Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: 00DNA mcmanus@******.albany.edu
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 11:22:15 -0400
A question on targeting using Anchoring. Now, it says that if you want to
use a spell targeting anything other than the Anchoring Focus itself or the
user of the focus then you have to put a detection spell in it. They give
a list of using Something like Detect Elf or even Detect Individual. Now,
my question is. Say you make get a wand (re-usable anchoring focus) and
you put Powerbolt and Detect Elf into it. Now...you run across an elf and
decide to get rid of him. You pull out the wand and trigger it. The
Detect Elf spell detects him and the spell hits him. OK. But what if
there is more than 1 elf. Does the spell allow you to hit any elf or does
it hit any elf. IE. It validates the targets or it actually chooses one
itself. If the latter...would it be random (the mysteries of magic) or
closest target or what?
I think that the flavor of the system works better if the detection spell
just validates the targets and then the user can aim the spell at any one
of them (in the range of the detection spell). However the examples seem
to indicate that the detection spell is the actually "aimer" as well. Did
I miss over a part that explains it better or if not what do you all think?
Again I like that it just validates the targets but this might lead to
abuse...couldn't everyone just get Detect Life and hit any living target.
But is that so bad either...Anchoring is already so expensive in terms of
everything...


--00DNA
"...user connection terminated."
Message no. 2
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 19:14:07 +0200
According to 00DNA, at 11:22 on 7 Jul 99, the word on
the street was...

[snip Detect Elf/Power Bolt anchoring]

> But what if there is more than 1 elf. Does the spell allow you to hit
> any elf or does it hit any elf. IE. It validates the targets or it
> actually chooses one itself. If the latter...would it be random (the
> mysteries of magic) or closest target or what?

I'd say the closest target, and if two or more are equally far away from
the anchoring, I'd determine randomly. Note that I have no particular
reason for this, except that it "feels right" to use the closest target.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
E-mails uit het verleden bieden geen garantie voor de toekomst.
-> ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 3
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 16:03:03 EDT
In a message dated 7/7/99 1:14:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, gurth@******.nl
writes:

>
> > But what if there is more than 1 elf. Does the spell allow you to hit
> > any elf or does it hit any elf. IE. It validates the targets or it
> > actually chooses one itself. If the latter...would it be random (the
> > mysteries of magic) or closest target or what?
>
> I'd say the closest target, and if two or more are equally far away from
> the anchoring, I'd determine randomly. Note that I have no particular
> reason for this, except that it "feels right" to use the closest target.


Better to Detect Enemy than something generic like Detect Elf. It also
doesn't require you to pull out the wand, activate it, and then have it
detect the Elf. What happens is it detects the elf without any help from you
(hence the reason for the detection spell) and then blasts him/her. I'd say
the first person to step into the detection area would get blasted.



-Twist
Message no. 4
From: 00DNA mcmanus@******.albany.edu
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 16:42:40 -0400
>> > But what if there is more than 1 elf. Does the spell allow you to hit
>> > any elf or does it hit any elf. IE. It validates the targets or it
>> > actually chooses one itself. If the latter...would it be random (the
>> > mysteries of magic) or closest target or what?


At 04:03 PM 7/7/99 -0400, Twist0059@***.com wrote:
>Better to Detect Enemy than something generic like Detect Elf. It also
>doesn't require you to pull out the wand, activate it, and then have it
>detect the Elf. What happens is it detects the elf without any help from
you
>(hence the reason for the detection spell) and then blasts him/her. I'd say
>the first person to step into the detection area would get blasted.

Well, I know how that works, but that's not what I'm going after. I'm
thinking of a wand that hold powerbolt or some other combat spell that can
be used when the user wants it to (hence requiring a trigger). Your
example is similar to the Detect Bullet and Bullet Barrier Combination...I
don't want an automatic thing at all...in a different section it says that
if you want the spell to target Anything besides the focus or the user then
you still have to include a detection spell. And it doesn't say how it's
used in that case...I mean not as an automatic detection. I picked Detect
Elf because the book uses either Detect Elf or Detect Ork as an example.
What I was really thinking is Detect Life...if indeed the Detection spell
in this case is just target validation and not target acquisition.
And besides...Detect Enemy...what if this is not for an Enemy...


--00DNA
"...user connection terminated."
Message no. 5
From: Steadfast laughingman@*******.de
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 02:15:36 +0200
And so it came to happen that Twist0059@***.com wrote in reply to
gurth@******.nl:

> > > But what if there is more than 1 elf. Does the spell allow you to hit
> > > any elf or does it hit any elf. IE. It validates the targets or it
> > > actually chooses one itself. If the latter...would it be random (the
> > > mysteries of magic) or closest target or what?
> >
> > I'd say the closest target, and if two or more are equally far away from
> > the anchoring, I'd determine randomly. Note that I have no particular
> > reason for this, except that it "feels right" to use the closest
target.
>
> Better to Detect Enemy than something generic like Detect Elf. It also
> doesn't require you to pull out the wand, activate it, and then have it
> detect the Elf. What happens is it detects the elf without any help from you
> (hence the reason for the detection spell) and then blasts him/her.

I think you would not have that much fun with that toy as the goody olde
"Detect Enemy" always has the backfire value.
That is if you do not say that the "Detect Enemy" works only for the wand,
that would not be that fruitfull. After all who has a harmfull attitude
towards an elaborate stick? And guess what, I think it would work that way,
but I am maybe wrong, see further down.

> I'd say the first person to step into the detection area would get blasted.

Problem here could be the Line of sight rule. Any detect spells can detect
the object/person it is designed for on a given basis. This includes
through solid objects. That means blocking the line of sight. Even further
what is if you have that wand and have it under your duster? Is that
covered in the rules? I have not yet taken a closer look regarding
Anchoring, maybe I should take me some time for it after all.

--

---> Steadfast
The one, the only.
That is, if you do not count the others.
Message no. 6
From: Steadfast laughingman@*******.de
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 02:15:40 +0200
And so it came to happen that 00DNA wrote:
<snip>
> Well, I know how that works, but that's not what I'm going after. I'm
> thinking of a wand that hold powerbolt or some other combat spell that can
> be used when the user wants it to (hence requiring a trigger). Your
> example is similar to the Detect Bullet and Bullet Barrier Combination...I
> don't want an automatic thing at all...in a different section it says that
> if you want the spell to target Anything besides the focus or the user then
> you still have to include a detection spell. And it doesn't say how it's
> used in that case...I mean not as an automatic detection. I picked Detect
> Elf because the book uses either Detect Elf or Detect Ork as an example.
> What I was really thinking is Detect Life...if indeed the Detection spell
> in this case is just target validation and not target acquisition.
> And besides...Detect Enemy...what if this is not for an Enemy...

<grmbl, snip 2.4 mp useless intel made, grmbl>
Damn, I hate it than I do such things. Why have the Gods/Totems/Lawyers of
Magic done this section about "Using an Anchoring Focus"?

Hurg, even more food for thought, they say in the example of the Magic Bomb
that the spell goes of with the focus as the center of the fireball. Does
that mean a Lightning Bolt would simply target the wand and zap IT if a
valid target comes into range? If so, I would say the wand is A) extremly
expensive and B) extremly unusefull. Hope my english betrays me here.

If it is valid to do the "Detect Life" than "Power Bolt" it, than you
have
your wand, as the user can actively surpress the spell if he touches it and
does not want the spell to go off. Well after that we can assume that the
user of the Anchored Focus will only allow the Lighnting Bolt to go of, if
the Target is his intended one.
Keep it simple, the User only has one try, after that he better uses other
means of subtility.
But the magic potions are truly nice, yes I like them. So if this Fantasy
genre typicall thing can be done in SR than there must be a way to do a
simple Lightning Wand, doesn't it? Well, one that can only be used once per
Combat, but it can be the edge. But how? Any ideas there other than the
afforementioned and are they legit than?
BTW for anyone who wants to hunt for infos, the part saying that you need a
detection spell is on MITS, page 71, 1st column, "Using an Anchoring Focus"
--

---> Steadfast
The one, the only.
That is, if you do not count the others.
Message no. 7
From: Michael & Linda Frankl mlfrankl@*****.msn.com
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 22:13:48 -0400
Well, I know how that works, but that's not what I'm going after. I'm
thinking of a wand that hold powerbolt or some other combat spell that can
be used when the user wants it to (hence requiring a trigger). Your
example is similar to the Detect Bullet and Bullet Barrier Combination...I
don't want an automatic thing at all...in a different section it says that
if you want the spell to target Anything besides the focus or the user then
you still have to include a detection spell. And it doesn't say how it's
used in that case...I mean not as an automatic detection. I picked Detect
Elf because the book uses either Detect Elf or Detect Ork as an example.
What I was really thinking is Detect Life...if indeed the Detection spell
in this case is just target validation and not target acquisition.
And besides...Detect Enemy...what if this is not for an Enemy...

--00DNA
"...user connection terminated."

Hmmm... since a detect enemies spell can detect thought (hostile), perhaps a
variant version of the spell could detect whom you we're feeling hostile
towards and use that as the trigger/targeting. However, be careful as this
could really wind up screwing you if you were to get into a heated argument
with someone that you didn't necessarily want to nuke (always the GM).

;)

Mike, aka Smilin' Jack
Message no. 8
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 12:12:21 +0200
According to Twist0059@***.com, at 16:03 on 7 Jul 99, the word on
the street was...

> Better to Detect Enemy than something generic like Detect Elf. It also
> doesn't require you to pull out the wand, activate it, and then have it
> detect the Elf. What happens is it detects the elf without any help from you
> (hence the reason for the detection spell) and then blasts him/her. I'd say
> the first person to step into the detection area would get blasted.

That is not really a solution to the problem posed, is it? It's a way to
avoid the problem, certainly, but it doesn't actually solve it.

Furthermore, what if two enemies step into the Detect Enemies spell range
at the same time?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
E-mails uit het verleden bieden geen garantie voor de toekomst.
-> ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 9
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:52:54 EDT
In a message dated 7/7/99 8:11:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
laughingman@*******.de writes:

> I think you would not have that much fun with that toy as the goody olde
> "Detect Enemy" always has the backfire value.
> That is if you do not say that the "Detect Enemy" works only for the wand,
> that would not be that fruitfull. After all who has a harmfull attitude
> towards an elaborate stick? And guess what, I think it would work that way,
> but I am maybe wrong, see further down.


You may have a point there!




-Twist
Message no. 10
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: Targetting with Anchoring
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:52:13 EDT
In a message dated 7/7/99 8:11:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
laughingman@*******.de writes:

> Problem here could be the Line of sight rule. Any detect spells can detect
> the object/person it is designed for on a given basis. This includes
> through solid objects. That means blocking the line of sight. Even further
> what is if you have that wand and have it under your duster? Is that
> covered in the rules? I have not yet taken a closer look regarding
> Anchoring, maybe I should take me some time for it after all.

I didn't think Anchoring needed LOS since you'd be casting the thing before
your target ever got there. I'll have to check the Anchoring rules closer
myself.



-Twist

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Targetting with Anchoring, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!