Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Question with the Armor Spell
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Gilthanis
What does everyone think about the armor spell? Does it provide basic armor or hardened armor? This is very important because of the power rating necessary to hurt an individual. The spell does not clerify and it does stack with hardened armor. There are no rules stating that the spell works any differently under any circumstances, which would lead one to believe that it is hardened.

What do you guys think?
algcs
I want to hear why APDS ammo 1/2s the armor spell.
Kagetenshi
For the same reason it halves regular armor.

And because it is not specified, the armor is unhardened.

~J

Ol' Scratch
As mentioned in the other thread, it's because the Armor spell, while magical, still has an effect that is on the same level as any other type of armor.

As for the hardened/standard question, as far as I'm concerned it only grants standard armor. It's not hardened in any way, and any Hardened Armor you're wearing has its effect applied first (ie, if the Power of the attack is greater than the Hardened Armor, it is not negated). That's *my* ruling.
BitBasher
Honestly the way it's written it could be either. It just blindly adds to your armor ratings. If you're wearing soft armor it adds to that. If you are wearing hard armor it adds to hard armor. It adds to whatever type of armor that you are wearing.

This spell IS specificed what type it adds, it specifically states that it adds it rating to the character's armor. It makes no distinction that it only adds to soft armor.
lorthazar
SR3ed p198


QUOTE
This spell creates a glowing field of magical energy around the target that protects against physical damage. One success is enough to create a field with a Barrier Rating equal to the spell's Force. Every two successes increase the Barrier Rating by 1. The Barrier can be brought down by physical attacks. Any reductions in Barrier Rating are restored at the beginning of the next Combat Turn. If the barrier is penetrated, it collapses and the spell ends. (see Barriers p.124, for more information.)



That is the exact wording of the spell in question.

Which means it is struck first and it is just a barrier not an armor rating. Think of it as Deflector Sheilds over your armor.

Eyeless Blond
What I'd like to know is why the armor spell doesn't layer like all other armor. As it stands I really dislike how you can have someone with Quickness 6 have 6/7 physical armor, then cast an Armor spell on him and have 13/14 armor with no combat pool or quickness penalties. Does anyone have any particular balance reasons why the Armor spell should get the layering advantages it gets?
Ol' Scratch
Because the layering rules were tacked on and they did little more than cut-and-paste spell descriptions from previous editions.
Eyeless Blond
QUOTE (lorthazar)
QUOTE
This spell creates a glowing field of magical energy around the target that protects against physical damage. One success is enough to create a field with a Barrier Rating equal to the spell's Force. Every two successes increase the Barrier Rating by 1. The Barrier can be brought down by physical attacks. Any reductions in Barrier Rating are restored at the beginning of the next Combat Turn. If the barrier is penetrated, it collapses and the spell ends. (see Barriers p.124, for more information.)

Er, this is the text for Physical Barrier, not Armor. smile.gif
Gilthanis
QUOTE (lorthazar)
SR3ed p198


QUOTE
This spell creates a glowing field of magical energy around the target that protects against physical damage. One success is enough to create a field with a Barrier Rating equal to the spell's Force. Every two successes increase the Barrier Rating by 1. The Barrier can be brought down by physical attacks. Any reductions in Barrier Rating are restored at the beginning of the next Combat Turn. If the barrier is penetrated, it collapses and the spell ends. (see Barriers p.124, for more information.)



That is the exact wording of the spell in question.

Which means it is struck first and it is just a barrier not an armor rating. Think of it as Deflector Sheilds over your armor.

As quoted on the other thread...you have an old printing that is wrong. Check the errata. Nothing in the spell description about barriers or raising the effectiveness with successes.
lorthazar
That depends if you have an original work or not.
Ol' Scratch
Fortunately, we're discussing the actual rules, not errors. So even if that is the description of Armor in your archaic print of the rules, it hasn't been the case for a long time. Including my (later?) FASA-printed copy that I have in my hands at this very moment.
algcs
QUOTE
This spell creates a glowing field of magical energy around the target that protects against impact and ballistic damage. One success is enough to create the magical field around the character of an Armor Rating equal to the Force of the spell. The Armor spell is compatible with all armor types and adds its rating to the rating of the physical armor being worn. This spell either works or it doesn't; extra successes do not add additional points to the Armor Rating.


This is the description of the spell we have in our L3 book. It is also the one in the Shadowrun 3rd Edition Errata.

If the spell effects stated that it summoned a magic combat suit that protected the caster or something I could understand APDS 1/2 it. Saying that it is armor of course it is 1/2ed is taking the easy way out.

Ol' Scratch
Once again, APDS works against BARRIERS, too. Solid walls. Armor doesn't create some eldrith super defensive screen... it just creates a barrier identical in its ability to stave off attacks that's nearly identical to the armor you regualrly wear. It's not Immunity to Normal Weapons in any way, shape, or form. It's not even in the same ballpark beyond both being magical.

If anything, why the rules handle Armor and Barriers with a completely different set of rules is what should be in question.
Kagetenshi
Not that they did it well, but the processes of making large holes in barriers and the processes of just getting an object through a barrier with enough energy left to have a party in someone's chest are fairly different and, at the lower-energy end of the spectrum, largely mutually exclusive.

~J
Ol' Scratch
I'm not trying to suggest it would have been elegant or anything. It's just that the fact that the two sets of rules are so alien to one another is what tends to cause problems.

Having different effects based upon the Power of an attack and the Armor Rating of the opponent that was similar to those for Barrier Ratings would have probably gone a long way. Like if its less than half the Armor Rating, no effect. If it's half to full, it has a reduced effect. If the power is equal to or greater, it has the standard effect, and if it's more than double it... something something. smile.gif (Not exactly in a rules-thinking mode at the moment, obviously.)
algcs
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Once again, APDS works against BARRIERS, too. Solid walls. Armor doesn't create some eldrith super defensive screen... it just creates a barrier identical in its ability to stave off attacks that's nearly identical to the armor you regualrly wear. It's not Immunity to Normal Weapons in any way, shape, or form. It's not even in the same ballpark beyond both being magical.

I don't disagree with APDS working on physical barriers. It is in the nature of its design. I disagree with APDS working against a magical non-physical barrier.

Where does it say Armor doesn't create a eldrith defensive screen? It says it creates a glowing energy field around the user. It doesn't say it creates a magical battlesuit that covers the user. Armor is obviously not solid, it doens't add to armor stacking and it doens't affect perception tests.

Kagetenshi
Can you explain a way for armor to work the way it does that isn't vulnerable to APDS?

~J
algcs
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Can you explain a way for armor to work the way it does that isn't vulnerable to APDS?

~J

Same way it works now. Magic. biggrin.gif

Unless I'm totally missing out on the glowing energy fields protecting people.

Ol' Scratch
Magic isn't immune to physical attacks. Especially when it's creating, yanno, a physical effect (even if it's described all weird). If it makes you feel better, think of it as an invisible sheath of armor that just happens to glow.
Eyeless Blond
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
Having different effects based upon the Power of an attack and the Armor Rating of the opponent that was similar to those for Barrier Ratings would have problem gone a long way. Like if its less than half the Armor Rating, no effect. If it's half to full, it has a reduced effect. If the power is equal to or greater, it has the standard effect, and if it's more than double it...

...you burst into flames. IMO everything involving magic used in combat should have some provision for the mage suddenly bursting into flames. smile.gif
algcs
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Can you explain a way for armor to work the way it does that isn't vulnerable to APDS?

~J

Seriously though it is is a magical glowing energy field. Saying it fuctions just like armor is cheaping magic.

Sure your going to have a few cases where a someone learns armor at 20 and figures out a way to drop it on all their buddies. Either that character isn't balanced to start with and has a lot of possible vunerablities or your power gaming at a fairly high level and should be ready for it.

If you just can't live without something being able to be able to pierce the armor spell then make it something relatable to MAGIC or let high technology items pierce it (Sort of an anti magic). But having a simple piece of lead automatically 1/2 a magical barrier is a bit much. Now if that bit of lead had some history behind it. Say used in a murder then recast by a talismonger the target might want to think about investing in some real world armor.
Kagetenshi
Saying APDS doesn't work against the spell cheapens technology.

We can make statements like this all day long, if you want.

~J
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (algcs)
But having a simple piece of lead automatically 1/2 a magical barrier is a bit much.

APDS ammunition is not "a simple piece of lead". The penetrator is made of tungsten carbide (or a similar ultra-hard high density material) and shaped for maximum penetration of rigid materials.

You can easily explain away the different ammunition effects on the Armor spell by saying that the spell basically just induces massive friction (or a similar force) on the bullet. If that's cheapening magic, then I bet you just hate the Elemental Manipulation spells.
algcs
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ Dec 7 2004, 04:13 PM)
If that's cheapening magic, then I bet you just hate the Elemental Manipulation spells.

If armor was an Elemental Manipulation spell I wouldn't have this problem with it. It would clearly be using a physical material to protect the caster. Actually not a bad idea for some spells. Air and Earth make sense. Fire would probably just be Flame Aura. Water Armor? That might be stupid.

If the spell was worded differently it wouldn't bother me.

Austere Emancipator
Other Transformation Manipulation spells with thoroughly physical effects that can be fully explained through science apart from the issue of how energy is created/removed:
Alter Temperature, Create Food, Fix, Freeze Water, Ice Sheet, Physical Barrier, Sterilize, Wind
algcs
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
Other Transformation Manipulation spells with thoroughly physical effects that can be fully explained through science apart from the issue of how energy is created/removed:
Alter Temperature, Create Food, Fix, Freeze Water, Ice Sheet, Physical Barrier, Sterilize, Wind

Isn't that what we are doing? Removing energy from an attack.
Kagetenshi
And APDS works in no small part by moving at a higher velocity and thus having more energy.

~J
Austere Emancipator
We might just as well be adding friction to the incoming object. Or making the incoming object act like it was encountering armor. Or a whole bunch of other ways the spell might work that would also mean an armor piercing round would penetrate the spell better than a non-armor piercing one. Since this is how it is by the rules, it would make sense to describe the spell as working in one of these ways, would it not?

If even with the evidence pointing to the contrary you decide to describe the Armor spell as simply removing kinetic energy from incoming threatening objects, then you are just begging for trouble. It doesn't sound any more "magical" either.
algcs
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
And APDS works in no small part by moving at a higher velocity and thus having more energy.

~J

Yes.

But if it was just the extra velocity then if you hot load some ammo (assuming you have a gun that uses shell casings) it should be AP.
Kagetenshi
No, it shouldn't. The higher velocity doesn't just come from more propellant, the mass is also reduced. The item is also harder, so it will deform less when it suddenly slows down (for whatever reason) upon contact with the armor spell.

~J
algcs
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
It doesn't sound any more "magical" either.

I try not to go down that path. Too much of the SR magic is just another piece of technology. It isn't alive. It isn't a system of mysteries that only a few would learn. It is a packaged set sold to the masses. Get a free copy of manabolt 1 with your D&D handbook.
Toptomcat
You people do realize that you're discussing how an ammo type that's essentially insolubly impractical in small arms would interact with a magic spell that protects you, ne?
Where does logic enter into this?
Kagetenshi
At every step after the assumption that the ammunition exists and is effective.

~J
Austere Emancipator
So you want your magic mystical, incomprehensible to science? I.e. you want your magic not to make sense? Okay, but then there's not much point arguing about whether the Armor spell would logically/reasonably/whatever be easier to penetrate with armor piercing ammunition, since you're taking the stance that logic/reason/whatever is bad.

Actual APDS (as in having a discarding sabot) ammunition might be very rare for most small arms, but just plain armor piercing ammunition is not. You can just ignore the DS bit and you're good to go.
algcs
QUOTE (Austere Emancipator)
So you want your magic mystical, incomprehensible to science? I.e. you want your magic not to make sense? Okay, but then there's not much point arguing about whether the Armor spell would logically/reasonably/whatever be easier to penetrate with armor piercing ammunition, since you're taking the stance that logic/reason/whatever is bad.

By its very nature magic is incomprehensible to science. Sure it can see the after effects, but there is no explination for the ball of fire that appeared in my hand but magic.

I would like to see it be a system rather than some thrown together group of spells that mostly mimic other things. Astral space is cool. But even that is mirrored by cyberspace.

Austere Emancipator
Freeze Water is not incomprehensible to science in that the effects it causes can be explained through thermodynamics (and others). The only puzzling bit is what causes that effect. Similarly the friction-causing effect of the Armor spell might be explained by science but science could not explain why this effect is there.
Kagetenshi
Even then a simple mana to energy conversion would account for it all. The exact formula and mechanism may be absent, but there's no reason for magic to be unscientific.

~J
algcs
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Even then a simple mana to energy conversion would account for it all. The exact formula and mechanism may be absent, but there's no reason for magic to be unscientific.

~J

If that is all it is I can't wait for my GM to agree to it. biggrin.gif

It would just be more fuel for my dislike of the magic system.

Ol' Scratch
<rolls his eyes>
BitBasher
QUOTE (Doctor Funkenstein)
<rolls his eyes>

I concur.
Tarantula
Hermetics view magic as a science, so it can be done scientifically.

Shamans might not agree, but you can have scientific magic.
John Campbell
QUOTE (lorthazar)
That depends if you have an original work or not.

So, out of curiosity, do you disallow the staging up of damage from combat spells in your game, too? That's another thing that wasn't included in the "original work", but was fixed, along with a lot of other mistakes, in 3rd printing. (By FASA... the first FanPro printing was 10th printing.)
Fortune
QUOTE (John Campbell @ Dec 8 2004, 09:43 AM)
QUOTE (lorthazar @ Dec 7 2004, 02:52 PM)
That depends if you have an original work or not.

So, out of curiosity, do you disallow the staging up of damage from combat spells in your game, too? That's another thing that wasn't included in the "original work", but was fixed, along with a lot of other mistakes, in 3rd printing. (By FASA... the first FanPro printing was 10th printing.)

Better still, if indeed it is the original set of rules that is important, then he should be using variable staging and, as far as magic is concerned, it would all be resisted with a TN equal to the caster's Sorcery skill (This was fixed in the second SR1 printing or the GM screen IIRC). biggrin.gif
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
No, it shouldn't. The higher velocity doesn't just come from more propellant, the mass is also reduced. The item is also harder, so it will deform less when it suddenly slows down (for whatever reason) upon contact with the armor spell.

~J

I should point out that removing mass to increase velocity makes absolutly no sense when designing an armor-piercing bullet. Energy is a combonation of mass and velocity. Momentum is mass*velocity, Force is mass*change in velocity, Kenetic energy is (mass*velocity^2)/2 If you remove mass, the velocity will automaticly increase but the energy, momentum, and force of the projectile will remain the exactly the same. Armor piercing ammo is generally denser and more massive than standard ammo, having cores made or steel, tungston, or uranium. These bullets have more inertia, they deform less, and they have greater energy at the same velocity. These bullets also tend to have less volume and are often pointed. Because pressure = Force/Area a pointed bullet can apply much more pressure than a rounded bullet and thus will cause more damage to a smaller portion of the armor.

My take on it is that the armor spell magically strengthens the molecular bonds in the subject's skin, thus making them more difficult to break. These bonds can still be broken using the same methods it simply requires more energy. Thus, APDS works for the same reason it works on other forms of armor, greater pressure.
Kagetenshi
Er, no, the energy will not stay the same. Check that formula again. Mass*(Velocity^2). If we have a Mass of 2 and a Velocity of 2, we have Energy 8; if we have Mass of 1 and Velocity 3 we have Energy 9. Given that what we'd really get by halving mass is twice the velocity (since momentum would be conserved) we'd actually have Mass 1 and Velocity 4, for an Energy of 16.

~J
John Campbell
Energy increases linearly with mass, but with the square of velocity.

Momentum:
1kg * 100m/s = 0.1kg * 1000m/s

Energy:
½ * 1kg * (100m/s)² = 5000J
½ * 0.1kg * (1000m/s²) = 50000J
U_Fester
I got tired of looking up rules for Armor Spells and went to look up the rules for APDS instead:

QUOTE
Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (ABDS) rounds are special ammunition designed to travel at high speeds and defeat standard armor.  When used, APDS halves (round down) the Ballistic Rating of armor or the Barrier Rating of an object in any attack.  APDS is not anit-vehicular and is therfore treated as normal ammunition against vehicles and drones.


To me the line "when used, APDS halves the ballistic rating of armor or the Barrier Rating of an object in any attack" states it all. Magic Armor when attacked falls under object in any attack.
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ Dec 7 2004, 09:26 PM)
Er, no, the energy will not stay the same. Check that formula again. Mass*(Velocity^2). If we have a Mass of 2 and a Velocity of 2, we have Energy 8; if we have Mass of 1 and Velocity 3 we have Energy 9. Given that what we'd really get by halving mass is twice the velocity (since momentum would be conserved) we'd actually have Mass 1 and Velocity 4, for an Energy of 16.

~J

You forget that the energy comes from the gunpowerder, not the bullet.

Gunpowder explosion pushes a 10 gram bullet with 10N of force for 1 second the result is a velocity of (10/.01)*1 = 1,000 Meters/second. The same force applied to a 5 gram bullet is (10/.005)*1 = 2000 m/s

(.01*1000^2)/2 = 5000J (.005*2000^2)/2 =10,000

That is strange.

Okay, Force is m*(d/t^2) Energy is m*(d^2/t^2)/2

Energy/Force leaves us with d/2 Force = work*distance so Work/Energy = 2 therefore work = 2(energy).

If work = 2(energy) Then energy will remain the same so long as work remains the same. I made the mistake of not taking into account decreased acceleration time when I made my calculations above.

Okay, (Velocity final)^2 = (velocity initial)^2 + 2ad since the bullet is stationary, Vi = 0

Let us assume a barrel length of 10 centimeters.

Velocity of the 10 gram bullet propelled with a force of 10N = Square root (2*.1m*1000m/s^2) = 14m/s

For the 5 gram bullet it is SqRoot(2*.1*2000) = 20m/s

(.005*20^2)/2= 1
(.01*14^2)/2 = 1

Is that proof enough for you?

Energy remains the same so long as the powder charge and barrel length remain the same. If you change either then you change the work thus you change the energy.

Conservation of energy. Energy in = Energy out. It is First Law of Thermodynamics, people.
algcs
QUOTE (U_Fester)
QUOTE
Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot (ABDS) rounds are special ammunition designed to travel at high speeds and defeat standard armor.  When used, APDS halves (round down) the Ballistic Rating of armor or the Barrier Rating of an object in any attack.  APDS is not anti-vehicular and is therfore treated as normal ammunition against vehicles and drones.


So when I shoot at an armor plated door at the bank APDS will 1/2 the armor, but if I shoot at a similar door on an armored car the ammo acts as normal ammo? wobble.gif
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