Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Jason Carter, Nightstalker" <CARTER@***.EDU>
Subject: Barriers
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 19:53:35 CET
The ever-questioning Woodsy Ask:
>>Once created, can a Barrier spell be moved, or reshaped? I cite the example
>>of the bullet-barriered mage on a motorcycle, for a precedent of a moving
>>barrier...
I would agree with the Rat, that a barrier cast on a moving object would move
while one cast at a stationary point or area would stay there. Personal
barriers would always stay with the caster.
Another example of a mobile barrier would be what my GM did the other day. A
group of mages got attacked by a Nomad. They grabbed a convient object, which
happened to be a two-liter soda bottle, tricked the beast into it, and casted a
mana barrier along the outside of it and then quickened it. Wala, a portable
astral prison. Pretty nifty.

See ya in Shadows,
Jason J Carter
The Nightstalker

P.S. For astral shadows read the rules on astral space. They say that you can
see through structures that are not made from unmodified mother earth.
Message no. 2
From: Sandman <SANDSJO2@******.JUNIATA.EDU>
Subject: Barriers
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 22:45:43 -0500
Just a quick note; the lab is closing, so I don't want to put down
all I have to say... :)

On Physical Barrier spell:
>From the description... "Barrier is an area-effect spell in which
the magician forms a force field of crackling energy.... Attacks
directed through a barrier spell have a visibility modifier of -1.
Physical barriers do not impede spells, even manipulation spells."

This is from the SRII rulebook, page 158 under Barrier. (Suprised?)

>From this, I think of a physical barrier spell as not totally invisible.
Otherwise you wouldn't have a point of visibility penalty. So my
guess would be that it might act as partial armor against that laser,
as the barrier is kind of translucent, wavery, something like that,
that would deflect part of the energy of the light beam. And it says
specifically that the barrier does not block any spell _including_
manipulations. As to the gas and normal flame, I would have to think,
although I would probably let the gas in... (hehehehe) Unless of course
the mage wanted to spend the karma to make a varient that didn't let
anything in, gas or otherwise. Then he'd just have to deal with a
limited air supply, no contact with the world outside the barrier (if
it's a surround barrier) because it'll block the air motion that would
carry sound, and perhaps radio waves and the like as well... hmmm...
Of course, he could design a spell to let these through, but he'd have
to think of it first, so he'd probably design a totally blocked shield
first, find the limitations, spend _more_ karma to fix those, find more
limitations... ohhh, my mind is spinning with the possibilities... :)

Gotta go; they'll wonder why I'm still in here after I'm supposed to have
closed the lab... :) Till we speak again.
Sandman

: Jon Sands ^ "You disobeyed my direct order. :
: sandsjo2@******.juniata.edu ^ You placed yourself in grave danger. :
: Snail: 1168 Juniata College ^ I am _not_ happy." :
: Huntingdon, PA 16652 ^ -Capt. Picard, "Interface" :
: **** "He hits and... I think I'm going to need more dice..." **** :
Message no. 3
From: Vincent Pellerin <Vincent.Pellerin@***.GMC.ULAVAL.CA>
Subject: Barriers
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 20:46:03 -0400
The way i think it work..

one or two weeks ago i posted something on barrier explaining
how i thinked they worked. Someone begun the folowing argumentation but
i did'nt respond (like a lot of people now, no time). So this is the
explanation of what i thought (but did not have the time to post.

The original thing i said was : i dont believe the anti-bullet
barrier "recognized" the thing trying to pass as a bullet but worked on an
energy principle, and should call a bullet a small projectile going real
fast. The responce was somethig in the line of "why would the barrier
recognize something by its speed and not by its nature.

The answer is IT DONT RECOGNIZE IT. When i talked of "energy" it
meant that the barrier as physical properties that are stopping bullet but
not melee weapons.

Think about this, a regular physical barrier stop anything physical,
a bullet barrier (or blade) is stopping specific things but have a lesser
drain. So it is logical to assume that the spell is simplier, so why
would it have the capacity to "recognize" objects and "choose" to let
it
pass or not?

Let suppose it change the nature of the air in its area (the area
would be the "wall" of the barrier) and that this zone is betwen 5 and 30
centimeters wide. The properties of the air could become close to some of
some heavy fluid (hight debsity) without changing its weight. A bullet
crossing that zone would suddenly have a great drag on it and be stopped.
But melee weapons would be almost not affected. I dont say that this is the
actual way it work, but this illustrate the way i think it work.

A blade barrier could work on an other principle, maybe the spell link
air molecules in a web with pretty small holes. A sword would be affected but
not a bullet.

This illustrat the way magic work in my mind (yes i know, it is a
pretty
mundane point of view, i am not "awakened" yet :-) ).

Melting bullet This is the kind of barrier i would not use, it is cool
as an effect but I would stipulate that this happen only if the bullet cannot
go throught it.

ex: You have a melting bullet barrier, force 6. A goon shoot you with an
heavy pistol..

Effect one, the bullet is not melted but is really hot, it goes
throught and wound you, you have know some very distracting wound.

Effect two, the bullet is not melted but is really hot and is
stopped by your armor, you know have a hole that is getting bigger and bigger.

Effect three, the bullet is melted, a (about) 100 m/s molten lead
projectile. Whatever surface it will strike it will transform into a small
cloud of molten lead, getting in your face, eyes, on your hands. I believe
this could be a small problem.

***Almost off topic****

Is there some flud mechanics expert here ? For the bullet barrier example a

question crossed my mind, what happen if a bullet strike a surface (let say
of water) with a 90x angle. Is the "interface" betwen the air/water have any
effect ? I mean, is the bullet gonna have another slowing factor beside the
drag of the air and water, something in the line of hydrostatic shock ? Is
the hydrostatic shock only the "shock wave" off the bullet passing throught
the human body or is it create by the interface air/body ?



_________________________________________________________________________
| _____ "You are yong only once....... |
| \ \ / ......... but you can be immature all yourlife !" |
| \ __/ / -heard somewhere, i don't remember |
| \ / |
| \_/ Vincent.Pellerin@***.gmc.ulaval.ca |
|________________________________________________________________________|
Message no. 4
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 13:09:30 +1000
Vincent Pellerin writes:

> The answer is IT DONT RECOGNIZE IT. When i talked of "energy" it
> meant that the barrier as physical properties that are stopping bullet but
> not melee weapons.

This makes perfect sense for a general barrier spell, but I'm not too sure
(I, like you, know very little of fluid mechanics) on your reasoning for the
specific barriers. I can't see how a real, physical barrier, could be made
out of air (literally) which would only stop a particular type of
projectile/attack.

> Think about this, a regular physical barrier stop anything physical,
> a bullet barrier (or blade) is stopping specific things but have a lesser
> drain. So it is logical to assume that the spell is simplier, so why
> would it have the capacity to "recognize" objects and "choose" to
let it
> pass or not?

Well, you could always look at it the other way around. The general barrier
spell has to recognise _everything_ which has a physical presence and stop it
from passing (a pretty broad definition), while the specific barrier spell
has a much easier time of it my only needing to recognise <specific thing>
and stop it from passing (a comparatively simple task).

> [Suggestion for mechanism of Bullet Barrier]

Well, I can't say yay or nay, but a barrier such as that would have effects
on more objects than just bullets I'd imagine. Likewise the idea for a Blade
Barrier (I'd like to see someone drive through that for example, and a car
as not exactly a blade in my books :-)).

> [Melting Bullet Barrier]

Remember that the idea of the spell was to convert the kinetic energy of the
bullet into thermal energy. So if it worked, the bullet would stop dead in
the air and drip down. If it didn't work, you'd be hit with a hot bullet
that had less kinetic energy. It'd probably do about the same damage, so
what'd the concern?

> [Request for fluid mechanics knowledgable person]

Adam? You out there? <grin>

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 5
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 10:46:27 GMT
Damion Milliken writes

> Vincent Pellerin writes:
>

> > Think about this, a regular physical barrier stop anything physical,
> > a bullet barrier (or blade) is stopping specific things but have a lesser
> > drain. So it is logical to assume that the spell is simplier, so why
> > would it have the capacity to "recognize" objects and
"choose" to let it
> > pass or not?
>
> Well, you could always look at it the other way around. The general barrier
> spell has to recognise _everything_ which has a physical presence and stop it
> from passing (a pretty broad definition), while the specific barrier spell
> has a much easier time of it my only needing to recognise <specific thing>
> and stop it from passing (a comparatively simple task).
>
> > [Suggestion for mechanism of Bullet Barrier]
>
> Well, I can't say yay or nay, but a barrier such as that would have effects
> on more objects than just bullets I'd imagine. Likewise the idea for a Blade
> Barrier (I'd like to see someone drive through that for example, and a car
> as not exactly a blade in my books :-)).
>

The answer to how does a barrier recognise a bullet is it's magic and
how SR magic works for you depends on your world view. (FASA stated
that admission in harlequins back) Therefore i would have thought
your 'anti bullet barrier' recognises as a bullet what you have been
condioned by your experiences as a bullet as its your spell and how
it works is determined by your view of the world. Note rules abusers
thats veiw not present opinion or conveniet temporary bending of your
ideas its on the very subconciuos level so pretendings sword=bullet
for a couple of seconds won't trick the multiverse sorry.

> Adam? You out there? <grin>
>
> --
> Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au
>
Mark
Message no. 6
From: Jani Fikouras <feanor@**********.UNI-BREMEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 1995 17:26:18 +0200
> > Think about this, a regular physical barrier stop anything physical,
> > a bullet barrier (or blade) is stopping specific things but have a lesser
> > drain. So it is logical to assume that the spell is simplier, so why
> > would it have the capacity to "recognize" objects and
"choose" to let it
> > pass or not?
>
> Well, you could always look at it the other way around. The general barrier
> spell has to recognise _everything_ which has a physical presence and stop it
> from passing (a pretty broad definition), while the specific barrier spell
> has a much easier time of it my only needing to recognise <specific thing>
> and stop it from passing (a comparatively simple task).

That would be nice :) but generally its the other way around. If you
want to filter certain things you gota check all of them. OTOH leting
everything go through or blocking everything requires no extra overhead
what soever.

--
"Believe in Angels." -- The Crow

GCS d H s+: !g p1 !au a- w+ v-(?) C++++ UA++S++L+$>++++ L+>+++ E--- N+ W(+)(---)
M-- !V(--) -po+(---) Y+ t++ 5++ R+++ tv b++ e+ u++(-) h*(+) f+ r- n!(-) y?
Message no. 7
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 1995 14:13:35 +1000
Jani Fikouras writes:

> That would be nice :) but generally its the other way around. If you
> want to filter certain things you gota check all of them. OTOH leting
> everything go through or blocking everything requires no extra overhead
> what soever.

Yeah, I realised that (forgot the smiley). But there really isn't a decent
way to explain why restricted target spells like Bullet Barrier work. Just
chalk it up to "it's magic - it works" is about as good as it gets sometimes.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 8
From: Robert Watkins <bob@**.NTU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 1995 20:32:22 +0930
Jani Fikouras wrote:
>
> > Well, you could always look at it the other way around. The general barrier
> > spell has to recognise _everything_ which has a physical presence and stop it
> > from passing (a pretty broad definition), while the specific barrier spell
> > has a much easier time of it my only needing to recognise <specific thing>
> > and stop it from passing (a comparatively simple task).
>
> That would be nice :) but generally its the other way around. If you
> want to filter certain things you gota check all of them. OTOH leting
> everything go through or blocking everything requires no extra overhead
> what soever.

Ah, but there's other factors: the difficulty of recognition (will increase
for what you are trying to recognise, will decrease for some other things),
then the difficulty in actually _stopping_ the objects.

--
Robert Watkins bob@**.ntu.edu.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
*** Finger me for my geek code ***
Message no. 9
From: Jani Fikouras <feanor@**********.UNI-BREMEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 1995 17:21:58 +0200
> > That would be nice :) but generally its the other way around. If you
> > want to filter certain things you gota check all of them. OTOH leting
> > everything go through or blocking everything requires no extra overhead
> > what soever.
>
> Yeah, I realised that (forgot the smiley). But there really isn't a decent
> way to explain why restricted target spells like Bullet Barrier work. Just
> chalk it up to "it's magic - it works" is about as good as it gets
sometimes.

The question here is whether such a specialised barrier "works" constantly
or only when the caster percieves the danger himself. If bullets are blocked
only when the spellcaster expects to get shot at then the answer is simple,
and quite frankly I think that this is the only way a spell like this can
make sence.

--
"Believe in Angels." -- The Crow

GCS d H s+: !g p1 !au a- w+ v-(?) C++++ UA++S++L+$>++++ L+>+++ E--- N+ W(+)(---)
M-- !V(--) -po+(---) Y+ t++ 5++ R+++ tv b++ e+ u++(-) h*(+) f+ r- n!(-) y?
Message no. 10
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 17:42:38 +1000
Jani Fikouras writes:

> The question here is whether such a specialised barrier "works"
constantly
> or only when the caster percieves the danger himself. If bullets are blocked
> only when the spellcaster expects to get shot at then the answer is simple,
> and quite frankly I think that this is the only way a spell like this can
> make sence.

Well, someone else (sorry forgot who) mentioned that there is more to
consider than merely recognising the intended object. You have to be able to
block that object too. Blocking a bullet is the same no matter which way you
look at it. Blocking a mac truck, and bullets, and people, and so on is
going to be a little more dificult.

But anyway, that isn't much of an explanation.

So tell me, do "Slay Elf" spells, and "Spirit Bolts" and
"Ram" spells and so
on not work in your games? They all require some sort of selective targeting
on the spells part, yet they all, like the Bullet Barrier, fall under the
Restricted Target modifier and so have _less_ drain than their "kill 'em
all" big brothers. Would you have all these spells have _more_ drain than
the general versions?

And how would you consider personal spells?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 11
From: Jani Fikouras <feanor@**********.UNI-BREMEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 18:47:47 +0200
> > The question here is whether such a specialised barrier "works"
constantly
> > or only when the caster percieves the danger himself. If bullets are blocked
> > only when the spellcaster expects to get shot at then the answer is simple,
> > and quite frankly I think that this is the only way a spell like this can
> > make sence.
>
> Well, someone else (sorry forgot who) mentioned that there is more to
> consider than merely recognising the intended object. You have to be able to
> block that object too. Blocking a bullet is the same no matter which way you
> look at it. Blocking a mac truck, and bullets, and people, and so on is
> going to be a little more dificult.
>
> But anyway, that isn't much of an explanation.
>
> So tell me, do "Slay Elf" spells, and "Spirit Bolts" and
"Ram" spells and so
> on not work in your games? They all require some sort of selective targeting
> on the spells part, yet they all, like the Bullet Barrier, fall under the
> Restricted Target modifier and so have _less_ drain than their "kill 'em
> all" big brothers. Would you have all these spells have _more_ drain than
> the general versions?
>
> And how would you consider personal spells?

Well I thought that you of all people would know better than to outright
provoke another WYTIWYG-fest :) So here we go again Damion!
What I meant in my original post was that it's all in the eye of the
beholder, in more than one ways. Bullet barriers would work for things
that the caster believes are bullets - this would make them useless
when the caster himself is not aware of the danger. And slay something
spells would be just an outright case of WYTIWYG, where the phycological
makeup of the character affects the way he molds magic. To make this
clearer consider the motives of someone learning a specialised attack
spell. Such a person definitely has something against the race/creature
in question so he unconciously fuels his magic with this latent/not-so-latent
hatred.

--
"Believe in Angels." -- The Crow

GCS d H s+: !g p1 !au a- w+ v-(?) C++++ UA++S++L+$>++++ L+>+++ E--- N+ W(+)(---)
M-- !V(--) -po+(---) Y+ t++ 5++ R+++ tv b++ e+ u++(-) h*(+) f+ r- n!(-) y?
Message no. 12
From: Philip Hayward <Philip.Hayward@***.UK>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Tue, 2 May 1995 13:20:53 +6000
Jani wrote:
> Well I thought that you of all people would know better than to outright
> provoke another WYTIWYG-fest :) So here we go again Damion!
Again? there are so many variations on WYTIWYG its a case of WYTIWYG :)

> What I meant in my original post was that it's all in the eye of the
> beholder, in more than one ways. Bullet barriers would work for things
> that the caster believes are bullets - this would make them useless

Should the drain remain the same for a a person who thinks of only standard
bullets as 'bullets' with little or no deviation, and another who believes
shells, grenades, sling-shot all to be 'bullets' as well? In some cases
we have spells with varying drain due to totem modifier. Illusions come
much more naturally to a Cat shaman hence his totem dice, its really the
same thing, but how far should we take it? do you have to be in LOS of the
barrier to sustain it? No. so do you mean its useless when the mage doesn't
see the bullets - I don't think so, or its useless when the mage doesn't
see the danger that a variation might cause like sling shots

> when the caster himself is not aware of the danger. And slay something
> spells would be just an outright case of WYTIWYG, where the phycological
> makeup of the character affects the way he molds magic. To make this
> clearer consider the motives of someone learning a specialised attack
> spell. Such a person definitely has something against the race/creature
> in question so he unconciously fuels his magic with this latent/not-so-latent
> hatred.

The hatred goes into his/her choice of wanting that spell, does it alter
the effect of the spell itself? not really, unless your saying that a
slay elf spell works on everything the elf-hater hates/considers to be
an elf - this is reasonable though it could be extended to include
elf-wannabees who imitate and try to become as elvish as possible if
they too are the object of this persons hatred of elves?

I'm beginning to ramble so I'll stop here.

Phil
<Philip.Hayward@***.uk>
Message no. 13
From: Jani Fikouras <feanor@**********.UNI-BREMEN.DE>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 11:33:25 +0200
> > Well I thought that you of all people would know better than to outright
> > provoke another WYTIWYG-fest :) So here we go again Damion!
> Again? there are so many variations on WYTIWYG its a case of WYTIWYG :)
>
> > What I meant in my original post was that it's all in the eye of the
> > beholder, in more than one ways. Bullet barriers would work for things
> > that the caster believes are bullets - this would make them useless
>
> Should the drain remain the same for a a person who thinks of only standard
> bullets as 'bullets' with little or no deviation, and another who believes
> shells, grenades, sling-shot all to be 'bullets' as well?

Sure one could use this logic to change a lot of things, but I dont think
that its in the spirit of SR. I think that the drain codes are fine as they
are.

> In some cases
> we have spells with varying drain due to totem modifier. Illusions come
> much more naturally to a Cat shaman hence his totem dice, its really the
> same thing, but how far should we take it? do you have to be in LOS of the
> barrier to sustain it? No. so do you mean its useless when the mage doesn't
> see the bullets - I don't think so, or its useless when the mage doesn't
> see the danger that a variation might cause like sling shots

I agree that this would make them prety useless as full time spells,
OTOH there are always anchorings. I think that this is the main aplication
of spells like that.

> > when the caster himself is not aware of the danger. And slay something
> > spells would be just an outright case of WYTIWYG, where the phycological
> > makeup of the character affects the way he molds magic. To make this
> > clearer consider the motives of someone learning a specialised attack
> > spell. Such a person definitely has something against the race/creature
> > in question so he unconciously fuels his magic with this latent/not-so-latent
> > hatred.
>
> The hatred goes into his/her choice of wanting that spell, does it alter
> the effect of the spell itself? not really, unless your saying that a
> slay elf spell works on everything the elf-hater hates/considers to be
> an elf - this is reasonable though it could be extended to include
> elf-wannabees who imitate and try to become as elvish as possible if
> they too are the object of this persons hatred of elves?

Thats exactly waht I mean, and I am fully aware that this could
be used for munchkin purposes. But I feel that the GM can stop such attempts
after all he is the one that feeds info to the players so he shoul know
what goes on in their heads.

--
"Believe in Angels." -- The Crow

GCS d H s+: !g p1 !au a- w+ v-(?) C++++ UA++S++L+$>++++ L+>+++ E--- N+ W(+)(---)
M-- !V(--) -po+(---) Y+ t++ 5++ R+++ tv b++ e+ u++(-) h*(+) f+ r- n!(-) y?
Message no. 14
From: WILLIAM FRIERSON <will1am@*****.ASU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 1995 04:11:41 -0700
Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK (Paul Jonathan Adam) wrote:

>Actually, shaped charges can be quite marginal on tanks. There are many cases
>from World War 2 and the Middle East where tanks were hit by HEAT rounds and
>didn't notice! The crew didn't notice until they saw the hole in the turret:
>thought it was just something ricocheting off the hull. The way to make them
>more effective is to use a wider "jet" of plasma, but this pierces less
>armour. You trade off drilling a hole in the armour against inflicting damage
>when you get to the other side.

Some of the newer missiles (the BILL) have warheads that are angled downward
and are designed to attack the top of the vehicle, where the armor is
typically thin (I know that an M-60a3 turret roof is only about an inch
or so). And some of the artillery rounds have been designed to shoot down
into the top of the tanks. These were designed because of the numerical
superiority that Soviet/WP armies enjoyed during the Cold War.

>Russian tanks and APCs, by the way, have very exposed fuel and ammo storage
>compared to Western vehicles: it reduces bulk and makes the tank smaller
>and faster, so less likely to be hit. The downside is that hits which would
>barely register on a Challenger, Abrams or Merkava blow the turret off a
>T-72 when the ammo cooks off in the racks.

There was an episode of Wings on missiles. They showed a cook off after a
TOW hit a radio-controlled tank/target. The _jet_ of flame blew the turret
up and out. I'm glad I wasn't a tanker. They try to instill a sense of
invulnerability in tankers, so for the most part, they drive and position
themselves in the open. I _knew_ my APC was weak, so I hid and always parked
well back from the tree line. I think that after training at NTC, tankers
get the message.

>One point from my Army training: anti-tank weapons are not much use on
>buildings, especially houses: they make a small hole in the brick and
>anything directly behind it, but that's all. Against bunkers they are
>very useful provided you can hit the firing slit.

The French have the ERIX missile, which can be fired from inside a room or
bunker, with no backblast. It uses a ballast system, expelling plastic
pellets instead of exhaust gases. I don't know how effective it is.

>The Russians have two warheads for their newest missile, the Kornet, for
>just this reason: a HEAT warhead for vehicles, and a "thermobaric" (probably
>fuel-air explosive) warhead for use on structures, trenches et cetera.

Pretty nasty. FAE warheads are bad news. Against most other explosives,
bunkers and entrenchments provide pretty good cover (excepting delay fused
artillery and the like). FAE mists a heavier-than-air explosive into the
air and is then detonated by a explosive primer. Some have said that FAE
coupled with precision guidance have made the nuke obsolete. Unfortunately,
there are a lot of people who would rather have nuclear warheads.

The TOW II has two shaped charges, to combat reactive armor. It's supposed
to work really well. Where did you here about the Kornet? I'm afraid I
haven't been keeping up. Do you have any pointers so those of us inclined
to can keep current?

Later

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Frierson Internet: WILL1AM@*****.asu.edu
Message no. 15
From: scarterjw@****.tristate.edu
Subject: Barriers
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:55:24 -0500
One thing about barrier spells:

Someone said that barriers go "into the ground" when cast.
A barrier is a manipulation spell, and therefore going through a
solid object, such as your basic ground, is impossible. I would
guess that the barrier just stops when it touches the ground: a
sphere when cast becomes a dome when it reaches the floor.
Therefore, a barrier cast in midair, assuming you allow
such things, would be a sphere, if it is cast that way.

I could be wrong, but that's how I interpret manipulation
spells.

/=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\
| John W. Carter |Janice: You had a brother who was a |
| SCarterJW@****.tristate.edu | comedian? |
|-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|Dr. Bob: Yes, but that was before he fell |
| Card-carrying member of: | into a vat of molten optical |
| The Reptile Sucks | glass. |
| Fan Club |Janice: What did he do? |
| (UMK3: More than a game... |Dr. Bob: He made a spectacle of himself! |
| ...it's a way of life) |-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
| | Home: http://www.tristate.edu:8080/carter |
\=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/
Message no. 16
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 12:31:33 -0700 (MST)
scarterjw@****.tristate.edu writes:
|
| Someone said that barriers go "into the ground" when cast.
|A barrier is a manipulation spell, and therefore going through a
|solid object, such as your basic ground, is impossible. I would
|guess that the barrier just stops when it touches the ground: a
|sphere when cast becomes a dome when it reaches the floor.
| Therefore, a barrier cast in midair, assuming you allow
|such things, would be a sphere, if it is cast that way.
|
| I could be wrong, but that's how I interpret manipulation
|spells.

Hey!...that's to easy! Are you playing ShadowRun or not? ;)

Seriously though, I agree with that. However, does a barrier readjust its
shape if you move through varrying terrain (assuming you can move a
barrier). Example, a mage casts a barrier around himself while backed up
against a wall. If he moves away from the wall does the barrier change into
a dome or does it stay a quarter sphere.

David

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Buehrer
Data Entry Supervisor
The UnCover Company email: dbuehrer@****.org
3801 E. Florida, Suite 200 Voice: (303) 758-3030 x132
Denver, CO 80210 FAX: (303) 758-5946

"The land that had nourished him and had borne him fruit now turned against
him and called him a fruit. Man, I hate land like that."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 17
From: U-Gene <R3STG@***.CC.UAKRON.EDU>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 15:55:55 EST
David Buehrer:
>does a barrier readjust its shape if you move through varrying terrain
>(assuming you can move the barrier). Example, a mage cast barrier around
>himself while backed up against a wall. If he moves away from the wall
>does the barrier change into a dome or does it stay a quarter sphere.

Sheesh, where do you get these questions? :)

Well at first I thought it would probably stay a quarter barrier because
you can't change a sustained spell, you would have to recast it.

Then I thought "well if you can't change the barrier to the terrain, it
would be very difficult to move because the bottom edge of the sphere
would keep you from going over small bumps and objects and curbs.
Even a small grade change may cause a the edge of the sphere to "catch" and
keep you from moving.

Hmmmm...... Ummmmmm....... hmmmmmm.... ummmmmm....

Gee, you got me stumped. I hate it when these questions come up during
game time.

I would say that it would keep its original shape since that keeps with
the rules mostly. It would probably "glide" over most grade changes,
but the mage might have to "hop" to get the barrier over lets say
a street curb for example.

U-Gene << magic no good. magic bad. very bad. >>
Message no. 18
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 07:49:11 -0700 (MST)
U-Gene writes:
|
|David Buehrer:
|>does a barrier readjust its shape if you move through varrying terrain
|>(assuming you can move the barrier). Example, a mage cast barrier around
|>himself while backed up against a wall. If he moves away from the wall
|>does the barrier change into a dome or does it stay a quarter sphere.
|
|Sheesh, where do you get these questions? :)

Sorry, I've been reading a lot of Hillerman lately and it's got me in a
questioning mood :)

|I would say that it would keep its original shape since that keeps with
|the rules mostly. It would probably "glide" over most grade changes,
|but the mage might have to "hop" to get the barrier over lets say
|a street curb for example.

"Today, my young apprentice, I am going to teach you the `bunny hop'."
:-D

Sounds good. I'll try it and see what happens. Thanks.

|U-Gene << magic no good. magic bad. very bad. >>

David <<magic nah ool. magic pooka. aheeee!>>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Buehrer
Data Entry Supervisor
The UnCover Company email: dbuehrer@****.org
3801 E. Florida, Suite 200 Voice: (303) 758-3030 x132
Denver, CO 80210 FAX: (303) 758-5946

"Whenever I hear the sparrow chirping, watch the woodpecker chirp, catch a
chirping trout, or listen to the sad howl of the chirp rat, I think: Oh
boy! I'm going insane again."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 19
From: Wolfchild <nathan.olsen@*******.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 10:17:51 -0500
about a couple years ago i was playing under a new gm who threw the
gm-wants-you-to-fail-so-here-comes-the-ork-shaman-with-a-magic-rating-
of-20-and-throwing-force-20-spells at us. i remember thinking later that
my character *could* have penetrated that force 20 barrier that he put up
with my sniper rifle using APDS and thus foiled his plans. this is of
course assuming i rolled really well and the shaman didn't whip out the
force 20 heal spell. (the gm was ignoring drain for that encounter btw)

ok, now the question. do magical barriers work the same as normal
barriers when dealing with armor-piercing ammo?

Wolfchild
--
+ . . . ' . . . There are nights when the
` . .` : ' . + wolves are silent
+ . . . , , . And only the moon howls.
. + . ` .'"'`'. .
. - ,; .' _, `, ._ - . E-MAIL
/, _d' "\.: )'' ; /`k. + ZOMBIE@****.mankato.msus.edu
6;`\,dF' \. / | ,-;. ;Rb._,/ ZOMBIE@****.mankato.msus.edu
':;jGF7 , ,_f_)\-./ .TQhx.,
;`TZ' j4. `b. ,qNBk. ON THE WWW
.f' ,6RWb`, .,j,y;fg_. `;q/ http://vax1.mankato.msus.edu/~
' '7p9TFGb\;dk.`~.,jPk9,'itz zombie/lynx.htm
Message no. 20
From: Randy Nickel <RANNIC@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 09:47:28 -0700
Wolfchild wrote:

>ok, now the question. do magical barriers work the same as normal
>barriers when dealing with armor-piercing ammo?

I asked a very similar question a while ago.

The barrier spells are treated just like barriers. Now, I don't have the
rules on me right now, but I believe that APDS has little effect on
barriers. That it will halve the protection that is give to anyone
behind the barrier, but that you will not blow a very big hole through
it. Explosive rounds are what you want to use to blow a hole a barrier.

So if you were trying to shoot the initiate 20 behind a barrier that was
also rating 20 with a Barret Sniper Rifle. The mage would only have a
protection of 10 from the barrier. Also, your target number is one
higher. Still, the Barret would actually stand a chance of hurting him.

But it sounds like your GM would have had this mage also wearing 5/3
armor (if not higher) and even though the ballistic rating would be
halved also, it would still give the Ork a very good chance of resisting
damage.

BTW, isn't the target number for a barrier spell the rating of the
spell, or is it just "6"? I don't recall and I don't have any of my
books here at work.

Otter
Message no. 21
From: Dan Gelinske <dunkelzahn@*********.COM>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 09:43:22 -0700
<snip talk about apds and barriers>
> BTW, isn't the target number for a barrier spell the rating of the
> spell, or is it just "6"? I don't recall and I don't have any of my
> books here at work.

It's just 6.

-Nebiru
"good? bad? I'm the guy with the gun."
-From Army of Darkness
Message no. 22
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 20:40:54 +0100
Randy Nickel said on 9:47/1 Jul 98,...

> BTW, isn't the target number for a barrier spell the rating of the
> spell, or is it just "6"? I don't recall and I don't have any of my
> books here at work.

It's a straight 6 for any type of barrier. Making it equal to the
rating of the barrier isn't a very handy thing to do, as that equals
the spell Force -- IOW you'd have to roll (Force) dice against a TN
of (Force)...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Could you ever be alone?
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> 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. 23
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 20:40:54 +0100
Wolfchild said on 10:17/1 Jul 98,...

> ok, now the question. do magical barriers work the same as normal
> barriers when dealing with armor-piercing ammo?

I'd say no. In my game, a bullet is a bullet to a magical barrier,
regardless of whether it's an 18.5 mm shotgun slug at 200 m/s or
a 4 mm APDS penetrator at 1500 m/s, so the barrier would use
its full rating against either of them.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Could you ever be alone?
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> 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. 24
From: Randy Nickel <RANNIC@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 11:52:34 -0700
Gurth wrote:

>It's a straight 6 for any type of barrier. Making it equal to the
>rating of the barrier isn't a very handy thing to do, as that equals
>the spell Force -- IOW you'd have to roll (Force) dice against a TN
>of (Force)...

Hmm....maybe that was 1st edition?!? Or maybe I'm just getting too old
and losing my edge....

Naaahhh.......

Otter
Message no. 25
From: Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Barriers
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 14:25:45 -0500
On Wed, 1 Jul 1998 20:40:54 +0100 Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:
>Wolfchild said on 10:17/1 Jul 98,...
>> ok, now the question. do magical barriers work the same as normal
>> barriers when dealing with armor-piercing ammo?

>I'd say no. In my game, a bullet is a bullet to a magical barrier,
>regardless of whether it's an 18.5 mm shotgun slug at 200 m/s or
>a 4 mm APDS penetrator at 1500 m/s, so the barrier would use
>its full rating against either of them.
>
>--
>Gurth@******.nl -
<SNIP Sig>

Hmmm ... I would say that depends on whether the barrier magically
creates a barrier or it creates a barrier-like magical effect ... in the
first case I'd say APDS aplies and in the second I'd say no or maybe ...
:/

D.Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, and RuPixel)
"Let he who is without SIN cast the first stone"

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Barriers, 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!