 Possession FAQ, Answers to your possession questions |
  |
 Oct 16 2007, 04:11 PM
Post
#76
|
|||
|
Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686  |
What I don't get, is fire spirits have severe allergy to water, and water spirits have severe allergy to fire. Why don't any other spirits have allergies to things? |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Oct 16 2007, 05:07 PM
Post
#77
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
See I agree the rules are very precise, in fact I think the same thing you do, what the rules say seems so obvious to me, but we both think they say something different. I dunno. The way I read it is it defines normal as not magical(not weapon foci, spells, adept or critter powers) and since immunity gives you an armor rating = to twice its magic that is of the hardened variety, then hardened armor rules apply. Since Hardened armor mentions being effected by AP.... it seems to draw logically- to me mind you- that ItNW would be effected by AP as well.
However, apparently you guys read it differently than me. Would you mind posting your logic, Buster? I would much appreciate it. Chris |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 05:10 PM
Post
#78
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
DTFarstar, I fully agree with you that AP affects ItNW.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 05:28 PM
Post
#79
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
actually, now that i've seen it, i disagree with 10 in general. for one thing, why would immunity to normal weapons stack? it's way more of a headache to have it stack, imo, because you have to decide on all the interactions. does a bullet slowed down by an armored jacket have a lesser chance of affecting a critter with immunity to normal weapons? what if we give them other forms of armor that are at the skin layer? secondly, the rules don't really support immunity to normal weapons not being affected by AP modifiers at all. certainly, no normal weapon totally ignores the immunity per se (although sufficiently low immunity would be reduced to 0), but if it works just like hardened armor, then it should be affected like hardened armor. if i was running around in milspec armor, i think you'd be hard-pressed to find a GM who doesn't think it's affected by APDS. that being said, *if* you're going to rule that way, you should make it clear that AP modifiers in the other direction also do not apply. thusly, sliverguns, shotguns, frag grenades, flechette rounds, and other similar weapons which have an AP penalty would be better against spirits, *if* you choose to use the rules Buster is proposing. however, given this is supposed to be an FAQ, i think it should be made clear that the rulings found in #10 are not the way the rules work officially, but rather that it's simply one of several suggestions about how a ruling might be made. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 16 2007, 05:45 PM
Post
#80
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
INW does not give you real armor but an "armor rating" (not my quotes, the quotes are in the rule description) against certain forms of physical attack. It specifically says that it only affects non-magical weapons and ammo and it specifically lists what it means by what is magical. There is even a completely different power called "Hardened Armor" that does in fact work exactly as you guys describe. Immunity to Normal Weapons is not the same power as Hardened Armor. The rules couldn't be any clearer.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 05:53 PM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
immunity to normal weapons explicitly references the rules for hardened armor as being how they work, first of all.
and secondly, there is nothing in the description of immunity to normal weapons that says AP modifiers do not apply. if it is an armor rating, then those things which change armor ratings will change it. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 06:23 PM
Post
#82
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 212 Joined: 30-November 04 Member No.: 6,858 |
No it's not, it's slightly crappier because it only defends against non-magical effects. That is the only difference. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 16 2007, 06:24 PM
Post
#83
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
From a fluff standpoint it makes no sense for AP armor or shock weapons to work on spirits either. Spirits are made from astral ectoplasm, "quicksilver and shadow" as the book says. Immunity to Normal Weapons represents their protoplasmic substance and otherworldly physiology, not a thick hide or set of platemail.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't shock weapons like tasers work by running an electric current through an living creature's nervous system, disrupting brain, nerve, and muscle function? Spirits are not living creatures nor do they have muscles or a nervous system. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 06:33 PM
Post
#84
|
|
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
And lightning don't make big holes in the ground neither.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 06:50 PM
Post
#85
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
In which case, it makes no sense for spirits to use armor rules at all, they should've gotten a completely different set to establish that it isn't armor. Since they didn't, it is armor, and is treated as such.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 08:08 PM
Post
#86
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I think that if AP was not supposed to be applicable when damaging, or attempting to damage Spirits, this exception to the normal rules would have been specifically mentioned.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 08:14 PM
Post
#87
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 212 Joined: 30-November 04 Member No.: 6,858 |
Absolutely, fluff is just fluff.
Shadowrun's always been like that. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 08:25 PM
Post
#88
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Seconded. Most definately. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 16 2007, 08:34 PM
Post
#89
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
:raises hand:
To the best of my knowledge, AP affects ItNW. That's the way it's written in the basic book, that's the way we discussed it working while writing the rules in Street Magic. -Frank |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 09:31 PM
Post
#90
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
I'm shocked that the intention all along was that spirits do in fact have plate armor. Sheesh, I was so happy that for once the RAW was completely in sync with the whole "quicksilver and shadow" amorphous form fluff. But it turns out that coherence was completely accidental.
I'll update the FAQ then. You guys better not be Mob Minding me. :D |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 09:32 PM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Actually, it wasn't in sync with that at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 09:42 PM
Post
#92
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
That's what I'm saying, it turns out that the rules and the fluff are in fact completely out of synch.
Updated the FAQ by the way. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 16 2007, 11:24 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
Sorry, Buster, please don't hate me. I really thought the majority sided on your side of the fence from the way I saw the thread that people were using a few days ago, I was just wondering what you guys were seeing that I wasn't. So... don't hate me.
I blame Frank! Speaking of which, I just got my hardcopy of Street Magic and was reading it literally cover to cover when I noticed that Frank Trollman was actually credited, so my question must become "Is that your actualy name?" I always assumed it was just a nickname or something because you liked/hated/acted like a troll or something. Which it could be your pen name or something as well, but it would really be great if your name was actually Trollman. Chris |
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2007, 12:08 AM
Post
#94
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,245 Joined: 27-April 07 From: Running the streets of Southeast Virginia Member No.: 11,548 |
I think what Buster is driving at is that Immunity to Normal Weapons acts like Hardened Armor in how it works **BUT** is NOT armor. As such, AP wouldn't have any effect. AP can't penetrate armor that doesn't exist. Yes, it's semantics but it does make a twisted sort of sense. ITNW is a form of damage mitigation towards Normal Weapons that isn't armor but works (mechanically) like it is. This makes sense from the standpoint of damage resolution as we already have rules on how to handle armors and combat. So why not make it work like armor on the backend but on the front end, it's not armor? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 17 2007, 12:12 AM
Post
#95
|
|||||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I think you need to read Frank's post again. ;)
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 17 2007, 12:25 AM
Post
#96
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
We aren't saying you can't, we are saying the intent and the rules as they are currently written and most obviously interpreted is that since it says it works like hardened armor, and hardened armor explicitly allows AP, then AP applies.
I'm not sure one way or the other how I like it. It gives mundanes more of a fighting chance vs. spirits, but it really doesn't make that much damned sense in the way the fluff describes spirits. Whether or not I like it though, the way it is written is important because I need to have a baseline for interaction between other players not in my group. Chris |
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2007, 01:19 AM
Post
#97
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 615 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,895 |
I can see Busters point, but all for 'simplicity' I would go with AP affect ItnW. Hower it is much like dual-natured:
Many people will take that to mean that dual-natured creatures ARE astral percieving all the time. Which as written may not be right (and if keeping consitant with SR3 isnt). They can interact and percieve (the astral) in the same way as a astral percieving mage.. however nothing says they also interact with the 'mundane' in the same way (penalties to mundane while astral percieving).
Note now where does it state the creature has armor or hardened armor. The critter has an 'Armor rating' equal to twice its Magic against that [iimmunity type] damage. This 'immunity armor' is treated as 'hardened protection', meaning that if the damage value does nto exceed the armor, then the attack automatically does no damage.. While I am open to both way, and personally thing spirits are powerful enough not to become too easy to kill, that the common interrepertation is fine (with me), but as written the critter does not have 'armor' and thus AP wouldn't necessarily apply... It does have an 'Armor rating' that counts as 'hardened' protection, which is not a defined reference, though you are refered to to the 'hardened armo' power for reference, but that section never mentions AP modiferes. Either way this is poor ambigious wording and could be taken either way. immunity provides an armor rating, thus is armor... AP modifies armor, thus AP modifes immunity rating... Immunity provides armor rating which is function like hardened armor, but is not 'armor' ... AP makes no mention of effecting 'immunity' .. thus AP has no effect on immunity... Now if Immunity was simply worded as: This provided '[Hardened] armor' equal to Magic*2 to the critter, against any attack that is not: magical, nor made of a substance the creature is vulnerable to. There would be no debate. However, when words 'like' , 'similiar', 'as if' come into play it implies that while similiar .. there is some difference, what exactly the difference is needs to be decided. This is compounded with the use of similiar but not 'proper' terminology. 'Armor rating' is not 'Armor' 'Hardened' protection is not 'Hardened Armor' Both sound similiar though, so was 'Armor' and 'Hardened Armor' meant, which would mean then to follow the full rules, or is using different terminology meant to help you understand the concept, but they intentionally do NOT use the previously defined words, to avoid giving (or taking) properties not intended. RAW (haven't seen an errate that clarifies), it is ambigious and in the real of GM's domain. Personally given the whole 'stream-line and simpfly approach' of SR4, I believe the intention is to allow AP to work, otherwise they need a while pile of new rules. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 17 2007, 01:32 AM
Post
#98
|
|||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
Even if you just reference the sentence from Hardened Armor that talks about stuff bouncing off if it doesn't penetrate, it still references AP working. Just saying, it doesn't seem very ambiguous to me. Chris |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 17 2007, 02:18 AM
Post
#99
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
Who says Immunity to Normal Weapons does NOT stack with normal armor? Either INW is armor or it is not armor. You can't have it both ways. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 17 2007, 02:41 AM
Post
#100
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,246 Joined: 8-June 07 Member No.: 11,869 |
I'm glad others saw the rules the same way I did. If Frank hadn't said the other interpretation was how the authors actually intended it since the beginning, I would never have believed it. After playing SR4 for 4 months now, I shouldn't be shocked at poor craftsmanship, but this takes the cake. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 30th January 2025 - 10:25 PM |
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.