Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Free Spirit 'Realistic Form'
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
Yerameyahu
Same thing.

Like I said much earlier, this works both ways. If shapechange is extremely undefined, that *does* mean significant GM intervention is required. If it's quite limited, then no problem. smile.gif It's worth noting that even the 'undefined' version has a nice limit (natural animals with X Body), compared to Realistic Form (anything… anything).
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Mar 6 2012, 01:33 PM) *
No, the option is already there. The stats for such a critter are up to the GM.


Exactly...
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 6 2012, 01:39 PM) *
Same thing.

Like I said much earlier, this works both ways. If shapechange is extremely undefined, that *does* mean significant GM intervention is required. If it's quite limited, then no problem. smile.gif It's worth noting that even the 'undefined' version has a nice limit (natural animals with X Body), compared to Realistic Form (anything… anything).


But the GM only needs to define things when they are needed. He does not have to do the work up front. Which essentially makes it a pretty inconsequential task, in my opinion. And most of that can be foisted off to the Player, with GM approval/modification at the end. *shrug*

Yes, it still has a limit of Body +/- 2. smile.gif
Yerameyahu
I don't agree. Statting a critter is not inconsequential, and doing that in real time is *worse* than up front.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 6 2012, 03:45 PM) *
I don't agree. Statting a critter is not inconsequential, and doing that in real time is *worse* than up front.


I Don't Agree... smile.gif

Never had any problems with it myself. *shrug*

As a Player, I do all the work required and submit to a GM for approval, usually before it is required in game.
As a GM, I would require the Above. *shrug*
Neraph
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 6 2012, 02:30 PM) *
Yes. No one said the book rules were good. smile.gif If you're going to turn into anything not listed, though, the GM has to stat it. That's houseruling more options into the spell.

Exactly. Just because "Rule 0" exists doesn't mean it is perfectly RAW to fall back onto it. In other words, as soon as you have GM intervention and the creation of a House-Rule, you no longer are playing by RAW, despite the fact that by RAW such a thing is allowed. What your table stats a falcon for someone else may stat as a canary. What your table stats a dolphin for another table may not agree.

That notwithstanding, the simple fact that the book references actually nothing in your quoted section does not invalidate the actually only 5 options quoted in mine. My assertion is supported by factual rules and governing attributes while yours is supported with "Rule 0."

EDIT: The "you( r)" in the above is a general you, not specific individual.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 7 2012, 10:28 AM) *
Exactly. Just because "Rule 0" exists doesn't mean it is perfectly RAW to fall back onto it. In other words, as soon as you have GM intervention and the creation of a House-Rule, you no longer are playing by RAW, despite the fact that by RAW such a thing is allowed. What your table stats a falcon for someone else may stat as a canary. What your table stats a dolphin for another table may not agree.

That notwithstanding, the simple fact that the book references actually nothing in your quoted section does not invalidate the actually only 5 options quoted in mine. My assertion is supported by factual rules and governing attributes while yours is supported with "Rule 0."

EDIT: The "you( r)" in the above is a general you, not specific individual.


You mean except for the part about "ALL Non-Human Creatures" right? Since ALL is definitely a greater Set than 5 is.
It is not a house rule if you use RAW to stat an animal. Just like it is not a houserule to have a Character with different stats than the Core Archtypes. It is using the rules to get to an end point. Nothing More.
Neraph
The part you quoted does in fact reference nothing because "all things not this thing" is not a viable list. This would also include puppets and imaginary figures (go look up the definition of "creature"). By RAW, only the 5 critters in the book are valid choices for the spell. By RAW, not even the critters mentioned in Running Wild are acceptable forms. It is only by the creation of a House-Rule and the allowance of your GM that anything other than those 5 critters can be used and that any stats aside from those 5 critters may be used.

House rules are rules applying only in a certain location or organization, by definition. Since the stats for your animal are only valid at your table, ie: a certain location, that places them firmly in the House-Rule classification, which is different from RAW. Now, RAW supports fully the creation of House-Rules, but House-Rules are not RAW, and cannot be by virtue of their nature. It is not possible to stat an animal by RAW, since the animal by RAW either has stats already or it does not exist by RAW. In the latter, stats can only be made by House-Rule.

EDIT: Note that I am not saying House-Rules are invalid or by any definition "poor" or "bad," just that in this case anything beyond the 5 examples given is by definition a House-Rule, regardless of whether or not the RAW supports the creation thereof.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 7 2012, 10:43 AM) *
The part you quoted does in fact reference nothing because "all things not this thing" is not a viable list. This would also include puppets and imaginary figures (go look up the definition of "creature"). By RAW, only the 5 critters in the book are valid choices for the spell. By RAW, not even the critters mentioned in Running Wild are acceptable forms. It is only by the creation of a House-Rule and the allowance of your GM that anything other than those 5 critters can be used and that any stats aside from those 5 critters may be used.

House rules are rules applying only in a certain location or organization, by definition. Since the stats for your animal are only valid at your table, ie: a certain location, that places them firmly in the House-Rule classification, which is different from RAW. Now, RAW supports fully the creation of House-Rules, but House-Rules are not RAW, and cannot be by virtue of their nature. It is not possible to stat an animal by RAW, since the animal by RAW either has stats already or it does not exist by RAW. In the latter, stats can only be made by House-Rule.

EDIT: Note that I am not saying House-Rules are invalid or by any definition "poor" or "bad," just that in this case anything beyond the 5 examples given is by definition a House-Rule, regardless of whether or not the RAW supports the creation thereof.


Like many things that you try to support, Neraph, I call BS on that. Going that route, no book but the main book is RAW. And that is clearly not true. smile.gif
Neraph
No, you are trying to use a Slippery-Slope fallacy.

I simply state, and support with rules quotes, that there are, by RAW, only 5 animal forms you can take, and that the creation of any other is the formation of a House-Rule, which is perfectly legitimate. You simply point at the RAW that allows the formation of a House-Rule and then claim your House-Rule as RAW, which it is not, even though its creation is indeed supported by RAW.
Yerameyahu
There's a difference between finding the rules in *a* book, TJ, and making them up at the table.

Think of this: what if this happened in Missions? Even if the GM allowed an unlisted animal form, he'd have to stat it out right then, and then the next GM would have to accept that house rule (or not). That's not a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as 'this animal is RAW'.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2012, 11:14 AM) *
Think of this: what if this happened in Missions? Even if the GM allowed an unlisted animal form, he'd have to stat it out right then, and then the next GM would have to accept that house rule (or not). That's not a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as 'this animal is RAW'.


I do not see a Problem there. That's just me I guess... smile.gif
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 7 2012, 11:10 AM) *
No, you are trying to use a Slippery-Slope fallacy.

I simply state, and support with rules quotes, that there are, by RAW, only 5 animal forms you can take.


Which is complete garbage , and you know it. smile.gif
Yerameyahu
It's not a *problem*. It's just not compatible with saying 'all choices are in the RAW'. They're not, they have to be houseruled in.

I literally just said this: "That's not a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as 'this animal is RAW'."
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2012, 12:46 PM) *
It's not a *problem*. It's just not compatible with saying 'all choices are in the RAW'. They're not, they have to be houseruled in.

I literally just said this: "That's not a *bad* thing, but it's not the same as 'this animal is RAW'."


And again, You and I disagree on the specifics. We should be use to it by now. smile.gif
Irion
@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Well, as much as it hurts me to say, but Neraph is kind of right.

It is the same thing with desgin your own spells. Every spell you design is a houserule, per definition.

(Well, you could arguee, that this is not the case for minor changes. Like physical to mana or mana to physical. (Like: If my spell only affects living things and can be used on the astral, it can be a mana spell)

But here you build your own critter. But with running wild, this is no longer the case. Now you may take any normal animal from running wild.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Irion @ Mar 7 2012, 01:33 PM) *
@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Well, as much as it hurts me to say, but Neraph is kind of right.

It is the same thing with desgin your own spells. Every spell you design is a houserule, per definition.

(Well, you could arguee, that this is not the case for minor changes. Like physical to mana or mana to physical. (Like: If my spell only affects living things and can be used on the astral, it can be a mana spell)

But here you build your own critter. But with running wild, this is no longer the case. Now you may take any normal animal from running wild.


But according to Neraph, Running Wild is not RAW for the purposes of the Spell, which is total BS.
Yerameyahu
So ignore that. The point is the difference between animals in RAW, and animals invented by specific GMs.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2012, 03:46 PM) *
So ignore that. The point is the difference between animals in RAW, and animals invented by specific GMs.


Which is a minor point at best, and largely irrelevant, as far as I am concerned. smile.gif
Dakka Dakka
I think you two misunderstand each other. Choosing an animal other than the 5 in SR4A is RAW ("Shapechange transforms a voluntary subject into a normal (non-paranormal) critter, though the subject retains human consciousness."). The actual stats however, that the GM had to assign to such an animal however are a houserule as any GM can choose any value.
Yerameyahu
I understand him. smile.gif You just stated my position. TJ is allergic to the word 'houserule', hehe.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Yerameyahu @ Mar 7 2012, 05:17 PM) *
I understand him. smile.gif You just stated my position. TJ is allergic to the word 'houserule', hehe.


The stats, themselves, may be houseruled, but the ability to select any animal is RAW. Neraph continues to deny that, insisting that only the 5 animals in the Main Book are RAW. smile.gif
Yerameyahu
*shrug*. There are (were) only 5 that are (were) 'involved no houserules'. Either way, bleh. :o
fistandantilus4.0
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 7 2012, 12:53 PM) *
Like many things that you try to support, Neraph, I call BS on that.

This thread has so far been surprisingly decent. So please keep it that way and leave out things like this.
The Jopp
I have to agree that limiting possible animals because "thats the only ones in their list" is a bit silly.

There area aproximately 4600 known MAMMAL species and the rules cannot stat them all and to limit a player to only 5 is very limiting.

There are for example pelnty of legends regarding transforming snake women (Boa Constrictor can be up to eleven meters long)(see the movie HISSS, indian bollywood horor movie) and those arent stated either but should clearly be possible to include when one encounter shapeshifters in an Indian setting for example.

I would on the other hand state that A shapeshifter would be limited by the rules for shapeshange spells so only up to BODx2 or BOD/2 so no Mouse to Troll or slim Elf to huge whale.

The Jopp
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 7 2012, 11:45 PM) *
But according to Neraph, Running Wild is not RAW for the purposes of the Spell, which is total BS.


I have to agree on this.

Running wild has mundane normal critters
SR4 has 5 mundane normal critters

The ONLY reason there is a'limit' to the spell in SR4 main book is because they HAD NOT OTHER CRITTERS STATTED AT THE TIME. If a later book arrives with MORE critters then they are allowed.

Its like saying a character is limited to the cyberware in the main book because Augmentations book came later.
Irion
QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Mar 7 2012, 11:45 PM) *
But according to Neraph, Running Wild is not RAW for the purposes of the Spell, which is total BS.

Right, did not read that part. So, well I would agree with you, it seems...
Yerameyahu
That's seriously not the point. smile.gif The point is that you're limited to RAW-described mundane animals, until your GM takes the time to houserule stats for any others. When he does, those new animals (which must be mundane, must be animals, and must be BOD±2) are only valid for his game (they're houserules, not RAW). Nothing wrong with that, but it's different from Realistic Form (no limits at all).
Neraph
QUOTE (fistandantilus4.0 @ Mar 7 2012, 09:05 PM) *
This thread has so far been surprisingly decent. So please keep it that way and leave out things like this.

I gots a thick skin.

QUOTE (The Jopp Posted Today, 02:11 AM)
I have to agree that limiting possible animals because "thats the only ones in their list" is a bit silly.

There area aproximately 4600 known MAMMAL species and the rules cannot stat them all and to limit a player to only 5 is very limiting.

There are for example pelnty of legends regarding transforming snake women (Boa Constrictor can be up to eleven meters long)(see the movie HISSS, indian bollywood horor movie) and those arent stated either but should clearly be possible to include when one encounter shapeshifters in an Indian setting for example.

I would on the other hand state that A shapeshifter would be limited by the rules for shapeshange spells so only up to BODx2 or BOD/2 so no Mouse to Troll or slim Elf to huge whale.

I am not arguing whether or not the RAW is "silly" (which is an arbitrary statement), only that it is RAW. How many animals, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and aquatic invertebrates that exist is inconsequential when the rules specifically mention only the attributes for 5. Legends and myths that have no bearing on the RAW at all are also irrelevant when it comes to a RAW discussion. Also, your troll-to-mouse/elf-to-whale is against O-RAW (Optional-Rule As Written): a fox or eagle can have Shift (Troll), completely by O-RAW. The Shift power for shifters should not be compared to the Shapechange spell for mortals - many interactions, most specifically the interactions of attributes in animal form, are wildly different.

I also take a minor issue with "species." Different species can be inter-fertile (dog/wolf, killer whale/dolphin, angus/brahman, polar/black bear, ect.) and many of them can be genetically viable (able to reproduce) themselves. The classification system of species, while it is useful, is also inherently flawed. Coyotes, wolves, and dogs are all different species, but they are all the same kind of animal; and all the different breeds of dogs are wildly different, but all the same species.

EDIT: Sorry the thread was hijacked for a discussion on Shapechange, but I really didn't start this one.
Aria
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 8 2012, 05:48 PM) *
EDIT: Sorry the thread was hijacked for a discussion on Shapechange, but I really didn't start this one.

lol...I stopped reading it a while ago, can't keep up with the ranting biggrin.gif
KarmaInferno
Shapechange specifies you may take the form of a non-paranormal critter. It further informs that the Critter section has stats for such critters.

Running Wild expands on the available critters.

It is in fact true that by absolute strict reading of the text in SR4A, the only critter forms available to Shapechange are the one in the SR4A Critter section. That technically, by strict RAW, Running Wild is not a valid source for further critters.

That is, quite frankly, stupid.

SR4A also specifies that Gear may be obtained in the Street Gear section. By the same strict literal reading of the rules, that makes Arsenal, Augmentation, and every other book out there except for the core book not valid sources to buy gear from. This too is a really stupid way to interpret the rules.

Rules interpretations MUST be tempered with a little common sense. Otherwise you're obsessing over semantics while ignoring intent, and that is, again, stupid.




-k
Dakka Dakka
This interpretation is not only stupid, it is also wrong. The description of the spell informs us that "Shapechange transforms a voluntary subject into a normal (non-paranormal) critter, though the subject retains human consciousness". Later the description instruct us to "consult the Critters section, p. 292, for the subject’s Physical attributes while in critter form". No where does it say that this limits the options for allowed animals it only tells us where to find attribute values for certain critters. Moreover this section does not claim exclusivity for values of possible critters. It is RAW to transform into a guppy, but if stats are needed for any action, making these stats up is a houserule.
Yerameyahu
Yes: any new stats are a house rule. Dealing with those on the fly is non-ideal. In exactly the same way, the much greater lack of guidance for Realistic Form requires house rules, and is non-ideal.
Neraph
QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Mar 9 2012, 09:47 AM) *
Shapechange specifies you may take the form of a non-paranormal critter. It further informs that the Critter section has stats for such critters.

Running Wild expands on the available critters.

It is in fact true that by absolute strict reading of the text in SR4A, the only critter forms available to Shapechange are the one in the SR4A Critter section. That technically, by strict RAW, Running Wild is not a valid source for further critters.

That is, quite frankly, stupid.

SR4A also specifies that Gear may be obtained in the Street Gear section. By the same strict literal reading of the rules, that makes Arsenal, Augmentation, and every other book out there except for the core book not valid sources to buy gear from. This too is a really stupid way to interpret the rules.

Rules interpretations MUST be tempered with a little common sense. Otherwise you're obsessing over semantics while ignoring intent, and that is, again, stupid.

This is actually my point, to a degree. I provide (whenever possible) the RAW in the raw. I have never come out against house-rules, I just let people know that they are, in fact, house rules.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 9 2012, 01:59 PM) *
This is actually my point, to a degree. I provide (whenever possible) the RAW in the raw. I have never come out against house-rules, I just let people know that they are, in fact, house rules.


So, WHEN, Exactly, did Running Wild become a House Rule Neraph? Since that WAS what you claimed. smile.gif
Neraph
Technically, the inclusion of any additional source material is inherently a house-rule. You have to house-rule the text for Shapechange to allow it to use additional critter attributes from Running Wild since the text of the spell does not reference that sourcebook at all. It is by house-rule that additional materials outside the core rulebook are included in the first place.

EDIT: And again, I'm not saying it is incorrect, and I'm not saying you should not; I am simply correctly referring to that decision as it is - a house-rule.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 9 2012, 04:20 PM) *
Technically, the inclusion of any additional source material is inherently a house-rule. You have to house-rule the text for Shapechange to allow it to use additional critter attributes from Running Wild since the text of the spell does not reference that sourcebook at all. It is by house-rule that additional materials outside the core rulebook are included in the first place.

EDIT: And again, I'm not saying it is incorrect, and I'm not saying you should not; I am simply correctly referring to that decision as it is - a house-rule.


You are so wrong here that it astounds me... Just WOW... wobble.gif
Irion
His argument is valid. It is a very precice interpretation of RAW. (And as a matter of fact, there will be a lot of things not working with this one)
But yes, it is not refering to upcomming sourcebooks.
(So if you not assume that additional material automatically include itself, he is right)

The other way would be, that running wild replaces the critter section (or is added to this section), as would the grimoire of streetmagic to the grimoire of the corebook. But it is an assumption.
Midas
QUOTE (KarmaInferno @ Mar 9 2012, 03:47 PM) *
Shapechange specifies you may take the form of a non-paranormal critter. It further informs that the Critter section has stats for such critters.

Running Wild expands on the available critters.

It is in fact true that by absolute strict reading of the text in SR4A, the only critter forms available to Shapechange are the one in the SR4A Critter section. That technically, by strict RAW, Running Wild is not a valid source for further critters.

That is, quite frankly, stupid.

SR4A also specifies that Gear may be obtained in the Street Gear section. By the same strict literal reading of the rules, that makes Arsenal, Augmentation, and every other book out there except for the core book not valid sources to buy gear from. This too is a really stupid way to interpret the rules.

Rules interpretations MUST be tempered with a little common sense. Otherwise you're obsessing over semantics while ignoring intent, and that is, again, stupid.
-k

Quoted for truth. Neraph, please say you do not think that Arsenal, Augmentation, Running Wild and all the other source books are not house-rules. Because, as Karma Inferno points out, according to your arguements they are.

The Shapechange spell specifically says you can change into any non-sentient non-paranormal critter. Running Wild gives stats for a wide variety of critters. As TJ pointed out, the Shapechange spell text even mentions Eagle Form despite the fact that eagle is not statted in the referenced Critter section of the BBB.

By RAW a mage can shapechange into ANY critter within the BOD+/-2 range. Shapechanging into a rat or a cockroach is absolutely fine by RAW, although in cases where the GM has to stat out said critter the stats the GM generates would constitute a house rule, but not the shapechanging into said critter, which is specifically allowed as per the spell description.
NiL_FisK_Urd
Except that running wild provides stats for rats and cockroaches ^^
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (NiL_FisK_Urd @ Mar 10 2012, 02:58 AM) *
Except that running wild provides stats for rats and cockroaches ^^


I really do need to get that book some day... smile.gif
snowRaven
QUOTE (The Jopp @ Mar 8 2012, 09:11 AM) *
I have to agree that limiting possible animals because "thats the only ones in their list" is a bit silly.

There area aproximately 4600 known MAMMAL species and the rules cannot stat them all and to limit a player to only 5 is very limiting.

There are for example pelnty of legends regarding transforming snake women (Boa Constrictor can be up to eleven meters long)(see the movie HISSS, indian bollywood horor movie) and those arent stated either but should clearly be possible to include when one encounter shapeshifters in an Indian setting for example.

I would on the other hand state that A shapeshifter would be limited by the rules for shapeshange spells so only up to BODx2 or BOD/2 so no Mouse to Troll or slim Elf to huge whale.

There are stats for Snake Shapeshifters in the Corporate Intrigue campaign book (not exactly what we were talking about, but still)
snowRaven
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 10 2012, 12:20 AM) *
Technically, the inclusion of any additional source material is inherently a house-rule.


Just to be clear:

Are you saying that any rule/gear/stat from a sourcebook published after the core rules is technically a house rule?
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (snowRaven @ Mar 10 2012, 08:42 AM) *
Just to be clear:

Are you saying that any rule/gear/stat from a sourcebook published after the core rules is technically a house rule?


That is indeed what he said... Silly though it may be... smile.gif
Irion
Want to place my bet too.
I do not think this is what he wants to say.
I think it is more about to which "section" the spell is refering.
In this case the spell refers to a section in the corebook.

If it would say something like "every critter you find stats for in the sr-books" it would be RAW to use running wild.
snowRaven
QUOTE (Irion @ Mar 10 2012, 05:12 PM) *
Want to place my bet too.
I do not think this is what he wants to say.
I think it is more about to which "section" the spell is refering.
In this case the spell refers to a section in the corebook.

If it would say something like "every critter you find stats for in the sr-books" it would be RAW to use running wild.

Yeah, but the same goes for say...picking Qualities at char gen(referencing the list and explanations in the core rules) and picking metamagics upon initiation (the section says 'one of the following' which would then exclude all the metamagics in Street Magic).
Neraph
QUOTE (snowRaven @ Mar 10 2012, 10:42 AM) *
Just to be clear:

Are you saying that any rule/gear/stat from a sourcebook published after the core rules is technically a house rule?

No, but the inclusion of said rule/gear/stat is. There is no rule that I am aware of in the Core Rulebook that specifically forces tables to use materials from all other books. The Rules/gear/stats in other sourcebooks are also RAW, but they are not by RAW automatically included into any given game - which makes the inclusion of such a House-Rule. This is also why some tables go "Everything but War!," or, "Core only," or in The Other Game, "Core books and Completes only, no Psionics," and so forth.

And again, TJ, I'm not saying that you should not allow any other shapes, and I'm not saying the rules don't let you change into other shapes but the 5 from Critter Section SR4A; I'm saying that using any other stats than those presented in the Critter Section of SR4A constitutes a House-Rule, even if it is a House-Rule to use RAW from Running Wild.

QUOTE (snowRaven @ Mar 10 2012, 11:33 AM) *
Yeah, but the same goes for say...picking Qualities at char gen(referencing the list and explanations in the core rules) and picking metamagics upon initiation (the section says 'one of the following' which would then exclude all the metamagics in Street Magic).

Exactly correct.
Irion
@Neraph
Well, thats kind of a leap of faith, for it assumes the corebook to have some "stand above everything".

There are actually no rules to include any given chapter in the corebook.

So starting from this position it would be a houseroule to actually allow anything...


I agree in so far that using a book or not using a book is not a question of houseruling either way. (So to use or not to use are both table preferances)
Neraph
QUOTE (Irion @ Mar 11 2012, 11:52 AM) *
@Neraph
Well, thats kind of a leap of faith, for it assumes the corebook to have some "stand above everything".

There are actually no rules to include any given chapter in the corebook.

So starting from this position it would be a houseroule to actually allow anything...


I agree in so far that using a book or not using a book is not a question of houseruling either way. (So to use or not to use are both table preferances)

Technically correct again. The assumption is that since you are using the Core Rulebook you have already House-Ruled its use, otherwise you wouldn't be playing whatever game is in question. As soon as a House-Rule is made upon which game to play, the Core Book(s - the Core Three from The Other Game directly reference each other and as such all three must be used to play minimally) are implemented. Any additional source material's inclusion becomes a House-Rule, even though official material (after its inclusion) is RAW.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Neraph @ Mar 11 2012, 11:13 AM) *
Technically correct again. The assumption is that since you are using the Core Rulebook you have already House-Ruled its use, otherwise you wouldn't be playing whatever game is in question. As soon as a House-Rule is made upon which game to play, the Core Book(s - the Core Three from The Other Game directly reference each other and as such all three must be used to play minimally) are implemented. Any additional source material's inclusion becomes a House-Rule, even though official material (after its inclusion) is RAW.


Except that if you actually LOOK at the Covers of the Books for Shadowrun, the CORE BOOKS are delineated.

SR4A Main Book
Core Gear Book (Arsenal)
Core Character Rulebook (Runners Companion)
Core Magic Book (Street Magic)
Core Matrix Book (Unwired)
Core MedTech Book (Augmentation)

Looks to me like they are ALL CORE BOOKS, and as such are all part of the MAIN RULES, whether you like that or not... smile.gif
And amazingly enough, they all reference each other directly (Just like the core books in the other game). Imagine That.

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