Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Vampire and Sunlight!
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Delarn
A question like that... Are vampire in VR via Trodes are allergic to UV nodes ? wink.gif
Shinobi Killfist
QUOTE (Apathy @ Feb 24 2010, 06:31 PM) *
But once you Warform it and invest it with a high force Ant spirit it's lots of fun.


If I have to warform a juggernaut to put it in the non-suck category I think something is wrong. But hey I also just flat out hate warform and I wish it was never added to the game.
Karoline
QUOTE (Shinobi Killfist @ Feb 24 2010, 07:50 PM) *
If I have to warform a juggernaut to put it in the non-suck category I think something is wrong. But hey I also just flat out hate warform and I wish it was never added to the game.


I don't know, I like the ability to 'customize' your pet beyond what kind of method of attack you've taught it. Also a good way to give it a boost without sinking money into ware for your pet which will drive it insane.

I do think it should be set up to be more limited though. The rules almost seem to suggest it should only be available for dogs, horses, cows, sheep, and other highly common animals due to the 'several generations in order to pick out the best particular qualities, and the gene template is then saved for cloning.' idea. Would also be hard to order up a custom warform, would instead have to pick from set templates.

I like it from an 'individualize and improve your animal some more' standpoint, but not exactly from a how it is implimented standpoint (Extensive training to do similar things to warform would have been much cooler I think)
Patrick Goodman
QUOTE (Shinobi Killfist @ Feb 24 2010, 02:42 PM) *
Do you know who did the juggernaut?? It is sissier than a basic 4 door car.

Again, I think that would be either Adam Large or John Dunn.

And, looking them over and comparing them to my (admittedly incomplete) knowledge of SR4A, I think I'm going to have to decline to play in your game if the opportunity presents itself. I don't see them as particularly wimpy. Maybe I'm just doing something wrong; it wouldn't be the first time.
Shinobi Killfist
QUOTE (Patrick Goodman @ Feb 25 2010, 12:33 AM) *
Again, I think that would be either Adam Large or John Dunn.

And, looking them over and comparing them to my (admittedly incomplete) knowledge of SR4A, I think I'm going to have to decline to play in your game if the opportunity presents itself. I don't see them as particularly wimpy. Maybe I'm just doing something wrong; it wouldn't be the first time.


You haven't really read how bad the ramming rules are yet have you. smile.gif

I was exaggerating a bit, given that cars have 6 armor on average and the juggernaut has 12. But that is close to SUV territory(10). But the basic problem is a Heavy Pistol with APDS would only need 3 net successes in order to penetrate its armor. Sure it will shrug off most of that damage but not all of it, give me 2 shots per pass and 3 passes in an initiative turn and a decent Sam has probably got it 1/2 to death in 1 CT with a heavy pistol. If that pistol was a SMG with APDs and you could get 4 net successes(not to hard for a decent SAM) and it could easily be dead in less than 1 CT. Going from shrugging off Anti vehicle missiles to close to dropped in 1 CT from a Sam with a heavy pistol is quite the power drop over 3 edition. And this isn't assuming a twinked out Sam rolling stupid amounts of dice, but a fairly basic starting Sam with APDS ammo. EX-Explosive which you can get at the start would almost do the same you'd just need 2 more success to penetrate the armor which is fairly hard for a non absurd character.

They were never particularly dangerous unless one caught you on foot or up to close in your car since you could usually just avoid them, but you weren't really bringing them down either. Now if gets close to town the local swat team will drop it in a matter of seconds since just hitting it with a sniper rifle will penetrate its armor with APDs and 2 successes will do it with normal ammo. And it wont be shrugging off those shots.
MintyFresh
QUOTE (Squinky @ Feb 23 2010, 05:05 PM) *
I know I said this earlier, but why even use an alleviate allergy spell? Just does up on Zero, it removes a lot of allergy headache for vamps. Nosferatu will still take damage though....

The impression I got from the opinions in this similar thread was that a whole different aspect of Vampire powers would keep you from using any drug, even one meant to reduce resistances like Zero, unless the Vampire in question had a pretty low magic attribute to begin with.

As far as Alleviate Allergy and regeneration, it's up to interpretation. From Street Magic, p.169:

QUOTE
This spell allows the caster to block or reduce an allergyís
effects on the target (see p. 80, SR4). Every net hit reduces the
allergy level by one (from Moderate to Mild, for example). The
spell does not remove the allergy, only alleviates its effects, and it
only alleviates the effects of one allergy at a time. The effects of
the Allergy return at full force once the spell ends.

It doesn't cure an allergy, it just temporarily removes the effects. For my money this means that a well cast AA spell would make the allergy effectively nonexistent while sustained, but that it would return in full force once the spell ends. SR4 says you "cannot regenerate damage until the allergenís presence is removed" but this is operating under the assumption that you are suffering from the allergy at the time. There's room to wiggle in the wording so (like most of these questions) it comes down to your GMs decision, but I don't think there's any question whether or not magic can be used to get around an allergy. It seems a bit silly to get into spell design to create a different version of the same spell with more specific wording.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (MintyFresh @ Feb 24 2010, 11:52 PM) *
It doesn't cure an allergy, it just temporarily removes the effects. For my money this means that a well cast AA spell would make the allergy effectively nonexistent while sustained, but that it would return in full force once the spell ends. SR4 says you "cannot regenerate damage until the allergenís presence is removed" but this is operating under the assumption that you are suffering from the allergy at the time. There's room to wiggle in the wording so (like most of these questions) it comes down to your GMs decision, but I don't think there's any question whether or not magic can be used to get around an allergy. It seems a bit silly to get into spell design to create a different version of the same spell with more specific wording.


Hence why a U.V. blocking spell would work better, as it would not allow for said wiggle room.
AngelisStorm
QUOTE (Mordinvan @ Feb 25 2010, 03:17 AM) *
Hence why a U.V. blocking spell would work better, as it would not allow for said wiggle room.


Except said spell would only block flash packs, flash lights, etc. The aforementioned "UV bullets" (capsule rounds with chemicals which produce UV) would still pierce the spell, unless the spell was created very specifically.

Honestly, just talk to your GM. If you're throwing up the 100pts to play a vampire, plus the points for Mystic Adep or Magician, etc etc, then the GM really shouldn't be smacking you down for using Aleviate Allergy so that you can Regen. Regen isn't that powerful, and your paying for qualities/spells/sustaining focus, and so on. Besides, if Alleviate Allergy is not getting rid of the downside of having an Alergy, why does the spell exist?

(Besides, it allows the GM to pull the same trick.)
Karoline
QUOTE (MintyFresh @ Feb 25 2010, 01:52 AM) *
It doesn't cure an allergy, it just temporarily removes the effects. For my money this means that a well cast AA spell would make the allergy effectively nonexistent while sustained, but that it would return in full force once the spell ends. SR4 says you "cannot regenerate damage until the allergenís presence is removed" but this is operating under the assumption that you are suffering from the allergy at the time. There's room to wiggle in the wording so (like most of these questions) it comes down to your GMs decision, but I don't think there's any question whether or not magic can be used to get around an allergy. It seems a bit silly to get into spell design to create a different version of the same spell with more specific wording.


Agreed, I think that part about 'still have the allergy' is simply to point out that the allergy isn't cured, it is simply temporarily removed. Really just seems to be pointing out that it is a sustained spell and not a permanent spell.

Of course this raises the question "Why isn't there a permanent version of this spell?" Well, the only real reason is game balance, though you could maybe come up with some mumbo-jumbo fluff reason.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (AngelisStorm @ Feb 25 2010, 01:11 AM) *
Except said spell would only block flash packs, flash lights, etc. The aforementioned "UV bullets" (capsule rounds with chemicals which produce UV) would still pierce the spell, unless the spell was created very specifically.

Honestly, just talk to your GM. If you're throwing up the 100pts to play a vampire, plus the points for Mystic Adep or Magician, etc etc, then the GM really shouldn't be smacking you down for using Aleviate Allergy so that you can Regen. Regen isn't that powerful, and your paying for qualities/spells/sustaining focus, and so on. Besides, if Alleviate Allergy is not getting rid of the downside of having an Alergy, why does the spell exist?

(Besides, it allows the GM to pull the same trick.)


It actually depends on how exactly the spell is worded. If it creates a field in which U.V. can not exist, then it would protect against bullets and all other forms of U.V. as well. IF it merely created a barrier which prevent U.V. from crossing, then ya, bullets and the like would still work just fine.

I agree that alleviate allergy 'should' be enough, but not everyone shares this opinion with me. Then again, I also don't think vamps should be susceptable to U.V. and should only be vulnerable to sunlight™, but that's just me.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (Karoline @ Feb 25 2010, 07:34 AM) *
Agreed, I think that part about 'still have the allergy' is simply to point out that the allergy isn't cured, it is simply temporarily removed. Really just seems to be pointing out that it is a sustained spell and not a permanent spell.

Of course this raises the question "Why isn't there a permanent version of this spell?" Well, the only real reason is game balance, though you could maybe come up with some mumbo-jumbo fluff reason.


You could create a permanent (edit) version, it would just have to have a component cost of sacrificing the amount of karma the allergy was worth to maintain balance. Or if you want you could just not give BP for allergies, and allow the spell to have a permanent version.
Professor Evil Overlord
QUOTE (Karoline @ Feb 25 2010, 06:34 AM) *
Agreed, I think that part about 'still have the allergy' is simply to point out that the allergy isn't cured, it is simply temporarily removed. Really just seems to be pointing out that it is a sustained spell and not a permanent spell.

Of course this raises the question "Why isn't there a permanent version of this spell?" Well, the only real reason is game balance, though you could maybe come up with some mumbo-jumbo fluff reason.


Same reason most spells aren't permanent - they don't need to be in this system. A sustaining (or anchoring) focus or quickening pretty much does that for you. With extended masking it isn't even much of a hazard on the astral. Just remember to turn them off before passing through a ward.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (Professor Evil Overlord @ Feb 26 2010, 01:39 AM) *
Same reason most spells aren't permanent - they don't need to be in this system. A sustaining (or anchoring) focus or quickening pretty much does that for you. With extended masking it isn't even much of a hazard on the astral. Just remember to turn them off before passing through a ward.


I think its mostly just that permanent spells would be kinda broken in many cases. Permanently being able to boost reflexes with just a spell and no essence cost? I kinda see that as having the capacity to crash some cyberware markets.
Professor Evil Overlord
QUOTE (Mordinvan @ Feb 26 2010, 01:41 AM) *
I think its mostly just that permanent spells would be kinda broken in many cases. Permanently being able to boost reflexes with just a spell and no essence cost? I kinda see that as having the capacity to crash some cyberware markets.


It's actually even worse than that - you could basically boost all 8 of the base stats, plus get extra IPs, some armor, maybe a personal barrier or two, etc. Magic basically beats out everything when it comes to stat boosting. Mages capable of using sustaining foci can get really sick in a hurry. The only real drawbacks are the enchanting time and the karma cost, both of which can get big in a hurry. Especially if you require the mage to cast spells into his own foci rather than paying some one else to do it (now they have to learn all those spells). The worse news - creative mages can even share the fun with quickening and anchoring for their mundane buddies (though both require initiation).
Mordinvan
QUOTE (Professor Evil Overlord @ Feb 26 2010, 03:17 AM) *
It's actually even worse than that - you could basically boost all 8 of the base stats, plus get extra IPs, some armor, maybe a personal barrier or two, etc. Magic basically beats out everything when it comes to stat boosting. Mages capable of using sustaining foci can get really sick in a hurry. The only real drawbacks are the enchanting time and the karma cost, both of which can get big in a hurry. Especially if you require the mage to cast spells into his own foci rather than paying some one else to do it (now they have to learn all those spells). The worse news - creative mages can even share the fun with quickening and anchoring for their mundane buddies (though both require initiation).

I know, and you can have a mage who hunts a shadow spirit like a sucubus, banishes it, and binds it forcing it into a power pact, and then goes to a night club where open sex is the thing, and assenses people and drains karma from those who can afford the hit. No one would notice, and the amount of Karma you could rack up in a night, or a month worth of night would be.... enough to likely pay for all those foci. (edit), heck if you even give some to the sucubus, she might not be too pissed about the whole affair in the end anyway.
Professor Evil Overlord
QUOTE (Mordinvan @ Feb 26 2010, 02:23 AM) *
I know, and you can have a mage who hunts a shadow spirit like a sucubus, banishes it, and binds it forcing it into a power pact, and then goes to a night club where open sex is the thing, and assenses people and drains karma from those who can afford the hit. No one would notice, and the amount of Karma you could rack up in a night, or a month worth of night would be.... enough to likely pay for all those foci. (edit), heck if you even give some to the sucubus, she might not be too pissed about the whole affair in the end anyway.


That's...just...evil. In a good way. devil.gif

Hopefully none of my players will read this and try to run with the idea.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (Professor Evil Overlord @ Feb 26 2010, 04:19 AM) *
That's...just...evil. In a good way. devil.gif

Hopefully none of my players will read this and try to run with the idea.


Its essentially an I win button.
AngelisStorm
Nah, that sounds like a great plot hook to me. Enter the Sylvestrian Knights and/or the Knights Templar. Great if you have a religious runner, but having the players on the sidelines of an epic throwdown like that? And if they don't want to play, get them stuck in the middle somehow.

Nice alternative to using Bloodzilla.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (AngelisStorm @ Feb 26 2010, 02:15 PM) *
Nah, that sounds like a great plot hook to me. Enter the Sylvestrian Knights and/or the Knights Templar. Great if you have a religious runner, but having the players on the sidelines of an epic throwdown like that? And if they don't want to play, get them stuck in the middle somehow.

Nice alternative to using Bloodzilla.

A player running around vacuuming karma out of every sex club in the city seems like a good idea? I'm thinking it could result in an epic throw down, yes, but not in any good way.
Muspellsheimr
Keep in mind that Joe Average likely does not have any 'spare' Karma. Thus, while somewhat unbelievable, it is entirely reasonable that the sex clubs visited gain you no more Karma than you would have acquired for the 'run' in binding the spirit. And guess what - that is your Karma reward for the run.

Also, you would need to bind a Free Spirit with it's formulae, as Banishing is effectively useless against it, Rules as Written - they don't have tasks owed like summoned spirits (unless I am completely forgetting something from Street Magic - don't have that one on me at the moment). Because of this, I never really got the point of Banishing Resistance - the only spirits that can have it, it doesn't really help against. This is one of the reasons I changed how Banishing works.
Muspellsheimr
Keep in mind that Joe Average likely does not have any 'spare' Karma. Thus, while somewhat unbelievable, it is entirely reasonable that the sex clubs visited gain you no more Karma than you would have acquired for the 'run' in binding the spirit. And guess what - that is your Karma reward for the run.

Also, you would need to bind a Free Spirit with it's formulae, as Banishing is effectively useless against it, Rules as Written - they don't have tasks owed like summoned spirits (unless I am completely forgetting something from Street Magic - don't have that one on me at the moment). Because of this, I never really got the point of Banishing Resistance - the only spirits that can have it, it doesn't really help against. This is one of the reasons I changed how Banishing works.
Mordinvan
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Feb 26 2010, 03:14 PM) *
Keep in mind that Joe Average likely does not have any 'spare' Karma. Thus, while somewhat unbelievable, it is entirely reasonable that the sex clubs visited gain you no more Karma than you would have acquired for the 'run' in binding the spirit. And guess what - that is your Karma reward for the run.

Also, you would need to bind a Free Spirit with it's formulae, as Banishing is effectively useless against it, Rules as Written - they don't have tasks owed like summoned spirits (unless I am completely forgetting something from Street Magic - don't have that one on me at the moment). Because of this, I never really got the point of Banishing Resistance - the only spirits that can have it, it doesn't really help against. This is one of the reasons I changed how Banishing works.


I seem to recall something about being able to summon/bind spirits immediately after you banish them, and you're right, it IS impossible to believe that no one would have spare Karma, that would mean the rest of the universe (edit) except PC's seem to be incapable of learning new things, and the shadow spirits would never bother visiting this realm as only 5-6 people on the whole planet ever have any spare karma.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012