 This one is a cheesy cheat I'm thinking of doing |
  |
 Oct 17 2006, 09:16 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 588 Joined: 27-February 06 Member No.: 8,316  |
So you take voice control, linguistics and commanding voice with a geas of speaking to save 25% on those powers
|
 |
 
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 09:18 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
I wouldn't allow it in my game.
Tis a cheesy cheat. You need to be able to speak to use 2 of the three. It would be like taking Burnout addition to breathing. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 09:19 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Uncle Fisty Group: Admin Posts: 13,891 Joined: 3-January 05 From: Next To Her Member No.: 6,928 |
I wouldn't allow it. Even if you do have to sit there muttering to your self liek a crazy person to learn a languae in an hour, I'd say no.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 09:27 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
Ha!
Now if the Geas was that you had to speak in a way that made it obvious that you were using the power. For example, commanding voice: "Obey the commands of Mr. Mental! I compel you, drop your weapons!" That's probably a fair geas. But really, that first one? That's what hardcover gaming books are for. *whap!* |
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 09:33 PM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,150 Joined: 19-December 05 From: Rhein-Ruhr Megaplex Member No.: 8,081 |
:rotfl: I think I have to read those rules again, but this is hilarious. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 17 2006, 09:35 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
Now bear in mind, as a GM I would only count the last three words toward the word-limit of the command. (there is one, isn't there? maybe I'm misremembering) The first nine words are geas, not power.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 09:55 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 524 Joined: 12-April 06 Member No.: 8,455 |
Y'know, that could really work with the catholic mages over in the religious traditions thread. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 10:02 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 398 Joined: 16-August 06 Member No.: 9,130 |
This thread just got me thinking, I would love to see someone make a satirical character based upon cheesing the game mechnics with things just like the above. Also seeing things like Burnout addiction breathing would be quite funny though that would have to be a complete joke build.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 17 2006, 10:09 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Satirical? I had a player back in HI whose characters were nearly ALWAYS based on loopholes such as the one in the first post.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 12:58 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 932 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orlando, Florida Member No.: 1,042 |
As a gamemaster I would say to you, stick it in your ear.
But I would do it in sign language. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 01:15 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
American Sign Language, or another one? :)
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 01:26 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Wouldnt 'burnout addiction - breathing' have essence loss and attribute loss? (bod + Str?)
I could see some old beardy mage with an oxygen tank to breath from because of a burnout on needing it, but that would also crossover into the 'Infirm' neg qual. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 03:30 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 144 Joined: 30-April 03 Member No.: 4,529 |
I would definitely allow it, but not as an incantation geas as you think you would be getting. Instead, I would apply a mixture of the rules for a condition/special action geas:
"Whenever the character fails to fulfill the condition of speaking for a full minute, the geas is broken for 24 hours." That should make for an interesting character concept. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 08:27 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
Exactly. This'd earn a four-edition-stack-upside-the-head-GM-show-of-disaproval. I rarely use it, but this warants it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 02:45 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
Ha! I like that one, too! And you know, I'm such a lovable GM I'd even let them talk incessantly in their sleep, just so they're not forced to break their geas daily. Seriously, having to talk constantly would be limiting enough in a game about stealth and subterfuge, I don't have to be any meaner. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 18 2006, 03:40 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
Voice control, linguistics and commanding voice with a geas of speaking...
Voice control and commanding voice I can get. Speaking clearly and audibly would sometimes be restricting, but generally youŽd be fine. IŽd stress "clearly and audibly" though. Linguistics only working while speaking? Not good at all. NO! |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 03:58 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
What does linguistics do again? Isn't that a translation power?
What if you had to say the phrase in both languages, like a cheesy learn-to-speak-esperanto (or whatever language you're speaking) audio-tape? |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 04:18 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
Linguistics allows you to learn a new language, in about an hour, to skill level 1. After that, you have to raise the skills the old fashioned way.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 04:49 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
Thanks for the reminder. Hmmmm, not sure how to corrupt a verbal geas for that one.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 05:01 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 4-September 06 Member No.: 9,304 |
Easy, if your talking, your not listening, so can't spend an hour to learn the new language.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 05:34 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
I don't see how that makes it a workable geas.
I think maybe we had a different goal, there. :-) |
|
|
|
|
Oct 18 2006, 07:52 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 588 Joined: 27-February 06 Member No.: 8,316 |
yeah the goal was to be funny, in a chesy sorta way.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19 2006, 01:29 AM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Under which category of geasa would that be? Under Incantation, OK. under any other category - sorry, not a canon example. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 19 2006, 04:14 AM
Post
#24
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 144 Joined: 30-April 03 Member No.: 4,529 |
Actually, I thought it was funny, and in a cheesy sort of way. I just thought it would be even funnier if a player trying to exploit a loophole was told "sure" and subsequently discovered he had an actual geas, because he failed to specify the correct term for the intended geas (loophole -- it's funny because it is ironic).
I am presuming, since there is no other discussion of category, that your comment was directed to my post. Since I specifically suggested combing two categories, I wasn't exactly going for canon per se, but since I love to debate, I'll respond anyway. A geas of speaking is likely to be inferred as an incantation geas, but since the terms "geas of speaking" isn't written in canon, it isn't a necessary interpretation. For example, imagine the following conversation: GM: Can you explain a geas of speaking? Player: Sure, it's a ritual geas requiring me to speak within every 24 hour period to fulfill. In this case, however, an Incantation geas would NOT be canon. A geas, by defintion, per canon, is a restriction. Since an incantion geas does not in any way limit a power that can be used only be speaking, it is not a restriction on that power, and therefore, not a geas. Since the likely interpretation of a geas of speaking is not canon, we must turn to the alternate, less likely, interpretations. The first possibility is the ritual geas suggested above. Once again, as a ritual geas, it isn't a restriction because it would be immediately fulfilled upon the use of the power (although you might argue a technical restriction because speaking and use of magic would be simultaneous, and might require at least one non-magical word first). You might, of course, modify the interpretation by requiring the adept to speak words of prayer, or speak to a specific person (perhaps a relative, or even the adept himself). Another possibility is a condition geas in which the person must be in a condition of speaking, or more specifically, a condition of constant rambling. This, of course, is a quite different geas of speaking than an incantation geas, because it does not have requirements of speaking "clearly and audibly." Actually, this could be a very effective limitation. The use of commanding voice requires the target to be able to hear and understand the adept, so a geas of speaking requiring the adept to be whispering or rambling in a low voice could be an effective restriction, greatly limiting the distance over which the power can be used. If you want a canon geas of speaking over the power of commanding voice, make it a condition geas. Of course, I needed a geas of speaking that would be an actual restriction on three separate powers, so I went for a non-canon combination of a ritual (which I mistakently called special action) and condition geas. Now look what you've done. You made me argue that a geas of speaking in this case couldn't be an Incantation geas. But if it can't be an incantation geas, then I didn't exploit a loophole. No loophole = no irony = not funny. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 19 2006, 04:37 AM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,086 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 364 |
And that's it for this week's program, Deconstructing Humor. Be sure to join us next week, when we'll analyze how sausage is manufactured.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 14th October 2025 - 12:24 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.