![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,248 Joined: 14-October 10 Member No.: 19,113 ![]() |
I am sure this is an old chestnut, but as it says in the question: Do they stack?
I have to say this is one of the (very few) areas that D20 is better than Shadowrun as it is always easy in that game to work out what stacks with what. (I realize I opened myself to flame wars but a little heat is a good thing in a conversation). |
|
|
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,290 Joined: 23-January 07 From: Seattle, USA Member No.: 10,749 ![]() |
I see no reason they wouldn't.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 189 Joined: 21-February 11 Member No.: 22,370 ![]() |
On the subject of stacking, I thought it was assumed in Shadowrun that things stack unless stated otherwise. The rules in this case are generally prohibitive, not permissive (i.e., they state when you can't stack things, rather than enumerating all the things that do stack).
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,290 Joined: 23-January 07 From: Seattle, USA Member No.: 10,749 ![]() |
As long as the sources make sense and don't contradict. Chameleon coating is just really good camouflage, while concealment can be any number of things, a fog bank rolling in, vegetation moving to obscure you, your sounds being dampened, or maybe people just have the inexplicable desire to look the other way. Even if they overcome the concealment power, they still have mundane stealth to deal with.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#5
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 973 Joined: 8-January 10 Member No.: 18,018 ![]() |
Yes, they stack.
On a side note: Do Silencers stack with Ruthenium and/or Concealment? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#6
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 583 Joined: 1-October 09 From: France Member No.: 17,693 ![]() |
I strongly doubt they could stack with ruthenium, as the polymer cover won't affect sound in any way that makes sense (except the "flash hider" part, for visually locating of the shooter), but they are likely to stack with Concealment.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#7
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,290 Joined: 23-January 07 From: Seattle, USA Member No.: 10,749 ![]() |
Yes, they stack. On a side note: Do Silencers stack with Ruthenium and/or Concealment? No because the apply to completely different checks. Ruthenium applies a penalty to the opposed perception check to notice someone using infiltration. A silencer applies a penalty to the check to notice a gunshot. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#8
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,946 Joined: 1-June 09 From: Omaha Member No.: 17,234 ![]() |
I rule they don't, concealment is about not being seen, R.P. is about being seen but looking like something else. This isn't grounded in mechanics perse, just so called common sense.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#9
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,911 Joined: 26-February 02 From: near Stuttgart Member No.: 1,749 ![]() |
Ruthenium is about what?^^
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#10
|
|
Target ![]() Group: Members Posts: 75 Joined: 17-July 11 Member No.: 33,515 ![]() |
Sure they stack. When you're Ruth'ed up you look like Predator. Now be blurry and hard to see, plus hidden in the shadows, plus a long ways off, plus behind something, you'll be even harder to see.
What I wonder though, is does Ruth transmit the light (or lack thereof) though or just project an image of what it sees on the opposite side? Cause if its the latter, doesn't that mean that a projection of darkness would still give off some light, like when your computer monitor draws the color black (as opposed to being off)? Would that screw up the camo effect at night since you'd be a kind of 'bright black' ? |
|
|
![]()
Post
#11
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 583 Joined: 1-October 09 From: France Member No.: 17,693 ![]() |
An LCD draws a "luminous black" only because the technical limitations of the technology prevent 100% absorbtion of the backlight - that's why it's contrast is lower than other technolgies (like cathodic) who actually light up the pixels instead of masking (incompletely) a white background.
IMHO ruthenium polymers alter their reflecting properties so that they just change color (thus looking black if no light shines on them, as there is nothing to reflect back) rather than actually emitting light. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#12
|
|
Immortal Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10,289 Joined: 2-October 08 Member No.: 16,392 ![]() |
What I wonder though, is does Ruth transmit the light (or lack thereof) though Fluffwise it does this. Technologically speaking, both are impossible. The former is impossible due to the inability to bend light in arbitrary directions as to go around an opaque object that changes shape. The latter because of this: Looks pretty sweet, right? Not from this perspective though! Basically: you can't project aimed light out of a single point where the angle of view changes the color of the projected light. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#13
|
|
Prime Runner Ascendant ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 17,568 Joined: 26-March 09 From: Aurora, Colorado Member No.: 17,022 ![]() |
Fluffwise it does this. Technologically speaking, both are impossible. The former is impossible due to the inability to bend light in arbitrary directions as to go around an opaque object that changes shape. The latter because of this: Looks pretty sweet, right? Not from this perspective though! Basically: you can't project aimed light out of a single point where the angle of view changes the color of the projected light. I just assume that these piffling little technological barriers have been conquered by the 2070's. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#14
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,654 Joined: 29-October 06 Member No.: 9,731 ![]() |
Fluffwise it does this. Technologically speaking, both are impossible. The former is impossible due to the inability to bend light in arbitrary directions as to go around an opaque object that changes shape. The latter because of this: Looks pretty sweet, right? Not from this perspective though! Basically: you can't project aimed light out of a single point where the angle of view changes the color of the projected light. First link fixed. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#15
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,019 Joined: 10-November 10 From: Annapolis Valley, Nova Scotia Member No.: 19,166 ![]() |
Sure they stack. When you're Ruth'ed up you look like Predator. Now be blurry and hard to see, plus hidden in the shadows, plus a long ways off, plus behind something, you'll be even harder to see. What I wonder though, is does Ruth transmit the light (or lack thereof) though or just project an image of what it sees on the opposite side? Cause if its the latter, doesn't that mean that a projection of darkness would still give off some light, like when your computer monitor draws the color black (as opposed to being off)? Would that screw up the camo effect at night since you'd be a kind of 'bright black' ? It is the later, assuming Ruthenium Polymer is the same thing used on the Chameleon suit. But, I assume the technology has been advanced sufficiently to give an accurate display of "no light". Edit: It is. QUOTE Chameleon Suit: A full body suit made from ruthenium polymers
supported by a sensor suite that scans the surroundings and replicates the images at the proper perspectives, providing the wearer with chameleon abilities. Apply a –4 dice pool modifier to Perception Tests to see the wearer. Also armored for additional protection. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#16
|
|
Moving Target ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 935 Joined: 2-September 10 Member No.: 19,000 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#17
|
|
Neophyte Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 2,248 Joined: 14-October 10 Member No.: 19,113 ![]() |
@General
Thanks for the answers. The consensus is pretty clear that the two stack. So what happens if a person with thermal vision is looking at a rutherium coat armoured mage. Do they take any minus's as the thermal image is still there? QUOTE The former is impossible due to the inability to bend light in arbitrary directions as to go around an opaque object that changes shape. I'm not sure that is still true given metamaterials. I'm not enough of a material scientist to understand them: at the moment they work with regular shapes and with wavelengths that are not near the visible spectrum, but I read somewhere (see the strength of this reference) that "they" are looking into irregular changing shapes. |
|
|
![]()
Post
#18
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,989 Joined: 28-July 09 From: Somewhere along the brazilian coast Member No.: 17,437 ![]() |
Ruthenium works for the visible spectrum (red to violet). For thermographic vision you have thermal dampening.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#19
|
|
Prime Runner Ascendant ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 17,568 Joined: 26-March 09 From: Aurora, Colorado Member No.: 17,022 ![]() |
Ruthenium works for the visible spectrum (red to violet). For thermographic vision you have thermal dampening. Here's a Monkey Wrench, just for fun. For Elves and Orcs, Lowlight is part of the Visible Spectrum, and for Dwarves and Trolls, Thermographic is part of the Visible Spectrum. Now how do you handle it? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#20
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,989 Joined: 28-July 09 From: Somewhere along the brazilian coast Member No.: 17,437 ![]() |
Fine.
Ruthenium works for the HUMAN visible spectrum (red to violet). For thermographic vision (biological, electronical, mechanical, magical or otherwise) you have thermal dampening. Happy now? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#21
|
|
Runner ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,946 Joined: 1-June 09 From: Omaha Member No.: 17,234 ![]() |
The consensus is stupid but hey 'It's mmaaaaaaaagic'
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#22
|
|
Prime Runner Ascendant ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 17,568 Joined: 26-March 09 From: Aurora, Colorado Member No.: 17,022 ![]() |
Fine. Ruthenium works for the HUMAN visible spectrum (red to violet). For thermographic vision (biological, electronical, mechanical, magical or otherwise) you have thermal dampening. Happy now? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Heh.... Awesome Clarification there Brazilian_Shinobi... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
![]()
Post
#23
|
|
Immortal Elf ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 10,289 Joined: 2-October 08 Member No.: 16,392 ![]() |
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#24
|
|
Running Target ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,290 Joined: 23-January 07 From: Seattle, USA Member No.: 10,749 ![]() |
I thought chameleon coating was just adaptive camouflage, that it recolored itself to match it's backdrop.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#25
|
|
Shooting Target ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1,759 Joined: 11-December 02 From: France Member No.: 3,723 ![]() |
Here's a Monkey Wrench, just for fun. For Elves and Orcs, Lowlight is part of the Visible Spectrum, and for Dwarves and Trolls, Thermographic is part of the Visible Spectrum. Now how do you handle it? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) And another : lowlight is not a part of a spectrum. It means you can perceive lower amount of light than normal human would, but still in the same range of frequencies.I thought chameleon coating was just adaptive camouflage, that it recolored itself to match it's backdrop. Regular camouflage is -2 to Perception Tests when appropriate, +2 when inappropriate. Chameleon coating is -4. So they're adaptive, but also somehow more efficient.
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th May 2025 - 04:47 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.