Armor spell, And encumbrance? |
Armor spell, And encumbrance? |
Sep 24 2010, 08:51 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 163 Joined: 28-September 09 From: Soldotna, Alaska Member No.: 17,683 |
Does the Armor spell count towards encumbrance, or not? I just realized that could prove problematic for a certain concept of mine (Medium milspec armor with an anchored Armor spell attached), and I can't seem to dig up my core book.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 08:53 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 973 Joined: 8-January 10 Member No.: 18,018 |
AFAIK, only worn armor counts towards encumbrance. But I'm away from books, so I can't really say for sure.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 08:57 AM
Post
#3
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 125 Joined: 21-March 10 From: Denver, CO Member No.: 18,325 |
Checked my SR4A book, never mentions one way or the other :\
If I were running the game, I'd rule it does not count toward the encumbrance limit, but you should clarify with your GM. |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 09:03 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 250 Joined: 16-January 09 From: Nowhere near you... unless you happen to be near Cologne. Member No.: 16,776 |
Does the Armor spell count towards encumbrance, or not? I just realized that could prove problematic for a certain concept of mine (Medium milspec armor with an anchored Armor spell attached), and I can't seem to dig up my core book. The armor spell is just an energy field that surrounds you, it does in no way interact with anything you wear. IMHO, it should not count towards encumbrance... you will glow like a christmas tree anyway, so that's enough of a downside in my book. -CJ |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 09:31 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,899 Joined: 29-October 09 From: Leiden, the Netherlands Member No.: 17,814 |
I'd say only worn armor counts; the following, for example, don't cause encumbrance:
- Troll dermal bone deposits - Cyberlimb armor |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 09:52 AM
Post
#6
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,911 Joined: 26-February 02 From: near Stuttgart Member No.: 1,749 |
It definitely doesn´t count to encumberance. I think in the errata or in the FAQ of the official homepage is the corresponding clarification.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 10:10 AM
Post
#7
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,507 Joined: 11-November 08 Member No.: 16,582 |
While this clarification may be at those locations, it is actually not needed. The encumbrance rules explicitly only apply to worn armor. The spell, adept powers, or 'ware are not worn.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 10:50 AM
Post
#8
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,911 Joined: 26-February 02 From: near Stuttgart Member No.: 1,749 |
Hmmm...this is the old fight of RAW against RAI.^^ It is better to ask.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 03:06 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
I'm not sure the cyberlimb armor doesn't count. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Depending on how sane the GM is, of course.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 03:20 PM
Post
#10
|
|
Old Man Jones Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 |
Every rules entry about encumbrance references "worn armor".
I think that might be important. -k |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 03:22 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
Sure, but there's RAW and then there's sanity. Armor spell is fine, though. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Anchored spells of any kind are kinda suspect, though. :/ Hmf. |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 04:06 PM
Post
#12
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 252 Joined: 26-August 10 From: Greensboro, NC Member No.: 18,971 |
I would also think if they intended to have spells/powers count for encumberance there would recoil for ranged, Physical effect spells; like Lightning Bolt. Or need of the scatter diagram for Lightning Ball.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 04:12 PM
Post
#13
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 |
I was almost sure that the spell text specifically said that it did not count towards encumbrance. I could be wrong.
Actually, this brings up a related point that I've been thinking about. Which is that (for characters with anything but superlatively high Body) 'Increase [Body]' is better than Armor in every conceivable way. For that matter, I fail to see how 'Increase Reaction' is not better than 'Combat Sense' in every conceivable way for characters with anything but superlatively high Reaction. And if you have superlatively high Reaction/Body you don't need either spell. |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 04:28 PM
Post
#14
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
I suppose you're ignoring the ability of armor to reduce P to S? It all depends, as you implied, on the precise circumstances.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 04:38 PM
Post
#15
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 |
I suppose you're ignoring the ability of Increase Body to let you wear exponentially more ARMOR (without encumbrance penalties).
Every point of Body increase is another die for Damage Resistance that can't be reduced by AP, and another two points of ballistic and impact armor you can wear without incurring encumbrance. i.e. one hit on an Increase Body test is the difference between Lined Coat + FFBA and Armor Jacket + FFBA. That's three extra dice right there and your Ballistic goes up by two for the purposes of reducing P to S. And then there's the drain. Armor is (F/2) + 3. Increase Body is (F/2) -2. That certainly does not depend on the precise circumstances. Armor is a better spell to cast on your Body 11 Trolls (although why bother) and the like because literally casting Increase Body at a high enough Force becomes an issue, but for anything Body 10 or less (assuming a Magic of 5) you might as well just overcast Increase Body at Force 10 and soak the measly 3P Drain. Did I mention that Increase Body adds CM boxes? |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 05:53 PM
Post
#16
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
You didn't say anything about wearing more armor, so I didn't include it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Yes, (Increase Body + a bunch of armor that you had handy) is better than (Armor spell all by itself). Like I said: circumstances. Here's one: you don't have a bunch of armor handy. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:01 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,996 Joined: 1-June 10 Member No.: 18,649 |
Increase Body + more armor + armor spell is better than all!
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:20 PM
Post
#18
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 |
QUOTE Yes, (Increase Body + a bunch of armor that you had handy) is better than (Armor spell all by itself). Like I said: circumstances. Here's one: you don't have a bunch of armor handy. Increase Body is still better, it has much less drain? And the extra soak dice you get from it can never be taken away by any level of AP? Did I mention that Increase Body adds CM boxes? |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:22 PM
Post
#19
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
And it can't turn Physical to Stun. You're right; they're different spells, and they overlap, but it all depends on the situational needs.
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:22 PM
Post
#20
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 |
Turning physical to stun is innately less important than taking less damage and having more health levels?
Increase Body has less drain. You can cast it at higher force and get more net hits and take less damage from drain than Armor while adding more dice to soak rolls that can't be reduced by AP. And it gives you more condition monitor boxes. It doesn't matter if it's stun or physical because you aren't taking it. In fact, if you cast increase Body you WANT it to be physical because that is the track you are getting more boxes to. A. Magic 5, Body 3 Mage In Lined Coat Casts Force 10 Increase Body: Lucky roll. Six Successes. Has to soak 3P Drain. +6 Soak Dice. +3 Physical CM Boxes. B. Magic 5, Body 3 Mage In Lined Coat Casts Force 5 Armor: Lucky roll. Maxed out at five successes. Has to soak 5S Drain. +5 Soak Dice. +0 CM Boxes. Will be taking more stun on top of the 5S he probably didn't soak all of due to his higher armor rating. And as the KICKER, if they are getting shot at with (say) a Sniper Rifle with APDS (-7 AP) A rolls 9 Dice, B rolls 7 Dice. That's without the fact that it is really not that hard to have heavier armor on hand if you know you have the Increase Body spell and can sustain it. |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:23 PM
Post
#21
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
Possibly. Possibly not. It depends. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
|
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:32 PM
Post
#22
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 |
What does it depend on?
Physical Damage can be restored by Heal and by First Aid. Stun Damage can be healed by...sleeping for several hours. Physical Damage is accrued by incoming attacks (which may not bypass your enhanced body + your current armor, or the extra armor that you may now wear). Stun Damage is accrued by incoming attacks if you have Armor sustained...plus the spells you are constantly casting. |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:43 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 |
You may not be casting these spells on a spellcaster, for one thing. Physical damage is *not* easier to heal than Stun, for another. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) People could also be using Trauma Dampers or Pain Editors, or Stims. It's a complex question; I don't understand why you feel the need to oversimplify it.
If you're up against tasers and knockout gas, then yes, Armor is inferior. If it's small arms fire, I'd rather shrug it down to Stun than take Physical damage I don't have to. I'm certainly not (as I re-reiterate) saying that Armor is always better, or that Body is somehow bad. I'm saying that different things have different uses. I hardly think 5 Force against 10 Force is fair, nor is the example of an extremely specialized anti-armor weapon. I'd also take issue with your blanket statement that if your Body is really high, you wouldn't even bother with Armor. You would, and unlike Increase Body, you *could*. Yet another relevant situational detail. |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 06:47 PM
Post
#24
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,996 Joined: 1-June 10 Member No.: 18,649 |
remember Increase body has to be cast at a force > your current stat.
Armor does not. It is easier to cast 2 Force 4 spells, than it is to cast 1 force 8 spell. 2 Sustaining Foci at force 4, are easier to obtain than 1 Sustaining Foci at Force 8 |
|
|
Sep 24 2010, 07:23 PM
Post
#25
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 |
You may not be casting these spells on a spellcaster, for one thing. Physical damage is *not* easier to heal than Stun, for another. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) People could also be using Trauma Dampers or Pain Editors, or Stims. It's a complex question; I don't understand why you feel the need to oversimplify it. If you're up against tasers and knockout gas, then yes, Armor is inferior. If it's small arms fire, I'd rather shrug it down to Stun than take Physical damage I don't have to. I'm certainly not (as I re-reiterate) saying that Armor is always better, or that Body is somehow bad. I'm saying that different things have different uses. I hardly think 5 Force against 10 Force is fair, nor is the example of an extremely specialized anti-armor weapon. I'd also take issue with your blanket statement that if your Body is really high, you wouldn't even bother with Armor. You would, and unlike Increase Body, you *could*. Yet another relevant situational detail. Stim Patches don't heal Stun in SR4. They remove wound penalties. And also I don't know if you're even arguing in good-faith at this point. Leave situational factors out of it. We are comparing the relative merits of two spells. Here are the factors that make Increase Body better than Armor, once more. Advantages of Increase Body: 1. It has MUCH less drain. 2. Bonus soak dice from Increase Body are unaffected by Armor Piercing. 3. It allows you to wear more armor, thus making Armor spell superfluous with a modicum of preparation. 4. It increases your condition monitor boxes. Advantages of Armor: 1. More attacks will inflict Stun damage (which is, and this is certainly a topic for a separate thread, only arguably a good thing). But even if we say that attacks inflicting Stun is INARGUABLY a good thing, it still seems pretty one-sided to me! QUOTE I hardly think 5 Force against 10 Force is fair Did you notice that the drain of Increase Body was two lower at FORCE TEN than the drain of Armor was at FORCE FIVE? Because that was my point. QUOTE remember Increase body has to be cast at a force > your current stat. Armor does not. Up to Body 10 a Magic 5 character is looking at a measly three drain for casting Increase Body at Force 10. Casting Armor at Force 4 is two more drain than that. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 10:36 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.