 [SoA2064] SOTM:2064, State of the Munchkin |
  |
 Nov 2 2004, 09:24 PM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Immortal Elf  Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890  |
I was fine until that jackass Critias started on with the whole squacking crap as a personal insult.
Considering neither he nor mfb can be bothered to crack open a book and cite a single quote to back up their views, I'm not going to bother replying to any more completely ignorant and blantantly wrong assumptions about the game. At least the confusion with mfb seems to be that he's using the word "limitation" in place of "potential limitation that will reduce the effectiveness of the linked power" whereas I'm using it as "an actual reduction fo the power when used." A Time geas limits an adept powers half the time. Most other geasa limit powers only on rare occasions, though they have the potential to limit an adept's powers most of the time. Huge difference between the two. EDIT: What's really confusing is that if mfb is using the term in that context, he's actually being more lax with geasa than I am. |
 |
 
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 09:25 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Critias: I'd rule OK on the sharpshooter one, although it'd never be one I'd personally take for a character.
For the other, if Pain Resistance is automatic (getting old ... can't remember), then that Geas is fine I guess, although it isn't usual to go that high with the Power that it'd be much restriction, and maybe too much restriction if it is taken at the extreme. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 09:30 PM
Post
#53
|
|||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
My bad. I didn't realize "squawking" was such a greivous personal insult, wherever it is you're from. It sure is on par with all the crap you've been flinging. My mistake. But, hey, once again, kudos on evading the actual topic at hand, and just insisting stubbornly that we're the ones who don't know what we talking about, instead of answering any questions or furthering the conversation in any reasonable, positive, manner. So, yeah. Given the evidence thus far, I'm left just continuing to think that maybe you beleive Adepts are overpowered because Geasa aren't very limiting. Way to change my mind, or anything. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 2 2004, 09:33 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
You've confused me with someone who gives a fuck what you think any longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 09:39 PM
Post
#55
|
|
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Nope. Just got you mixed up with someone worth talking SR with, apparently. My mistake. Sorry about the friction, everyone, I'll try not to let it happen again.
Fortune: any reason for the "I'd never take it" feeling about the sharpshooter one? I just know how overpowering anyone with a sniper rifle can be in the first place, much less one with extra dice to roll, so I figured effectively cutting his rate of fire in half (while sticking to the flavor of a sharpshooting character, as someone who doesn't pull the trigger as fast as he can) was a decent balance. And, for the damage resistance once, I'm still not sure on the best way to handle it, either. S'why I'm asking. ;) I thought it'd be cool to build right into it the fact that the Adept has to focus and concentrate to literally push the pain aside, and that sometimes he just can't -- but I'm having trouble coming up with a way to represent it with the actual die rolls, etc. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 09:43 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Personally,geasa are there to trade one limitation for another.
Taking a Geas Talisman:Must be wearing gloves Isn't a real limitation since as a criminal, you should be wearing gloves asn probably would be at any given time on a run. Now, a Geas to never wear gloves it worth considering. If it is a situation that never could conceivably come up, then it isn't a legitimate geas, imo. Fasting is a personal fav of mine as you are not normally fasting, you must make a conscious effort to fast (as a GM, using the spells nutrition and such would break the geas) during the run. And as for the must take aim action, I'd allow that, if there was no beneifit applied to the TN. One thing that holds true in Shadowrun, power comes at a price. Sure you can empty a clip fast than most folks can walk across the room an flip on a light switch, but just try to sit down in a family oriented restaurant and have a quiet meal without freaking and geeking the wait staff and the screaming children. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 09:54 PM
Post
#57
|
|||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
I guess my problem is, however, that gestures doesn't define what a gesture is. I've seen players trying tell me blinking is their gesture. That way, unless someone removed their eyelids, they could always be performing a gesture. Not blinking? Okay, how about smiling, wiggling a toe, scratching your cheek, brushing your hair? These are all gestures, just not obvious ones. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:00 PM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Dash, no offense but if someone handed me a character with any of those 'gestures' as their Geasa IRL, I'd roll it up and bop them on the nose, and hand it back to them.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:05 PM
Post
#59
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Actually, in reply to myself, I think Funk's POV on geasa is probably similar to my own. Most of the ones in the book are not restrictive enough. The time limitation, as he mentions above, is fantastic, but most of the other ones are extremely easy to work with.
Plus, players get creative. Had a fenrir shaman that must have eaten raw meat within x hours (don't remember the timespan) to fulfill the geas. So, I made the butchers he worked through think he was buying for a ghoul and a private eye started following him making life hard. So, he decided that pigeons, squirrels, etc. were all meat and killing them was easier than paying a butcher. Then, he got wise to getting sick so investigated sterilize as a spell so that he could "clean" the meat before eating it. Most of the geasa that I've encountered in around 3 years of gaming have provided the awakened character with a benefit while not providing them with an apprciable limitation in return. But, that's a topic for another thread (not like we haven't done it before :grinbig: ) |
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:07 PM
Post
#60
|
|||
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
That's exactly what I did. But, by the rules, they're all gestures and it's only my own feelings that made those geasa invalid. If that player wanted to get uppity about it, I wouldn't have anything to fall back on other than "I'm the GM, damnit, and I say so." which strikes me too close to answering "Because." to the question "Why?" |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:09 PM
Post
#61
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Because it applies every single time I want to use that Power. I'm not saying it's bad, and I certainly would allow it in my games. I just don't know if I would personally choose it for a character I was playing, but then I rarely play snipers so that might be it. I'd never apply it to IA: Pistols! :eek: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:13 PM
Post
#62
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
plus, the description of the gesture mentions "free and visible" movement. winking, wiggling, smiling, and scratching one's cheek are not what i'd call "free and visible".
see, that's how this works. geasa are a limitation placed on one's magic. it's up to the GM (and, ideally, the player) to make that limitation a limitation. it's not an excuse to cripple the character, but it's not a minor, occasionaly inconvenience, either. it's a limitation. the geas rules are, i think intentionally, kinda vague on exactly what can and cannot be a geas. that's a license to be creative; not a license to let your players break the game, nor a license to break the characters playing in your game, nor a license to break the game if you're a player. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:18 PM
Post
#63
|
|||||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Heh, well, yeah. I mean, in a lot of ways, I think the basic combat rules are built around pistols -- the power ratings of weapons, the damage codes, basic armor values, the rate of fire per action... You'd be nuts to cut that in half. But for someone (ideally) sitting a few hundred meters away, who's supposed to be (almost by definition) placing single, highly accurate, devastating, shots...? I think it's not too bad. And it slowed down the long-range sharpshooter some, compared to the guys who were trying to blaze away with pistols, point blank. Err, rather, it was neat for the one fight in one game I had the chance to use him in. *sigh* Thanks for the input, though. I'm always leery of "home brewed" geasa, and try to get feedback from as many folks as I can on 'em, so I can gauge it better before the next zany home-brewed geasa I come up with. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:21 PM
Post
#64
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
But that exact "vaugeness" (word?) leads to these kinds of problems. Gestures is a more obvious one, but what about talisman? So I have a whale-bone sculpture with an embedded grain of sea salt with tribal symbols on a necklace. IIRC, the talisman gease requires at least three specific "things" to be included with the talisman (i.e. (1) whale bone, (2) sea salt, and (3) tribal symbols). Whether you like my talisman example or not, insert one you do like and we'll move on.
So, the geas is fulfilled as long as the talisman is in the posession of the character. So to break it, take the necklace away. Easy to do if you capture the character, but, unless I missed something the talisman is not magical, just a "crutch" for the player to lean on. Therefore, the guards may not take it away. But what if you can't capture them? Then a pick-pocket might try to steal it, but the fact that this example is a necklace makes that more difficult. A ring or something like that might be more "stealable" but how about a toe-ring. In this case, unless it were a strip search being captured may not even reveal the existence of the talisman and no one is going to pick-pocket your toe-ring. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:30 PM
Post
#65
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
the talisman is a fairly identifiable item, which could occasionally make it easier for the character to be tracked down or identified. the character will have a harder time impersonating someone, in the rare case where that might be necessary. hell, once in a while? it's okay to just straight up break that pretty whalebone scrimshaw, just because. not all the time, maybe not even as often as twice in the character's career. a talisman like that--or any other geas--is an opportunity for the GM to make life interesting for the character. not because the player needs to be punished, or anything, but because the GM's entire purpose is to challenge the players.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 10:50 PM
Post
#66
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Nevermind. It's been a long day and I'm not sure what point I was trying to make :) I agree with what mfb said above this post, but somehow I always feel bad as a GM when I target a player like that. I'm probably just too easy on them :oops:
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 11:07 PM
Post
#67
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
So now you've gone from "geasa have to limit the player 50% of the time because that's the point of a geas" to "once or twice in a character's career." Yet the whole time bitching because I've been saying the latter from the beginning. Jesus. :please: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 2 2004, 11:19 PM
Post
#68
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
here's the problem, funk. you're constantly using phrases like "occasional, minor inconvenience" to describe geasa. you reference the fact that when you run games, geasa are reasonable limitations, but you never treat them as such on the boards. as soon as someone mentions adepts, you pipe right up with how adepts can geasa their powers, and you never mention the limits those geasa place on the powers they're applied to. if you're intending to convey that geasa are a route to power that comes with reasonable limits built in, you should stop the constant harping on how the Awakened ability to use geasa on magic lost to cyber makes them uberbadasses that ruin the game for everyone else. every time someone mentions the magic loss cyber incurs, you throw geasa back without mentioning anything about the drawbacks geasa include. so, yeah, lots of us kinda think that you view geasa as occasional hinderances that don't really slow adepts/mages down, especially when you say exactly that. and then? you wonder why the hell those of us who are arguing with you squawk about how limiting geasa are, and how they should present a hurdle for adepts and mages to overcome in exchange for the bonuses they get for taking one. we wouldn't be going overboard about how limiting geasa are, if you'd stop going overboard about how limiting they're not.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 11:31 PM
Post
#69
|
|
|
Man In The Machine Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,264 Joined: 26-February 02 From: I-495 S Member No.: 1,105 |
Children, play nice. :noflame:
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 2 2004, 11:55 PM
Post
#70
|
|||||||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Riiiight. I think what you mean to say is that I don't treat them as the whole insane "you MUST restrict the adept 50% of the time because he was dumb enough to take a geas!!!" which is what I oppose. Yes, I do say occasional minor inconvience because they are more often than not an occasional (mfb: "maybe not even as often as twice in the character's career") and minor inconvenience (in that as soon as the limitation is removed -- stepping out of a Silence spell's area for an Incantation geas, escaping handcuffs for a Gesture geas, or recovering/replacing your talisman for a Talisman geas; compare each of those to undergoing surgery to repair Stress to implants -- the inconvenience is gone).
That's because they can geasa their powers and the limitations geasa imposed is invoked by saying the word "geasa." Why don't you complain when people say "why don't you get that implant as an alpha grade implant, or buy it used to save a little cash?" Same difference. Or what, do you expect everyone to give an exhaustive list of every little detail of every little game mechanic everytime one is referenced? Or are you going to fly totally off-base and state that the rules say that used implants come with something ridiculous like 9 points of Stress and fail to function 50% of the time despite the rules never stating anything even remotely that bad (kinda like with geasa in general)?
Feel free to point out where I've ever said that. Whenever I bring up geasa, it's to point out what an adept can do, just like when I point out that a samurai can get his implant in a higher grade or as a used implant. I don't know how that twists around in your head to me harping on geasa explaining why some adept powers are overpowered. Because I have news for you -- it's those adept powers that I object to. With or without geasa, they're still unbalanced and/or prone to abuse.
Then quote me. Find where I said exactly that. I have never said that they're not a hindrance or that they don't limit a character. The only thing I've ever said is that they don't limit them constantly. As in the whole ridiculous 50% guideline some people -- yourself included -- are/were stating. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Nov 2 2004, 11:55 PM
Post
#71
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 38 Joined: 7-June 04 Member No.: 6,386 |
I dont have SOTA64 yet, I have seen other posts about the social adept though. Any other munchkin concepts coming out of the book?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 3 2004, 12:00 AM
Post
#72
|
|
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
The animal adept has awesome potential as security; combined with a Rigger and they could be unstoppable. However, you can't start with most of what makes it powerful.
Animal Empathy + Attunement Animal + Empower Animal (Astral Perception, Killing Hands) and any perception enhancing powers. For a Magician's Way Adept add Living Focus and Aid Spell to those. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 3 2004, 12:01 AM
Post
#73
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,065 Joined: 16-January 03 From: Fayetteville, NC Member No.: 3,916 |
Eh.
Has anyone written up the "social cyberware" numbers yet? For everyone terrified that adepts will dominate the game, we might as well level the playing field and let cyber-junkies have access to Shadowrun-esque plausible cybernetics that do, basically the same thing. I suspect a lot of cybernetic enhancements would have been developed in the world of SR - the books only cover a tiny portion of what could be done. -Siege |
|
|
|
|
Nov 3 2004, 12:03 AM
Post
#74
|
|||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
The trick there being that Sterilize "cooks" the meat, thus not making it raw anymore. The trick to geasea is that they're things a mage/adept do *voluntarily* to make up their magic. What you're doing basically is putting effort into focusing your willpower toward something you used to do instantly, without a thought. If you go too far out of your way to "get around" the limit, you're violating the spirit of the agreement you made with yourself. The player might be thinking of ways to "trick" the geas into being not obvious, but if the character is busily trying to find ways *around* the Geas he's not really dedicating himself to *following* the Geas, is he? In other words, he's deliverately choosing not to obey the geas, and then you get to ream him over by invoking the rule in the first paragraph of the upper right corner of MitS p. 33:
So in, for example, the Talisman Geas, the Awakened character must be dedicating himself to this Talisman in some way. This I'd interpret to mean showing it off in some way, holding it out when using the geased power (if an active power), or wearing it clearly and conspicuously visible whenever the power is active (for a passive power), etc. Gestures must be something the Awakened character dedicates himself to: something obvious, deliberate, conspicuous, etc. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Nov 3 2004, 12:16 AM
Post
#75
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Oh my <insert deity here>! I think I'm going to make that into flash cards so I can hand it to players. I bow before your awesome reading comprehension skills :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 14th July 2026 - 04:46 AM |
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.