| From: | Angel <olds@******.CC.PURDUE.EDU> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | LONG - Physical Adepts Q's Combined |
| Date: | Thu, 8 Apr 93 20:06:20 EST |
few ideas that people MIGHT be interested in, I thought I'd
jump in now. This is in response to several physical adept
themes (shielding, magical resistance, vehicular killing hands).
Please, no flames, only constructive criticism! ;> ( I know, I
know, no one one this net would do that, right? 8-> )
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 93 11:33:11 -0500
From: bradferguson%dlu.dnet@***.VANDERBILT.EDU
Subject: them physad's
:Anybody ever seen rules regarding {{killing hands}} against vehicles and/or
:barriers and other inanimate objects? Or do the standard rules cover it with a
: little adaptation?
Ok, this is where some people can find this idea somewhat munchkinish.
In a power game I was in once, there were such things as vehicular
killing hands avaiable at twice the cost of normal killing hands.
In normal game terms though, I see no real reason for vehicular
killing hands because of the following:
any vehicle with armor, thus requiring vehicular
strength penetration, will be able to blow off
the staging one killings hands with ease.
Our house rules (not sure what the book rule is) gives
the armor rating in autos for resistance, plus the body rating in
dice to resist. So, while I still like the concept, I see no
practical use for them mostly because of staging. This is also
a game in which for intensive purpose, we use SRI. If anyone
wishes or can adapt the idea into something better, I would love
to hear it.... :)
: I was thinking that since they are even able to cut through the armour that
: characters wear, it ought to be able to do *something* against barriers or
: vehicular armour. Now, regular unarmoured vehicles are going to get cut like
: warm cheese - I don't imagine they build commuter vehicles for toughness over
: speed and economy.
:
Again, if the staging were different I could see it being helpful.
But a physical adept with vehicular killing hands against a car
with a body of three and only two points of armor has a decent chance
of resisting....however, I am open to suggestions... :)
: Anybody else out there have any interpretations of their own? I am playing a
: physad and since I got lev-S killing hands for her, I'm looking for all the us
es
: I can squeeze out of it.
Well, I dont see normal killing hands being able to do vehicular damge,
so my idea wouldnt apply here unless you can come up with a conversion
for a normal weapon versus vehicular....kinda like a LMG gives
both normal and vehicular damages.... The only suggestion I could
think of off the top of my head is half the power and minus one
staging (so that would be strength / 2 M level for your adept).
Again, I dont see that being problem for a barrier or car with
armor to help blow it off.
:One other thing Ive been wondering about, I want to sound off the net. I not-
:iced that this attack can also reach into the astral! Even if the adept does
:not have the assensing ability (costing a hefty 2 magic points), the attack
:could (conceivably) strike an astral being. What's the question? Well, suppose
:you have a physad who cannot assense, belabored in some way by an astral form,
:be it mage, spirit or whatever - could you have an assesnsing character "spot"
:for him? I realize there would be some modifiers, but, once again, I'm just
:trying to get some input.
I would say it depends on your definition of "belabored" and "spot".
If a spirit has engulfed a person, it has manifested, so yes in this
particular instance because the spirit is in the physical. However,
things such as accident, confusion and such things that the spirit
doesnt have to menifest to do, I would say it would be as bad as
doing a blind shot. The person would have to first make that
intelligence test to notice the "astral friction" grim II mentions
that even mundanes can do now. If he rolls good enough to see it,
then again, there is no problem. However, the most I would allow
a spotter to help is taking away +2 from a blind shot, so the target
would be a base 4, +8 for being blind, and -2 for having the general
direction with help from your friend. The only comical difference
here would be if you had six watchers surrounding the spirit going
"Right here, right here!!!" :) (but again, technically watchers
cant manifest in the physical so you would be in the same position!
pg 88, grim I second sentence, for those who are curious about that
one!) :)
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 93 22:30:17 CET
From: "Jason Carter, Nightstalker" <CARTER@***.EDU>
Subject: Physical Adept Magic Resistance
:Reverend said:
:>>Unfortunately, that means that Physads cannot get Shielding, nor defense.
:>>Does anyone here think that it should be a buy-able power? I would personally
:>>prefer to have some sort of magic resistance, a la Spell Defense. Any
:>>comments?
Funny you should ask. Two days ago, one of our players asked if
it was possible to buy masking without getting atral perception.
We have been debating whether or not it is possible to do this or
not. Unfortunately we have not come to a conclusion. Maybe we
could help each other out on this one.
There are basically two arguments. One being that there is a
special power involved in having masking, dispelling, shielding,
and centering. They can only be attained by initiates, this much
is certain. But why is it important to have perception and or
projection? One argument is that it takes time to learn how to
control the aura in order to mask it. But if that is so, why
is aura masking a conitual thing, unless otherwise noted by the
character? And if it not such a big thing, why can only initiates
get the power? The other argument being that there should simply
be a way to do it. Physical Adepts can center, so if they are
willing to spend the magic on the rest of the metamagic powers,
why cant they get them?
Well, now that I have the arguments out, I will try to answer my
own questions...hopefully you guys will respond and help us come
to a conclusive answer. :)
Shielding is sorta easy to answer in my book. It is not possible
for someone without a sorcery skill to spell defense him or her self.
Just as they can't quicken without casting a spell, or dispell without
being able to use again, sorcery skill. Now, if a person were to
develop a sorcery skill, I could then see this happening. But in
alot of ways I can see this as a detriment to a group because it
is one of the things you DEPEND on magicians to give you. It is one
of their ways to protect you. SO, personally, I would leave the
spell defense to mages and shamans and concentrate on athletics,
killing hands and other stuff.
Keeping all of this in mind, I would have to agree with Jason
Carter. I think that shielding, masking, etc, etc can be bought
with a point of magic per meta magic power. So, anyone who
wanted shielding, masking and dispelling would have to have
3 points spent on magic as well as a sorcery skill. (personally,
I cant see someone who has no capability to cast spells able to
dispell or quicken them, but to each their own! :> )
:Magic Resistance Cost: 1
: Only initiate Physical Adepts may purchase this power. The effect of this
:power is that at will the adept may exercise the shielding Metamagic power on
:himself. However as Physical Adepts are not able to use the sorcery skill, he
:will gain only one shielding die per grade of initiation.
:
This is the real problem. Is it fair to make adepts to by something
that magicians get with a sorcery skill without making them
get a sorcery skill? I honestly dont know how it would work. SOme
could argue that adepts are paying a high enough price with their
magic but others could say that it is not possible to use without
a sorcery skill since in the discription of the power it says it
is needed in order to use. (I dunno about anyone else, but I
think I have not come any closer to an answer than when we started!)
The final question here is, by allowing physical adepts to buy
powers that are/were only available to initiate mages and shamans,
are we degrading and striping them of unique powers? This, I think
is something each gm will have to consider before adopting the above
rules. Because if we allow physical adepts access to a spell casters
unique powers, shouldnt we allow it to go both ways? *grin* I think
I am getting to philosophical here, but oh well.
Congratulations to anyone who has made it this far...and please
post responses so that we can come to a decision! :)
QuickSilver, the BeastMaster
(Stephanie Olds)
--
