Full Version: Immunity to Normal Weapons
| QUOTE (ixombie @ Jan 21 2008, 11:04 PM) |
| I don't think the intent rule is the best way to resolve the situation. It creates too many unanswerable questions. Like if I intend to crush a spirit with a car crusher, is the crusher a weapon? If I intend to dump a big load of rocks on top of the spirit, are the rocks weapons? If I intend to burn down a building with a spirit inside of it, is the fire a weapon? Is the burning building a weapon? |
I don't see the unanswerable questions. Anything used with the intent to cause harm counts as a 'weapon'. Basically it boils down to the Spirit only losing its ItNW in cases of a true accident with no premeditation.
As I said above, I don't really mind that I have to handwave it as 'magic', or that I might, once every 100 games or so, have to rule that a random Spirit was run over in a traffic accident.
I'd agree 100%. But I don't think Intent is needed.
Anything that causes harm is a weapon. Regardless of intent or usage.
Engine falls off a passing plane and hits a spirit, it gets ItNW. Rigger forces the engine to blow to drop it on a spirit, it gets ItNW.
Anything that isn't magical in nature, that causes harm to a spirit is effected by ItNW. Including car crushers.
Anything that causes harm is a weapon. Regardless of intent or usage.
Engine falls off a passing plane and hits a spirit, it gets ItNW. Rigger forces the engine to blow to drop it on a spirit, it gets ItNW.
Anything that isn't magical in nature, that causes harm to a spirit is effected by ItNW. Including car crushers.
Why is the accident different? I see it more as an immunity to "natural damage", regardless of the cause. If an armor rating would apply, so does the immunity. What the Gentleman said.
Thirded.
| QUOTE (GentlemanLoser) |
| I'd agree 100%. But I don't think Intent is needed. |
You're right. It isn't necessary. I was merely trying to explain how this type of variation on the rules (suggested by Cardul) would be no real trouble to implement or adjudicate.
If it causes damage, it has a damage code and is therefore a weapon.
Moreover, in Manslaughter cases, even in the case of accidental death the implement is still called a weapon, regardless of intent.
All of that is moot, however, if you ask yourself why a creature's ability would be based off of another character's state of mind. Now we are arguing semantics rather than trying to determine the nature of spirits and their powers.
While it wouldn't be too terribly trying to make rules variants(which I abhor) for something like that, it just seems counter-intuitive to common sense, which should be the default rule when in doubt.
Moreover, in Manslaughter cases, even in the case of accidental death the implement is still called a weapon, regardless of intent.
All of that is moot, however, if you ask yourself why a creature's ability would be based off of another character's state of mind. Now we are arguing semantics rather than trying to determine the nature of spirits and their powers.
While it wouldn't be too terribly trying to make rules variants(which I abhor) for something like that, it just seems counter-intuitive to common sense, which should be the default rule when in doubt.
| QUOTE (Fortinbras) |
| All of that is moot, however, if you ask yourself why a creature's ability would be based off of another character's state of mind. Now we are arguing semantics rather than trying to determine the nature of spirits and their powers. |
But that isn't the only viable explanation. ItNW is a form of magic, and therefore the magic itself could work off intent (for lack of a better word). Magic has precedence for being able to detect intent, as illustrated in things like the Detect Enemies spell. ItNW might be said to work in a similar manner, if someone chose to use this rule variant, and if they felt the need to explain it.
An appeal to common sense (alone) is not necessarily a fair argument when dealing with magical phenomena.
But we could keep arguing semantics on this all day though.
| QUOTE (Fortune) | ||
You're right. It isn't necessary. I was merely trying to explain how this type of variation on the rules (suggested by Cardul) would be no real trouble to implement or adjudicate. |
Ah! My bad.
As for the nature of a Spirits ItNW, I'm pressuming for manifesting Spirits its a by product of how they build a physical body from the Astral plane. Plus the fact they don't really have any internal workings to damage.
How this would transfer over to a inhabited Spirit, I've no idea apart from copping out with it's magic!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.