 Regen, Is it balanced as a physad power? |
  |
 Jan 18 2005, 06:51 AM
Post
#76
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf  Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486  |
And yet, it wouldn't count against you with your Initiate Group. Only when you actually use magic without fulfilling your Geas(a) is it considered to be a Geas infringement. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Jan 18 2005, 06:55 AM
Post
#77
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
That's true. It is broken without being infringed, or insert-convoluted-wording-that-I'm-too-tired-to-come-up-with-right-now-here.
~Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz… |
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 07:23 AM
Post
#78
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Which edition of MitS are you using? The Geas/a stricture state that you must take a geas if you lose a Magic point, but it doesn't say you can't break the geas or that if you break your geas, you are violating the stricture. By the way, I'd also like to ask another question: If there was a power that cost 8 PPs, would you allow the perfectly legal Exclusive geas? After all, no clever munchkin wordplay here. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 18 2005, 07:45 AM
Post
#79
|
|||||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I must be remembering this strangely-worded tidbit ...
Yep, I'd have no problems with that. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 18 2005, 08:08 AM
Post
#80
|
|
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Then by that wording, breaking your geas is breaking your stricture, therefore you will get into a lot of trouble with your avatar/group. It doesn't matter that you didn't perform magic.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 08:31 AM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Then a person with a Fasting Geas is truly screwed by that point of view.
It specifically mentions (I believe on the same page) that Geasa only affect your Magical Skills. If you are not using those skills, then the Geasa cannot be broken. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 08:40 AM
Post
#82
|
|
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
It states what tests are not subjet to geasa and that because certain geasa cannot be performed in astral, a geas may hamper Magical skills in astral space.
Also if a player is stupid enough to take a fasting geas, then he deserves to have it bite his PC in the ass. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 08:49 AM
Post
#83
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 18 2005, 09:05 AM
Post
#84
|
|||||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
So? Geasa affects only the character's use of Magical Skills. The important question is: Does the use of Magical Skills affect Geas? Does using Magical Skills break the geas? Unless the condition or restriction forbids your using Magical Skills, the geas is not broken if you use Magical Skills. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 18 2005, 12:53 PM
Post
#85
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 18-August 03 Member No.: 5,518 |
Geas on a spell: Must be using Sorcery.
:D |
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 01:30 PM
Post
#86
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 401 Joined: 7-June 02 From: Living with the straw sheep. Member No.: 2,850 |
Translation: Stricture - Members must be celibate Geas - Chastity Break geas, break stricture. Geas - Fasting Stricture - Members must fast Conclusion: either members all die after a few days, or members must fast for specific days/times/periods (all _days_ of Ramadan or Lent, every Friday). In the latter case, breaking the stricture inevitably breaks the geas, but breaking the geas does not per se imply breaking the stricture. Unless you joined the bonehead Jim Jones magical society for suicidal anorexics o'doom. :spin: Of course, YMMV |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 18 2005, 04:51 PM
Post
#87
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I think the balancer here would be that most groups that either exist for more than about four weeks or aren't composed solely of people with the Nutrition spell wouldn't take permanent fasting as a stricture. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:24 PM
Post
#88
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
You could always have nutrients injected through an IV or somesuch.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:36 PM
Post
#89
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
but "damage" is used interchangably with "injury". you haven't yet proved that you can be damaged without being injured--the difference between damage and injury is never spelled out in the book, or even strongly implied. therefore, damage and injury are the same thing; therefore, stress is an injury. prove that SR3 strongly differentiates between "injury" and "damage", and you'll have a case. as it doesn't, you don't. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:37 PM
Post
#90
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 120 Joined: 3-May 04 Member No.: 6,298 |
Let me quote myself to point out the wording you are basing this whole argument on:
The limitation is not "conditions should generally break the geas at least half the time". It is that the "conditions should generally break the geas about half the time." You're trying to build your whole argument around rules-lawyering the specific language of that line, but you don't match the language of the line. Being broken more than half the time and being broken about half the time are different things. Nowhere in the geas rules does it mention that a tougher geas is better. Nowhere in the geas rules does it mention that a more strict geas is better. If you want to use your power as a GM to say that that is better, then fine, but then we're hitting the fact that the GM can make any ruling they want, so the argument is pointless. By a strict, literal interpretation of the rules, which is what you're trying for, your proposed limitation does not match the criteria you're trying to use. It says "about half the time" and characters aren't injured about half the time.
The concept of a neutral party allowing something is meaningless. They can support a rules modification, but the only people who have the authority to allow rules modifications are: the developers of the game, when acting in an official context, and the GM. Other people can discuss it, approve of it, have an opinion about it, but they can't allow it. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:39 PM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
good point. the only-when-uninjured geas is broken way, way more than half the time, which makes it not viable as a geas.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:41 PM
Post
#92
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Could have 1 level of pain resistance and just always cause a light wound (hit your head on a door or something) enough to be about half the time. Ignore the TN mod, and now you're "injured" properly without the regen healing it. Bam.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:47 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
doesn't work. you're still injured, you're just not taking mods for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 05:58 PM
Post
#94
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Yes, you're injured, which leaves you injured about half the time (if you do it right), without mods, allowing you to take the cheezy geas.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 06:10 PM
Post
#95
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
except that the regen will heal that injury within three seconds, since you're injured.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 06:19 PM
Post
#96
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Stun. Doesn't regenerate.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 06:26 PM
Post
#97
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
i don't believe that's correct, though i don't have my books on me to check. stun does, i'm pretty sure, regenerate.
edit: checked the Critters .pdf. based on the fact that it doesn't specify physical or stun damage in the power, the regeneration power extends to stun damage by default. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 07:38 PM
Post
#98
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,664 Joined: 21-September 04 From: Arvada, CO Member No.: 6,686 |
Where is the critters pdf? I was going off what others said that stun didn't regen because I don't have the book.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 07:39 PM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,453 Joined: 17-September 04 From: St. Paul Member No.: 6,675 |
Free download at shadowrunrpg.com
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2005, 07:42 PM
Post
#100
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Ah, how odd… I was pretty sure it was specified for Shapeshifters, but no, physical damage due to drain is just regenerated much more slowly.
~J |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st November 2025 - 07:15 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.