Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 23 2011, 03:57 AM

I have a possession-based tradition character in my SR game, who tends to summon Force 10-14 spirits. He's mentioned that if it possesses an object, the object has no 'augmented maximum', so it gets the full benefit of augmented traits. Is this true? I was wondering if the item could only get a 50% increase (or perhaps double) the actual trait.

Can you use a Force 14 spirit to make an indestructible marshmallow?

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 23 2011, 04:12 AM

… I'm sorry, I couldn't get beyond the incredible problem of your first sentence.

Posted by: DMiller Aug 23 2011, 04:42 AM

It's really not that uncommon of an issue.

Force 10+ spirits aren't unheard of in my game either. Of course we are VERY pink mohock.

As far as bumping past some maximum... Our table says that the spirits don't have a maximum, so they add force to all stats without limits (including when possessing a metahuman). But as always YMMV.

-D

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 23 2011, 05:22 AM

It doesn't surprise me though, I tended to do this in SR 3 with my shaman. I'd only get 1-2 tasks, but hey, for those tasks, the thing's damn near unstoppable. I've given the player a semi-warning once, in that the spirit he tried to summon at one point spent an Edge on the resistance roll. I indicated that the character has to really learn to play nice with the spirits, or they'll be more reluctant to just accept being summoned.

So his character's now trying to talk with, socialize with, and make friends with the spirits, rather than just yanking the biggest one he can find. (On my part, in SR3, my character was always making nice with spirits, to the point where he invented a metamagic to 'gift karma' to a spirit as a thank you before dismissing them.)

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 23 2011, 01:55 PM

Even without Edge, the expected drain for Force 14 is more than 9P with a maximum of 28P. Are you sure the player is using the rules right?

Moreover inanimate objects do not get any additional functionality by possession. So an object that could not normally move on its own could not either if it is possessed. Otherwise, yes you will get very resilient objects.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 23 2011, 02:37 PM

Well, he's also doing things like having it possess weapons and armour (which increases the accuracy and damage of the weapon, or the B/I of the armour). I'm just wondering if there should be an upper limit for what it can do / have (like 1.5 or 2 x the item's normal value).

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 23 2011, 02:46 PM

And how, exactly, does a spirit increase the accuracy of a Weapon by possessing it?

Posted by: Seerow Aug 23 2011, 03:17 PM

This. Possession is meant for either possessing people, or creating D&D style golems (ie animating statues, drones, and the like). You could probably possess a full armor suit... but possessing a gun? Wouldn't do you a damn bit of good.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 23 2011, 03:25 PM

A gun probably won't get any bonuses but you could argue that the DV of a melee weapon is due to its "mechanical functions".

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 23 2011, 03:31 PM

I wouldn't argue that at all... You would just get a really tough weapon out of the deal.

Posted by: LurkerOutThere Aug 23 2011, 03:31 PM

No, spirit possesed people (the biggest issue) are still subject to metahuman maximums per the errata document at least, and thank Big D for that.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 23 2011, 03:47 PM

Isn't the DV a "physical rating" of the weapon as well? Not only its resilience? Strictly speaking weapons aren't even barriers and as such do not get a barrier rating. What would you improve on a weapon?


Are you sure. The only place I saw this was in the FAQ. The rules in Street Magic say the exact opposite.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 23 2011, 04:05 PM

A vehicle that is possessed gets an increase in Speed, Body, and Armour (SM II pg 102). It mentions an object's 'physical ratings' get increased. Would this include accuracy in a gun? The more I think about this, the more I'm thinking that a weapon's accuracy or DV is not a 'physical rating' - the accuracy can be compared to the Handling of a vehicle (which is not augmented).

I don't see any restriction to 'augmented maximum' for possession though, in SM II.

Posted by: Mardrax Aug 23 2011, 04:15 PM

Or the B/I values of armor?

Posted by: CrystalBlue Aug 23 2011, 04:20 PM

I think he's meaning that, instead of having the character attack with the weapon, it would be the spirit attacking with the weapon, which might have more dice to throw at the attack roll. Though, this is wrong, as the spirit can't actually 'attack'. It's stationary in the weapon.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 23 2011, 04:38 PM

Absolutely Nothing.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 23 2011, 04:40 PM

If it can increase the Body and Armour of a car, wouldn't it also increase the BI of armour?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 23 2011, 04:42 PM

No... Worn Armor is not a Vehicle.

Posted by: Christian Lafay Aug 23 2011, 04:54 PM

I was unaware that possessing spirits increase the body of a vehicle... I REALLY need to start looking deeper into the magic rules and stop playing mundanes. I also need to stop drooling over the, now assumed, way to put more slots for mods onto a vehicle since it's body just went nuts.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 23 2011, 06:49 PM

What? You obviously can't add more mods. The Body is increased for the purposes of damage resistance, and maybe ramming? Sounds like a terrible rule in the first place, but either way, it doesn't get bigger, or heavier, or anything like that. If you want more mods, just Overmod (because clearly your GM doesn't care).

Posted by: Christian Lafay Aug 23 2011, 07:02 PM

This is Shadowrun, good sir. "Obvious" comes up very little. But I understand your point.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 23 2011, 07:32 PM

Hehe. I know that you mean it's often *ignored*, but it frequently comes up. Just another aspect of the Possession mess, anyway.

Posted by: Tanegar Aug 23 2011, 07:35 PM

To sum up the consensus (with which I happen to agree): the possession mage's player has been blowing smoke up your ass. Next session, smack him good and hard over the head with the rulebook.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 23 2011, 07:38 PM

I'm still dying to see the dice rolls that have allowed him to survive this several times.

Posted by: Seerow Aug 23 2011, 07:44 PM

Does Absorption or Bloodmagic allow you to reduce drain on summoning, or only on spells? Cause that's about the only way I can think of surviving.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 23 2011, 07:53 PM

Me Too...



Absorption does not, Blood Magic Might.

Posted by: Mardrax Aug 23 2011, 07:53 PM

Blood magic could, off the top of my head. But when players get their hands on blood magic, things have gone too far anyway.

Posted by: pbangarth Aug 23 2011, 08:17 PM

Even if he is just Summoning, and not Binding, sooner or later this PC will kill himself. Encourage the player to Summon at every opportunity. Hasten the inevitable.

Posted by: Tanegar Aug 23 2011, 08:51 PM

Remember to add grisly descriptions of the spirit reanimating his corpse and eye-socket-raping his teammates to death. If they're not puking, you didn't do it right.

Posted by: LurkerOutThere Aug 23 2011, 11:48 PM

Also remember the rules about having spirits spend edge to resist, any spirit summoned by a magician with a lower magic rating then them really should be spending edge to resist that.

Posted by: UmaroVI Aug 23 2011, 11:54 PM

The rules are super unclear about what does and doesn't get boosted by spirits, and they basically say "go hog wild, make things up based on what you think will balance your game." I don't see indestructible marshmallows as a big problem but I sure wouldn't allow melee weapons to get bonuses to hit and also to DV like that.

Posted by: Hound Aug 24 2011, 12:27 PM

I'm pretty sure I remember seeing a thing about still having to use augmented maximums. Might have been reading it wrong though, or possibly confusing it with the rules on Inhabitation.

For the possession of weapons/armor, I've always looked at it like, they don't increase the actual DV or B/I, but they still get to use their spirit powers. So your armor that's possessed by an F5 spirit will still have 10/10 hardened armor. Or if you possess a sword with a fire spirit, it could have a flame aura.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 24 2011, 12:37 PM

That's the only thing that definitely doesn't happen, though. It might be a good house rule.

Posted by: Hound Aug 24 2011, 12:50 PM

hm, really? I guess I'll have to read that whole section again. Maybe that whole book just to be sure. Annoying how half of the relevant information on Possession is in a sidebar, and some of it is in random other places...

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 24 2011, 01:05 PM

To clarify, those things do 'happen', just not in a player-useful way. The armor is still bolstered… against destruction, but doesn't help defend the PC. The weapon might have an aura, but it only affects attacks made by the spirit under its own action (or if someone tried to sunder the weapon, I guess).

Posted by: Hound Aug 24 2011, 01:08 PM

see, the way I look at it is this:

for armor, in order to hit the PC wearing the armor, you have to puncture the armor (at least with bullets, which is honestly what most runners are worried about when they wear armor.) Therefore, you would have to puncture the spirit which is possessing the armor, therefore an attack against that spirit is implied in any attack against a player wearing spirit-possessed armor.

for weapons, I read the elemental Aura power as "Any creature in melee range of the Aura must resist damage from it." So, according to my understanding, whether you're attacking or not, is irrelevant.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 24 2011, 01:22 PM

I dig, I'm just telling you that those are non-RAW. They're house rules. You're reading what isn't written there. There's nothing wrong with that, and the 'real' rules are often terrible.

Posted by: Hound Aug 24 2011, 01:37 PM

fair enough. Doesn't seem too OP to me, this way, especially since I would count that as terrible treatment of a spirit (for the armor at least)

On the topic of the guy summoning force 10+ spirits, I would assume such a spirit would be like, a demi-god. If they summon spirits that high, I'd start giving them extra powers the player doesn't know about, and letting them bend the rules of summoning. Even if the player is very nice to spirits, a powerful one wouldn't be used to being commanded and might not appreciate it.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 24 2011, 02:04 PM

Is it really? Unless you use additional house rules, the spirit is in no danger of being damaged and doesn't even have to do anything.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 24 2011, 02:07 PM

Sure, but it'll get bored. They need proper stimulating exercise, those spirits.

Posted by: Hound Aug 24 2011, 02:09 PM

how so? if we're assuming that the armor is the spirits "body" and that in order to hit the player, a bullet would have to pass through it, wouldn't that mean that, given those premises, the spirit would suffer some kind of damage? Or, at the very least, discomfort/pain/whatever-spirits-feel-when-a-bullet-passes-through-their-physical-body?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 24 2011, 02:14 PM

It's only until sunrise/sunset. I can think of worse lots.
Which again is a house rule. You can only target the spirit armor composite or the wearer by RAW unless you are using AoE weapons. If you use such a houserule it is no worse than sending the spirit into combat possessing another object/person.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 24 2011, 02:30 PM

Unless the magician does a ritual summon to extend that (which is par for the course here).

Thinking about the armour thing - why would a person get resistance to normal weapons and attribute boosts, and a car get extra body/armour, but normal armour wouldn't?

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 24 2011, 02:37 PM

The armor *does*. But the armor having ITNW doesn't give the *wearer* anything.

Hound, Dakka Dakka's pointing out that that's another house rule. RAW, armor (and things possessing armor) doesn't take damage like that. So you have to make a new rule to support your other rule.

Posted by: Cheops Aug 24 2011, 02:38 PM

What if it is a Guardian spirit? Isn't that what they're supposed to do?

As for helping with dice rolls, if the spirit has the relevant skills and the flight power I would be willing to let it roll a teamwork test to help in attacking or dodging or whatever. You could even make a case that it is the spirit triggering the firing mechanisms not the mage. A free suppression fire in whatever direction the mage is pointing would be a pretty fun follow up to a Powerball casting.

Posted by: Hound Aug 24 2011, 02:38 PM

yeah I can see that, I'm not really trying to argue RAW, just explaining my point of view really. The rules often seem wonky to me in some places, and I suspect it's more due to oversights, rather than intentions.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 24 2011, 02:44 PM

Don't sugarcoat it: the rules in many places are bad. It's just fundamental on Dumpshock that we're clear on the what they are in the first place, and then we can fix them.

Posted by: Dahrken Aug 24 2011, 05:51 PM

... but in that case the wileder should be exposed to the damages from the aura too (and the eventual other spirit possessing his armor). With a F10+ spirit this is quickly going to hurt.

Posted by: Minimax le Rouge Aug 25 2011, 02:08 PM

a materialized fire spirit is in melee range of is personnal Energy Aura, but have no immunity so by the (dumbs) rules he vanished?

Possession traditions have no clear rules. So all i have read above sounds like House Rules to me.
Up to each GM to forge is opinion on this, but i don't see unbalanced think about a spirit possessing an armor or a weapon, and gifting the owner an extra armor or damage. If the spirit possessed directly a Vessel, it works like this, so why can't you have the same (but reduced to one aspect) think?

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 25 2011, 02:46 PM

If I had to guess, for possession, it works like manifestation, only requires an object / person, and the rules under possession are more or less the only change involved. It can do anything else a manifested spirit can do. I'm more concerned about what it does to inanimate objects that acts like the immunity and augmented attributes normal people get.

Though honestly, for physical stats, I'd probably have ruled 'higher of Force or the possessed host's physical attributes' - much less munchinking involved.

Posted by: Dahrken Aug 25 2011, 05:55 PM

The key point here is IMHO "it's own". The weapon itself would be safe from the aura of the spirit in it, but not the guy handling it,as the effect says that the aura increase damages done by melee attacks made by the spirit or is inflicted on anyone attacking the spirit, but does not say it damages the spirit itself...

To take a parallel : imagine a dwarf with the spell "Elemental Aura" sustained on him. He is safe from the aura (rule-wise the wording of the spell is nearly word for word the same as the critter power).

Suppose a troll grab him by a feet to slam him repeteadly into a wall. Would you inflict damage on the troll just once, when he grabs him (and be able to wield his magically-enhanced metahuman club without further damage), or for as long as he keeps his hold on the dwarf sheated in destructive magical forces ?

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 25 2011, 06:19 PM

Of course he will be damaged repeatedly as he is repeatedly attacking the dwarf via subduing. First he grabs and then he does STR S damage (which is described as slamming him into the wall). Would the troll perform a melee attack with the dwarf on a target, that target would by RAW not be damaged by the dwarf's aura, because the dwarf is definitely not attacking the secondary target.

Posted by: Dahrken Aug 25 2011, 06:40 PM

Fringe cases can be a source of endless fun with RAW ! Here are a few more :
- if the troll blocks an incoming attack with his "club", would that count as an attack against the dwarf and expose the attacker to the aura or not ?

- if the dwarf is willing to be used as a club, does his wielder take no damage as he is now not attacking his "weapon" ?

- if the troll throws the dwarf at a target the dwarf wants to body-slam (for extra damage), does that count as a melee attack from the dwarf for the purpose of the spell ?

Posted by: Minimax le Rouge Aug 26 2011, 07:23 AM

Ok i can imagine this. So that dwarf can burn my ass just spanking it, but can he scratch is nose ? Did he burn his face? Touching is a melee attack by the rule, if he touch himself, he will burn.
The rules are just stupid the way they are written. They just need interpretation. In my mind a fire spirit is immune to fire. But not by th rules.

If i ordered the fire spirit to posses my sword i burn myself with the sword?
ok right so my order is : posses de blade of my sword. Do i need a fire-resistant glove or is it ok now ?

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 26 2011, 01:40 PM

You can't possess just part of a whole.

Posted by: Minimax le Rouge Aug 26 2011, 02:47 PM

And why not?

It's not a monobloc object. If a spirit posses an emerald i can put that emerald on a jewel mount to make a pendant.

Once again it's just an interpretation of the rules, because their is no clear rules. Each GM have to decide how it works.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 26 2011, 03:33 PM

And a hand is only part of a body, made of individual bones and flesh and muscle, so the spirit can choose to possess just the bones of the hand, right?

Posted by: Minimax le Rouge Aug 26 2011, 04:04 PM

and the bones are made of atoms, so can he possess just an atom?

That's the point, unclear rules lead to houserules. So the question is:
A spirit possessing a blade is it overpowered or not? If you thinck it is, so your rules say it's not possible.
I am thinking it's regular stuff, as possessed armor, possessed jewels, possessed cars, and so on.
In both case it would nedd Houserules.

Posted by: Tanegar Aug 26 2011, 06:10 PM

It's been consistent, AFAIK, through all editions that magic cannot affect a part of something. It can only affect the whole object or organism.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 26 2011, 06:44 PM

I agree, especially with mana spells, and area spells as a whole. In the sword instance, yes, the spirit can possess the blade. As long as the blade is not attached to the rest of the weapon at the same time. If you rule that Element aura affects anything touching the object (as it probably should, but that argument has been done to death), good luck putting the sword back together.

In this case, I would disagree with the spirit possessing armour while it's on the body, anyway. That means the magician must plan that ahead, or undergo the process of an actual possession to himself. But I would allow the ITnW to affect the whole, either way. Of course, I also use the rules for wearing down armour (if the damage value is more then the armour value, reduce the relevant armour value by one), and will break items of armour when I feel it's appropriate.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 26 2011, 06:54 PM

Hmm. I wonder if 'Destroy Hand' would be a viable spell, or 'Steal Heart'.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 26 2011, 07:19 PM

No. As a basic principle, magic doesn't work on parts of things (especially living things). That's why Turn to Goo is such a weird error in this edition.

Posted by: Tashiro Aug 27 2011, 03:58 PM

Reading the book, it mentioned that physical ratings get augmented. Weapon damage is a "gear rating", but my player wants to know if counts as a "physical rating".

Posted by: pbangarth Aug 27 2011, 04:08 PM

"Physical rating" is about the intrinsic material characteristics of the object. "Gear rating" is about how well it can be used. I think the former is affected by Possession, the latter not.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 27 2011, 04:15 PM

You are correct on the description but Gear ratings can indeed be physical ratings like the Chemsuit or the insulation modification.

Posted by: Dakka Dakka Aug 27 2011, 04:17 PM

The former could possibly work but on the latter you will never get LOS to a valid target unless the thorax is open, at which point you won't need magic to kill the victim.

Posted by: Yerameyahu Aug 27 2011, 04:47 PM

AFAIK, there are no definitions for 'physical ratings'. The GM must decide what effects the (mess of) possession has on anything not explicitly given as an example in the book. If you think a spirit would make the armor more chem-sealed, I guess go for it.

Posted by: Tanegar Aug 27 2011, 07:00 PM

IMO, this is making an already verging-on-broken mechanic even stronger. If you want to make your armor a vessel, go ahead, but I'd rule that it won't protect you any better.

Posted by: Bodak Aug 30 2011, 05:28 AM

Not at all. Manifestation is a purely psychic ability. A summoned spirit arrives on the Astral and can manifest to its summoner. Manifestation is useful for appearing to the team at the exact spot where an invisible enemy is and keeping pace with him (Information Guided Indirect Fire (ar162)). It can also be an irritant (read the section on Watchers).

Materialisation (a totally different power) allows access to the material plane (a bit like possession but without needing a vessel, as you say).

It's also why Wreck Cyberware is such an oddity in SR3. It would make sense if the description explicitly stated it only applied to non-implanted 'ware. Otherwise, as soon as the cyber is "paid for with essence" it should not be targetable in isolation.

Still, the main problems here seem to be reliably summonning and commanding F10-14 Spirits (with Intelligence and Willpower double their summoner's); doing so and surviving the drain; and applying their Force bonus to damage/armour ratings. With F10 spirits there's no point asking if he has bothered to prepare the vessels first to make the possession test easier.