Well, nothing wrong with having niche and specialty powers, per se. If it simply gave extra actions, that's getting into Wires territory. The action economy is a balance issue (per my examples above), so it'd have to be appropriately expensive; suddenly, it'd be a must-have power, for Take Aim/Called Shot alone.

Don't forget all the Matrix Free actions

I don't know... Shooting 1-2 Arrows in 3 Seconds is pretty damn good, especially if they are on Target...
But I do take your point... Anyways, that is how I roll for Archery anyways... Complex Action to Ready/Fire...

Yeap, it's pretty good for aimed shooting. When people quote the rate of fire that could be achieved in volley fire, they often conveniently forget it was targeting an army rather thant asingle human-sized target...

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but nowhere in the rules are inanimate objects immune to toxins or drugs. Nothing offers them any sort of immunity or rules exemption. To be fair the majority of the toxins/drugs/whatever don't really affect vehicles/drones since they might not have a particular stat that doesn't mean strange things can't happen.

Let's take some K-10 and mix it with DSMO. Place the mixture in a capsule round and shoot a few cars. What ends up happening is they do not get any of the bonus stuff (such as the extra strength or pain tolerance) but when the duration wears off they explode in a grand fireball as they take something like 18P unresisted. Or what is that one magical drug that forces you to astrally perceive? Imagine that drone being dual natured for the duration....

It's really funny when you think about it.

Actually you can't posion rock and such. There's some really obscure clause some place. Tutori found it trying to work out if the above was true or not. Also k-10 wouldn't work I'm quite sure its stun damage still.

Yep... Vehicles do not take Stun Damage... whether it is 18 Stun ro 1800 Stun...

Some toxins do P; I had already stated that fact I'm sure.

Must of Missed it... But toxins only affect living systems... so, it is really a moot point anyways... Ironically, Spirits are indeed living systems... Vehicles, unfortunately, are not...

Common Sense does not evaporate in a vaccuum after all...

Well, the spirit part of that it still up for debate. 'Living systems' is far too vague to be an accurate condition for toxins.

Oh sorry was thinking of oxygenated fluorocarbons.

Perhaps, But I am sure that Common Sense can prevail here, what do you think?

Can't treat something with a Blood Treatment that does not actually have any Blood though... Kind of makes sense that way, don't you think?

Not many folks take that Quality.





-karma

I know that this is the dumb rules topic, but I think this post is all dumb, no rules. More generally:

I am sorry if this counteracts the point of this topic, but does RAW really have to cover things that are totally basic common sense like that a car cannot be on drugs? Is that really the responsibility of the RAW? I feel, as a player, a GM, and a game designer, that it should not be. That the RAW is an addition to basic, straight-up common sense and not a replacement of it. I know that as a game designer, I would find it a big waste of my time to have to write things like "inanimate objects cannot be poisoned or on drugs" which would be self-obvious to any player who was doing anything but specifically trying to think of convoluted ways in which the rules were "broken". I'm just saying. I feel the same way about things like not giving grunts language skills.

As a matter of fact, the only fuck up in RAW that I actually see as being the fault of the devs is the thing about spirits not being able to manifest. That seems like a glaring oversight. But even that can be overcome with the slightest bit of common sense...which, I know is not the point of this topic.

If there ar real world equivalents (i.e. cars) self evident facts need not be mentioned expressis verbis, but if there aren't (i.e Spirits, Magic etc.) you cannot assume all sorts of things because you think that is the way they should work.

vehicles and drones being immune to drugs makes sense.

What about biodrones?
Spirits?
It would be nice to have the questionable cases specifically explained.

Probably it is not in the rules because acids are covered under the same rules. Also you could come up with poisons that affect vehicles. Sugar in the gas tank anyone?

I can imagine a gas grenade that meant to put out fires by inhibiting combustion being used to stop the engine of an internal combustion engine. That would be poison.

Well, not biodrones. Those are just animals. But, yes, spirits is kinda the big one. We also shouldn't have to find the 'rules' for spirits hidden in a splatbook under the barely-usable Free Spirit PC section, either.

No, I don't think those would qualify as poison. It's good thinking, but it doesn't seem like those tactics really require the whole Vector/Penetration/Power/Onset/etc. setup.

They can Manifest just fine. They can't Materialize, Possess, or Inhabit, per (strict) RAW. Confusing Materialization and Manifestation is a dangerous thing to do because then your mages become super-powerful.

Yeah, I went over that a little earlier.

The point of contention was vectors.

The counterpoint was that, if you follow a strict interpretation of contact vectors, then you have to call a shot to bypass armor or capsule rounds and squirt guns are ineffective.


As to the benefit of Multi-tasking, it's not a straight up numerical benefit as much as a character defining trait that's up to the GM to convey. Applying numbers for a moment, look at it this way. It makes Observe in Detail a free action and gives you a 2nd free action per IP. Now, a normal person without Multi-tasking can observe 2 things per IP with two simple actions, whereas a person with Multi-tasking can observe 4 things per IP. That's twice as many per pass. combine with always-on IP enhancement like improved reflexes, and a deductive (also RP-heavy) power like Analytics, and suddenly you've got magical Sherlock Holmes. He walks into a room, takes in everything in seconds and then begins connecting them together into a working framework.

It's really up to the GM to make that apparent though, since rolling 12-16 Perception checks every 3 seconds is a ridiculous waste of time. If instead you assume that the character has bought (say 4) hits on every object to cross his sight, then you're really starting to see what multitasking actually is. Perfect awareness.

Well. *Better* awareness.

Superhuman for sure.

Well, only compared to normals. You miscalculated the number of Observes (3 total, not 4, because you can't trade 1 Simple for 2 Frees). So, you're 50% more observant than an *unaugmented* person, unless you're also augmented. In that case, you're just 50% more observant than someone with equal IPs. So, yes, 'superhuman', but only sorta kinda.

Anyway, I'm just goofing around. It's definitely intended as an 'observant dude' power, but there are certainly other creative uses.

So, you get 2 free actions from the quality, and trade 2 simple actions for two more. Total of 4.

Oh, duh: you're doing nothing but Observing. Sorry, I misunderstood.

It works quite well if a bot master if you have yor personal drone respond to quickly sent text messages or verbal sayings. Things not quite commands. For example if you built some back pack droen you could have it reload your gun with the message reload. It's there in RAW as you can give pilots scripts like agents.

Well, let's not speculate on the utility of imaginary backpack reloader drones. But yes, I'm sure people can find uses for extra actions.

No that thread will come latter. I hash of ideas fro scripting agents/pilots to get them do you actions for free.

And here I was having my character use Multi-Tasking to check up on Facebook and post to message boards.

Hey, the character has the Media Junkie: Severe quality.






-karma

I see I'm going to have to do some sliiight tweaking to my Caracas character. *thinks*

The "Influence" spell seems pretty OP.

Get anyone to do what you want, force is largely irrelevant, with no counter spelling save, and no opposed test at all if there isn't something there to confront the character with the wrongness of the suggestion.

Or did I misunderstand it:

Influence (Mental)
Type: M • Range: LOS • Duration: P • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 1
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. 210.
The caster can also withdraw the suggestion at any time.

I mean, who needs to bother with Negotiation or Con if they have this.

Face: "I'd like to negotiate a higher fee for the job please, mr GM".
GM: "Okay, make an negotiate skill + charisma roll"
(Face and GM rummage for dice)
Mage: Forget it man, I cast influence: "This job is worth more than that, you want to pay us your top price, we are worth the money". Cast at force 1. No need to roll drain, I use the buy the hits 4-for-1 rule.
GM: ...

Influence is resisted by the target. At force one he only has to get one hit. The mage's hits are limited by the force of the spell.

And a Johnson who does not plan for that sort of thing is not worth the name. He could even try the same.

A single command per spell...

I don't know, how you came up with this... Of course the target gets a resistance roll. Like any other Mana spell, Influence is resisted with Willpower + counterspelling (in any). Since force limits the number of hits on the spellcasting test, a higher force means greater chance to succeed in overcoming spell resistance.

That's the time when am GM has to be creative...

-CJ

[Edit] Damn, Dakka was faster...

I've underlined the crucial aspect here. The GM has a hell of a lot of scope for interpretting 'confronted' and 'wrongness'.

Does merely thinking the unthinkable count as being confronted, or does it actually take someone to say to them "that's crap"? E.g. if you suggest to someone that they should kill their children, should they be rolling to resist every time they think about it (which would be more combat rounds than not) or just when they actually attempt the act of infanticide?

Does wrongness mean 'contradiction' or only 'impossibility'? I.e. If the target thinks a window is open but can see that it's closed then that definitely counts, but what if they think they want a burger whilst remembering that they were vegetarian yesterday? It's entirely possible that they could want a burger (they're only metahuman after all) but they might personally consider the idea unthinkable for them.

Essentially what I'm getting at is that this spell is very easily tamed if the GM's on the case. He doesn't even have to be consistent about it if he wants to assert that the target's level of conviction in the subject matter is relevant, since this will vary wildly by target and subject matter.

Influence is not as powerful as people sometimes think.

There are two major parts to this

1) The GM is given massive amounts of leeway to allow resistance tests

Scenario

Female mage walks into the lobby smiles at the guard and casts influence "you want to let her through you trust her"
She tried to blag her way in with a flase ID and the hope she has jedi'd the guard.

In theory that would be enough to tip the social con in her favour as he would be less inclined to stop her or check correctly.

But

As a GM you can have anything from a supervisor come over at the wrong moment who hasnt been Jedi'd and ask why he's not checking up to a Spider on the comms asking why hes forgeting to check her id. It doesnt have to be railroading or GM cock blocking to make it hard to just wave your hand and get in to somewhere hard and thats not even counting astral watchers a simple watcher spirit with a command to alert people when a guard suddenly has a spell aura on him in the astral is pretty simple.

And

2) The books state over and over again that mental manipulations are some of the most mistrusted spells going they aint called mind rape for no reason. If a mage is getting a bit ott with the mental manipulation word will get round. All of a sudden the Johnson isnt meeting you in the flesh or your contacts will only deal by remote because they cant be sure they are thinking straight around you.


For getting out of a speeding ticket or something its cool but for really crazy shit its just not as powerfull as some people think

Would the mathematical improbability of succeeding at defusing a data bomb past rating 2 count as broken?

A technomancer with defuse threaded to 12 would have issues with a rating 3 data bomb and would set off a rating 4 data bomb pretty frequently. IMO defuse should be an extended test (rating x 2, 1 minute). Rather than the current (rating x 2) or die success test.

Well, but it should be dangerous to turn off a bomb, but not break it.

The issue comes in when I as a player spend ¥400 on a prgram that I then set on my commlink (per RAW data bombs can be set on a node) and now get to dump pretty much any hacker that tries to hack my commlink. Of course that almost always turns into an arms race with the GM and that's no fun for anyone.

This was addressed in SR4A (see p230 "Disarm Data Bomb (Disarm)"). It is no longer a success test and is now an opposed test. It is much easier now.

PC rolls Hacking + Diffuse vs Data Bomb's Rating x 2.

So in your example the TM (lets say skill of 4 in hacking) would have 16 dice to roll vs 6 dice (rating 3 Data Bomb) or 16 dice vs 8 dice (rating 4).

Even a mundane hacker with a skill of 4 and a program of 4 has the same chance as a Data Bomb R4 to succeed. Well, almost, the hacker needs 1 net hit so slightly harder.

Much easier, and much more deadly.

Now it does rating(x)d6 in damage. TM goes splat.

Yeah, but with a little edge spent to reroll I doubt it's too big a worry. Unless you're in a VR minefield.

Data bomb should be dangerous! But it is dooable but dangerous.

The problem is that you easily *could* be in a minefield: databombs are easy to place on everything, as many as you want.

I think abit of balance is needed when making a run.

Would any GM really Databomb everthing in a node just to mess with the Hacker? Its just as easy to put booby traps into rooms/safes/toilets with grenades for detonation from a GM's point of view but I cant say I've heard of a good one being such a ass.

wouldn't regular users just kinda die if a system was built that way?

That's my point. I don't *want* the Matrix to be a complete minefield; I'm just saying it's easy to make it one. :/ Vastly easier than actual explosive booby-traps.

Grenades and similar explosives can also be
rigged with a tripwire to set up as a basic booby-trap. This requires a
Demolitions + Agility (8, 1 Complex Action) Extended Test.


Assumming someone with a DP of 6 it would take four complex actions per trap (12 seconds).

Ten mins and you can have a room wired with multilpe tripwires rigged to blow.

Add in the various tech triggers to a grenade upto and including my fav the photoelectric trigger (trigger trips when exposed to light or light is blocked off depending on setting)

Demolitions is your friend

No, since regular users would have the passwords so the databombs wouldn't explode. Or they could use AR.

Yes, but you have to actually buy the grenades and triggers and go to the places. Databomb is free.