Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shirogr@*****.com (Shiro BsquLadat)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 15:42:05 -0700 (PDT)
help me out a little here.
Lets say that a character receives a deadly wound and
someone uses biotech to stabilize him.Can another one
aply magical healing to him to farther reduce the
damage and if not, after how much time can a healing
spell be aplied?If the answer is in a book please tell
me the number of the page.


====

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Message no. 2
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:58:03 +0200
According to Shiro BsquLadat, on Sunday 17 August 2003 00:42 the word on
the street was...

> Lets say that a character receives a deadly wound and
> someone uses biotech to stabilize him.Can another one
> aply magical healing to him to farther reduce the
> damage

Yes. You can't do it the other way around, though: if the victim is first
the subject of a magical healing attempt (regardless of whether it
succeeds or fails), you can't then apply first aid to reduce the wound
further.

> and if not, after how much time can a healing
> spell be aplied?

Treat must be used within an hour of the wound being inflicted, Heal can be
applied at any time.

> If the answer is in a book please tell me the number of the page.

Pages 193-194 of the SR3 main rules tell you all you need to know about the
Heal and Treat spells, while page 129 has the rules for first aid,
including the line "Biotech cannot help once magical healing has been
applied."

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Don't you know you know what's right?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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: baishen@**********.com (Bai Shen)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 18:51:43 -0400
>
>
>>Lets say that a character receives a deadly wound and
>>someone uses biotech to stabilize him.Can another one
>>aply magical healing to him to farther reduce the
>>damage
>>
>
>Yes. You can't do it the other way around, though: if the victim is first
>the subject of a magical healing attempt (regardless of whether it
>succeeds or fails), you can't then apply first aid to reduce the wound
>further.
>
Is there any particular in game reason for this? It also seems kinda
silly from a rules POV.

Bai Shen
Message no. 4
From: mattgbond@********.com (Matthew Bond)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:46:19 +0100
Bai Shen wrote:
>>> Lets say that a character receives a deadly wound and
>>> someone uses biotech to stabilize him.Can another one
>>> aply magical healing to him to farther reduce the
>>> damage
>>>
>>
>> Yes. You can't do it the other way around, though: if the victim is
>> first the subject of a magical healing attempt (regardless of
>> whether it succeeds or fails), you can't then apply first aid to
>> reduce the wound further.
>>
> Is there any particular in game reason for this? It also seems kinda
> silly from a rules POV.

Because the magical healing will automatically fix anything that first
aid would be able to treat, but if first aid has already been done then
magic can still heal remaining damage that first aid was unable to fix.
So you can first aid then apply magic, but not the other way round.

First aid can reset dislocated joints, relieve sucking chest wounds,
straighten fractures for splinting etc but doesn't actually repair
damage. Magic does all that and actually starts repairing the damage
too. So once you have been magically treated further first aid would be
of no real use.

Matt


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 12/08/2003
Message no. 5
From: baishen@**********.com (Bai Shen)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:10:56 -0400
>
>
>>Is there any particular in game reason for this? It also seems kinda
>>silly from a rules POV.
>>
>Because the magical healing will automatically fix anything that first
>aid would be able to treat, but if first aid has already been done then
>magic can still heal remaining damage that first aid was unable to fix.
>So you can first aid then apply magic, but not the other way round.
>
>First aid can reset dislocated joints, relieve sucking chest wounds,
>straighten fractures for splinting etc but doesn't actually repair
>damage. Magic does all that and actually starts repairing the damage
>too. So once you have been magically treated further first aid would be
>of no real use.
>
Ah, okay. So the only way to medically heal boxes is with a doctor at a
clinic?

Bai Shen
Message no. 6
From: mattgbond@********.com (Matthew Bond)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 03:39:10 +0100
Bai Shen wrote:
>>> Is there any particular in game reason for this? It also seems
>>> kinda silly from a rules POV.
>>>
>> Because the magical healing will automatically fix anything that
>> first aid would be able to treat, but if first aid has already been
>> done then magic can still heal remaining damage that first aid was
>> unable to fix. So you can first aid then apply magic, but not the
>> other way round.
>>
>> First aid can reset dislocated joints, relieve sucking chest wounds,
>> straighten fractures for splinting etc but doesn't actually repair
>> damage. Magic does all that and actually starts repairing the damage
>> too. So once you have been magically treated further first aid would
>> be of no real use.
>>
> Ah, okay. So the only way to medically heal boxes is with a doctor
> at a clinic?

Or just getting bed rest if you make your body test... It's all pretty
clearly explained on p126-129 of SR3.

And the person who said you can't use biotech after a failed use of
magic is wrong. Biotech can only not be used after a successful use of
magical healing.

Matt


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 12/08/2003
Message no. 7
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 10:41:41 +0200
According to Matthew Bond, on Monday 18 August 2003 04:39 the word on the
street was...

> And the person who said you can't use biotech after a failed use of
> magic is wrong. Biotech can only not be used after a successful use of
> magical healing.

In SR3, it says that "Regardless of its success (...) once magical healing
has been APPLIED" (my emphasis), you can't use Biotech anymore -- this is
in the last sentence of the second paragraph (not counting the header
"Using Biotech") on page 129 of the SR3 main rulebook.

Which means that it doesn't matter if you succeed or fail at casting that
Treat spell, normal first aid has become impossible.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Don't you know you know what's right?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 8
From: mattgbond@********.com (Matthew Bond)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 12:41:10 +0100
Gurth wrote:
> According to Matthew Bond, on Monday 18 August 2003 04:39 the word on
> the
> street was...
>
>> And the person who said you can't use biotech after a failed use of
>> magic is wrong. Biotech can only not be used after a successful use
>> of magical healing.
>
> In SR3, it says that "Regardless of its success (...) once magical
> healing
> has been APPLIED" (my emphasis), you can't use Biotech anymore --
> this is
> in the last sentence of the second paragraph (not counting the header
> "Using Biotech") on page 129 of the SR3 main rulebook.
>
> Which means that it doesn't matter if you succeed or fail at casting
> that
> Treat spell, normal first aid has become impossible.

Ahh, yes, your right it does say that on p.129... I was reading the
section on p.127 where under Magical Healing it says "Successful use of
either spell precludes the use of additional healing or treating spells,
or of first aid"

I guess that boils down to if you fail magical healing you can't use
first aid but can still try another spell. Once you succeed in magical
healing you can't do anything afterwards but natural healing through
time.

Matt


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 12/08/2003
Message no. 9
From: iridios@********.net (Iridios)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 20:43:14 -0400
Gurth wrote:
> According to Matthew Bond, on Monday 18 August 2003 04:39 the word on the
> street was...
>
>
>>And the person who said you can't use biotech after a failed use of
>>magic is wrong. Biotech can only not be used after a successful use of
>>magical healing.
>
>
> In SR3, it says that "Regardless of its success (...) once magical healing
> has been APPLIED" (my emphasis), you can't use Biotech anymore -- this is
> in the last sentence of the second paragraph (not counting the header
> "Using Biotech") on page 129 of the SR3 main rulebook.
>
> Which means that it doesn't matter if you succeed or fail at casting that
> Treat spell, normal first aid has become impossible.

The full rule is "Regardless of it's success, BIOTECH CANNOT HELP
(emphasis mine) once magical healing has been applied."

The word "it's" in the above sentence is referring to Biotech, not
magic, because the subject of the paragraph (and the section) is the
Biotech skill.

In other words, no matter how well the Biotech skill is applied, it
cannot stabilize a patient that has been stabilized by magic
(Heal/Treat).

It also uses the phrase "once magical HEALING (emph mine) has been
applied." This suggests that it covers the application of healing,
not the casting of the spell.


--
Iridios / http://iridios.bravepages.com

Top ten reasons to visit my new site:
10. Because I said so.
------------------------------------------------------
GCC0.3: y69>?.us[PA] G89 SCP/F/PA:@@[SR] B+>++ f@*
RR rm= rr+ l- m=>- w--->= s=>*:= GM+:+(=):=[PF] hp!>+ LA= mf+ W+ C--(+) CG-
OG+ F= c->= K=(?)
------------------------------------------------------
This email has been verified by no one.
8/18/03
Message no. 10
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:01:37 +0200
According to Iridios, on Tuesday 19 August 2003 02:43 the word on the
street was...

> The full rule is "Regardless of it's success, BIOTECH CANNOT HELP
> (emphasis mine) once magical healing has been applied."

Which, as I recall, I quoted verbatim in my original post on this
subject...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Don't you know you know what's right?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 11
From: davidb@****.imcprint.com (Graht)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 08:21:46 -0600
At 08:43 PM 8/18/2003 -0400, Iridios wrote:
>Gurth wrote:
>>According to Matthew Bond, on Monday 18 August 2003 04:39 the word on the
>>street was...
>>
>>>And the person who said you can't use biotech after a failed use of
>>>magic is wrong. Biotech can only not be used after a successful use of
>>>magical healing.
>>
>>In SR3, it says that "Regardless of its success (...) once magical
>>healing has been APPLIED" (my emphasis), you can't use Biotech anymore --
>>this is in the last sentence of the second paragraph (not counting the
>>header "Using Biotech") on page 129 of the SR3 main rulebook.
>>Which means that it doesn't matter if you succeed or fail at casting that
>>Treat spell, normal first aid has become impossible.
>
>The full rule is "Regardless of it's success, BIOTECH CANNOT HELP
>(emphasis mine) once magical healing has been applied."
>
>The word "it's" in the above sentence is referring to Biotech, not magic,
>because the subject of the paragraph (and the section) is the Biotech skill.

Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a contraction of
"it is", making the sentence "Regardless of it is success, biotech cannot
help once magical healing has been applied." which of course doesn't make
any sense. However, this *is* indicative of the fact that I'm silly ;)

>In other words, no matter how well the Biotech skill is applied, it cannot
>stabilize a patient that has been stabilized by magic (Heal/Treat).

"help" and "applied" = "stabilized"?

>It also uses the phrase "once magical HEALING (emph mine) has been
>applied." This suggests that it covers the application of healing, not
>the casting of the spell.

Except that the world "magical" refers to magic. I.e., casting spells
and/or using magic.

--
To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
http://www.graht.com
Message no. 12
From: nightgyr@*********.com.au (GreyWolf)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 09:37:27 +1000
> I guess that boils down to if you fail magical healing you can't use
> first aid but can still try another spell. Once you succeed in magical
> healing you can't do anything afterwards but natural healing through
> time.

Hey "why not weigh in" I thought... might be a bad idea, oh well do it
anyway...

I treat the situation thusly:

1) Person gets hurt by X means for X damage. Assume its a deadly wound, but
other than this all wounds are treated the same - except deadly (or greater)
wounds require stabilisation.

2) Person can accept first aid if available.

3) Person requires second aid skill use (aka paramedic, aka biotech/trauma
specialisation) to stabilise if required if not doing so naturally. Magic
will not stabilise you (by itself) from the damage from deadly wounds unless
it gets you to moderate or less. I think there is a specific spell in MitS
which does this though. (anyone?)

4) person can accept magical healing spells if first aid is not available or
after first aid/second aid is done if available (and they want it to work).

5) After magical healing is applied first and second aid will no longer
work - you need bed rest and/or surgery.

6) after magical healing is successful no other magical healing will work
either. (Heal and treat spells only) - unless other wounds are sustained
which can then be treated using magic again as per the full list here.

7) If youre still unstabilised after healing and you still cant succeed the
natural rolls with the reduced TN due to beaing healthier, then you require
surgery to fix you up. this is treated as emergency surgery as per M&M.

Comments, questions, anyone?

GreyWolf
Message no. 13
From: maxnoel_fr@*****.fr (Max Noel)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 02:24:39 +0200
GreyWolf wrote :

>
> 3) Person requires second aid skill use (aka paramedic, aka
> biotech/trauma
> specialisation) to stabilise if required if not doing so naturally.
> Magic
> will not stabilise you (by itself) from the damage from deadly wounds
> unless
> it gets you to moderate or less. I think there is a specific spell in
> MitS
> which does this though. (anyone?)

The spell is called Stabilize, and can be found in the SR3 core
rulebook. In order for it to succeed, it must be cast at a power equal
to or greater than the number of overflow damage boxes the target has
taken. However, if it's successful it will prevent the target from
dying. It doesn't heal any damage but stops the "suffer 1 additional
damage box every (Body) turns when you're at Deadly or worse" mechanism.

> 6) after magical healing is successful no other magical healing will
> work
> either. (Heal and treat spells only) - unless other wounds are
> sustained
> which can then be treated using magic again as per the full list here.

One important point people (read: munchkins ;) ) often forget is that
a particular set of wounds can only be healed once. i.e. if you suffer
S damage, are healed back to M, and cut yourself with a knife (thus
taking additional L damage -- 4 boxes total), no matter how much
successes a mage then trying to heal you will score, he won't be able
to heal more than 1 box of damage.

-- Wild_Cat
maxnoel_fr@*****.fr -- ICQ #85274019
"Look at you hacker... A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting
and sweating as you run through my corridors... How can you challenge a
perfect, immortal machine?"
Message no. 14
From: iridios@********.net (Iridios)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 20:31:36 -0400
Gurth wrote:
> According to Iridios, on Tuesday 19 August 2003 02:43 the word on the
> street was...
>
>
>>The full rule is "Regardless of it's success, BIOTECH CANNOT HELP
>>(emphasis mine) once magical healing has been applied."
>
>
> Which, as I recall, I quoted verbatim in my original post on this
> subject...
>

In your original post I saw the following:

<cut'n'paste>
In SR3, it says that "Regardless of its success (...) once magical
healing has been APPLIED" (my emphasis), you can't use Biotech
anymore -- this is in the last sentence of the second paragraph (not
counting the header "Using Biotech") on page 129 of the SR3 main
rulebook.
</cut'n'paste>

The (...) is not part of the rule and it replaced the words that I
emphasized which changed the apparent meaning of the rule.

--
Iridios / http://iridios.bravepages.com

Top ten reasons to visit my new site:
2. Because I've run out of reasons.
------------------------------------------------------
GCC0.3: y69>?.us[PA] G89 SCP/F/PA:@@[SR] B+>++ f@*
RR rm= rr+ l- m=>- w--->= s=>*:= GM+:+(=):=[PF] hp!>+ LA= mf+ W+ C--(+) CG-
OG+ F= c->= K=(?)
------------------------------------------------------
This email has been verified by no one.
8/19/03
Message no. 15
From: iridios@********.net (Iridios)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 20:39:40 -0400
Graht wrote:
> At 08:43 PM 8/18/2003 -0400, Iridios wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> The full rule is "Regardless of it's success, BIOTECH CANNOT HELP
>> (emphasis mine) once magical healing has been applied."
>>
>> The word "it's" in the above sentence is referring to Biotech, not
>> magic, because the subject of the paragraph (and the section) is the
>> Biotech skill.
>
>
> Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a contraction
> of "it is", making the sentence "Regardless of it is success, biotech
> cannot help once magical healing has been applied." which of course
> doesn't make any sense. However, this *is* indicative of the fact that
> I'm silly ;)

Yeah. Well... That whole it's/its thing is a continuing problem of
mine.

>
>> In other words, no matter how well the Biotech skill is applied, it
>> cannot stabilize a patient that has been stabilized by magic
>> (Heal/Treat).
>
>
> "help" and "applied" = "stabilized"?

The whole section refers to biotech reducing L/M/S damage or
stabilizing a patient with deadly damage. I just used the
stabilization reference.

>
>> It also uses the phrase "once magical HEALING (emph mine) has been
>> applied." This suggests that it covers the application of healing,
>> not the casting of the spell.
>
>
> Except that the world "magical" refers to magic. I.e., casting spells
> and/or using magic.

"Magical" refers to the source of the healing, not the act of
healing. You could leave the word magical out of the sentence
without disrupting the meaning of the sentence.

Think of it this way. After a doctor treats his patient in a
hospital, will biotech help the patient heal anymore? Then healing
from any source will generally make further use of biotech unnecessary.



--
Iridios / http://iridios.bravepages.com

Top ten reasons to visit my new site:
9. Because it's there.
------------------------------------------------------
GCC0.3: y69>?.us[PA] G89 SCP/F/PA:@@[SR] B+>++ f@*
RR rm= rr+ l- m=>- w--->= s=>*:= GM+:+(=):=[PF] hp!>+ LA= mf+ W+ C--(+) CG-
OG+ F= c->= K=(?)
------------------------------------------------------
This email has been verified by no one.
8/19/03
Message no. 16
From: wraith@************.com (Maelwys)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 11:07:28 -0500
> -----Original Message-----
> To: Shadowrun Discussion
> Subject: Re: biotech and magical healing
>
>
> Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a
> contraction of
> "it is", making the sentence "Regardless of it is success,
> biotech cannot
> help once magical healing has been applied." which of course
> doesn't make
> any sense. However, this *is* indicative of the fact that
> I'm silly ;)


Oh, just because I can...

When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
(The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and "It
is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
"Graht's" or "It's". In the case above, "it's" is a
possessive form of it.
It refers to the magical healing, possessing the successes. So the sentence
is correct as it stands.
Message no. 17
From: swheelock@******.com (Scott W)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 13:13:01 -0300
>Oh, just because I can...
>
>When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
>(The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and "It
>is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
>"Graht's" or "It's". In the case above, "it's" is a
possessive form of it.
>It refers to the magical healing, possessing the successes. So the sentence
>is correct as it stands.

Unless there's some crazy grammar rule I don't know, "its" is the
possessive, all the time. The lion has a carcass; It's its carcass.


-Boondocker
Message no. 18
From: trunks@********.org (kawaii)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 12:28:28 -0400
From: "Maelwys" <wraith@************.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 12:07


> > -----Original Message-----
> > To: Shadowrun Discussion
> > Subject: Re: biotech and magical healing
> >
> >
> > Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a
> > contraction of
> > "it is", making the sentence "Regardless of it is success,
> > biotech cannot
> > help once magical healing has been applied." which of course
> > doesn't make
> > any sense. However, this *is* indicative of the fact that
> > I'm silly ;)
>
>
> Oh, just because I can...
>
> When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
> (The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and
"It
> is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
> "Graht's" or "It's". In the case above, "it's" is a
possessive form of
it.
> It refers to the magical healing, possessing the successes. So the
sentence
> is correct as it stands.
>

<lumberg>I'm gonna go ahead and suggest that it is a typo. ;) </lumberg>

its is the possessive form of it, and it's is always the contraction of it
is. :)

Not that I want to get into a grammar war or anything. ;)

Ever lovable and always scrappy,
kawaii
Message no. 19
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:06:26 +0200
According to Maelwys, on Saturday 23 August 2003 18:07 the word on the
street was...

> When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
> (The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and
"It
> is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
> "Graht's" or "It's". In the case above, "it's" is a
possessive form of
> it. It refers to the magical healing, possessing the successes. So the
> sentence is correct as it stands.

Erm... no :) In English as I understand it, the possessive form of "it" is
"its", without an apostrophe. The reason many people get it wrong is most
likely because this is an exception to the normal rule (that possessive
form is indicated by word + apostrophe + letter "s").

Damn, and English isn't even my first language...

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Don't you know you know what's right?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ 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. 20
From: datwinkdaddy@*******.com (Da Twink Daddy)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:16:10 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maelwys" <wraith@************.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> To: Shadowrun Discussion
> Subject: Re: biotech and magical healing

> > Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a
> > contraction of
> > "it is".

> When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of
it is
> (The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and
"It
> is"), OR it can indicate a possessive.

If there were most nouns behind the "'s", you would be correct,
because "'s" is used both for contracting "is" and for making nouns
possesive. However, "it" is not a noun and it's possive form is not
made by adding "'s". It possessive form of "it" is "its"
and only
its. I can remember many a point marked off my school papers because
of using the apostrophe when it's incorrect.

Da Twink Daddy
datwinkdaddy@****.edu
ICQ: Da Twink Daddy (514984)
YM: DaTwinkDaddy
AIM: DaTwinkDaddy
Message no. 21
From: datwinkdaddy@*******.com (Da Twink Daddy)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:30:16 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>


> According to Maelwys, on Saturday 23 August 2003 18:07 the word on
the
> street was...

> > When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of
it is
> > (The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is"
and "It
> > is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
> > "Graht's" or "It's". In the case above, "it's" is
a possessive
form of
> > it. It refers to the magical healing, possessing the successes.
So the
> > sentence is correct as it stands.

> Erm... no :) In English as I understand it, the possessive form of
"it" is
> "its", without an apostrophe. The reason many people get it wrong is
most
> likely because this is an exception to the normal rule (that
possessive
> form is indicated by word + apostrophe + letter "s").

Yes, of course it shouldn't be hard since that's not the only
exception to the rule, if the rule is stated, "To make the posessive,
add "'s"".

Really, the rules are:
1. To make a posessive of a singular noun, add "'s". (book -> book's
or OS -> OS's)
2. To make a posessive of an ancient name that ends in s, add "'".
[Since ancient names are also, generally, singular nouns you can use
this rule or rule 1. This rule is old, inconsistent, and frowned upon
by a few.] (Jesus -> Jesus')
3. To make a posessive of a plural noun that ends in s, add "'".
(planes -> planes')
4. To make a posessive of a plural noun that doesn't end in s, add
"'s". (children -> children's)
5. To make a posessive of a pronoun, use the possesive form (none of
which contain a "'"):
he/him -> his
she/her -> hers
it -> its
they/them -> their

AFAIK, when you keep there 5 (or 4 if you drop 2) rules in mind, you
will always find making posessives and choosing between its and it's
easy.

Da Twink Daddy
datwinkdaddy@****.edu
ICQ: Da Twink Daddy (514984)
YM: DaTwinkDaddy
AIM: DaTwinkDaddy
Message no. 22
From: shirogr@*****.com (Shiro BsquLadat)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
--- Da Twink Daddy <datwinkdaddy@*******.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
>
>
> > According to Maelwys, on Saturday 23 August 2003
> 18:07 the word on
> the
> > street was...
>
> > > When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that
> it's a contraction of
> it is
> > > (The two so far in this sentence are
> contractions of "there is"
> and "It
> > > is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as
> "Bob's" or
> "Adam's" or
> > > "Graht's" or "It's". In the case above,
"it's"
> is a possessive
> form of
> > > it. It refers to the magical healing, possessing
> the successes.
> So the
> > > sentence is correct as it stands.
>
> > Erm... no :) In English as I understand it, the
> possessive form of
> "it" is
> > "its", without an apostrophe. The reason many
> people get it wrong is
> most
> > likely because this is an exception to the normal
> rule (that
> possessive
> > form is indicated by word + apostrophe + letter
> "s").
>
> Yes, of course it shouldn't be hard since that's not
> the only
> exception to the rule, if the rule is stated, "To
> make the posessive,
> add "'s"".
>
> Really, the rules are:
> 1. To make a posessive of a singular noun, add "'s".
> (book -> book's
> or OS -> OS's)
> 2. To make a posessive of an ancient name that ends
> in s, add "'".
> [Since ancient names are also, generally, singular
> nouns you can use
> this rule or rule 1. This rule is old,
> inconsistent, and frowned upon
> by a few.] (Jesus -> Jesus')
> 3. To make a posessive of a plural noun that ends in
> s, add "'".
> (planes -> planes')
> 4. To make a posessive of a plural noun that doesn't
> end in s, add
> "'s". (children -> children's)
> 5. To make a posessive of a pronoun, use the
> possesive form (none of
> which contain a "'"):
> he/him -> his
> she/her -> hers
> it -> its
> they/them -> their
>
> AFAIK, when you keep there 5 (or 4 if you drop 2)
> rules in mind, you
> will always find making posessives and choosing
> between its and it's
> easy.

F

====

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Message no. 23
From: loneeagle@********.co.uk (Lone Eagle)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 02:42:23 +0100
hAt 05:07 PM 23/8/2003, Maelwys wrote:

> > Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a
> > contraction of
> > "it is", making the sentence "Regardless of it is success,
>Oh, just because I can...
>
>When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
>(The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and "It
>is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
>"Graht's" or "It's".

Sorry but no you can't. Its is an exception to the normal rule in that it
is possessive without the apostrophe, adding an apostrophe simply makes it
a contraction.
There is no "'" in "The big ork raised its katana, taking a ready
stance."


--
Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea."

www.wyrmtalk.co.uk - Please be patient, this site is under construction

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+
Message no. 24
From: swheelock@******.com (Scott W)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 22:46:07 -0300
>> > Actually, when there is an apostrophe in "it's" then it is a
>> > contraction of
>> > "it is", making the sentence "Regardless of it is success,
>>Oh, just because I can...
>>
>>When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
>>(The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and
"It
>>is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
>>"Graht's" or "It's".

According to my registration list, there's still a good 30% of the forum
that hasn't chimed in on this error. Can the offending parties please hurry
up their responses so we can shame this person to the tune of 100%? Thank
you very much, queue up right here.


-Boondocker
Message no. 25
From: chris@*******.com (Chris Maxfield)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 12:28:58 +1000
Records show that at 11:46 AM on Sunday 24/08/2003 AEDT, Scott W advised:
> According to my registration list, there's still a good 30% of the forum
>that hasn't chimed in on this error. Can the offending parties please hurry
>up their responses so we can shame this person to the tune of 100%? Thank
>you very much, queue up right here.

I'll just sit back and watch the mauling from a distance, thank you. :-)

Chris
Message no. 26
From: gak_ShadowRN@***.net (gak_ShadowRN@***.net)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 16:12:50 +0200
On 23 Aug 2003 at 22:46, Scott W wrote:

<snip>
> >>When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a contraction of it is
> >>(The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there is" and
"It
> >>is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
> >>"Graht's" or "It's".
>
> According to my registration list, there's still a good 30% of the forum
> that hasn't chimed in on this error. Can the offending parties please hurry
> up their responses so we can shame this person to the tune of 100%? Thank
> you very much, queue up right here.
>

Oh, well, ok. Maelwis, Boondocker's right. (Haha! So now what?) :-P


-- Gak
Message no. 27
From: alanchambers@*******.net (Alan Chambers)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 22:51:50 -0400
> According to my registration list, there's still a good 30% of
> the forum
> that hasn't chimed in on this error. Can the offending parties
> please hurry
> up their responses so we can shame this person to the tune of 100%? Thank
> you very much, queue up right here.
>
>
> -Boondocker
>

Do I have too?
Alan
Message no. 28
From: tim.lau@**********.com (Tim Lau)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 04:28:03 +0100
<snip>
>Do I have too?
>Alan

I'd rather not.
Message no. 29
From: SteveG@***********.co.za (Steve Garrard)
Subject: biotech and magical healing
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:47:46 +0200
Maelwys wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Oh, just because I can...
>
> When there's an apostrophe, it can mean that it's a
> contraction of it is
> (The two so far in this sentence are contractions of "there
> is" and "It
> is"), OR it can indicate a possessive. Such as "Bob's" or
"Adam's" or
> "Graht's" or "It's". In the case above, "it's" is a
> possessive form of it.
> It refers to the magical healing, possessing the successes.
> So the sentence
> is correct as it stands.
>

Nice English lesson :) Unfortunately you got one thing wrong. The
possessive form of "it" is an exception to the rule and is written without
the apostrophe: "its".


Slayer

"Beware my wrath, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
- Unknown Dragon


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about biotech and magical healing, 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!