IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Combat Sense, Adept Power and Spell stacking?
mmmkay
post Aug 20 2011, 08:59 AM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 13-July 09
Member No.: 17,390



Does the adept power Combat Sense stack with the spell Combat Sense?

I searched, but couldn't find a ruling. Usually spells and adept powers stack, but I wanted to know if there was any text indicating that this is not the case since I could not find it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheOOB
post Aug 20 2011, 09:10 AM
Post #2


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 23-January 07
From: Seattle, USA
Member No.: 10,749



Things in shadowrun stack unless they say otherwise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mmmkay
post Aug 20 2011, 09:22 AM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 13-July 09
Member No.: 17,390



Yea, but do they say otherwise? Is there a rule about same name powers/spells?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheOOB
post Aug 20 2011, 09:37 AM
Post #4


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 23-January 07
From: Seattle, USA
Member No.: 10,749



QUOTE (mmmkay @ Aug 20 2011, 04:22 AM) *
Yea, but do they say otherwise? Is there a rule about same name powers/spells?


Neither of them say they don't stack, and ones a power and ones a spell, so they are different bonuses.

I personally think it's a developer oversight naming them both the same thing(as it's needlessly confusing), but they stack.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mmmkay
post Aug 20 2011, 09:54 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 13-July 09
Member No.: 17,390



Thanks OOB.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Infornography
post Aug 20 2011, 09:58 AM
Post #6


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 89
Joined: 18-August 11
Member No.: 36,178



QUOTE (TheOOB @ Aug 20 2011, 09:10 AM) *
Things in shadowrun stack unless they say otherwise.
That's only what powergamers want everyone to believe.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Aug 20 2011, 10:55 AM
Post #7


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



QUOTE (TheOOB @ Aug 20 2011, 11:37 AM) *
I personally think it's a developer oversight naming them both the same thing(as it's needlessly confusing), but they stack.
It is not as bad as Mystic Armor (Adept Power) and Mystic Armor (Critter Power). Those two don't even do the same thing.

QUOTE (Infornography @ Aug 20 2011, 11:58 AM) *
That's only what powergamers want everyone to believe.
Prove there is a rule saying otherwise.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Aug 20 2011, 11:44 AM
Post #8


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



QUOTE (Infornography @ Aug 20 2011, 05:58 PM) *
That's only what powergamers want everyone to believe.

And that's only what the roleplay drama queens want everyone to believe.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shinobi Killfist
post Aug 20 2011, 03:47 PM
Post #9


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,431
Joined: 3-December 03
Member No.: 5,872



QUOTE (Infornography @ Aug 20 2011, 05:58 AM) *
That's only what powergamers want everyone to believe.



Them's the rules. I think they should take a cue from D&D and name bonuses for 5e and same named bonuses don't stack but for 4e unless specified they stack.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irion
post Aug 20 2011, 05:06 PM
Post #10


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,236
Joined: 27-July 10
Member No.: 18,860



Both interpretations are valid and everything in between too.

QUOTE
I think they should take a cue from D&D and name bonuses for 5e and same named bonuses don't stack but for 4e unless specified they stack.

Yes, I guess that would have been a good idea.
Like:
A sticks with everything.
B sticks not with itself.
C:does not stick with anything.


QUOTE
Prove there is a rule saying otherwise.

Well, doing it your way SnS would have an armorpenetration of (armor+X)/2 or even armor/2+X. X be the armorpenetration of the rifle you fire it with.

There is a lot of stuff, where it is more than questionable if everything sticks. Healing tests are another thing to consider.
If you go really RAW partial darkness and full darkness would scould tick too.

There is no real rule, but you may have a lot of arguments about this topic anyway...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Psikerlord
post Aug 21 2011, 10:47 AM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 292
Joined: 20-April 09
From: Sydney 'plex
Member No.: 17,094



that's what your GM and group is for ... to discuss this type of thing and make a houserule on it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aerospider
post Aug 21 2011, 11:23 AM
Post #12


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,150
Joined: 15-December 09
Member No.: 17,968



QUOTE (Irion @ Aug 20 2011, 06:06 PM) *
If you go really RAW partial darkness and full darkness would scould tick too.

This much is definitely not possible, even for the RAWest of interpretations as the two states cannot co-exist. The darkness is either full or partial, but not both.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irion
post Aug 21 2011, 12:53 PM
Post #13


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,236
Joined: 27-July 10
Member No.: 18,860



@Aerospider
Depends on the definition...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aerospider
post Aug 21 2011, 12:58 PM
Post #14


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,150
Joined: 15-December 09
Member No.: 17,968



QUOTE (Irion @ Aug 21 2011, 01:53 PM) *
@Aerospider
Depends on the definition...

I'm intrigued. Please provide a definition that calls for both modifiers.

Partial credit if you can describe a situation in which any single and specific element is in both a full and a partial state simultaneously.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tymeaus Jalynsfe...
post Aug 21 2011, 01:44 PM
Post #15


Prime Runner Ascendant
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 17,568
Joined: 26-March 09
From: Aurora, Colorado
Member No.: 17,022



QUOTE (Aerospider @ Aug 21 2011, 05:23 AM) *
This much is definitely not possible, even for the RAWest of interpretations as the two states cannot co-exist. The darkness is either full or partial, but not both.


See, I read that as being subject to one or the other, but not both... *shrug*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aerospider
post Aug 21 2011, 02:28 PM
Post #16


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,150
Joined: 15-December 09
Member No.: 17,968



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Aug 21 2011, 02:44 PM) *
See, I read that as being subject to one or the other, but not both... *shrug*

Exactly the point I'm arguing. Stacking those two modifiers is akin to imposing the long range shooting penalty and the extreme range shooting penalty at the same time. You can't be at more than one range at once and you can't be in two different levels of darkness at once. Don't expect RAW to ban things that are not possible by definition - the book can only be so big.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irion
post Aug 21 2011, 03:51 PM
Post #17


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,236
Joined: 27-July 10
Member No.: 18,860



Partial darkness: less than light than X.
Total darkness no light.
If you have no light it is also darker than X.

Is this definiation somewhat strange? Yes, no question about it. There are a lot of things where it is questionable if they do or should stack. (And there is nothing said about it)


Lets go to my favorite example, shall we:
Healing wounds:
During combat in a swamp in the middle of a severe storm.
No do I get: -4 or -10.
Both can be argued for.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Aug 21 2011, 04:06 PM
Post #18


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



Funny how people don't ask if negative, 'unfun' things stack against them. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Aug 21 2011, 04:28 PM
Post #19


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



QUOTE (Irion @ Aug 20 2011, 07:06 PM) *
Well, doing it your way SnS would have an armorpenetration of (armor+X)/2 or even armor/2+X. X be the armorpenetration of the rifle you fire it with.
Nope the rules say otherwise:
QUOTE ('SR4A p. 324')
The Stick-n-Shock replaces the weapon’s Damage Value with its own.


QUOTE (Irion @ Aug 20 2011, 07:06 PM) *
If you go really RAW partial darkness and full darkness would scould tick too.
Wrong as well. There is no modifier for partial darkness. It is a modifier for partial light (SR4A p. 152). The conditions Partial Light and Full Darkness cannot exist at the same time.

On a related note Target Hidden and Full Darkness do stack of course.

@Healing Modifiers: Yes RAW is -10, but the problem here is that the conditions are weighed (good to terrible) which are mutually exclusive and give examples which can of course stack (combat, in a swamp, that is burning)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irion
post Aug 21 2011, 05:37 PM
Post #20


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,236
Joined: 27-July 10
Member No.: 18,860



@Dakka Dakka
QUOTE
Wrong as well. There is no modifier for partial darkness. It is a modifier for partial light (SR4A p. 152). The conditions Partial Light and Full Darkness cannot exist at the same time.

Depends on how you define it. Sorry for not looking up the correct wording.
I would not go into the "but the wording says" kind of argument. There are a lot of those in the book.

QUOTE
@Healing Modifiers: Yes RAW is -10, but the problem here is that the conditions are weighed (good to terrible) which are mutually exclusive and give examples which can of course stack (combat, in a swamp, that is burning)

Not really. A fight in a swamp is thougher than a fight in a steril invironement.
And sorry, actually there is nothing telling so.
So if you go with stacks unless something else is said, it stacks.

@Yerameyahu
Like nobody is interested in the restriction in the spell description....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aerospider
post Aug 21 2011, 06:38 PM
Post #21


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,150
Joined: 15-December 09
Member No.: 17,968



QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Aug 21 2011, 05:28 PM) *
Nope the rules say otherwise:

Now this is very high pedantry and not something I take heed of, but technically damage value and armour penetration are distinct elements. I already checked and RAW really doesn't state explicitly that the AP of S'n'S ammo replaces that of the weapon. Or the type of armour used for that matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irion
post Aug 21 2011, 11:46 PM
Post #22


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,236
Joined: 27-July 10
Member No.: 18,860



@Yerameyahu
Just a note: Because there is a lot of those. If you really go with RAW at a rule lawyer, he will probably cry, because his char won't even get out of bed without hurting himself.
There is a lot of stuff, which is just ignored because it "can not be that way".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yerameyahu
post Aug 22 2011, 02:27 AM
Post #23


Advocatus Diaboli
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,994
Joined: 20-November 07
From: USA
Member No.: 14,282



Funny how they always find the stackings that *help* them, though. No matter how many of those there are. And they never ignore *them*, no matter how obviously things 'can not be that way'. I'm just saying. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) TANSTAAFL.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tymeaus Jalynsfe...
post Aug 22 2011, 02:57 AM
Post #24


Prime Runner Ascendant
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 17,568
Joined: 26-March 09
From: Aurora, Colorado
Member No.: 17,022



QUOTE (Aerospider @ Aug 21 2011, 12:38 PM) *
Now this is very high pedantry and not something I take heed of, but technically damage value and armour penetration are distinct elements. I already checked and RAW really doesn't state explicitly that the AP of S'n'S ammo replaces that of the weapon. Or the type of armour used for that matter.


It is pretty obvious that the rules quoted earlier for SNS actually replaces the normal damage/effects from the weapon with the SNS Effects. Not sure how you could read it any other way. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aerospider
post Aug 22 2011, 07:03 AM
Post #25


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,150
Joined: 15-December 09
Member No.: 17,968



QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Aug 22 2011, 03:57 AM) *
It is pretty obvious that the rules quoted earlier for SNS actually replaces the normal damage/effects from the weapon with the SNS Effects. Not sure how you could read it any other way. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

You must be thinking of a different thread because the only quote here mentions only damage value. Other than that, in RAW I can't find any text that says to treat the stats for SnS any differently to other ammo, which is cumulative with the weapon's AP. I don't play it that way, but we were talking rules-lawyerage. If you have a quote that is explicit please do provide.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 05:03 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.