Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Pre-Errata Discussion
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Patrick Goodman
Take your wife to the emergency room and spend all afternoon there, and the thread starts to get out of hand. PLEASE focus on the actual errata issues, and take the arguments about interpretation to other threads. It's already to the "Pain in the Ass" stage to gather them from this thread.

So the rock's getting hotter, is what I'm saying, and if I drop it, someone else might not pick it up.

Fatum
At the start of each subsequent turn, RHat.
RHat
Point, though it changes nothing. The sequence goes like this:

Light On Fire > Combat Turn Ends, 3P damage is caused > Combat Turn Starts, damage is increased by 1 but not yet caused > Combat Turn Continues, fire is not put out > Combat Turn Ends, 4P damage is caused

The first damage hit, either way, is 3P.
DMiller
QUOTE (RHat @ Jun 26 2013, 01:38 PM) *
Point, though it changes nothing. The sequence goes like this:

Light On Fire > Combat Turn Ends, 3P damage is caused > Combat Turn Starts, damage is increased by 1 but not yet caused > Combat Turn Continues, fire is not put out > Combat Turn Ends, 4P damage is caused

The first damage hit, either way, is 3P.

This was my understanding as well. So the Wombat example does seem out of place.

Also, just wonering how long until something is completly destroyed.
RHat
QUOTE (DMiller @ Jun 25 2013, 10:42 PM) *
This was my understanding as well. So the Wombat example does seem out of place.

Also, just wonering how long until something is completly destroyed.


Presumably you'd use the barrier rules to determine that.
phlapjack77
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Jun 26 2013, 05:21 AM) *
Also, I think the "Agility roll" should be fully qualified. Agility x 2? Agility + Intuition?

QUOTE (RHat @ Jun 26 2013, 08:07 AM) *
Also, "Agility roll" would be just Agility.

The rules quoted say that to put out a fire is an Agility + Intuition test. That's the roll that Wombat is making.
RHat
QUOTE (phlapjack77 @ Jun 26 2013, 12:19 AM) *
The rules quoted say that to put out a fire is an Agility + Intuition test. That's the roll that Wombat is making.


That may well be - but the terminology "Agility test" is fully qualified.
phlapjack77
QUOTE (RHat @ Jun 26 2013, 02:22 PM) *
That may well be - but the terminology "Agility test" is fully qualified.

I feel dumber for having read this post. What's your point?
RHat
QUOTE (phlapjack77 @ Jun 26 2013, 12:59 AM) *
I feel dumber for having read this post. What's your point?


The errata suggestion was merely that the Agility test should be fully qualified. It may well be that Agility test is in error, but it is in fact fully qualified - the logic of the suggestion would hold that all cases of "(Attribute) test" would be in error.
phlapjack77
But the words "Agility test" are never spoken (or written) except by you. The quoted example uses "Agility roll", and this is confusing, since the rule states the roll is Agility + Intution. Perhaps you're nit-picking the terminology of "fully qualified", but the poster's intent to question the quoted example's meaning was clear.
RHat
QUOTE (phlapjack77 @ Jun 26 2013, 01:43 AM) *
But the words "Agility test" are never spoken (or written) except by you. The quoted example uses "Agility roll", and this is confusing, since the rule states the roll is Agility + Intution. Perhaps you're nit-picking the terminology of "fully qualified", but the poster's intent to question the quoted example's meaning was clear.


Perhaps, but I'm of the opinion that errata suggestions should be precise to better facilitate their purpose.
phlapjack77
QUOTE (RHat @ Jun 26 2013, 03:50 PM) *
Perhaps, but I'm of the opinion that errata suggestions should be precise to better facilitate their purpose.

Your opinions aren't well transmitted with short, one-line responses that are devoid of any signs that you understood the meaning of the poster and are just trying to enforce preciseness. smile.gif
RHat
Yeah, I'll grant I dropped the ball a bit. In conciliatory spirit, here's my suggested text correction:

QUOTE
Wombat catches fire. At the end of the Combat Turn Wombat has not put out the fire and has to resist 3P damage. In his next Action Phase Wombat decides to try to put out the fire with the classic stop, drop, and roll. The gamemaster calls it a Complex Action with a Drop Prone free action and asks for an Agility roll modified by his wounds. Wombat hits the dirt, rolls—and fails. Another Action Phase comes up and Wombat keeps trying. This time he gets 1 hit, still not enough to put out the fire but enough to lessen it a little. At the end of this Combat Turn Wombat faces 2P damage again.


Should read:

QUOTE
Wombat catches fire. At the end of the Combat Turn Wombat has not put out the fire and has to resist 3P damage. In his next Action Phase Wombat decides to try to put out the fire with the classic stop, drop, and roll. The gamemaster calls it a Complex Action with a Drop Prone free action and asks for an Agility+Intuition roll modified by his wounds. Wombat hits the dirt, rolls—and fails. Another Action Phase comes up and Wombat keeps trying. This time he gets 1 hit, still not enough to put out the fire but enough to lessen it a little. At the end of this Combat Turn Wombat faces 2P damage again.


Or, alternatively, the following:

QUOTE
When something catches fire, the fire has an initial Damage Value of 3. This damage is caused at the end of each Combat Turn, and the DV increases by 1 at the start of each subsequent Combat Turn until the item is completely destroyed or the fire is put out. You can fight the fire a number of ways (water, smothering, etc.), making an Agility + Intuition Test and reducing the fire’s DV by 1 for each hit.


Should read:

QUOTE
When something catches fire, the fire has an initial Damage Value of 3. This damage is caused at the end of each Combat Turn, and the DV increases by 1 at the start of each subsequent Combat Turn until the item is completely destroyed or the fire is put out. You can fight the fire a number of ways (water, smothering, etc.), making an Agility + Intuition Test (or a different test based on the action taken) and reducing the fire’s DV by 1 for each hit.
BishopMcQ
Alright folks. In an effort to keep the errata thread clean of debate, please post your discussions here. When you reach a consensus, put it in the Errata thread.
Shemhazai
If he caught fire and took 3 damage at the end of the turn, shouldn't it go up by one at the beginning of the subsequent turn? So it would be 4, reduced by 1 from the Agility Test (or possibly Agility + Intuition Test) back down to 3, not 2.
DMiller
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Jun 27 2013, 05:06 AM) *
If he caught fire and took 3 damage at the end of the turn, shouldn't it go up by one at the beginning of the subsequent turn? So it would be 4, reduced by 1 from the Agility Test (or possibly Agility + Intuition Test) back down to 3, not 2.

That would be my understanding as well. So for clarity there are 2 changes needed in this section, the Agility roll and the damage Wombat resists at the end of turn 2.
RHat
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Jun 26 2013, 02:06 PM) *
If he caught fire and took 3 damage at the end of the turn, shouldn't it go up by one at the beginning of the subsequent turn? So it would be 4, reduced by 1 from the Agility Test (or possibly Agility + Intuition Test) back down to 3, not 2.


Ah, now I see what you were getting at. Somehow thought you were referring to the first damage hit.
Shemhazai
So on the fire damage example, should we make an official errata proposal in that thread?
DMiller
Yes, I think we've hashed it out.
Sengir
To avoid clogging the errata thread:
QUOTE (Bull @ Jul 15 2013, 10:51 PM) *
We just rebalanced 'ware, for the most part.

And brought up the maximum chargen money to 450,000 ¥. No matter whether you consider it cash or non-monetary rewards from the character's past, a character can now has access nearly twice the value he had before. If soyburger and lifestyle also cost double, that's no problem. But if they don't, we get back to why the Million Dollar Samurai was removed in the first place.
Abstruse
QUOTE (Sengir @ Jul 16 2013, 10:31 AM) *
To avoid clogging the errata thread:

And brought up the maximum chargen money to 450,000 ¥. No matter whether you consider it cash or non-monetary rewards from the character's past, a character can now has access nearly twice the value he had before. If soyburger and lifestyle also cost double, that's no problem. But if they don't, we get back to why the Million Dollar Samurai was removed in the first place.

And prices on cyberware have jumped too compared to 4A. And a lot of cyberware changed what it does (stuff that used to give a flat +dice bonus now increase limits instead, giving you a reason to choose one over the other). And Adept power point costs were slashed in half almost across the board. And magic users got a huge boost in Reckless Spellcasting and totem benefits. And deckers can brick pretty much anything in combat. Pretty much everyone else I've seen complaining about sams is how they got nerfed compared to all the other archetypes.
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