![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#76
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 13-March 11 From: Portland, Oregon Member No.: 24,230 ![]() |
You need a sustaining focus for each spell, with a Force that is at least as high as the Force of the spell it sustains. So sutaining say 4 buff spells of Force 13 will need 4 Force 13 sustaining focus - and the karma to bind them. Ah, I see it now. Thanks. Dunno where I came up with that other rule. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#77
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,300 Joined: 6-February 08 From: Cologne, Germany Member No.: 15,648 ![]() |
@Longbowrocks :
Regarding the astral targetting, yes, an astrally perceiving mage can target subjects on the physical plane. If he can see them normally as well, with a physical sense. Astral perception doesn't hinder targetting on the material plane. but with astral perception alone, you can only lock on to astral/dual-natured targets. There's a few neat tricks enabled by how the issue is handled (for example, you can manaball a group of spirits or ghouls without risking to hit your non-dual natured teammates stuck between them), but astral perception does nothing against a mundane opponent just taking cover. I think the rules also suggest to apply partial cover modifiers to spellcasting tests (they also suggest modifiers for casting at really long ranges, together with the -3 penalty for casting through optical devices like mage sight goggles, binoculars or endoscopes). |
|
|
![]()
Post
#78
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 13-March 11 From: Portland, Oregon Member No.: 24,230 ![]() |
@Longbowrocks : Regarding the astral targetting, yes, an astrally perceiving mage can target subjects on the physical plane. If he can see them normally as well, with a physical sense. Astral perception doesn't hinder targetting on the material plane. but with astral perception alone, you can only lock on to astral/dual-natured targets. I can see that being RAI, but I don't see anything specifying that as RAW. Could you cite something? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/proof.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#79
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: 27-July 10 Member No.: 18,860 ![]() |
I wonder a bit. We have mentioned a lot of modifiers here. I wonder if a mage (considering all of them) es even able to cast a spell.
He needs one net hit to effect anything after all. So lets get started: Our mage trys to scare of some grangers in the barrens of seatle. First we apply the BC of 1 which is said to be present in the Barrens. Lets put the scene in around around 10 o clock pm. So it is quite dark. And we are in Seatle so it is raining a bit. So with normal sight we would be down by -5! With Astral Vision we would be at: -3. If you think of combat and apply partial cover or even good cover for everyone you go down to: -7(-9) or -5(-7). The avarage mage would be crippeled in such a situation. If you start applying all the modifiers (from camelion suite or the Camouflage spell it is getting even worse. QUOTE The camouflage coloring adds a –1 dice pool modifier to standard visual Perception Tests and ranged combat attacks made against the subject for each net hit scored by the caster. (And how does the mana version interact with astral perception) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#80
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 13-March 11 From: Portland, Oregon Member No.: 24,230 ![]() |
With Astral Vision we would be at: -3. Why would astral vision be affected by darkness? Is this in a table somewhere? If you start applying all the modifiers (from camelion suite or the Camouflage spell it is getting even worse. You sent me racing through the books on this one. There is no chameleon suite, it's a suit, which I don't think would help against astral perception because it's optical camo. Camouflage spell looks similar. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#81
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,236 Joined: 27-July 10 Member No.: 18,860 ![]() |
QUOTE There is no chameleon suite Just a typo, sorry for that. QUOTE Why would astral vision be affected by darkness? Is this in a table somewhere? There is an astral visibility table in Streetmagic. BC gives a malus and it depends on how many lifeforms there are. etc. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#82
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,300 Joined: 6-February 08 From: Cologne, Germany Member No.: 15,648 ![]() |
I can see that being RAI, but I don't see anything specifying that as RAW. Could you cite something? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/proof.gif) SR4A, p. 183, Targeting : A magician in the physical world can only cast spells on targets that are in the physical world. Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted). An astrally perceiving (or otherwise dual-natured) magi- cian can cast spells on a target in either the physical world or in astral space. An astral target can only be affected by mana spells—even if the magician is in the physical world astrally perceiving—as it has no physical presence. Emphasis mine. When you are assensing a physical, non-dual-natured target, you only see the aura. Your aura is not an astral form, it cannot be targeted by spellcasting on the astral. Likewise, you couldn't target an astrally projecting mage who is manifesting unless you would change to astral perception. You only see a ghost-like image that he is casting on a plane he isn't actually present on. The same holds true for the auras of mundanes : they are not actually present on the astral. They are particularly vibrant shadows of an entirely physical entity. This is why being a dual-natured being (ghoul, shapeshifter) is such a pain in the ass- in contrast to everyone else in the game, you can be targeted by projecting mages all the time. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#83
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,109 Joined: 13-March 11 From: Portland, Oregon Member No.: 24,230 ![]() |
Emphasis mine. When you are assensing a physical, non-dual-natured target, you only see the aura. Your aura is not an astral form, it cannot be targeted by spellcasting on the astral. Likewise, you couldn't target an astrally projecting mage who is manifesting unless you would change to astral perception. You only see a ghost-like image that he is casting on a plane he isn't actually present on. The same holds true for the auras of mundanes : they are not actually present on the astral. They are particularly vibrant shadows of an entirely physical entity. This is why being a dual-natured being (ghoul, shapeshifter) is such a pain in the ass- in contrast to everyone else in the game, you can be targeted by projecting mages all the time. Thanks. This is something I've been misinterpreting for a while to varying degrees. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#84
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 ![]() |
I find this excerpt more important:
QUOTE An astrally perceiving (or otherwise dual-natured) magician can cast spells on a target in either the physical world or in astral space. It's only astrally *projecting* mages that can't target physical-only things. I'm only emphasizing this, not correcting anyone. I am not aware that you're in any way hindered by not using a natural sense; blind mages can target physical things while astral-perceiving. You still need a physical LOS, but astral sight needs that *anyway*. There've been some major threads about this, and the rules have changed significantly between editions.In any case, this issue is the main reason mages often get vision augmentations: avoid astral vulnerability, and increase sighting options. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#85
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 821 Joined: 4-December 09 Member No.: 17,940 ![]() |
QUOTE Similarly, a magician in astral space can only cast spells on targets that have an astral form (though the auras of things in the physical world can be seen, auras alone cannot be targeted). My intepretation of it is that this rule applies when the mage is purely astral - otherwise they wouldn't bother with using the next paragraph to specify that a mage in astral perception can target either ot the astral or physical plane. This second paragraph doesn't differentiate between eyeball or assensing targeting - so either method should work. Basically when the mage is on one side of the fence, he can only target what's effectively present on his side - but when he's stradling it through astral perception (or whatever way to achieve a dual-nature) he can target both sides - though only one side with a given spell, and a spell selection that's influenced by the chosen side (namely, mana spells only when casting through the astral, and maybe a few astral-only spells disabled in the pyscial plane). |
|
|
![]()
Post
#86
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 ![]() |
Exactly.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#87
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,925 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 948 ![]() |
Here's an interesting twist.
There is the "carrier" negative quality at 5 points. One could use that one but add different diseases, somewhat creating a living pandoras box of diseases walking around. There could be balance issues so the GM should monitor exactly WHAT the diseases do. That way a character could have the following fun. Amnesia Carrier (Disease) Carrier (Disease) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#88
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 821 Joined: 4-December 09 Member No.: 17,940 ![]() |
Here's an interesting twist. There is the "carrier" negative quality at 5 points. One could use that one but add different diseases, somewhat creating a living pandoras box of diseases walking around. There could be balance issues so the GM should monitor exactly WHAT the diseases do. That way a character could have the following fun. Amnesia Carrier (Disease) Carrier (Disease) That's something I would totally ban as a GM - and certainly not tolerate as a player a soon as I figure it out. Because even the the character isn't harmed by what he's carrying, the other PCs arent - and will probably the first to catch it. With a TPK (bat the carrier) a likely result if the diseases are bad enough. It reeks of 'I wanna destroy the game' playstyle. Even for an NPC I'd be wary of it - and strongly dislike it from the GM as it will have a strong feeling of 'I'm going to screw you and enjoy it and there's nothing you can do about it or even to see it coming'. Season with as much evil cackling and hand-rubbing as necessary. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#89
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,925 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 948 ![]() |
That's something I would totally ban as a GM - and certainly not tolerate as a player a soon as I figure it out. Because even the the character isn't harmed by what he's carrying, the other PCs arent - and will probably the first to catch it. With a TPK (bat the carrier) a likely result if the diseases are bad enough. It reeks of 'I wanna destroy the game' playstyle. Wouldn't this apply then to any one player that wants to play a Ghoul, even Gary the friendly Ghoul? After all, unless they take a quality for it they will be carriers as well. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#90
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,019 Joined: 10-November 10 From: Annapolis Valley, Nova Scotia Member No.: 19,166 ![]() |
Wouldn't this apply then to any one player that wants to play a Ghoul, even Gary the friendly Ghoul? After all, unless they take a quality for it they will be carriers as well. True, but HMHVV, even the Ghoul one, needs some kind of physical contact, such as biting/scratching/spitting in their soyburger. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#91
|
|
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,547 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760 ![]() |
That's something I would totally ban as a GM - and certainly not tolerate as a player a soon as I figure it out. Because even the the character isn't harmed by what he's carrying, the other PCs arent - and will probably the first to catch it. With a TPK (bat the carrier) a likely result if the diseases are bad enough. It reeks of 'I wanna destroy the game' playstyle. I also wouldn't be TOO worried about it, it all depends on the vector. I've yet to see characters share blood. They don't get into melee combat with each other or (generally) bite each other. Same with sex. You can have even more esoteric vectors (or limitations on who is vulnerable). A mage who is carrier for a mage-attacking disease in a party with no other mages is fine. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#92
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 821 Joined: 4-December 09 Member No.: 17,940 ![]() |
I also wouldn't be TOO worried about it, it all depends on the vector. I've yet to see characters share blood. They don't get into melee combat with each other or (generally) bite each other. Same with sex. You can have even more esoteric vectors (or limitations on who is vulnerable). A mage who is carrier for a mage-attacking disease in a party with no other mages is fine. It can ary with the disease - and the point cost should reflect this. But the post I answered to left the feeling the diseases would fall into the 'nasty and contagious' slot, turnign the character into a 2070's Thyphoid Mary. An STD affecting only sheeps would deserve a forceful slap on th head rather than any sort of points (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) . Though a character that turns out danger to any mage he interacts with is going to quickly have problems finding spell formulas and other magical gear. Odds are he can kiss any magical group goodbye too. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 8th July 2025 - 06:35 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.