 Enhance Aim, Or does it? |
  |
 Nov 18 2004, 12:17 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,133 Joined: 3-October 04 Member No.: 6,722  |
I'm currently thrashing out the details of a character for Quartos's game on RPGi. During the discussions - which involved a Personal Enhance Aim (Extended) spell - he commented that as a Detection spell Enhance Aim would run the risk of being resisted.
I'm intrigued. It's something I'd never even considered. For some reason, I think I'd got the idea that the spell affected me, not my targets, although I see what he's getting at. What do the rest of you think? NOTE: I'm not looking to circumvent the GM here, I just thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion. |
 |
 
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:18 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
By canon, it is resisted by anyone and everyone it would be used against. In practice, I've never seen a GM do it. Myself included.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:38 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
huh...well...that sounds silly. I've never used that spell (haven't been a mage often, though they are often in the party).
Imagine if I said, Enhanced Vision: can be countered by those you see. Um...huh? So I can see better unless they roll a counter to it that suddenly puts a pocket void in my vision? Strange concept to me. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:40 AM
Post
#4
|
|||
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
Those should be Health Spells anyway. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:44 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Actually, there should be at least two categories of Detection Spells. Those that alter your ability to perceive, and those that reveal information to you.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:51 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
I kind of hate that TN 6 (combat sense is TN 4), that it needs 2 successes per point of reduction, that it is maximum reduction of half of Force. And you need some way of sustaining it to be of real use.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:53 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Getting a -2 bonus at Force 4 is pretty easy, but anything beyond that requires tons of mojo and Karma Rerolls. But that's as it should be.. gives magicians with a combat focus a chance of duplicating a Smartlink's bonus without the cyber.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 01:12 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
With 12 dice aren't you looking at a reroll or 2 to get four successes? So anytime you need to drop and recast it, you are running through your karma pool.
I think 4 successes on 12 dice would take a lot. 12 dice, expect 2 successes. Reroll 10 dice, expect 1 2/3 successes. 2/3 success doesn't cut it 1/3 of the time, so another reroll. 3 karma pool to get 4 successes. Usually I have other things I want to save my karma pool for, especially mid-run if I need to drop and re-cast. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 01:58 AM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
So instead of aiming at the target, aim at his clothes. Inanimate nonmagical objects don't get a resistance test; and I've yet to see anyone with magical focus underoos. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 18 2004, 02:06 AM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
I've yet to see a GM let that slide. Same with levitate. Trying to overcome limitations of spells with mind games doesn't work in my game. The rule of thumb for me is if invisibility would cover it, the person can resist for it (in the cases of magicians skirting the rules). This post has been edited by Kanada Ten: Nov 18 2004, 02:08 AM |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 18 2004, 02:09 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
well, that's why you cast it in the comfort of your home, and toss it into a sustaining focus. hell, if you're not doing that, your -2 TN is going to be cancelled out by the +2 TN for sustaining.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 02:13 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 556 Joined: 28-May 04 From: Moorhead, MN, USA Member No.: 6,367 |
But new targets still get to resist, don't they? Don't you need to write down the roll for all sustained/quickened spells like that?
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 02:44 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,066 Joined: 5-February 03 Member No.: 4,017 |
Since the TN for the spell doesn't change, you only need the success count when someone tries to resist. A sustained spell targeted like stunball would need each and every number of the test recorded.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 02:47 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
First, you shouldn't confuse the law of averages with what's accomplishable. Second, it's not that hard to recast the spell. It has an easy Drain Code and if you're noticing you're not getting the type of a response that you're used to from it, break the spell and recast it into your focus until you do. Two or three shots with max dice should get it done. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 18 2004, 03:26 AM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
I wish I remembered how to do probabilities. Here's a shot at it though.
Assuming Sorcery 6, Spell Pool 6, Willpower 6. Probability of rolling 4 6s with 12 dice. Need to roll a 6 with 3 dice, four times in a row. Rolling 3 dice, should get a 6 every other roll. (1/2) * (1/2) * (1/2) * (1/2) = 1/16. 16 complex actions is less than a minute, maybe less than 30 seconds. To resist drain, need not roll 1s on 3 of 6 dice. Would be unfortunate enough to roll a 1 on 2 dice 3 times in a row. (1/3) * (1/3) * (1/3) = 1/27. So expect to take drain more than every other time you succeed in rolling 4 6s. I have no idea if these calculations are correct. They make sense to me. If someone who knows how to figure probabilities wants to note the formula, I would be quite pleased. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 03:30 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Here's an example of what I mean. I'm using Irony's Web Dice 'cause I'm too lazy to roll a ton right now.
Roll 1: 4, 2, 6, 4, 4, 1, 6, 1, 3, 2, 2, 2 = 37. Roll 2: 3, 2, 3, 2, 2, 5, 5, 3, 6, 2, 4, 6 = 43. Roll 3: 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 1, 3, 1, 6, 4, 6, 6 = 55. Roll 4: 6, 6, 3, 1, 3, 4, 2, 1, 5, 1, 1, 1 = 34. Roll 5: 6, 6, 5, 6, 2, 4, 6, 4, 1, 5, 6, 6 = 57. Rolls 3 and 5 both gave four or more successes. That's nearly half of the 12d6 rolls. It's not hard. Averages and probabilities are nice for some things, but as any gambler (as opposed to casino) knows, you shouldn't rely on them to be accurate. They're only useful when you're rolling millions of times over and over and over again, not for a handful of rolls. Every time you roll that die, there's a one in six chance you're going to get any number; it doesn't matter if you just rolled a 6 20 times in a row, that next roll still has a 1-in-6 chance of hitting 6. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 04:06 AM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,948 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
I understand what you mean. I can flip a coin 5 times and get 5 tails. It doesn't mean it will ever happen again.
That's why I was hoping someone could post the probability and expected outcomes. |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 05:33 AM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Senior GM Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,406 Joined: 12-April 03 From: Redmond, WA Member No.: 4,442 |
(FYI, tisoz, it will happen again. Trust me on this.)
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 06:26 AM
Post
#19
|
|||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Oh, I grant that there'd be a question as to rather or not a called-shot penalty would be needed at this point; but the general idea is pretty safe. Essentially, Doc and others are "letting it slide" by skipping the target's resistance test, which amounts to the same thing. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Nov 18 2004, 11:18 AM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 210 Joined: 8-October 04 Member No.: 6,736 |
I don't know a shorthand way of doing it, but here goes. Chances of rolling 2 or fewer ones is (1 way to roll 0 ones+6*(5)^5 ways to roll 1 one+15*(5)^4 ways to roll 2 ones)/(6^6 total rolls possible) Comes out to about a 60% chance of not taking drain. If you put a spell pool die or two into resisting drain instead of casting, you will dramatically increase your chances of shrugging it off. With 8 dice resisting, you need to roll 4 or fewer ones. (1+8*5^7+28*5^6+56*5^5+70*5^4)/(6^8)=.763 I don't know if changing your chances from 3 in 5 to 3 in 4 is worth it, though, since you'll be drawing spell pool dice off of your casting. There must be some optimal number of dice to put in each, but I don't know what it is. Your best bet is to just get a trauma damper so you only have to stage it down once or have an improve willpower sustaining focus. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Nov 18 2004, 12:57 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,073 Joined: 23-August 04 Member No.: 6,587 |
Of cause with the spell you can combine it with ether smart goggles (including version 2) to get an additional -1 TN (and +2TN for called shots) or a optical scope and laser sight for long range work (as my current PC uses it)
If your pre casting the spell at home into a sustaining focus use max spell pool for the casting. You will recover from the light stun quickly enough. If you have more than 6 spell pool (albino gnomes or initiates) put the rest in drain resistance. We have not been rolling resistance tests for the targets. I don’t know if that is a house rule or a mistake on the part of my GM (KremlinKOA on these boards) but I didn’t think it was necessary. It doesn’t make much since for a spell that is supposed to augment your skill to be dependant on the stubbornness of your targets. Edward |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 04:57 PM
Post
#22
|
|||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 236 Joined: 14-March 04 From: Cal Poly: SLO Member No.: 6,155 |
Doesn't work. Targeting what somebody has with them is the same as targeting them. If you get them as soon as they put it on, maybe, but once they've been wearing it for a while, it gets the same magic stuff as their own aura. Assensing, Pg 171BBB
I remember seing more on that somewhere, but can't find it right now. Also, most detection spells, including inhanced aim, are mana based, which wouldn't work on clothing anyways. Spells, Type, Pg 178BBB
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Nov 18 2004, 05:14 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 401 Joined: 7-June 02 From: Living with the straw sheep. Member No.: 2,850 |
I've never played Enhance Aim as requiring a resistance test...
I interpret Enhance Aim as giving you a better sense of where you're pointing your weapon relative to what you're looking at - hence, it doesn't need to overcome any kind of resistance from whatever you are aiming at. If Enhance Aim requires a resistance test, does a spell that grants you lowlight vision require a resistance test? And if not, what is the difference between the two? Is there a canon interpretation of this that isn't hideously ambiguous? |
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2004, 05:29 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Canon states that Detection Spells are resisted unless otherwise specified in the individual spell's description (like in Combat Senses). No such exception is made in the description for Enhanced Aim.
... but there should be. :D |
|
|
|
|
Nov 19 2004, 01:33 AM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 |
Well, if Clairvoyance allows a resistance test, why not Enhanced Aim?
JaronK |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st April 2025 - 11:31 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.