DigitalMage
Sep 11 2003, 12:05 PM
I am just writing up my notes on vehicle combat and noticed the following:
| QUOTE |
SR3 p150, Vehicles and Magic
If the Armor Rating of the vehicle is equal to or greater than the Force of the combat spell, the spell has no effect. |
Now I know an Errata was made to the magic section that made a certain Force rating is required to affect inanimate objects:
| QUOTE |
p. 182: Sorcery Test [12]
Add the following sentence to the 4th paragraph, before the sentence that begins..."Consult Object Resistance Table..."
"The Force of the spell must be equal to or greater than half the Object Resistance, rounded down, for it to affect an object. Vehicles add Body and half armor to object resistance before dividing in half." |
My question is this:
Does the first rule still apply in light of the new errata?
As there is no errata to retract the former rule I would assume not.
Sphynx
Sep 11 2003, 01:14 PM
Both apply. So, just because your Force can exceed the Armour rating doesn't mean it'll have any effect if it doesn't exceed the OR + modifier.
So yes, the first rule still applies.
Sphynx
TinkerGnome
Sep 11 2003, 01:16 PM
Both are probably still in effect. It doesn't really come into play unless you have a very low body, very high armor vehicle. Even an unarmored body 0 drone requires a force 4 spell or better to affect it.
If you want to take out vehicles, use lightning elemental manipulations which appear to ignore vehicle armor and don't have to roll against the OR.
Reth
Sep 12 2003, 04:59 AM
Well in my opinion the new and more logical rule from the errata replaces the old one since the new rule is more logical and first and foremost consistent with the rule for calculating TN's on the spell test.
I know it doesn't say so explicetly in the errata, but it would be downright stupid to have to sit and check against to seperate rules every time you wanted to use magic on vehicles, instead of just one rule.
The new rule is more logical in my opinion since it fits with the concept of magic and armor, i.e. combat spells bypasses armor on living targets AND damage from within, thus i think it is more correct to say that a vehicles body is its primary statistic concerning its own structural integrity, armor adds to this provided the attack comes from outside the vehicle, but since a combat spell damages from within, the armor only functions at half its rating, but it does still help the vehicle, since it still provides some structural integrity. This way is the only way it makes sense in relation to the rules for magic and armor.
Personally i think they meant to erase the old rule but just forgot or something. Generally speaking you now need to have somewhat higher force powerbolt/ball spells.
DigitalMage
Sep 12 2003, 10:14 AM
Its not that cumbersome to use both rules. You can check at a glance whether Force exceeds Armour - and if it does then you go to the hassles of determining whether Force is equal to or greater than (OR + B + (A/2))/2
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.