Petrify + Corrode Options

[Xahn Borealis]

What do we think of letting Corrode [Calcium Carbonate] work on a target (let's say an elf for brevity's sake) under the effects of a sustained Petrify spell? Waste of a spell formula, or actually useful in this case? What else could such a spell work on?

[Aerospider]

What do we think of letting Corrode [Calcium Carbonate] work on a target (let's say an elf for brevity's sake) under the effects of a sustained Petrify spell? Waste of a spell formula, or actually useful in this case? What else could such a spell work on?

Not sure I could back this up with RAW but I'd decry it based on the notion that the stone into which the elf has been turned is magical and that Corrode only affects mundane material. I guess what I'm saying is I like to think Petrify turns one into a stone-like material rather than actual stone.

[Yerameyahu]

I just don't allow Petrify, it's nonsense.

[Xahn Borealis]

I just don't allow Petrify, it's nonsense.

._. But I do. That doesn't help me.

[Yerameyahu]

Don't be so self-centered. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

It seems like a useless tactic even if it worked, though. You're right: a waste of a spell.

[Xahn Borealis]

It's mostly for visual effect more than anything. A signature killing style.

[Yerameyahu]

Oh, well then 'a waste' doesn't matter. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) You confused me by mentioning it. If that's the only intention and use, the GM should allow it regardless.

For better or worse, the spell says they actually turn into calcium carbonate. RAW, I can't see why this wouldn't work.

[Xahn Borealis]

I'm the GM, just wanted a little consensus~

inb4 Horizon conspiracies

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Oh, well then 'a waste' doesn't matter. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) You confused me by mentioning it. If that's the only intention and use, the GM should allow it regardless.

For better or worse, the spell says they actually turn into calcium carbonate. RAW, I can't see why this wouldn't work.

This ^^^^^
The effects are RAW, so it should work. It is less effecient than simply using Mana-Bolt, but "Style ove Substance" and all that... I often fall victim to the Style over Substance stance, as I tend to use it myself often enough, even if it is the less optimal approach. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tanegar]

Such a particularly cruel M.O. would be worth extra Notoriety, IMO.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Not sure that is any less cruel than a Napalm Spell, personally.

[Tanegar]

That would also be worth Notoriety. Basically, my rule of thumb is this: if a PC goes out of his way to be cruel and/or bloodthirsty above and beyond what seems necessary and reasonable for the situation, he gains a point of Notoriety. Killing people in a firefight is not worth Notoriety. Walking up to an unconscious corpsec trooper and capping him in the head is.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

That would also be worth Notoriety. Basically, my rule of thumb is this: if a PC goes out of his way to be cruel and/or bloodthirsty above and beyond what seems necessary and reasonable for the situation, he gains a point of Notoriety. Killing people in a firefight is not worth Notoriety. Walking up to an unconscious corpsec trooper and capping him in the head is.

You only get it once, though. *shrug*
I agree with the giving of Notoriety, but honestly, Killing with Magic is Cruel, regardless of whether it is a Contrioved setup or a simple spell. Killing in general is not a necessity in Shadowrun (there are a lot of alternatives) and yet, I have rarely seen rampant Notoriety being inflicted on those that revel in the destruction. Most Shadowrunners have a higher body count than many terrorist acts.

But, in Shadowrun, you can only ever receive a Notoriety point for something once. Sometimes I think that is as mistake, and other times I think it is a very good thing.

I don't know any good solution to that dilemma.

[Xahn Borealis]

Characters under Petrify are unconscious and unaware. Would it really be so cruel?

Also, if it has any bearing on the situation, the spellcaster in question is a Banshee NPC.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Characters under Petrify are unconscious and unaware. Would it really be so cruel?

Also, if it has any bearing on the situation, the spellcaster in question is a Banshee NPC.

Not as cruel as a Napalm Spell on a Conscious and Aware Target, No... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tanegar]

You only get it once, though. *shrug*
I agree with the giving of Notoriety, but honestly, Killing with Magic is Cruel, regardless of whether it is a Contrioved setup or a simple spell. Killing in general is not a necessity in Shadowrun (there are a lot of alternatives) and yet, I have rarely seen rampant Notoriety being inflicted on those that revel in the destruction. Most Shadowrunners have a higher body count than many terrorist acts.

But, in Shadowrun, you can only ever receive a Notoriety point for something once. Sometimes I think that is as mistake, and other times I think it is a very good thing.

I don't know any good solution to that dilemma.

Yeah, I definitely don't agree with that. It hasn't become a big issue in my campaign yet, but I'm thinking a point of Notoriety per act, per incident. If you execute a bunch of troopers, you get a point; then you cut a man's eyes out while interrogating him, you get another point. On the next run, you execute some more troopers, even though you did the same thing before, you still get another point. PCs who indulge their bloodlust frequently and without restraint should rapidly build up high levels of Notoriety, IMO. Then they start to get things like a spot on Knight Errant's Most Wanted, rewards offered for information leading to their capture, bounties on their heads, angry survivors seeking revenge... being a complete monster is hard.

Public Service Warning: TVTropes will ruin your life.

[Dakka Dakka]

Not as cruel as a Napalm Spell on a Conscious and Aware Target, No... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

How is a napalm spell much crueler than a regular Fireball? Contrary to actual napalm, the spell only causes more knockdown than a fireball. All the nasty effects of the real stuff are not part of the spell.

[Manunancy]

It's not particularly cruel as the target can't feel a thing, but it's ceertainly very unusual - and if you do it a lot, it offers the law a very big shiny neon sign saying 'it's the same guy doing all those crime'. Which certainly deserve notoriey as it won't be a string of random acts by part unknown, but the actions of repeat offender. And nabbing him will let the cops close a full folder of crimes in one swoop.

Guess what, they're going to be more motivated than trying to solve a pile of random drive-by-shooting form a pile of different gangs.

[Dakka Dakka]

True, but does a spell from Street Magic make it significantly more unusual than a spell from the core book? I don't think so. Less than 1% of the population have access to any spell. I doubt that local law enforcement would not pull any stops for a crime perpetrated with naplam and just go through the motions on one with a fireball.

[StealthSigma]

Yeah, I definitely don't agree with that. It hasn't become a big issue in my campaign yet, but I'm thinking a point of Notoriety per act, per incident. If you execute a bunch of troopers, you get a point; then you cut a man's eyes out while interrogating him, you get another point. On the next run, you execute some more troopers, even though you did the same thing before, you still get another point. PCs who indulge their bloodlust frequently and without restraint should rapidly build up high levels of Notoriety, IMO. Then they start to get things like a spot on Knight Errant's Most Wanted, rewards offered for information leading to their capture, bounties on their heads, angry survivors seeking revenge... being a complete monster is hard.

Public Service Warning: TVTropes will ruin your life.

This is really a problem of the limited nature of Reputation. An act should be attributable to the character in order for him to earn Street Cred or Notoriety. Note that most of the acts listed for Notoriety can fall under that categorization. If a character repeatedly commits the act but it is not attributable to him, then he shouldn't earn Notoriety.

Ideally, this is how I would see such a situation going. Let's say you corrode a petrified opponent. Who knows you did this if you weren't caught in the act by any living witness? Most likely just your partners in crime. If the other players don't tell the GM otherwise then you essentially should have gotten away with the act without gaining notoriety. However the GM should still record the event as a point of notoriety for "The Mad Dissolver" and make note that you are known by that moniker among LEOs even though they don't necessarily have the evidence to link the two. As you continue to dissolve your victims, The Mad Dissolver's notoriety grows. If you are ever identified as The Mad Dissolver then, and only then, should the notoriety by applied to the character and preferably at a ratio of how much The Mad Dissolver earned prior to be IDed (1:4 for example).

It might be a bit more bookkeeping, but I think it's a much more reasonable manner of handling serial behavior.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Thanks, StealthSigma... That was what I have been contemplating, in one form or another, for a while. Well put.
We have been looking at Individual Reputations for Individual Identities for awhile now. It is very Book-Keeperish though. Taskes a lot of effort to track all of that infoirmation and apply it correctly. Not impossible, to be sure, just tedious, especially when you work with 20+ Identities, as some of our characters do.

[StealthSigma]

Thanks, StealthSigma... That was what I have been contemplating, in one form or another, for a while. Well put.

No, thank you.

I think it serves a couple of purposes. First, it gives reasons for various groups to pay attention to a crime scene after the fact. This does increase the risk for the runners as a whole and gives them a reason to attempt to curb the behavior. Second, it still functions, somewhat, within the current rules for notoriety. You only ever gain The Mad Dissolver notoriety once based on the value that had been earned until you were discovered. Granted you do gain more than one point at that time but it's still fairly close all things considered.

We have been looking at Individual Reputations for Individual Identities for awhile now. It is very Book-Keeperish though. Taskes a lot of effort to track all of that infoirmation and apply it correctly. Not impossible, to be sure, just tedious, especially when you work with 20+ Identities, as some of our characters do.

It can be bookkeepish, but it can also be done smartly, I think, in order to cut down the bookkeeping. Realistically, there probably isn't more than 1 or 2 serial behaviors being committed by each player.

For example, make sure an individual identity requires serial behavior before it starts accruing notoriety towards it. That way if someone petrifies and corrodes someone once, it doesn't really start to accrue until after say.... the 3rd mission they've committed the act during.

[Dakka Dakka]

"There's no problem with living a double life. It's the triple and quadruple lives that get you in the end." - Yury Orlov (Lord of War)

[StealthSigma]

"There's no problem with living a double life. It's the triple and quadruple lives that get you in the end." - Yury Orlov (Lord of War)

Reputation should be tracked in multiple manners to behave in a realistic fashion. There should be a tracking of your true reputation (no matter where you are, people know you). There should probably be some tracking based on whatever ID you're using at a given time. In Seattle you use the ID of Not Sure (a mild mannered gunsmith) while in Denver you go by Beef Supreme (an adrenaline junkie). There should be tracking of any serial behaviors you commit (The Mad Dissolver).

I think realistically tracking the multiple reputations to be an unnecessary burden but I do feel that serial behaviors should be tracked up until a character is known to be the serial Xer. It is dumb that as long as a character does not leave witnesses, he will never gain notoriety for particularly heinous acts.

[Falconer]

It has nothing to do with reputation.

The first spell has a defined effect.. even allowing you to break the statue to pieces if you so desired. It also gives the statue armor based on your casting ability. (so don't forget that when resisting the second).

So a shatter spell would work just as well with varying grades of success.... 'extra chunky', 'gravel', 'dust', 'baby powder'


You could just as easily do corrode flesh... and kill the suckers without hurting their cyberware.... or any other similar ways to kill things. If anything it's a much more circuitous route to the same ends. Though statues don't fight back... so maybe there is some merit.

Or a shape rock spell... who needs some fleshcrafting done when we unsustain....