Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Technomancer <arvanit@***.uch.gr>
Subject: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 00:37:04 +0300 (EET DST)
* One of my players has created a mage character with the following
(among other things):
A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
Spell locks with
Increase Reflexes +3
Increase Willpower +4
Increase Reaction +4
Increase Intelligence +4
Increase Body +4
And so on...

When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
How can something present a danger to him?
He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
faster than most (if not all) samurai.
Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?


*********************************************************************
* Technomancer * Modesty is one of my countless virtues *
* arvanit@***.uch.gr *
* http://www.csd.uch.gr/~arvanit/ *
*********************************************************************
Message no. 2
From: brett@***.orst.edu (Brett Barksdale)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 14:42:35 PDT
ERROR: This message seems to be empty. It is located at rn960627::90551,962.
Message no. 3
From: brett@***.orst.edu (Brett Barksdale)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 14:58:57 PDT
Oops. Sorry about that first blank message. Accidents happen...

>* One of my players has created a mage character with the following
>(among other things):
>A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
>Spell locks with
> Increase Reflexes +3
> Increase Willpower +4
> Increase Reaction +4
> Increase Intelligence +4
> Increase Body +4
> And so on...
>
>When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
>3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
>How can something present a danger to him?
>He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
>faster than most (if not all) samurai.
>Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?

Well, let's start with the preventative phase. To do all of this
requires 6+ spell locks. Where did he get them all? Is he a
master enchanter/alchemist with nothing but time on his hands?
Probably not. With that in mind, he must be acquiring them from
other people. Now, the base cost in the SRII book for a spell lock
is 45000 nuyen. This does *not* include any sort of street index.
Now, if these spell locks are so darn devastating that you can
get a few of them and turn into Magi-Rambo, then you can bet your
booties that the street index for them is going to be *way* up there.
The book sez 2, but if you can really get this much "bang for your
buck for them", I couldn't see anyone turning them over with a street
index of less than 5. That's 225,000 *per*.
Of course, they can be taken off of defeated mages, but then the
PC should've faced a monstrosity as bad as they are, no?

What I'm trying to say is that in any world where spell locks can
give so much power, it would be *exceedingly* difficult to get them
from *anyone*. Hey! The PC isn't the only mage out there who would
like to be Magi-Rambo.

But assuming that the player has been carefully building up their
stockpile of spell locks over a long time, what to do? Pretty easy.

Anytime someone gets *that* many foci active on them at one time, they
are going to be a fraggin' beacon in Astral space. I really don't like
the concept of random bands of gang-shaman cruising Astral space or
astral/dualnatural critters ready to pounce on a PC as soon as they
go astral or "fire up" a foci. But come on! Anyone with SIX+ ACTIVE
FOCI has got to expect to be an astral bug beacon (perhaps
literally... :-). Every astral thing and its mother is going to be
paying attention to Foci-Boy with that many foci going. Eventually,
he's going to get whittled down. He can turn them off, but he will
keep losing karma consistently as his spell locks keep getting
grounded-thru. Not much is going to take him one-on-one, but the
"tide" will get its due.

Now if you let a PC walk around like an astral Christmas tree with
no repurcussions as all, then it's your fault that he's a Magi-
Rambo that's messing up your game.

Even so, what's the big deal? Even so powered up, he's no worse
than a wired-up armored troll. Very tough, but Shadowrun is such
an offensive-minded game that *anyone* will go down to a few solid
bursts of auto-fire. If he goes down, he's either dead or captured
and minus *all* his spell locks. Oops! :-)

- Brett
Message no. 4
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 18:21:03 -0500 (EDT)
>
>
> Oops. Sorry about that first blank message. Accidents happen...
>
> >* One of my players has created a mage character with the following
> >(among other things):
> >A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
> >Spell locks with
> > Increase Reflexes +3
> > Increase Willpower +4
> > Increase Reaction +4
> > Increase Intelligence +4
> > Increase Body +4
> > And so on...
> >
> >When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> >3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.

my question is how did he get a bod and willpower of 12? +4 to each that
would require those stats to be 8 each?? Also remember that you have to spend
starting spell points to bond foci at the games start which results in a mage
without spells so why not be a samurai of PhysAd using the optional rules
proposed by Kilroy (http://www.ntr.net/~kilroy/) that makes second ed PhysEds
playable.

> >How can something present a danger to him?
> >He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> >faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> >Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?
>
> Well, let's start with the preventative phase. To do all of this
> requires 6+ spell locks. Where did he get them all? Is he a
> master enchanter/alchemist with nothing but time on his hands?
> Probably not. With that in mind, he must be acquiring them from
> other people. Now, the base cost in the SRII book for a spell lock
> is 45000 nuyen. This does *not* include any sort of street index.
> Now, if these spell locks are so darn devastating that you can
> get a few of them and turn into Magi-Rambo, then you can bet your
> booties that the street index for them is going to be *way* up there.
> The book sez 2, but if you can really get this much "bang for your
> buck for them", I couldn't see anyone turning them over with a street
> index of less than 5. That's 225,000 *per*.
> Of course, they can be taken off of defeated mages, but then the
> PC should've faced a monstrosity as bad as they are, no?

You answer your own question later as to why the cost isn't outrageous. BTW
as I understand it street index represents supply and demand not inflation due
to power of the item that is actually covered in availability. The more
powerful and dangerous it is the harder it is to find.

> What I'm trying to say is that in any world where spell locks can
> give so much power, it would be *exceedingly* difficult to get them
> from *anyone*. Hey! The PC isn't the only mage out there who would
> like to be Magi-Rambo.

They give power but as a friend put it (dunno if he was full of it or not
but...): active foci attract attention in astral space from spirits and such
as an "unnatural" stink...sort of like magic pollution and therefore a bunch
concentrated in one spot would attract some unpleasant attention.

> But assuming that the player has been carefully building up their
> stockpile of spell locks over a long time, what to do? Pretty easy.
>
> Anytime someone gets *that* many foci active on them at one time, they
> are going to be a fraggin' beacon in Astral space. I really don't like
> the concept of random bands of gang-shaman cruising Astral space or
> astral/dualnatural critters ready to pounce on a PC as soon as they
> go astral or "fire up" a foci. But come on! Anyone with SIX+ ACTIVE
> FOCI has got to expect to be an astral bug beacon (perhaps
> literally... :-). Every astral thing and its mother is going to be
> paying attention to Foci-Boy with that many foci going. Eventually,
> he's going to get whittled down. He can turn them off, but he will
> keep losing karma consistently as his spell locks keep getting
> grounded-thru. Not much is going to take him one-on-one, but the
> "tide" will get its due.

And I would think that a poor mage/shaman gang would watch, follow, and ponce
on to get all those nifty foci to share with each other. Remember that
carrying around large amounts of valuables is a magnet for trouble be they
magic, matrix, or otherwise type stuff. (Yes a gang of four eyed matrix geeks
will mug you for your Fairlight Excalibur :)).

> Now if you let a PC walk around like an astral Christmas tree with
> no repurcussions as all, then it's your fault that he's a Magi-
> Rambo that's messing up your game.

He is trying to avoid that hence why he asked for advice :).

> Even so, what's the big deal? Even so powered up, he's no worse
> than a wired-up armored troll. Very tough, but Shadowrun is such
> an offensive-minded game that *anyone* will go down to a few solid
> bursts of auto-fire. If he goes down, he's either dead or captured
> and minus *all* his spell locks. Oops! :-)

The problem is he is a spell casting speed freak which leaves the samurais
feeling inadequete and we dont want that since then the will have to show off
and do dumb things like kill deckers, burn down restaurants, and gun down
guard posts (joke).

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 5
From: tglinka@*****.ASU.EDU
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 15:21:38 -0700 (MST)
On Fri, 28 Jun 1996, Technomancer wrote:

> * One of my players has created a mage character with the following
> (among other things):
> A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
> Spell locks with
> Increase Reflexes +3
> Increase Willpower +4
> Increase Reaction +4
> Increase Intelligence +4
> Increase Body +4
> And so on...
>
> When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> 3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
> How can something present a danger to him?
> He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?

What about focus addiction from the Awakenings book?


T. Glinka
Message no. 6
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:10:19 -0400 (EDT)
At 12:37 AM 6/28/96 +0300, you wrote:

>One of my players has created a mage character with the following:
>A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
>Spell locks with
> Increase Reflexes +3
> Increase Willpower +4
> Increase Reaction +4
> Increase Intelligence +4
> Increase Body +4
> And so on...
>
>When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
>3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
>How can something present a danger to him?

You're new to the list, aren't you? *evil GM grin*

>He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
>faster than most (if not all) samurai.

Those locks don't help him in astral space.

--
"I remember my first sexual encounter because I kept the recipe."
- Jeff Dahmer
Message no. 7
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 20:13:35 -0500 (EDT)
> >He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> >faster than most (if not all) samurai.
>
> Those locks don't help him in astral space.

Oh yeah I forgot to mention that :) (truthfully was sure if I was remembering
correctly).

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 8
From: Benjamin <benjamin@*****.com>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 17:37:58 PDT
> * One of my players has created a mage character with the following
> (among other things):
> A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
> Spell locks with
> Increase Reflexes +3
> Increase Willpower +4
> Increase Reaction +4
> Increase Intelligence +4
> Increase Body +4
> And so on...
>
> When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> 3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
> How can something present a danger to him?
> He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?
>
>

Have an NPC mage ground Flame Bomb through his +body spell lock.

What aboput an Uncommon mage?

Accelleratin of a falling object is about 10m/sec/sec. wait unttil he stands
still outside for long enough and have someone throw something from the top of
a skyscraper. (say, a sack of cement, a bike, a telephone pole,etc.). Claim it
was going 300 m/sec. AS combat turn is about 3 sec, this is 900m/combat round.
Apply damage for hitting a wall. 90D damage.

use Glue to stick one of his spell locks to a wall. he moves, lock comes off,
lock inactive.

Design the Destroy Spell Locks damaging manipulation. All spell locks iun the
area of affect ...

If he/she/other is REALLY that bad, try a cyberzombie with MBW<max> and a
bunch of other stuff.

See? PLENTY of things that can be a danger to him!
Message no. 9
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 23:11:17 -0500 (EDT)
> Accelleratin of a falling object is about 10m/sec/sec. wait unttil he stands
> still outside for long enough and have someone throw something from the top of
> a skyscraper. (say, a sack of cement, a bike, a telephone pole,etc.). Claim it
> was going 300 m/sec. AS combat turn is about 3 sec, this is 900m/combat round.
> Apply damage for hitting a wall. 90D damage.

Aiming from the top of a skyscraper and calculating for all factor (wind flow,
wind changes, etc...remember that high up on skyscrapers the winds are
travelling at high velocities which is why these buildings are designed to
sway) is more hassle then hiring a Yakuza expert hitman. At least he will
work at it till it is done right and usually get it right the first time
because of experience and expertesse.

> use Glue to stick one of his spell locks to a wall. he moves, lock comes off,
> lock inactive.

what are you talking about? If you can glue it to a wall without him noticing
then why not just take it and beat the drek outta the now weakened mage.

> Design the Destroy Spell Locks damaging manipulation. All spell locks iun the
> area of affect ...

A little unbalancing to the game and to be honest a lazy solution to a problem
that only requires a little thaught, knowledge of the game, and immagination.

> If he/she/other is REALLY that bad, try a cyberzombie with MBW<max> and a
> bunch of other stuff.



> See? PLENTY of things that can be a danger to him!
>


--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 10
From: Benjamin <benjamin@*****.com>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 21:40:24 PDT
> > use Glue to stick one of his spell locks to a wall. he moves, lock comes off,
> > lock inactive.
>
> what are you talking about? If you can glue it to a wall without him noticing
> then why not just take it and beat the drek outta the now weakened mage.
>

The manipulation spell, Glue. In Awakenings.
Message no. 11
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 02:01:27 -0500 (EDT)
> > > use Glue to stick one of his spell locks to a wall. he moves, lock comes
off,
> > > lock inactive.

> > what are you talking about? If you can glue it to a wall without him noticing
> > then why not just take it and beat the drek outta the now weakened mage.

> The manipulation spell, Glue. In Awakenings.

Oh. Haven't gotten the chance to look through that one yet.
Also most locks (at least how I do it when I use locks with characters I make)
are jewelry such as rings, necklaces, earrings, etc or trinkets kept within
pockets (usually hidden pockets). I tend to avoid things that can be easily
taken away or destroyed off hand (yes I am not gonna buy that power foci
fedora even if it is stylish :)). But all this is my personal playing
preference and paranoia of GMs taking away my toys.

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 12
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 11:03:08 +0100
Technomancer said on 0:37/28 Jun 96...

> When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> 3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
> How can something present a danger to him?
> He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?

I say he has found not a loop in the rules, but has applied them to his
own ends. There are a number of things you can do about this, and many of
them have already been mentioned. The "ground physical spell through
focus"-ploy has been tried and found usable by many GMs on this list, but
also keep in mind that a character can only have a number of active foci
equal to his Intelligence. With the kind of char you described, I
wouldn't be surprised if that were 6 :)

Also remember that (almost) nothing boosts astral abilities, so the spell
lock that gives him +X Willpower will not increase it while he's astrally
projecting, nor does he get the Reaction or Initiative bonuses, etc.

Yet another way of handling this is putting him into situations where his
spell locks won't be useful to him, or even can get him into trouble.
Although you should be careful with this if you want to keep the player
in your group... He might decide you're making life unnecessarily
difficult for him because you feel like it, and leave.

But first of all, talk to the player about it. Explain what you find wrong
with his character, and why, and ask him to change it, or let him come up
with *good* reasons why his character has all this stuff. You should be
able to find a compromise somewhere.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Opa is geconsumeerd en uit de maatschappij geweerd
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
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?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 13
From: "Ferri Pagano" <Ferri_Pagano_at_STRM__Amsterdam1@******.com>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 96 10:35:53 EST
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Invinsible? Mage
Author: shadowrn@********.itribe.net at Internet
Date: 27-6-96 18:28


* One of my players has created a mage character with the following
(among other things):
A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
Spell locks with
Increase Reflexes +3
Increase Willpower +4
Increase Reaction +4
Increase Intelligence +4
Increase Body +4
And so on...

When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
How can something present a danger to him?
He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
faster than most (if not all) samurai.
Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?


*********************************************************************
* Technomancer * Modesty is one of my countless virtues *
* arvanit@***.uch.gr *
* http://www.csd.uch.gr/~arvanit/ *
*********************************************************************

We had similar problems in our campaigns, and it gets worse...
such a mage can use his rerolls to get a lot more successes from his
armor spell lock, nothing in the rules forbids this, and a STARTING
mage can have all that and much more.
In our campaign we came up with some limitations for locks to limit
the amount of superman like charachters.
1) spell locks do not work while you are astral.
2) spell locks that increase attributes do so only as extra dice, and
do NOT also increase the target number of spells, otherwise a
willpower + 4 spell lock is unbalancing. as you get no drain as well
as no damage from spells,...
3) I have a problem with some locks such as Improved invisivility
because players use rerolls to get the number of successes into the
ridiculous [15 or so] .
If you choose to allow all as per the rules, then remember that spell
locks are worth "only" 45000 NY so enemy mages WILL have them, if both
sides have them then that should restore game balance. All mages I've
ever seen in our group had at least 3 locks and often more. Enemies
tended to have just 2, willpower+4 and increase reflexes +3, nice for
only about 90 000 NY
BTW: I said it before and will say it again: an ipe concussion grenade
will floor a mage anytime, and street sams are a lot faster than mages
IF their [A] resources have been properly spent [AND you allow all
rule books!].

Ferri
Message no. 14
From: Night Prowler <ggreve@*******.hanse.de>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:46:38 +0200
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:46:34 +0200 (MET DST)

> > [tons of spell lock descriptions deleted ]
> >When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> >3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
> >How can something present a danger to him?
> You're new to the list, aren't you? *evil GM grin*

>>>>>[ *cackle* Maybe you should give him a hint: All I say is
GROUNDING... (no - not the discussion *grin*) What about a nice
Force 10 Powerball by some good enemy ? I BET the others will love him
for this... *EVIL GRIN* ]<<<<<
- Night Prowler <09:46:21/06-28-96>


> >He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> >faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> Those locks don't help him in astral space.

>>>>>[Yup. No attribute raising spell helps on the astral plane !
]<<<<<
- Night Prowler <09:45:28/06-28-96>
Message no. 15
From: "Sascha Pabst" <Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Subject: Re:Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:45:57 +0200
On 27.06.96, Technomancer wrote about "Invinsible? Mage":
> * One of my players has created a mage character with the following
> (among other things):
> A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
> Spell locks with
> Increase Reflexes +3
> Increase Willpower +4
> Increase Reaction +4
> Increase Intelligence +4
> Increase Body +4
> And so on...
>
> When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> 3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
> How can something present a danger to him?
> He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?
a) Grimoire2 p. 86 states astral Attributes are not affected by locked
spells
b) How can the character get end-values of 12? This implies a basic
value of 8...???
c) See Focus Addiction rules in Awakenings p.103
d) With all these locks "up", he'll have a neon sign up that says "Here
I am!".
e) You can still ground through Spell locks

Sascha

--
+---___---------+----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |The one who does not|
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de| learn from history |
| \___ __/ | | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| *Wearing hats is just a way of life* | through it again. |
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 16
From: Technomancer <arvanit@***.uch.gr>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:10:50 +0300 (EET DST)
* Thanks guys. I had missed the rules about astral attributes.
So here is one of my possible solutions:
A mage and his pet elemental, so that the player is busy defending his
foci, while he is burned away 8).
PS: He only has 10 (6+4) willpower, and by body I meant his damage
soaking capacity (6+4+armor spell).

*********************************************************************
* Technomancer * Modesty is one of my countless virtues *
* arvanit@***.uch.gr *
* http://www.csd.uch.gr/~arvanit/ *
*********************************************************************
Message no. 17
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 96 00:10:26 +1100
>Now, if these spell locks are so darn devastating that you can
>get a few of them and turn into Magi-Rambo

A spell lock is not for a given spell. It's simply a place where you can
lock a spell.

--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.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.
Message no. 18
From: "Mark Steedman" <M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 15:56:26 GMT
Technomancer writes

> * One of my players has created a mage character with the following
> (among other things):
[lots Spell locks ]

> And so on...
>
> When he turns them all on, he ends up having something like
> 3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
14+4D6 probably.

try wired 3, muscle aug 4 enhanced articulation and attributes 6,
thats only 15+4D6 and not vulnerable to grounding and thats only the
'everyone uses' (for nasty characters) wear.

Given karma FAR worse things are possible (physads to average 45 or
so) or money, delta wired three or MBW4(+synaptic 1) and the things
that stack like inc cybered reflexes! (probably average 40+)

Needless to say the above are not advised!

> How can something present a danger to him?
oh easy try friends in combat, the 5 troll gangers walk into the bar
fight at their initatives, modify the ganger archtype for troll and
punch, +1 reach & 4 friends that them needing -1's and him 9's oh
dear i don't care if hes got 12 dice body, strength 9 or 10 vs impact
armour!

> He will beat any common mage in the astral (12 Willpower) and he is
> faster than most (if not all) samurai.
> Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the rules?
>
well someone pointed out the locks and astral.
You could try wards! though the rules in awakenings itself are a bit
nasty like no hope for spell locks.
Don't allow +4 willpower to provide dice for drain, magic that
affects magic is the realm of metamagic powers not some cheap locked
spell.
Don't allow int gained through +4 int to allow more foci, that caps
things at about 6 though i usually hint rather strongly that more
than 3-4 locks / foci WILL attract attention. beat the best kid on
the block.

I also bad folks from turning locks off and reacitvating without
spending karma.
you see, levitate person, barrier, invis, etc spring to mind as nice
spells to cast once with piles of rerolls and never pick up mods for
sustaining ever again. (i make a few more mods on this front as well
to ease lock looting and the grounding karma race)

Mark
Message no. 19
From: "Ferri Pagano" <Ferri_Pagano_at_STRM__Amsterdam1@******.com>
Subject: Re[2]: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 96 17:32:42 EST
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Author: shadowrn@********.itribe.net at Internet
Date: 28-6-96 11:21


Technomancer writes

<snip long text>
I also bad folks from turning locks off and reacitvating without
spending karma.
you see, levitate person, barrier, invis, etc spring to mind as nice
spells to cast once with piles of rerolls and never pick up mods for
sustaining ever again. (i make a few more mods on this front as well
to ease lock looting and the grounding karma race)

Mark


Real nice idea, just forcing players to roll the spell success test again
everytime they turn on their foci would limit the amount of 15+ successes
spells, though asking players to fork karma again is a bit unbalancing vs the
poor mages.
F.
Message no. 20
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 11:57:13 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 29 Jun 1996, Robert Watkins wrote:

> >Now, if these spell locks are so darn devastating that you can
> >get a few of them and turn into Magi-Rambo
>
> A spell lock is not for a given spell. It's simply a place where you can
> lock a spell.

Right, but every time you want to lock a new and different spell
(or even a higher force version of an old spell), you have to "re-bond"
it, which means dropping another Karma. Not terribly worrisome, but it
adds up after a while.

Marc
Message no. 21
From: Jeffrey Riordan <JRIORDAN@***.gov>
Subject: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 11:58:28 -0400
>>> Technomancer <arvanit@***.uch.gr> 06/27/96
05:37pm >>>
* One of my players has created a mage character
with the following (among other things):
A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
Spell locks with
Increase Reflexes +3
Increase Willpower +4
Increase Reaction +4
Increase Intelligence +4
Increase Body +4
And so on...

When he turns them all on, he ends up having
something like
3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
How can something present a danger to him?
He will beat any common mage in the astral (12
Willpower) and he is faster than most (if not all)
samurai.
Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the
rules?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Besides the obvious things that have been pointed
out such as grounding, allowing spell locks to work in
Astral space, etc. You may also want to look at the
rules for what constitues use of an action. As I recal
Activating a spell lock is a simple action. Unless your
mage walks around with them always on he has to
spend most of the 1st three seconds of a fight gearing
up for it. (I assume that he already has the increased
reflex on of course.) 2 foci go on per action so if he
gets 3 actions he'll be left with 1 simple action at the
end of the combat turn to do something.
I wonder how someone's teammates would feel
about that as the opponent Mage cast's a spell while
theirs is still getting his pants on so to speak.
You may want to point this out to the player that they
can't do much if they get surprised. I garuntee that
even if you have the increased reflex 3 up you will
still probably loose out to the street sam with wired 2
because he'll have other goodies like enhance artic
levels of muscle augment which add even more.
Worse case scenario throw a surprise situation at him
at see who does better on the Quickness tests.
Hmmm... they have TNs of 2 and you have 4 and gee
they have muscle augment and articulation plus
wired. That means they get anywhere from 8 to
whatever level of stuff they've piled on. Unless
you're increased reaction lock is on you're bummed
because increased reflex only adds dice not reaction.
What a pity.... (Evil GM Smile)
Message no. 22
From: brett@***.orst.edu (Brett Barksdale)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 96 09:15:58 PDT
> 3) I have a problem with some locks such as Improved invisivility
> because players use rerolls to get the number of successes into the
> ridiculous [15 or so] .

Then change your karma guidelines. I am, actually, pretty liberal
on what I let my players use karma on. The rub is - if it's not
a straightforward combat/danger use of karma, using it burns it right
out of your pool (it does *not* replenish). Rigger *really* needs
a better roll to fix his car? - burn a karma to re-roll, but it ain't
coming back. Want to have a bitchin' inviso spell in your spell lock? -
burn a karma to re-roll, but it ain't coming back. And if they didn't
get their "15 successes" with their first re-roll, it costs 2 karma
to re-roll again - and *they* ain't coming back either. And so on...

I think it's a pretty fair system. It gives the players a lot of
flexibility to burn their karma on what *they* think is really
important. But there isn't enough karma (by *any* stretch of the
imagination) to pull the "15 successes on every spell lock" crap.

- Brett
Message no. 23
From: brett@***.orst.edu (Brett Barksdale)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 96 09:19:10 PDT
>>Now, if these spell locks are so darn devastating that you can
>>get a few of them and turn into Magi-Rambo

>A spell lock is not for a given spell. It's simply a place where you can
>lock a spell.

Thanks. I knew this, though... :-)

The concept was that if spell locks (with the right spells available
to be cast, naturally) could dominate the game like the original
poster was implying was happening in his game, no one would ever
want to part with them unless:

(a) you paid them a sh*tload of nuyen (45000 my arse...), or
(b) you take them from their still-warm corpse... :-)

Sorry I wasn't clear enough the first time.

- Brett
Message no. 24
From: Jeffrey Riordan <JRIORDAN@***.gov>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 12:42:01 -0400
>>> Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk>
06/28/96 11:56am >>>
I also bad folks from turning locks off and reacitvating
without spending karma. you see, levitate person,
barrier, invis, etc spring to mind as nice spells to cast
once with piles of rerolls and never pick up mods for
sustaining ever again. (i make a few more mods on
this front as well to ease lock looting and the
grounding karma race)

Mark
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I personally have a problem with banning folks from
being able to activate and deactivate spell locks with
out spending Karma. The reason I say this is
because the Karma point is spent when the spell is
put into the lock not when it is placed or activated.
There are several paragraphs of description on the
fact that anyone who is magically active can activate a
spell lock.
In several different campaigns we've run into some
problems with the spell lock looting/use. Here are
some of the HOUSE rules that we came up with to help
curtail this problem.

Looting:
1) a spell lock is simply a vessel that contains a spell
and nothing more. If the mage who cast the spell into
it is dead the spell it had in it is gone because the link
back to the mage is broken. It's still usable as a spell
lock but you'll have to install a new spell in it's place.

2) If you manage to get a spell lock and the mage
hasn't died you have 2 options a) give it back or :) or
b) break the link he/she has with it and substitue your
own link. This has several inherent problems in that
you don't know what kind of spell may be in the lock
(since you have to activate it to find out what it is it
could be rather nasty like a trap lower attribute 4 spell
for all you sick GMs out there). Plus you get the same
usability out of it as the other mage did. Say he only
had 2 success on the armor spell then you've only got
2 success as well. No rerolling etc... (yea, you could
be lucky and it's a improved inviso spell with 8
success but if that's true I want to meet what kill him!)

Locking Spells:
1) you CAN not reroll the spell casting of a lock using
Karma from your good Karma pool. If you allow this
as a GM then I would suggest NOT refreshing the
Karma pool until everyone else's refreshes as well. I
beileve that in the Grim or SRII it states that you only
get to throw the dice once on locking, if you succeed
great but that's all the success you get and you spend
the 1 point of Karma. If you want more success you'll
have to burn another point of Karma for the new spell
to be locked in.

2) Following along these lines however we do allow
you to recast the spell with out spending a Karma
point IF and ONLY IF you made no success. The
reason for this can be found in the Foci section
regarding bonding in that Karma is only spent after a
successful spell cast. The reason we did this is
because some spells require only 1 success to
succed such as barrier spells, while other spells rely
on multiple success to increase their power. Rules 1
and 2 mesh very nicely together in our opinion to keep
down on the 15 success inviso spell.

Yes there is the flaw that you can keep casting to
get high level barrier spells but that's true in the old
system as well. All you need to do is roll 1 6 on a
force leve 10 barrier and bango immunity to most
weapons.
I can see how you have a problem with being able to
reuse the spells again and again without going
through the drain and all but that's why Spell locks
were created. I think if you added the guide lines
about only making the success tests on locks once
and once you succed you can't reroll with out
spending Karma again it cuts down on the munching.

Now here is a thronier problem. Heal spells in locks
do you allow them and if so how do you judge their
effectivness against wounds, how often can you use
them on people, etc...
Message no. 25
From: Brian Johnson <john0375@****.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 15:05:21 -0500 (CDT)
> > Those locks don't help him in astral space.
Specific reference/PN?
Message no. 26
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 16:30:00 -0500 (EDT)
> (a) you paid them a sh*tload of nuyen (45000 my arse...), or

Actually as I recall mundanes can make spell locks so 45000 for a realitively
easy to make item is good. Also you have to figure in street index and
negotiations with a talismonger or fixer unless of course you could purchase
it legally at the 45000 cost but Lone Star requires ritual samples and
registration of all foci as I recall so paying more is preferred but not
necessarily needed.

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 27
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 16:35:19 -0500 (EDT)
> You may want to point this out to the player that they
> can't do much if they get surprised. I garuntee that

Why explain? I prefer to present players with learning situations then to
hand them things on a silver plater. If they are using flawed tactics then I
would rather they find out or realize on their own instead of telling them
since it is more fun that way.....at least for me :).

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 28
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.net.au>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 96 14:11:01 +1100
>> A spell lock is not for a given spell. It's simply a place where you can
>> lock a spell.
>
> Right, but every time you want to lock a new and different spell
>(or even a higher force version of an old spell), you have to "re-bond"
>it, which means dropping another Karma. Not terribly worrisome, but it
>adds up after a while.

That's why you have lots of spare locks... the limit is not on how many
spell locks you can have bonded to you. It's on how many you can have
active at any one time. OTH, you want to really protect those locks...
leaving a dozen or so material links lying around isn't the safest thing
to do.

Sure, spell locks cost a lot, but they are relatively easy and quick to
make.


--
*************************************************************************
* .--_ # "My opinions may have changed, but not the fact *
* _-0(#)) # that I'm right." -- Old Fortune Saying *
* @__ )/ # *
* )=(===__==,= # Robert Watkins <---> robertdw@*******.com.au *
* {}== \--==--`= # *
* ,_) \ # "A friend is someone who watches the same *
* L_===__)=, # TV programs as you" *
*************************************************************************
Message no. 29
From: Brian Johnson <john0375@****.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 18:23:14 -0500 (CDT)
> wind changes, etc...remember that high up on skyscrapers the winds are
> travelling at high velocities which is why these buildings are designed to
> sway)

Sorry, buildings are designed to limit sway between both story to story,
and from the total height. Interstory is around H/250 and total is
higher that that. Winds 'higher up' are not high velocitied, they are
more like 3/2 as fast as on ground. And sway that does occur is
medium-frequency, small magnitude, and strongly rhythymic.. Or you'd get
seasick in the building.

In regards to trying to kill someone by dropping objects on them, use a
large bag of pennies, and have you and several friends each drop a
handful at the same time. You'll hit the guy, and with the heights of
buildings in shadowrun being so High, the mass of the object is irrelevant.
Message no. 30
From: "Sascha Pabst" <Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:33:26 +0200
On 28.06.96, Jeffrey Riordan wrote about "Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply":
[snip]
> [no karma to activate lock] The reason I say this is
> because the Karma point is spent when the spell is
> put into the lock not when it is placed or activated.
> There are several paragraphs of description on the
> fact that anyone who is magically active can activate a
> spell lock.
*aehem* not really. But there are rules who can activate
a lock (same tradition), and it is stated the Karma is
spent when the spell is cast. So we agree.

[House rules]
> 2) If you manage to get a spell lock and the mage
> hasn't died you have 2 options a) give it back or :) or
> b) break the link he/she has with it and substitue your
> own link.
c) Use the lock as component for ritual sorcery :-)

Sascha

--
+---___---------+----------------------------------------+--------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst |The one who does not|
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de| learn from history |
| \___ __/ | | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| *Wearing hats is just a way of life* | through it again. |
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| - Me | |
+------------- http://www.informatik.uni-oldenburg.de/~jhary -----------------+
Message no. 31
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:07:00 -0500 (EDT)
> Sorry, buildings are designed to limit sway between both story to story,
> and from the total height. Interstory is around H/250 and total is
> higher that that. Winds 'higher up' are not high velocitied, they are
> more like 3/2 as fast as on ground. And sway that does occur is
> medium-frequency, small magnitude, and strongly rhythymic.. Or you'd get
> seasick in the building.

Whatever, it still creates a wind affecting the targetting of the drop.

> In regards to trying to kill someone by dropping objects on them, use a
> large bag of pennies, and have you and several friends each drop a
> handful at the same time. You'll hit the guy, and with the heights of
> buildings in shadowrun being so High, the mass of the object is irrelevant.

It turns from killing one person to killing or maiming most of the people on
the street at the time. It is still an immature solution to the problem of
eliminating one person (IMHO).

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 32
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:46:10 -0600
Luc AKA BobW wrote:
>
>Aiming from the top of a skyscraper and calculating for all factor (wind flow,
>wind changes, etc...remember that high up on skyscrapers the winds are
>travelling at high velocities which is why these buildings are designed to
>sway) is more hassle then hiring a Yakuza expert hitman. At least he will
>work at it till it is done right and usually get it right the first time
>because of experience and expertesse.
>

We are talking about a GM responce to the character. When you fill the
characters in on hte news around town just mention that ther is a bunch
of idiots throwing things and people off of tall buildings. Not that I
am saying you should arbitrarily kill off characters that you don't like.
Just make life dificult on them. Make the mage famous.

He he he, I love this idea. Someone gets video of him shrugging off
incrediblle amount of damage (A Troll go gang on Vikings with big axes?)
Everywhere he goes people recognise him. He is hounded for autographs.
He is often attacked. ("He doesn't look that tough. It was gust an act
like wrestling used to be. Comon guys let's get 'im.") Either the player
will love the attention untill he dies (it's just a matter of time) or
he will recognise how lame his game is getting. In either case, when the
player starts to make his new player, he should find that the availability
of this type of spell locks at caracter generation is a lot lower.

Piatro
Message no. 33
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:46:19 -0600
Technomancer wrote:

>
>One of my players has created a mage character
>with the following (among other things):
>
>A spell lock of armor (3 successes)
>
>Spell locks with
> Increase Reflexes +3
> Increase Willpower +4
> Increase Reaction +4
> Increase Intelligence +4
> Increase Body +4
> And so on...
>
>When he turns them all on, he ends up having
>something like
>3d6+16 initiative, 10-12 willpower and 12 body.
>How can something present a danger to him?
>He will beat any common mage in the astral (12
>Willpower) and he is faster than most (if not all)
>samurai.
>Am I missing something, or has he found a loop in the
>rules?
>

One quick question. How many of these spells does he know and how
many did he pay another mage to link to the the locks. If he cast
all of the spells himself, he would have to accumulate some karma
before he could Bond them all. If he bought the locks with spells
in place, there are links to the casters whenever he uses them (I
highly dout this would happnen -- few mages are _that_stupid) and
would also cost force points at character creation. In either case,
the expenditure in force points for reating a character with the
locks you have mentioned would result in an otherwise weak and
innefectual mage.

Piatro
Message no. 34
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:46:25 -0600
Jeffrey Riordan wrote:
>
> Now here is a thronier problem. Heal spells in locks
>do you allow them and if so how do you judge their
>effectivness against wounds, how often can you use
>them on people, etc...

A spell lock created a link to _sustain_ a spell without further
attention from the caster. Locks only work with sustainable spells.
Istantanious or permanent spells do their work and then dissapate
so there is no way you can cast them into a spell lock.

Piatro
Message no. 35
From: Benjamin <benjamin@*****.com>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 21:38:53 PDT
> A spell lock created a link to _sustain_ a spell without further
> attention from the caster. Locks only work with sustainable spells.
> Istantanious or permanent spells do their work and then dissapate
> so there is no way you can cast them into a spell lock.
>
> Piatro
>
>

But you haave to _SUSTAIN_ heal/treat in order for there to be any effect
worth metntioning.
Message no. 36
From: "Robert J. Waters" <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 05:18:42 -0500 (EDT)
> But you haave to _SUSTAIN_ heal/treat in order for there to be any effect
> worth metntioning.

The only spells that can be locked have "Sustained" duration which healing
spells don't have.

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 37
From: "Paolo (Ook?) Falco" <Falco@****.it>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:53:49 +0000
On 28 Jun 96, Brian Johnson wrote:

> In regards to trying to kill someone by dropping objects on
> them, use a large bag of pennies, and have you and several
> friends each drop a handful at the same time. You'll hit the
> guy, and with the heights of buildings in shadowrun being so
> High, the mass of the object is irrelevant.

Like heck it is :)
If it were, you'd be killed by raindrops. Actually, a *man*
falling from Radio Warsaw's tower will reach terminal velocity
before he hits the ground... A penny's terminal velocity would
be much, much smaller. On the other hand, ballbearings... :)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Paolo Falco | A set is called self referencing if it
Ironbound Section | contains a self referencing subset
-----------------------------------------------------------------
See the Rollerbrawl Rules and the Anarchic Lemming Corp. site at:
*********> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/2717 <*******
Message no. 38
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 14:13:06 -0600
Benjamin wrote:

>> A spell lock created a link to _sustain_ a spell without further
>> attention from the caster. Locks only work with sustainable spells.
>> Istantanious or permanent spells do their work and then dissapate
>> so there is no way you can cast them into a spell lock.
>>
>> Piatro
>>
>>
>
>But you haave to _SUSTAIN_ heal/treat in order for there to be any effect
>worth metntioning.

Sorry. I seemed to have missed that one, but I have an excuse. There is
no additional notation on the Permanent label for the spell and the time
table in in the next collum. I'll have to "remind" my players of this rule
before we sstart playing next time in case they have convieniently forgotten
it.

Piatro
Message no. 39
From: Luc <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:15:15 -0500 (EDT)
> >But you haave to _SUSTAIN_ heal/treat in order for there to be any effect
> >worth metntioning.
>
> Sorry. I seemed to have missed that one, but I have an excuse. There is
> no additional notation on the Permanent label for the spell and the time
> table in in the next collum. I'll have to "remind" my players of this rule

> before we sstart playing next time in case they have convieniently forgotten
> it.

You sustain it till it to take permanent effect and if I recall the spell is
stopped before the permanent effect happens then the healing doesnt happen.
There is a difference between ssustain to get permenent effect and sustain to
maintain a spell. IMO being able to spell lock healing type spells removes
the stress of risking drain for healing people and removes alot of the danger
of getting hurt.

"Just have the burn-out mage use the spell lock with heal cause my target
number to heal him will surely get me serious drain."

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 40
From: "Mark Steedman" <M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 08:34:12 GMT
Brett Barksdale writes

>
> > 3) I have a problem with some locks such as Improved invisivility
> > because players use rerolls to get the number of successes into the
> > ridiculous [15 or so] .
>
> Then change your karma guidelines. I am, actually, pretty liberal
> on what I let my players use karma on. The rub is - if it's not
> a straightforward combat/danger use of karma, using it burns it right
> out of your pool (it does *not* replenish).

> But there isn't enough karma (by *any* stretch of the
> imagination) to pull the "15 successes on every spell lock" crap.
>
You may well find folks cast the spell the first time they need it in
combat and then reroll the fails, combat i have a karma pool and then
lock it. I have not seen this done but then have not really had the
opporunity myself to demonstrate.

Mark
Message no. 41
From: "Mark Steedman" <M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 08:51:46 GMT
Jeffrey Riordan writes
>
> I personally have a problem with banning folks from
> being able to activate and deactivate spell locks with
> out spending Karma. The reason I say this is
> because the Karma point is spent when the spell is
> put into the lock not when it is placed or activated.
> There are several paragraphs of description on the
> fact that anyone who is magically active can activate a
> spell lock.
Yes there are but as the limit is on foci is active foci it is all
too easy to run a lot of utility spells off locks and things like
improved invis and levitation are not things tech can readily
duplicate.

> In several different campaigns we've run into some
> problems with the spell lock looting/use. Here are
> some of the HOUSE rules that we came up with to help
> curtail this problem.
>
> Looting:
> 1) a spell lock is simply a vessel that contains a spell
> and nothing more. If the mage who cast the spell into
> it is dead the spell it had in it is gone because the link
> back to the mage is broken. It's still usable as a spell
> lock but you'll have to install a new spell in it's place.
>
I'd say that was by the book, the problem becoming if the PC's have
+3D6 initative, det enemies and a couple more every bad guy mage
needs a couple of locks to keep up and the PC's are soon swimming in
the things. I have wandered around FASA written adventures run by
other folks collectiong the magical loot and ended up with a couple
of million newyens worth of foci in loot from a run paying 20K or so
per person! let alone spell locks at 1 karma point for +4 attribute
makes cyber/bio ware very expensive.

> 2) If you manage to get a spell lock and the mage
> hasn't died you have 2 options a) give it back or :) or
> b) break the link he/she has with it and substitue your
> own link. This has several inherent problems in that
> you don't know what kind of spell may be in the lock
> (since you have to activate it to find out what it is it
> could be rather nasty like a trap lower attribute 4 spell
> for all you sick GMs out there). Plus you get the same
> usability out of it as the other mage did.
Easy activate somewhere quiet then kill the spell in astral combat,
take care you don't catch the lock but as locked spells count as
rating 1 no problem.

> Locking Spells:
> 1) you CAN not reroll the spell casting of a lock using
> Karma from your good Karma pool. If you allow this
> as a GM then I would suggest NOT refreshing the
> Karma pool until everyone else's refreshes as well.
Easy solution, wait till you want spell in combat, cast lock reroll!
but your second note here is a good thing to remember if folks want
to karma things like nature spirits or spells they cast and sustian
just before they 'burst down the door'.

> I
> beileve that in the Grim or SRII it states that you only
> get to throw the dice once on locking,
you could still use karma pool.

Overall you somewhat missed why i drop on the on'off'on locks, i'm
more bothered about the utillity spells in locks outright myself than
the '15 success improved invis' [try astral, hey grenade that BOOM
'oh thats where the invisible mage was' or ultrasonics/thermo] Its
the flying invis (for a comlex action and no drain) mage thats not
picking up a +4 for sustaining two spells mage i'm worried about 3 or
4 success on each spell is plenty enough is he has enough brains to
use cover as well (once you add other mods it base 4 +cover + twice
invis(a modifier to target number not a base roll!) and thats 12 for
partial cover even for 2 on the invis spell) ok its not 'YOU CANNOT
see me' but its enough to slow down the incommings plenty enough.

> Now here is a thronier problem. Heal spells in locks
> do you allow them and if so how do you judge their
> effectivness against wounds, how often can you use
> them on people, etc...
>
I have not had to put up with this one, actually with my ruling it
would not work (only cast once). by the book though oh dear! very
nifty.

opinions folks ?

Mark
Message no. 42
From: Jeffrey Riordan <JRIORDAN@***.gov>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply -Reply
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 09:52:51 -0400
>>> Sascha Pabst
<Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
06/29/96 12:33pm >>>
On 28.06.96, Jeffrey Riordan wrote about "Re:
Invinsible? Mage -Reply":
[snip]
> [no karma to activate lock] The reason I say this is
> because the Karma point is spent when the spell is
> put into the lock not when it is placed or activated. >
There are several paragraphs of description on the
> fact that anyone who is magically active can activate
a
> spell lock. *aehem* not really. But there are rules
who can activate a lock (same tradition), and it is
stated the Karma is spent when the spell is cast. So
we agree.

[House rules]
> 2) If you manage to get a spell lock and the mage
> hasn't died you have 2 options a) give it back or :)
or
> b) break the link he/she has with it and substitue
your
> own link.
c) Use the lock as component for ritual sorcery :-)

Sascha
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Well I'll admit that I've never actually had the
opportunity to actual take one from a live mage.
Somehow they always seem to die just before had,
I'm beginning to think it's more than a coincidence. :)
Message no. 43
From: Brian Johnson <john0375@****.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:44:53 -0500 (CDT)
> > Sorry, buildings are designed to limit sway between both story to story,

> Whatever, it still creates a wind affecting the targetting of the drop.

Buildings do NOT CREATE WIND.

> > In regards to trying to kill someone by dropping objects on them, use a
> > large bag of pennies, and have you and several friends each drop a
> > handful at the same time. You'll hit the guy, and with the heights of
> > buildings in shadowrun being so High, the mass of the object is irrelevant.
>
> It turns from killing one person to killing or maiming most of the people on
> the street at the time. It is still an immature solution to the problem of
> eliminating one person (IMHO).

So my solution doesn't kill the guy? That is the only relavent counter
argument, thank you. I'm not interested in the 'maturity' of the
solution. People driving on the highway have been killed by rocks
dropped on them from an overpass, is that mature? Did it not happen?
Did it not kill them? All of these are no.
Message no. 44
From: Brian Johnson <john0375@****.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:58:18 -0500 (CDT)
> >the mass of the object is irrelevant.
>
> Like heck it is :)
> If it were, you'd be killed by raindrops.

Go to India, wait for the Monsoon, tell me the raindrops dont HURT.
further, spherical opjects have the highest drag of anything. It's why
cars/airplanes/bees/rockets don't look like spheres.

> [man] falling from Radio Warsaw's tower will reach terminal velocity
120 - 240 Mph, depending on orientation, Ask a Sky diver.
Incidentally, throwing a mouse out of an airplane is a waste of time,
they don't have a high enough terminal velocity to kill them.
Horses splatter, and Humans either bounce or splatter.
Density figures in to this process as well. If you'd like more details...

> before he hits the ground... A penny's terminal velocity
would > be much, much smaller. On the other hand, ballbearings... :)

Wrong. Pennies are much more aerodynamic than ball bearings, though I'd
guess the ball bearings would kill also. There are documented cases of
people being killed by falling pennies, and other objects, so would you
care to explain how that happened?
Message no. 45
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:27:35 -0600 (MDT)
Brian Johnson wrote:
|
|> before he hits the ground... A penny's terminal velocity
|would > be much, much smaller. On the other hand, ballbearings... :)
|
|Wrong. Pennies are much more aerodynamic than ball bearings, though I'd
|guess the ball bearings would kill also. There are documented cases of
|people being killed by falling pennies, and other objects, so would you
|care to explain how that happened?

The problem with pennies (and coins in general) is that they start to
flip end over end, faster and faster in proportion to rate of speed at
which they fall. And this tumbling changes the aerodynamics and the
coin doesn't fall in a straight line. It's path curves.

If a falling obect can tumble it won't fall in a straight line. So
ballbearings would actually be a better choice than pennies.

I've had direct experience with this. When I was young and stupid I
dropped some coins from a bridge. (And no, I wasn't trying to hit
anyone.)

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like
underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.html~~~~~~
Message no. 46
From: Brian Johnson <john0375@****.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:43:42 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 1 Jul 1996, David Buehrer wrote:

> The problem with pennies (and coins in general) is that they start to
> flip end over end, faster and faster in proportion to rate of speed at
> which they fall. And this tumbling changes the aerodynamics and the
> coin doesn't fall in a straight line. It's [sic] path curves.

I'll agree with this. If you need them to fall in a straight line, I
think giving the penny rotation about its axis of [polar] symmetry, it
would prevent the tumbling, like a gyroscope. Else use a lot of pennies

Of course, You'd have to buy the pennies from a coin collecter, now that
I think on it further. Digital cash, right? Or cast your own.


> If a falling obect can tumble it won't fall in a straight line. So
> ballbearings would actually be a better choice than pennies.

Oh, Spinning ball bearings will create lift and drag, and the object will
drift (doesn't really curve) off target. Same effect as a
curveball/fastball. Fastballs don't drop as fast as they should, because
the top side is moving slower wrt the air, so it creates lift, and the
bottom side is moving towards the plate, faster, so it creates drag. Ken?
So I think regardless of what you use, you'll have this problem.

Get a city spirit to use the 'accident' power after you drop the object.
?
Message no. 47
From: Luc <rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:14:57 -0500 (EDT)
> > > Sorry, buildings are designed to limit sway between both story to story,
> > Whatever, it still creates a wind affecting the targetting of the drop.
> Buildings do NOT CREATE WIND.

Actually highrise structures create HIGHER wind speeds. You are right they
don't create the winds but the do magnify them (my sentence was poorly worded,
sorry).

> > > In regards to trying to kill someone by dropping objects on them, use a
> > > large bag of pennies, and have you and several friends each drop a
> > > handful at the same time. You'll hit the guy, and with the heights of
> > > buildings in shadowrun being so High, the mass of the object is irrelevant.
> > It turns from killing one person to killing or maiming most of the people on
> > the street at the time. It is still an immature solution to the problem of
> > eliminating one person (IMHO).
> So my solution doesn't kill the guy? That is the only relavent counter
> argument, thank you. I'm not interested in the 'maturity' of the
> solution. People driving on the highway have been killed by rocks
> dropped on them from an overpass, is that mature? Did it not happen?
> Did it not kill them? All of these are no.

The point is that your solution MIGHT kill the guy. There is no accuracy in
dropping things from highrises or overpasses because for extra factors added
into the equation of trying to hit them. In both cases there is a greater
likely hood of killing poeple other than your target then there is of killing
your target. By immature I meant it is a simplistic solution that creates a
bigger problem than solving one. The police tend to make a high priority of
people who endanger many people by dropping things off off highrises and
overpasses.

--
Luc AKA BobW

EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME! EXCUSE ME!
BUT THE CORPSE STILL HAS THE FLOOR!
--Kevin Spacey as Lloyd in The Ref (1994)

EMail: rjwate01@*****.louisville.edu
Web : http://www.louisville.edu/~rjwate01/
Message no. 48
From: Brian Johnson <john0375@****.tc.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 14:56:54 -0500 (CDT)
> Actually highrise structures create HIGHER wind speeds. You are right they
> don't create the winds but the do magnify them

These higher wind speeds tend to be on the bottom 5-10 floors, for the
curious.

> The point is that your solution MIGHT kill the guy. There is no accuracy in
> dropping things from highrises or overpasses because for extra factors added

Accuracy-Schmacuracy, Shotguns aren't accurate in a similar sense, but they
still kill.

> into the equation of trying to hit them. In both cases there is a greater
> likely hood of killing poeple [sic] other than your target then there
> is of killing
> your target. By immature I meant it is a simplistic solution that creates a
> bigger problem than solving one.
I will remind that this was posted to a 'out of control player' problem,
the problem that you mention is irrelevant. The player has been taken
care of by a group of terrorists who hate Tall buildings, or some such.

Access to the roof would be a much more intractable problem anyway.

> [police pursue] people who endanger many people by dropping things off off
>highrises and overpasses.

Regardless, His problem was solved simply.
Message no. 49
From: dbuehrer@****.org (David Buehrer)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 15:05:26 -0600 (MDT)
Brian Johnson wrote:
|
|Get a city spirit to use the 'accident' power after you drop the object.

In that case I'm going to drop a piano. Now that's a signature ;)

BTW, that's the best use for Accident that I've ever seen.

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like
underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.html~~~~~~
Message no. 50
From: jaeger@***.net (Sharper)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 21:15:24 -0600
>> [man] falling from Radio Warsaw's tower will reach terminal velocity
>120 - 240 Mph, depending on orientation, Ask a Sky diver.
>Incidentally, throwing a mouse out of an airplane is a waste of time,
>they don't have a high enough terminal velocity to kill them.
>Horses splatter, and Humans either bounce or splatter.
>Density figures in to this process as well. If you'd like more details...
FYI, if you drop a cat out of an airplane it will survive, but break all
four legs (it lands upright.) They figured this out from the times that cats
have jumped/been dropped off of sky scrapers. I always thought this was
interesting...as for dropping things to kill people, I think that dropping
impact grenades would do the job a little better than pennies.
Just my two dropped pennies worth,

©Sharper
*
What you think and feel is determined by you, not by people and events
around you.
*
Message no. 51
From: Droopy <droopy@**.net>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:50:47 -0400
At 02:56 PM 7/1/96 -0500, Brian Johnson wrote:

>> The point is that your solution MIGHT kill the guy. There is no accuracy in
>> dropping things from highrises or overpasses because for extra factors added
>
>Accuracy-Schmacuracy, Shotguns aren't accurate in a similar sense, but they
>still kill.

Yes, but shotguns kill from a hundred meters or less. The building would
have to be taller than that.


--Droopy
Message no. 52
From: wilsonpj@******.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU (Peter)
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 1996 02:35:19 -0600
Luc wrote:

>
>You sustain it till it to take permanent effect and if I recall the spell is
>stopped before the permanent effect happens then the healing doesnt happen.
>There is a difference between ssustain to get permenent effect and sustain to
>maintain a spell. IMO being able to spell lock healing type spells removes
>the stress of risking drain for healing people and removes alot of the danger
>of getting hurt.
>
>"Just have the burn-out mage use the spell lock with heal cause my target
>number to heal him will surely get me serious drain."
>

But the target for the spell is determined by the essence of the wounded character. This
indicates that the caster has to pay close attention to
how the spell is interacting with the target. For this reason treat and
heal don't work well with spell locks. Sure you _could_ bond a healing
spell to a lock, but you ould not use that lock again unless you were
healing the same character, with the same essence, and the same wound
level (and wound location if you are really picky). If you are in a
hurry and can't afford the time to sustain the spell it will work, but
then you clense the lock so it is ready for the next use.

IMO the burnt-out mage you were refering to would be better off with a
spell focus to aid in healing others.

Piatro
Message no. 53
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@*******.net>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage -Reply
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 22:18:34 -0400 (EDT)
At 06:33 PM 6/29/96 +0200, Sascha wrote:

>> [no karma to activate lock] The reason I say this is
>> because the Karma point is spent when the spell is
>> put into the lock not when it is placed or activated.
>> There are several paragraphs of description on the
>> fact that anyone who is magically active can activate a
>> spell lock.

>*ahem* not really. But there are rules who can activate
>a lock (same tradition), and it is stated the Karma is
>spent when the spell is cast. So we agree.

Speaking of which, did the first edition say anything about other
mages activating/deactivating them?


--
"I remember my first sexual encounter because I kept the recipe."
- Jeff Dahmer
Message no. 54
From: "Sascha Pabst" <Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Subject: Re: Invinsible? Mage
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 1996 23:57:54 +0200
David Buehrer wrote:
> Brian Johnson wrote:
> |Get a city spirit to use the 'accident' power after you drop the object.

> In that case I'm going to drop a piano. Now that's a signature ;)
>
> BTW, that's the best use for Accident that I've ever seen.ROTFL!

Sascha
(still without my signature)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Invinsible? Mage, 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.