Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: U-Gene <C14101@*******.BITNET>
Subject: looking for help
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 10:48:32 EDT
Hello all. Back from the weekend. Hope I didn't miss anything on the list
while I was gone. Anyway, I came up with a few questions....

Do APDS rounds half the effect of a bullet barrier? I think we had this
discusion before, but I don't remeber what we came up with.

I also remember someone saying that a car's armor is reduced as per the
barrier rules. This makes sense but I don't really remeber the rules saying
that (at least specifically). But does that mean if a weapon hits a car and
acceeds the armor rating, that it opens a 1/2 meter hole?

And if a mage insists on carring around more spell locks then he can mask,
how do you persuade him other then having him assassinated from astral space.
hence, thier rival mage group blasts him with mana bolt 6 plus 6 magic pool.
I think I can talk him in to carring them inactive at least.

And what do inactive locks and focusus look in astral space. Are they obvious
or do they look "normal" or use an Astral Perception check or what?

And what about the 6 bullet bursts of the Super Mach 100. Do you use a +6
recoil modifier or the standard +3 burst recoil modifier?

And my final question is, does this letter look in neat order? This crazy
system at school doesn't have a return carriage or enter key and doesn't have
an automatic return like most systems. I was just wondering if this was real
hard to read after reading someone else's who had a bunch of = .

hem. Well then.

GM -- "Havoc, you feel your lungs filling with blood as a powerful spell
grounds out through your now blackend body."
Havoc -- "Ughhh...can I still cast Treat???"

<< U-Gene -- A Decker who is just about sick of GMing. >>
<< Help me please! (Dragged back to table kicking and screaming>>
Message no. 2
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 16:04:26 +1000
U-Gene writes:

> Do APDS rounds half the effect of a bullet barrier? I think we had this
> discusion before, but I don't remeber what we came up with.

Well, by the rules I think it would. The Barrier spell creates a barrier
with a barrier rating equal to it's Force, and APDS halves the effective
barrier rating of any barriers it's fired through. Even though the spell is
magical, it is still creating a physical barrier and so must abide by the
rules asosciated with real bariers.

> I also remember someone saying that a car's armor is reduced as per the
> barrier rules. This makes sense but I don't really remeber the rules saying
> that (at least specifically). But does that mean if a weapon hits a car and
> acceeds the armor rating, that it opens a 1/2 meter hole?

The rules say to treat vehicle armour _like_ a barrier rating, not _as_ a
barrier rating (or similar). Slight difference. Here's the way I read the
vehicle armour rules. Whadda you guys think?

Case 1: Base Power less than or equal to Vehicle armour rating

Nothing at all happens. You do not get to damage the armour, you do
not get to reduce it like a barrier rating. You do nothing.

Case 2: Base Power greater than Vehicle armour rating

A] If the weapon is a normal (non-armour piercing) weapon

i) Reduce Damage category by one. If the weapon is rated at
light, it does no damage.
ii) Subtract Vehicle Armour rating _plus_ Body rating from
the weapons power. (Minimum of 2. It is likely here that
nearly all weapons will have a resultant of 2.)
Power-(Vehicle Armour+Body)
iii) Roll Body+(Armour/2) (rounding down) against the target
number determined above.
Body+(Armour/2) vs. target determined above.

B] If the weapon is an armour piercing variety (eg, AVM/R, or half
the weapons out of FoF)

i) Do not reduce damage category by one.
ii) Subtract 1/2 the Vehicle Armour Rating (rounding down)
from the Power of the weapon.
Power-(Armour)/2
iii) Roll Body+(Armour/2) (rounding down) against the target
number determined above.
Body+(Armour/2) vs. target determined above.

Note that the rules seem contradictory, on page 108 it says, in reference to
armour piercing weapons "Those weapons have a semiarmor-piercing warhead and
do not have their Damage Level reduced, but the Power is reduced by the
vehicle's armor." While on page 99, it says "Against AVRs, the Barrier
Rating of a barrier is halved (round down), as is the Armor Rating for
vehicles (round down)." Now, I decided to make use of the rule on page 99,
but it does get a bit deadly if your vehicle gets hit with an armour
piercing weapon.

> And if a mage insists on carring around more spell locks then he can mask,
> how do you persuade him other then having him assassinated from astral space.

Just destroy them often. The player will soon work out that relying on spell
locks lets you down at crucial moments (like one of my players did when he
walked through a ward which was at the entrance to the big bad guys lair.
The mage found himself spell-lock-less all of a sudden, with the final
encounter of the adventure looming over his head...<evil GM grin>). He will
also pretty soon work out that spell locks are a massive karma drain. If he
still persists in using them, hey, what's it matter? All the more
opportunity for you to do something nasty to him when you feel the need, and
he gets less karma for useful things too. Many corps will have elementals on
patrol to take care of astral intruders. An elemental will consider a focus
as an astral intruder, and will (depending on orders) attack it. Kiss goodby
to all of your foci, unless you turn them off.

> And what do inactive locks and focusus look in astral space. Are they
> obvious or do they look "normal" or use an Astral Perception check or what?

Anyone who glances at a dormant focus from the astral will immediately know
it's true nature. (Under Spells Locks, pg 138.)

> And what about the 6 bullet bursts of the Super Mach 100. Do you use a +6
> recoil modifier or the standard +3 burst recoil modifier?

The description says to apply normal recoil modifiers, so give it +6.

> [Neatness]

Yeah, the format's fine (at least it is to me).

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

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 3
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 12:12:23 +0200
>Do APDS rounds half the effect of a bullet barrier? I think we had this
>discusion before, but I don't remeber what we came up with.

Can't remember the thread, but I'd say no. I'd rule a Bullet Barrier sees
any bullet as a "bullet" regardless of specific attributes of that bullet.

>And if a mage insists on carring around more spell locks then he can mask,
[snip]
>I think I can talk him in to carring them inactive at least.

Just talking to the player should help -- his character would know about the
roaming enemy magicians in astral space.

>And what do inactive locks and focusus look in astral space. Are they obvious
>or do they look "normal" or use an Astral Perception check or what?

Unmasked foci are obvious.

>And what about the 6 bullet bursts of the Super Mach 100. Do you use a +6
>recoil modifier or the standard +3 burst recoil modifier?

+6, though some people use +3 (I think FOF isn't very clear on this one).

>And my final question is, does this letter look in neat order? This crazy
>system at school doesn't have a return carriage or enter key and doesn't have
>an automatic return like most systems. I was just wondering if this was real
>hard to read after reading someone else's who had a bunch of = .

No CR??? That's worse than the terminals in the library I regularly visit...
Anyway, it looked OK (better than many others I've seen posted here :)


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Sanity is contagious
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 4
From: U-Gene <C14101@*******.BITNET>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 11:39:52 EDT
Damion Milliken wrote
> B] If the weapon is of armor-piercing variety [snip]
> i) Do not reduce damage code by one
> ii) Subtract 1/2 from the vehicle armor rating (round down)
> from the power of the weapon
> Power-(armor)/2
> iii) Roll Body+(armor/2) against the a target number
> determined above.
> Body+(armor/2) vs. target number above
>

That seems reasonable. But in determining the reduction in power (ii),
why wouldn't it be Powere-(armor+body)/2 since armor+body determines the
"balistic" rating for normal rounds. I see this could conflict with the
reference you mentioned to being "use half the armor rating", but ii)
seems to be vary deadly. Besides, to me it also like "use half the armor
rating" could also mean Power-(body + armor/2) which would make APDS rounds
less deadly. I think this might be a GM call. [I probably go home to look
at the rules AGAIN]. I think I will use Power-(body+armor)/2.
Everything else on this point you [Damion] said looks good.

>>What about the 6-bullet bursts of the Super Mach 100. Do you use a +6
>>recoil modifier or the standard +3 burst modifier?
>
>The description says to apply the standard recoil modifiers, so give it +6

But the standard recoil modifier for a burst _is_ +3. That's why I asked
this question! [U-Gene considers riping high velocity weapon pages out of
Fields of Fire book.]

Thanks for the suggestions on spell locked mages.

But I think I have a split vote on the APDS vs. bullet barrier.

BTW I think Gurth said something like Harlequin being a legendary shadowrun
module. I would have to say, YES! I started running Harlequin for my
players when we first started. No one had ever played Shadowrun before,
including me, and it was _GREAT_. Highly recommended.

>> [neatness]
>
> Yeah, the format is fine (at least to me)

Good, not only does it not have a standard CR, but I also can't copy text
so I have to retype everything I reply to!

<< U-Gene -- Decker looking forward to retiring from GM after HB >>
Message no. 5
From: Matt Hufstetler <gt2778a@*****.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 15:44:59 -0400
> >Do APDS rounds half the effect of a bullet barrier? I think we had this
> >discusion before, but I don't remeber what we came up with.
>
> Can't remember the thread, but I'd say no. I'd rule a Bullet Barrier sees
> any bullet as a "bullet" regardless of specific attributes of that bullet.

I also wouldn't think the APDS would have much effect with the barrier.

> >And what do inactive locks and focusus look in astral space. Are they obvious
> >or do they look "normal" or use an Astral Perception check or what?
>
> Unmasked foci are obvious.
What about unbonded foci? Say I carry around three spell locks for use in
an emergency(Never happen, but this is a theoretical situation anyway)?
Wouldn't the locks at least require a detailed aura reading to find?

> >And what about the 6 bullet bursts of the Super Mach 100. Do you use a +6
> >recoil modifier or the standard +3 burst recoil modifier?
>
> +6, though some people use +3 (I think FOF isn't very clear on this one).

No, FOF isn't very clear on this one, however we use the +6. About the
only thing the HV stuff is used for is effective suppression fire.

> >And my final question is, does this letter look in neat order? This crazy
> >system at school doesn't have a return carriage or enter key and doesn't have
> >an automatic return like most systems. I was just wondering if this was real
> >hard to read after reading someone else's who had a bunch of = .
>
> No CR??? That's worse than the terminals in the library I regularly visit...
> Anyway, it looked OK (better than many others I've seen posted here :)

On most unix machines(or so I've read), you should be able to use CTRL-J
to get a CR. Unless you are using some funky text editor like Pico.



Matt 'Comatose Raspberry' Hufstetler
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt2778a
Internet: gt2778a@*****.gatech.edu
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 11:14:00 +0200
>> Can't remember the thread, but I'd say no. I'd rule a Bullet Barrier sees
>> any bullet as a "bullet" regardless of specific attributes of that
bullet.
>
>I also wouldn't think the APDS would have much effect with the barrier.

This would work both ways: the Bullet Barrier would provide its full rating
against APDS (instead of half), but also against flechette (which would use
either Ballistic or double Impact), so you're at a disadvantage with those.

>> Unmasked foci are obvious.
>What about unbonded foci? Say I carry around three spell locks for use in
>an emergency(Never happen, but this is a theoretical situation anyway)?

Unbonded foci are by definition inactive, and you can't activate them until
you pay Karma. I assume you mean switched-off spell locks; with those, I'd
rule they are also obvious, but maybe there's something in one of the books.


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Tijd voor een andere tekst...
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 7
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 12:37:25 GMT
U-Gene writes

>
> Do APDS rounds half the effect of a bullet barrier? I think we had this
> discusion before, but I don't remeber what we came up with.
>
As far as i know but i did not see the discussion on it.

> I also remember someone saying that a car's armor is reduced as per the
> barrier rules. This makes sense but I don't really remeber the rules saying
> that (at least specifically). But does that mean if a weapon hits a car and
> acceeds the armor rating, that it opens a 1/2 meter hole?
>
Don't think so its hardened but it's armour not a barrier, any
comments?

> And if a mage insists on carring around more spell locks then he can mask,
> how do you persuade him other then having him assassinated from astral space.
> hence, thier rival mage group blasts him with mana bolt 6 plus 6 magic pool.
> I think I can talk him in to carring them inactive at least.
>
If you feel very kind just dispell them but realistically the force 6
mana bolt is what he diserves and what any self respecting security
mage would give him.

> And what do inactive locks and focusus look in astral space. Are they obvious
> or do they look "normal" or use an Astral Perception check or what?
>
I would say astral perception check but remember when inactive they
don't have that great astral limk so can easily be hidden in a
pocket, what no LOS well you cannot see it then.

> And what about the 6 bullet bursts of the Super Mach 100. Do you use a +6
> recoil modifier or the standard +3 burst recoil modifier?
>
I use +6, FASA should really have given an explicit ruling on this
one as if you use a mere +3 they become very powerful.
Buy the rules in the main book as FoF does not overule them they
would be +1 per bullet hence the +6 but the shadowtalk does suggest
the modifier should be +3. Anyone got a vote on this or able to get
FASA to clarify?

> And my final question is, does this letter look in neat order? This crazy
> system at school doesn't have a return carriage or enter key and doesn't have
> an automatic return like most systems. I was just wondering if this was real
> hard to read after reading someone else's who had a bunch of = .
>
Came out ok for me.

> hem. Well then.
>
> GM -- "Havoc, you feel your lungs filling with blood as a powerful spell
> grounds out through your now blackend body."
> Havoc -- "Ughhh...can I still cast Treat???"
>
to which the answer if if you are still concious yes, and in his next
action the opponent reapeats treatment, long before that treat spell
takes effect, can we say mage burgers.

> << U-Gene -- A Decker who is just about sick of GMing. >>
> << Help me please! (Dragged back to table kicking and screaming>>
>

Mark
Message no. 8
From: Jonas Gabrielson <m94jga@*******.TDB.UU.SE>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 17:20:48 +0200
On Wed, 26 Apr 1995, Gurth wrote:

> >> Unmasked foci are obvious.
> >What about unbonded foci? Say I carry around three spell locks for use in
> >an emergency(Never happen, but this is a theoretical situation anyway)?
>
> Unbonded foci are by definition inactive, and you can't activate them until
> you pay Karma. I assume you mean switched-off spell locks; with those, I'd
> rule they are also obvious, but maybe there's something in one of the books.

I would rather think that as the focus does not tap mana from the
astral while they are inactive, the link from astral to physical would be
lost, and spells can thus not be grounded through them. However, they can
be spotted with Astral Perception, if they aren't masked.

Ditto with unbonded foci - they have an aura, since they have been
enchanted, but as they cannot be activated, they cannot link to the
astral, as per above. However, a focus linked to another mage can be
activated by him, if in line of sight, but spells will ground into the
physical focus, not the bonded mage. A bond between the focus and the
mage, or a similarity in auras, will be noticed, though.

- Jonas
Message no. 9
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 23:21:17 +1000
U-Gene writes:

> That seems reasonable. But in determining the reduction in power (ii),
> why wouldn't it be Powere-(armor+body)/2 since armor+body determines the
> "balistic" rating for normal rounds. I see this could conflict with the
> reference you mentioned to being "use half the armor rating", but ii)
> seems to be vary deadly. Besides, to me it also like "use half the armor
> rating" could also mean Power-(body + armor/2) which would make APDS rounds
> less deadly. I think this might be a GM call. [I probably go home to look
> at the rules AGAIN]. I think I will use Power-(body+armor)/2.

I ruled as I did because of the paragraph on pg 108 which says:

"The Power and Damage Codes for grenades and other explosives are affected
in the same manner, with the exception of anti-vehicle rockets and missiles.
These weapons have a semiarmour-piercing warhead and do not have their
Damage Code reduced, but the Power is reduced by the vehicle's armour."

{Note: This is one half of the contradictory bit I was speaking about, it
says on page 99 that the vehicle armour rating is halved.}

Anyway, I suppose it could be read that the Power of an armour piercing
weapon was reduced by both the Body, and half the armour rating. ie, the
bonus of the armour piercing ability is that you do not have the damage
level reduction, and you only reduce the Power by half the armour (as well
as the Body), rather than the full armour rating (as well as Body). But it
really does make vehicles such as the Citymaster and Banshee invulnerable.

I don't think it is possible to interpret a (Body + Armour)/2 Power level
reduction though. It's either (Armour/2) or Body + (Armour/2). The first one
makes for very nasty armour piercing weapons, and the second for very
innefficient armour piercing weapons.

Has anyone sought clarification on this from the Dark Lord's at all? It has
had me confused for quite some time.

> But I think I have a split vote on the APDS vs. bullet barrier.

After considering the methods which must be employed for barrier spells to
work, I'll have to change my thoughts on the APDS vs Barrier spells. The
barriers _cannot_ (in my view any more) work by physical means (ie creating
a real barrier). They must work by some magical process which detects the
presence of the desired object (blades, bullets, everything in the case of a
general barrier), and prohibits it's passing. Hence it wouldn't matter if
the bullet were explosive, APDS, flechette, gel or whatever, it would have
the base Power when considering barrier spells, not any of the appropriate
modifications. The bullet (for example) is not "blasting though" the
barrier, it is more of a case of the barrier retarding the round, which is
therefore independent of the type of bullet.

> Good, not only does it not have a standard CR, but I also can't copy text
> so I have to retype everything I reply to!

<shudder> I'd _HATE_ that, I really feel sorry for you man.

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

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 10
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: looking for help
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 1995 23:48:48 +1000
Jonas Gabrielson writes:

> However, a focus linked to another mage can be activated by him, if in
> line of sight...

You sure? I always thought that foci other than spell locks could only be
active if touching the person they were bonded to. And that spell locks
could be turned off and on by the controlling magician at will (regardless
of LOS).

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

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a19 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+$ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about looking for help, 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!