There is a table on p. 182 in SR3:
Full Version: Object Resistance Ratings
| CODE |
| Object Resistance Table Category Target Number Natural Objects (Trees, Soil, Unprocessed Water) 3 Manufactured Low-Tech Objects and Materials (Brick, Leather, Simple Plastics) 5 Manufactured High-Tech Objects and Materials (Advanced Plastics, Alloys, Electronic Equipment) 8 Highly Processed Objects (Computers, Complex Toxic Wastes) 10+ |
I'd like more detail in this table. I hate to be accused by my players that I give this ammo OR of 7 just because I don't want them to cook the Cyber Zombie (w/ auto shotgun) on their first fireball. Compounding the problem, I have a player who expects "Analyze Device" to be a useful spell.
I thought the right way to attack this was to first try to understand: What was the writer's intention with the original table?
1. All natural Objects have a maximum OR of 4. Which ones should get 3, which 4? Should Orichalcum have 2 (or less) as it's supposed to be extraordinarily susceptible to magic?
2. Did the writer want to tell us anything with the distinction between objects and materials?
I guess the writer thinks there are no unprocessed materials. (As soon as it's used to build anything, it is processed.)
Is complex toxic waste an object?
Did the writer maybe mix OR with Background Count here, which also drives TNs up?
3. Does the writer know how complex a simple plastic is, molecularly?
What are your guidelines to determine Object Resistance Ratings?
Does size matter? (No jokes please.)
Does miniaturisation matter (CPUs)?
Homogeneity? (Word?)
Date of inception?
Should Background count be factored in?
Temperature?
Microorganisms?
How do you weight complexity in manufactury (# of steps, needed tools, length of tool chain, processes, difficulty) or final complexity of structure (molecular or other)?
What are Object Resistance Ratings for typical objects/materials in your game? Reasons?
Please feel free to rate these, but don't confine yourself.
Franchi shotgun w/ normal ammo
Vindicator w/ APDS
Ruger Thunderbolt
AVS
Ford Americar
Stereo
Lone Star Strato-9
Glass pane
Plascrete
Sheet metal
Reactive armor
Living coral
Diesel fuel
Ethanol
Cellphone
Fairlight Excalibur
Ares Dragon helo
Blimp
Aircraft carrier
Motocross bike
SOTA racing bike
Bicycle
T-Shirt
Chemical plant (discriminate)
Duct tape
K-Bar knife
Katana
Dicoted katana
FAE
Thermite
Diesel / fertilizer bomb
C4
Uranium (natural)
Uranium (depleted)
Uranium (enriched)
Flak vest
Military grade body armor
Abrams
Banshee
Space Shuttle
Paper
Credstick
Lock (discriminate)
Fuse box
Fuze
Gold
Iron
Aluminium
Steel
Damasc steel
Monofilament whip
Soy burger
Wanda, the Stuffer Shack cashier
(My players seem to think she needs one)
| QUOTE (zephir @ Feb 15 2007, 12:39 PM) |
| Is complex toxic waste an object? |
I think you're making too much of the inconsistent use of "object" and "material".
| QUOTE |
| Did the writer maybe mix OR with Background Count here, which also drives TNs up? |
No.
| QUOTE |
| 3. Does the writer know how complex a simple plastic is, molecularly? |
Irrelevant. Unless I'm mistaken, a number of fatty acids are more complex than simple plastics on the molecular scale, yet as wholly natural substances they'd be low on the OR scale (barring other factors, which I'll get to). Likewise, stainless steel is, unless I'm mistaken, less molecularly complex than either (of course, you need to consider multiple molecules for "stainless steel"), but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't rate a lower OR than lipids. The scale isn't based around molecular complexity, but around a touchy-feely "did cold corporate hands, or the uncaring hands of humans who do not live in shamanic harmony with nature, have a role in the construction of this object".
The entire OR system is a ridiculous mess, and something that I intend to replace as soon as time and inspiration are available.
~J
If you can pick it up in nature, it's OR 3
If you can pick it up and nature, but someone went over it with a tool, it's OR 5
If it takes a bunch of people and machines to make it, it's OR 8
If it takes a LOT of people and machines to make it, it's OR 10.
Wanda, the Stuffer Shack cashier has no OR, she has attributes such as Will to resist (even if that's 1)
If you can pick it up and nature, but someone went over it with a tool, it's OR 5
If it takes a bunch of people and machines to make it, it's OR 8
If it takes a LOT of people and machines to make it, it's OR 10.
Wanda, the Stuffer Shack cashier has no OR, she has attributes such as Will to resist (even if that's 1)
That's not true, Wanda has an OR of 3 (you can pick her up in nature). The OR is just never used until you kill her.
(Another interpretation, granted, is that she gains an OR of 3 when she dies but does not have it before that)
~J
(Another interpretation, granted, is that she gains an OR of 3 when she dies but does not have it before that)
~J
I would argue Wanda's OR is closer to 4 or 5, since she is full of preservatives, has bits of cyberware, has undergone complex chemical treatments in her life (even if it's only by taking pharmaceuticals), etc. That said, if Wanda is a test-tube baby, her OR would bump up a notch or two, and if she was actually a functional clone, it would jump up another three or four points.
Granted. She's also touched tools, and probably used horrible things like mathematics.
~J
~J
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.