.

He's also limited to Force 3 most of the time.

So would Elemental Aura be worth considering even at Force 2? (Sustained through a Focus) Trid Phantasm centred around himself for some added confusion?

They still haven't developed spells that transmit through melee weapons, have they?

Posted by: mmmkay Aug 7 2011, 06:25 AM

How many IPs do you have? Because sustaining improved reflexes on yourself gives you more bang for your buck than elemental aura. Perhaps the other mage will be sustaining improved reflexes instead?

Make sure to get personalized grips on your swords =) (also in arsenal)

Posted by: Udoshi Aug 7 2011, 06:40 AM

Why are you limited to force 3, exactly? Cause if you wanna be a full mage, you damn better well be taking magic 5 or 6.

You know that the rules that govern the Mystic adept spellcasting/adept power split changed in 4th anniversary edition, right?

Posted by: Blitz66 Aug 7 2011, 06:58 AM

What I believe Udoshi is saying here is that, while you're not rolling as many dice for casting, this character's Magic score is 6 for every purpose other than spellcasting/summoning dice and determining the number of Power Points.

That being the case, my own humble recommendation is to go with the typical combat mage loadout. Improved Reflexes for extra IPs, Improved Invisibility so as to make it a little easier to not get shot, Stunbolt to remote-punch anybody who is inconveniently difficult to sword, etc.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 7 2011, 12:04 PM

IMHO Improved Reflexes is one of the weaker ways to get extra IPs. You have to cast the spell and get 2-4 hits, you light up on the astral plane, astral barriers are a problem, without a sustaining focus you are at -2 for everything and last but not least the spell only increases Initiative not REA. I'd rather get the IPs from Bioware or adept powers.

BTW what are you planning to take for adept powers?

Levitate and heal are nice spells for everyone as well.

Posted by: Blitz66 Aug 7 2011, 03:50 PM

Sure, but this is a Magic 6 character, so I'm assuming no 'ware, and he's only got 3 PP worth of Adept powers. Improved Reflexes spell is, the way I understand it, easily the weakest method of getting extra IPs, but the adept power costs far too much. Only with a combination of Gaes and Warror's Way does it become reasonably cost-effective, and he's already planning on using a sustaining focus for combat buffs. Either way, the extra IPs are a priority, and I think getting them by swapping out a relatively unimportant spell is a decent way to go about it.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 7 2011, 04:24 PM

I have to second this statement. IPs are important to combat characters, even if not needed, and especially to melee front liners who can always use more ways to defend against ranged attacks when they are just out of range, or more chances to hit.

Have you considered taking Martial Arts qualities? A lot of them will help your damage or hit output, and the Two-weapon style maneuver is very useful useful for attack and (full) defence in the same round, which I would consider. Your powers are important as well, as the right powers can affect what spells shore up weaknesses, and what spells get better. That said, with only 3 PP, I would consider Adept Geas', if your GM allows them, just to get more variety out of what you have, even if they are limited in use.

Posted by: UmaroVI Aug 7 2011, 04:28 PM

IR is the least good way but it is also by FAR the cheapest if you are already going to be casting spells.

The "boilerplate" mystic adept: Get Heightened Concentration (Digital Grimoire). Use it mostly to ignore the Sustaining penalty (obviously, you can find other uses for it too); with magic 6, that's 3 spells. Increase Reflexes, Increase Agility, and Increase Reaction are my recommendations. You can also take Psyche and then sustain 6 spells with no penalty, although your GM will probably want you to start making addiction checks if you do this every run.

Other than that, as a melee character, you should try to pick up spells that will help you deal with things that don't want to melee you. Improved Invisibility is a good suggestion, so is Levitate. I do recommend knowing Stunbolt as a "fallback" option - even if you aren't great with it, it's sort of the "holdout pistol" of the mystic adept. If you are otherwise very focused on being Kung Fu Sword Guy, you might want to focus on Health spells (good for buffs), and pick up stuff like Heal and also spells like Increase Charisma and Increase Intuition that you can use to help other people for Legwork-y stuff.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 7 2011, 04:28 PM

And, with an Adept Geas and the Warriors Way, you get 3 IP for 1.25 pp, leaving 1.75 pp remaining. That is pretty good as an adept in my opinion. Assuming you like Warriors Way and Geasa, of course.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Aug 7 2011, 04:34 PM

Mystic Adepts generally use Improved Reflexes, mostly in a sustaining focus.

This is because despite the drawbacks, it's the only really viable choice. Adept IP boosts eat into an already limited Power Point pool, and implanted ones kill the overall Magic rating.




-k

Posted by: BishopMcQ Aug 7 2011, 07:28 PM

Marwynn--Depending on the Adept powers that you are taking, some of the Detection and Manipulation spells can be really handy. Grab a sustaining focus for each type, and then you can cycle through Hawk Eye, Spatial Sense, Gecko Crawl, Levitate, etc.

Posted by: Achsin Aug 7 2011, 07:39 PM

I like Elemental Aura at force 2 cast through a sustaining focus with edge (to remove the hit cap). One of my characters has Fire Aura which makes him a very noticeable target, but there's something nice about having a 9P -half AP attack, and it fits the Pink Mohawk game he's in. Otherwise I might have gone with smoke or something.

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 7 2011, 09:53 PM

Thanks guys. To clarify, he has Magic 6 split between 3 Power Points and 3 "spellcasting" points.

Qualities:
Ambidextrous
Martial Arts (Arnis de Mano: +1 Blades, Two Weapon Style, Finishing Move)
Mystic Adept
The Magician's Way

Powers:
Improved Reflexes I
Combat Reflexes
Sustenance
Counterstrike

There's a Geas for all the Powers, and the ranks are in flux at the moment. I was also thinking about Sorcerous Parry...

Spells:
Lightning Bolt
Stunball
Detect Life (Extended)
Heal
Improved Invisibility
Levitate
Mana Static
Influence

That's what I currently have. The spell choices are utilitarian at the moment, I'd expect any sane mage to have those. But that's the thing, I don't want a sane mage... I want one that dual wields swords (well) and perhaps go Super Saiyan.

Fire/Electricity/Light Aura? I know Heal and Levitate are too awesome not to have. I was also considering Physical Barrier, which would let him charge shooting guys in relative safety (if Invisibility is otherwise not possible).


Heightened Concentration actually sounds good... Hmm... Also, what do you guys think about Mind over Matter? I can choose a Charisma tradition for instance to boost his Strength. I'll have a smooth talking, hard hitting, swift casting fella.

Posted by: AKWeaponsSpecialist Aug 7 2011, 10:00 PM

I suggest Lightning, maybe a dual aura (Lightning/Smoke?). Electricity has too many benefits in too many situations to pass up. Also, M/M wouldn't help with damage, since you can only replace the attribute for rolls, and your weapons damage is static, according to your strength. So it's Damage+hits, not Strength/2+x+hits.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 7 2011, 10:24 PM

You may want to check with your GM what information the spell detect life provides. According to its description it should only give the number and position of lifeforms and not type, gender, identification, equipment, occupation and purpose as well as the table "detection spell results" suggests.

Be careful with Mana Static. This will affect your Magic as well, if you are in the AoE.

Posted by: Saint Hallow Aug 8 2011, 03:46 AM

None of you would recommend the Armor spell or any other of protective magic? I would think having that would help if the mystic adept decides to enter a fray & a bunch of bullets start flying.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 8 2011, 03:58 AM

The armor spell draws a lot more fire than it protects against. Increase BOD or Deflection are nice, but not as powerful as Improved Invisibility. With 8 spells already the character would need at least spellcasting 5 to add another two.

BTW What is Combat Reflexes? Do you mean Combat Sense?

Posted by: KarmaInferno Aug 8 2011, 01:57 PM

Actually, there's never any good reason to take Deflection over Combat Sense.

Deflection is only 1 Drain less, and only protects against ranged attacks.

Combat Sense on the other hand also protects against Melee, and nets you a Surprise test bonus.





-k

Posted by: DamienKnight Aug 8 2011, 02:10 PM

Combat Sense requires that you dodge, decreasing your dodge pool incrementally. Deflect never decreases with use. Theoretically for less dangerous attacks you could choose to NOT dodge, preventing your dodge dice from decreasing and still have deflect dice to use.

Also, deflect and combat sense stack... so why not use both? Not to mention that Deflect is a Manipulation spell, while combat sense is a Detection spell... so if you have bonuses with Manipulation spells (one of the most useful spell categories) you can get bonuses to deflect that you wouldnt get to Combat Sense.

Also, if he is dual wielding swords and keeps one sword for attacking and one sword for defense, he is probably going to have plenty of dice for melee defense, ranged is where he needs the extra help.

As far as mystic adept sword weilding goes, you might want to look into a Possession Spirit Tradition that allows Guardian spirits. Summon Guardian spirits force 3 or higher and select Elemental Aura as their optional power, then have them possess your weapon (added durability and now it can penetrate astral creatures as though it were a magic sword) and have it activate its own Elemental Aura... give the weapon the elemental effect and +4 DV. Lightsaber anyone?

Oh, and if no one has said it yet, you need to get a Path from the Way of the Adept book. Totally worth the BP quality cost, as it will save you points on your most expensive adept powers.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 8 2011, 02:17 PM

The oft-repeated lightsaber trick is just that: a trick. Stacking geasa, Ways, etc. is also something the GM might balk at. Heightened Concentration depends a lot on how lenient the GM is. Be careful about any of these things without clear, prior GM approval.

Posted by: DamienKnight Aug 8 2011, 02:46 PM

Good point Yerameyahu.

After experiencing the Light Saber phenomenon in our group, we made some changes. We added a houserule that when a spirit uses Elemental Aura, instead of adding a straight 4 DV to the damage, it instead added Force /2 to DV. No more force 1 spirits granting uber weapon power. As far as legality, there is no interpretation of the rules that says it wouldnt be possible.

Also, possession spirits are overpowered, no doubt about it. With channeling they really make characters too powerful. To reign this in a bit, I suggest using the houserule in Street Magic that suggests that Possession spirits are forced to choose a type of possession preference, and get penalties when attempting to possess something outside their preference. We interpret this as either they like to possess people, or they like to possess inanimate objects.

Also, we halved the attribute boosting power of possession spirits in general. ie a force 4 added 2 to all attributes, instead of 4.

Heightened Concentration is great, though not as awesome as simply using Psyche, the most overpowered drug in Shadowrun. It allows mages to take half penalties for sustaining, and has no negative crash effect that most other drugs have.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 8 2011, 03:37 PM

That does not work this way by RAW. The Elemental Aura gives the target +4 DV on its attacks. If the spirit puts the power on the sword it will do nothing unless the spirit itself attacks while possessing it (which should not be possible). The sword does not attack, it is the wielder, and the weapon is not attacked very often either.

On the other hand I like the flaming sword/lightsabre idea as well, so as a GM I have no problem with a player who wants the aura concentrated on the weapon instead of wielder+weapon.

Posted by: Kyrel Aug 8 2011, 05:14 PM

For a swordwielding mystic adept I'd probably go after these spells:

Night Vision
Thermographic Vision
Heal
Increase Body
Increase Agility
Increase Strength
Increase Reflexes
(Decrease Body)
(Decrease Agility)
(Decrease Strength)
(Decrease Reflexes)
Combat Sense
Improved Invisibility
Stealth
Armour
Astral Armour
Catfall
Deflection
Levitate

And then I'd make sure to get two spirits to lend my swords Energy Aura.

Posted by: Bearclaw Aug 8 2011, 07:34 PM

That really disagrees with what I read as the intent of the Heightened Concentration power. It says a single modifier. Sustaining 3 spells doesn't give you a +6 modifier, it gives you 3 +2 modifiers, right?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 8 2011, 08:07 PM

It is a single category Negative Modifier. 3 Spells results in a -6 Modifier, not 3 -2 Modifiers.

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 8 2011, 08:15 PM

/facepalm

Yep, Combat Sense. My bad.

Deflection sounds nice but the MA has Reaction 5, with +1/2 from Improved Reflexes plus +2/3/4 from Combat Sense. That's 8 dice at minimum on a standard defense roll, right? Combined with Improved Invisibility (at Force 3, enough to fool sensors that aren't on Drones) that should be decent protection enough. Also, I'll probably need that Manipulation Sustaining Focus for other spells.

I was also considering a Possession Tradition, Psionics actually, and have the swords be prepared vessels of some sort. Not having delved too deeply into such Traditions, would that work?

Thanks for all the suggestions! It's given me lots to think on.

Posted by: UmaroVI Aug 8 2011, 08:47 PM

IIRC Psionics cannot prepare vessels.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 8 2011, 09:13 PM

Before negative modifiers (wounds, previous attacks, visibility etc.), yes.

Why not go Force 5? It's only +1 drain and you have a chance of affecting drones as well. The drain isn't even physical with MAG 6.

A possessed sword is just a sword that is extremely hard to break. The spirit can only move the movable parts of a sword (which most of the time are none). It cannot fly around. As I said above, Energy Aura on the sword does next to nothing.

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 8 2011, 10:15 PM

Darn on the Psionics.

Wait, I'm confused. This is a Mystic Adept with Magic 6, but 3 points have been converted for Adept Powers. Are you saying I can cast Force 6 spells without overcasting?

Darn, on the Energy Aura but I'll get my GM to do something, he's okay with a "Lightsaber" Manipulation spell. If I can cast a spell that creates a wall of fire, I can darn well cast one that's tied to a blade. Actually, he may want it to be a Combat Spell of sorts, something about the hits being the charges/number of combat turns.

Apart from that, would self-sustaining Improved Agility at Force 6 be worth it? I'm working on the assumption that I'm overcasting this at Force 3 with only Magic 3 left for spellcasting.

Posted by: Bearclaw Aug 8 2011, 10:18 PM

Wow, that's a big difference. Am I the only one who didn't see it that way?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 8 2011, 10:29 PM

Yes. There is a whole discussion about that on dumpshock (too lazy to search). The FAQ blatantly contradicts the RAW. By RAW you only use the partial magic for magic related skill tests, for everything else its the full magic. Designating a Force is not a skill test.

As I wrote above, just ask your GM, if he is fine with the Energy Aura just being concentrated on the blade. Whether the whole adept including all equipment bursts into flames and hits with a flaming sword or has just a flaming sword is just cosmetics IMHO.

Legal but not worth it IMHO. A Force 6 Sustaining Focus is very expensive and not available at CharGen, not even with Restricted Gear.

Posted by: Aerospider Aug 9 2011, 03:01 PM

No you aren't, because it's not true (to my reading, at least). TJ and I are already battling this out in the 'Magic related questions topic' (sorry, I seem to be ignorant of how to make links in DS) so I won't get into it here, but my advice (nothing personal TJ) is not to take his word for it on this occasion.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 9 2011, 04:34 PM

No Offense Taken. We just seem to have two different opinions on this matter. No worries...

Posted by: DamienKnight Aug 10 2011, 03:25 PM

So an aura of energy radiating from the sword would not add an elemental attack to your sword combat? Logic says that if your sword is enveloped with magical fire it is going to burn people...

And I disagree about your interpretation of RAW. If the spirit possesses a statue and punches you with an aura on, it adds elemental DV. If a troll picked the statue up and threw it at someone, the spirit is causing the damage, the aura would damage the target. And if it possesses a sword and puts an aura on it, that burning aura is going to hit the target when you slash someone with it. So long as the object the spirit is possessing is coming in violent contact with the target, the elemental aura would modify the DV. A DM would have to create a houserule to disallow the aura, because it would add to damage by even

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 10 2011, 03:58 PM

Logic also dictates that a burning sword would burn the wielder without protection. The power does not say anything about singeing the floor as the critter as the critter walks by either.

The spirit possessing a statue cannot move the statue unless it had moving parts which allowed such movement.

The other thing is a spirit possessing an inanimate object does not have physical attributes the object does not possess. So it would have no STR, AGI, REA to do anything.

Even though this makes sense, it is not RAW. An inanimate object isn't even a valid target for the Energy Aura and many possessed objects cannot perform an attack as explained above:

For a possession tradition the best way to do it is to possess the wielder. Materialization Traditions cannot make flaming swords with the Energy Aura Power.

A spirit sustaining the spell [Element] Aura on the fighter would work for both types of traditions but a possession Spirit of Man would have to possess something to be able to cast on the physical plane. The possessing spirit better just possesses the wielder and uses its Energy Aura (which is better in most cases)

Posted by: Miri Aug 10 2011, 04:39 PM

The exact wording of the power says that attacks made by the critter, yes. But when the critter is possessing a sword and the sword has a flaming aura how exactly are you going to handwave away the fact that the sword is.. well.. on freaking fire? After all, the last paragraph says that if the critter gets attacked the attacker takes the damage, implying that it is a very intense always on aura, and not just one that flares up when the critter swings a fist/paw/claw/fang at its target.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 10 2011, 04:44 PM

I have no problem with houseruling it that way, I'm just saying the RAW say otherwise. Still I would not give the defensive bonus to the wielder if the weapon had the aura.
And while we're houseruling, there should be the word melee in the description of the defensive bonus, otherwise the sniper shooting at the spirit gets burned as well.

Posted by: DamienKnight Aug 10 2011, 06:11 PM

Dakka has made up his mind. Point out how the rules support it, he is just going to say, 'Nope, thats a houserule.' Either way, just use common sense, which the authors absolutely intended you to employ when playing shadowrun.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 10 2011, 06:23 PM

The aura is definitely for attacks the *spirit* makes, per RAW. Do what you want at your table.

Posted by: UmaroVI Aug 10 2011, 06:42 PM

I hear that if you make houserules, Jason M. Hardy will personally come to your gaming table and kick your ass. It's vital that you insist that they aren't houserules, and that you're just enforcing what the rules support - that's the only protection!

Posted by: scarius Aug 11 2011, 06:37 AM

i have a couple of mages/mystic adeps in my group that have the elemental arua spell, for them i have the aura be visible on the astral plane and just change the dynamics around them to reflect this slightly. eg one has ice arua, so on the astral plane he has he from covered in ice that is raidiating coldness, in the real world the temp drops around him and water tends to freeze when he casts it high/has a lot of net hits.

but i do have a question:

if i have an ice aura, and then i jazz up a sword for a spirt and give it elemental aura, does this mean i have 2 aruas at the same time?

Posted by: DamienKnight Aug 11 2011, 02:12 PM

I would personally not stack the aura effect for melee DV, but that sounds like a GM call. The rules dont specify how these auras would act with each other. I would think that the stronger aura would override the weaker aura.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 11 2011, 03:23 PM

The [element] aura spell is always obvious on the astral plane as it is a spell, but giving away what spell it is surpasses what the can be found out with assensing. The best you can do by RAW is it's a manipulation spell cast by an awakened character with such a signature.

As i wrote above, by RAW casting the spell on the sword is not a good idea, but if you allow that to work as one would think it works, there is no rule against having both. You could even have two auras on the wielder of the sword. At least the elemental effects should stack. From a balance perspective I doubt +2*hits or +4+hits is a good idea but there is no rule forbidding it. Somone attacking the wielder would probably have to resiste Force DV twice and not a DV of 2*Force once.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 12 2011, 01:29 PM

I'd personally work it with the (semi-)precedent of the Elemental Indirect Combat spells like Firewater and whatnot - you get both elemental secondary effects, damage is not increased, and they resist with all applicable elemental protections.

As an example, a free spirit has Elemental Aura (Fire) and has cast (Cold) Aura with 5 successes. He gets a +5 DV aura that can set things on fire and is resisted with -1/2 AP + Fire Resistance + Insulation.

Oh, and I'd personally always use the Blast element.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 01:31 PM

Blast is quite good. I like Sound and Smoke too.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 12 2011, 01:34 PM

Sound is ridiculously good, but I avoid it because I feel it's too overpowered (*gasp!*). Smoke just makes them Nauseated right? I like getting pretty much guarenteed knockdown.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 12 2011, 01:39 PM

They're all pretty ridiculous. Splatcreep in magicrun?! :o

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 01:44 PM

Well...



I like both for Non-Lethal Takedowns. That said, I only use them for very specific builds of characters as well. They are BOTH very, very obvious. Smoke is visible and Sound can be heard (Neither are subtle).

Posted by: UmaroVI Aug 12 2011, 01:45 PM

And nothing says "subtle" like Flamethrower, am I right?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 01:47 PM

True, but I have never actually used that spell in play either, so...

Posted by: Neraph Aug 12 2011, 01:50 PM

The reason I don't like Smoke is because I consider a gas mask as a piece of gear like I do underwear: always got at least one on.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 02:21 PM

True, it is often a very handy peice of equipment. But not everyone actually uses them, even if they carry them.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 12 2011, 06:57 PM

And that is at aleast one hit with no armour. I personally have used Smoke on a Tamanous related NPC Adept. Of course, he also had a pet Basilisk, so he could petrify/suffocate people, then take out whatever he needed. Sure, smoke could cause some permanent damage to tissue, but that could be treated later. At least it's in one piece for now.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 13 2011, 04:32 AM

I wear them all the time. I usually have them built in to my helmets. Or I play AIs in Drones.

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 13 2011, 06:59 AM

ELEMENTAL WEAPON
Cost: .75

This power allows an adept to channel mana to a wielded melee weapon with a Simple Action. While active, a specific Elemental effect (chosen when purchased) covers the weapon and converts all damage done with that weapon to that Element's effects. The effect lasts for Combat Turns equal to the Adept's Magic attribute. If the Adept were to be disarmed or no longer be in physical contact with the weapon then the Elemental effect will dissipate as soon as contact is lost. The effect can be renewed with a Free Action as long as it is active.

For an additional .25 power points, another handheld weapon can be granted a similar effect and all are activated with the same Simple Action and renewed with the same Free Action. If another Element effect is desired then the cost is .5 instead.

============

Rather unimaginative, but my GM asked me for a proposed "lightsaber" power and I wanted to run it by you guys first. Think it's a bit much considering the Unarmed guys need 1 PP for it? If it's 1 PP should you then be able to activate it for both (or more) hands at the same time?

Posted by: Neraph Aug 13 2011, 01:51 PM

I'd just use the Calling rules to Call a possession or inhabitation spirit for the swords. Also, Ancient History had some materials written for an upcoming magic book that ended up getting canceled. Maybe someone could link it for you (I have it downloaded). It has inside it some adept abilities for melee weapons.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 13 2011, 02:09 PM

You mean 'abuse' them.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 13 2011, 03:27 PM

You are one of the rare few that I have encountered that do so in game.
Even IRL when I was in the Corps, I often noticed that people went without their masks when they should have definitely had them on. When asked, the answer was invariably some form of "because it's uncomfortable." On occasion, that bit them in the ass during training maneuvers. Sucked to be them. Still, they never really changed either, so...

Posted by: Blitz66 Aug 13 2011, 03:41 PM

Military is similar. The things are miserable, so people try to avoid using them. Of course, gas is more miserable, but no one wants to think about that. I'd like to think that the 2070s has gas masks that people don't mind wearing, but somehow I doubt it.

As an aside, gas masks and beards don't mix, and I don't see that changing in the next hundred years. I wonder how often runners end up shaving to accommodate a gas mask...

Posted by: Blitz66 Aug 13 2011, 03:42 PM

Oops.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 14 2011, 04:09 AM

My favorite armor is a heavily modded Evo HEL suit. Other than that I try to get the GM to allow me to build a gas mask into a helmet, which I always wear on 'runs. Or I play a drone.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 02:24 PM

Not a big fan of the Hel Suit. I prefer the more innocuous armors over the ones that are highly obvious, and memorable.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 14 2011, 02:26 PM

I like it because you should be able to wear normal clothes over it (it's skin-tight). And the amount of armor protections you can get are ridiculous.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 03:15 PM

Ummmmm.....



No where does it say that it is form fitting and cabaple of being worn under normal clothes. It is a space work suit, usaed for EVERYDAY DRESS. You know, like what they wear on the space station. Comfortable, maybe, but not necessarily form fitting and not concealable under clothes. The fact that it is carrying an Air tank, and has many outside pockets should indicate that it is an outer wear (and fairly distinctive outer wear at that) that is meant to be worn by itself.

You want Form Fitting Underarmor, wear FFBA.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 14 2011, 03:21 PM

You quoted it yourself.



I can wear clothes over clothes very easily. Not everything is sold to perfectly fit someone. You can buy baggy clothes.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 14 2011, 03:25 PM

Sure. And you pay encumbrance penalties for stacked clothes. You *can* wear 6 sweaters.

Posted by: Lanlaorn Aug 14 2011, 03:26 PM

Did you actually read what you quoted? It says right in the description:

It would seem they're going for the scifi spandex style here. A five minute air tank in the day and age of nanotechnology also doesn't mean what some scuba like nonsense, at all.

Even if the GM rules that you can't conceal it with clothing, it's definitely less "highly obvious and memorable" than the full body armors. It's basically a catsuit/jumpsuit (depending on how tight "tight fitting" is) compared to the SWAT suit craziness other people wear.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 03:48 PM

Read it again, then. Tight Fitting does not mean Form Fitting. My Jeans are tight fitting, yet comfortable. Does not mean I am going to wear two pair of them.

And it is Memorable because it is a fricking SPACE SUIT. Can't really confuse them for anything else, now can you?

Posted by: KarmaInferno Aug 14 2011, 04:40 PM

I dunno, I've worn loose-fitting clothing over tight-fitting clothing before.

Like sweatpants over jeans, when it was cold.






-k

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 04:58 PM

See, I just wear a coat at that point.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 14 2011, 05:25 PM

Only causes encumberance if the clothing you wear also has armor ratings

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 05:40 PM

Semantics... Try wearing 6 sweaters and see how much whole body dexterity you will have. You WILL be encumbered. Arguing that you can wear excessive clothing with no penalty smacks of gamesmanship.

Posted by: Miri Aug 14 2011, 09:53 PM

*cough*RAW*cough*

Ima wear a HEL suit under a Durable Clothing utility jumpsuit.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 04:11 AM

I also never mentioned 6 sweaters.

When I think of the Evo HEL suit, http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/359/evachildren10244je.jpg/sr=1 is what I see. You could easily wear some http://www.nexternal.com/armynavy/images/Woodland-Camo-BDU-Shirt1.gif (non-armored ones) or a http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20090810-man-hakama%20mit%20edu.gif over that.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 01:05 PM

That is not what I see, however (nor what is described), I see a Space Station Suit like what our Astronauts wear. Now, you are correct that that is what is worn underneath their Space Walk Suit. But, I would not call it something you would wear underneath BDU's. Sorry, it is already like a set of BDU's in that they have multiple cargo pockets, etc.

Posted by: Miri Aug 15 2011, 02:03 PM

Well the problem with that is, a Spacesuit can not be worn over any other type of armor. So no running around in a HEL suit and if you have to go EV slipping into a Spacesuit. A HEL suit is lightweight enough to be worn on earth comfortably.

Edit to add: The last thing you want in a weightless environment is for a loose fold of cloth to get caught on something. So I see a HEL suit as a skin tight outfit much like the Form Fitting stuff, but too thick to be worn under any other armor much like the FF stuff can be.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 03:38 PM

You're simply not being consistant. http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/space-suit-mmua.jpg is hardly the definition of "thin, tight-fitting." Maybe your jeans are tight-fitting, but are they also thin? And if so, can you wear them underneath baggy jeans? I bet you can. In fact, I know you can - in New Jersey and when I went snowboarding in Colorado I would often wear 2 sets of sweats with jeans over them and 3+ pairs of socks.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 03:50 PM

And THAT suit is not what we are talking about, now are we. Look at what is worn on the Space Station, and you will see exactly what the HEL suit is being described as.

And I bet you were at least partly encumbered... In Fact, I would almost guarantee it.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 03:54 PM

You are in error. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/living/spacewear/index.html hardly things that would keep you safe in the vaccum of space.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 04:02 PM

Things may have changed since the last time I saw Station Operations, but What the Hel Suit is described as is what I remember seeing them wearing. The Suit for EVA is not it. I will look to see if I can find the relevant pic that I remember and strive to link it somehow, as I am Link Deficient.

AS for your T-Shirts and Pullovers. Not very protective in Vacuum are they.

Okay... It is called a Partial Pressure Suit. I would actually call it a Flight Suit, personally, but there you go. The pictures I found are for Vehicular Operations, and are capable of minimal protection against Vacuum, as long as the helmet is in place. Hmmm. Seems exactly what the HEL suit is described as. And it not something that you put underneath other clothes. You want Form Fitting Armor, Wear FFBA.

Posted by: Miri Aug 15 2011, 04:04 PM

Are you possibly thinking of the thermal tube covered underlining that they wear on the under the hard EVA suits?

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 04:06 PM

I think I know what you're talking about, and I still don't think it's correct. Plus, it goes against the description of the HEL suit, whereas the visual for EVA agrees with it (except the EVA lacks the hoodie+facemask). And I still assert you can wear baggy clothing over tight clothing and not suffer from it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 04:14 PM

Nope, the Partial Pressure Suit.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 04:15 PM

How do you equate the HEL suit to an EVA Suit. They are NOT the same thing. There is no way whatsoever, that you could every claim, the EVA suit is comfortable for everyday wear.

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 15 2011, 04:34 PM

This not only irrelevant it's also inane. Please take it elsewhere.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 04:42 PM

Really? Hmmmm... Seemed pretty relevant to the conversation to me.
Even if it was a bit off topic.

Posted by: Marwynn Aug 15 2011, 05:06 PM

No, it's completely irrelevant to the topic. And it is absolutely, positively inane.

Posted by: Blitz66 Aug 15 2011, 05:16 PM

I don't know. I think, if the space suit in question was meant to be FFBA - auto-corrected by my phone as TCHAIKOVSKY - then it would have associated language similar to FFBA. I, personally, wouldn't allow it, but whatever. Don't think there's a rule expressly forbidding that use of that equipment, so enjoy, if you like.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 06:50 PM

Note I'm not saying to STACK IT WITH OTHER ARMOR, just that you can WEAR BAGGY CLOTHES OVER CERTAIN TIGHT-FITTING ARMORS. This also includes, say, the Armor Vest or the Urban Explorer.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 15 2011, 06:54 PM

While I don't think the dayglow basic colour of the Urban Exploreris the best, I don't picture it as something of a tight fit, so, I doubt I'd wear anything over it, unless I was headed to the arctic and wanted a nice big (and warm) parka.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 07:01 PM

You could feasibly wear a shirt, pants, jacket, and possibly more over http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/06/25/article-0-01BE65F700000578-9_468x909.jpg.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 15 2011, 07:05 PM

Yeah, alright. But I don't know if I'd consider that on par with an Urban Explorer. It doesn't look like it would offer much protection, and certainly not the 6/6 rating.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 07:19 PM

Of course not - we're not 60 years in the future with advanced ballistic fabrics.

Posted by: Sephiroth Aug 15 2011, 07:22 PM

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 15 2011, 07:28 PM

Alright. I concede the argument anyway.