Check me out, love., Edit my new NPC |
Check me out, love., Edit my new NPC |
May 25 2004, 11:00 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
Greetings, all. Please read and edit the following NPC. I want to make sure (1) his dice pools are figured correctly and (2) the stat block itself is formatted properly. Thanks so much!
Yuphani B Q S C I W E M R 3 3 2 4 7 6 6 9 4 Init: 4 + 4D6* (29 + 1D6 in Astral combat) *Due to sustained Increase Reflexes (see below) Dice Pools: Astral 3, Astral Combat 8, Combat 7, Spell 10 Karma Pool/Professional Rating: 4/4 Skills: Aura Reading 6, Conjuring 5 (Banishing 7), Edged Weapons 6, Motorboat 3, Motorboat B/R 6, Pistol 5, Sailboat 3, Sailboat B/R 6, Ship, Ship B/R 6, Sorcery 6 (Astral Combat 8) Knowledge Skills: Arcane Matters 5, Carpentry 5, History 6, Shipmaking 6, Multiverse 5, Space-Time Continuum 6 Metamagic (Initiate Grade 3): Absorption, Masking, Possession Spells: Armor 6, Astral Armor 6, Clairvoyance 9, Fix 5, Heal 5, Increase Reflexes +3 6, Manaball 9, Mind Probe 8, Stunbolt 7 Edges and Flaws: Astral Chameleon, Sensitive Neural Structure Gear: Force 6 sustaining focus. |
|
|
May 25 2004, 11:31 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
Combat Pool should be 8 (Q+I+W/2) unless the INT bonus doesn't count for some reason, and Spell Pool should be 7 (I+W+M/3).
|
|
|
May 25 2004, 11:45 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 403 Joined: 27-August 02 From: Scotland Member No.: 3,175 |
Also, Reaction should be 5 ((Q+I)/2), assuming those are his natural stats; and Astral Initiative should be 27+d6 (I+20+d6), I think..
|
|
|
May 26 2004, 12:55 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
Thanks, chaps!
|
|
|
May 26 2004, 01:53 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
I think the sustaining focus still works on you while in astral form, so long as the focus itself is attached to your meatbod. As a side note, keeping that thing active's gonna be a pain: first, you can't mask it, and second you're having to resist 6D drain when you cast the spell.
As well, there's really no point in stunbolt 7 over stunbolt 6. I'd trade that spell point to Armor. There are other ways to "min-max" this NPC, or at least make it more efficient, but as it's an NPC you don't necessarily need to do that. |
|
|
May 26 2004, 02:13 AM
Post
#6
|
|||
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,049 Joined: 24-March 03 Member No.: 4,323 |
Sure there is. If the target has any TN modifiers (such as from damage, pepper punch, a sustained Agony spell, or something similar) stunbolt 7 is significantly better than stunbolt 6. While the difference between the two is less significant, perhaps, than the difference between stunbolts 4 and 5, there is still an important difference. Remember: as this is an NPC, there is no real concern over "trading points." If Union Jane wants him to have a higher-force armor spell, he gets it. Random side-note concerning Manaball 9: damn |
||
|
|||
May 26 2004, 05:22 AM
Post
#7
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 7 Joined: 25-May 04 From: Victoria, Australia Member No.: 6,357 |
The reason stunbolt 7 is no better than stunbolt 6 is because of the rule of six.
To gain a success against stunbolt 6 you need to roll a six, natch. To gain a success against stunbolt 7 you need to roll a...er well, a six. You're going to re-roll that die and I'll put a lot of money on you getting at least a one. Stunbolt 6 should do the job nicely. |
|
|
May 26 2004, 06:26 AM
Post
#8
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 608 Joined: 9-July 02 From: California Member No.: 2,955 |
Until we hit the aforementioned TN modifiers. When you have a +1, the six becomes a seven (ie, still a six) but the seven becomes an eight, which sucks a little bit harder.
|
|
|
May 26 2004, 06:26 AM
Post
#9
|
|||
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,049 Joined: 24-March 03 Member No.: 4,323 |
I am well aware of the rule of six. For chrissakes, man, read my post and think about it for more than 2 seconds. Here, I'll break it down for you: if you have light stun, a +1 TN modifier, that increases the difficulty to resist a spell by one. Following me so far? Ok... Now, normally, the difficulty to resist a force 6 spell is 6. if you have light stun, that target number is 7. Given the rule of 6, that is a meaningless change. But what happens to a force 7 spell? It becomes TN 8 to resist! Oh ho HO! Even considering the rule of 6, TN 8 is, say it with me, more difficult to resist than TN 7. If youll notice, I already mentioned that the difference between a force 6 and a force 7 spell is
Edit: rock on with the simultaneous posting This post has been edited by Jason Farlander: May 26 2004, 06:27 AM |
||
|
|||
May 26 2004, 06:42 AM
Post
#10
|
|||
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,685 Joined: 17-August 02 Member No.: 3,123 |
While I understand your position, things that affect your spell resistance TN are quite rare (damage mods like that light stun don't affect spell resistance, FYI). I can't think of anything, actually, but I'm sure there's some esoteric rule out there that I'm forgetting. In my experience Force 7 is a waste. |
||
|
|||
May 26 2004, 07:20 AM
Post
#11
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,049 Joined: 24-March 03 Member No.: 4,323 |
Asscrackers... its not as cut-and-dry as I thought, but im not so sure I'm willing to accept Zazen's comment yet.
SR3 pg 183, concerning spell resistance: "No target modifiers apply to this test except where specifically noted." SR3 pg 127, concering condition levels: "The Injury Modifier is a universal target number modifier that applies to nearly all Success Tests the injured character may attempt, except those for resisting or avoiding damage." Resisting stunbolt *does* seem to be a test for "resisting or avoiding damage, " but does that mean that injury modifiers apply to non-damaging spells? Why the distinction? Can saying that something affects everything except X reasonably not be considered a specific notation of its affect against anything non-X? Another wrinkle: the same spell resistance test section also makes a point to distinguish between ordinary spell resistance tests and elemental manipulation resistance tests, with the latter actually being a standard damage resistance test. While you could count combat spell resistance tests as being tests to "avoid damage," the term "avoid" implies dodging more than anything else. Even if you discount injury modifiers (again, something I'm not quite willing to accept_, theres still the relatively common sustaining TN mod. Sustaining is noted as affecting "all tests, including Drain Resistance Tests (but not normal Damage Tesistance Tests" Again, does "all tests" in this case not include spell resistance? If saying that a TN mod affects everything is not considered sufficient to rule that it affects spell resistance, what TN mods exist that do *explicitly* mention their effect on spell resistance tests? |
|
|
May 26 2004, 08:21 AM
Post
#12
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,685 Joined: 17-August 02 Member No.: 3,123 |
I think that "except where specifically noted" is pretty clear. It means to rule out TN mods except those that, well, specifically note that they apply to spell resistance.
But no, I can't think of any off the top of my head, but then again I just got home after a long grueling day and just sucked down a good portion of tequila. :) |
|
|
May 26 2004, 09:27 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,665 Joined: 26-April 03 From: Sweden Member No.: 4,516 |
Practical Reasons for Stunbolt Force 7 instead of Force 6:
1 - Mana Surges: if your spell force is reduced by 1, your still at 6, and if it gets increased by 1 you are at 8 all of a sudden. 2 - Nimue's Salamanders: They can reduce the force of spells cast within E x 2 meters of them. 3 - Drain: If you have a magic of 6 and, for some reason, you wish to take physical drain instead of stun... (not viable in this case, but there are instances it can be). Or, if you use Exclusive to push the drain down, you get to the 'lowest' drain power while still keeping the limited enefits of a Force 7 stunbolt. 4 - Immunity to Magic power: if it happens to reduce force by 6, you might still affect the critter. (Not sure if any critter actually have this, but in theory it's viable). For alot of other spells, Force plays a role to limit successes and matters when quickening, and then a Force 7 spell has additional benefits. (I thought there was one other instance where a spell's Force can be reduced, or you have to roll the Force in an opposed test or something... must be memories of 2nd edition I think) |
|
|
May 26 2004, 12:46 PM
Post
#14
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 138 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Paris, France Member No.: 639 |
While I don't have my books at hand and so can't be sure about wound TN mods for spell resistance issue, I just wanted to point out that a spell resistance (at least in case of combat spells) is NOT a damage resistance test. You resist the spell, not the damage of the stunbolt. If you get let's say 4 successes on your resistance test while the spellcaster got only 3 successes on his Sorcery test for a D damage level stunbolt, you take no damage at all becasue you resisted the spell. |
||
|
|||
May 26 2004, 12:57 PM
Post
#15
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,751 Joined: 8-August 03 From: Neighbor of the Beast Member No.: 5,375 |
So, one could say you "avoided" the damage then.
|
|
|
May 26 2004, 03:04 PM
Post
#16
|
|||
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,049 Joined: 24-March 03 Member No.: 4,323 |
I understand your take on the matter, Zazen. However, unless someone can point out a single example of a target number modifier that specifically mentions its application to spell resistance tests, I find it likely that your interpretation is largely the result of a poor choice of words on the part of the writers. (Something that seems to rather commonly cause problems...) |
||
|
|||
May 26 2004, 03:16 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
Never meant to start such a discussion, gentlemen, but I appreciate your ardor!
This NPC is meant to be more of a "story starter" than an actual participant. He's really quite potent, to be sure. I wanted his statistics complete just because I am obsessive about such things. I'm sure you understand. So . . . other than the debate over Force 6 vs. Force 7, we all agree that the numbers look proper? |
|
|
May 26 2004, 03:41 PM
Post
#18
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,049 Joined: 24-March 03 Member No.: 4,323 |
Other than the things that have already been mentioned, and the fact tha 8) isnt a valid astral combat specialization value, everything seems to be in order. You might want to change "arcane matters" to, sixth world magic, sorcery background, or some other canon knowledge skill; on the other hand, you might not.
Oh... it wasnt specifically mentioned, but, since your reaction is actually 5, your initiative should be 5+4d6. Nothing else on there is a derived statistic, so nothing else can be considered an error. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 01:44 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.