Shadowrun 3rd Revised - Dumpshock Forums

Shadowrun 3rd Revised, our backs turned, looking down the path

Taran View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 02:02 AM Post #551
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 164 Joined: 7-July 03 Member No.: 4,891	There's been a lot of talk upthread about eliminating magic loss for deadly wounds. I'm certainly in favor. Does anyone like those rules?

Kagetenshi View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 02:12 AM Post #552
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802	I do, but I'm not deeply committed to keeping them. Why eliminate? ~J

Taran View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 02:45 AM Post #553
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 164 Joined: 7-July 03 Member No.: 4,891	#1: As Kyoto Kid said, they fall disproportionately on adepts, who are the least able to mitigate the magic loss. #2: It's simultaneously severe and random. Losing a point of magic is huge (though, again, huger for adepts), and its loss isn't something you can control, really. I mean, you can avoid taking D wounds, but you're avoiding that anyway. D wounds are never fun, and having taken one you're at the mercy of fate. Which brings us to... #3: It's a kick in the teeth. You just took a deadly wound, so something already went badly wrong and your life sucks. This is especially true if you can't heal right away. To have that failure permanently memorialized with a point of magic loss is beyond harsh, it's mean. PS: WTF? When I first replied, the forum listed Lindt as the most recent responder. After I previewed, Kagetenshi was listed as the author of the last post. I reiterate - WTF?

Kagetenshi

Jul 5 2007, 02:55 AM

Post #554

Manus Celer Dei

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,008
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802

QUOTE (Taran @ Jul 4 2007, 09:45 PM)

#2: It's simultaneously severe and random. Losing a point of magic is huge (though, again, huger for adepts), and its loss isn't something you can control, really.

The rules for permanent injury from Deadly damage for mundanes fall under the same category. Moreover, Streetsams and (especially) Riggers are more likely to be killed outright and unavoidably (HoGging aside) by permanent injury. Is its elimination also desired?

~J

Kyoto Kid View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 02:57 AM Post #555
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490	...it basically makes no real sense other than a half-baked way of imposing an extra limitation on the awakened. Basically there are enough other factors that can adversely affect MA and magical activity including: Permanent Loss ...Essence/Body Index loss due to Implantation (voluntary or involuntary) ...Essence loss due to grievous wounds/dismemberment ...Essence Drain Critter Power Temporary Loss/Reduction ...Mana voids ...Background Counts The key here is the relationship of Essence and MA. If Essence is unaffected, MA should not be permanently lost.

Kagetenshi View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 03:00 AM Post #556
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802	Which leads to the impossibility of a single-grade Initiate ever burning out (or someone whose Magic has exceeded their Essence, if using a system where starting Magic may not be 6. Also, I'm ignoring cyberzombification because I think it's exceptional enough to ignore). There are principles that can be used, but that one is a non-starter for me. ~J

Taran

Jul 5 2007, 03:22 AM

Post #557

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 164
Joined: 7-July 03
Member No.: 4,891

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

The rules for permanent injury from Deadly damage for mundanes fall under the same category.

...except that we don't use those rules, because they're painful and arbitrary.

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Moreover, Streetsams and (especially) Riggers are more likely to be killed outright and unavoidably (HoGging aside) by permanent injury. Is its elimination also desired?

No, of course not. C'mon. Everybody risks death when they take deadly injury (though I'd expect mages to be at a higher risk of that because they tend to have lower Body than the sams). Mages face this random other risk that riggers and samurai do not, one that (again) they cannot protect themselves against. They can only try to not die, just like everybody else.

QUOTE (Kagetenshin)

Which leads to the impossibility of a single-grade Initiate ever burning out

Even without magic loss from deadly wounds initiates can still burn out. The easiest way is that magic-loss-causing injection we were talking about. IIRC some of the Awakened drugs risk your Magic too, if you have any. If we wanted, we could have drugs affect Magic, at least some that offer magical power. The essential difference between this stuff and magic loss through deadly injury is that it's not random; it has to happen as the direct result of a reasoned choice, either by the mage or by his enemies.

Kagetenshi

Jul 5 2007, 03:27 AM

Post #558

Manus Celer Dei

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,008
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802

QUOTE (Taran @ Jul 4 2007, 10:22 PM)

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Moreover, Streetsams and (especially) Riggers are more likely to be killed outright and unavoidably (HoGging aside) by permanent injury. Is its elimination also desired?

No, of course not. C'mon. Everybody risks death when they take deadly injury (though I'd expect mages to be at a higher risk of that because they tend to have lower Body than the sams). Mages face this random other risk that riggers and samurai do not, one that (again) they cannot protect themselves against. They can only try to not die, just like everybody else.

I meant the risk of taking Permanent Injury (which it appears we aren't using—I thought I'd rolled way back when, though that may have been on my own initiative) and rolling a 6, losing a point of Essence which will cause many a Sam or Rigger (who is less likely to have the Body to pass the Permanent Injury roll in the first place) to go negative and autodie.

Edit: I'm leaving the above because it demonstrates my thinking, but I'm an idiot. A 6 loses you Reaction, you don't lose Essence from it. Regardless, the proposal that we scrap those rules as well makes things consistent and removes that part of my objection.

As for the "impossibility" bit, that was a counter to Kyoto Kid's proposal that nothing that doesn't cause loss of Essence should cause permanent loss of Magic—everything you point out violates that. If only loss of Essence can cause loss of Magic, either we need to make the Magic loss greater than 1-to-1 or no character will ever lose more Magic than they have Essence.

~J

Taran View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 03:38 AM Post #559
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 164 Joined: 7-July 03 Member No.: 4,891	Dear God. I had no idea that rule existed; your comments make much more sense now. No, I don't use that. In fact, I have an SR3 core PDF; I'm going to go find that rule, cut it out of my hardcopy book, and burn it. I'm not at all kidding, and I know the pages are two-sided, but I am seriously that unhappy. Ok, back. I couldn't find it, but I can never find anything in the paper books anyway. But for reals, no fooling, every time you take deadly injury, if your essence is < 1 you have a 1 in 6 chance to just die? That's even worse than permanent attribute loss, which is how I'd thought that worked. What a stupid, meaningless death that would be. And yeah, ok, Initiation makes Magic = Essence a nonstarter, I agree. Initiates should be able to burn out.

Kagetenshi View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 03:41 AM Post #560
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802	Well, you get a Body roll against TN 4 to prevent losing any attributes, but you have an n in 6 chance of autodying if you fail that test where n is the number of attributes other than Charisma (oddly enough, but including Reaction) that you have a natural 1 in. Worse yet, it reduces your RML by one, which in turn reduces your attribute max by one or two. Yeah, I hadn't thought about it, but it deserves a place on the chopping block. Or maybe we should tie wild horses to its limbs and send them running to the corners of the earth. Anyway, in light of the fact that geasa for magic loss are deader than the dodo, I guess I'll give my stamp of approval to removing the magic loss for D wounds rules. Edit: I should clarify: I'm eliminating the rules for losing attributes from Deadly damage. The rules for permanent damage as in having to buy some replacement organs don't offend me nearly so much, and I'm inclined to keep them, though the doubled healing time for zero successes may be excessive (especially in the SotSW style of game, where even the base times are nigh-eternal). ~J

Taran View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 03:57 AM Post #561
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 164 Joined: 7-July 03 Member No.: 4,891	Wait, wait. You lose a point from a random attribute, where "attribute" is defined to include both Essence and Reaction but not Charisma? WTF? WTFFFFFF? No mortal internet can contain my hatred for this. In fairness, though, if anyone else likes this rule, or Magic loss for that matter, they should probably say something. I am, after all, hating on this rule without having ever used it. PS: Where is it? I'd still like to destroy it physically. And maybe read it. On Preview: Yeah, organ loss is fine with me too. It sucks, but at least you can fix it. Doubled healing time would probably also be ok in a game with a normal amount of downtime and access to real medical care; the heart of bug city is not a great test bed for that sort of thing. People running online games, what's your experience?

Kagetenshi View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 04:04 AM Post #562
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802	I'm not just considering the heart of Bug City—think about your game before Bug City went down, or my game. We've been playing three years real-time, and your game has advanced about two months (so someone with a Deadly wound healing at the doubled base time would have just healed down to Serious) while mine has advanced about a month. Edit: also, it turns out that Alex only needs ten days of rest. I figure that should be vastly easier to come by than fourteen, though it still may be three more years real-time before I lose those wound mods :) As for the section, as I've been saying in my unclear fashion, it turns out that Essence is not in fact at stake. It's on pages 127 and 128. Apparently the writers couldn't conceive of physical trauma reducing your force of personality, which suggests that they did no research whatsoever. C'est la vie. ~J

Critias

Jul 5 2007, 04:55 AM

Post #563

Freelance Elf

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 7,324
Joined: 30-September 04
From: Texas
Member No.: 6,714

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)

QUOTE (Critias)

If you make an Adept that happens to have Edged Weapons instead of or in addition to an applicable martial art, a GM that lets you tote around reach melee weapons without problem, a guy that has a couple hundred thousand dollars burning a hole in his credstick, a GM that lets you tote around foci without problem, and an Adept with the karma to burn on being able to use it, great.

...which is why as an adept you wait until you initiate and get Masking MetaMagic before getting the Weapon Focus (as the original KK did). Also, as long as it is not Activated it doesn't broadcast it's a focus. So carrying it around, even using it in its "turned off" mode would not draw any more attention than another mundane weapon. Also I would like to think most adepts are not so stupid as to openly carry something like a Katana or a Bastard Sword everywhere they go (that's what smaller more concealable weapons like Cougar Fineblades are for). Someone who does so asking for it.

Unfortunately until the rewrite (addition of the Critical Strike power), Unarmed combat was fairly pitiful in the damage category for you only received your Strength(M) as the power rating which, (unless you were a Troll Adept, or going the way of the burnout with Titanium Bone Lacing) could pretty much be staged down if not shaken off by someone wearing an Armoured Jacket, a bike messenger helmet, & forearm guards.

I'm not saying that Unarmed combat is a total waste for a human or elf, just that I see it is more a backup than a primary attack.

Weapon Foci were originally brought up as a way for a starting Adept to whoop up on a starting Mage. That's what I was replying to, when I expressed my confusion/disdain for those that think Weapon Foci are the answer to all an Adept's problems.

A starting character has the problems I mentioned, in terms of not being able to Mask, not having karma to bond with it in the first place, and that sort of thing. A starting character is what was being talked about.

Also, I specifically mentioned the problems with carrying around a sword/katana/broadsword in reply to the "Reach" benefit that was specifically listed (but once I brought up the problem with Reach weapons, IE, they're long, the Weapon Focus changed into a Cougar Fineblade). Reach was, in fact, the very first advantage to a Weapon Focus that you listed. So is your Weapon Focus a Reach weapon (with all the subtlety problems those weapons cause, and a dubious advantage nullified by the use of a single martial arts manuever) or a Cougar Fineblade (so that the very first benefit you listed is null and void)?

Unarmed Combat is plenty dangerous, if you're good at it and spend CP wisely. You can be better at it if you choose to drop a single power point on Strength Boost, lose a little magic for even just Plastic Bone Lacing (with at least half an Essence point still left to buy other goodies with, for a negligible 1 point of magic that needs to be Geased), both of the above, etc, etc (all for a fraction of the cost of a weapon focus in the first place, and all give additional benefits). Unarmed is hardly the redheaded stepchild you make it out to be, even for Elves and Humans.

And you always have Unarmed with you. Some GMs will let you carry a sword or a polearm, or even just a knife, everywhere you go. Mine don't, so I prefer -- especially with an Adept -- for my characters themselves to be the weapons. If you ARE in a situation where you can carry a weapon, great. Toss on a pair of Shock Gloves and one-shot every bad guy just as easily as Ninja McNinja with his katana can. In addition, with Unarmed skills you're able to buy Manuevers (some of which are very, very, nice). Yes, you can apply some Manuevers to Edged Weapons as well (with the right martial art), but in order to do so you're still investing heavily in an Unarmed skill and your Edged Weapons (which goes back to "burning through karma like it's going out of style).

Ultimately, though, we're just arguing preference. You prefer edged weapons or clubs whatever, I see unarmed as still a perfectly viably choice. Are we done derailing the conversation at hand?

tisoz

Jul 5 2007, 05:17 AM

Post #564

Free Spirit

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,948
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Bloomington, IN UCAS
Member No.: 1,920

QUOTE (nezumi)

Lone Star can afford their own mages who make their own sustaining foci.

Really? Better ask Kage how much a Lone star officer makes in a year. Where are they getting the enchanting shop and paying for it? Better yet, how are they getting all the time off to devote to making their own foci?

QUOTE

Let me ask it like this, if a criminal came up to you and said 'hey, let me buy your car off of you, but uh... I'm not going to change the plates or the registry on it or anything, and you can't claim it's stolen."

It depends on the level of contact. I did just that with my '74 'Vette and my sister - then she even had the gall to not pay me. I even paid the insurance on it for about a year.

However, a better analogy is a gun dealer. They come up to you, buy your gun, never bother to register it, so you do not bother to inform anyone it is no longer yours. Even at gun shows and the like where people are a bit more careful about covering their @$$, illegal purchases get made by people that are not supposed to own guns.

I have to wonder how any type of black market could be remotely workable with the way you describe your game universe to work.

QUOTE

The powers that be really can't allow such an easily controlled source of illegal weapons.)

I'm guessing that you mean an astral trail going from the item to the creator? Visiting a metaplane makes it much harder to make that trace. In the case of a free spirit, he can effortlessly travel to his native plane, which happens to be a metaplane.

Link

Jul 5 2007, 05:46 AM

Post #565

Moving Target

Group: Members
Posts: 519
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Queensland
Member No.: 3,180

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Well, you get a Body roll against TN 4 to prevent losing any attributes, but you have an n in 6 chance of autodying if you fail that test where n is the number of attributes other than Charisma (oddly enough, but including Reaction) that you have a natural 1 in.

Is the Decrease (Attribute) spell the (only?) precedent for the effects of reducing an attribute to 0?

QUOTE (SR3)

Decrease (Attribute)
If a Physical Attribute is reduced to 0, the victim is paralysed. If a Mental Attribute is reduced to 0, the victim stands about mindlessly.

How these would be adjudicated if the result of a deadly wound, I'm not sure. Maybe a few months in a vat or with PTSD therapy or perhaps rule that the attribute losses are recovered when the injuries are full healed rather than a permanent affect.

Additionally, replace reaction loss with charisma as noted above. Reaction is a secondary attribute and losses to intelligence or quickness will also reduce it.

Magic loss due to deadly wounds keeps the risk of burning out a significant threat. As for concerns with losing a valuable magic point and the fact that with the Magic Loss mechanics, a 12+ Magic rating will always lose a point, we prevent this fait accompli by keeping the check at 7 or higher no matter the Magic rating.

Wounded Ronin

Jul 5 2007, 05:50 AM

Post #566

Great Dragon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

The rules for permanent injury from Deadly damage for mundanes fall under the same category.

~J

Hell, man, I already think those rules are too lenient, myself. If someone blasts me with a shotgun at close range that is loaded with shot I feel as if I'm going to be more likely to lose something than the rules suggest.

Critias View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 05:59 AM Post #567
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714	The problem with increasing the severity of those rules is that, for the most part, they only punish player characters. Any given PC will have more attacks aimed at him throughout the course of a campaign than any given NPC. Most NPCs that take a Deadly wound, well, die. Those that don't are likely as good as dead, because the odds are they're out of the game anyways. Those most likely to suffer from the permanent injury rules are player characters -- if that's what you're after, great. But it's something to keep in mind.

Wounded Ronin

Jul 5 2007, 06:10 AM

Post #568

Great Dragon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,640
Joined: 6-June 04
Member No.: 6,383

QUOTE (Critias)

The problem with increasing the severity of those rules is that, for the most part, they only punish player characters. Any given PC will have more attacks aimed at him throughout the course of a campaign than any given NPC. Most NPCs that take a Deadly wound, well, die. Those that don't are likely as good as dead, because the odds are they're out of the game anyways.

Those most likely to suffer from the permanent injury rules are player characters -- if that's what you're after, great. But it's something to keep in mind.

You're absolutely right about that. The same point came up on another forum discussing Jagged Alliance 2 modding...something like, "You have to kill all the enemies but the enemies only have to injure your team little by little."

I suppose that it depends on the style of game that you want to play. From my perspective, since I'm a fan of a more "difficult" game that is also more simulationist, it makes sense that characters who get into a lot of firefights have a small chance of becoming superbadass whirlwinds of death and a bigger chance of sustaining a career-ending injury, rather than the other way around.

I suppose that the opposite of what I like is more widely popular, though, so maybe my idea isn't best for a mainstream rule set. Hmm.

Critias View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 06:20 AM Post #569
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714	I never minded that sort of crippling stuff in CP:2020, but in Shadowrun it's a little more serious. In Cyberpunk, shit. Blew out your knee? Just go buy a NEW leg, y'know? The prices were lower, no one loses magic for it, Essence/Humanity work differently enough (hell, a basic new cyberleg is normally going to be 1/6th of the cyberware a given character can ever have!)... that it just doesn't work out in Shadowrun that way. With Awakened characters, especially, it is often a character-ending set of die rolls. Their chances of losing Magic outright can really screw a character over, and any replacement limbs (assuming they can afford one) will result in more mojo loss, y'know? I guess it just comes down to how lethal you want your game to be (with "lethal" extending to "including just making someone worthless as a Shadowrunner," not just killing them outright).

Sphynx

Jul 5 2007, 06:23 AM

Post #570

Neophyte Runner

Group: Members
Posts: 2,222
Joined: 11-October 02
From: Netherlands and Belgium
Member No.: 3,437

@Kyote Kid + Response to Magic Loss conversation at the end.

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid @ Jul 5 2007, 03:54 AM)

...@Sphynx

Just looked over and downloaded your house rules PDF. Overall, very nice indeed.

A few questions:

Astral Abilities: As I read it, an Adept can begin with Astral Perception (provided she spends the BPs for it) in addition to the powers she purchases with Power Points?

Yes. They can get Astral Perception + 6 Power Points of powers. That was 1 of 2 spots where we 'broke the rules' for this system as we felt it made alot more sense. The other is using BP to buy Spell Points instead of Nuyen.

QUOTE

Advancement: Does the character need to allocate Karma to improving her Magic Attribute/Power Points in addition to initiating? Or, once play has started, do just the normal rules for magical advancement in MiTS apply? (This is part of my dislike of SR4 for it could take months of RL time to see any perceptible advancement unless every other mission was a Karma haul or you played several times a week).

That is answered in the PDF as clearly as we could do. To repeat, Karma can only be used to 'finish' buying her initial Magic rating up to the original base of 6. If you spend 8 points on magic (to get it to 5) you can only spend 12 karma to finish that advancement to 6.

QUOTE

Magic Loss: My one other concern is that pesky old rule about Magic Loss from wounds. This is partially brought up by the wording in the description of Power Points where it says that Magic Loss reduces Magic Points allocated to Spellcraft before reducing Power Points. So for a "full adept" (no spellcasting ability) it would still subtract from the Powers as per the original system then, correct?

This is a char-gen only system, normal post-gen rules apply with the one exception of using Karma to 'finish' your char-gen.

QUOTE

Admittedly, this is one sore spot I have regarding Adepts since they tend to be more combat focused and therefore more prone to taking wounds than a strict spellcaster (eliminating this rule was one of the few improvements in 4th ED). Adepts also tend to pay a higher price for magic loss, the loss of actual abilities, as opposed to reducing the limit of how powerful of a spell that can be tossed. Furthermore, a spellcaster has several options to compensate for this (foci, overcasting, Elemental assistance, etc) which an adept does not have access to. Basically once the powers are lost, she has to initiate to get them back.

I agree. It took us about 3 months after 3rd edition came out to dump the Magic Loss system entirely (with the exception of when one losses essence of course). It took us about 2 games to dump the Cyberware/Bioware degradation rules as well. Not so much for the unbalanced effects-only-PCs, and everything else everyone in this thread has mentioned, but also because it took a KISS system and over-complicated it by having us bring out tables and rolls that just weren't needed to keep the game fun. But then again, we're not known for playing a system of magic and sci-fi with much "realism" either. We just play to have fun. If it were up to me, all those bonus rules would get missed in the SR3R version of the game.

Kagetenshi

Jul 5 2007, 11:07 AM

Post #571

Manus Celer Dei

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,008
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802

QUOTE (Link @ Jul 5 2007, 12:46 AM)

How these would be adjudicated if the result of a deadly wound, I'm not sure. Maybe a few months in a vat or with PTSD therapy or perhaps rule that the attribute losses are recovered when the injuries are full healed rather than a permanent affect.

By a strict interpretation of the rules, either the player spends two Karma to buy the character's Attribute back up to 1 or their character is permanently incapacitated per those rules. If you use the Training Time rules, the character is permanently incapacitated anyway.

And yes, I believe Decrease [Cybered] Foo is the only precedent.

QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)

Hell, man, I already think those rules are too lenient, myself. If someone blasts me with a shotgun at close range that is loaded with shot I feel as if I'm going to be more likely to lose something than the rules suggest.

I know you're all for realism, and I usually am as well, but I have a bad reaction to things that reward simply discarding the character and creating a new one except at high karma levels. IMO it'd take an extremely nontraditional game for most people to tolerate progressively losing capability in a permanent manner.

~J

nezumi

Jul 5 2007, 12:56 PM

Post #572

Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,546
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760

The rule is on page 128. It does *NOT* include essence, kage misquoted. The only way you can lose essence due to deadly damage is if some bit of ware is implanted (which is conceivable).

I do like the current rules. Granted, I don't recollect ever having to use them, so I don't think my opinion is worth very much. I agree with WR, but from the other side of the field. I generally think I'm too easy with my PCs. They really have to earn their deadly wounds. As a consequence, when they do get to that point, I think it has to have some bite. Without attribute loss, assuming the person doesn't go into overdamage (which is generally pretty rare in my games. If the guy is down, he's down.) Sure healing is expensive, but it isn't a real stick.

QUOTE

Really? Better ask Kage how much a Lone star officer makes in a year. Where are they getting the enchanting shop and paying for it? Better yet, how are they getting all the time off to devote to making their own foci?

I didn't say Lone Star officer. I said Lone Star. Read the Lone Star book and you'll see they already hire plenty of mages on their own, to the point that they have their own magical forensics group.

QUOTE

It depends on the level of contact. I did just that with my '74 'Vette and my sister - then she even had the gall to not pay me. I even paid the insurance on it for about a year.

Are you suggesting your sister is a criminal?

QUOTE

However, a better analogy is a gun dealer. They come up to you, buy your gun, never bother to register it, so you do not bother to inform anyone it is no longer yours. Even at gun shows and the like where people are a bit more careful about covering their @$$, illegal purchases get made by people that are not supposed to own guns.

Except if you're doing a strawman purchase, the strawman generally claims the gun is stolen to avoid liability. THAT is the difference. There really is no real life equivalent in that it wouldn't be like my selling you my gun, but my selling you something I am continuing to pay rent on. An active focus counts against the mage's maximum, and he can easily track it down and destroy it himself. If someone steals my gun, I just claim it's stolen and that's that (hence the black market). If someone steals my focus, I can and need to sever that connection. The physical focus might be lost, but the spell cast on it is terminated. THAT is why you can't sell spells or active sustaining foci on the black market, because they have an active, supported connection to the mage.

Maybe a better real life example would be if someone 'steals' space on your web server to host child porn. You are actively supporting it in that you're maintaining the server, it has your name all over it. To INTENTIONALLY say 'yeah, sure, you can host your child porn on my server' is stupid beyond words. To INTENTIONALLY say 'yeah, you can have this spell I cast' seems similarly short sighted.

Kagetenshi

Jul 5 2007, 01:01 PM

Post #573

Manus Celer Dei

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,008
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802

QUOTE (nezumi)

The rule is on page 128. It does *NOT* include essence, kage misquoted. The only way you can lose essence due to deadly damage is if some bit of ware is implanted (which is conceivable).

Yeah. My confusion came, I think, in part from the rules for stimpatches, which direct Mages to check for Essence loss as per the Essence loss for deadly damage rules.

Yes, you heard me right. No, as established no such rules exist.

~J

nezumi View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 01:34 PM Post #574
Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet; Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,546 Joined: 24-October 03 From: DeeCee, U.S. Member No.: 5,760	Oh, before I forget, does dropping attribute (and magic) loss from deadly damage include the magic loss from not accepting the +2 modifier 'target is awakened' penalty on first aid checks? I would argue that these numbers most certainly should be kept.

Kagetenshi View Member Profile	Jul 5 2007, 01:42 PM Post #575
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802	Ooh. Hm. I would not be opposed to retaining the option to ignore the special treatment for Awakened in exchange for risking Magic loss. It's an even bigger decision now that they aren't just making a check anyway. Does anyone have an opinion on the temporary magic loss from non-cloned transplants? ~J

« Next Oldest · Community Projects · Next Newest »