![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#76
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 230 Joined: 17-August 10 Member No.: 18,942 ![]() |
Please let me explain the clear logic behind the rule regarding augmented limits.
There are several combos of cyber, gene, nano, bio, adept, spells, powers, etc out there which can increase more than 10 points of a single attribute. For eg the attribute body. (this is just an example off the top of my head..) A combo of cyber, gene, nano, bio, adept, spells, powers can easily increase the human bod attribute to 12. Therefore, to prevent such an abuse of too much enhancements, the developers clearly try to limit augmentation limits to a human up to 9. And that is the PRIME PURPOSE of the augmentation limit rules. To prevent a SR character from stacking up too many enhancements. Thus a character can only take in enhancements which stack his bod to 9. However, possession/inhabitation is NOT a power with the prime purpose of enhancing attributes. Attributes enhancement is a SIDE EFFECT of possession/inhabitation. Therefore the rules regarding augmented limits clearly do not cover possession/inhabitation cos the game has to show the difference in power between a force 20 spirit possessed adept and a force 10 spirit possessed adept. There would be no internal consistency if the game does not show such a difference. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#77
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 ![]() |
It's eminently arguable that 'augmentation' is the primary (for some players, only) effect of inhabitation/possession; more importantly, there's no rules distinction for 'primary objectives' whatsoever. Why are you bothering? Just house rule. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#78
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 230 Joined: 17-August 10 Member No.: 18,942 ![]() |
It's eminently arguable that 'augmentation' is the primary (for some players, only) effect of inhabitation/possession; more importantly, there's no rules distinction for 'primary objectives' whatsoever. Why are you bothering? Just house rule. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Please check out my last post. It explains things very clearly. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#79
|
|
Advocatus Diaboli ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 13,994 Joined: 20-November 07 From: USA Member No.: 14,282 ![]() |
I think you're on to something. This explains why drugs aren't explicitly in the list of 'capped' augmentations: because some of them have the 'primary objective' of getting high, not augmentation. Of course, that means that Jazz and others *are* explicitly for augmentation, and belong on the list. Alas, logic is so complicated. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#80
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,336 Joined: 24-February 08 From: Albuquerque, New Mexico Member No.: 15,706 ![]() |
Let me repeat the following just in case you do not realize how clearly logical my arguments are. No, they are not. Inhabitation/Possession is a power where the spirit takes over the body. More or less, correct. Augmentation is not the primary objective of this power. It is a side effect. Debatable. And irrelevant. Therefore the rules regarding augmented limits do not cover inhabitation/possession. Incorrect Augmented limits only cover powers or any other rules with the primary objective of increasing attribute limits eg cyber, bio, magic, spells.. Incorrect. But for sake of argument, we will say you are correct. Now show me a rules quote stating the "primary objective" of Possession. Otherwise how is the game gonna reflect that a force 20 spirit possessed human is stronger than a force 10 spirit possessed human? Irrelevant. And anything based off Magic - like IMMUNITY TO NATURAL WEAPONS. Please check out my last post. It explains things very clearly. No, it doesn't. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#81
|
|
Old Man Jones ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,415 Joined: 26-February 02 From: New York Member No.: 1,699 ![]() |
However, possession/inhabitation is NOT a power with the prime purpose of enhancing attributes. Attributes enhancement is a SIDE EFFECT of possession/inhabitation. Dude, that's your opinion. Either come up with book quotes to support your claim or stop presenting it as if it were fact. -k |
|
|
![]()
Post
#82
|
|
Great, I'm a Dragon... ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Retired Admins Posts: 6,699 Joined: 8-October 03 From: North Germany Member No.: 5,698 ![]() |
Please let me explain the clear logic behind the rule regarding augmented limits. There are several combos of cyber, gene, nano, bio, adept, spells, powers, etc out there which can increase more than 10 points of a single attribute. For eg the attribute body. (this is just an example off the top of my head..) A combo of cyber, gene, nano, bio, adept, spells, powers can easily increase the human bod attribute to 12. Therefore, to prevent such an abuse of too much enhancements, the developers clearly try to limit augmentation limits to a human up to 9. And that is the PRIME PURPOSE of the augmentation limit rules. To prevent a SR character from stacking up too many enhancements. Thus a character can only take in enhancements which stack his bod to 9. However, possession/inhabitation is NOT a power with the prime purpose of enhancing attributes. Attributes enhancement is a SIDE EFFECT of possession/inhabitation. Therefore the rules regarding augmented limits clearly do not cover possession/inhabitation cos the game has to show the difference in power between a force 20 spirit possessed adept and a force 10 spirit possessed adept. There would be no internal consistency if the game does not show such a difference. Thanks. That's it. Thread closed. If you start accepting the concept of "different opinions are totally ok" let me know. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th August 2025 - 02:38 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.