IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Yes. Another Shapechange Question, Hows it work?
Thanos007
post Nov 21 2004, 09:15 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 369
Joined: 1-September 03
From: New York State
Member No.: 5,563



Play just started a new character, a mage. Took transform as one of his spells. Now how does this work? Lets say for example the target is an ork with a natural body of 8. The mage wants to change said ork in to a tiger also body of 8. What's the target number? The way I read it my target number is 8 and the threshold is 4. So the mage would have to roll 4, eights. Right?

Thanks for the help.

Thanos
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 21 2004, 09:19 PM
Post #2


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



You're right. The target number is 8, the threshold is 4, and he can use a spell of any force to do it (since the difference between the target's Body and the critter that he's being turned into is 0, thus requiring a Force 0 or higher spell). The mage needs to score at least four net 8's on his Spellcasting Test. If the target's Spell Resistance Test drops the total below four successes, the spell fails.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kanada Ten
post Nov 21 2004, 09:27 PM
Post #3


Beetle Eater
********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 4,797
Joined: 3-June 02
From: Oblivion City
Member No.: 2,826



God, they fragged up on the Threshold rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 21 2004, 09:31 PM
Post #4


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Eh, I don't mind them all that much.

The only problem is that it creates a double-whammy effect. Characters not only get to resist the spell using the targeted attribute, but you have to get more successes based upon the target's attribute in the first place. If you only required one or the other (such as a TN based upon the target's Attribute, and a Threshold equal to the difference between the Force of the spell and the critter's Body), it wouldn't be so bad... especially if it was a semi-universal consistancy throughout the entire magic system.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thanos007
post Nov 22 2004, 12:04 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 369
Joined: 1-September 03
From: New York State
Member No.: 5,563



Ok. So let's say I want to change the same ork in to a rat with a body of 1. My target number stays 8 but now the threshold is 11. Right? (8/2=4) +(8-1=7)=11

Thanos
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tisoz
post Nov 22 2004, 12:11 AM
Post #6


Free Spirit
*******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920



But now it needs to be at least a force 7 spell.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 22 2004, 12:16 AM
Post #7


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Actually, reading the rules says otherwise. It's Critter's Body - Target's Body. So that's 1 - 8 = -7, rounded up to 0. The Threshold is 0 as well, so you only need one success.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kanada Ten
post Nov 22 2004, 12:21 AM
Post #8


Beetle Eater
********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 4,797
Joined: 3-June 02
From: Oblivion City
Member No.: 2,826



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Actually, reading the rules says otherwise. It's Critter's Body - Target's Body. So that's 1 - 8 = -7, rounded up to 0. The Threshold is 0 as well, so you only need one success.

:eek:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 22 2004, 12:23 AM
Post #9


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Why do you think I always turn into small animals when I use it? :) It's great for that. It sucks for turning into a combat-monster like an elephant or a shark or something.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kanada Ten
post Nov 22 2004, 12:31 AM
Post #10


Beetle Eater
********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 4,797
Joined: 3-June 02
From: Oblivion City
Member No.: 2,826



I don't read it that way, but hey, 'tis cool. Personally, I go with the absolute difference.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 22 2004, 12:34 AM
Post #11


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



That's probably the best way to handle it. I tend to do that with Transform (since it can be used offensively), but not Shapechange (voluntary targets only).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CoalHeart
post Nov 22 2004, 03:55 PM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 280
Joined: 22-October 03
Member No.: 5,757



Wait.... I'm confused and I don't have my book to double check.

Are you saying turning big burly orks into tiny a mouse is somewhere on the absurdly easy side compared to turning a frail human into a tiger of comporable size?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 22 2004, 03:57 PM
Post #13


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Yep.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CoalHeart
post Nov 22 2004, 04:19 PM
Post #14


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 280
Joined: 22-October 03
Member No.: 5,757



I just found me a new favorite spell. :)

Now to make some aura masked disposable anchoring foci. Human zoo here I come!

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 22 2004, 04:20 PM
Post #15


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Note that this only lowers the requirements for the spell's Threshold and Force. The target number will still be high when targeting some big, burly ork, and they still get to resist the spell.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tisoz
post Nov 23 2004, 02:11 AM
Post #16


Free Spirit
*******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Actually, reading the rules says otherwise. It's Critter's Body - Target's Body. So that's 1 - 8 = -7, rounded up to 0. The Threshold is 0 as well, so you only need one success.

Actually, reading the rules doesn't say Critter's Body - Target's Body. It says it is the difference between the bodies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 23 2004, 03:43 AM
Post #17


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



It's a word problem from basic math.

"The Threshold is equal to half the target's Body plus the difference between the critter's and the target's unaugmented Body Attributes."

Translates directly to...

Threshold = [ Target's Body + ( Critter's Body - Target's Body ) ]

Thus changing into any small creature with a Body of 1 or less will always be a Threshold of 1, and changing into anything with a Body lower than the target's Body will always be easier than turning into something bigger and badder. As well it should.

I do admit that I missed up with my math earlier because I forgot about the first part of the formula.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tisoz
post Nov 23 2004, 03:54 AM
Post #18


Free Spirit
*******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,918
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920



I understand where you are getting your inerpretation. I agree that is what it literally says. However, if they used an example with a critter smaller than the human, I think it would be the absolute value. Or, subtracting the smaller number from the larger number. If they changed the critter in the example to a rat, and did it my way, then you would probably say every critter bigger than the human has a default TN of 2.

It doesn't make sense to me that shrinking a mass (Body 6 human to body 1 rat)should be simpler than expanding it (Body 6 human to Body 8 tiger.) Further, that shrinking a mass to different degrees (Body 6 person to body 5 critter compared to body 1 critter) should be the same difficulty (default TN2.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 23 2004, 04:06 AM
Post #19


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



I don't mind it for Shapechange at all. While it does offer up some useful options, you are still transforming into a horribly vulnerable creature. A harsh sneeze could kill most Body 1 creatures without even trying, for instance.

The only real problem comes with Transform because it makes it relatively easy to dispatch powerful foes with a single not-too-hefty-in-the-Drain-department spell. 'Course with thier Body still being the target number, it's not that big of a deal except in the middle to lower-upper Body scores.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gilthanis
post Nov 25 2004, 03:43 PM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 139
Joined: 19-September 04
From: Charleston, IL
Member No.: 6,676



QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
It's a word problem from basic math.

"The Threshold is equal to half the target's Body plus the difference between the critter's and the target's unaugmented Body Attributes."


If the description was solely a math test yes, but since it is just describing the difference the threshold can make, I would say that it really means the distance between two points (still a math equation). From body A to body B rather than a reduced target number for shrinking. I also don't think that the shapechange spell requires the target to resist whith their attribute since they voluntarilly took it. Transform I would only require a resistance test if they were involuntary.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cold-Dragon
post Nov 27 2004, 07:12 PM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 753
Joined: 31-October 03
Member No.: 5,780



hey all, figured I'd point out a question I just got from earlier statements...

if the book says "the difference between the critter's body and the target's body" isn't that saying the steps, not math? I can understand reading it like this in math:

critter - target = number

but if it's purely in logic over math, then it can be

crittier - target = number

OR

target - critter = number

When I read it, I see it as whatever result makes a positive number (a difference between them). So if it's a critter of 8 and a target of 8, then it doesn't matter, but if it's a critter of 4 and a target of 8, then the formula is forced to use the smaller number last so you get a positive real difference (technically a negative difference doesn't exist unless you can force numbers to stay in one place).

so in that case, the formula is forced into:

8(target) - 4(critter) = 4 (number).

I would think going from giant burly orc to a rat should be as hard as vice versa (that's a lot of mass and muscle and such to make vanish or appear).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 27 2004, 07:22 PM
Post #22


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



Sure, that may very well be the intent if not the wording.

Personally, I just have a problem with seeing why it's so relatively easy to turn a really buff human into a bear (both having Body 9) than a tiny little fox (Body 2), but if you have a slightly below-average human (Body 2), it's pathetically easy to turn him into that tiny little fox, but turning him into a bear is nigh impossible.

In fact, even with a Force 6 spell, you can't turn the former into a fox or the latter into a bear at all. Yet the same Force 1 spell can perform the other transformations without a problem whatsoever.

The whole "change in mass" sillyness of an excuse has no impact on anything, either. The change in mass between the human and the fox regardless of Body is immense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cold-Dragon
post Nov 27 2004, 07:36 PM
Post #23


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 753
Joined: 31-October 03
Member No.: 5,780



maybe the idea of the body difference is suppose to represent just getting a 'new boddy' over all? Your mind might be use to you being night and burly (or small and frail) going from one to the other would probably confuse the average person a bit. Or some confusing jumbo about science or not.


My guess is they wanted control factors to help keep from having giant elephants stomping supermarkets and so on. (or turning tanks over).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 27 2004, 07:46 PM
Post #24


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



That's the thing. (My interpretation of) the rules make it a bitch to try and turn into an elephant or a rhino, but not into a mouse or bluejay. It's just that the tougher you are to begin with, the easier it to turn into those combat monsters without increasing the difficulty of turning into a harmless little critter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gilthanis
post Nov 28 2004, 05:34 AM
Post #25


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 139
Joined: 19-September 04
From: Charleston, IL
Member No.: 6,676



Because to get as complex as you are wanting to justify it Doc, then it would require more than a Body Attribute to justify Arnold's size from PeeWee. Or 6'5" from 4'2". The higher the body represents typically more than just pure size, but muscle density which would be more resiliant to change than fatty tissue. Don't get me wrong, you can have a really fat guy with body 9, but that isn't the only possibility that the rating covers. In your example, reducing mass should be just as difficult as gaining mass. Otherwise you would be a fox with a 9 body compacted into a typically small 1 or 2 body. That would be a pretty brawn fox. To justify it you would have to say the body disappeared into nothing and blame it on the calorie hungary manasphere.

I agree the wording is exact, but I will stick to my earlier opinion. The wording implies the difference between the two, not a set one minus two and all negatives are free theory.
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: 27th October 2020 - 04:18 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.