Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Gorbi gbmaill@***.de
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 20:28:40 +0200
Hello!

I had an argument with a player about the game mechanics of manipulation
spells like "turn to stone" or the spells "turn to
liquid/energy/furniture"
from NAGEE. One argument was that if a vital organ such as the heart or the
lung ceases to exist, the subject of the spell dies after the spell is
released.
The counter-argument was that the aura of the subject is untouched, it still
says "this is a healthy man with a working heart". So if the spell is
released the "physical component" of the being "asks" the aura what
form it
should take.
Any ideas?
Or a plausible explanation why spells like that simply don't work?

Gorbi

--
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers
there will be." --Lao Tse
Message no. 2
From: Arcady arcady@***.net
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 13:31:33 +700
>> I had an argument with a player about the game mechanics of manipulation
>> spells like "turn to stone" or the spells "turn to
liquid/energy/furniture"

>> from NAGEE.
>
><K reads this line, falls over in silent frustration and states> "Gorbi, I
am
>VERY sorry those spells ever made it into NAGEE. I personally wanted to
>shoot Patrick Ray (not Patrick from here on the list) for trying to come up

>with them. When I told him no repeatedly, he promptly took them into another

>GM's game, and managed to have them done. At least, that is what I remember.

> He just could NOT wait to put them into the NAGEE when Jerry was putting

>those things together."

Isn't "Turn To Stone" just a more literal way of doing the petrify spell? I
would have it work the same as that spell as far as game mechanics are concerned.
If I'm rembering the correct item that is.

But there's one core thing about all this. While everything in the game should
be filtered through the GMs interpretation before being added to the game; it's
especially true of something from an unofficial source. As a GM you should feel
no qualms whatsoever ruling however you want in regards to something from NAGEE
or any other non-canon source. Of course the only concern a GM should make with
an 'official' source is how confusing would it make things to change it vs.
how much does it fix things to your GMing needs to do so.

A player cannot 'hold a GM hostage' to the rules. Particularly if those rules
aren't even official.

Arcady Resume: http://resumes.dice.com/arcady <0){{{{><
Art: http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/lothlorien/artists/brianfw/brianfw.html
/.)\ Projects: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Portal/1865/
\(@/ Homepage: http://www.jps.net/arcady/
Message no. 3
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 15:18:21 EDT
In a message dated 8/31/1999 1:36:58 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
gbmaill@***.de writes:

> I had an argument with a player about the game mechanics of manipulation
> spells like "turn to stone" or the spells "turn to
liquid/energy/furniture"
> from NAGEE.

<K reads this line, falls over in silent frustration and states> "Gorbi, I am
VERY sorry those spells ever made it into NAGEE. I personally wanted to
shoot Patrick Ray (not Patrick from here on the list) for trying to come up
with them. When I told him no repeatedly, he promptly took them into another
GM's game, and managed to have them done. At least, that is what I remember.
He just could NOT wait to put them into the NAGEE when Jerry was putting
those things together."

>One argument was that if a vital organ such as the heart or the
> lung ceases to exist, the subject of the spell dies after the spell is
> released.

More or less, this is an interesting "excuse" to come up with. I always said
that achieving and "energy state" was simply too complex for most spells to
obtain. "Liquid State" wasn't so bad, as it is compared to "Mist
Form" which
was obtainable, and even studiable in some circumstances (Mist Lynx).
"Furniture" I have to admit, I don't recall that ever being tried.

> The counter-argument was that the aura of the subject is untouched, it
still
> says "this is a healthy man with a working heart". So if the spell is
> released the "physical component" of the being "asks" the aura
what form it
> should take.
> Any ideas?
> Or a plausible explanation why spells like that simply don't work?

See above.

-K
Message no. 4
From: Mike & Linda Frankl mlfrankl@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:05:47 -0400
Gorbi asketh:
> from NAGEE. One argument was that if a vital organ such as the
> heart or the
> lung ceases to exist, the subject of the spell dies after the spell is
> released.
> Or a plausible explanation why spells like that simply don't work?

Since magic cannot target the tire of a car as it is part of the integral
wholeness (aura wholeness) then I would imagine that the spell could not
target a specific organ. Not to mention that there is no way to establish
LOS for the organ either.

;)

Smilin' Jack
Message no. 5
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:32:10 -0400
At 22.05 08-31-99 -0400, you wrote:
>target a specific organ. Not to mention that there is no way to establish
>LOS for the organ either.

Well....
Raven has a disturbing image of a mage with spurs, shudders, and thinks
that he's been doing conics for too long.


Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 6
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 10:27:47 +0200
According to Gorbi, at 20:28 on 31 Aug 99, the word on
the street was...

> I had an argument with a player about the game mechanics of manipulation
> spells like "turn to stone" or the spells "turn to
liquid/energy/furniture"

Just to make sure: you mean Shapechange, Amorphous Liquid; Shapechange,
Energy Form; Shapechange, Human/Metahuman; and Shapechange, Inanimate
Object, right?

> from NAGEE.

Issue 3, to be precise, and to be updated to SR3 stats in issue 8.

> One argument was that if a vital organ such as the heart or the lung
> ceases to exist, the subject of the spell dies after the spell is
> released.
> The counter-argument was that the aura of the subject is untouched, it still
> says "this is a healthy man with a working heart". So if the spell is
> released the "physical component" of the being "asks" the aura
what form it
> should take.
> Any ideas?

Characters who are Petrified (as per the spell or critter power) don't die
when the spell takes effect or is released, so I don't see why they would
with a spell that does more or less the same -- except that with these
Shapechange spells, the target remains conscious, while with Petrify
consciousness is lost.

> Or a plausible explanation why spells like that simply don't work?

The one explanation I can come up with is "Magic doesn't do those things"
but that's not really a valid explanation within magical theory, I'm
afraid. I don't like them, myself, and I don't think I'd allow them in my
campaign, but they may be _possible_ nonetheless.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 7
From: Gorbi gbmaill@***.de
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 13:45:48 +0200
> According to Gorbi, at 20:28 on 31 Aug 99, the word on
> the street was...
Gurt wrote:
>> I had an argument with a player about the game mechanics of manipulation
>> spells like "turn to stone" or the spells "turn to
liquid/energy/furniture"
>
> Just to make sure: you mean Shapechange, Amorphous Liquid; Shapechange,
> Energy Form; Shapechange, Human/Metahuman; and Shapechange, Inanimate
> Object, right?
>
>> from NAGEE.
>
> Issue 3, to be precise, and to be updated to SR3 stats in issue 8.

Yes, I didn't remember the correct names, only the effects.


> Characters who are Petrified (as per the spell or critter power) don't die
> when the spell takes effect or is released, so I don't see why they would
> with a spell that does more or less the same -- except that with these
> Shapechange spells, the target remains conscious, while with Petrify
> consciousness is lost.

Okay, let's assume all the spells work like the Petrify power (without the
loss of consciousness).
But my question remains: Why do the targets of the spells don't die? The
heart has stopped, the brain doesn't get oxygen and so on. Hey, the target
doesn't een HAVE a heart or a brain. The astral space and the matrix show us
that a person can exist outside the body. But WITHOUT the body?
Can anybody give me an explanation except "Well, don't as, it's magic."


Gorbi

--
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers
there will be." --Lao Tse
Message no. 8
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 08:14:35 -0700
> But my question remains: Why do the targets of the spells don't die? The
> heart has stopped, the brain doesn't get oxygen and so on. Hey, the
target
> doesn't een HAVE a heart or a brain.

You just answered your own question. How can you suffer brain death, when
you don'y have a brain? The body CAN'T die, if it doesn't exist. The
spells, by changing the body into non-living materials, would suspend ALL
organinc function, including death.

Mongoose
Message no. 9
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 12:58:35 EDT
In a message dated 9/1/1999 6:41:20 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
gbmaill@***.de writes:

> Okay, let's assume all the spells work like the Petrify power (without the
> loss of consciousness).

Uh, no, lets' not. the spells are not "Inherent" and therefore IMO at least,
they are also not as powerful overall.

> But my question remains: Why do the targets of the spells don't die? The
> heart has stopped, the brain doesn't get oxygen and so on. Hey, the target
> doesn't een HAVE a heart or a brain. The astral space and the matrix show
us
> that a person can exist outside the body. But WITHOUT the body?
> Can anybody give me an explanation except "Well, don't as, it's magic."

Okay, IF what you are all saying about Petrify is true (that you remain
conscious, but immobile), you can look at if from the POV that your
consciousness is *trapped* in the power itself. And, like astral forms,
consciousness can be seperated from the flesh in a number of ways (powerful
drugs, astral projection, astray gateway, etc.).

the body itself is in effect, placed in a state of pure/total metabolic
stasis, and therefore doesn't suffer from prolonged "starvation" or
"asphyxiation".

-K
Message no. 10
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 21:21:57 +0200
According to Gorbi, at 13:45 on 1 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> Okay, let's assume all the spells work like the Petrify power (without the
> loss of consciousness).
> But my question remains: Why do the targets of the spells don't die? The
> heart has stopped, the brain doesn't get oxygen and so on. Hey, the target
> doesn't een HAVE a heart or a brain.

So it can't stop -- problem solved :)

> The astral space and the matrix show us that a person can exist outside
> the body. But WITHOUT the body? Can anybody give me an explanation
> except "Well, don't as, it's magic."

You see, that's exactly the problem -- "it's magic" is the only answer
that will work. Applying physics or chemistry to Shadowrun spells simply
doesn't work in about 99% of all cases, because magic doesn't stick to the
rules of science. If it did, how do you explain Levitate, or Flamethrower?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 11
From: Josh strago@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 16:00:04 -0400
Gurth wrote:

> According to Gorbi, at 13:45 on 1 Sep 99, the word on
> the street was...
>
> > Okay, let's assume all the spells work like the Petrify power (without the
> > loss of consciousness).
> > But my question remains: Why do the targets of the spells don't die? The
> > heart has stopped, the brain doesn't get oxygen and so on. Hey, the target
> > doesn't een HAVE a heart or a brain.
>
> So it can't stop -- problem solved :)
>
> > The astral space and the matrix show us that a person can exist outside
> > the body. But WITHOUT the body? Can anybody give me an explanation
> > except "Well, don't as, it's magic."
>
> You see, that's exactly the problem -- "it's magic" is the only answer
> that will work. Applying physics or chemistry to Shadowrun spells simply
> doesn't work in about 99% of all cases, because magic doesn't stick to the
> rules of science. If it did, how do you explain Levitate, or Flamethrower?
>

I'm no physics major, and I have severe problems with quantum mechanics, but
isn't there a small (infinitesimal) chance that a thrown object will move UP and
not down? Magic *could* just control atoms and sub-atomic particles and thus
allow that infinitesimal chance to occur under whatever. I know that's not the
correct explanation, but it IS scientific. ;)

> --
> Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
> De plaag is terug...!
> -> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
> ->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
> -> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-
>
> GC3.1: 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?
> Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998



--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+ M-
Message no. 12
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 15:23:08 -0600 (CST)
On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Gurth wrote:

> According to Gorbi, at 13:45 on 1 Sep 99, the word on
> the street was...
>
> > The astral space and the matrix show us that a person can exist outside
> > the body. But WITHOUT the body? Can anybody give me an explanation
> > except "Well, don't as, it's magic."
>
> You see, that's exactly the problem -- "it's magic" is the only answer
> that will work. Applying physics or chemistry to Shadowrun spells simply
> doesn't work in about 99% of all cases, because magic doesn't stick to the
> rules of science. If it did, how do you explain Levitate, or Flamethrower?

Science can explain /anything/ (except women). *smile*

Since magic is evident, I would think SR's scientists have accepted the
fact that there's the gaiasphere, mana, magic, all that. Right?

You want an explanation for levitate? Here's two: It causes a force to
push the subject upwards. Or, it lessens their 'mana weight' (or maybe
just the area around them), which would result in a direct application of
Archimedes' Principle (definition: the gaiasphere pushes upward on the
subject with a force equal to the 'weight' of the mana the subject
displaces. If the subject's 'mana weight' is lowered, the gaiasphere will
push up on the subject).

Yes, I know that the second creates a problem for magicians levitating,
but if the gaiasphere is really dense, then you can lessen their 'mana
weight' without hindering magical castings.

Flamethrower? The magic spell merely excites the molecules in the air
until they combust, then spreads that effect.


-Jared Leisner
Beginning Physics student, please leave your Flamethrower at home.
Message no. 13
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 01:00:11 +0200
And finally, Jared Leisner expressed himself by writing:

> Science can explain /anything/ (except women). *smile*

But can Magic explain them? :)

--
[arclight@*********.de]<><><><><><>[ICQ14322211]
Vorsicht Ritchie, ein Hochhäus!! - Wer?
<><><><[http://www.datahaven.de/arclight]><><><>;
Message no. 14
From: Mike & Linda Frankl mlfrankl@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 17:14:56 -0400
Raven wrote:
> >target a specific organ. Not to mention that there is no way to establish
> >LOS for the organ either.
>
> Well....
> Raven has a disturbing image of a mage with spurs,
> shudders, and thinks
> that he's been doing conics for too long.

Yeah, but if you can open them up to see the organ without the spell then
you really don't need the spell in the first place.

Conics?

;)

Smilin' Jack
Message no. 15
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 21:13:21 -0400
At 17.14 09-01-99 -0400, you wrote:
>Conics?

"An object dropped from a moving aricraft (see Fig 22.55) will follow a
parabolic path if air resistance is negligable. A weatehr interment
released from a height of 3520m is observed to strike the water at a
distance of 2150 m fromt he realease point. Write the equation of the
path, taking axis as shown. Find the height of of the insturment when x is
1000m"
You know, conics. The planar shape formed by cutting off a cone at a
certain point and angle, include parabolas, hyperbolas, the circle, lines
and the point. It's part of both calculus (according to my book, any ways)
and geometery, and really, really, really sucks to have to turn in 50 of
the damn things every day.


Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 16
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 01:13:21 -0400
At 17.14 09-01-99 -0400, you wrote:
>Conics?

"An object dropped from a moving aricraft (see Fig 22.55) will follow a
parabolic path if air resistance is negligable. A weatehr interment
released from a height of 3520m is observed to strike the water at a
distance of 2150 m fromt he realease point. Write the equation of the
path, taking axis as shown. Find the height of of the insturment when x is
1000m"
You know, conics. The planar shape formed by cutting off a cone at a
certain point and angle, include parabolas, hyperbolas, the circle, lines
and the point. It's part of both calculus (according to my book, any ways)
and geometery, and really, really, really sucks to have to turn in 50 of
the damn things every day.


Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 17
From: Penta cpenta@*****.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 22:14:25 -0700
IronRaven wrote:
It's part of both calculus (according to my book, any ways)

> and geometery, and really, really, really sucks to have to turn in 50 of
> the damn things every day.

Uh oh. I take geometry this next school year, which starts tomorrow.....EEEEEEEEK!

John the utterly scared.
Message no. 18
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 22:32:35 -0400
At 22.14 09-01-99 -0700, you wrote:
>Uh oh. I take geometry this next school year, which starts
tomorrow.....EEEEEEEEK!

I'm taking it at the college level with Attilla the Hun's illegitemite
daughter as a professor. At the high school level, they usually start you
out with simpel things, like irregular solids. <g> Seriously, you most
likley have things like "this is a square" the first week.
This nasty stuff is review for us.



Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 19
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 11:44:30 +0200
According to Josh, at 16:00 on 1 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> > You see, that's exactly the problem -- "it's magic" is the only answer
> > that will work. Applying physics or chemistry to Shadowrun spells simply
> > doesn't work in about 99% of all cases, because magic doesn't stick to the
> > rules of science. If it did, how do you explain Levitate, or Flamethrower?
>
> I'm no physics major, and I have severe problems with quantum mechanics, but
> isn't there a small (infinitesimal) chance that a thrown object will move UP and
> not down? Magic *could* just control atoms and sub-atomic particles and thus
> allow that infinitesimal chance to occur under whatever. I know that's not the
> correct explanation, but it IS scientific. ;)

That's the explanation you'd use in Mage: The Ascenscion, when casting a
levitate-like spell in a room full of physicists :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 20
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 11:44:30 +0200
According to leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu, at 15:23 on 1 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> Since magic is evident, I would think SR's scientists have accepted the
> fact that there's the gaiasphere, mana, magic, all that. Right?

Yep.

Certainly, your explanations (that I snipped) work. However, what Gorbi
was trying to do -- I think -- is explain spell effects using
_traditional_ science. In that case, it doesn't work, because the magic
isn't involved in the process (despite being the cause). That has the
result of causing impossible effects when you look at it rationally.

> Flamethrower? The magic spell merely excites the molecules in the air
> until they combust, then spreads that effect.

It's been quite some time since I was last actively involved with
chemistry, but it seems to me that a _lot_ of energy is needed to do that,
at least with the molecules that make up the air you're affecting with the
spell.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 21
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 13:30:47 -0600 (CST)
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Arclight wrote:

> And finally, Jared Leisner expressed himself by writing:
>
> > Science can explain /anything/ (except women). *smile*
>
> But can Magic explain them? :)

Anyone got a Grade 1000 Initiate hanging around that can travel the
big, bad metaplanes no one's mapped yet?

I think from the books that Harl didn't understand at least one of the
women in the IE court...so, if he's been around that long and still can't
understand women, what hope do mere mortals have?
Message no. 22
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 13:33:47 -0600 (CST)
On Wed, 1 Sep 1999, Penta wrote:

> IronRaven wrote:
> It's part of both calculus (according to my book, any ways)
>
> > and geometery, and really, really, really sucks to have to turn in 50 of
> > the damn things every day.
>
> Uh oh. I take geometry this next school year, which starts tomorrow.....EEEEEEEEK!

I'll take your geometry class if you take my Calculus III class. I start
next Weds (woo hoo!).
Message no. 23
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 13:44:14 -0600 (CST)
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Gurth wrote:

> According to leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu, at 15:23 on 1 Sep 99, the word on
> the street was...
>
> It's been quite some time since I was last actively involved with
> chemistry, but it seems to me that a _lot_ of energy is needed to do that,
> at least with the molecules that make up the air you're affecting with the
> spell.

Wouldn't you just need to make a tiny flame, then gather pure oxygen in a
line, or something?

Anyways, I didn't say they /were/ the explanations, just that they could
be.
Message no. 24
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 21:36:32 +0200
According to leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu, at 13:44 on 2 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> Wouldn't you just need to make a tiny flame, then gather pure oxygen in a
> line, or something?

You need something for that oxygen to react with in order to have a flame,
I'd think.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 25
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 1999 17:04:41 -0600 (CST)
On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Gurth wrote:

> According to leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu, at 13:44 on 2 Sep 99, the word on
> the street was...
>
> > Wouldn't you just need to make a tiny flame, then gather pure oxygen in a
> > line, or something?
>
> You need something for that oxygen to react with in order to have a flame,
> I'd think.

I know, I realized that after I sent the message. Maybe mana is the
reactant?
Message no. 26
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 10:16:37 +0200
According to leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu, at 17:04 on 2 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> > You need something for that oxygen to react with in order to have a flame,
> > I'd think.
>
> I know, I realized that after I sent the message. Maybe mana is the
> reactant?

I doubt it'd work that way. At any rate, all this is going against what I
was trying to say: that you shouldn't try to apply too much science to
magic, because then you get into these kinds of discussions :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 27
From: leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1999 09:49:08 -0600 (CST)
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Gurth wrote:

> I doubt it'd work that way. At any rate, all this is going against what I
> was trying to say: that you shouldn't try to apply too much science to
> magic, because then you get into these kinds of discussions :)

Well, then you shouldn't have brought it up, should you have? Seems to me
that it's kind of unkind to ask for (implicitly, explitly, whatever) a
scientific explanation of magic, then turn around and smack the explainer
in the face with a dead otter.

Well, Gurth. Now I have to go recover from that slap in the face. Maybe
I'll have the strength to read on in the list later this week. I hope
you're happy with yourself.


-Jared Leisner

P.S. Another good reason to not apply science too much would be just to
keep the mystery in magic.
P.S.S. Yes, this was a joke.
Message no. 28
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 1999 11:44:15 +0200
According to leisnj48@****.cis.uwosh.edu, at 9:49 on 3 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> Well, then you shouldn't have brought it up, should you have?

I didn't -- Gorbi asked for a scientific explanation (not in so many
words, but IMHO he still did) and I tried to explain why a scientific
expalanation _wouldn't_ work. That then got turned into trying to find
scientific explanations for the spells I used as examples...

> P.S.S. Yes, this was a joke.

Please use smileys in future -- until I read this line, I thought you were
serious...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
De plaag is terug...!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: 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?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 29
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 02:12:21 +0200
Ereskanti@***.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 9/1/1999 6:41:20 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
> gbmaill@***.de writes:
>
> > Okay, let's assume all the spells work like the Petrify power (without the
> > loss of consciousness).
>
> Uh, no, lets' not. the spells are not "Inherent" and therefore IMO at
least,
> they are also not as powerful overall.
>
Those maybe not, but what will stop me from developing turn to
anti-matter?

Nothing by the rules that where used to create the turn to stone or turn
to what ever spell.

Instant past nuke power spell, very handy :)

--
Barbie

"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - Adolf Hitler

barbie@********.de
http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie/index.html

SRGC 0.22: SR1 SR2+++ SR3--- h++++ b++ b--- UB++ IE- RN+ SR_D+++ W++
dk sh++++ ri++++ sa+++ ad+++ m+++(x+++) gm++ m+++ P+++(P*)
Message no. 30
From: Starrngr@***.com Starrngr@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:39:19 EDT
In a message dated 9/4/99 9:15:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
barbie@********.de writes:

> Those maybe not, but what will stop me from developing turn to
> anti-matter?
>
> Nothing by the rules that where used to create the turn to stone or turn
> to what ever spell.
>
> Instant past nuke power spell, very handy :)

The distressing tendancy for the act of casting the spell correctly
annihilating the caster before he can pass on his knowlege to others comes to
mind. ;)
Message no. 31
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 06:54:03 EDT
In a message dated 9/4/1999 11:15:35 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
barbie@********.de writes:

> > > Okay, let's assume all the spells work like the Petrify power (without
> the
> > > loss of consciousness).
> >
> > Uh, no, lets' not. the spells are not "Inherent" and therefore IMO
at
> least,
> > they are also not as powerful overall.
> >
> Those maybe not, but what will stop me from developing turn to
> anti-matter?

Pure sanity on most of our parts probably. ;-)

I did have a Moon Shaman once that had a "Transform Radioactive Material to
Gold" spell once though. Wasn't so bad really. The spell required the
material to be "lethally radioactive" and not just generically, and it had
rich target numbers. The whole reason it was developed is the group was
hired to deal with some nuclear-level terrorists, and the shaman wanted a
fast, efficient way to deal with the nuclear threat itself.

Not so bad overall, and the spells have only ever been used in maybe 3 games
overall. Not bad considering they were made about 7 years ago ...

> Nothing by the rules that where used to create the turn to stone or turn
> to what ever spell.

In theory, you are correct, there is nothing. But again, this is entirely a
campaign/game power-level question.

> Instant past nuke power spell, very handy :)

Smirk...we have but one of those around ... "Self Sacrifice" merged with
"Hand of God" ruling. Nothing more, Nothing less.

-K
Message no. 32
From: Zixx t_berghoff@*********.netsurf.de
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 23:01:05 +0200
On 2 Sep 99, at 11:44, Gurth wrote:

> > Flamethrower? The magic spell merely excites the molecules in the air
> > until they combust, then spreads that effect.
>
> It's been quite some time since I was last actively involved with
> chemistry, but it seems to me that a _lot_ of energy is needed to do that,
> at least with the molecules that make up the air you're affecting with the
> spell.

Hmmm...well, the problem is that you would have to reduce (translation
correct?), say, carbon-dioxide into it's components and then let it react
again. That *would* be physically correct (if we forget about the magic for
a second ;)). I don't have the numbers here, but I don't think you have
enough material to cause a serious-wound flamethrower.

All IMO, of course...


Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx
ICQ: 9293066

A society without religion is like a crazed psychopath without a loaded .45

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:-- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+ w---() O-
M-- PS+(+++) PE- Y+>++ t+(++) 5+ X++
R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++ e>+++++(*)
h! r--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
Message no. 33
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 23:17:45 -0400
> > > Flamethrower? The magic spell merely excites the molecules in the air
> > > until they combust, then spreads that effect.
> >
> > It's been quite some time since I was last actively involved with
> > chemistry, but it seems to me that a _lot_ of energy is needed to do
that,
> > at least with the molecules that make up the air you're affecting with
the
> > spell.
>
> Hmmm...well, the problem is that you would have to reduce (translation
> correct?), say, carbon-dioxide into it's components and then let it react
> again. That *would* be physically correct (if we forget about the magic
for
> a second ;)). I don't have the numbers here, but I don't think you have
> enough material to cause a serious-wound flamethrower.
>
> All IMO, of course...

The energy required for chemical reactions like burning is on the order of
approximately one electron volt per atom.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Manipulation Spells and Game Mechanics, 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.