A good case can be made that based upon the rules for Zombies, which have stats of C*+F where C* are the stats of the character/critter at the time of death (pg 87 street magic) that the same rules should almost certainly apply to living characters, as it would be pants on head retarded for a troll possessed by a spirit to get stronger if he was possessed AFTER he was already dead.
Pg 13 of the digital grimore gives an example where someone is possessed and with no statement limiting them to any caps. This would be the complete absence of the rules you're screaming about.

Once again.

A lack of statement is not identical to the opposite being true.


The book provides rules for augmented maximums - any magical or technological attribute adjustment is subject to augmented maximums.

If such an increase fails to specify it is an exception, it is not an exception - regardless of if it includes a redundant statement (typically called a "reminder") or not.


In the case of Immunity stacking with other forms of armor - restrictions on "stacked" armor applies to worn armor - I have provided rules quotes for this. There are no restrictions on stacking sources of armor that are not worn. Thus, unless specified otherwise (such as FFBA), worn armor does not stack. Further, unless specified otherwise, not-worn armor does stack. Immunity does not specify it is an exception to the rule, and stacks.

In the case of possessing spirits & vessels, the rules clearly state the possessed spirit's Force is added to the vessel's Physical attributes. It does not specify this is an exception to the augmented maximums rule, and so it is, in fact, subject to augmented maximums.


Developer input can assist in determining how a rule is intended to work, but until such input is included in official errata, it has no impact whatsoever on how the rule actually does work (outside House Rules). This has even been stated by developers/authors on numerous occasions.


For example, did you realize that Rules as Written, every spell in the book (yes, including Indirect Combat) is subject to Object Resistance? This is clearly not how it is intended to work, but despite me bringing it up on the forums repeatedly (one such time even being a significant debate), it has not actually changed as Written. Every game that uses Object Resistance "as intended" is using a House Rule.

[Note: In my House Errata document, I clearly state Indirect Combat & Environmental Manipulation spells are not subject to Object Resistance]

Except that you will note that even Voodoo only has three of the 4 uber spirits... his tradition has all 4...

Keep the Faith

I think you are missing the forest through the trees. I only needed a tradition with task and guardian. I made one up because I didn't feel like searching all the traditions for one that fit my criteria.

I understand your reasoning, but why did you have to add all 4 Uber Spirits? on eor two with the rest coming from the original core book makes a lot of sense... But using all of the best spirits in a single Tradition is just crazy in my opinion... it very quickly leads to a broken game...

And as for my stance on Possession vs. Materialization... I do not believe that either are broken if you take into account how the world actually works...

Just Sayin'

Keep the Faith

I just picked the ones that looked like people or animals not tree demons or burning scarecrows with no legs.

Understood...

But you can describe the spirits in any way that makes sense to you... I have used Air Spirits as Ghosts (of obviously human form)... the traditions will view spirits under their own lamp of reason, so to speak, so they are somewhat mutable...

Keep the Faith

Please forgive the question, but which spirits are the uber ones, and why do you qualify them as such?

See zombie example.

Yes which is why I've never made a mage that used a single spell of that category, because over coming OR, followed by dodge, followed by armor+body makes any of those spells useless.

Task because you can use them as skillwires.
Guardian because you can give them any combat skill and they can counterspell
Man because you can give them any spell you know
Guidance because they can counterspell.

The spirits in SR4A have no magical defense and aren't very flexible or unique.

Wow, this thread has gotten out of hand. I think there are 4 or 5 different arguments raging, all of them having very little to do with the original topic. All right, so the term RAW has been thrown around a lot lately on this thread. I think we can all agree that the RAW for possession spirits is generally unclear and the primary reason for all of these arguments. Whether you choose to interpret the rules as saying that hardened armor does or does not stack with worn armor, you aren't going to convince anybody of the validity of your point by repeating arguments multiple times, cursing, or name calling. Whether or not you choose to use the FAQ as a reliable source of rules changes is up to you, it does represent the opinions of at least one developer and clarifies a number of issues, however, nearly all of its clarifications lean towards making things more powerful and open the door for PCs to break the system of the game, so I would say that rather than use the FAQ as RAW, RAI or whatever that you should instead simply use it at your own risk. One thing I believe I must weigh in on is the use of Ghost Cartels as a reliable source of game examples. Here are the three possession examples used in ghost cartels-



This first example is fine except for the fact that the spirit doesn't have 8 edge as it should. It uses certain rules interpretations but does show the potential of a force 8 spirit possessing a being with average physical stats.



This second example of a dead body possessed by a shedim is where things get a little hairy. Looking at the stats, it's obvious this person is possessed by a force 4 spirit, and yet his initial reaction of 4 is brought up to 9 by possession. Also, he has a listed Initiative of 8 when it should be 13, or 12 if using proper possession rules. This is all a little off, but it could just be bad math. It's this third example that's really bad.



This guy has a force 6 possession spirit in him, and yet his reaction goes from 3 to 12 while possessed. If that's an oversight it's a pretty huge one, but I venture to guess that that is, in fact, exactly what the developer intended when designing the character. This guy is a boss, he needs to have high stats. My guess is that the developer chose to design this character's attributes outside of the original rules for the purposes of creating a challenging boss fight. The reason I don't think a module should be used even for RAI is because they are designed to be fun and challenging, not 100% accurate to the actual rule books. Either that or they're just rife with typos. Either way you shouldn't take examples from them out of context and use them as supports for an argument.

I'm not about to wade into the rest of the Possession debate, which I think others are handling better than I could, but I want to point out that this is incorrect. Drain is not a payment to the spirit. Drain is the cost of bending the spirit to your will and bringing it to the physical world. The spirit may get something out of the deal in the process of coercing it from its astral home, however. Sometimes a summoning ritual includes things that motivate the spirit, or sometimes the spirit is motivated by the new experiences in themselves. But drain is not a payment to the spirit; it gains nothing from the drain the summoner suffers.

Maybe aside from the possibility to overcome the weakened summoner and go free to become much stronger as a free spirit that can ask for karma as a means of payment for services.

You guys mentioned a quote from a developer:

Apparently, possession spirits did not have maximums at all before then (similar to materialization spirits), and much teeth gnashing occurs.
It really is an interesting forum thread, especially as a counter-point to this one. Frank Trollman weighed in believing that caps would make possession underpowered and insignificant.

Thanks, McCummhail, that is a very useful link. I had forgotten about it, despite the fact that I had chimed in on the ward discussion. I think all of us would benefit from a read (or reread) of that thread.

So taking the spirits which actually are flexible is broken?
Seems more to me that telling a player he must use spirits which you consider not "very flexible or unique" is like telling the street sammy that they should employ the less effective ware, and they're not allowed to upgrade.

Are you addressing me here? I don't think that taking spirits that are flexible is broken nor do I think that a player must have to take those spirits to be effective.

Ok, you were just the one to provide the reason for it, so I assumed it was a view you supported.

I've hear many people argue differently. If you were only opening a gate, and enticing them through, then the drain would be independent of the force of the spirit you were calling. If you were constantly abducting spirits from their native realm, they would invariably be hostile to every summoner since the dawn of time, and people would have stopped doing it a while ago.

I'm certainly not saying that a Summoning is simply opening a gate. It's not a gate at all, it's an effort to coerce a spirit to cross into the physical world from its natural habitat.

For simple summoning, "abduct" and "hostile" are too strong of terms. It's a short term agreement. Some spirits may find it annoying, some may look at it with ambivalence, some may be excited by the new experiences and opportunities for mischief. This should depend on many factors, such as GM's roleplaying whim, the summoner's tradition, and what the summoned spirit is being commanded to do.

Binding is a whole different can of worms. Binding is typically insulting to spirits, to say the least. This is made clear in the Uncontrolled Spirits sidebar on page 180 of SR4 Core. And yes, they will be hostile towards the Summoner if they get the opportunity. As the book says:



Summoning, and Binding, are attempts to get a spirit to do something you want it to do, not necessarily what the spirit wants to do. Whether it's a matter of outsmarting the spirit (Logic), negotiating with the spirit to work out terms (Charisma), or reminding the spirit of its role and place in the universe (Intuition), it's always a struggle for dominance, and the cost of that struggle is Drain.

You guys should actually read the descriptions of the different traditions. In each it gives the relationship that spirits have with mages of that tradition and how they feel about being summoned. In general, if a summoner role plays his tradition well and treats his spirits in a well-meaning manner as determined by his tradition, they shouldn't have negative feelings towards him. Binding is a bit trickier, however, simply saying that all spirits hate binding is inaccurate. Certainly all spirits should have misgivings about binding, a binding mage can force a spirit to do whatever he wants, up to and including having the spirit kill itself sustaining a spell. However, a mage that has proven himself as trustworthy and capable would probably have little trouble binding lower force spirits, who probably would have something to gain from interacting with him, and might be able to appease higher force spirits into agreeing to being bound in exchange for some service outside of Drain. Even if a mage knocks himself unconscious trying to bind a high force spirit, if he was following the guidelines of his tradition and/or offering the spirit something for its service he should probably be able to wake up from the encounter without having the force 8 spirit tear him in half. It's all a matter of roleplaying, if a mage is treating his spirits ike tools, then all the negative possibilities apply, but if he's treating them with respect, or at least in accordance with the manners of his tradition, the spirit should at least be ambivalent towards him, attempt to bind or no.

There aren't traditions that treat spirits as tools? I would have thought that Hermetic would have been along the lines of X + Y + a pinch of ABC = Spirit

I wrote many of the tradition descriptions. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

And I agree with what you're saying. It's not universal. Even the book language about binding states that it's not universal, it's just that many spirits are insulted by Binding and that higher forced spirits are more likely to be violent towards the binding magician.

And yes, many Hermetics do treat spirits like tools, but they are tools they need to be very careful using. Because if they aren't careful, those tools will kill them.

You might be talking to me Mordinvan...

All SPirits are useful, but not all spirits are created equal (so to speak)... Creating a Tradition that has ALL of the most useful Spirits in it is just a tad bit on the powergaming side of things... I think that Traditions should be somewhat balanced... thus it should not have all of the most useful/best spirits...

Keep the Faith