Unarmed adept Options

[Irion]

@Kolinho

Perhaps the penis comment was a bit extreme

You can't take back penis comments. It implies you have a small penis. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Kolinho]

@Kolinho

You can't take back penis comments. It implies you have a small penis. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/upsidedown.gif)

Negative. As I am not a powergamer, I am evidently neither 14 years old nor challenged in the phallic department.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Shortstraw]

You could still be a rules lawyer that needs control to make up for impotence (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Irion]

You know what really scares me?
I bet you could hold a lecture on this matter and if you manage to keep a straight face, people will take it seriously.

[Shortstraw]

It's like art history!

[snowRaven]

You know what really scares me?
I bet you could hold a lecture on this matter and if you manage to keep a straight face, people will take it seriously.

Oh, definately!

They'd even pay to attend...

[Neraph]

A good thread about possession and items (some good ideas / some bad ideas / many opinions) is here:
Possession of objects thread


Allowing an Edge-boosted Inc Ref spell to be put in a F1 Sustaining Focus is purely power-gamer made up, however.

Again, Boomer, see if your table allows this.

Thank you for the plug.

Not convinced you can do that, or certainly at my table if a spirit possessed a weapon they wouldn't be quiet about it. That is, assuming I hadn't ruled out possession spirits full stop. Which I have.

Oh dear. Do you have a wet paper bag for a GM?

If you were in my group, we'd be having words.

Like in about 90% of the wording across the books, the interpretation is ambiguous at best. Most of the time, people read it how they want it to be. This is a perfect example of that. As a GM, i'd be tempted to rule out Edge-boosted spells being loaded into Foci. Kinda defeats the point in Edge really.

See wet paper bag comment above. Certainly if he lets it go.

That probably makes sense, I like the inventiveness certainly... but would that not OP Killing Hands and the like? IOW are there not Adept powers requiring no weapons already there to compensate for an unarmed Adept's inability to use Weapon Foci? It would be like allowing Killing Hands to be used with a Ultimax HMG-2, no?

Careful, you're sounding far too aggressive and condescending about points that are either RAW or subjective. For example: a 17 (+2 spec, +2 totem, +6 spirit ; total: 27) dicepool for Spellcasting is quite easy to get at chargen with a 400 BP character, and that's not even taking Infected into account. From what you've said you'd think that is completely "munchkiny, power-gaming, jerkiness with a wet paper bag as a GM," but I ask why you seem to want to limit what the players are capable of? If it is possible under the clear intent of the rules of a game you are playing why do you feel the need to house-rule things out of existence (possession, Edge-boosted spells in sustaining foci)?

[Kolinho]

Thank you for the plug.

Careful, you're sounding far too aggressive and condescending about points that are either RAW or subjective. For example: a 17 (+2 spec, +2 totem, +6 spirit ; total: 27) dicepool for Spellcasting is quite easy to get at chargen with a 400 BP character, and that's not even taking Infected into account. From what you've said you'd think that is completely "munchkiny, power-gaming, jerkiness with a wet paper bag as a GM," but I ask why you seem to want to limit what the players are capable of? If it is possible under the clear intent of the rules of a game you are playing why do you feel the need to house-rule things out of existence (possession, Edge-boosted spells in sustaining foci)?

To avoid OP characters. Simple really.

The game provides me with a framework, a framework that is absolutely riddled with flaws and holes, to which I will adapt to fit the level of a game I wish to run. I have no interest in having the PCs come up against the same things I am outlawing so it's not like I'm being unfair.

Specifically, possession spirits seem extremely easy to manipulate into game breaking positions. An edge boost shouldn't be able to last, it's meant to be a one off. You can't use edge to help you in an extended test, so I don't think you should be able to use it (extremely cheesily imo) to give you a long term benefit in sustaining foci either.

I want, need even, the players to be limited into what is fair to everyone playing. Shadowrun, at it's heart, should be about danger and paranoia, suspense and subtlety. Reducing it into a penis-waving contest is not the kind of game I want to run, and devalues the amount of work I put into creating storylines and plots. If you make the game about how good you can be, I feel that takes away from making characters having actual substance. Too many times I have seen characters defined by what they can do rather than what they can do being defined by who they are, which is far more healthy for a story-based campaign.

I meant no offence though, each table is different and I respect that.

[Yerameyahu]

That's kind of a 'duh' question. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) 'Why would you want to limit player power?' … To limit player power! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) It's not about playing the game how you're 'supposed to', or how the RAW or RAI tells you. It's about making sure it's fun, and that depends entirely on the campaign and group. 'Can' doesn't mean 'should'.

[Angelone]

Ragewind's suggestions are helpful, they give me idea's of what to look out for when I GM.

[snowRaven]

Ragewind's suggestions are helpful, they give me idea's of what to look out for when I GM.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[VykosDarkSoul]

And lest ye forget o players, the proverb of the goose and the gander? Remember, just cause you can make a sniper with half a million dice on chargen, so to can you be sniped.

[Kolinho]

And lest ye forget o players, the proverb of the goose and the gander? Remember, just cause you can make a sniper with half a million dice on chargen, so to can you be sniped.

This is how it is. Definitely. Any attempt from my players to powergame, or if they are voicing an objection to a house rule, is responded thus.

[Irion]

But should it be like that.
I hear this in many game systems as an "solution", but can't help but wonder.

Shouldn't it just be a bit more difficult to snipe somebody? (I mean it is not that easy in real life, afterall)

You have to find a spot to set up, you need be close enough to hit but you have to keep your distance in order to not beeing spoted and so on.
And sure, some man sized target on a range might be easy to hit from 100m. But some guy in a crowed might be even hard to spot at this distance.
(And some guy sneezes at the wrong time and adds the additional "armor" of "his head" to the targets resistance roll. Well, thats what happens if you critical glitch an edge roll)

That I guess this is the case with most of the highly focused builds (well, some magic tricks aside).
It can get really bad, as soon as you add the world around you, to the theoretical situation.

The point is, many ignore that and tell, it is not part of the rules. But this stance would mean, it would only be allowed what is explicitly stated in the rules. (Which would undo most of the "builds" at this point)

So I have to agree, that Munchkin is the right word here. Because it is not about getting most of the rules. It is about using a different approach to determin the rules for what you do and for what the rest of the Gameworld can do.

[VykosDarkSoul]

You have to find a spot to set up, you need be close enough to hit but you have to keep your distance in order to not beeing spoted and so on.
And sure, some man sized target on a range might be easy to hit from 100m. But some guy in a crowed might be even hard to spot at this distance.

That, my dear friend, is what a spotter is for. and in the shadowrun day and age any spotter worth his salt is going to be a hacker of some type, hack the node they are in, find their location, put a great big hunters mark (big red bobbing arrow, pointing down) into your snipers AR feed.

Hell, you wouldnt even need to have the spotter near the sniper with the tech here.

-- the point however, is that whatever the players can think to do, the gm can do as well, and better if he/she so wishes, because the only limits a GM has are the ones they give themselves (which a good GM will recognize and adhere to).

If you are playing in a high-powered, min-maxed game or with a GM who is thus, then by all means, go for it. If not, restrain yourself, for the fun of all.

[Irion]

@VykosDarkSoul
Finding a commlink does not probably not give you an exact location.
Butting a big Arrow over this guys head is not that easy. Unless you have marked him with something. And so on.


Because let all this tech work against the sniper too and before you even set up to take your gun out, two drones are hovering in front of you starting to warm up their gatlings and order you to drop it.

This is exactly what I mean. On the one hand letting tech work like magic but on the other hand just ignoring the effects...

[VykosDarkSoul]

We can parry and riposte back and forth all day about it, one of us positing a scenario, and the other rebutting, however, the point is that if you can immagine it, via tech or magic, you can probably pull it off.


The question is not if you CAN or CANT, but rather if you SHOULD or SHOULDNT.

[Irion]

@VykosDarkSoul
The problem with this view is, that it is so focused on a single act.

Here be it the sniper. It does not take into account what it would mean for the rest of the game world, if it would follow the SAME route of interpretation.

Can I imagine to scan for DNA Planet wide. Yes, of course. StarTrek is doing it.
Should it be possible in Shadowrun? No, definitly not.

[The Wrestling Tr...]

If you want to boost your damage value as a melee adept here are some recommendations:
- Critical Strike ( +1DV per level)
- Bone density augmentation ( +1DV per rating)
- Elemental Strike (halves impact armor)
- Penetrating strike ( -1 AP per level)
- Martial arts Boxing (+ 1DV per rating, Max +2DV and also +1 dice to defend against melee per rating Max + dices)
- Bioware to boost strenght to raise the base DV
- Smashing Blow (doubles base DV against barriers, for example cars or walls)

[VykosDarkSoul]

I believe Muy Thai offers the same benefits as Boxing as well

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I believe Muy Thai offers the same benefits as Boxing as well

And there is nothing stopping you from having both, except your own restraint... (for a total DV Mxximum boost from martial arts of +3 DV)...

[The Wrestling Tr...]

don't forget that martial arts count toward positive quality limit of 35BP (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Glyph]

We can parry and riposte back and forth all day about it, one of us positing a scenario, and the other rebutting, however, the point is that if you can immagine it, via tech or magic, you can probably pull it off.


The question is not if you CAN or CANT, but rather if you SHOULD or SHOULDNT.

It depends on the GM, though, and how he chooses to interpret (or sometimes house rule) vague or broken rules. With the exception of toturi, most GMs will tweak the rules or interpret them in a way that curbs the worst abuses. And approval by the GM is the final step of character creation.

Personally, I favor this approach over "If you do it, the GM can do it too" as a way to balance things. First, escalating the power level means that the powergamer is challenged - but everyone else is overwhelmed. Second, it does not make sense for things that are equivalently powerful to an elite criminal saboteur to be suddenly common. If a certain rules combo or piece of gear is unbalancing, address it; don't have the local street gang suddenly acquire several of them, too.

don't forget that martial arts count toward positive quality limit of 35BP (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

15 BP (for +3 to unarmed damage) is pretty doable, though. And the martial arts quality also gives you access to maneuvers, which can be very useful.

[The Wrestling Tr...]

If you take changeling you can also take the positive quality spikes, which give you an additional +2DV but raises the cost of buying armor +50%

[Kolinho]

It depends on the GM, though, and how he chooses to interpret (or sometimes house rule) vague or broken rules. With the exception of toturi, most GMs will tweak the rules or interpret them in a way that curbs the worst abuses. And approval by the GM is the final step of character creation.

Personally, I favor this approach over "If you do it, the GM can do it too" as a way to balance things. First, escalating the power level means that the powergamer is challenged - but everyone else is overwhelmed. Second, it does not make sense for things that are equivalently powerful to an elite criminal saboteur to be suddenly common. If a certain rules combo or piece of gear is unbalancing, address it; don't have the local street gang suddenly acquire several of them, too.

It doesn't have to be a case of one or the other though. Clearly a sensible combination of the two is the best option.