Ummm, the only spell called "Sterilize" that I can find has a duration of Instant… where is the Permanent version?

And, regarding "Intoxication", the effects are virtually immediate when you read the text...

In both cases I would conclude the FAQ interpretation is spot on.

***
You know, while I was looking in street magic to read up on these spells I found an interesting tidbit:

Pg160

Choosing Durations



Nice to see they dropped the interpretable word: sustained. And actually, personally, I think the entire section makes a lot of the rules from the mainbook much more clear.

But that is just my opinion.

Nuclear launch detected!

As much as I want to strangle the incompetent (rules-wise) fool that wrote the FAQ, I accept that the FAQ is stated to have the comprehensive listing of questions and answers about Shadowrun, 4th Edition. And as such I accept it as the official interpretation of the RAW.

You can do whatever you like in your game. But when you play something like SRM or a con game where everyone has to be on the same page sans house rules, you look to the FAQ and the books themselves. If you do not want to follow the FAQ in your house, that is ok and everyone can do their own thing in their house. But once you get into the public space, there is a certain baseline and that baseline, unfortunately, is the FAQ.

But please... don't turn the public space into your own pubic spaces.

Yes, everyone agrees with what the FAQ says. Not everyone agrees that the FAQ is correct. It seems that some who have played previous versions of SR are questioning the abrupt change in how to sustain until permanent that came not from SR4 but from the FAQ. There have been other questionable FAQ entries both in this version and in the past, so many -including me- have come to look at the FAQ as merely one man's opinion. I, and others, have grown weary of the FAQ stating things that should be errata. The FAQ should stick to defensible interpretations of the rules, not making rulings based on best judgment.

I knew I should've checked the books before posting.

Open mouth, insert foot... Repeat as necessary...

** Edit ** Of course, now that I've checked the SR3 rulebook, Sterilize is indeed a permanent spell. I can't vouch for SR4, though.



Very nice!!!


Back to the subject at hand, it does sound like the FAQ spells it out pretty clearly. I still prefer the instant healing method, as it adds the dramatic effect of what happens when the wounds spontaneously reappear if the spell is dropped before being made permanent. This is the reason I will continue to use the so-called "drive-by healing". I'm a sucker for the cinematic...

I feel that "drive-by healing" is an inaccurate description, though. It's still a touch based spell, it's just that in my world the effects are instantaneous. Now a game of "mailbox baseball" combined with "drive-by healing" might get rather interesting...

You mean the same section of rules that descrbes sustaining spells exactly the same way? Which, by your goofy interpretation, means a magician *must* maintain their Range for the entire duration of the sustaining. Which sure is hard when you turn the subject invisible, huh. I'd hate to have a mage cast Combat Sense (Range: T, Duration: S) on me in your game, too! Yikes. Nothing like having some mage having to run around clutching on to me for the duration of a fight. Nevermind, again, that there's zero rules for that sort of thing because spellcasting doesn't work the way you think it works. That doesn't matter one iota. Other spells in the same boat include Detect [all], Increase Attribute, Increase Reflexes, Physical Mask, Silence... the list just goes on and on and on...

And of course you have other permanent spells, too, like Ignite and Influence, which are infinitely less useful if you have to maintain range and a duration for handfuls of Combat Turns in order for the spell to do its job.

Of particular interest is Mindlink. Which, you know, specifically states that the subject has to stay within range of the magician. Wonder why they have to specifically say that for this one and only spell if that's how all spells work. I just can't figure out why that would be. Gosh golly.

That said, I do apologize for referencing Sterilize; I got it confused with Clean while I was browsing.

Sustain and Permanent are two different types of durations.

Of course they will describe the duration type: Sustain the same way as in the main book...

The important thing to note is they removed the word sustained from the description of Permanent spells. To me that clarifies that they where not using it as a secondary duration, they were just saying you had to cast the spell until it was done. I suspect this will not change your opinion though...



Ummm, some Permanent spell effects occur immediately (like influence)... you do realize this, right?
Others, take time for the effect to take hold, like heal.



Mindlink is a sustained spell, not a Permanent one. Usually, you do not need to maintain a sustained spell once it is cast... at least according to the FAQ anyway.

Pray tell, what gives you this impression?

SR4, 200, Heal, "Heal repairs physical injuries. It heals a number of boxes of Physical damage equal to the spell’s hits from the Spellcasting Test. Hits can also be used to reduce the base time for the spell to become permanent; each hit spent this way shaves of 1 Combat Turn (hits can be split between healing and reducing time as the caster desires).
A character can only be magically healed once for any single set of injuries."

SR4, 203, Influence, " This spell implants a single suggestion in the victim’s mind, like a powerful post-hypnotic command. The subject will carry out this suggestion as if it were her own idea and it will then fade. If confronted with the wrongness of the suggestion, the subject can make a Willpower Test to overcome it as described under Mental Manipulations, p. 202. The caster can also withdraw the suggestion at any time."

Neither says that this is immediate. Neither says it is at the end of the Duration. They are both Permanent spells, and in fact, influence will typically need to be sustained for longer in order to become permanent as well.

So, what makes you think that heal is not instant, or that influence is?

The descriptions for both Sustained and Permanency are all but identical except for the fact that you only have to "maintain" a Permanent spell for so long before you no longer have to "maintain" it. The description for Sustained spells uses exactly the same terminology and wording, sans for the not having to "maintain" it after so long. And according to you -- as opposed to anywhere in the actual rules -- you also have to "maintain" your Range for the duration of a spell. Which, again, is found nowhere whatsoever in the rules.

Unless you'd like to point me to such a rule. Or even a hint of such a rule. Note that Permanency is a duration just as much as Sustained is.

Which really puts a damper on a ton of spells. Physical Mask is a great example. It has a Duration of Sustained and a Range of Touch. What a great disguise spell! No one'll suspect a thing as a cluster of people come scuttling past, all clinging desperately to one person. And... wait wait wait. I just re-read the last bit of your post.


...

That's all I have to say on this subject now. Bury that head in the sand, baby. Bury it nice and deep.

Can I ask why you hold up the FAQ as absolute? It's an FAQ, and not a very good one at that. If it was an errata, you might have a point, but it's not. It's someone's (occasionally failed) attempt at making the confusing parts of the core rules clearer.

As for your argument to apply logic to the heal spell, it doesn't follow. Yes, when you use first aid you have to stay there and operate for the full duration, that much is obvious, but heal is a spell. It doesn't have to abide by the laws of physics, and it doesn't have to make sense to the casual observer. Now, if the spell description specifically stated that you had to mentally worm around inside their body while you made the 'repairs' permanent, you, again, might have a case, but in lieu of such fluff-text, we can only go by the rules, and by Rules As Written, you only have to keep the spell active or sustain it until the requisite time has passed.

Saying you should have to stay in contact with them because that's how non-magical healing works is not a logical follow on from the fluff, it is a concern about game balance. It may or may not be a valid concern, and I don't intend to enter that particular arena of discussion on this topic, but purely by RAW and fluff, there is no reason for a 'drive-by' heal not to work.

Just taking a quick check of all the permanent spells....

Ignite specifies that the target doesn't actually ignite until the spell is made permanent, which implies the other spells start their effects when cast, and not when made permanent.


Ooo, heres another good question. The spell, Clean [element] when cast on air. How exactly do you see the air (which is invisible) to cast the clean spell on it?

You've obviously never been to a south-east Asian metropolis. The air is anything but invisible! =P

And I bet they wish they had access to that spell.

No no no. It's, "clearly you've never been to Singapore."

LOL!!

The crutch of your argument was the fact that the word sustained was in the Permanent duration description.

Street magic removed the word and said 'maintain' for a reason, and the FAQ also clarifies by saying straight up you have to continue the act until the spell is done.

But I am the one burying my head in the sand?

LOL!!!!



(And, since you need things s-p-e-l-l-e-d-o-u-t; you don't MAINTAIN a sustained spell when casted means: you don't 'continue casting it and require LOS or Touch like you do with Permanent spells. You only pay the -2 'concentration fee' per the Sustain duration rules; the person who has the spell can go where ever they want, so long as they stay in range. Is that clearly written enough for you, or should I use smaller words?)

It's not just singapore though, there are a bunch of them that are that bad, even as far north as Hong Kong.

I am SO glad I don't live in s-e Asia.

You just contradicted yourself.

Doesn't actually ignite until the spell is made permanent.

Doesn't actually heal until the spell is made permanent.

See a pattern?

<quietly chews on some gum while quoting the book... from the same page someone selectively decided to read>

Street Magic p. 160
"Sustained spells last as long as the caster maintains them; their effects end when the spell ends."
"Permanent spells must be maintained for a time, then they become permanent."

<blows a bubble and pops it before hitting Add Reply>

The FAQ is lacking (namely because they updated the rules with new books, but neglected to update the FAQ), I will give you that... but it is also explanations by those who made the game. It should count for something.

But like I said earlier, I am not trying to change minds. I was asked if there was any written rule that supported my position; and I happened across one in Street magic- since the crutch of the argument supporting 'drive by heals' and other Permanent affects is based on the use of the word 'sustained' in the Permanent duration description.

Had they repeated the word, it would imply that you can 'Sustain-per duration type' a spell till completion; which would give credence to the 'drive by heal'.
Since they didn't, it implies that you must effectively continue casting that same spell until it is made permanent, which give credence to the FAQ.

[aside]Cut the ad-hominem attacks the fuck out. They don't help your argument and they just make you come across as a jerk. Yes, the same goes for Dr. F, but his sarcastic humour pisses me off less than your post's smug superiority. As an aside, personal attacks are also against the TOS - any more mod posts in here and the damn thing'll get locked.[/aside]

As for your point, you obviously didn't read his post very clearly:



I underlined the most relevant part. Yay, SM changed a word from the description, but that doesn't stop 'sustained' and 'maintained' from having exactly the same rules-text.

So Dr. F's argument still stands. They may have changed a word, but there's still nothing, anywhere in the rules to indicate that the FAQ isn't talking out it's arse.

The fact is that the description for the 'permanent' spell duration does not mention having to remain in range any more than the sustained duration description does.

That said, you have one reply after this to come up with a more convincing argument than 'but the FAQ says so,' or I'll simply cease bothering to argue, since several people in this thread have satisfactorally refuted that argument to my mind.

LOL, Dr. Funkenstein.

Again, it doesn't say Sustained... which is both the duration type that would allow you to 'drive by heal' and the crutch of your argument.

One last reply... here, let my smugness resonate:

Like I said earlier, I am not trying to change minds. I was asked if there was any written rule that supported my position; and I happened across one in Street magic- since the crutch of the argument supporting 'drive by heals' and other Permanent affects is based on the use of the word 'sustained' in the Permanent duration description.

-Had they repeated the word, it would imply that you can 'Sustain-per duration type' a spell till completion; which would give credence to the 'drive by heal'.
-Since they didn't, it implies that you must effectively continue casting that same spell until it is made permanent, which give credence to the FAQ.

Clearly, no one is going to change their minds, and I really did not intend to have another dick-waving fest.

Believe what you want and play how you like. I really don't give a fuck.

OK, I'm going to reply to this seperately, since it's a slightly different issue, but no. FAQ's really don't inherently count for anything, even if they were written by the very people who wrote the rules.

A well-written and thoughtful FAQ can clear up confusion and make the system run in a more streamlined fashion. A poorly written and ill-concieved FAQ muddies waters with contradictory statements, and is best ignored. Ironically, FAQ's written by the designers themselves most often fall into the latter category. With this in mind, it falls upon the reader to determine if the FAQ is useful or not, and the simple fact that it was written by the people who wrote the books doesn't automatically give it credence.

As Tarantula pointed out above, the SR4 FAQ leaves many things to be desired in an FAQ, and is thus almost entirely unhelpful.

Yes, the FAQ says you have to maintain touch for the entire duration of the heal spell, but as it is meant to be a clarification and not an errata, it does not take precedence over the actual rules as written. Since it's fairly obvious from the evidence presented that the rules do not require you to maintain contact for its duration, it can be safely assumed that the FAQ is wrong.

A) It is not the crutch of his argument, read it again.
B) Having a duration of 'sustained' is not what would allow a drive-by heal. Read. It. Again.
C) Guess what the permanent duration type also doean't say? It doesn't say, anywhere, that you have to stay in range while 'maintaining' a permanent spell - any more than it says that while 'maintaining' a sustained spell.

Your argument is both unsound and invalid, unlike Dr. F's, which is cogent.

Can we please do away with the phrase "drive-by heal"?

It's not like we're shooting heal spells at anyone, considering it has a touch only range.

I hereby propose we refer to this phenomenon as a "hit-and-run heal", or perhaps a "fire-and-forget heal" spell...

What say you, fellow Dumpshockers?

As an australian citizen I feel I must register my moral outrage at the very notion of adding syllables to a phrase!

Nevermind.

Going by the FAQ, the way Permanent spells are maintained are clearly spelt out then - that the spell continues being cast before it becomes permanent. Note also since the way the Permanent spell is maintain differs from Sustained Spells now due to the FAQ, then it would therefore not incur any dice pool penalties unlike Sustained Spells which incur the -2 dice penalty for each Sustained spell. In effect, Permanent spells now trade a complex action (casting the spell) in place of the -2 dice penalty.

What part of heal says that they do not heal until made permanent?

Since ignite specifies what happens, its typically the exception to the normal functioning, which would be to start the effect when the spell is cast.

Have you ever read the heal spell, Tarantula?

Why do you think it says 'Hits can also be used to reduce the base time for the spell to become Permanent'?

That the hits can be used to reduce the time needed to sustain/maintain the spell before you don't need to sustain/maintain the spell any more.

It certainly doesn't say "Damage isn't healed until the spell is permanent".

Explain to me why you would need to 'maintain/sustain the spell a number of turns' then if the heal is supposed to happen immediately after you cast the spell.

Also, tell me where it explicitly states you heal immediately.

In order to make the spell permanent. If you stopped before that time came up, it would not be permanent and would undo.

In the spellcasting section, you go through the steps for casting the spell, Step 5 is determine effect. Which happens before drain is done. Thus, the spells effects happen, even before drain happens. (Unless of course, stated otherwise as with Ignite).

Also, SR4, 195, Duration, "Permanent spells must be sustained for a short time, after which their effects become “natural� and no longer require magic or concentration to maintain. The time required to make a spell’s effects permanent is equal to twice the Drain Value in Combat Turns."

This implies that the effects of the spell happen when cast, and take magic or concentration to maintain until they become "natural" and no longer need to be maintained.

First off, 'Drain Value' is not Drain. You cast that spell, maintain/sustain it for combat turns equal to the Drain Value x2, once it is permanent (or interrupted), then you roll against Drain. Per steps written.

And really, I'm sorry, but you have made it clear that 'implies' is not good enough.
Show me where it explicitly states that heal is instant.

Wrong, again. Steps are:
1. Choose Spell
2: Choose Force
3: Choose Target
4: Make Spellcasting Test
5: Determine Effect - Heres where the effects happen.
6: Resist drain
7: Ongoing effects, such as being sustained. - This is where you sustain/maintain the spell until permanent.

Actually, that list just adds more credence to the POV that Permanent spells are not the same as Sustained... IMHO.

Clearly this is interpretable; so where is the explicit stating (that you continually demand of others) that states healing spells happen immediately and if you break 'sustaining them' the wounds 'reappear'?

I really wish some errata or Dev. would put this to rest...

I never said it explicitly stated that heal happened instantly.

The logic I use for my position is this:
Most spells effects happen when cast.
An exception to this is the ignite spell, which specifies in its description that they don't ignite until made permanent.
Heal does not have an exception stating that the wounds are not healed until made permanent.

Therefore, heals effects happen when cast.

Sorry, you have continuously argued with folks that 'the book doesn't explicitly state xyz'; therefore, you must state the explicit if you want your point to stand.

Show me where it states that heal is instant, or stfu.

Yes, I have, typically when the explicit would be needed to trump the general rule.

Spells effects happen during Step 5 of the spellcasting. The only spell I've found in a quick skim that changes this is Ignite, which states the effects happen once made permanent.

Since heal does not state it happens when made permanent, it happens the same as all other spells, during step 5 of the spellcasting, before even drain is applied.


It is not explicitly said for heal, because all spells follow those rules, unless they specifically function differently, as is the case with Ignite.

IMHO, your completely wrong...

But then it all boils down the that damn interpretation of whether or not you can Sustain (per duration) a Permanent spell.

Funny, the FAQ clears it up completely, yet- it is a worthless document to the ones who insist they can 'heal instantly' using the 'stop and go' method.

I really wish a Dev would post on here to to put this issue to bed... oh, wait, but then you (and others) would go on about how the Dev is wrong because the book can be interpreted another way.

In closing, because you insist it for others- I insist it for you: show me the explicit, or stop wasting my time.

The FAQ doesn't say that heal happens when made permanent either. In fact, you can go with the FAQ ruling of needing to remain in touch contact, and the wounds would still be healed upon casting of the spell.

I haven't said a Dev was wrong, just that they contradicted the books, and that one or the other needs to be corrected to be in agreement.

I have shown you the explicit for all spells to have their effects happen when cast. The only times this changes, are when the spells explicitly state so, such as Ignite.

Also, did it ever occur to you that they probably say:



Simply to tell you what the effect of 'accelerated molecular motion in a target' means?

Again, this to me reinforces my stance completely, Permanent spell effects do not happen until the spell is complete.

But, regardless... refer to my last post if you have anything else to say.

SR4, 195, "Permanent spells must be sustained for a short time, after which their effects become “natural� and no longer require magic or concentration to maintain. The time required to make a spell’s effects permanent is equal to twice the Drain Value in Combat Turns."

If the effects become natural once made permanent, then they exist before they are made permanent. This means they begin when the spell is cast.

Natural= becomes a part of you... takes hold.

The wound closed and finally became 'natural', you heal X damage.

The ignite agitated your molecules and became natural- you are on fire.

And you skip completely the fact that it says "no longer require magic or concentration to maintain". If you were maintaining the effect, then the effect is already there.

1. Explain the difference between these two durations as they are worded in the rules. (Hint: The only difference is that a Permanent spell doesn't have to be maintained indefinitely.)
2. Show me, in the rules, where it says the Range of a spell must be maintained for the Duration of the spell. (Hint: This is the only reason you'd have to keep touching the target of a Range: T • Duration: P spell. Bigger hint: No such rule exists.)

The FAQ is completely wrong. You are completely wrong. There's not even a suggestion in the rules that Permanent spells work the way you wish they did. Spells like Ignite only prove to drive that point home. If they did work that way, Ignite wouldn't be an exception to those rules and need to have it mentioned specifically in its own text.

While most will agree that the FAQ is a bit outdated (as newer books have altered original rulings and there has been no update)- It is your opinion that the FAQ (created by the ones who made the game) is wrong.

I personally do not hold that opinion, and feel the game makes much more logical sense when applying the FAQ in this instance.

Ignite is not an exception, save the fact that it is Permanent spell that does damage.

No I didn't. Once it becomes 'natural', (AKA takes effect) you no longer need to 'maintain/sustain the spell'.

If I am lighting a stubborn lighter, I take many turns 'flicking it' until it lights. Once lit, I no long have to concentrate my time 'flicking' it. Same principle applies.

Only on ignite, as it is the exception to the rule.

Once it becomes "natural" does not mean the same as "takes effect". Becomes "natural" is the same as no longer requiring magic or concentration to maintain.

If you are maintaining the spell, then it is not "natural"


Example. I cast intoxicate on you and succeed. You're now drunk. After 1 turn, I stop sustaining/maintaining the spell, and you stop being drunk. Why? Because I didn't maintain it long enough to be natural.

Now, if I maintained it for the required length, then I stop maintaining it, and you remain drunk until your body processes it normally.

No.

Intoxication is just a bad spell (as, not all spells are great). You would have to maintain contact for two rounds (minimum) before the effect took hold, but then you could let go and go about your business as spanky would remain 'drunk'. So, you cannot just 'brush up against someone'; you would have to distract them, or entice them for a short while to let the magic work its mojo.

Besides, all it does is give 'fatigue', all in all, not ever worth while.

And why would it not take effect immediately?

Again, I go back to the spellcasting steps:
1: I choose intoxication
2: I cast at force 6
3: I target you and I'm currently touching you
4: I make my test, and get 6 hits.
5: You make your resistance test, and get 0 hits, so I now have 6 net hits. You now take 6 fatigue damage.
6: I make my drain test and get 3 hits, taking 0 drain.
7: I "maintain" the spell for 2 combat turns, not the required 3, and your fatigue damage goes away.


What part of the rules shows this to be the incorrect order of things?

Your interpretation that you can 'sustain the spell after the drain' is the problem.

I do not agree with that interpretation one bit. I agree with the FAQ which would interpret that Drain does not happen (under force six, per your example) until the end of round 3. You would have to touch the target the entire time, so you better be pretty and have a good charisma.

Neither of us are going to change the others mind. I support the FAQ, you reject it... move on.