Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Manolis Skoulikas great_worm@*****.com
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 15:41:41 +0300
I have only recently noticed that free spirits with the sorcery power
do not suffer from drain AT ALL!

What a great game breaker!
Even I am disgusted.


You say: ''Come on, how many free spirits have sorcery?''
Answer: ''All free allies, and they can be freed and bound when small!''
And they have Sorcery 6+ to boot. With a force of similar rating
they can cast 'one success elemental manipulations spells'
at high force deadly damage with no drain.
So what, one spell at deadly won't kill every one.
What about spell stacking though?

Imagine multiple spell stacked deadly ''acid stream'' spells.
A force 5 free ally will be able to cast 5 of these spells
at the same round! Five OR tests at NO modifier and five diffrent
dodge and resistance tests at the deadly.
Or cast a powerball, a manaball, a decrease strength, a decrease
charisma and a smoke cloud for the rest that survived.
No drain at all people.

And this can easily be used by unscrupulous players or power gamer GMs.
Imagine the DCPS (dead characters per second) on this one.
Or the army of dead npcs after the smoke has gone down!

Say we have free force 5 ally (easily conjured, freed and bound
at force 2, then fed some karma to reach force 5 or something)that
is working happily for a PC group who are feeding it karma by the
dozen.
Or the pet free ally of the major bad guy, that come running for help
when his master is in need.
We all know that this potentially VERY game unbalancing
and that it can be done without great effort.

I would appreciate opinions and ways to bring balance back to the game


The Wiz


PS: If you do not think this is a glitch of the game, or for some reason
feel
that it does not constitute a problem for your campaigns, please do
not participate on this one.
I am tired of hearing how this could not be done (when anyone who has
rudimentary knowlewdge of the game knows it can), or how one would
slaughter his players if they used it on him/her (this is a preferably a
game for free thinking people that do not bully their players into
acquiesence).
Sorry about the rant but I would like constuctive opinions on this one!
Message no. 2
From: HHackerH@***.com HHackerH@***.com
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 10:51:53 EDT
In a message dated 4/18/00 7:40:42 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
great_worm@*****.com writes:

> I have only recently noticed that free spirits with the sorcery power
> do not suffer from drain AT ALL!

With all that commentary about Allies you had not so long ago, and only NOW
you are making this remark?????? (*shudders*)

> What a great game breaker!
> Even I am disgusted.

********

> You say: ''Come on, how many free spirits have sorcery?''
> Answer: ''All free allies, and they can be freed and bound when small!''
> And they have Sorcery 6+ to boot. With a force of similar rating
> they can cast 'one success elemental manipulations spells'
> at high force deadly damage with no drain.
> So what, one spell at deadly won't kill every one.

I like how they are pretty much guaranteed to have the Sorcery 6+, but given
that this is the "staple" skill of the magician, I can understand it.

> What about spell stacking though?

What about it? Multiple spells going off at one time??? Yeah, they are Free
Spirits and should be played different to begin with from the get go.

> Imagine multiple spell stacked deadly ''acid stream'' spells.
> A force 5 free ally will be able to cast 5 of these spells
> at the same round! Five OR tests at NO modifier and five diffrent
> dodge and resistance tests at the deadly.
> Or cast a powerball, a manaball, a decrease strength, a decrease
> charisma and a smoke cloud for the rest that survived.
> No drain at all people.

DRAIN would not be the big problem. The multi-action modifier would be.
That's what? A +2 per additional spell after the first (going on the "5
spells" option you have here) to all the target numbers as well, yes? Sure,
that Flamethrower option just went from a basic t# of a "4" to a remodified
T# of a "12". Seems balancable to me. And OR (I'm presuming you mean Object
Resistance test here) would likely be all that much higher.

> And this can easily be used by unscrupulous players or power gamer GMs.
> Imagine the DCPS (dead characters per second) on this one.
> Or the army of dead npcs after the smoke has gone down!

Actually, considering the number free spirits we have as "contacts" and
"buddies" in the games here, I can safely say that like EVERY OTHER RULE in
the book, it is ultimately up to how it is used and interpreted by the GM and
the players as to the end consequences it will have upon the game.

> Say we have free force 5 ally (easily conjured, freed and bound
> at force 2, then fed some karma to reach force 5 or something)that
> is working happily for a PC group who are feeding it karma by the
> dozen.

Just remember that the PC group has to do all those annoying conjuring rolls
as well.

> Or the pet free ally of the major bad guy, that come running for help
> when his master is in need.
> We all know that this potentially VERY game unbalancing
> and that it can be done without great effort.
>
> I would appreciate opinions and ways to bring balance back to the game

Okay, here is a simple one. The Force of the Free Ally being is the maximum
force of spells (PLURAL) that can be used at one time. And I would easily
use the core/base force, and not the adjusted force for this ability btw,
otherwise you are just are further encouraging the "munchkinous" mentality in
the game.

Other "fixes" for this problem.

A) Don't allow it. But, again the games here have a LOT of Free Spirits and
the like running around and the kind of good, enjoyable, fun that can be had
is still worth it IMO.

B) Karma ... all of these spells have a Karma cost. The one loophole for
this does exist now, but it could be interesting to have a simple rule
claiming that the Free Spirit still has to have some "REAL" karma (not
mystically reduced by way of metaplanar quest karma) to learn the spells in
question.

C) The spirit in question is not necessarily bound forever by the
agreements, and as you have in the past appeared to be a "rules knowledgeable
individual", you can also use something very simplistic to stifle this one
potential problem. You can MAKE the bound being and the player-character's
"contract agreement" be completely written up. Keep a copy for yourself.
And then, whenever this "Sorcery thing" comes up, you can refer to the
contract to ensure that it is qualifiable and possible within the boundaries
of the agreement. Yes, it means more paperwork on everybody's part, but if
you, the GM, or whomever is truly concerned about this; it would probably be
a really advisable course of action.

"PC: Quick, cast Heal on him ... we need him for the fight."
"FA: Sorry, not required to perform such ... it's not in the contract."
"PC: WHAT??? You have to do as I say!!!"
"FA: No, I don't. In paragraph 3, line 5 ... subsection-b ... <clears voice
melodramatically to grind the point home> 'the entitled agreement aquaints
for the beneficial usage of sorcery at the bequest of the binding agreement
holder on their own, personal, behalf.' *He* <pointing at guy> isn't *You*."
"PC: That ain't right ... we're going to renegotiate"
"FA: Please do ... I would love the engagable discussion."

And of course, the Free Ally would love it, because this would mean it would
be an additional chance for the FA to go free from the guy again. Basically
the "contract" becomes a GM's Writ of Guarantee against such stupid abuse.

As with all other things in the game, if you devolve down the state of pure
game mechanics all the time and that is all you can see is the "abusive
potential in the rules", then you remove the truly balancing power in the
game.

Role-Playing.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-K
-"Just a Bastard"
-Hoosier Hacker House
"Children of the Kernel"
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
Message no. 3
From: Iridios iridios@*****.com
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 19:06:05 -0400
Manolis Skoulikas wrote:

> You say: ''Come on, how many free spirits have sorcery?''
> Answer: ''All free allies, and they can be freed and bound when small!''

Don't you need their true names to bind them? And the only way to get
their true name is to go on an astral quest. You can't go on this
quest until they get their true name, which isn't until their freed.
IMO, that means the free ally has time to disappear (if it feels like
being nice) or to fry your arse while you are on the quest (which at
minimum will be 1 hour long).

> I would appreciate opinions and ways to bring balance back to the game

See above.
>
> The Wiz

--
Iridios
--
God Is

Visit "The ShadowZone"
http://members.xoom.com/Iridios/ShadowZone

Sig by Kookie Jar 5.97d http://go.to/generalfrenetics/
6:56:15 PM/200:03:01 (1) [no thud]
Message no. 4
From: Kenneth Vinson kennethv@****.wisc.edu
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:45:32 -0500
Manolis Skoulikas <great_worm@*****.com> wrote:
<snip>
>I have only recently noticed that free spirits with the sorcery power
>do not suffer from drain AT ALL!
>What a great game breaker!
>Even I am disgusted.
>You say: ''Come on, how many free spirits have sorcery?''
>Answer: ''All free allies, and they can be freed and bound when
small!''

A long time ago in perhaps 1990 when the first edition Grimoire came
out and I was about 19 and prone to munchkinism I conspired with a
friend of mine about binding the newly introduced free spirits. We
discussed how a magician could conjure a relatively low force ally or
even just an elemental and then set it free, make the roll to see if the
spirit goes "free" and then, knowing the native plane already, go on a
cake walk of an astral quest to learn its true name and then bind it. I
assume that this is the method you are referring to in your post.
Well, at that time, my friend had an account on Genie, a now defunct
early version of AOL or Compuserve(for all the youngin's out there), and
on that board as a regular was one Paul Hume, co-creator of Shadowrun,
near solely responsible for the Shadowrun magic system and writer of the
Grimoire(1st and 2nd ed.) We decided to post our little idea to him and
see what he thought. The reply was filled with barely restrained
contempt and vitriol. Mr. Hume told us, in no uncertain terms, that
adolescent rules-lawyers such as ourselves had no right to play the game
and that if we wanted to go against the spirit of the rules in such a
flagrant way then he'd rather not hear about it. Needless to say we
were surprised at such a response to what we had thought was rather a
clever idea.
With ten years of hindsight and further gaming experience I now look
on that incident as my turning point into a more mature gaming mindset
that looks to the rules as a guide but knows enough to read the intent
of the game designers between the lines. So my point is, if you've
bothered to wade through this personal reminiscence, is that game
balance is what the GM and the players make it. It's a poor artist that
blames his tools and that applies to GM'ing as much as anything else.
If something seems ludicrous to you in the rules simply disallow it. If
your players aren't complete munchkins they will understand completely.


>PS: If you do not think this is a glitch of the game, or for some
reason
>feel that it does not constitute a problem for your campaigns, please
do
>not participate on this one. I am tired of hearing how this could not
be done (when >anyone who has rudimentary knowlewdge of the game knows
it can), or how one >would slaughter his players if they used it on
him/her (this is a preferably a
>game for free thinking people that do not bully their players into
acquiesence).
>Sorry about the rant but I would like constuctive opinions on this one!

I know my reply falls under your disclaimer for what kind of response
you wanted but I couldn't help myself. And if you have players that you
would have to bully into accepting a ruling about not abusing the power
and mystery of free spirits then you have far more serious problems with
your group than a glitch in the game mechanics.

Cheers,

Ken Vinson
kennethv@****.wisc.edu
Message no. 5
From: Simon Fuller sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 08:52:05 +1000
-----Original Message-----
From: HHackerH@***.com <HHackerH@***.com>
To: shadowrn@*********.com <shadowrn@*********.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 12:54 AM
Subject: Re: Free spirit power:Sorcery



>C) The spirit in question is not necessarily bound forever by the
>agreements, and as you have in the past appeared to be a "rules
knowledgeable
>individual", you can also use something very simplistic to stifle this one
>potential problem. You can MAKE the bound being and the player-character's
>"contract agreement" be completely written up. Keep a copy for yourself.
>And then, whenever this "Sorcery thing" comes up, you can refer to the
>contract to ensure that it is qualifiable and possible within the
boundaries
>of the agreement. Yes, it means more paperwork on everybody's part, but if
>you, the GM, or whomever is truly concerned about this; it would probably
be
>a really advisable course of action.
>
>"PC: Quick, cast Heal on him ... we need him for the fight."
>"FA: Sorry, not required to perform such ... it's not in the contract."
>"PC: WHAT??? You have to do as I say!!!"
>"FA: No, I don't. In paragraph 3, line 5 ... subsection-b ... <clears
voice
>melodramatically to grind the point home> 'the entitled agreement aquaints
>for the beneficial usage of sorcery at the bequest of the binding agreement
>holder on their own, personal, behalf.' *He* <pointing at guy> isn't
*You*."
>"PC: That ain't right ... we're going to renegotiate"
>"FA: Please do ... I would love the engagable discussion."
>
>And of course, the Free Ally would love it, because this would mean it
would
>be an additional chance for the FA to go free from the guy again.
Basically
>the "contract" becomes a GM's Writ of Guarantee against such stupid abuse.
>
It could get worse than that if you aren't very careful.
"Oyabun: I have brought you here into my inpregnable fortress to give you a
large sum of....EEEAAAARRGH!"
(Stream of acid hits the Oyabun, killing him instantly.)
"PC: What the frag did you do that for?!"
"FA: It states in the contract that I am to protect you from any potential
harm. This former human was reaching into his jacket, where many humans keep
weapons."
"PC: He was going to give me money for that job I did! You knew that!"
"FA: Potentially he could have drawn a gun and shot you."
(the rest of the conversation is drowned out by the chant of KILL KILL
coming from the army of cyber samurai bursting through the ricepaper walls)
This could also apply to the spirit not being told that it can't kill the
PC's loved ones while the PC is asleep next to them, the spirit not being
told no personal harm means not hiring others to do the harming, and a whole
host of other things. Some spirits may try to avoid being banished, but most
I think would prefer it to slavery, since they may well survive banishment
in one of the metaplanes.
Message no. 6
From: Manolis Skoulikas great_worm@*****.com
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 02:59:00 +0300
Iridios wrote:

> IMO, that means the free ally has time to disappear (if it feels like
> being nice) or to fry your arse while you are on the quest (which at
> minimum will be 1 hour long).
>
Fry my ass with a random spell at force 1?

In any case it can be disrupted easily by any one (from a guardian
spirit to a fellow team member).

Dissapearing doesn't help if you know the true name.

In any case, my problem is not with the binding.That is really a piece
of cake even with the ally present and knowing.
My problem is with the frivolous use of the sorcery power.
I appreciate the idea though. An abusing player should
get what he deserves: an abusing GM :)

The Wiz
Message no. 7
From: Manolis Skoulikas great_worm@*****.com
Subject: Free spirit power:Sorcery
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 02:59:15 +0300
HHackerH@***.com wrote:

> DRAIN would not be the big problem. The multi-action modifier would be.
> That's what? A +2 per additional spell after the first (going on the "5
> spells" option you have here) to all the target numbers as well, yes? Sure,
> that Flamethrower option just went from a basic t# of a "4" to a remodified
> T# of a "12". Seems balancable to me. And OR (I'm presuming you mean
Object
> Resistance test here) would likely be all that much higher.

Considering the elegy you gave on spell combos not a long while ago,
I am surprised you have n't noticed that the +2 modifier no longer
applies on spell stacking on the sorcery spellcasting TN
(just on the drain TN)
*puzzled look*
Sorry for the delay on the sorcery power realization.
My munchkin powers seem to be failing me nowadays.
:)

>
> Actually, considering the number free spirits we have as "contacts" and
> "buddies" in the games here, I can safely say that like EVERY OTHER RULE in
> the book, it is ultimately up to how it is used and interpreted by the GM and
> the players as to the end consequences it will have upon the game.
>
I think you got the gist to what I am trying to say here.
As you would putit:''you came very close''. (sorry, could n't resist)
The problem is this not just every other rule.It is a possible game
breaker. Even if you explain it to your players, or if you decide not to
use it on them, it really takes very strong willpower not to give in to
the temptation when your ass is on the line. When the player is facing
tough situations, it is very easy to go for the ''easy way'' and use the
ally as a last resort solution, instead of puting his character's (and
his compatriots)life on the line and toughing it out. The problem is
that every thing should be in balance. Even desperate solutions should
have some kind of game balance. I would rather find something that
balances this imbalance than simply rule it out as something that just
isn't my style of gaming. Misinterpretations, ommisions and additional
home rules by the GM, tend to damage the trust of the players
considerably. So I try to deal with the game breakers in a way
consistent to the game and the rules. If this is not possible, only then
do I make a ruling. I am happy to say that in nine years of SR (six of
full time play) I have only made one ruling. I hope I will not make
second one here. So I am still open to solutions in game terms. Not that
some of which I have read is not interesting. It is just that they all
focus on spirit attitude, not viable game systems solutions.




> B) Karma ... all of these spells have a Karma cost. The one loophole for
> this does exist now, but it could be interesting to have a simple rule
> claiming that the Free Spirit still has to have some "REAL" karma (not
> mystically reduced by way of metaplanar quest karma) to learn the spells in
> question.
>
I got to hand it to you. I would never have thought of that.
How unbelievably and ludicrously munchkinous!!!!!
My players will laugh their butts off when they hear that. (as I am now)
A spirit making metaquests for ''cheap'' spells.
Maybe getting initiated on the way. Or bond some foci while at it?
You don't really mean that there exists a player in reality who would
dare propose a ''cheap'' metaquest for a free ally?

...

Hopefully not. (suddenly cold in here. Shudders at the thought)


> C) The spirit in question is not necessarily bound forever by the
> agreements, and as you have in the past appeared to be a "rules knowledgeable
> individual", you can also use something very simplistic to stifle this one
> potential problem. You can MAKE the bound being and the player-character's
> "contract agreement" be completely written up.

Been reading too many demon stories, K.
A bound spirit does not disagree if it feels that the mage can
eventually banish it.
If you don't like your boss you quit.
If you are no longer worth it, you are fired.
If you are more grief than of help, you are suspended.

If you are an ally you are banished.
Finito la musica, passato la fiesta.
That's it. Nada. The big Zero. History.
(and you thought free enterprise was a bitch)

No contracts, no bargains, no liabilities.
Shadowrunning is dangerous enough without a spirit making
rules lawyering.

If you treat your spirit well it might develop some useful
initiative (courtesy of the GM).
If you don't it might try to turn on you but never openly.
It is so grave a risk, that no spirit takes it.


> As with all other things in the game, if you devolve down the state of pure
> game mechanics all the time and that is all you can see is the "abusive
> potential in the rules", then you remove the truly balancing power in the
> game.
>
> Role-Playing.
>
If you don't have a good foundation to build on the building will
eventually crumble. As I see it, a viable game system is a good
foundation on which to build a believable story and include real like
NPCs. If I find loops, my story starts leaking and with game breaking
rules adventures can go down the tubes. And as you may have noticed,
I really hate making rulings as to what rule no longer applies this
afternoon and what game system we must change this week.

If I see a loop, I call it. I don't just ignore it, hoping to pass it
by.
And hopefully I deal with it in aconstructive way so that game balance
is restored. If I can do it within the letter as well as the spirit
of the rules, so much the better.

The Wiz

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Free spirit power:Sorcery, 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!