Unarmed combat and dual natured creatures, I guess they should never take astral combat. Options

[Draco18s]

The fact that they didn't, but still left the FAQ answer hanging out there, points to a disconnect between the people writing the FAQ and the people writing the books.

The FAQ is written by people who used to work tangentially on the ShadowRun line. That is, people who worked at Catalyst, but actually had very little say in the mechanics of the game. Thus their opinion has roughly the same weight as mine or yours.

In almost every case, I don't even think to consult the FAQ, since it's not a published book. (But now also because there's good reason to ignore the FAQ.) I wonder how many GMs insist on following the FAQ even when that document contradicts the books...as a sort of non-errata errata.

About a third of this forum follow it. Another third don't, and the remaining third play games that are so heavily house ruled as to be unrecognizable.

[James McMurray]

In almost every case, I don't even think to consult the FAQ, since it's not a published book. (But now also because there's good reason to ignore the FAQ.) I wonder how many GMs insist on following the FAQ even when that document contradicts the books...as a sort of non-errata errata.

Our group follows it. I'm not too terribly concerned about quibbling over the word "errata" vs. the word "FAQ." That's for the hyper-anal rules junkies to do if they want to. The document was put there by the company to explain how the game plays. When there's a disconnect we just pick the one we prefer. Or, as in the case with Mystic Adepts since nobody has played one, we ignore it until it comes up.

[Draco18s]

The document was put there by the company to explain how the game plays.

From what I recall, it was actually written by former employees and then submitted to the company as a "would you please host this document?" and was done so because the company itself did not have the resources to create a similar document itself.

It's about as official as these forums are official.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

From what I recall, it was actually written by former employees and then submitted to the company as a "would you please host this document?" and was done so because the company itself did not have the resources to create a similar document itself.

It's about as official as these forums are official.

^^^^^^^^ THIS.............. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Badmoodguy88]

Well this has been and interesting thread, if off topic. I only meant to say mystic adepts are not the be all end all of magical types, but I do personally prefer them.

I got one objection to not having astral combat. And also someone saying natural weapon does not work in astral. I know it is listed as a physical power but so is sapience and we don't all loose our minds in astral. I figured that because natural weapon is a physical and nonartificial modification to the body that it caries over. I can however see arguments against this. Elemental attack and energy aura clearly would not work, but would regeneration also not work in astral? Just about all the damage you would get in astral would not be healed by regeneration in any event, but if a spirit with regeneration fled to astral after taking physical damage, would they not heal until they left astral?

The rest of you seem to think not taking astral combat is fine. So I am going to go with that being the consensus for naturally dual nature beings.

[darthmord]

In SR3, there was an Adept MetaMagic that allowed MAgic MINUTES of Astral Projection.

The Metamagic can be found in SOTA64.

No reason it can't be directly ported to SR4/A since virtually all of the metamagics made the transition with very little change.