IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Vehicle armour and the armour spell
hermit
post Mar 27 2005, 02:19 PM
Post #1


The King In Yellow
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,805
Joined: 26-February 05
From: JWD
Member No.: 7,121



In short: how do they stack? the description says the armour spell "generates a barrier that adds to both ballistic and impact armour". Does this imply the spell counts as soft armour, or does it add hardened armour on top of a vehicle?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psykotisk_overle...
post Mar 27 2005, 02:48 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 269
Joined: 8-November 04
Member No.: 6,817



Since it adds its rating to the existing armor the type of armor generated will be the same as the type that is already affecting the target. Thus, a veichle with armor 4 targeted by a force 5 armor spell will function as a veichle with armor 9.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Mar 27 2005, 03:27 PM
Post #3


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



The way I would rule it is that it's soft armor regardless of what it's cast on. In past threads it has been established that it's not a good idea to think about it too hard -- you might run into trouble with characters buying normal clothing with Gel Packs (at negligible cost, providing B1/I1 hardened armor) and then casting Armor-6 on top of that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Mar 27 2005, 03:28 PM
Post #4


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



I agree with Austere Emancipator on this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edward
post Mar 27 2005, 03:41 PM
Post #5


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,073
Joined: 23-August 04
Member No.: 6,587



Full magician.
Cash A
VCR
Force 6 sustaining focus (armour)
Vehicle armour +6 to command vehicle.

I rather think not. Although a glowing field around your vehicle really dose scream shoot me.

But Seriously
I would rule that it reduces the power of the weapon by the spells force (halved for AV and APDS) before considering the vehicle armour.

In other words it is soft armour.

I would also rule that no mater what other armour your wearing the armour provided by an armour spell is not hardened. If you want it to be hardened learn the hardened armour spell witch has +1 drain level and only adds half force to hardened armour. (or something like that).

Edward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hermit
post Mar 27 2005, 03:57 PM
Post #6


The King In Yellow
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,805
Joined: 26-February 05
From: JWD
Member No.: 7,121



Thanks for the replies, guys!

Sounds reasonable. I was wondering since my group's mage knows that spell (being a physad, he doesn't have too many spells to begin with), and after encountering a chimera and losing an irretrievable drone (Branscan), I was wondering if that way, a drone (or, for thatb matter, any vehicle) could get an added layer of protection.

Soft armour makes sense, as does calculating it before the vehicle armour comes into effect. that's nasty enough:

QUOTE
Drone (armour 4) is attacked by someone firing a HMG (11S base damage). Armour 5 is cast on the drone. The effective power level of the HMG drops to 6S; according to the vehicle armour rules, that halves to 3, meaning the drone isn't affected by the attack.


Very effective, even without adding itself as hardened armour.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psykotisk_overle...
post Mar 27 2005, 04:12 PM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 269
Joined: 8-November 04
Member No.: 6,817



"The armor spell is compatible with all armor types and adds its rating to the rating of the physical armor being worn"
This implies that the armor provided by the spell is the same as the armor the target is currently wearing. "always soft armor" is a house rule.

It is however a reasonable house rule, since this spell would be very powerfull when cast on veichles otherwise.
When cast on anything but veichles it doesn't matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Mar 27 2005, 04:11 PM
Post #8


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



QUOTE (psykotisk_overlegen)
When cast on anything but veichles it doesn't matter.

Yes it does. Consider Gel-packed Secure Long Coat (available at chargen for 3250 nyyen) + Armor-6 vs. 10 rounds of FA HMG fire. If you just added the Armor spell as hardened armor, you'd be immune. If you add it as normal (soft) armor, the guy's still facing 10D.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spetulhu
post Mar 27 2005, 04:20 PM
Post #9


Target
*

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 15
Joined: 27-February 05
From: Finland
Member No.: 7,122



Are you even allowed to cast that spell on a vehicle?

And if it's allowed, is it at higher difficulty and risk? It would take a larger field to protect a car than a person, for example. Why should it be as easy as protecting yourself?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psykotisk_overle...
post Mar 27 2005, 04:35 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 269
Joined: 8-November 04
Member No.: 6,817



In order to affect a veichle it would have to be of a force at least equal to
(Object resistance+body+(half armor))divided by two.


Sorry, yes it does makes a difference for things that are not veichles to, thanks for pointing that out. Edit2: but your example is invalid, as gel-packs can't be added to a secure long coat. But i still see your point. (loves to nitpick)


edit: in effect this means that a veichle with loads of armor could only be affected by a really powerfull armor spell. So the only possible magical increase in protection would be a friggin huge one, when the opposite would be IMO the most reasonable. Oh well, such is game balance (and the lack thereof)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowGhost
post Mar 27 2005, 04:42 PM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 14-July 03
Member No.: 4,928



You can only cast this on Characters (or living things):

QUOTE
This spell creates a glowing field of magical energy around the target that protects against impact and ballistic damage. One success is enough to create the magical field around the character of an Armor Rating equal to the Force of the spell. The Armor spell is compatible with all armor types and adds its rating to the rating of the physical armor being worn.


While 'Target' may be ambiguous, 'around the character' & 'physical armor being worn' are pretty explicit.

You could create a custom armor spell for vehicles.... But I'd hate to see the drain and Target number for it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowGhost
post Mar 27 2005, 04:48 PM
Post #12


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 14-July 03
Member No.: 4,928



QUOTE (psykotisk_overlegen @ Mar 27 2005, 04:35 PM)
In order to affect a veichle it would have to be of a force at least equal to
(Object resistance+body+(half armor))divided by two.

Here's where we can spend 10 pages debating the word 'affect'... IMO, the armor spell *doesn't* affect a vehicle (even if you could cast it on a vehicle).... it creates a barrier around the vehicle. The vehicle itself is in no way changed/modified or otherwise 'affected' any more than if you had a troll standing in front with a riot shield to block shots coming at the vehicle.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Mar 27 2005, 04:55 PM
Post #13


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,017
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187



Nothing canon to suggest that it is hard or soft. It simply produces a magical field of a certain Armour Rating. By the book, it should stack on top of the Hardened Armour. However, whether it can be cast at a vehicle, it is open to debate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tarantula
post Mar 27 2005, 05:43 PM
Post #14


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,664
Joined: 21-September 04
From: Arvada, CO
Member No.: 6,686



QUOTE (psykotisk_overlegen)
Sorry, yes it does makes a difference for things that are not veichles to, thanks for pointing that out. Edit2: but your example is invalid, as gel-packs can't be added to a secure long coat. But i still see your point. (loves to nitpick)

Why can't you? CC requirements for Gel Packs are x2/x4 availability, x5 cost, +2 street index. Secure long coat is 3/24hrs, 650, with gel packs that goes up to, 6/4days, 3250. Whats the problem?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psykotisk_overle...
post Mar 27 2005, 05:42 PM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 269
Joined: 8-November 04
Member No.: 6,817



You can't add any mods to securetech clothing.

Edit: so, there's nothing saying that you can cast it on veichles, but if you could it would add to the veichle armor right? And casting it on someone wearing hardened armor would improve their hardened armor, it is not another layer of soft armor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tarantula
post Mar 27 2005, 06:23 PM
Post #16


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,664
Joined: 21-September 04
From: Arvada, CO
Member No.: 6,686



You're right.

Canonly, it adds directly to the armor rating, if its hardened, it adds hardened, vehicle it adds vehicles, etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mortax
post Mar 27 2005, 08:08 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 571
Joined: 9-January 05
From: In the 9th circle of hell
Member No.: 6,950



True, but by cannon rules the avg. person weighs 150 kilos.
(Bod 3*50kg). Some rules don't make sense or are game unbalancing. I'd say make it soft armor, as not doing so make it too easy to munchkin.

Just my MHO, I could be wrong. :-)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Mar 27 2005, 08:07 PM
Post #18


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



QUOTE (Mortax)
True, but by cannon rules the avg. person weighs 150 kilos.
(Bod 3*50kg).

Where is this rule in SR3? I have never seen or heard of it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psykotisk_overle...
post Mar 28 2005, 12:48 PM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 269
Joined: 8-November 04
Member No.: 6,817



According to canon the average human weighs 70kg, (SR3), I don't know where you pulled that body*50kg from but that's just sick, makes humans range from 50kg to 300kg, with those being in best shape and fitness also bieng the most obese ones. Just sick!


Now, if you're casting on veichles I can see how this is munchkinizing, as you're vastly improving the spells efficiency. (But I guess on second thought that casting it on Veichles probably isn't possible in the first place)

However, casting on any armored or unarmored person I fail to see the problem with letting it be hardened armor for those wearing hardened armor.
Almost all regular armor is legal, completely legal. AFAIK all hardened armor is not only restricted, but is also impossible for civilians to get a permit for. If you're wearing very visible hardened armor and going around with a glowing armor field around you, you deserve a high armor-rating, because you can expect a lot more trouble than anyone else. Not only are you wearing mil-spec gear, you're surrounded by an illegaly high force spell that is visible.

Now, for people wearing normal or no armor, and the armor spell, the benefit isn't to great, but it's still good.
For people wearing hardened and the armor spell, the benefit is great, but they're like a glowing sign saying arrest me.

Limiting this spell when cast on hardened armor would be like limiting the enhance aim (or whatever it's called) when cast on someone using a big gun, because their net benefit of hitting someone with their gun is higher than that of a character with a hold-out.


In short, why houserule "soft armor only" to penalize those willing to put a glowing field around their very obvious and illegal armor?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bossemanden
post Mar 28 2005, 08:00 PM
Post #20


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 3-August 04
Member No.: 6,535



If we consider the Armour spell to always be soft armour, then another question arises.
Is the armour spell calculated before or after any hardened armour?

An example:

Brick the Thick is wearing a light military armor (hardened) with rating 7/6 and an armour spell force 5 on top of that.

Someone shoots him with 3 rounds from an Ares HV MP-LMG (6S base staging to 9D).

Either the Light Military armor takes the damage down to 2D (with the armour spell not really helping) or the armour spell drops the damage to 3D which is below half power of the hardened armour, thus effectively doing no damage.

Now does Brick the Thick soak 2D or nothing?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Mar 28 2005, 08:07 PM
Post #21


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



It does state that the glowing field of the Armor spell is cast around the subject, so logically it should count first, lowering the power of the attack before factoring the actual worn armor.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Mar 28 2005, 08:12 PM
Post #22


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



QUOTE (Bossemanden)
Brick the Thick is wearing a light military armor (hardened) with rating 7/6 and an armour spell force 5 on top of that.

Someone shoots him with 3 rounds from an Ares HV MP-LMG (6S base staging to 9D).

No matter what, Brick the Thick is unharmed because the base, unmodified Power of the attack is lesser than or equal to the rating of the hardened armor.

Fortune: Yes, that would be logical. And remind me to try the unarmored clothing + Gel Packs + Armor-6 combo in any game you're running. ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Mar 28 2005, 08:31 PM
Post #23


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ Mar 29 2005, 06:12 AM)
Fortune: Yes, that would be logical. And remind me to try the unarmored clothing + Gel Packs + Armor-6 combo in any game you're running. 

What would be the alternative?

Note that I am not, nor have I ever advocated that the Armor spell increase hardened armor. As far as I am concerned, it is always normal armor, no matter what the person is actually wearing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Austere Emancipa...
post Mar 28 2005, 08:39 PM
Post #24


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,889
Joined: 3-August 03
From: A CPI rank 1 country
Member No.: 5,222



QUOTE (Fortune)
What would be the alternative?

If I got what you're saying right, the alternative would be to count all armor at the same time, and still consider the hardened armor "no effect" limit to be just the rating of the actual piece of armor providing the hardened effect.

For example, consider the above-mentioned unarmored clothing + Gel Packs + Force 6 Armor. This provides hardened Ballistic 1/Impact 1, +6 points of Ballistic and Impact from the spell. If you factor the Armor spell in first, the character is in effect immune to any single shots or attacks with a Power of less than or equal to 7. A SMG burst (7M -> 10S) would, I assume, still do damage to the character according to this application of the rules.

If you counted all the armor at the same time, someone with the above set-up could still theoretically be harmed with a Light Pistol firing normal ammunition.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Mar 28 2005, 08:37 PM
Post #25


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



I think that's basically what I meant. I guess I just didn't word it well. I meant that the Hardened Armor wouldn't (or shouldn't) be increased by the spell.

[edit] Looking back, I didn't say anything like what I meant. I always factor the total Armor Rating all at once. To do otherwise would be somewhat silly. [/edit]
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: 24th April 2019 - 06:28 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.