IPB
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Spell Design: Electronic Invisibility, A Variation on Improved Invisibility
Eyeless Blond
post Jul 19 2004, 05:19 PM
Post #51


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156
QUOTE (Necrotic Monkey)
I am not backpeddling. Maybe you should read the original quote.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your argument here, then.

QUOTE
The lowest OR score is 3 for things like living trees, and that's on SR3 p. 182. Thus a Force 1 spell will not affect any inanimate object because 3/2 is 1.5. Though one can argue that this is rounded down as is most things in the game, but then you run into the problem with a minimum TN of 2.


The first sentence is clearly false, because from the errata you quoted:

QUOTE
The Force of the spell must be equal to or greater than half the Object Resistance, rounded down, for it to affect an object.


Maybe I'm being dense, but 1.5 usually rounds down to 1, not 1.5.

And I really have no idea what that second sentence is saying at all. I've already intepreted it once to mean that you're rounding half the OR to 2 because OR is sometimes used as a TN, and so should always be rounded to a 2. Apparently this was false, so I honestly don't know what it means.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zazen
post Jul 19 2004, 06:03 PM
Post #52


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,685
Joined: 17-August 02
Member No.: 3,123
He just wants to take it back :P

QUOTE
Just about everything is a target number for something in the game. The Target Number of a spell, as specified by the term "Target" in the spell's stat block, is wholly different than the target of a spell. But half the OR of a target is still the "target number" used to determine the required Force to affect it. Oh wait, it's not because this is not my real opinion. I am posting this for typing practice.

Don't blame me 'cause they use the same and similar terms to describe a plethora of different things. Actually you can blame me, because I'm the only person to ever come up with this bizarre argument and I'm saying it for no reason, since I don't believe in it anyway.


Even if he did only mean "it kinda sorta could be argued by somebody else but not me", then he's still wrong. Nobody outside the special olympics will ever say this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Necrotic Monkey
post Jul 19 2004, 06:50 PM
Post #53


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 16-July 04
Member No.: 6,488
QUOTE
Nobody outside the special olympics will ever say this.

Then we have multiple special olypiads on these boards, because they've been saying stupid things like that ever since the inception of the board. See the aforementioned example.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nikoli
post Jul 19 2004, 07:25 PM
Post #54


Chicago Survivor
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 5,079
Joined: 28-January 04
From: Canton, GA
Member No.: 6,033
I have always interpereted that to mean that it's not so much that 2 is the minumum TN, it's that a 1 is never a success. It equates to the same thing, but is more accurate.

That being said, an improved invis Force 1 will not cover microphones, pressure plates, etc. so you'd need to design a slightly more powerful spell. of course, onece your mage does that, learns it and uses it for the first time and the astral residue gets analyzed by VERY powerful corp. mages, your wiz-kid is going to be in a serious world of hurt (or potentially very wealthy, depending on how the spell was used.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zazen
post Jul 19 2004, 07:28 PM
Post #55


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,685
Joined: 17-August 02
Member No.: 3,123
QUOTE
they've been saying stupid things like that ever since the inception of the board


I felt like this one raised the bar a little. Anyway, now we all agree it's stupid. Three cheers for unanimity :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · Shadowrun · Next Newest »
 

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 12th April 2022 - 12:32 PM
Powered By IP.Board © 2022  IPS, Inc.

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.