Full Version: Warding and vehicles
Ok so a Gm friend and I had a dispute about warding vehicles and wanted to see if there was something we were missing. Can you ward an entire vehicle so that it is immune to accident powers etc or could you use the power against its wheels etc etc by saying that the ward is based on the car only?
You can't make mobile wards: if the anchor moves, the ward collapses. So the original question is moot.
Too bad. I'd want one for a car so I could ram Spirits with it. 
QUOTE (CanRay @ Sep 18 2011, 06:09 PM) 
Too bad. I'd want one for a car so I could ram Spirits with it.
that and warding up heavy vehicles so a spirit can't jump in and fear bomb the driver/crew.
Or scream industrial metal with the volume cranked up to 21. 
I don't think that's right, Traul. "The anchor cannot be moved in relation to the ward."
It's in Street Magic, p.123. The paragraph is called "Remaining stationary". "Wards are not portable astral objects". It looks like they were more thinking about warding weapons than vehicles, but the result is the same: you can't do it.
Ah, cool. 
I'd rather it be that way, myself.
I'd rather it be that way, myself.
QUOTE (Traul @ Sep 19 2011, 10:09 AM)
You can't make mobile wards: if the anchor moves, the ward collapses. So the original question is moot.
This is not true. See this post which deals with that very concept. You can ward a vehicle in SR4 just fine. It's a horrible idea that should never have been allowed, but it is totally legitimate now. This thread also had mention of it.
I mean, 'totally legitimate'? Until there's errata, no. FAQ, psh.
FAQ, psh.
The argument is that this is already explicit in the core books:
QUOTE (Synner @ Jun 7 2007, 08:44 AM)
The core book (p.185) says as much, a ward cannot be moved from its physical component to another location. This means the two cannot be separated or distanced. It makes no reference as to what happens when the physical reference itself moves.
Again both Street Magic and the core book state that the ward cannot move in relation to the anchor. If the ward and anchor moves there has been no relative movement.
While the FAQ clarifies with examples, it's not introducing anything new. So no worries if the FAQ is dismissed - Synner's argument still stands. It's all there.
Again both Street Magic and the core book state that the ward cannot move in relation to the anchor. If the ward and anchor moves there has been no relative movement.
Eh. It's not very convincing, and I think we'd all prefer it not be true. Besides, this question will be answered in a forthcoming sourcebook. 
Besides, this question will be answered in a forthcoming sourcebook.
Speak for yourself! As I've always told people when they bring up the point that they don't like the idea of anchor points and wards moving together...
How do you reconcile this with the rotation of the earth, or the warding of rooms with, say, doors that swivel outward or inward, or skyscrapers, which flex and move in relation to their base anchor point whenever there's wind?
I understand the resistance to warded vehicles, but it's necessary for two major reasons:
1) Large craft such as aircraft carriers or cruise ships would be unable to secure area via wards, even though reasonably one can ward a room inside a ship, because the "vehicle" is moving.
2) It's necessary to prevent utter dominance of spirits in any kind of military combat - spirits may manifest within any craft be it a suborbital or a tank, and down it with a trivial expenditure of powers, unless there is a mage defending each an every military vehicle.
I would suggest setting a lower limit on the Body of any vehicle to be warded, however, as well as the restriction on being enclosed.
How do you reconcile this with the rotation of the earth, or the warding of rooms with, say, doors that swivel outward or inward, or skyscrapers, which flex and move in relation to their base anchor point whenever there's wind?
I understand the resistance to warded vehicles, but it's necessary for two major reasons:
1) Large craft such as aircraft carriers or cruise ships would be unable to secure area via wards, even though reasonably one can ward a room inside a ship, because the "vehicle" is moving.
2) It's necessary to prevent utter dominance of spirits in any kind of military combat - spirits may manifest within any craft be it a suborbital or a tank, and down it with a trivial expenditure of powers, unless there is a mage defending each an every military vehicle.
I would suggest setting a lower limit on the Body of any vehicle to be warded, however, as well as the restriction on being enclosed.
QUOTE (CanRay @ Sep 18 2011, 06:09 PM)
Too bad. I'd want one for a car so I could ram Spirits with it.
You can still do this.
Ramming is treated as a melee attack.(per the vehicle rules section)
Weapon Foci specifically come with you when you astrally project, and can be used against things there - and use regular weapon skills to boot, instead of astral combat. (per weapon foci rules)
Enchanting a roadmaster as a weapon focus, and playing demolition derby in the spirit world? Priceless.
I've often toyed around with the idea of sending a group on a run to steal a project car - you know, one of those odd, one of a kind, doctorate project/initation thesis/crazy mage in his basement with spare time things - involving an engineer building a car from scratch, and enchanting the whole thing as he went. Perhaps a museum wants it, after sueing for possession, and making sure the other guy didn't show up for court.
You cannot fully ward a vehicle, through you could create a ward in a vehicle. The ward does not move, per se, however when the vehicle in which it is contained moves, it it anchored to part of that vehicle.
QUOTE (Adarael @ Sep 18 2011, 11:21 PM)
Speak for yourself! As I've always told people when they bring up the point that they don't like the idea of anchor points and wards moving together...
How do you reconcile this with the rotation of the earth, or the warding of rooms with, say, doors that swivel outward or inward, or skyscrapers, which flex and move in relation to their base anchor point whenever there's wind?
I understand the resistance to warded vehicles, but it's necessary for two major reasons:
1) Large craft such as aircraft carriers or cruise ships would be unable to secure area via wards, even though reasonably one can ward a room inside a ship, because the "vehicle" is moving.
2) It's necessary to prevent utter dominance of spirits in any kind of military combat - spirits may manifest within any craft be it a suborbital or a tank, and down it with a trivial expenditure of powers, unless there is a mage defending each an every military vehicle.
I would suggest setting a lower limit on the Body of any vehicle to be warded, however, as well as the restriction on being enclosed.
How do you reconcile this with the rotation of the earth, or the warding of rooms with, say, doors that swivel outward or inward, or skyscrapers, which flex and move in relation to their base anchor point whenever there's wind?
I understand the resistance to warded vehicles, but it's necessary for two major reasons:
1) Large craft such as aircraft carriers or cruise ships would be unable to secure area via wards, even though reasonably one can ward a room inside a ship, because the "vehicle" is moving.
2) It's necessary to prevent utter dominance of spirits in any kind of military combat - spirits may manifest within any craft be it a suborbital or a tank, and down it with a trivial expenditure of powers, unless there is a mage defending each an every military vehicle.
I would suggest setting a lower limit on the Body of any vehicle to be warded, however, as well as the restriction on being enclosed.
I agree with your points about the affects of not being able to ward vehicles, especially large military class ones, of course when a vehicle gets large enough you can bring awakeneed ivy and other solutions in to play so there is that.
RE Swigning doors: It doesn't matter, as long as the door itself isn't warded a ward doesn't conform to the strict confines of a room anyway, the door might leave the confines of the ward but the ward itself stays in place.
As to the movement of the earth, none of the other shadowrun magical effects care about physics, why would this? Remember this is the game that if you get someplace where sundown and sunset changes you get longer and shorter usage of your spirits with all the wackyness that entails.
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 18 2011, 11:34 PM)
You cannot fully ward a vehicle, through you could create a ward in a vehicle. The ward does not move, per se, however when the vehicle in which it is contained moves, it it anchored to part of that vehicle.
Except for the fact that the ward moves, the rules don't care if it moved relative, only that it moves.
QUOTE (LurkerOutThere @ Sep 18 2011, 11:39 PM)
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 18 2011, 11:34 PM)
You cannot fully ward a vehicle, through you could create a ward in a vehicle. The ward does not move, per se, however when the vehicle in which it is contained moves, it it anchored to part of that vehicle.
Except for the fact that the ward moves, the rules don't care if it moved relative, only that it moves.
The ward is not moving, it is stationary in relation to its anchor. We had it confirmed at the tournament this year at Gen Con... I seem to remember this was also in the official FAQ.. Which coincidentally has gone missing from the Shadowrun4 website..
"...Men live and die, and the Turtle Moves. Empires grow and crumble, and the Turtle Moves. Gods come and go, and still the Turtle Moves. The Turtle Moves." - Didactylos, Small Gods, Sir Terry Pratchett.
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 18 2011, 11:42 PM)
The ward is not moving, it is stationary in relation to its anchor. We had it confirmed at the tournament this year at Gen Con... I seem to remember this was also in the official FAQ.. Which coincidentally has gone missing from the Shadowrun4 website.
Oh, time to put on my Plan 9 Tinfoil Hat and work out where the conspiracy is!
QUOTE (http://web.archive.org/web/20100125050546/http://www.shadowrun4.com/resources/faq.shtml#4)
Can a ward be placed inside a moving van?
"A physical anchor cannot move more than a few centimeters relative to the ward enclosure when the ward was created." That's the key phrase and it can be pretty tricky. For instance, if you create a domed ward outdoors using a rock as the physical anchor, and then someone kicks that rock a few feet, the ward will collapse. It has moved more than few centimeters from its position relative to the domed ward at creation. But, if you ward a shipping container using the walls of that shipping container as the physical anchor, and the shipping container is shipped across the Pacific Ocean, the ward does not collapse. The entire warded enclosure is moving, so in the relationship between the ward and physical anchor, it hasn't moved at all from its relationship at the ward's creation.
As an aside, this is also why the spin of the Earth doesn't cause the domed ward around the rock to collapse. Because the entire enclosure is moving with the rotation of the Earth. Until someone kicks that rock, the relationship between the ward and stone remain the same.
"A physical anchor cannot move more than a few centimeters relative to the ward enclosure when the ward was created." That's the key phrase and it can be pretty tricky. For instance, if you create a domed ward outdoors using a rock as the physical anchor, and then someone kicks that rock a few feet, the ward will collapse. It has moved more than few centimeters from its position relative to the domed ward at creation. But, if you ward a shipping container using the walls of that shipping container as the physical anchor, and the shipping container is shipped across the Pacific Ocean, the ward does not collapse. The entire warded enclosure is moving, so in the relationship between the ward and physical anchor, it hasn't moved at all from its relationship at the ward's creation.
As an aside, this is also why the spin of the Earth doesn't cause the domed ward around the rock to collapse. Because the entire enclosure is moving with the rotation of the Earth. Until someone kicks that rock, the relationship between the ward and stone remain the same.
So, as long as there's some kind of frame (Like the interior of a car or the walls of a mobile home), the ward can move. But if the ward is cast on something that lacks said anchoring points, then it collapses as it moves.
Makes sense.
Makes sense.
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 19 2011, 02:42 PM)
I seem to remember this was also in the official FAQ.. Which coincidentally has gone missing from the Shadowrun4 website..
Did you look here http://www.shadowrun4.com/game-resources/f...sked-questions/ ?People were arguing against the FAQ being legitimate though, so if possible, let's keep this to the books (which Synner argues allow for mobile wards).
QUOTE (LurkerOutThere @ Sep 19 2011, 06:39 AM)
Except for the fact that the ward moves, the rules don't care if it moved relative, only that it moves.
Except for that the rules only about wether or not the ward moves in relation to the anchor.
As has been iterated time and again: move the anchor the same ammount as you're moving the ward and you're fine.
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 19 2011, 06:34 AM)
You cannot fully ward a vehicle, through you could create a ward in a vehicle.
Why could you not fully ward a vehicle, provided said vehicle doesn't exceed ward space limitations?
QUOTE (Mardrax @ Sep 19 2011, 01:50 AM)
Why could you not fully ward a vehicle, provided said vehicle doesn't exceed ward space limitations?
Where is the anchor then?
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 19 2011, 08:37 AM)
Where is the anchor then?
Maybe the roof?
slightly different question:
do you have to tell the ward to move, or does the ward move automagically with the anchor?
do you have to tell the ward to move, or does the ward move automagically with the anchor?
That's the fun part: sometimes the ward moves with the anchor, sometimes it doesn't and the ward collapses. Why? Magic.
QUOTE (Adarael @ Sep 18 2011, 09:21 PM)
Speak for yourself! As I've always told people when they bring up the point that they don't like the idea of anchor points and wards moving together...
How do you reconcile this with the rotation of the earth, or the warding of rooms with, say, doors that swivel outward or inward, or skyscrapers, which flex and move in relation to their base anchor point whenever there's wind?
I understand the resistance to warded vehicles, but it's necessary for two major reasons:
1) Large craft such as aircraft carriers or cruise ships would be unable to secure area via wards, even though reasonably one can ward a room inside a ship, because the "vehicle" is moving.
2) It's necessary to prevent utter dominance of spirits in any kind of military combat - spirits may manifest within any craft be it a suborbital or a tank, and down it with a trivial expenditure of powers, unless there is a mage defending each an every military vehicle.
I would suggest setting a lower limit on the Body of any vehicle to be warded, however, as well as the restriction on being enclosed.
How do you reconcile this with the rotation of the earth, or the warding of rooms with, say, doors that swivel outward or inward, or skyscrapers, which flex and move in relation to their base anchor point whenever there's wind?
I understand the resistance to warded vehicles, but it's necessary for two major reasons:
1) Large craft such as aircraft carriers or cruise ships would be unable to secure area via wards, even though reasonably one can ward a room inside a ship, because the "vehicle" is moving.
2) It's necessary to prevent utter dominance of spirits in any kind of military combat - spirits may manifest within any craft be it a suborbital or a tank, and down it with a trivial expenditure of powers, unless there is a mage defending each an every military vehicle.
I would suggest setting a lower limit on the Body of any vehicle to be warded, however, as well as the restriction on being enclosed.
You do know that the Accident Power works without the Spirit entering a Vehicle, Right? And the theoretical Ward inside does bupkiss.
OK, so you got the shell of the vehicle warded against Accident. Can't have the engine flood for no reason.
Too bad there's so many things that can go wrong with the road, other cars, pedestrians, the various advertising/surveillance blimp-drones flying around, the beer truck you're driving behind opening up and spilling it's contents right in front of you...
...
OH THE METAHUMANITY!!!
Too bad there's so many things that can go wrong with the road, other cars, pedestrians, the various advertising/surveillance blimp-drones flying around, the beer truck you're driving behind opening up and spilling it's contents right in front of you...
...
OH THE METAHUMANITY!!!
What I really want, what I want more then anythign when fifth edition comes around is a rework of the magic system. I want someone to sit down from top to bottom and think up how the system works, and make it consistatn throughout even if only according to it's own rules. Then i want them to think of what sort of implications the system will have and take nothign for granted.
Personally the notion that a ward is good to move so long as it's moving uniformly is garbage, it can either move or it can't.
Personally the notion that a ward is good to move so long as it's moving uniformly is garbage, it can either move or it can't.
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Sep 19 2011, 08:01 AM)
You do know that the Accident Power works without the Spirit entering a Vehicle, Right? And the theoretical Ward inside does bupkiss.
Except as far as I recall, the accident power has to act upon a victim, not an inanimate object - the power increases the chance of a glitch & critical glitch. Since the object cannot roll dice, it cannot botch, only the pilot. The pilot - or pilot software - is inside the ward, and therefore is protected by the ward.
Even if that's not the case, the accident power is shit for downing planes. Increase the chances of a botch when a pilot has a halfway decent amount of dice and a copilot? Pfeh. Manifest in cockpit, engulf pilots, laugh all the way down!
QUOTE (LurkerOutThere @ Sep 19 2011, 06:18 PM)
Personally the notion that a ward is good to move so long as it's moving uniformly is garbage, it can either move or it can't.
A ward is anchored to an object inside the ward. If this object moves, without the entire warded area moving in tandem with it, the ward breaks down.
It's simple enough, really. Just like an umbrella breaks to bits when the center pole moves in another direction than its spokes, so does a ward. Move the whole though, and you'll stay high, dry, and protected from any rain that doesn't turn to big magical hailstones.
QUOTE (Redjack @ Sep 19 2011, 01:37 PM)
Where is the anchor then?
It's the cupholder that sits where the gearknob used to, back when stick-shift was still around to drive certain people places, and other people mad. Or the middle headrest, or the ashtray, or the babyseat. Does it really matter?
QUOTE (Mardrax @ Sep 19 2011, 05:35 PM)
A ward is anchored to an object inside the ward. If this object moves, without the entire warded area moving in tandem with it, the ward breaks down.
It's simple enough, really.
It's simple enough, really.
No it's not. What makes the ward sometimes move with its anchor, sometimes not?
Consider the difference between: I am warding this vehicle, binding the ward to a widget bolted to the vehicle, and I am warding this vehicle, binding the ward to a rock that I throw in the trunk.
QUOTE (Adarael @ Sep 19 2011, 09:32 AM)
Except as far as I recall, the accident power has to act upon a victim, not an inanimate object - the power increases the chance of a glitch & critical glitch. Since the object cannot roll dice, it cannot botch, only the pilot. The pilot - or pilot software - is inside the ward, and therefore is protected by the ward.
Even if that's not the case, the accident power is shit for downing planes. Increase the chances of a botch when a pilot has a halfway decent amount of dice and a copilot? Pfeh. Manifest in cockpit, engulf pilots, laugh all the way down!
Even if that's not the case, the accident power is shit for downing planes. Increase the chances of a botch when a pilot has a halfway decent amount of dice and a copilot? Pfeh. Manifest in cockpit, engulf pilots, laugh all the way down!
Read it again. Forces a Crash Test with a Penalty equal to the Force of the Spirit. Any Non-Piloted Drone immediately crashes if the Spirit is Force 3 or so, since the pilot will no longer be able to generate the necessary Hits Threshold (3) at that point. At Force 6, even a Piloted Vehicle may have issues. Of course, Living Pilots have Edge.
QUOTE (UmaroVI @ Sep 19 2011, 07:39 PM)
Consider the difference between: I am warding this vehicle, binding the ward to a widget bolted to the vehicle, and I am warding this vehicle, binding the ward to a rock that I throw in the trunk.
The former makes the ward function until someone undoes the bolt, the latter makes it function until the vehicle acc/decelerates in any direction and the rock starts rolling around, barring the rock in the car with really shaggy carpeting in the trunk, which will just need higher acceleration to break the ward.
QUOTE (Traul @ Sep 19 2011, 06:47 PM)
No it's not. What makes the ward sometimes move with its anchor, sometimes not?
Physics. When the anchor is in (and preferably firmly attached to) the warded object, which then proceeds to move, the anchor moves in tandem with the object, so the ward stays in place. It's not rocket science, although I'm starting to picture Bill O' Reily's face here.
QUOTE (UmaroVI @ Sep 19 2011, 10:39 AM)
Consider the difference between: I am warding this vehicle, binding the ward to a widget bolted to the vehicle, and I am warding this vehicle, binding the ward to a rock that I throw in the trunk.
The Rock can move and the Bolted Widget cannot. If the rock moves more than a few centimeters (likely if it is loose in the trunk), the ward goes away.
Do I get a Cookie?
Damn: Mardrax got there first...
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Sep 19 2011, 08:06 PM)
Do I get a Cookie?
Damn: Mardrax got there first...
Damn: Mardrax got there first...
Don't worry there TJ, if I get a cookie, you can have half. You'll get the half with most chocolate chips even!
QUOTE (Mardrax @ Sep 19 2011, 08:05 PM)
I'm starting to picture Bill O' Reily's face here.
got you beat there:
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Sep 19 2011, 04:28 PM)
QUOTE (Mardrax @ Sep 19 2011, 11:14 AM)
Don't worry there TJ, if I get a cookie, you can have half. You'll get the half with most chocolate chips even!
Oooh.... Chocolate. Yum...
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Sep 19 2011, 08:21 PM)
got you beat there:
Ah, crud!
Would you like a share of the cookie too?
QUOTE (Mardrax @ Sep 19 2011, 08:27 PM)
Ah, crud!
Would you like a share of the cookie too?
Would you like a share of the cookie too?
I can explain that!
Also, no, thank you, you and TJ can have the cookie ^^
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Sep 19 2011, 10:01 AM)
Read it again. Forces a Crash Test with a Penalty equal to the Force of the Spirit. Any Non-Piloted Drone immediately crashes if the Spirit is Force 3 or so, since the pilot will no longer be able to generate the necessary Hits Threshold (3) at that point. At Force 6, even a Piloted Vehicle may have issues. Of course, Living Pilots have Edge.
I can't "read it again", since I don't have my book at work.
Non-piloted drones statistically will crash 1/3rd of the time they're forced to make "very easy" vehicle tests on a semi-crowded street ANYWAY. Logic REALLY suggests any drone should have a rating 3 autosoft installed along with its 3 Pilot rating, because otherwise they cannot take off or land reliably on their own.
I dunno, even at Force 6, burning people alive is more reliable. A competent pilot - 4 dice in his skill (or 2 with a specialty), 4 Response in his commlink, hot sim + Control Rig, and a handling of 0? He's got 10 dice before accident and 4 dice after it, AND a -1 threshold from being in hot sim. Conversely, he probably has no way to handle a Force 6 spirit murdering him in the driver's seat or cockpit.
QUOTE (Adarael @ Sep 19 2011, 08:40 PM)
I dunno, even at Force 6, burning people alive is more reliable. A competent pilot - 4 dice in his skill (or 2 with a specialty), 4 Response in his commlink, hot sim + Control Rig, and a handling of 0? He's got 10 dice before accident, AND a -1 threshold from being in hot sim. Conversely, he probably has no way to handle a Force 6 spirit murdering him in the driver's seat or cockpit.
Tag the pilot with Fear, before Accidenting him off his ejection seat for bonus points.
Now that's a fine combo indeed!
If you want to stop Accident, why don't you just summon a spirit & have it use it's Guard power?
thank you for the many opinions here; they are pretty much what we surmised in our debate. We both agree that the ward can be made in the vehicle but the key to our issue was the location of the warding (ie is it anchored inside the vehicle etc or would the spirit have to act through the ward if its a field around the vehicle). We decided the spirit could act without dealing with the ward because wards would want to be constructed the easiest way possible ie the interior of the vehicle is much less likely to change its shape/ disposition (think ramming or weapon damage) than the inside of the vehicle would (ala the placement off the widget etc).
QUOTE (Adarael @ Sep 19 2011, 11:40 AM)
I can't "read it again", since I don't have my book at work.
Non-piloted drones statistically will crash 1/3rd of the time they're forced to make "very easy" vehicle tests on a semi-crowded street ANYWAY. Logic REALLY suggests any drone should have a rating 3 autosoft installed along with its 3 Pilot rating, because otherwise they cannot take off or land reliably on their own.
I dunno, even at Force 6, burning people alive is more reliable. A competent pilot - 4 dice in his skill (or 2 with a specialty), 4 Response in his commlink, hot sim + Control Rig, and a handling of 0? He's got 10 dice before accident and 4 dice after it, AND a -1 threshold from being in hot sim. Conversely, he probably has no way to handle a Force 6 spirit murdering him in the driver's seat or cockpit.
Non-piloted drones statistically will crash 1/3rd of the time they're forced to make "very easy" vehicle tests on a semi-crowded street ANYWAY. Logic REALLY suggests any drone should have a rating 3 autosoft installed along with its 3 Pilot rating, because otherwise they cannot take off or land reliably on their own.
I dunno, even at Force 6, burning people alive is more reliable. A competent pilot - 4 dice in his skill (or 2 with a specialty), 4 Response in his commlink, hot sim + Control Rig, and a handling of 0? He's got 10 dice before accident and 4 dice after it, AND a -1 threshold from being in hot sim. Conversely, he probably has no way to handle a Force 6 spirit murdering him in the driver's seat or cockpit.
4 Dice (Threshold 2) is not likely at all. And, If the Vehicle is warded, the Spirit may never penetrate the ward.
I say you can't ward the inside of a vehicle, then have it move and keep the ward. Here's why:
On the physical plane, the ward is just an invisible wall that magic can't move through without a fight. In the astral, though, it's a solid thing. It is tied in the astral to locations. These astral locations are not part of the vehicle. The ward is also tied to a phsical anchor. So, when the physical anchor moves away from the astral location, the connection is torn and the ward is destroyed.
On the physical plane, the ward is just an invisible wall that magic can't move through without a fight. In the astral, though, it's a solid thing. It is tied in the astral to locations. These astral locations are not part of the vehicle. The ward is also tied to a phsical anchor. So, when the physical anchor moves away from the astral location, the connection is torn and the ward is destroyed.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.