Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Geasa
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Dawnshadow
Most people seem to think geasa have to be serious limitations or they're not valid. I'm curious about this mindset -- since it appears to me that geasa are brutal enough with a minor, 'virtual' limitation. One that potentially could appear, but the odds are against it (10 to 1, at least).

Magic loss is very easy to get.. you have to beat your magic score on 2d6. That means that someone with magic 7 (a single initiation), has a better than 50% chance of losing magic (58.3% chance, in fact).

Once you take a geas, there appear to be two possibilities: Your magic is at the level it was before, so long as you have the geas, or your magic is below the level.

The first means that any subsequent tests for magic loss are still at TN 7. The second means that you burn out if you take 7 geasa and have only initiated once. (Cast spells as if you have magic 7, real magic at 1.. lose a magic point, take a geas -- and you have real magic 0, so are burned out).

Now.. the sick part. Even assuming you've got geasa that aren't particularly limitting, except under unusual circumstances (Why would anyone EVER take a geas that's a brutal limitation?) -- you still should shed them, because if you don't, you're on the path of burning out. Either fast (the second example), or a little slower (the first interpretation).

Now, to shed a geas, you have to initiate. Your only benefit for the initiation is the lost geas. You don't get the metamagic or aura change. Your initiate grade goes up -- which is a very mixed blessing. Means you pay more karma every following initiation. You might be able to use a few things a little better -- invoking, divining and shielding come to mind. But you're still being really penalized for taking the geas.

It actually works out that every geas you shed, costs you 2-3 karma for every initiation following. 3 if you're initiating solo. 2 if you initiate in a group. (Averaged out, ordeals can drop it down by 0.5). That's a hefty karma cost, on someone who's already a karma sink, being awakened.

Anyone who wants to see it at its worst, play a magician's way adept. All magic loss is applied to spellcasting/conjuring, which is lower than your magic rating almost 100% of the time. So you wind up making magic tests against a high level rating, with a lower amount of magic that can be lost before you no longer have any mage abilities.

Beyond that, there's geasa as ordeals or for adepts to reduce power points, which can never be shed. Why, why, why would those EVER be taken as a serious limit?

So: Why do people think that geasa have to be serious limitations?
Even if you take them, you're closer to burning out.
Getting rid of them drains karma, long term and short.
They're fairly easy to wind up with.
mfb
i don't think geasa have to be a serious limitation. but they shouldn't be something the character can just forget about, or there won't be any reason to shed them. it really doesn't matter how hard it is to get rid of a geasa--like i said in the other thread, i'd have a pretty hard time getting rid of my own head; that doesn't mean having a head is a limitation.

your statement about adept geasa confuses the hell out of me. an adept with a voluntary geasa gets a 25% discount on the powers bought with that point--why in the name of god wouldn't you want that to be pretty limiting? otherwise, you're getting something for nothing, and there'd never be any reason to not geasa your power points.

they're only easy to end up with if you're checking for magic loss frequently. my adept is pushing 200 karma, and he has yet to have to make a magic loss check--and he's been played under something like 20 different GMs, so it's not that my GM is easy. checking for magic loss is something that should happen once or twice in a character's career; you make it sound like it happens once a month.
toturi
There is actually 2 types of geas for adepts. Voluntary and Involuntary. Voluntary geasa allows you to "purchase" more powers per power point. Involuntary geas is what you take to avoid magic loss.

It is voluntary geasa that people are having trouble with. GMs (usually) want the geasa to have real limitations, otherwise they feel that the player is just trying to get more powers than he is supposed to. Players(usually) on the other hand want to squeeze out as much of an edge as they can possibly get, otherwise the PC might not be able to handle whatever challenge the GM comes up with (something we all could relate to, we all want a good bargain).

Some GMs say that if they wanted to allow the PCs to be at a higher power level, they'd have used a higher BP limit or given more Karma. But they fail to consider that these measures are self-limiting/balancing within the game mechanic framework. BP does not give the PC a higher Magic. Karma, on the other hand, is either prohibitively expansive(20 per PP) or increases the risk of Magic loss(Initiation, which defeats the purpose of the higher Magic).
Dawnshadow
QUOTE (mfb)
your statement about adept geasa confuses the hell out of me. an adept with a voluntary geasa gets a 25% discount on the powers bought with that point--why in the name of god wouldn't you want that to be pretty limiting? otherwise, you're getting something for nothing, and there'd never be any reason to not geasa your power points.

they're only easy to end up with if you're checking for magic loss frequently. my adept is pushing 200 karma, and he has yet to have to make a magic loss check--and he's been played under something like 20 different GMs, so it's not that my GM is easy. checking for magic loss is something that should happen once or twice in a character's career; you make it sound like it happens once a month.

Forget about game balance for a minute, just stop and think about it from a character perspective.

Why would you take a geas, voluntarily, if it's going to be more of a handicap then the 0.25 extra pp? Any geas that can reasonably affect the character more than 1/4 the time is a serious drawback, beyond the value of what you're getting. Based on that, I'd say that a geas that could reasonably block the power 1/4 of the time is the extreme edge of reasonable -- since it's a permanent limit, you can't just put another batch of power points in to get rid of the geas. That, to my mind, means that you don't need near as much of a limit. It should be one that could come up.. but shouldn't, except in really unusual circumstances.

[ Spoiler ]


See what I mean?

My adept is at almost 400 karma. He's had around 9 magic loss tests. About one every 2 months. Maybe a bit more often then that. The other adept in the group, a hundred or so karma more I think, has had a half dozen magic loss tests, that I can think of-- but he's got a lot higher body and a few other advantages.

Likewise.. magic loss, once or twice in a character's career? That sounds a LOT like an easy career. Or it could just be that I'm used to exceptionally violent ones. Or, of course, there's the 'small guy with the rest troll-tough' party bias. But even the 'troll-tough' characters have taken a half dozen or more deadly wounds.
LinaInverse
My shaman just cracked the 120 Karma mark, and I have never had to make a Magic loss test. The closest I've come was a Serious wound. Bear in mind, this is a campaign that has killed 2 PCs in the last 6 months, and about 75% of the time, results in at least 1 PC taking Serious or Deadly damage at the end of the night, so I'd hardly call that an easy career. Also, we have had another mage (diff player) have to do 2 Magic loss tests, so again, the risks are real.

The diff between my char and most others (including said other mage) is that my char is mostly a support mage, not a combat mage, so she's normally not the person up front of a firefight. That said, our group is currently in the Arco right now, so it'll remains to be seen if my streak stays intact.
Dawnshadow
Our group (3 PCs) averages 0 to 1 not taking serious to deadly per run.

The second last run: Only one didn't take deadly. (The combat adept)

The last run: One took deadly, one burned 4 karma pool to avoid taking deadly. He wound up with only a moderate.. maybe not even that much. My MW Adept was the one who didn't, but he was hiding in 'disguised shadowrunner tank' for most of it, and had a 7 success improved invisibility spell when he went out.

The run before that, both involved PCs took deadly. NPC healed them, since they were incidentals.

The run before that, 2 of the 3 took deadly.
Eyeless Blond
QUOTE (Dawnshadow @ May 18 2005, 08:59 AM)
Any geas that can reasonably affect the character more than 1/4 the time is a serious drawback, beyond the value of what you're getting. Based on that, I'd say that a geas that could reasonably block the power 1/4 of the time is the extreme edge of reasonable -- since it's a permanent limit, you can't just put another batch of power points in to get rid of the geas. That, to my mind, means that you don't need near as much of a limit. It should be one that could come up.. but shouldn't, except in really unusual circumstances.

Agreed, to a point. Some geasea should affect your character more often, like the Night-only geas you mentioned, because that weakness is more difficult for an enemy to exploit or even learn about. Talismans can be taken away; hands can be bound and mouths can be gagged for Gestures and Incantations, but noone is capable of making the sun rise on you, or forcing you to eat something (Fasting). Such geasea, because they aren't as much of a risk, should come into play more of the time, otherwise you and the GM will just forget that they are there.

The problem that some of us were coming up agianst in the other thread was that some geasea, like the Talisman geas for a filling in your back molar, don't *ever* impact your Magic, except in the most contrived circumstances (how often has anyone here faced a Called Shot to the back of your mouth?). From a game balance perspective this is a bad thing, because if a geas inever affects you or ever has to be brought into consideration then it's just a freebie, giving you something for nothing.

From an in-game perspective it doesn't make sense either, as geasea are, reading from the rules, "a restriction an Awakened character chooses to maintain the level of his magical ability after an event that would otherwise decrease his ability to weild mana." The implication of that section is that the geas, whatever it may be, is a kind of crutch, something that the mage leans on in a psychological sense for "luck" or whatever. A filling isn't a restriction; you hardly even know it's there. A strand of wooden prayer beads with a small cross at the end that you grasp in your hand evey time you cast a spell does qualify; the reassurance that it's there, that you managed to fufil some completely symbolic gesture for no purpose other than powering your magic, that can provide the necessary ego-boo to give you that extra oomph to use your skills to their full potential, and beyond.
mfb
the benefit of a geas should just about match the cost, otherwise you're getting something for less than its actual worth. you yourself pointed out the reason an adept would take a geas that affects him more than 25% of the time is, he thinks he can minimize the effects of that geas.
Dawnshadow
I question 'night-only' not being easy to exploit. It's harder to find out about (especially when it's not ALL of the person's magic), but it's easy to exploit in any sort of plot based game. A run, not so much, but anyone hunting the character? Find out the schedule.. character probably sleeps during the day, so attack him at home while he's in bed. It's a double handicap -- vastly reduced magic, and 'asleep'.

Um... I haven't had a called shot to the back of the mouth. I had someone cover his face saying 'Not the mouth!' when he was about to get punched for opening his mouth and causing problems.

It was the titanium bone lacing, pair of cyberlimbs, strength 7...

Edit: MFB, there's no way to minimize night-only. Taking the geas like that was thematic and because I took aptitude (edged weapons), ambidexterity (8 point), and had dikoted weapons..
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (Dawnshadow)
Forget about game balance for a minute, just stop and think about it from a character perspective.

Why would you take a geas, voluntarily, if it's going to be more of a handicap then the 0.25 extra pp? Any geas that can reasonably affect the character more than 1/4 the time is a serious drawback, beyond the value of what you're getting.

First, people aren't rational actors who always do the cost-benefit analysis. We'd like to think we are, and gamers who have the benefit of metaknowledge and the numberical figures in front of them do have that benefit. a PC in-character does not.

People can pick geasa for any number of reasons. Look at the description of Warrior Path Adepts in MitS, that they pick voluntary geasa limiting them to certain days of the year or geographical areas. That's unbelievably limiting, but it makes a certain amount of sense within the context of their beliefs. I like the idea of attacking people's weaknesses--and especially geasa--as do virtually all, if not all, of the other GMs on Shadowland. And like Eyeless said, if you're going to pick something like Talisman as your geas, then you're going to be expected to treat it like one and not just stick in in a back molar and forget about it. This is the ultimate binky because if you lose it, you do suffer a certain amount of harm.

It's even more pronounced for voluntary Adept geasa because they can never be removed. Something that is going to cripple a magical power for the rest of their life requires, to me, a considerably higher psychological commitment and requisite belief in that geas fulfillment act or object to maintain something for such a long period of time that it can never be broken.
QUOTE
My adept is at almost 400 karma. He's had around 9 magic loss tests. About one every 2 months. Maybe a bit more often then that. The other adept in the group, a hundred or so karma more I think, has had a half dozen magic loss tests, that I can think of-- but he's got a lot higher body and a few other advantages.

Likewise.. magic loss, once or twice in a character's career? That sounds a LOT like an easy career. Or it could just be that I'm used to exceptionally violent ones. Or, of course, there's the 'small guy with the rest troll-tough' party bias. But even the 'troll-tough' characters have taken a half dozen or more deadly wounds.

I think I can speak for mfb when I say that his Adept has seen some incredible runs that none of my PCs would have survived. Frankly, he's run repeatedly under GMs that I'm not good enough to challenge. That is, every PC I've tossed at them has died. My guess is that the reason why he hasn't rolled for Magic Loss in X years is because he's just that good a player.
mfb
QUOTE (Dawnshadow)
Edit: MFB, there's no way to minimize night-only.

you mean besides planning more runs at night?
Dawnshadow
MFB: Didn't help. He's still had a good number of runs or magic-would-be-REALLY-nice-here events during the day -- and a bunch under the open sun (direct light), which is just worse for him. He's got a hefty totem penalty then. In fact, most of the runs are at night -- except, of course, for the climactic events, and the blood sacrifices at dawn, and the random encounters while travelling through cocoa fields... you get the picture.

Crimsondude: I would suggest that anyone who can survive that type of game is someone who is not being exposed to a comperable degree of challenge. He may be that good (which is very impressive and worthy of applause), but the degree of relative challenge is less than a less dangerous game with less skilled players.

Also, while attacking peoples weaknesses is good (especially things like voluntary geasa), attacking involuntary geasa frequently, or even relatively frequently, is disconcerting, and extremely frustrating. Especially talisman geasa, but not exclusively so.

Voluntary geasa I understand it -- I despise the pricing system on them though. It would be better with variable price reduction depending on how limiting the geasa is, because if you can only use your killing hands Deadly under the full moon, it's not worth it. Your character might be a great werewolf theme, but you're being handicapped. Badly. For virtually no comparative benefit. Powers that only can be used 10% of the time, but don't give you much extra power?

That's akin to the psionic debate, where almost everyone house ruled them to 'not suck', because you aren't getting full build points from them. Why then is it acceptable for voluntary geasa to not get full power point value?
mfb
because you're getting more than your full power point value, with geasa. you're making a sacrifice in one area in order to make a gain in another. if the sacrifice isn't a sacrifice, then there's no reason for everyone not to do it.
Crimsondude 2.0
QUOTE (Dawnshadow)
Crimsondude: I would suggest that anyone who can survive that type of game is someone who is not being exposed to a comperable degree of challenge. He may be that good (which is very impressive and worthy of applause), but the degree of relative challenge is less than a less dangerous game with less skilled players.

I'm not going to speak for him. If he feels it necessary to let you in on some of these runs, I'm sure he will. Without context, I could make disparaging comments about how frequently you've had to make magic checks. But that doesn't do anyone any good. I'm of the mind that if my PC is making a Magic Check, it's because the opfor hasn't put another bullet in them yet.

QUOTE
Also, while attacking peoples weaknesses is good (especially things like voluntary geasa), attacking involuntary geasa frequently, or even relatively frequently, is disconcerting, and extremely frustrating. Especially talisman geasa, but not exclusively so.

Why is it disconcerting? The PC opened the door, and I'm going to walk through it just like I would walk through any door opened by something in their background or any action they take on a run. I think it's not doing anyone any good not to be merciless.

QUOTE
Voluntary geasa I understand it -- I despise the pricing system on them though. It would be better with variable price reduction depending on how limiting the geasa is, because if you can only use your killing hands Deadly under the full moon, it's not worth it. Your character might be a great werewolf theme, but you're being handicapped. Badly. For virtually no comparative benefit. Powers that only can be used 10% of the time, but don't give you much extra power?

I don't see why except to allow more min-maxing.

QUOTE
That's akin to the psionic debate, where almost everyone house ruled them to 'not suck', because you aren't getting full build points from them. Why then is it acceptable for voluntary geasa to not get full power point value?

Because life's not fair that way, I guess. Because they are getting 25% more power than they otherwise would had that not taken the Geas in the case of voluntary Adept Geasa, and therefore the cost-benefit analysis should take that into account before we even look at the original PP cost.

With other Geasa, it is because you get a pretty good benefit for taking the Geas if you're a full mage. I mean, it takes a great deal of handwaving and stretching to make it unfair for a mage.
Dawnshadow
QUOTE (mfb)
because you're getting more than your full power point value, with geasa. you're making a sacrifice in one area in order to make a gain in another. if the sacrifice isn't a sacrifice, then there's no reason for everyone not to do it.

Misinterpreting, MFB.

I mean: 1 pp (geased) + 0.25 pp should be equivalent to 1 pp. Easiest way for that to happen, is if the geasa means that, reasonably, you can't depend on the power 1/4 of the time. It doesn't have to be disallowed, just, not something that can be depended on.

Killing Hands, Deadly is 4 pp.
Geased (full moon) is 3 pp.

It's useable only 10% of the time. That means, it's effectively worth: ~= 0.4 pp.
Add in an extra power point and you have 4 pp becoming 1.4 pp. 2.5 power points effectively wasted.

Geased (night only):
Useable 50% of the time, approximately, it's worth 2 pp. Another power point taken from the geas, and it's 3 pp. You've effectively lost a power point. Congratulations.
mfb
sure. for a voluntary geas, ~25% of the time is the minimum i'd allow. i'm especially unsympathetic towards adepts who voluntarily geas their powers, because it was their choice.
Edward
For balance reasons believe a geasa should be limiting, not very limiting but a bit. The only one that really bothers me is “my cyber wear is my talisman” because it is almost unherdov for this to be lost.

Also you make it sound like if you don’t shed your geasa quickly you will be on the path of the burnout evry time.

I don’t think that is the case, in fact hitting the path of the burnout is something the player usually has to choose. You can use your magic without fulfilling the geasa, your at +2TN for magical actions and you use the lower magic rating. unless you chose very poorly when selecting a geasa you should be able to cope with this limitation on the occasions when it comes up. (the short time between the loss of a talisman and the acquisition of a replacement, the few times when you have to cast quietly and don’t want to speak lowly) I would rarely bother to shed a geasa buy any means.

What is causing you to have to test for magic loss every 2 months (game or RL months, how many runs)? A well executed run should not involve any character taking a deadly wound, its easy enough to always take stable precautions with drugs and medical care. If a character goes down we consider it a major error on the part of the players. And the fue times we have made a mistake that bad those that took the deadly wounds did not survive long enough to worry about magic loss. And Dawnshadow, if you expect to be that badly shot up why the hell is you character still running, if almost every job brings you to the point where you’re reaching out for the pearly gates would you not look for a new job. I know I would.

and you can minimise a night only geasa, you just never do a job during the day if you could do it at night.

Edward
Dawnshadow
2 game months.

Still running because there's an entire large scale plot that he's involved in, can't get out of, and whether or not he was running, it would still drag him further into it. Especially the 4+ grade blood mage hunting him. In fact, the MW Adept is the only one who absolutely can't get out.

Um... Let me count the runs.. I think the average is every other run? With the occassional pair, usually the damage being resolved by prompt magical healing. Sometimes from the ally spirit, sometimes by NPC teammate on the run.

If you consider a deadly wound a failure on the part of the players, then you would walk away from our group. A deadly wound on the part of the players is assumed to be an indication that the challenge level of the opposition is appropriate. It's not 'the fault of the players' so much as the level of force directed against us is such that we take that degree of damage. Even when trying to play it safe and cautiously.

And as for the burnout.. depends on the amount of magic loss you're suffering. If you're running at 50% or worse, at moderate to high levels of damage.. it takes a lot of karma to hold your own. And remember, mage geasa, you break one, you break them all.
Crimsondude 2.0
Wow.

And here I thought Ellery was a bastard GM.
nezumi
To simply answer the original question, I think mages tend to quickly become more powerful than most other character types, and as they advance, that gap only widens. Geas allow a mage to be a mage AND the street sam (since now you can have magic and have cyber, making the sam pretty redundant). So there has to be something to keep the mage from doing that. I"ve seen adepts with practically all their power points geased away and 5 points of cyber, and they're absolutely vicious unless those geas mean something. So my voluntary geas should affect the PC about 50% of the time (oh yes, try the 'magical object geas'. I'll let you run without a problem for 6 months. Hehehe....)

That said, if it's an involuntary geas, I'm usually pretty kind, since there's no other benefit to it.

Geas have to be limiting to keep mages and adepts in check. The cost of getting rid of said geas don't even factor into the calculation.
mfb
that's incredibly abnormal, dawnshadow. it's hardly fair to hold other groups to the standards your group uses, when your group is so far outside of how most groups play.
Crimsondude 2.0
Indeed. My idea of "fun" (you know, the standard I use to gauge my interest in X run/campaign) doesn't include my PCs suffering Deadly wounds in every run.
Dawnshadow
MFB: In a game where one of the big selling points is that combat is deadlier, how is PCs taking a lot of damage that puts them down for the count 'abnormal' or 'unexpected'? I'd expect PCs to take a lot of hits. Then again, I could be misinterpreting things -- maybe the unusual thing is that we don't get to avoid at least one hefty firefight, even if it's a violation of the plan.

CrimsonDude: He isn't. He inflicts a lot of damage, but he doesn't brutalize PCs outside of that, and is more reasonable then a lot of stuff I've seen GMs post about. Mistakes aren't instant fatalities, but they are painful. Opponents aren't unbeatable. No 'instant death' because the opponent is 'ungodly'. NPCs don't randomly upstage PCs (even when we wish they would). Neat possibilities and extrapolations of the rules are possible. So the mage is under improved invisibility.. he's on fire, and I know approximately where he is, so I shoot the empty void that looks like it's got flames dancing off it.

Nezumi: How is 15-30 karma not a factor? 2-3 runs at normal level and payout? How can it not be a factor?
Crimsondude 2.0
Then something is definitely wrong if your 400 karma PC has, "had around 9 magic loss tests. About one every 2 months. Maybe a bit more often then that."
Dawnshadow
Lots of damage. The firepower is at a level to make it a threat to the Sam, which means it's devestating when it comes at the MW Adept. I don't consider the damage and magic loss tests to be the problem -- those make sense. It's the geasa rules that look atrocious. Especially under the interpretations that seem to be cropping up most often here.

And.. let me get this straight..

People find it fun when the GM abuses PCs with geasa, or get less value for their powers, but not when PCs take deadly damage?
mfb
it's an either-or. if i ran a game where i regularly slapped characters with D wounds, i wouldn't be picky about their geasa. i don't regularly slap characters with D wounds, so i am pickier.

as far as deadlier combat goes, the draw for me is the fact that i have to out-think opponents--i have to do so, because if i don't, i'll die. it's walking the thin line between crazy-but-it-worked and you-shouldn't-have-done-that-now-you're-dead.
nick012000
Eh. The only time my street sam PC has taken a Deadly wound was when he did something particularly stupid. Even then, he probably could have killed the two guys who shot him. Heck, he wouldn't have gon down if he had taken even one of them down...

Anyway, I think that the general deadlyness of our campaign is "They would have killed the lot of you if you hadn't killed the lot of them first."

We currently have ~30 Karma. Last run, we were doing a B&E vs. some vampires, led by a blood mage. They all died horribly. In the previous run, we killed a level 4 Initiate mage, and his two street sam guards.
Crimsondude 2.0
Or maybe I just used my CP well.

Nah... Can't be. CP's useless.
hyzmarca
Am I the only one who thinks that there should be a good RP reason for any volluntary gease. It isn't just something that lets an adept pack in more powers it is a psycological crutch and there should be a logical psycological reason for that crutch.

I would actually allow the tooth talisman if there was a good reason for it.
Consider this scenario. A young boy gets into a fight at school and loses one of his first permenant teeth to a bully's fist.

He is very upset about this. To alieviate his feelings of inferiority the boy's father tells him that the fase tooth the dentist is making for him is a magical tooth that will protect him from bullies. After getting the tooth the boy's adept powers manifest. The next day his improved quickness, strength, and unarmed ability lets him knock out a few bully teeth. Or, his kinestics and imporves social abilities allow him to talk his way out of it.

For the rest of his life he really believe that the tooth is the source of his powers. Instead of getting new teeth as he grows he has the old one's mounting ajusted to fit his mouth. It is far too small and looks out of place. It can also be knocked out more easily than other false teeth because it is too small. If he gets a wound effect that should cause damage to a slot 6 piece of cyberware the tooth gets knocked out. For sentimental reasons it is irrplacable. However, if push comes to shove he could have a dentist/enchanter make a tooth weapon focus to restore his potency.

It works even better for an ork's tusk. An ork with a child-sized artifical tusk would be fairly identifiable.
Crimsondude 2.0
No, you aren't alone.
toturi
You are thinking psychological crutch when you should be thinking psychological edge. Some may also look upon a gun as a crutch, but another may look upon it as a weapon.

For example, an adept that geased his Pain Resistance to being wounded may be thinking that he is using the pain from the wound against itself. He believes his Improve Ability in Martial Arts should only work when he is engaged in combat. He recognises that there are no real limits to the powers themselves, only whether they are useful or not. And by limiting his powers to the times that they are useful, he is only being practical. He recognises that a hammer is a still hammer, whether he uses it. Why should he not lighten the burden of the hammer?
hyzmarca
QUOTE (toturi)
You are thinking psychological crutch when you should be thinking psychological edge. Some may also look upon a gun as a crutch, but another may look upon it as a weapon.

For example, an adept that geased his Pain Resistance to being wounded may be thinking that he is using the pain from the wound against itself. He believes his Improve Ability in Martial Arts should only work when he is engaged in combat. He recognises that there are no real limits to the powers themselves, only whether they are useful or not. And by limiting his powers to the times that they are useful, he is only being practical. He recognises that a hammer is a still hammer, whether he uses it. Why should he not lighten the burden of the hammer?

Its easier for me to beat someone up when I'm beating someone up than it is for me to beat someone up when I'm not beating someone it.

This might make sense for characters with a very high level of doublethink skill.

Voluntary adept geasa are fairly closely related to fetish limited spells.

It is an artificial construct that helps the adept channel magic for a power the same way the fetish helps a mage channel magic for a spell. It is an integral part of the power's "formula" which is why it can't be shed.

Being in unarmed combat is a natrual condition of the Killing Hands power. The fact that you have to make an unarmed attack test is already written into the basic "formula".

Using only when in unarmed combat as a condition for killing hands is equivilant to letting a mage use "whoever I'm touching" as a fetish for a Death Touch spell.
fistandantilus4.0
hyzmarca, I love that one. I don't know that I would allow it normally, but maybe just for it's creativeness. It would have to be easier than a normal tooth to knock out though. Say 1 -12 chance on any applicable hit (melee combat , falling etc). That way it's not TOO bad, but ALWAYS a chance.

I like having a good reason for vulantary Geasa. I have an adept that is an elf poser, has a recessive gene that made him an albino human instead of an elf. His first power was facial sculpt, and he makes him self look like an elf. He's mostly a social adept. But he's so insecure (has darksecret about his true race) about it, that his powers are geases to only work when he's in another form, using both facial sculpt and melanin control. Not always a huge drawback. But if he isn't using both of these powers, none of his powers work.

I saw another character that became an adept when he was transformed in to a vampire. Because he became magically active when he became infected, all of his powers were geased to work only at night. Because in the characters mind, vampires are helpless in the day time. So none of his new "magic powers" would work.
Critias
QUOTE (toturi)
For example, an adept that geased his Pain Resistance to being wounded may be thinking that he is using the pain from the wound against itself. He believes his Improve Ability in Martial Arts should only work when he is engaged in combat.

Are...you serious?

I mean, about those two geasa? Do you honestly suggest those as fair and reasonable? I'm taking the time to ask because, maybe, I dunno, you're joking about something. Or you're drunk. Or maybe you're joking about something because you're drunk. Or...or... You aren't serious about those as real geasa, though, right? Right?

"I only ignore pain when I should be feeling pain" isn't a limitation, any more than "I can only do kung fu when I do kung fu" is. Maybe you don't know what limitation means. I dunno. Why stop there? You should also make Improved Ability: Pistols only work when you're firing a pistol. Or cripple your Kinesics by only having it do you any good when you're interacting with people socially. Or your Wall Running could by hamstrung by only being in affect when you're running somewhere besides the ground, maybe. I dunno. That last one's pretty steep.

Please, God, someone tell me he wasn't serious about those two.
toturi
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ May 19 2005, 01:01 PM)
Being in unarmed combat is a natrual condition of the Killing Hands power. The fact that you have to make an unarmed attack test is already written into the basic "formula".

Using only when in unarmed combat as a condition for killing hands is equivilant to letting a mage use "whoever I'm touching" as a fetish for a Death Touch spell.

Yet, it is possible to use Killing Hands outside of combat. You can use it to break things outside of combat, you can use it with Delay Damage (Silent) outside of combat. The geasa are like blinkers, you can choose to place those blinkers at the edge of your vision or you can use them to cut deep into your field of vision.

EDIT: Critias, take a look at my sig and tell me I am not serious. Second line.
hyzmarca
QUOTE (toturi)
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ May 19 2005, 01:01 PM)
Being in unarmed combat is a natrual condition of the Killing Hands power. The fact that you have to make an unarmed attack test is already written into the basic "formula".

Using only when in unarmed combat as a condition for killing hands is equivilant to letting a mage use "whoever I'm touching" as a fetish for a Death Touch spell.

Yet, it is possible to use Killing Hands outside of combat. You can use it to break things outside of combat, you can use it with Delay Damage (Silent) outside of combat. The geasa are like blinkers, you can choose to place those blinkers at the edge of your vision or you can use them to cut deep into your field of vision.

EDIT: Critias, take a look at my sig and tell me I am not serious. Second line.

Both of those things require one to make an unarmed combat test.
toturi
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
Both of those things require one to make an unarmed combat test.

But you are not in combat. You are making Unarmed Combat Test, essentially a Skill Test. Can't you make a Chess(skill) Test outside a chess match?
hyzmarca
QUOTE (toturi)
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ May 19 2005, 01:59 PM)
Both of those things require one to make an unarmed combat test.

But you are not in combat. You are making Unarmed Combat Test, essentially a Skill Test. Can't you make a Chess(skill) Test outside a chess match?

If chess is an active skill then no.

There is little difference between using delay damage (silent) and attacking someone who is unaware or asleep. It can easily be considered a form of combat that the enemy participant doesn't know about.

The same can be said applied to attacks against a barrier, which can be considered to be combat against that barrier. If an Adept with astral perception can engage a ward or astral barrier spell in astral combat using his killing hands there is little reason that he can't engage a physical wall in physcial combat using his killing hands.

If your going with only combat against someone who is fully aware and can fight back that's different. It would mean that killing hands can't be use for suprise attacks, attacks against non-combatants, attacks agaisnt the disabled, ect. It would possibly make killing hands useless against vehicles, drones, and non-sentient astral objects as well, depending on the concept. That is fairly limiting.
toturi
My point is that you can make a Skill Test outside of the type of situation one normal associates the Skill Test with, not that it will be useful when you do that. And that adept powers may be used in situations that are not normally associated with that power.
Critias
QUOTE (toturi)
EDIT: Critias, take a look at my sig and tell me I am not serious. Second line.

So...so...

So you mean it when you say "only when damaged" as a legit limitation on Pain Resistance? Seriously?

That's ridiculous. Absolutely, patently, ridiculous. That's like saying you can only use your Adept's enhanced vision in less-than-perfect lighting conditions, or (as mentioned) can only get IA: Pistols dice when using a pistol, or something. I genuinely have no fucking idea how you can't see what a not limitation that is. How can you possibly justify it as being worth a 25% power reduction?
toturi
QUOTE (Critias)
I genuinely have no fucking idea how you can't see what a not limitation that is.

Neither do I. The only reason why I can come up with people not using geas is that either they cannot wrap their heads around the concept of virtual limitation or that their GMs cannot or will not.
Sahandrian
I have a better idea.

What if, instead of geasing Pain Resistance to when you're wounded, you geased it to "when I suffer a wound modifier?"

So then an adept with Pain Resistance 2 and that geas takes a Light wound, gaining +1 to TNs. He has a wound modifier, so Pain Reistance activates, removing the +1. He's no longer has a wound mopdifier, so Pain Reisistance goes away, and his +1 for the wound returns. But then Pain Resistance actives, removing the +1...

Oh, here's another good one.

geas Improved Reflexes to "when I go last in combat."

I was going to suggest Improved Pistols and "whenever I fire my gun and miss," but that actually makes sense and has a bit of flavor. You fire and miss, so the power activates and you have more dice for the next shot so that you don't miss this time...
Critias
You're insane. It's the only answer I can think of. How can you so not get it, and be chemically balanced? A Geasa, in order to be fair and balanced, should be worth a 25% decrease in cost. A Geasa like "my pain resistance only kicks in when I feel pain" is in no way, shape, or form, a limitation ("virtual" or otherwise). Why? Because no one's pain resistance kicks in until they feel pain. It's the nature of pain resistance to resist -- that's right, you guess it, pain. If you aren't injured, you don't have anything to resist, so it's only natural it not work at the time.

It's absolutely ridiculous. No sane GM in the world would let you take a Geasa like that.
toturi
Understand this:

Picture the usable portion of each adept power as a circle of radius r in a reactangular field length l and width w. Picture the outline of a circle with radius r. Apply this outline (limit) to the adept power circle.

When you are not feeling pain, your Pain Resistance is on, except it does nothing.
mfb
so, l would represent the upper limit of your insanity, and w would represent what the fuck.
toturi
Thanks... check out my new sig. biggrin.gif

BTW, it is an l, not a capitalised i.
hyzmarca
To be fair. Only when wounded Pain Resistance doesn't help you against tortue and disease.

What it also doesn't help against is BTLs recorded from a runner who was being killed at the exact second he died looped over and over gain on a dedicated chipjack linked to a cortex bomb. All of the pain modifiers from the BTL plus and +4 for experiencing two realities and the magic loss from the implant.


However, this is a case where one must look at the spirit of the rules rather than the letter of the rules. By the spirit of the rules such retailitory chipjacks would be as wrong as such munchy geasa. Really, how often are people tortured?
weblife
I belive a geas should be symbolic of nature, and it has to be something that can be forcibly removed from the character.

Fx. talismen, rings, amulets etc. can be recognized as such by people able to scan magical devices. - And thusly confiscated.

A GM that allows talismen to be incorporated into the character, as cyberware or special teeth, well its going on its way out to munchkin-ville.

As for geasing "being hurt" as the trigger for Pain Resistance is unbalanced. It cannot ever be broken, so its not a proper geas. - There's a good rule of thumb. If the geas you have chosen cannot EVER be broken then its not a proper geas.

I believe that a geas is more of a tool of improvement, than it is a crutch. But some sensibility must be applied.

It makes exellent sense to have a Ring of Power, a talisman that helps draw magic from its surroundings to fuel the Adept/Mage. The ring can be removed, albeit it probably seldomly will be, unless the character is taken captive and an enemy mage recognizes the Ring for what it is.
Critias
QUOTE (weblife)
It makes exellent sense to have a Ring of Power, a talisman that helps draw magic from its surroundings to fuel the Adept/Mage. The ring can be removed, albeit it probably seldomly will be, unless the character is taken captive and an enemy mage recognizes the Ring for what it is.

Or if a passing pickpocket likes the shiney-shiney, or if the ring is distinctive enough the character is often recognized or hassled for it, or if the ring sets of metal detectors when he's inconvenienced by it, or if the ring is very expensive and flashy, etc, etc, etc.

There are clear and tangible drawbacks to wearing a ring in exchange for awesome godlike power. That is a fair and balanced Geas. It has mundane as well as magical drawbacks, and it's something that can always be taken from him, inconvenience him, point him out of a crowd, etc.

Your Killing Hands only working when you Kill something with your Hands, by comparison, is childish and rules-raping.
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Critias @ May 19 2005, 03:55 AM)
QUOTE (weblife @ May 19 2005, 03:39 AM)
It makes exellent sense to have a Ring of Power, a talisman that helps draw magic from its surroundings to fuel the Adept/Mage. The ring can be removed, albeit it probably seldomly will be, unless the character is taken captive and an enemy mage recognizes the Ring for what it is.

Or if a passing pickpocket likes the shiney-shiney, or if the ring is distinctive enough the character is often recognized or hassled for it, or if the ring sets of metal detectors when he's inconvenienced by it, or if the ring is very expensive and flashy, etc, etc, etc.

There are clear and tangible drawbacks to wearing a ring in exchange for awesome godlike power. That is a fair and balanced Geas. It has mundane as well as magical drawbacks, and it's something that can always be taken from him, inconvenience him, point him out of a crowd, etc.

Your Killing Hands only working when you Kill something with your Hands, by comparison, is childish and rules-raping.

Actualy, killing hands only when trying to killing with your hands is limiting.

The most obvious is no kicking. However, others are much more insidious.

You can't kill drones and vehicles because they aren't alive. This leaves the adept only doing (Str/2)L damage against these enemies.

You can't kill spirits. You can only disrupt them. This leaves the adept doing (STR)M damage against a being with immunity to normal weapons instead of (STR)D damage that bypasses that immunity.

It is significantly different from killing hands when only in combat because it only works against a specific class of enemy. It isn't difficult for GMs to pull out lightly armored drones or spirits often enough to make it a real limitation.

On the other hand, it isn't easy for the GM to torture a character often enough to make pain resistance only when wounded a real limitation.

IN the end it depends on the GM. That is a very good reason why all gease are subject to GM aproval, by canon.
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