Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Sound element
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Seth
I am currently running a mostly RAW game (non RAW for character creation, but mostly RAW after that). One of the players wants to use the "Sound" element, which as far as I can see is just better than all the others.

What do most of you do with the "Sound" element?
Epicedion
For spells? You can't make sound combat spells. They're stun only, and elemental effect spells have to be physical damage.

..

Okay, so I'd just make them have the same DV as physical damage spells and try not to worry about it. If your mage wants to resist 8 drain to lob a sound burst spell, more power to him. Also consider that the acid and fire spells have a chance to seriously wreck exposed gear.

Keeping some context here, compare it to what happens if you shoot a guy in the face with a 45 nuyen.gif HE grenade out of your grenade launcher.
phlapjack77
Do you consider it that much better than a stunbolt/ball? The two seem pretty comparable, both have up- and down-sides...

Do you allow stick-n-shock ? Also, to many people, in the camp of "too good".
Mäx
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Mar 5 2011, 01:50 PM) *
For spells? You can't make sound combat spells.

Yes you can, street magic even list names for those in the "other elemental combat spells" side panel.
Fortinbras
Why is your player wanting to use "sound" and in what context is he wanting to use it. Is he making his own spell? Would the sound damage be entirely audiatory and subject to things like Select Sound Filter to determine resistance to damage, or would it be a burst that so powerful that it turned cars on end. If it's the latter, I'd say that's damage from wind due to it's power.

I think it's more likely your player got so used to magic in D&D he's trying to incorporate it's mechanical disconnect into the Shadowrun setting.
Seth
I think mostly the driver is that its not resisted by armour, unlike any other spell. So it just does more damage.

He is thinking of combining it with blast (talk about crazy drain) to knock cars on their end. "These are the sounds of sonic destruction".

After reading the above posts, I am minded to go ahead and see how it works. With other elements, the bad guys armor is only half the impact (mostly), and most bad guys will have damper ears. So the difference in armor is probably small.

phlapjack77
QUOTE (Seth @ Mar 5 2011, 08:41 PM) *
I think mostly the driver is that its not resisted by armour, unlike any other spell. So it just does more damage.

He is thinking of combining it with blast (talk about crazy drain) to knock cars on their end. "These are the sounds of sonic destruction".

After reading the above posts, I am minded to go ahead and see how it works. With other elements, the bad guys armor is only half the impact (mostly), and most bad guys will have damper ears. So the difference in armor is probably small.

But stunbolt also gives no armor save, AND the target doesn't get a dodge roll...

"Sounds" (hehe) like an interesting concept, I'd say it's worth allowing. From your description it doesn't seem like the player is just trying to "win" at SR with this.
Doc Byte
"Sound" reveals its full potential when used underwater. Unfortunately you'll have to make up your own rules as it's not considered in the rulebook.
Makki
just keep in mind a sensible shadowrunner doesn't want to alert more opposition than necessary. That's why every shadowrunner rolls Infiltration, to see how good he manages. That's why the sam as a silencer on his gun. Sound effect means Sound, unless he also casts silence at the target wink.gif. We ruled, everybody in the area gets hits additional dice to hear the attack, similar to the silence spell reducing the noise.

otherwise there's nothing wrong with the idea. indirect combat spells are bad as they are due to their ridiculous drain. You can always ask the player to include the reason and the circumstances of the acquiring of the spell into the background story.
Epicedion
QUOTE (Mäx @ Mar 5 2011, 07:14 AM) *
Yes you can, street magic even list names for those in the "other elemental combat spells" side panel.


In the Drain Modifiers table (Street Magic, p163) beside "Elemental Effect" it says "(must be Physical spell with Physical damage)" -- in the sidebar that explains Sound spells, it says that Sound damage is Stun only, which would prevent you from ever making a Sound spell.

I was making a joke, since it's a pretty big contradiction.
Sephiroth
QUOTE (Fortinbras @ Mar 5 2011, 08:19 AM) *
I think it's more likely your player got so used to magic in D&D he's trying to incorporate it's mechanical disconnect into the Shadowrun setting.

Not in the slightest.
Ol' Scratch
Sound has the problem of being Sound. ie, it's not at all quiet. At all. Meaning any kind of security is going to know he's doing something and will have little difficulty finding him. I mean, it should be worse than even Blast, and Blast represents tornado-like winds and shockwaves.
Mr Clock
Yeah...re: that bit in Street Magic, that's just weak editing/ proofreading. Smoke also only does Stun, yet is listed as an Elemental Effect. Somebody messed up. Anyway.

Ditto on the Sound being Sound. That's some noticeable spellcasting right there. How to treat the detection? Purely Force-based, or dependant on Spellcasting test successes? Threshold or bonus to perceiving?
CanRay
The flipside of Sound is that Sound Dampeners are pretty cheap, and would be standard issue on a lot of things, especially for Shadowrunners and Corporate Security, who would be using firearms inside buildings often. LOUD!!! I consider them a "Must Buy" for either the cybernetics, or incorporated into a helmet.

But, against passive targets (Read: Civilians), it's a great spell to use to incapacitate a large group without causing any serious damage. I mean, hell, Trog Rock Concerts are louder!
stu_pie
Found that an Adept running round with sound as part of elemental strike was pretty powered, the ignore armour I guess is used to balance fact it cant be used during stealth. Electric attacks seem just as strong IMO, half impact armour and can stun people, which is pretty powerful and more handy when running in the shadows
Yerameyahu
Yes, the Sound/'look I still do Physical' cheat is very abusive. If you allow it.
Bull
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Mar 5 2011, 02:24 PM) *
In the Drain Modifiers table (Street Magic, p163) beside "Elemental Effect" it says "(must be Physical spell with Physical damage)" -- in the sidebar that explains Sound spells, it says that Sound damage is Stun only, which would prevent you from ever making a Sound spell.

I was making a joke, since it's a pretty big contradiction.


I think that it's simply poor wording, and that the second "Physical" likely shouldn't be capitalized.

My read would be this:

The first Physical means that it is a Physical, not a Mana spell. Simple enough.

The second gets into semantics a bit, and is also why I think it shouldn't be capitalized. I think it's saying that it has to create "actual" physical damage (which can still be damage in the Stun category), rather than simply having some other effect... An Elemental spell that did not damage and JUST did the electrical elements disorient effect, for example.

In the long run, I think folks are over thinking this. smile.gif

And, as is pointed out, it's not really any better than a stun spell. Higher drain, same overall effect, can't be used on an Astral only target... it's only real upside is the ability to indirectly get targets in the blast radius, since Elemental Spells are Indirect rather than Direct.

Plus, if you get known for using it, Silence makes a great counter. Just hope no one ever creates a Shadowrun version of Vibranium, too. smile.gif

Bull
CanRay
QUOTE (Bull @ Mar 5 2011, 11:08 PM) *
Plus, if you get known for using it, Silence makes a great counter. Just hope no one ever creates a Shadowrun version of Vibranium, too. smile.gif

Bull

Actually, I have a PC who has a party of NPCs working on that as one of their projects...

They have a lot on their plate, however. Interesting group. You meet one in the ShadowSkool stories. wink.gif
Kronk2
QUOTE (Doc Byte @ Mar 5 2011, 08:51 AM) *
"Sound" reveals its full potential when used underwater. Unfortunately you'll have to make up your own rules as it's not considered in the rulebook.

Treat as the blast element. Sound is the repeated compression and rarefaction of a wave form. Blast is a single compression and rarefaction. mechanistically this is as close as you are going to get.
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Mar 5 2011, 08:24 PM) *
In the Drain Modifiers table (Street Magic, p163) beside "Elemental Effect" it says "(must be Physical spell with Physical damage)" -- in the sidebar that explains Sound spells, it says that Sound damage is Stun only, which would prevent you from ever making a Sound spell.

I was making a joke, since it's a pretty big contradiction.
Joke aside it is indeed a contradiction. By RAW this is taken even further with the lightning bolt/ball spells. Those indeed do P damage even though the elemental effects description says S. You could do this with Sound as well.
Mr Clock
Pretty sure on consideration that it's intended to imply that a damaging manipulation has to generate a measurable physical effect of some kind. May be drifting from RAW, but it sticks with what I see as RAI.
Yerameyahu
The Lightning Bolt doing P is a pretty notable error, though.
Game2BHappy
I used it in one game for the NPCs. I made it ridiculously loud so its use was as good as setting off an alarm. The PCs had to finish up and exit quick to avoid more security forces.
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 6 2011, 04:36 PM) *
The Lightning Bolt doing P is a pretty notable error, though.
What makes you think that? The wording in Street magic could just as well be erroneous.
Yerameyahu
That's what I mean. If you're making the assumption that the elemental effects work as written, then there's a bald conflict there. Something has to give.
CanRay
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 6 2011, 11:36 AM) *
The Lightning Bolt doing P is a pretty notable error, though.

Having been electrocuted a few times, it doesn't take much to go from "Stun" to "Physical"... Lightning Bolt is probably just over that line.

And even further as you pump more Force into it.
Yerameyahu
That's not really the point, though. smile.gif We can imagine any element doing P damage, yes. I'm just talking about how the element effect list doesn't match the spells that are theoretically made by applying them.
Mäx
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 6 2011, 07:11 PM) *
That's not really the point, though. smile.gif We can imagine any element doing P damage, yes. I'm just talking about how the element effect list doesn't match the spells that are theoretically made by applying them.

You apply all the effects of the element to the spell and then turn the damage to physical(if it already isn't), as all indirect combat spells do physical damage.
Just like you would do with an adept who has killing hands and elemental strike.
Whipstitch
Clout does Stun, actually. It doesn't have an elemental effect, but it IS a Physical type Indirect spell that does not deal Physical. At any rate, Yerameyahu's point simply appears to be that any conversion from Stun to Physical is implied through tables and a related limitation rather than clearly written, particularly given that the point of having Killing Hands is to convert Stun to Physical and to bypass ItNW. That's a bit of ambiguity in the rules rather than a failure of imagination.
Epicedion
I would rather keep the listed spells as they're written, and make any future Electricity spells function as per the sidebar.

Or in other words, since there's already one electrical physical damage spell and its variants, there's not much need to make an identical one.

I'd also just flat out ignore that "elemental must be physical" rule in general, except for cases of things that obviously have no vector to cause stun damage. No stun fireballs for example. No Stun acid. I'd just apply it case-by-case.

Maybe someone can help me out with explaining why Elemental spells have such a high Drain modifier in the first place. You'd think that Direct Mana spells, which bypass armor completely and are usually harder to resist, are relatively cheap.
Mr Clock
Manabolt is a Vulcan death grip with range. It's the simple channelling of mana into another living body with the intent to cause harm.

Fireball is calling on an element to manifest in the material plane. It's a bit more of a strain.

What happened to damaging Manipulations, anyway? Seems like they've all been recategorised into Combat spells. Can you still pull off a Firehose (sustained, single target, Fire damage) if you're willing to suck up the Drain?
Bodak
QUOTE (CanRay @ Mar 7 2011, 02:56 AM) *
Having been electrocuted a few times,
Electrocution necessarily involves death. Hopefully you only meant you have experienced electric shocks a few times!

QUOTE (Mr Clock @ Mar 7 2011, 09:25 AM) *
Fireball is calling on an element to manifest in the material plane. It's a bit more of a strain.
This sounds more like a totally different power: Materialisation. Manifesting never directly affects the physical plane (though having a Watcher manifest with a bloodcurdling scream during a tricky driving manoeuvre could prove hazardous).
Yerameyahu
Mäx, that's kind of the point of this thread. If a sonic 'fireball/lightning bolt' automatically does P, but also ignores armor, that's insane. It also contradicts one side of the rules. … That's exactly what we're talking about, and how it can't be right. smile.gif
Epicedion
QUOTE (Mr Clock @ Mar 6 2011, 06:25 PM) *
Manabolt is a Vulcan death grip with range. It's the simple channelling of mana into another living body with the intent to cause harm.

Fireball is calling on an element to manifest in the material plane. It's a bit more of a strain.


Sure, but it's still a game, so you wouldn't really expect risk and reward to go in opposite directions.

If your Magic 5 mage tosses a Manabolt at a standard security guard with an armor vest, the guard gets to roll Willpower, and the mage gets to roll against DV 2. A guard in this situation is probably going to take about 7 damage.

If your Magic 5 mage tosses a Flamethrower at the guard, the guard gets to roll Reaction (probably on 3 dice) to reduce net hits and then gets to roll to resist the damage (probably on 5 dice), and the mage gets to roll against DV 5. A guard in this situation is probably going to take about 5 or 6 damage. The formula seems to be taking more drain gives more chances to resist damage, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

More than double the DV for less effect. Sure you can set things on fire, but damn. The only real roles for elemental spells are extremely high-cost utility and blowing up drones, which other spells pretty well suck at. If that's the rationale behind it, sure, but it just seems a little weird.
phlapjack77
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2011, 08:13 AM) *
If a sonic 'fireball/lightning bolt' automatically does P, but also ignores armor, that's insane.

That doesn't seem so insane. Powerbolt / manabolt do this, and does more damage for less drain (barring the net hits / DV change to direct combat spells)

QUOTE (Epicedion @ Mar 7 2011, 08:32 AM) *
More than double the DV for less effect. Sure you can set things on fire, but damn. The only real roles for elemental spells are extremely high-cost utility and blowing up drones, which other spells pretty well suck at. If that's the rationale behind it, sure, but it just seems a little weird.

It seems that part of the problem is that the real value of the elemental effect spells is GM-dependent. Powerbolt, you know what's going to happen, it's all right there in the calculation. Fireball - will some stuff get set on fire? Ammo explode? Acid - will important things get damaged? That's GM-dependent, usually. So the GM has to be aware that these kinds of spells are more reliant on his/her ability to make them useful to the player.
Yerameyahu
That's apples and oranges, though. Compared to its elemental cousins, it's crazy. The direct/indirect issue is its own separate problem. smile.gif
phlapjack77
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2011, 09:36 AM) *
That's apples and oranges, though. Compared to its elemental cousins, it's crazy. The direct/indirect issue is its own separate problem. smile.gif

Ah, I see what you mean now. Sorry for the misinterpretation smile.gif
TheOOB
QUOTE (Epicedion @ Mar 6 2011, 08:32 PM) *
Sure, but it's still a game, so you wouldn't really expect risk and reward to go in opposite directions.

If your Magic 5 mage tosses a Manabolt at a standard security guard with an armor vest, the guard gets to roll Willpower, and the mage gets to roll against DV 2. A guard in this situation is probably going to take about 7 damage.

If your Magic 5 mage tosses a Flamethrower at the guard, the guard gets to roll Reaction (probably on 3 dice) to reduce net hits and then gets to roll to resist the damage (probably on 5 dice), and the mage gets to roll against DV 5. A guard in this situation is probably going to take about 5 or 6 damage. The formula seems to be taking more drain gives more chances to resist damage, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

More than double the DV for less effect. Sure you can set things on fire, but damn. The only real roles for elemental spells are extremely high-cost utility and blowing up drones, which other spells pretty well suck at. If that's the rationale behind it, sure, but it just seems a little weird.


The elemental effects can be powerful. I don't like fire, acid, and cold spells because the effects are GM specific with no clear ruleing in the book. The other elemental effects are quite powerful(for the most part) and often worth the extra drain. A force 4 ball lightning will knock out most the targets it hits, and give penalties to anyone who makes the check against the test. Very powerful.

For the record, my GM ruling on fire spells is that each round they have to make a Body+.5impact armor test vs the fire DV they took last round(with a bonus or penalty if I deem the subject/environment will help or hinder the flame). For acid spells, in addition to the smoke I rule that equiptment hit by acid has degraded performance, even if it survives, so I might shave off a few points of armor, or make a weapon work worse. Cold spells I rarely see used, but I have them slow movement speed/lower initiative.
Mäx
QUOTE (TheOOB @ Mar 7 2011, 12:46 PM) *
A force 4 ball lightning will knock out most the targets it hits

Not really, even a very basic mook with average human body and willpower(3) and 6 points of armor will make that save every single time on average.
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Mäx @ Mar 7 2011, 12:06 PM) *
Not really, even a very basic mook with average human body and willpower(3) and 6 points of armor will make that save every single time on average.
Willpower is irrelevant for indirect combat spells. Ball Lightning is resisted by REA(+Counterspelling if applicable)(+Dodge/Gymnastics on Full Defense)-2
Mr Clock
Again from 2nd Ed, but wasn't there a big thing where you could make a Combat spell with an elemental effect with the trade-off that it was pretty weak, or a damaging Manipulation with an elemental effect that would really sting, at the cost of more Drain?
Lansdren
QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Mar 7 2011, 11:19 AM) *
Willpower is irrelevant for indirect combat spells. Ball Lightning is resisted by REA(+Counterspelling if applicable)(+Dodge/Gymnastics on Full Defense)-2



I think he might be refering to the stun test for electrical attacks which is a Body (rather then armour) + Willpower (3) test to avoid being put down on the ground, even if you pass the test you still have modifier which can be make or break in a fight.





Heres a question though - Combined Water and Lighting AOE spell as per napalm and the like. Would you give a bonus to the electricity damage as its being conducted through the water? It is sugested in the rules for electriciy based weapons but left to GM fiat. Personal opinion is that for the extra drain I would be willing to give a extra point of damage or maybe a couple of extra meters of range (due to water speading before the charge finishes)
Dakka Dakka
QUOTE (Lansdren @ Mar 7 2011, 02:30 PM) *
I think he might be refering to the stun test for electrical attacks which is a Body (rather then armour) + Willpower (3) test to avoid being put down on the ground, even if you pass the test you still have modifier which can be make or break in a fight.
Could be. This test however also uses half impact armor as a positive dice pool modifier.
Mäx
QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Mar 7 2011, 03:36 PM) *
Could be. This test however also uses half impact armor as a positive dice pool modifier.

Yes, why do think i mentioned the 6 points of armor?
I assumed he ment the incapasitation rule, because thats the only way a force 4 lightning ball can knock someone out.
Yerameyahu
Lansdren, only if you're going to penalize spells like Firewater. I think it's safer to not let the elements interact.
Lansdren
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2011, 03:28 PM) *
Lansdren, only if you're going to penalize spells like Firewater. I think it's safer to not let the elements interact.



Thats a fair point I didnt think of that.

Just came to mind as I was rereading the electricity rules about the shock part.
Mäx
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2011, 05:28 PM) *
Lansdren, only if you're going to penalize spells like Firewater. I think it's safer to not let the elements interact.

Well, an effect of a spell that creates napam can be quite nasty too.
Lansdren
QUOTE (Mäx @ Mar 7 2011, 03:54 PM) *
Well, an effect of a spell that creates napam can be quite nasty too.



True but the spell itself does say its water and fire which if we add in more logical elemental interplay they might counter each other abit. We enter the realm of GM fiat at best or arguring round in circles at worst.
CanRay
54. “Napalm sticks to kids” is *not* a motivational phrase. - The 213 things Skippy is no longer allowed to do in the U.S. Army
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