Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Jeffrey Riordan <JRIORDAN@***.gov>
Subject: Astral/physical debate -Reply LONG
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 10:01:52 -0400
>>> Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.net> 09/06/96
03:04am >>>
<SNIP defining what are rules an what are Game
comments by Shadowrunners>

In the GM section, the bacteria is described as
"genetically engineered form of bacteria". As I've
cited before, bacteria is alive, thus has an astral aura.
The places that FAB is called astrally active is in the
story section
"Behind the Curtain", and on page 39, in a brochure
that KE supposedly puts out. Read again the part on
p4 about KE exaggerating and lying about its
products. On page 40, the question by posters to
Shadowland ask if the bacteria is dual-natured.
So by the rules I've already quoted from in the SR2
main book and what we can determine from the GM
Info section of CorpSec, FAB works as any other
non-magical living object. It has a non-detachable
aura which cannot pass through another aura.

>..Hmmm..Unless a net wraps COMPLETELY around
an astal entity >the entity is pushed out of the way
and escapes..FAB is designed to flood an >area and
does NOT freeze the entity in amber so to speek but
rather slows the >entity from a run to a walk..
>My sugestion is pick up your copy [or borrow one]
look in the back at the >index and read everything
that is shown..Then go to pg 65 and read the part
>called "activation"...then make comments...Oh yea,
dont forget to read the >runner's comments in the
sidebars..

I've already stated why you should disregard the
comments in the sidebars.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Okay so If I understand the argument so far FAB is
basically a living thing just like a normal person. (I
shudder to think of a magically active bacteria and the
warped people who would try to teach it to spell cast.
:)

Continuing on....
>>> Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.net> 09/06/96
03:04am >>>
>> At 11:56 AM 9/5/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> >>What happens when the FAB net covers a mage
is the mage's aura influences
>> >>the FAB's aura in the astral plane. The effect of
this in the physical
>> plane is that
>> >>the net appears to wrap around a gap of air. >
>IMHO..what then would happen is discribed by
Magister in one of the >sidebars..As the net [this
assumes the net actually wraps completely around
>the entity] it acted on by gravity in an attempt to drag
the mage to the >ground the auras of the FAB attempt
to intersect with that od the astral >entity..

But the rules clearly state that auras are corporeal in
the astral plane and cannot intersect [once again, I
refer you to the SR2 black book].
Magister's comments on page 83 are 'black'
information and are wrong, according to game
mechanics. Although his quote on page 82 is mostly
correct by the game mechanics, everything after the
last comma isn't proven by the rules.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Again True that Auras can't occupy the same point in
space at the same time (physically or Astrally). I've
never seen a rule that states this but modern physics
will tell you that to physical objects can't occupy the
same space at the same time so not much
imagination is needed to assume the same for Auras
since they are "physical" objects on the Astral plane.

Continuing on....
>>> Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.net> 09/06/96
03:04am >>>
>> When the physad attacks the
>> >>mage with a FAB club, the club's aura hits the
mage's aura. The effect of
>> this in
>> >>the physical plane is that the club strikes
something in the air. The
>> astral mage
>
>For this situation..I would say this..the club has one
of the following >different effects..My favorite-Nothing
happens..the casing of the club is too >thick or
molecularly dense to allow the aura to be used as a
weapon in this >manner..

That doesn't work according to the game mechanics.
The casing of the club is non-living, so it would pass
through the astral mage's aura. The astral mage's
aura comes into contact with the aura of the FAB.
Auras cannot intersect. [all from the SR2 book, first
page on Astral Space]

>Or assuming you will allow this abuse to occur in
your game..as the >cylinder is inserted into the area
where the mage is supposed to be the FAB >dies and
refer to the previous example for the stun..
Just have FAB technology expensive. It already
appears insanely expensive to begin with. You've got
these pressurized tubes in the walls pumped full of
FAB that begins to die off immediately. As soon as
the physad pours FAB into his club, the FAB starts to
die. How long has he been carrying around the club?
Chances are, by the time he gets to use it, the FAB's
dead already. Dead object, no aura.

>I would say the same for an Ivy net as well..it [the
ivy] dies having no >willpower...

Cite an actual rule, and I'll consider that arguement.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Okay now here is where I have the problem with the
Club as a weapon even loaded with FAB. As you and I
believe several other people have said earlier the
FAB is just a living organism with an Aura so it has an
actual presence on the Astral Plane. You are now
telling me that because of that presence it can be
used against a mage? Why can't I just use my fist?
It's got an aura same as the FAB only it's attatched to
a senient creature. Now is where you get into trouble
because as I recall from SR2 nothing can harm a
mage from the physical plane unless it is astrally
active. Spells, spirits, barriers, foci etc... are the only
things I know of that can be "active" on the astral
plane.
As for the ivy net, well unless it is still rooted in
something it's dead almost as soon as you pull it out
of the ground.

Continuing on....

>>> Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.net> 09/06/96
03:04am >>>
>Oh an by the way when a FAB net is used against the
an astral >target the net does not attempt to do
anything it is the person who tried to >snare the
astral being who is trying to do something..therefore
that whole >argument about the who is trying to do
what makes a difference as to which >gets affected in
what way is aimed in the wrong direction...

Someone else said that I was confusing an 'active
effect' with a 'passive effect'. I wasn't. I was
comparing a 'direct effect' with 'indirect effect'.

The Earth's gravity directly acts on the net. Direct
effect: Net is pulled down towards the Earth.

The net is pulled down towards the Earth. Direct
effect: The net's aura is pulled down towards the
Earth. [The Earth's gravity directly acts on the net.
Indirect Effect: The net's aura is pulled down towards
the Earth]

The net's aura is pulled down towards the Earth.
Direct effect: The net's aura falls on top of motionless
astral being because two auras cannot intersect. [The
Earth's gravity directly acts on the net. Indirect effect:
The net's aura falls on top of motionless astral being
because two auras cannot intersect.]

The net's aura falls on top of motionless astral being
because two auras cannot intersect. Direct effect:
The physical component of the net stops falling and
has trapped the motionless astral being.

Using the actual rules (not the game-flavoring
Shadowtalk posts, not short stories, actual hard and
fast rules) for Shadowrun, 2nd Edition, can someone
point out a flaw in the above logic? [Please cite your
sources.] Because as the rules are written, there is
no such thing as the forced integration of auras, there
is no provision for the watermelon seed theory (nice
theory, by the way), and there is no justification for the
battle of willpower to see who gets to survive.

I'm getting near the point where I'm going to collect
the various arguements on Astral/Physical (aural)
Interaction and send them off to FASAMike.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Please do send them to FASAMike I would be
interested in seeing what he has to say.
As to the rest of the comment about direct/inderect
effect by your reasoning if I fall ontop of a Mage in
astral space I'll push him to the ground and can
actually hold onto him by wrapping my arms around
his aura. Granted I can't see him but my Aura does so
it's valid.
Please don't take that the wrong way but the
argument that you are making the way I see it is that
anything with an aura can be used against a mage in
astral space while he on the other hand is strictly
forbiden to be able to do anything unless it's
magically active.
My own view of FAB is that it is a wonderful way to
be able to imprison a mage in a room for a short time
since the mage can't smell the stuff and if it's hidden
in the walls/floor/ceiling makes for a nasty surprise.
As for being able to construct a net like that well I
would be very interested to see how it's done
considering the conditions FAB needs to survive. I
would also like to point out that inorder to use
something like that you would hav to throw it on them
while they are ontop of another living aura. Anything
else and well even by Faux Pas definition they could
sink right through the floor because the net pushes
them down. It would work if they are outside on solid
earth but not very well in the cities.
Even assuming for the sake of argument that a net
made of FAB can be constructed and wrapped around
my mage character well that's fine by me. I having
complete control over the appearance of my Aura
simple change it to that of a fly and fly out through the
gaps in the net. You aren't limited to the appearance
of your MEAT body on the Astral plane. When people
see you they see what you want them to see. When
the ASSENCE you they get the real image of what your
physical body is and what your nature is, such as
were wolf, vampire, Great dragon etc.
I also want to make a comment about things that
have been said in some of the narratives and
examples in soruce books. Don't ever think about
using that stuff as the basis for justifying
rules/actions. I remember in I believe it was
awakenings describing a Detective that was Magically
active who was casing a Shaman's house and noted
that it was astrally secure from astral presences.
Well the description was pretty good about Ivy
covering the walls and such but unless the guy hard
wards over all the doors, windows and chimney it
wasn't secure at all. Might keep out the honest
travellers but not the ones looking for him in
particular. It gets even worse for things like corp
buildings and stuff. How do you prevent roof access
to a building that has air conditiong? Ever been ontop
of a roof for an office building? There are tons of
equipment up there that have straight runs into the
building circumventing any type of protection save
Barrier and Ward spells.
Well I've gotten of the subject so I'll stop now.
Message no. 2
From: Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.net>
Subject: Re: Astral/physical debate -Reply LONG
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 16:21:13 -0500
At 10:01 AM 9/6/96 -0400, you wrote:
[big snips of my stuff I've posted earlier]
>Okay so If I understand the argument so far FAB is
>basically a living thing just like a normal person.

Yes.

> Again True that Auras can't occupy the same point in
>space at the same time (physically or Astrally). I've
>never seen a rule that states this but modern physics
>will tell you that to physical objects can't occupy the
>same space at the same time so not much
>imagination is needed to assume the same for Auras
>since they are "physical" objects on the Astral plane.

This again is true, and for the arguement that "How can something with mass
(the FAB-filled net) affect something without mass (the trapped mage)? Just
a thought..."

The aura affects the aura. As a secondary result, the net hangs in mid-air.
The thing with mass (the net) does NOT affect the thing without mass (the
astral mage).

><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> Okay now here is where I have the problem with the
>Club as a weapon even loaded with FAB. As you and I
>believe several other people have said earlier the
>FAB is just a living organism with an Aura so it has an
>actual presence on the Astral Plane. You are now
>telling me that because of that presence it can be
>used against a mage? Why can't I just use my fist?

Exactly, why not? And you illustrate why the FAB-club shouldn't do any
damage with that question. Because the FAB doesn't have an active astral
presence, it cannot fight or be hurt in any way in astral space [SR2, p147].
This invalidates the 'willpower struggle to see who survives' theory someone
else mentioned. Your fist can't do damage to an astral being, and neither
can FAB.

>It's got an aura same as the FAB only it's attatched to
>a senient creature. Now is where you get into trouble
>because as I recall from SR2 nothing can harm a
>mage from the physical plane unless it is astrally
>active. Spells, spirits, barriers, foci etc... are the only
>things I know of that can be "active" on the astral
>plane.

Yes.

> As to the rest of the comment about direct/inderect
>effect by your reasoning if I fall ontop of a Mage in
>astral space I'll push him to the ground and can
>actually hold onto him by wrapping my arms around
>his aura. Granted I can't see him but my Aura does so
>it's valid.
> Please don't take that the wrong way but the
>argument that you are making the way I see it is that
>anything with an aura can be used against a mage in
>astral space while he on the other hand is strictly
>forbiden to be able to do anything unless it's
>magically active.

That is how the rules are set up. So you're not having tea and no tea at
the same time. You're having tea. :)

[a bit snipped about the limitations of FAB and a FAB Net]
> Even assuming for the sake of argument that a net
>made of FAB can be constructed and wrapped around
>my mage character well that's fine by me. I having
>complete control over the appearance of my Aura
>simple change it to that of a fly and fly out through the
>gaps in the net. You aren't limited to the appearance
>of your MEAT body on the Astral plane. When people
>see you they see what you want them to see. When
>the ASSENCE you they get the real image of what your
>physical body is and what your nature is, such as
>were wolf, vampire, Great dragon etc.

Your astral form appears as an idealized self-image according to p 146 of
the SR2 rule book. You can disguise it by masking. But you can't change
shape and size.

-Thomas Deeny
the Cartoonist at large is on the web at www2.cy-net.net/~fauxpas

"We were told to turn it down, stuff got broken, and everyone got naked. It
was a successful party."
-Marcus "DoubleDaves will have to name one of their stores after me" Drew.
Message no. 3
From: bluewizard@*****.com (Steven A. Tinner)
Subject: Re: Astral/physical debate -Reply LONG
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 22:27:08 -0500 (EST)
>Your astral form appears as an idealized self-image according to p 146 of
>the SR2 rule book. You can disguise it by masking. But you can't change
>shape and size.

That's the way I understand it as well.
Your astral form IMHO is controlled by your subconcious will, not concious
control.
To get Freudian, I suppose astral image is controlled by Id (or is that Ego?
I can never remember?) Whichever one is the subconcious.
Message no. 4
From: The Jestyr <s421539@*******.gu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Astral/physical debate -Reply LONG
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 08:07:04 +1000 (EST)
On Fri, 6 Sep 1996, Jeffrey Riordan wrote:

> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> Okay so If I understand the argument so far FAB is
> basically a living thing just like a normal person. (I
> shudder to think of a magically active bacteria and the
> warped people who would try to teach it to spell cast.
> :)

Aaaagh! I hadn't even THOUGHT of that!

Please, SHHHHHH! My GM reads this list!

<<running for the hills and vowing never to accept a run involving
KE-guarded places>>


Lady Jestyr

------------------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect... in a world full of icebergs
------------------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes s421539@*****.student.gu.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503
------------------------------------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Astral/physical debate LONG, 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.