IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> A few clarifications, if you please..., Impromptu FAQ request
melquisedeq
post Feb 17 2019, 02:31 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: 30-July 14
From: Cascais, Lisboa, Portugal
Member No.: 190,262



Hi! As Dumpshock is meant to be the definitive surviving bastion of SR3 mechanics and lore, I'd like to pick your collective minds on a few things that happened during play last week.
Happy to get both RAW and RAI answers, and personal considerations too.

1) My character dumped Strength (2) for ridiculous Quickness (15)... Started at 6, +2 Night One, +1 Exceptional Attribute, +1 Bonus Attribute Point, +4 Muscle Toner, +1 Suprathyroid Gland. Considerations on the preceding math aside, I was wondering if a Monofilament Whip (yeah, I know) can be used defensively in melee. I've not found it explicitly stated anywhere that you couldn't, so general melee weapons apply, in which case you can. But it did cross my mind that a whip is mostly a weapon of grace and precision, not really useful for parrying. On the other hand, given the fluid nature of melee combat in SR, it could be interpreted defensively as in: the whip creates a "threat range" as the wielder spins it around, intimidating while it waits for an attacker to slip into range. The defender winning the attack would mean basically that he struck the attacker with the whip as he dodged out of the way. What do you guys think? Can a whip be used defensively in melee?

2) We were surprised by a pack of Barghests at some point. This is a scripted event from (spoiler) one of the adventures in Super Tuesday (/spoiler) so the whole thing starts at "defend from paralysing howl howl then roll initiative". There's no rolling perception to see them before they see you, no running away before they're in howl range, nothing. What happened was, out of 5 runners, only one escaped the howl through sheer luck (he rolled four 6s in a six dice pool). Everyone else took a 6 point penalty to Quickness (beast's Essence), which was enough to get 3 of them frozen and unable to act. Luckily, my character has god-like Quickness and took it in stride, so he mopped the floor with the barghests hand-to-hand while the other lucky guy, the mage, cast silence around us. It ended up being a great scene, because there was real tension, but we triumphed through coolness, tactics, and just the right amount of luck. Now... IF the mage bollocksed his roll (the statistically likely outcome), the barghests would have been able to use their paralysing howl repeatedly, each once per turn, meaning my character would too succumb to paralysis after a third hit. THAT - IS - MAD! The damned dogs would have just sat back, crooning the soundtrack to Frozen until we were all helpless, and then dine on us at leisure. Straight away TPK. What am I missing here? Is it really meant to be this brutal?

Thanks for having read this far. Cheers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lionesque
post Feb 17 2019, 08:48 PM
Post #2


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 6-April 17
From: Copenhagen, Republic of Scandinavia
Member No.: 207,604



Hi

Ad 1: As I understand the melee combat section in the core rulebook, specifically pp.123-124, you can indeed go on full defense with a whip (mono or not) in hand. >I'm not sure why you'd want to, unless your skill is pathetic, but whatever fills your credstick, omae (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Ad 2: Sounds like your GM takes the written word a litte too literally to me. I believe that the situation you describe qualifies as what the kids call a 'dick move' on the part of the GM - although it may not have been intentional, of course! I don't know the adventure, and it's certainly possible that the authors negleted to mention that the GM should call for Perception rolls or give the PCs some other way to prepare for an encounter, but your GM should, IMHO, still allow the players some chance to see the trap before they walk into it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cochise
post Feb 17 2019, 10:54 PM
Post #3


Mr. Quote-function
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Somewhere in Germany
Member No.: 1,376



QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
1) My character dumped Strength (2) for ridiculous Quickness (15)... Started at 6, +2 Night One, +1 Exceptional Attribute, +1 Bonus Attribute Point, +4 Muscle Toner, +1 Suprathyroid Gland. Considerations on the preceding math aside,


The consideration on that preceding math however says: That list of modification only gets you to Quickness of 14 not 15 under RAW.

QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
I was wondering if a Monofilament Whip (yeah, I know) can be used defensively in melee.


Under RAW of 3rd Ed any of the available melee weapons can be use "defensively" in two ways:
  1. with standard melee where you roll your melee related skill in opposition to any attacker. This option includes the possibility of harming the aggressor in the process.
  2. with the melee combat option for full defense wherein you'd use the whip for defense but cannot ever do damage to the aggressor


QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
But it did cross my mind that a whip is mostly a weapon of grace and precision, not really useful for parrying. On the other hand, given the fluid nature of melee combat in SR, it could be interpreted defensively as in: the whip creates a "threat range" as the wielder spins it around, intimidating while it waits for an attacker to slip into range. The defender winning the attack would mean basically that he struck the attacker with the whip as he dodged out of the way.


The melee rules in SR3 are an abstraction. They don't waste time on details like how suitable a specific weapon is and which types of movements are involved. You could easily describe various movement and whipping patterns that are aimed at keeping an aggressor at bay instead of directly hitting him. Just do yourself the favor and don't overthink this for purposes of "realism".

QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
What do you guys think? Can a whip be used defensively in melee?


Simply put: Yes

QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
2) We were surprised by a pack of Barghests at some point. This is a scripted event from (spoiler) one of the adventures in Super Tuesday (/spoiler) so the whole thing starts at "defend from paralysing howl howl then roll initiative".


While a GM certainly can handle things that way going by the "Tell it to them straight" intro to "Rude Awakening" that's not exactly how things are supposed to go there: Albeit the text indeed says that one of the Barghests "lets loose a low mournful howl" there's nothing in there that actually says that this particular howl is in fact also the use of the critter's power "Paralyzing Howl".

QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
There's no rolling perception to see them before they see you, no running away before they're in howl range, nothing.


Another aspect that strikes me as a bit off: The text of "Tell it to them straight" most definitely mentions the runners registering the Barghets prior to them charging in to attack (and howling for that matter). Hence I'm inclined to say that the GM - even if he insisted on having one of the Barghets successfully going through with its howl as its first action - should have gone with a surprise test prior to the actual rolling of initiative and the onset of the howl's effect.

QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
What happened was, out of 5 runners, only one escaped the howl through sheer luck (he rolled four 6s in a six dice pool).


This data is unfortunately insufficient when trying to determine whether or not things were in accordance with the rules:

  1. What where the exact Willpower stats of all 5 Runners?
  2. Did the Barghest really successfully hit 3 of 5 Runners there? It's an opposed test after all:
    • How many successes did the Barghest score against said Willpower stats for each Runner?
    • How many successes did the Runners roll with WilLxd6 against TN of 6?


QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 04:31 PM) *
Everyone else took a 6 point penalty to Quickness (beast's Essence), which was enough to get 3 of them frozen and unable to act. Luckily, my character has god-like Quickness and took it in stride, so he mopped the floor with the barghests hand-to-hand while the other lucky guy, the mage, cast silence around us. It ended up being a great scene, because there was real tension, but we triumphed through coolness, tactics, and just the right amount of luck. Now... IF the mage bollocksed his roll (the statistically likely outcome), the barghests would have been able to use their paralysing howl repeatedly, each once per turn, meaning my character would too succumb to paralysis after a third hit. THAT - IS - MAD! The damned dogs would have just sat back, crooning the soundtrack to Frozen until we were all helpless, and then dine on us at leisure. Straight away TPK. What am I missing here? Is it really meant to be this brutal?


You're not necessarily missing anything there. Some critter encounters are indeed supposed to be brutal - and in certain cases even outright lethal. There are special considerations to be had here in particular:

  1. Super Tuesday is aimed at (very) experienced Runners. So it's not the best idea to have starting characters / low Karma characters going into some of those published adventures. In particular: Your account doesn't mention the use of Karma Pool for re-rolling and/or adding dice to the Willpower tests. A reasonably large Karma Pool of experienced Runners would have made it possible to oppose the howl way easier.
  2. The module is actually a 2nd Ed module and thus was originally resolved under a slightly different initiative system that - depending on the involved characters' initiative values - could have gone way easier or far worse.
  3. Many of the official modules have a distinct lack of balance to themselves. Thus a GM should actually benchmark encounters prior to the actual game session in order to avoid such nasty surprises - unless he and the players want the degree of lethality things like that can entail.


Btw. be thankful that you didn't face a critter with the Confusion power.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kren Cooper
post Feb 17 2019, 11:23 PM
Post #4


Wordsmith
**

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 230
Joined: 21-June 10
From: Leeds, UK
Member No.: 18,740



I'd be very dubious about the math on the Quickness stat as well.

Starting max rating = 6. Add two for racial mods, takes you to 8. Add BAP, takes you to 9.
Exceptional attribute does NOT give you a point of quickness, it just adds to the RANGE of your racial max stat and absolute max. So a normal human has a racial max of 6, and an absolute max of 9. An elf has a normal racial max of 7 and an absolute max of 11. With EAP, that would rise to 8 and 12.

Muscle toner is bioware - and bioware counts as "natural" attributes (P77 Man and Machine). The way we play at our table is that bioware can only take you up to your normal racial max - so in the case of taking EAP, that would be 8 for an elf (which you're already at). Now, it doesn't specifically say that, so you could take the +4 and boost to the absolute limit, which would put you on 12. But if you did, then you certainly shouldn't be taking the +1 from Superthyroid as well.

So, the answer depends on how you interpret how far bioware can push you - the racial max or absolute max. As said above, at our table you can boost to the racial max with bioware, after that you have to pay karma and time - and lots of both, to train naturally. Cyberware is a flat bonus on top because it's machine augmentation, so taking Muscle Replacement from the core book would be a fair alternative.

As to the whip and using it defensively - absolutely. Whyever not.

Regarding the paralysing howl - I would have interpreted it as the paralysing howl can give you a quickness penalty based on net successes to a max rating of (Essence of creature) - it can't stack up indefinitely. Still bad, but not quite as terminal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cochise
post Feb 18 2019, 06:36 AM
Post #5


Mr. Quote-function
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Somewhere in Germany
Member No.: 1,376



QUOTE (Kren Cooper @ Feb 18 2019, 01:23 AM) *
I'd be very dubious about the math on the Quickness stat as well.

Starting max rating = 6. Add two for racial mods, takes you to 8. Add BAP, takes you to 9.
Exceptional attribute does NOT give you a point of quickness, it just adds to the RANGE of your racial max stat and absolute max. So a normal human has a racial max of 6, and an absolute max of 9. An elf has a normal racial max of 7 and an absolute max of 11. With EAP, that would rise to 8 and 12.


With Exceptional Attribute (as opposed to the also involved Extra Attribute Point) the Racial Maximums have gone up to 9(14) [one of the cases where things get rounded up] on a Night One.
So it's 6 from base attributes + 2 from Night One + 1 Bonus Attribute Point (which doesn't take him over normal racial attribute limit created by Exceptional Attribute) + 4 from Toner + 1 from the Gland. All in all a legal natural 14 Quickness attribute at the absolute Racial Maximum ... just not 15.

QUOTE (Kren Cooper @ Feb 18 2019, 01:23 AM) *
So, the answer depends on how you interpret how far bioware can push you - the racial max or absolute max. As said above, at our table you can boost to the racial max with bioware, after that you have to pay karma and time - and lots of both, to train naturally. Cyberware is a flat bonus on top because it's machine augmentation, so taking Muscle Replacement from the core book would be a fair alternative.


The debate on whether or not Bioware can exceed the "natural absolute Racial Maximums" is not involved here.

QUOTE (Kren Cooper @ Feb 18 2019, 01:23 AM) *
Regarding the paralysing howl - I would have interpreted it as the paralysing howl can give you a quickness penalty based on net successes to a max rating of (Essence of creature) - it can't stack up indefinitely. Still bad, but not quite as terminal.


Well that's certainly a solution - just not RAW .. and there's little indication to that being RAI either.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 18 2019, 04:22 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



The others have already answered, but I can't think of any melee weapon that can't be used defensively with the same skill you'd use for an attack. So that's okay for a whip as defense, and that'd probably work as you described: your whip would threaten the attacker more than generating an effective "parry".

QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 17 2019, 03:31 PM) *
2) We were surprised by a pack of Barghests at some point. This is a scripted event from (spoiler) one of the adventures in Super Tuesday (/spoiler) so the whole thing starts at "defend from paralysing howl howl then roll initiative". There's no rolling perception to see them before they see you, no running away before they're in howl range, nothing.


That's just wrong. There is a mechanic for surprise in the BBB that has to be used in these cases, and a mechanic for perception, which, arguably, should have given you an opportunity to make a test. The way the GM played it is unfair, but maybe it was just a mistake, in any cas you might want to tell him.

In any case, the paralyzing howl certainly is brutal.

BUT: If I read the adventure correctly, there should have been less Barghest than there were runners. And if I'm reading the critter power correctly, it can affect only one target per complex action. So, in any case, at least one of you shouldn't have had to make a test to resist. In addition to that, the text in the adventure only mention one barghest using its power and the rest simply "attacking".

I'm all against ennemies using suboptimal technics to give more chance to the players, in the case where the enemy is human and at least a little combat hardened. But for critters, it can make sense that the barghests would not take on a bunch of human in the best possible ways. Humans, and in particulars a bunch of skillful runners, shouldn't be their usual meal, especially in the described context, where they seem to be savage animals.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cochise
post Feb 18 2019, 06:55 PM
Post #7


Mr. Quote-function
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Somewhere in Germany
Member No.: 1,376



QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 06:22 PM) *
BUT: If I read the adventure correctly, there should have been less Barghest than there were runners.


Four in total to be precise.

QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 06:22 PM) *
And if I'm reading the critter power correctly, it can affect only one target per complex action.


Debatable ...

General single target aspect in RAW:

Page 7, Critters -> Range:
[..]Critter powers generally affect only one person or thing per action, except as noted in the individual power's description


Basis for multi-target exception:

Page 13, Critters -> Paralyzing Touch/Howl:
[..]Some creatures have a version of this power known as Paralyzing Howl. In this case, the being can affect any target able to hear it.[..]


Without further qualifiers the underlined word can be interpreted as multi-target within RAW under the condition that potential targets can hear the Howl. The rest of the text doesn't provide cut and dry qualifiers for or against such an interpretation under RAW.

QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 06:22 PM) *
So, in any case, at least one of you shouldn't have had to make a test to resist.


So this - in any case - is merely a conclusion drawn upon the interpretation of an ambigious rule. One ...

QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 06:22 PM) *
In addition to that, the text in the adventure only mention one barghest using its power and the rest simply "attacking".


... that ultimately is of no consequence if a GM decided to interpret "any" as being the basis for a multi-target exception for this power's usage.

Now add this general caveat:

Page 6, Critters -> Powers of the Awakened (also in the core rules):
[..]The game mechanics given on the following powers are intended as guidelines for gamemasters. Players should never be absolutely certain of the capabilities of a paranormal opponent; there's always a chance a power might work slightly different from critter to critter. (Uncertainty is a wonderful dramatic rule)[..]


At this point the GM is well within RAW when having that Barghest's Howl affect all runners without even invoking "Rule No. 1".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 18 2019, 09:03 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (Cochise @ Feb 18 2019, 07:55 PM) *
General single target aspect in RAW:

Page 7, Critters -> Range:
[..]Critter powers generally affect only one person or thing per action, except as noted in the individual power's description


Basis for multi-target exception:

Page 13, Critters -> Paralyzing Touch/Howl:
[..]Some creatures have a version of this power known as Paralyzing Howl. In this case, the being can affect any target able to hear it.[..]


The power description doesn't note that it can affect several people or things per action. "Any target" doesn't mean that this can be several target. So by RAW, that's still only one.

You're right that the gamemaster is within his right to decide that it affects several target at once. He could also decide that it kills on the spot, or reduce quickness by three times the creature's essence or by 100 too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cochise
post Feb 18 2019, 09:13 PM
Post #9


Mr. Quote-function
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Somewhere in Germany
Member No.: 1,376



QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 11:03 PM) *
The power description doesn't note that it can affect several people or things per action. "Any target" doesn't mean that this can be several target.


Sorry, but I have to repeat myself there: The use of "any" in that particular sentence can be interpreted as being the "description" you claim that the power doesn't note. So ...

QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 11:03 PM) *
So by RAW, that's still only one.


... RAW is too ambiguous to make the claim that you are making there.

QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 11:03 PM) *
You're right that the gamemaster is within his right to decide that it affects several target at once.


And he'd still be within RAW. Remember?! You were the one who tried to make this about RAW by making claims about what RAW says on Paralyzing Howl and what it doesn't?

Don't get me wrong here: I'm not saying that I'm necessarily in agreement with what the GM obviosuly did there, I'm merely objecting your absolute approach to what you think is "RAW" but cannot be fully supported by actual "RAW".

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 18 2019, 09:21 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (Cochise @ Feb 18 2019, 10:13 PM) *
Sorry, but I have to repeat myself there: The use of "any" in that particular sentence can be interpreted as being the "description" you claim that the power doesn't note. So ...


No, it isn't, as it can mean a singular person, and is then not noting it as an exception to the rule of "one person per power use". Noting that the power can affect several people cannot be ambiguous.

Otherwise, for example, powers just mentionning "victims" instead of "a/the victim" could be considered to affect several victims while they don't by RAW.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bannockburn
post Feb 19 2019, 08:21 AM
Post #11


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,579
Joined: 22-April 12
From: somewhere far beyond sanity
Member No.: 51,886



Your interpretation is redundancy, freudqo.
There is no need to even mention that the howl can affect any target if it's only singular, because by definition it can already only affect targets that can hear the howl.

It's also not ambiguous because of this: The barghest howls and doesn't need to choose a target because all are affected, except if for some reason it wants to NOT affect one. Say ... pack mates.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 19 2019, 10:20 AM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (bannockburn @ Feb 19 2019, 09:21 AM) *
Your interpretation is redundancy, freudqo.
There is no need to even mention that the howl can affect any target if it's only singular, because by definition it can already only affect targets that can hear the howl.


No, if you don't put this sentence, the barghest can affect any target that is in its line of sight. Here the book specifies a condition: the target should be one that can hear it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bannockburn
post Feb 19 2019, 11:27 AM
Post #13


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,579
Joined: 22-April 12
From: somewhere far beyond sanity
Member No.: 51,886



Alright, believe what you like (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 19 2019, 01:04 PM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (bannockburn @ Feb 19 2019, 12:27 PM) *
Alright, believe what you like (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


I will, thank you. Though, I don't see how the right to believe what I like is related to what is written in the rules and the fact that what you said was wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bannockburn
post Feb 19 2019, 01:42 PM
Post #15


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,579
Joined: 22-April 12
From: somewhere far beyond sanity
Member No.: 51,886



Because it wasn't wrong (*), despite what you might think, and we're in belief territory now: When you need to bring up LOS for a sound based power to prop up your argument, I see no reason to engage in that argument any further.
So, instead I'll just leave you to it, since it doesn't matter to me either way. OP will be able to form an opinion based on what was presented here easily.

Cheers, man.

Edit: (*) To clarify: I don't BELIEVE I am wrong, so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 19 2019, 04:27 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (bannockburn @ Feb 19 2019, 02:42 PM) *
Because it wasn't wrong (*), despite what you might think, and we're in belief territory now: When you need to bring up LOS for a sound based power to prop up your argument, I see no reason to engage in that argument any further.


We are dealing with RAW here, and you know it. What was wrong was the fact that the sentence was supposed to be redundant and that the "any target" had to reflect a situation with multiple possible targets. This relied on the fact that the sentence wouldn't be of any use otherwise, while it is indeed if you want to precise that the target should be able to hear the howl. And that's not even looking at the true meaning of "any+singular"…

I could stop here, but I'd like to precise two things:
- A redundancy can perfectly happen for no reason or for the sake of teaching by repetition. The blindness power thus states: "As this name suggests, the Blindness power induces blindness in a single target.". Why do they say it's a single target while it is in the general power rules? This is redundant.

- There are many reasons to believe the howl power could work with deaf targets. Sound doesn't only affect your ears, as anyone attending a loud concert surely would notice. Additionally, the other sound-based powers (sound projection and hypnotic song) very explicitly state that they can affect several people who can hear the sound (notice that the rules make quite little sense in the case of hypnotic song, but well, that's what comes from simplifying the rules from old sourcebooks…).

Finally, if you're not convinced, you can remember that the powers described in the critters sourcebook actually derive from the powers in the "paranormal animals of Europe" sourcebook for sr2 (where hypnotic song makes more sense). And there, you'll notice that the "any target" mention doesn't exist and that very clearly only one target can be affected.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
melquisedeq
post Feb 19 2019, 05:02 PM
Post #17


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: 30-July 14
From: Cascais, Lisboa, Portugal
Member No.: 190,262



I knew Dumpshock wouldn't let me down (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) So...

1) Cochise hit the nail in the head, I was overthinking the answer to a question no one posed. Abstract combat, right! It's just that Monofilament Whips are the only melee weapon that uses Quickness instead of Strength, and my "usually-GM" brain immediately decided there had to be a caveat. "Shadowrun players aren't allowed to have the cake and eat it too", I must've thought.

2) The GM actually played it as suggested by 'Read it to them straight': one howl to open hostilities, then normal attacks. It was me (again, GM brain taking over) who looked at the math of Paralyzing Howl and thought "Holy shit the potential for TPK is off the wall". One single howl knocked out 3 out of 5 runners in the 60+ earned karma range, none of whom has Willpower under 5. The two unaffected were, one, a guy who has enough Quickness to lose 6 full points of it and still move, and two, a Willpower 6 guy who beat the GM's 2 successes with some very unlikely 4 of his own. A very fine point that was made, though, was that if there ever was a time to spend karma pool, this should have been it. Karma pool is something we as group often forget. Our bad.

Regarding the debate that ensued here, we've played it as affecting anyone who hears it. To be honest, none of us reading the power description interpreted it in any other way than affecting everyone who hears it, though I see how the term "anyone" can be read that way. It feels to me like one of those things the 6th World can pull that is still able to put the fear of Zeus into the heart of hardened cityslickers.

0) I'm well aware of the old debate surrounding Exceptional Attribute and Bonus Attribute Point. Let's just say that in my group the rules are:

- Bioware is limited by absolute maximum like cyberware, not racial/natural maximum of 6 + racial modifier. It's part of the augmented attribute calculation, even though it adds directly to the natural attribute.
- EA adds 1 to the racial max of each of the attributes you buy it for. You can buy it once per attribute. You can then spend character creation resources to effectively raise that potential. So a human could start at 7 in all stats, provided he had 42 attribute points at creation.
- BAP adds 1 straight up, regardless of the current value. It can only be purchased once per character. It can also potentially raise the absolute maximum, if it rounds up when multiplied by 150%.

So let's say, in this order: maxed out Quickness [6], Night One +2 [8], EAP and spent point in it +1 [9], BAP +1 [10]. Natural Quickness for this guy is 10, and absolute maximum would be Natural x 1.5, right? Which would be 15, no? Or is 14 the absolute maximum Quickness ANY character can ever have, period?

I could very well have stated the guy wrong, and will definitely look to fix him. This is purposefully a munchkin character, I only bust him out every now and again when I'm not GMing so I'm perfectly fine with obvious cheese... but cheating is not cool and not my intent at all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
melquisedeq
post Feb 20 2019, 01:37 PM
Post #18


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: 30-July 14
From: Cascais, Lisboa, Portugal
Member No.: 190,262



Sorry, just to get a clearer post regarding my Quickness math. I went about it in this order:

- Maxed out Quickness 6 = [6]
- Night One racial modifier +2 = [8]
- Exceptional Attribute and one build point spent +1 = [9]
- Bonus Attribute Point +1 = [10]

Summed up, Natural Quickness for this guy is 10, right?
And we get Absolute Maximum by multiplying Natural x 1.5, correct?
So we 10 x 1.5 = 15. Or am I missing something here?

If so, can someone please confirm that 14 the absolute maximum Quickness ANY character can ever have in SR3?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 20 2019, 02:43 PM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 20 2019, 02:37 PM) *
Sorry, just to get a clearer post regarding my Quickness math. I went about it in this order:

- Maxed out Quickness 6 = [6]
- Night One racial modifier +2 = [8]
- Exceptional Attribute and one build point spent +1 = [9]
- Bonus Attribute Point +1 = [10]

Summed up, Natural Quickness for this guy is 10, right?
And we get Absolute Maximum by multiplying Natural x 1.5, correct?
So we 10 x 1.5 = 15. Or am I missing something here?

If so, can someone please confirm that 14 the absolute maximum Quickness ANY character can ever have in SR3?


No, you get Absolute Maximum by multiplying Racial Modified Limit by 1.5 round up. In your case, Racial Modified Limit is calculated as 6 + 2 (Night One) + 1 (Exceptional Attribute) = 9. So Absolute Maximum is 9*1.5 = 13.5 rounded up to 14.

Furthermore, there is no debate as to what Exceptional Attribute and Bonus Attribute Point can do:
- BAP: You get one attribute point. You can only use it once per attribute, and you can only use it once to raise one single attribute past Racial Modified limit. This does allow you to overcome the limit of 6 attribute points being spend into each attribute (only once though…).
- EA: Your racial modified limit is upped by one, and your Absolute Maximum is modified accordingly, and you can do it only once per attribute. In any case the only way to reach this new limit is to use BAP, which you can only do once for this attribute.

The only "debate" that I've heard of was if you could use BAP for several different attributes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
melquisedeq
post Feb 20 2019, 03:11 PM
Post #20


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: 30-July 14
From: Cascais, Lisboa, Portugal
Member No.: 190,262



Thanks freudqo, the absolute maximum 14 does make sense and I'll change the character accordingly.

I'll still go with our group's take that, EA allows you to fill that +1 potential with normal build points, and BAP can be added on top of that (it just won't contribute to the absolute limit).
For us, hypothetically, with infinite build points a character creation human could buy EA for all six attributes, then buy a point in each attribute, thus starting with 7 all around and absolute maximum of 11.
That same human could then buy BAP once, to get one of those attributes to 8. Absolute maximum would still be 11 all around (THIS was the part I thought I might've bollocksed).

Anyway, thanks a bunch, everyone.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 20 2019, 03:49 PM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



Let me clarify: I'm just telling that the rules don't allow for what you say. You can't spend more than 6 attribute points on any attribute. That's written somewhere in BBB.

I think the most you can do by the book is having 3 attributes at 7 and 3 at 6 (for a human) before Cyber/Bio/Adept, if you ignore the recommandation of 60 Building Points spent in attributes. That can be done by spending all your edges on 3 BAP and 2 EA, and considering that BAP can be applied several times.

In general, I'm all for house ruling that you could spend as much points as you want on Attributes. Honestly, if you're willing to do that and to give up on the rest and still make an interesting character, why not?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
melquisedeq
post Feb 20 2019, 05:44 PM
Post #22


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: 30-July 14
From: Cascais, Lisboa, Portugal
Member No.: 190,262



But then why would the core book include the following bit [sr3.244]?

QUOTE
Exceeding the Racial Modified Limit

It is possible for characters to improve their Attributes to a rating higher than their Racial Modified Limit, up to their Attribute Maximum. A character’s Attribute Maximum is equal to their Racial Modified Limit times 1.5 (see Racial Attribute Limit Table, p.245). To improve an Attribute above the Racial Modified Limit has a cost equal to 3x the rating to which the Attribute is being raised. For example, an elf character who wanted to raise her Strength from 6 to 7 would have to spend 21 Good Karma Points to do so.

Raising Attributes higher than the Racial Modified Limit should be a rare thing. We don’t recommend having “super characters” whose standard Attribute ratings are their Attribute Maximum, as they can unbalance the game.


The part about not being able to put more than 6 points into any one ability refers exclusively to character creation, methinks. It's part of the "Creating a Shadowrunner" section, in which it's also said that skills cannot start above 6, and yet no one's arguing that skills also cannot ever be raised above 6, right?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freudqo
post Feb 21 2019, 07:28 AM
Post #23


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: 11-May 12
Member No.: 52,307



QUOTE (melquisedeq @ Feb 20 2019, 06:44 PM) *
But then why would the core book include the following bit [sr3.244]?



The part about not being able to put more than 6 points into any one ability refers exclusively to character creation, methinks. It's part of the "Creating a Shadowrunner" section, in which it's also said that skills cannot start above 6, and yet no one's arguing that skills also cannot ever be raised above 6, right?


Errrr? Are we not talking about character creation since the beginning? I don't think you can acquire an edge such as BAP or EA after character creation, we never talked about karma, only about building points and attribute points.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cochise
post Feb 21 2019, 01:54 PM
Post #24


Mr. Quote-function
***

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Somewhere in Germany
Member No.: 1,376



QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 11:21 PM) *
No, it isn't, as it can mean a singular person, and is then not noting it as an exception to the rule of "one person per power use".


The problem is: Just as "any" can mean a singular person in that sentence it can also mean all persons that fulfill the other explicitly stated target restriction (can hear). So the RAW sentence has two distcint yet "legal" interpretations. That's what's typically called "ambiguity". And with Raw being ambiguous you're simply not correct when claiming that "by RAW the power is still single target".

And that's just based on the sentence I quoted because I could take it further by pointing out that the power in question is - albeit magical - also a physical effect that happens to be connected to another phyiscal phenomenon that by its very nature already is "area-effect": a howl. A howl - with or without the paralyzing effect - is an accustic phenomenen that can and will be perceived by anyone within audiable reach and not "protected" in some way.
When we look at the various standard limitations of SR magic in general or spellcasting in particular (the later also the mechanical foundation for Critter powers unless exceptions are explicitly stated) we can also make the following observations:

  1. Without explicit reference magic users cannot exclude valid targets from the effects of their "spells". This is of particular relevance for area effects.
  2. Physical combat spells with a spell duration of "instant" and area effect can and will hit targets within the spell's area of effect even if LOS requirements for the caster are not met but the spell effect can still reach a potential target.
  3. Critter powers default to spell casting rules and regulations when and wherever their particular rules do not say otherwise and/or the GM doesn't invoke the also already mentioned rule that GMs - under RAW - are allowed to alter the RAW power descriptions.


So what does that amount to? Well that turns the howl into the equivalent of a pyhsical "sonic ball" spell that targets any person that can hear the physical aspect of the spell with the spell's center being the Barghest. And the spell's effect is that it lowers Quickness in accordance to the power description on whichever target is in audio reach and fails to resist.

QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 18 2019, 11:21 PM) *
Noting that the power can affect several people cannot be ambiguous.


You're confusing "should not" with "cannot". The RAW wording most definitely is ambiguous and thus you simply can longer claim that "by RAW the howl is (definitely) still ony a single target power".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
melquisedeq
post Feb 21 2019, 03:50 PM
Post #25


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 66
Joined: 30-July 14
From: Cascais, Lisboa, Portugal
Member No.: 190,262



QUOTE (freudqo @ Feb 21 2019, 07:28 AM) *
Errrr? Are we not talking about character creation since the beginning?


Ah OK, I probably should have said this before... Since I'm integrating into an ongoing campaign, I started with +50 karma, +250'000¥, and some leniency on character creation limits.
Anyway, I've toned the guy down to a less divisive 12 Quickness.

In the meanwhile I did come up with some new doubts regarding the augmentation and attributes:

- Bioware is considered an addenda to the natural attribute, unlike cyber. Does this mean it impacts the karma cost to raise its attribute? What about a linked skill?

- Which Body value do I use to stabilise wounds: Base + racial mod; Base + racial mod + bio; Base + racial mod + bio + cyber?

- Do bio and cyber contribute to the number of Physical Damage Overflow boxes?

- (bonus question) Tailored Pheromones are the only bioware in NSRCG that shows its modded value in brackets, as if it was cyberware... is this a simple mistake or am I missing some footnote somewhere?

Once again, thanks in advance for looking into this.
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: 21st September 2019 - 03:55 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.