IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

20 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Shadowrun 4: Magic
Shinobi Killfist
post Sep 23 2005, 04:56 PM
Post #283


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,431
Joined: 3-December 03
Member No.: 5,872



QUOTE (Shadow_Prophet)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Sep 23 2005, 10:16 AM)
In fact, you are both right, and the rules are wrong:
QUOTE (SR4 p. 196)
Indirect Combat spells are treated like ranged combat attacks; the caster makes a Magic + Spellcasting Success Test versus the target’s Reaction.
Ranged Combat is an Opposed test.

I'm not sure that they're completely wrong per se. Rolling magic +spell casting vs the targets reaction is like a ranged combat test.


But anyways powerball, manaball, stunball are not nessicarily better than fireball. Depends on the application. If you just want to kill your target. Yeah the others are probably better. If you want to hurt him and set him on fire along with the surroundings, and or set off other combustable people ect, then fireball is the way to go.

matter of preference and tactic.

which is why powerball, manaball etc are better. The elemental effect spells are frequently worse and sometimes better and you get to pay more drain for the glory of that. Yeah if you want to set things on fire its the only way, but there generally worse in combat with some side benefits. I can' conceive of paying more drain for that. With the possible exception of electricity effects which are fairly large extra benefits, the extra benefits don't justify the extra drain.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Sep 23 2005, 05:36 PM
Post #284


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



I prefer Stun spells myself, and not just because of the significantly cheaper Drain. The Stun damage track is shorter than the Physical, and there are three races that have bonuses to Body while only one has a bonus to Willpower (which is equal to their bonus in Body anyway, so that's a wash).

Sure, stimpatches can quickly undo the Stun I've just done, but then I've also cost an enemy an Initiative Pass while they were medicating themselves. That's one less chance for them to shoot at me.

Taking enemy gear is a great way to supplement the financial value of a run. Gear is usually more functional when it's not charred to a crisp, and usually easier to fence when there isn't blood all over it.

Also, if you're caught, the charges for making people sleepy aren't as bad as for melting their brains. Then there's the whole datagathering aspect of taking prisoners or Mind Probing incapacitated foes. Or you can just apply inexpensive, non-Draining bullets to the foreheads of unconscious enemies. :)

.... But y'all already know all that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Sep 23 2005, 05:44 PM
Post #285


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



Now that I've been plenty preachy, my turn to ask a question:

Since Indirect Combat Spells are considered Ranged Attacks, does that mean I can call shots with them? That is, can I sacrifice up to 4 dice on my attack roll and add a flat +4 DV onto the spell by shooting someone in the face with lightning?

I'd imagine this wouldn't be possible with AoEs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shadow_Prophet
post Sep 23 2005, 06:12 PM
Post #286


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 445
Joined: 18-August 05
Member No.: 7,567



powerball, manaball, stunball, are all better for your style and for what you yourself want to do. Though they are not always better. All spells have their advantages and disadvantages.

As for calling shots with spells? I'd say no but thats me...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Sep 23 2005, 06:25 PM
Post #287


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



To clarify: I'm asking about called shots with Indirect Combat Spells only, since they're just ranged attacks. You're making real-world fire shoot from your hands, and directing it at your target rather than just synching a spell's energy with a target's aura and letting it ground out (as in the case of Direct Combat Spells, which bypass armor). I agree that DC Spells can't call shots, since you're blasting their whole aura.

If it's possible to call shots with IC Spells, then that's a significant saving grace.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Clyde
post Sep 23 2005, 07:00 PM
Post #288


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 458
Joined: 12-April 04
From: Lacey, Washington
Member No.: 6,237



I'd say that you could. It says treat the thing as a ranged attack, and you can call shots with ranged attacks. Definite bonus to indirect spells there.

As for whether to choose a straight combat spell or the fireball, one thing to consider is the psychological effect. Most people fear being burned. Fire and acid would have that effect in a way that a straight stunball cannot. If facing a large number of less trained opponents a psychological edge helps a lot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eagle
post Sep 27 2005, 08:29 AM
Post #289


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,679



I've got a slight problem with the object resistance table
I would have thought that a computer was a piece of electronic equipment. With the amount of processing power in everyday items it's pretty difficult to separate the two.

Now if meant electrical equipment ie gross items without any processing power such as an electric motor, voltage transformer, old style washing machine (no chips, only mechanical clicks) then I could understand it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Sep 27 2005, 02:15 PM
Post #290


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



My initial guess would be that computers nowadays contain more fiberoptics than electronics, but that still doesn't feel intellectually comfortable to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dogsoup
post Sep 29 2005, 12:00 PM
Post #291


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 291
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 806



Since IC spells counts as ranged attacks, could you "take aim" prior to such a spell?

Oh, and IC spells used against barriers: Is it Barrier Armor Rating alone or BARx2? Page 157 and 196 seem to contradict each other.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Sep 29 2005, 08:55 PM
Post #292


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



QUOTE (Dogsoup @ Sep 29 2005, 08:00 AM)
Since IC spells counts as ranged attacks, could you "take aim" prior to such a spell?

Off the cuff and without checking the RAW, I'd say yeah. If you can target locations, then logically it sounds like you can aim. You can aim with normal ranged combat and IC spells use those rules.

However, I could see how the game designers could have skirted that issue easily by mentioning that the spell energy isn't present until the precise moment of casting. You wouldn't have anything to aim until you were already throwing dice. Kinda like how you're unable to aim until your gun is drawn (which I don't believe they explicitly stated either).

Prepare to houserule!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post Oct 1 2005, 05:13 PM
Post #293


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



QUOTE (Eagle)
I've got a slight problem with the object resistance table
I would have thought that a computer was a piece of electronic equipment. With the amount of processing power in everyday items it's pretty difficult to separate the two.

Now if meant electrical equipment ie gross items without any processing power such as an electric motor, voltage transformer, old style washing machine (no chips, only mechanical clicks) then I could understand it.

You want to burn the CPU: OR 4.

You want to melt the tires, fool the camera's CCD, rupture the gastank and set the thing on fire: OR 3.

Basically I rule that unless it's a drone, a nanite, or a commlink you're probably looking at OR 3. Drones get that extra bit 'cause they're cool that way. :)

And honestly that's hard enough for the average mage to hit, though I suppose child's play so some of the casting monsters we see on here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dogsoup
post Oct 1 2005, 08:59 PM
Post #294


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 291
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 806



QUOTE (Azralon)
QUOTE (Dogsoup @ Sep 29 2005, 08:00 AM)
Since IC spells counts as ranged attacks, could you "take aim" prior to such a spell?

Off the cuff and without checking the RAW, I'd say yeah. If you can target locations, then logically it sounds like you can aim. You can aim with normal ranged combat and IC spells use those rules.

However, I could see how the game designers could have skirted that issue easily by mentioning that the spell energy isn't present until the precise moment of casting. You wouldn't have anything to aim until you were already throwing dice. Kinda like how you're unable to aim until your gun is drawn (which I don't believe they explicitly stated either).

Prepare to houserule!

I'm starting to weigh in favour of allowing "take aim", but my personal houserule would be to only use as a way to make up for negative modifiers: You can never throw more dice than your spellcasting pool due to aim.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rotbart van Dain...
post Oct 1 2005, 09:15 PM
Post #295


Hoppelhäschen 5000
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,807
Joined: 3-January 04
Member No.: 5,951



Take Aim itself is pretty limited in use, too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Space Ghost
post Oct 2 2005, 04:30 AM
Post #296


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 129
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 400



Actually, it does state that you can only "Take Aim" with a readied ranged weapon. That doesn't settle the argument, since many will claim that a spell is the most "ready" weapon anyone can have, except maybe a cybergun.

My vote goes for no, though. i take "ranged weapon" to mean something that comes off of one of the ranged weapon charts in the street gear section.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Oct 2 2005, 04:43 AM
Post #297


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

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



I vote 'no' as well. I feel that there is no real way to improve the aim of the spell without other magical means.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightRain
post Oct 2 2005, 07:28 AM
Post #298


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 268
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Brisbane, Australia
Member No.: 78



QUOTE (Fortune)
I vote 'no' as well. I feel that there is no real way to improve the aim of the spell without other magical means.

What a wonderful idea for a new form of metamagic
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Oct 2 2005, 07:50 AM
Post #299


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

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



Now that I would agree with! :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eyeless Blond
post Oct 2 2005, 03:55 PM
Post #300


Decker on the Threshold
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 2,922
Joined: 14-March 04
Member No.: 6,156



That would be neat, to have a metamagic that lets you throw more dice into spellcasting by doing something extra. Y'know, to center yourself so you cast better? Hmm, let's call it... Goodercasting! :P

In all seriousness, if you don't allow Take Aim to be used with spells, then there's no way to use optical vision magnification to zoom in on your targets. Of course, as in SR3 there are no rules for spell ranges, are there?--so the point is sadly moot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nick012000
post Oct 3 2005, 03:01 AM
Post #301


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,283
Joined: 17-May 05
Member No.: 7,398



QUOTE (NightRain)
QUOTE (Fortune @ Oct 2 2005, 02:43 PM)
I vote 'no' as well. I feel that there is no real way to improve the aim of the spell without other magical means.

What a wonderful idea for a new form of metamagic

Maybe something like Dragonball Z, where yopu just stand there, building up the magical energy in your hand until you shoot it out.

"Ka...me...ha...me...HA!!!!"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Oct 3 2005, 03:32 AM
Post #302


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



QUOTE (nick012000 @ Oct 2 2005, 11:01 PM)
QUOTE (NightRain @ Oct 2 2005, 02:28 AM)
QUOTE (Fortune @ Oct 2 2005, 02:43 PM)
I vote 'no' as well. I feel that there is no real way to improve the aim of the spell without other magical means.

What a wonderful idea for a new form of metamagic

Maybe something like Dragonball Z, where yopu just stand there, building up the magical energy in your hand until you shoot it out.

"Ka...me...ha...me...HA!!!!"

How 'bout no?

Someone please play a DBZ-themed mystic adept in my game so I can demonstrate the awesome lethality of aimed called shots and the panther cannon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Siege
post Oct 3 2005, 04:12 AM
Post #303


Dragon
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,065
Joined: 16-January 03
From: Fayetteville, NC
Member No.: 3,916



I always preferred a dragon punch myself.

It's a schtick and if magic does manifest in forms familiar to the user, I expect a lot of superheroes and video game adepts would start cropping up, considering our fascination with both mediums.

Frag, there should be at least one Sailor Moon mage running around somewhere and a spikey-haired kid muttering to the Pharoh as he throws down card-shaped Foci to invoke his spells.

I draw the line at spells taking the form of small, cute animals that then cast the spells, however. :D

-Siege
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
warrior_allanon
post Oct 3 2005, 08:37 AM
Post #304


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 775
Joined: 31-March 05
From: florida
Member No.: 7,273



i havent tried anything around DBZ, i dont like the anime, i have however made a Yu Yu Hakusho based character for SR3 that didnt turn out to bad...was a phys mage with a force 6 manabolt spell but only one point in magic, so he could only currently cast it at force one or at most force two without getting a power focus, i only played him in one game but he worked out alright

what about that character concept seige
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ranneko
post Oct 3 2005, 12:09 PM
Post #305


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 349
Joined: 16-January 05
Member No.: 6,984



QUOTE (Siege)
I draw the line at spells taking the form of small, cute animals that then cast the spells, however. :D

Seige, clearly those are just bound spirits.

Doesn't quite explain the cap of 6 those, I guess they all just have the same charisma.

=P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Oct 3 2005, 07:14 PM
Post #306


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



QUOTE (Siege)
It's a schtick and if magic does manifest in forms familiar to the user, I expect a lot of superheroes and video game adepts would start cropping up, considering our fascination with both mediums.

Frag, there should be at least one Sailor Moon mage running around somewhere and a spikey-haired kid muttering to the Pharoh as he throws down card-shaped Foci to invoke his spells.

I draw the line at spells taking the form of small, cute animals that then cast the spells, however.  :D

Once again, I find myself agreeing with Siege. Thematics and schticks are what make magic "comfortable," just like it made custom Matrix icons fun to design.

I even had a guy who wanted his character to follow the "Jedi" tradition once; now with SR4 flexbility, maybe he could resist drain with Intuition + Willpower. Cross-genre concepts is one of Shadowrun's appealing elements to me; cross-continuity concepts ain't. I told him he could think he was a Jedi, but he'd still be using magic. He can call it the Force all he wants.

Perhaps I shall make a go-gang with an anime theme so as to inherently generate animosity (pun intended) and loathing from my more serious players. Complete with verbal announcements of when they cast spells and use particular martial arts moves. :oops:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Azralon
post Oct 6 2005, 04:18 PM
Post #307


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,651
Joined: 23-September 05
From: Marietta, GA
Member No.: 7,773



Spellcasters with Bear as a mentor get +2 to resist physical damage; troll adepts rejoice in your further indestructibility.

But what happens to spellslingers who are overcasting? Do they get +2 dice to resist the physical damage done by the drain associated with casting a spell at a higher Force than their Magic?

Or shall I (happily) assume that there is enough distinction between physical drain and physical damage to where the +2 does not apply for overcasting?

If not, then I forsee many Bear magicians overcasting quite a bit and then turning around to heal (with their +2 bonus on Health spells) the physical damage that they so easily resisted. Slap on Quick Healer while you're at it. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

20 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 5th February 2025 - 02:55 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.