 Dragon challenge, Taking down a dragon, SR4 style |
  |
 Jul 23 2007, 10:11 AM
Post
#376
|
|||||||
|
Shooting Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,677 Joined: 5-June 03 Member No.: 4,689  |
In case anyone is curious, here's my take on munchkinism, as opposed to just powergaming. I've been studying it, and the Channelling/Possession issue really is a nasty one. The loophole in the rules does allow infinite Magic increase even with only a single magician -- sloppy, sloppy writing -- but infinite loops wreck scenarios; and persistently trying to take advantage of them after having identified them shows a determination to win even by breaking the game (and thus at the expense of others who may have wished to test the scenario without breaking it). For this purpose, I'll follow Buster's recommendation and have all conjuring use only the conjurer's personal Magic. Interpretation is that the magician can't use the spirit's share of Magic to use with conjuring skills. It's a change from the strict rules, yes. I'm not making any broad-based "loop" rulings, except to specify that I'm looking to test tactics and killability, not the breakability of the rules. If you want to play this out as closely to RAW as possible, you'll not force me to make these kinds of rulings again.
It might, if it has a chance. Of course it has defences, of the kind you might expect of a critter who knows that there aren't all that many dragons in the world but that several have already been killed (and even sacrificed): but it won't know you specifically are coming until and unless you alert it. That means its standard passive defenses only to begin. Up to you to guess what those might be. Reiterating, since it may have been lost amid the numbers: high-end by-the-book western dragon, 2M nuyen (I back-spent 1M translated to bp on contacts and the chargen max spells), no karma (meaning no foci, no initiation, no metamagic). The runners and their personal resources/skills/magic only are up against the dragon and its personal resources/skills/magic. Time limit is 24 hours, during which time the dragon doesn't plan to be emerging from its lair.
Although Batman is only one individual, with non-augmented human max attributes and skills. One sincerely hopes any good SR team could do better! Two plans of approach have been suggested: the ritual team, and Crusher Bob's detailed multi-specialised team from the previous page: which hasn't been discussed at all. New ruling re spells: if you want a spell that isn't exactly as written (ie. different range), you can have it -- but not at chargen. It will cost you karma, not bp.
Mmm ... valid point where a chain of directly-linked probabilities is involved: ie. each depends utterly on the success of the previous one. Not so much when the tests are independent and isolated. Incidentally, unless I miss my guess (possible, I'm rusty on game theory), the reducing odds are represented in your example: an inverted gambler's fallacy. Really, I suspect randomness is harder on the PC team than the dragon. And since I'm interested in the tactics rather than stray luck one way or the other, well ... |
||||||
 |
 
|
||||||
|
Jul 23 2007, 11:18 AM
Post
#377
|
|
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
There are various ways to go about this scenario: Using an unstoppable tactic, it is one of them. Why is an infinite loop not a valid solution when the very premise of this scenario is to manifestly to win? If this was a proper game with a real GM instead of a GM whose almost sole purpose is to play the antagonist, I'd agree that breaking the scenario would be defeating the purpose of gaming, but this is no ordinary scenario: This is Tal on one side playing the dragon and simultaneously playing the part of the GM that controls the rules - you control, in effect, what you would like to see defeat your dragon instead of the rules taking care of themselves, and the rest of the forums as "players". Leveraging the rules is force majuere in tactics and killability.
I have kept out of the PC creation as well as dragon creation: I have mostly commented on rulings where I feel are not to canon. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 11:56 AM
Post
#378
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
The loop, as has been stated, is not infinite. It is severely limited by drain. The statistical likelihood that a character avoids being knocked unconscious or killed by drain is reduced by every iteration until the loop ends with the magican in question dying, and possibly releasing an angry double-digit-force Free Spirit to kill his friends.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 12:44 PM
Post
#379
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
24 hour limitation. It'll take more than 24 hours for that group to: 1. Acquire needed spell. (Etiquette+Charisma Extended Test, 8/1day) 2. Learn needed spell. (Intuition + Spellcasting Extended Test, 5/1day) 3. Do the other things they need to do. 3a. You're already burning 11 hours on the ritual. 3b. How many hours are you burning on the sympathetic link already? AS WRITTEN, they're munchkinized for this scenario. (By my view of what makes a munchkin) (NTTAWWT) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 23 2007, 01:21 PM
Post
#380
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
It's only infinite in the average case; if you use the 1:3 ratio, which makes every case the average case, well then yeah, it's infinite. If you use real dice, then eventually you get zapped by a statistical outlier and your head explodes. The summoning drain hurts -- at up to two times force -- but the bind drain really screws up your day at up to 4 times force. Of course, for a single scenario, you don't have to get all that lucky, what with the maximum force of the spirit doubling each time you do it. You don't have to be all that lucky to get up into the 40+ force range. If you try to do the loop in a campaign setting, it will kill you eventually.
It depends on the dice pool. Whoever has the larger dice pool is going to have a smaller variance (as a proportion of the mean), so the larger your dice pool, the more likely you are to hit closer to your average. Generally, the dragon is going to have a larger dice pool, but there are cases -- such as with a mage with an ally spirit and a power focus (or some other focus) -- where this won't hold. Of course, with the small size of the Shadowrun dice pools, the difference in variance may be negligible from a practical point of view. While I understand wanting to simplify by using the 1:3 ratio, it really skews the results and lets you do things you would never ever attempt otherwise. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jul 23 2007, 02:01 PM
Post
#381
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
Here's an example of completely skewing the results based on a 1:3 ratio.
(This is achievable using the scenario parameters, with obnoxious amounts of minmaxing) Take a dwarf. Body: 6 Charisma: 6 Willpower: 7 Magic: 6 Summoning 4 (Arbitrary Spirit Type) Binding 6 (Arbitrary Spirit Type) Spellcasting 4 Increase Willpower (hence, given infinite tries Willpower = 10) Increase Charisma (hence, given infinite tries Charisma = 9) Increase Body (hence, given infinite tries, Body=10) Focused Concentration (2) 4xInitiate (44 karma) 4xIncrease Magic (102 karma) Binding Focus Force 5 (15 Karma) Ally Spirit Force 1 (8 karma) Summoning Skill Increase 2 (22 karma) Summoning Dice Pool: Magic (10) + Summoning (6) + Specialization (2) = 18 Binding Dice Pool: Magic (10) + Binding (6) + Specialization (2) + Focus (5) = 23 Pretty much, this means you can summon any spirit up to force 17, and bind any spirit up to force 11. Drain Resist Dice Pool: Willpower (10) + Charisma (9) + Focused Concentration (2) Physical Damage Track: 8+Body/2=8+5=13 We can summon anything up to force 10 without drain, and survive any summoning we can accomplish (ie, up to Force 20) We can bind anything up to force 6 without drain, and survive any binding up to force 18. Hence, this character can start play with 6 force 11 bound spirits, with as many services as he's willing to pay for (using rebinding rules). Now, let's assume that at least 5 other folks in the group is either a magician or mystic adept with channeling. You now have six folks running around with force 11 spirits channelled. On the day of the run, this guy whips up an additional force 10 spirit (with no drain), it has 3 services. Don't forget all the other mystic adepts/magicians; they'll be whipping up their own spirits, too. With more minmaxing, you could possibly find the point on the curve where the survivable binding drain equals the max you can summon, and you could end up with slightly higher bound spirits. And I haven't even factored in edge yet. Now, rolling dice, nobody would lightly "whip up" 6 force 11 bound spirits, and then lightly "whip up" an additional force 10 spirit on the day of the run. But with the 1:3 rule, it's no problem at all. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 02:39 PM
Post
#382
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
How is this different than a GM in a standard game saying "no, you can't use a summoned spirit to help summon a spirit" before they go into a corp compound? GMs play the opposition forces and referee the rules. That's their job. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 23 2007, 03:17 PM
Post
#383
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,677 Joined: 5-June 03 Member No.: 4,689 |
Incidentally, if a tactic is only possible or impossible with dice variance, then you accept that its validity depends entirely on luck.
Is anyone interested in actually running through this scenario? rather than solely crunching numbers computer-style? Only one person in the last five pages of thread has seriously considered what active and passive defenses the dragon might have up. Hardly anyone has tried to consider how the dragon might think (not character, just tactically), except to insist on what the dragon ought not to be able to do psychologically -- although the same psychology apparently doesn't apply to its attackers, even though the scenario is kill-or-be-killed -- and anyone who has tried has been quickly drowned out by the number crunchers. I need to know whether I ought to start a new thread for people who actually want to test this on a level outside a purely number-crunching pressing-the-I-WIN button. (You'll remember what I said about chess? Even with the modern level of computer processing, a grandmaster can still beat the computer.) Sheer curiosity: of the extreme number crunchers, how many of you have an active regular face-to-face SR game that has lasted? |
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 03:32 PM
Post
#384
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
My current campaign has been on break for awhile now -- GM is in the nasty part of med school -- but had been going for a couple of years prior to that. I'm GMing Werewolf instead, for the time being. Normally, when I play, I apply the first rule I proposed: I will not do anything that would break the game for the other players. I actually had a character get to that point, at which point I retired the character. And I'm interested in making a group. However, the parameters aren't exactly static here, so I'm trying to get them nailed down before I put a full group together.
The tactic is possible either way. The variables are, as always in Shadowrun, what is the risk assumed in the use of this tactic, and am I willing to assume it, and what is the likely outcome? It's really no different than being in combat and asking yourself, "If I want to shoot this dragon, what is the likelihood of the shot being effective? Well, let's see... I'm behind cover, the dragon has hardened armor, I have this many dice, I think the dragon probably has this many dice, I have a smartlink, the power on my weapon is X, the dragon has Y armor... hmmm... no, I think I'll use my missile launcher, because that has a higher likelihood of being effective." If you, the GM, implement a house rule like 1:3, that changes the risk parameters, and necessarily impacts what the 'runners are and are not willing to try. For example, with the 1:3 rule, I either hit the dragon every time, or I never hit the dragon (assuming constant circumstances). Either I do enough damage to hurt the dragon every time, or I never do. You have to take that into account. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 23 2007, 03:43 PM
Post
#385
|
|||||||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
By the very fact that the very premise of the thread is not a standard game? And that this is not in the Welcome to the Shadows forums?
Does GMing SRMissions count?
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jul 23 2007, 04:09 PM
Post
#386
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
So it's impossible for a standard game to be a one shot involving a dragon hunt? Why? And what does the forum it's in matter? The thread, despite being in "the wrong forum" is obviously (at least to me) a request for people to create characters for and participate in a one-shot game. House rules have been proferred, rulings made, and the scenario defined beforehand so that the players can make the types of characters that would have been hired for this run. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 23 2007, 05:25 PM
Post
#387
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
... for now. The search space isn't infinite, and it will eventually be mapped. They recently just finished up checkers; there is now a computer that plays checkers that cannot lose. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 23 2007, 05:38 PM
Post
#388
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Sure it's possible for a "standard game" to be one shot a dragon hunt, but I'd say that it isn't standard to drop the team off at the dragon lair and say that they have 24 hours to kill or be killed, BUT the dragon isn't already on active alert.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 06:52 PM
Post
#389
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Right. There's nothing about this topic about creating a believable shadowrunning team and this just being another random run they're getting hired for.
It's a min/max thread created by Taila with the sole purpose of raping the rules to see how effective someone can be at defeating a dragon under extreme and limited circumstances, yet refuse to admit to himself or anyone else that that's exactly what the scenario is about. If it were the former case, the desired characters would simply be standard runners who've used the bonus karma and resources to hone their personal specialties. What's being asked for, however, are one-shot characters custom designed to defeat a dragon under the alloted restrictions, usually with most if not all of the detailed plans being shot down through hand-waving. If custom designed characters and their plans are being dismissed, there's no point in even trying to throw standard, believable characters into the mix. Unless the aforementioned hand-waving swings the other way. And in that case there still isn't any point in any of this! So yes, despite various bouts of self-denial, this most assuredly is a min/maxing thread for specialized, munched-to-Hell-and-back characters. Nothing at all wrong with that -- it's a ton of fun -- except when you start getting all high and mighty towards the very people doing what was asked; making said munchkins and powergaming characters. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 06:55 PM
Post
#390
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 08:08 PM
Post
#391
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
I don't think Talia has said that you can't make min-maxed, drago-killing adapted characters. I think it's just established, quite reasonably, that you can't pull exploitative stunts with the rules that would be banned in game by any sane GM. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 23 2007, 08:12 PM
Post
#392
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
My response was aimed towards a variety of posters, particularly the ones bemoaning the highly specialized, rules-raped, munched out characters where little to no work has gone into defining their other abilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 23 2007, 08:30 PM
Post
#393
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
Oh, fair enough then. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 25 2007, 01:30 AM
Post
#394
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Hey now... I defined their other abilities. They have other skills too! Like, uhh, Survival! And... artisan! Yes! They can live in a forest and sculpt pretty statues that they sell at flea markets when they're not busy smiting dragons from their cave!
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2007, 02:03 AM
Post
#395
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 530 Joined: 11-June 05 Member No.: 7,441 |
Heh, still munchy.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. :) |
|
|
|
|
Jul 25 2007, 02:41 AM
Post
#396
|
|||||||||||||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,677 Joined: 5-June 03 Member No.: 4,689 |
Oh good. I wanted to keep these questions uniquely in this thread, rather than spreading them across every other spinoff: but I didn't want to keep flogging a dead horse. Thus all following quotes are from here, which I'm trying to keep clear for addressing the core question there.
Possibly because I didn't explain it yet. (And, as Frank Trollman notes later, Astral Window isn't necessary for the ritual magic scenario.) I'm a firm believer in the adversarial system of testing validity. In taking the "side" of the dragon, I'm testing the limits of the dragon, complete with establishing passive defences, and defences that won't kick in until the dragon is alerted, and defences after that which work on the basis of the best defence is a good offence. In taking the "side" of the runners, people who don't see this as a waste of time are doing exactly the same wrt the runners. Testing scenarios at some point involves committing to one specific direction, and accepting the consequences of that choice, combat turn by combat turn. It's not a choose-your-own-adventure with infinite re-starts, after all. And thus it would be somewhat pointless for me to explain exactly how the ritual magic scenario fails until you commit to it -- which the participants of this thread haven't. So far, all I've seen is mathematical analyses why a plan of action ought to succeed. I'm telling you that, as it stands, it won't: and you're leaving yourselves wide open to counterattack. The answer why is canon from the book: but the runners' "side" does have to think of it. Otherwise it ceases to be a true adversarial system. Oh, and if I just tell you: aren't you doing exactly what Frank Trollman accuses me of doing, below?
You know the dragon's capabilities. I've told you that the dragon and its tactics have been "frozen" long since, and I'll give you the link to its location on the Internet after the scenario has been played through. You have everything in your hands necessary to make an educated guess about what it might have done to plug obvious holes to its safety. Edit:
I have no idea where you are getting that idea. Discussion among participants doesn't mean judgement against.
Read about that. For now, all it proves is that within what we currently can analyse, there exists a possible guaranteed win in checkers. So what happens when the machine plays itself? In any case though: is the human element completely and in all respects reduceable to algorithm? (Which btw would also negate free will: since perfect reduction to algorithm would also mean complete predictability.) [/edit]
Apologies. Your suggestion must have been as overlooked by others as Crusher Bob's. Until it's explicitly ruled out by the thread participants, I'll include it again in the possibilities. May I suggest though, that anyone who thinks this thread is a waste of time doesn't have to participate in it? |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Jul 25 2007, 04:25 AM
Post
#397
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
While I can understand why the PCs should be limited to 1 try, I do not understand why the forum posters have to decide on 1 specific direction for this thread. Again if this was a normal game with a GM, there would not be such a situation for infinite tries. But this is not a normal thread and it is not a "normal" run. Tal, you have your dragon more as a PC than an NPC. To be fair to both the scenario testers and the dragon, there needs be a neutral party to arbitrate the rules and the rolls. Right now, it is neither a true game nor a pure simulation as was the frst impression that I had. As it stands, it is not even a true adversarial system. The player of the dragon is also holding the rules fulcrum. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 25 2007, 04:57 AM
Post
#398
|
|||
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,677 Joined: 5-June 03 Member No.: 4,689 |
If the participants in the scenario have more than one try, then they can learn from the previous attempt and specifically plug that hole: and again that lets the runners' "side" have the advantage that Frank Trollman accuses me of taking.
Interesting point. How do you normally play your NPCs then? Mine are potentially capable of action, reaction, and preemptive action: depending entirely on their level of knowledge, their ability to act on that knowledge, and their personality. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jul 25 2007, 06:12 AM
Post
#399
|
|||||||
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
Slow week on the forums. Besides, just because I think what you are trying to put together is a waste of time doesn't mean that I find no value in some of the stuff that has come out of this thread.
Since it wasn't my idea in the first place, no. What it would be however is a display that you've actually thought the scenerio though, and be a way to make sure that you've understood the rules involved.
No worries, if I actually decide that there is something to be gained from running through the challenge other then to see which one of us cares enough to out-think the other in this scenerio then I'd come after Mr Magoo using a twist which I hadn't been broadcasting and character sheets that only I had access to until after the run-through was complete. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jul 25 2007, 06:26 AM
Post
#400
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Talia. How's this sound. Since I'm the one who came up with the ritual dragon killing team entirely on my own, you let me play it out through PMs, and we discuss it that way. I promise to keep my trap shut and not post about it in any threads until this thread has come to a resolution (though, you are free to post whatever information about what transpires as you like.) Sound reasonable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd December 2024 - 03:22 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.