Lightning Reflexes, Any thoughts Options

[Jaid]

See, if you had said this at the start, that might have been it. But that you felt the need to post so many references at first, it seems you felt it's not actually so clear. Wouldn't it be simpler if there were one sentence in the rulebook saying this?

The flying thing, come on. I'll pretend you didn't bring this silliness up. I agree with you about rules not always having to be explicit, it's even part of my sig. Really obvious things, like your flying or Damage overflow example, I agree those don't need explicit rules. But I think this IP part isn't so obvious and could use some explicit rules.

As for your EDIT EDIT, I actually agree with you here, and I agree this section of the rules could also use some refinement in editing and clarification.

so because he went the extra mile to kill it extra dead, it must have been nearly impossible to prove otherwise?

what the hell kind of logic do they have where you live, exactly?

why would the rulebook have a sentence about this specifically? can you show me a sentence anywhere that tells me that agility or body or intuition increases stack?

[phlapjack77]

so because he went the extra mile to kill it extra dead, it must have been nearly impossible to prove otherwise?

what the hell kind of logic do they have where you live, exactly?

why would the rulebook have a sentence about this specifically? can you show me a sentence anywhere that tells me that agility or body or intuition increases stack?

Yes, I'm saying that because he felt the need to post 14+ references for a ruling, I think this shows the rules for this could be improved and made more clear. It's not like he presented a concise bit of evidence, I argued against it, THEN he posted the wall o' references. He went there from the very beginning.

You say "so because he went the extra mile to kill it extra dead, it must have been nearly impossible to prove otherwise?". I'm not saying that. I'm saying because of the way it was proved, and other confusion I've seen about this situation, that the rules could be better in this instance.

I can't believe you would get so up in arms for a simple statement like "the rules could be clearer".

What the hell kind of politeness do they ascribe to where you live, exactly?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Yes, I'm saying that because he felt the need to post 14+ references for a ruling, I think this shows the rules for this could be improved and made more clear. It's not like he presented a concise bit of evidence, I argued against it, THEN he posted the wall o' references. He went there from the very beginning.

You say "so because he went the extra mile to kill it extra dead, it must have been nearly impossible to prove otherwise?". I'm not saying that. I'm saying because of the way it was proved, and other confusion I've seen about this situation, that the rules could be better in this instance.

I can't believe you would get so up in arms for a simple statement like "the rules could be clearer".

What the hell kind of politeness do they ascribe to where you live, exactly?

Except that most of us think that the rules are already clear in this regard. Neraph went overboard in his "proof," nothing more. There is nothing wrong with that. But becasue of it you seem to think that the rules for this are not clear enough. I think this is where the disconnect is. *shrug*

[Neraph]

All I did was bring all the available evidence for my position to the table at the beginning instead of building up to it. You can accept that interpretation or not, but please don't let it turn into something nasty.

[Jaid]

Yes, I'm saying that because he felt the need to post 14+ references for a ruling, I think this shows the rules for this could be improved and made more clear. It's not like he presented a concise bit of evidence, I argued against it, THEN he posted the wall o' references. He went there from the very beginning.

You say "so because he went the extra mile to kill it extra dead, it must have been nearly impossible to prove otherwise?". I'm not saying that. I'm saying because of the way it was proved, and other confusion I've seen about this situation, that the rules could be better in this instance.

I can't believe you would get so up in arms for a simple statement like "the rules could be clearer".

What the hell kind of politeness do they ascribe to where you live, exactly?

still waiting on that rules quote that tells you that any other attribute bonus stacks. if it isn't a problem for them, it isn't a problem for the initiative pass attribute.

[phlapjack77]

All I did was bring all the available evidence for my position to the table at the beginning instead of building up to it. You can accept that interpretation or not, but please don't let it turn into something nasty.

Yeah, it's cool. I accepted your interpretation of the ultimate ruling, no problems with that.

still waiting on that rules quote that tells you that any other attribute bonus stacks. if it isn't a problem for them, it isn't a problem for the initiative pass attribute.

I think there's a long history of things like attribute bonuses, "to hit" bonuses, etc stacking. The concept of +1 Str, +1 DexAgi, those are familiar. I feel like IPs are different enough to warrant their own sentence in the rules for drugs.

But ok, several people think it's clear enough. My vote is still for a more concise rule in 5th (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Jaid]

I think there's a long history of things like attribute bonuses, "to hit" bonuses, etc stacking. The concept of +1 Str, +1 DexAgi, those are familiar. I feel like IPs are different enough to warrant their own sentence in the rules for drugs.

But ok, several people think it's clear enough. My vote is still for a more concise rule in 5th (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

+1 attack (which is pretty close to +1 IP) is also a familiar concept, at least to me.

[SpellBinder]

Could be worse, like in the Palladium system where it's possible for a character to be attacking at the equivalent of several times per second and not even be a combat oriented character. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[FuelDrop]

Could be worse, like in the Palladium system where it's possible for a character to be attacking at the equivalent of several times per second and not even be a combat oriented character. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Rigger with 5 IP and a humanoid drone doing boxing. WITH CHAINSAW FISTS!!!

[Halinn]

Rigger with 5 IP and a humanoid drone doing boxing. WITH CHAINSAW FISTS!!!

monofilament chainsaw fists.

[Miri]

I've been pondering equipping the humanoid drone body my Rigger wants with a Monowhip. As odd as it sounds all attacks are done with the Gunnery Skill, including melee apparently. Have a Machine Sprite in the drones node with me as I rig it to stage glitches down and.. well.. some potentially ugly CQC action there.

[Lionhearted]

I've been pondering equipping the humanoid drone body my Rigger wants with a Monowhip. As odd as it sounds all attacks are done with the Gunnery Skill, including melee apparently. Have a Machine Sprite in the drones node with me as I rig it to stage glitches down and.. well.. some potentially ugly CQC action there.

"Oh that thing? I call it the windmill, Of carnage!"

[Miri]

"Oh that thing? I call it the windmill, Of carnage!"

It slices! It Dices! I hate Julian fries so no, it can't make them... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

[All4BigGuns]

You could fly a rotor drone into melee to slice-and-dice enemies with its propulsion system (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Miri]

You could fly a rotor drone into melee to slice-and-dice enemies with its propulsion system (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

*chuckle* custom made rotors that have leading edges like a Monosword eh?

[NiL_FisK_Urd]

You could take 2 Lockheed Optic-X Drones, span 10m monwire between them and fly through a pedestrian area - at ankle height.

[Neraph]

monofilament chainsaw fists.

Dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists.

[phlapjack77]

Dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists.

Possessed Dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists.

[FuelDrop]

Possessed Dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists.

There is no kill like overkill.

[Halinn]

There is no kill like overkill.

There is no overkill, only "open fire" and "I need to reload"

[Jaid]

Could be worse, like in the Palladium system where it's possible for a character to be attacking at the equivalent of several times per second and not even be a combat oriented character. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

eh, no, not really. not unless you get an extremely improbable set of factors all working together to give you temporary boosts, including things external to your character, at any rate.

the palladium system has many problems that the GM will likely need to deal with in some way or another as you play (because there's nothing to tell you it's a problem until you run into it). this is not one of them.

[SpellBinder]

True, but using drugs in SR to get similar boosts are just as temporary. Difference being that there's a rule for SR4 stating that, baring a few special circumstances (matrix only), you're limited to 4 IPs at the most. I never saw anything in a Palladium book saying you were limited to X attacks a turn, and that's a number that at worst can easily go well into the hundreds.

[Jaid]

True, but using drugs in SR to get similar boosts are just as temporary. Difference being that there's a rule for SR4 stating that, baring a few special circumstances (matrix only), you're limited to 4 IPs at the most. I never saw anything in a Palladium book saying you were limited to X attacks a turn, and that's a number that at worst can easily go well into the hundreds.

again, if you're not deliberately building for cheese, you're not going to get stupid amounts of attacks per melee. it just doesn't happen. it is a non-problem. palladium has lots of problems: unclear writing, contradictory rules, terrible editing, terrible science (which may or may not be a problem for a given reader), poorly-thought-out writing, and lots of other stuff. getting hundreds of attacks per melee round really is not something that regularly happens. palladium has problems, but this really isn't one of them.

and if you are building for cheese. that's a problem with the player, not the system (that is, you will have that problem no matter what system you're in, so long as that player does not change. the exact effects will vary with the system, but the basic underlying problem will always be there). or are we pretending that things like the pornomancer don't exist in shadowrun, and the system is completely immune to any form of abuse?

[Neraph]

Possessed Dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists.

This is the essence of the DS forums - theoretical character optimization to an extreme.

Inhabited by a Great Form blood/toxic/bug Spirit Dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists.

EDIT: ... which also has a weapon comm and a weapon personality which plays hardcore trogg thrashmetal.

[Halinn]

Rocket-powered inhabited by a great form blood/toxic/bug spirit dikoted monofilament chainsaw fists with MRSI software

Also weapon comm and its own theme music.