Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Stephen Wilcoxon <wilcoxon@***.UDEL.EDU>
Subject: new spell...
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1993 05:36:22 EDT
This is a better version of Mindlink (out of Grim II)...

Telepathic "Chat" Type: Detection TN: 4
Range: Extended Duration: sustained Drain: [(F/2)-2]S
Note: requires voluntary target

Allows the caster to "chat" with the target (must be metahuman). If the
target is unwilling to communicate, then no link is established. Like a
normal conversation, the other person in the link only knows what the
"speaker" wants to tell him.

Comments/criticism welcome... Does anyone actually see the use of Mindlink
(which according to the description is only useable with ONE person who must
be specified at design/learning)?


Twilight

The Crystal Wind is the Storm, and the Storm is Data, and the Data is Life.
-- The Player's Litany
Message no. 2
From: Fahnuir <FAHNUIR@******.BITNET>
Subject: New spell
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 1994 16:53:28 PRT
Hummm...

I'd like u all to take a look at this spell one of my players is trying to des
ign...

Name: Stone Bolts Blizard (Damaging Manipulation Spell)
Type: Physical
Range: Los
Area effect spell
Elemental side effect - Blast *this is where i'm not sure if it is correct*
Base damage: M
Target: 4
Duration: Sustained


Drain Modifiers :

Damage "M" - (F/2) M
Physical Spell ( +1 Drain Target) - (F/2+1) M
Area Spell ( +1 Drain Level) - (F/2+1) S
Elemental side Effect ( +1 Drain Level ) - (F/2+1) D
Sustained Damaging Manipulation ( +1 Drain Level= +2 Drain Target) (F/2+3) D


Final Drain Code (F/2+3) D

He claims that the efect of the stones hiting the victim could cause the victi
m to suffer the effects of the Blast Elem. Side Effect

The damage the magician is able to achieve trough his successes are represente
d by the size of the Stones and their number ( A deadly damage level means a lo
t of big Stones, etc... But this is optional, because nowhere it is said that w
hen a mage designs a spell he must say how it works... We just like to explain
things if we think it is possible...)


Comments on this please...

Thanx...


Fahnuir All Aidur, High Prince of Tir Ur Den

"Let me show u the world in my eyes..." - dM
Message no. 3
From: Timothy Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: New spell
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 1994 11:29:17 -0600
On the idea of new spells, is there ever going to be someone that
converts all the spells out of old systems to SRII? Just knowing the staging
doesn't help me overly much, and I'd love to see the pile of things from the
old game (like Turn to Goo...I MUST see that spell).

----------------------- "Well, you see, they took the Bible literally.
Tim Skirvin Adam and Eve, the snake and the apple...took
(tskirvin@ it word for word. Unfortunately, their
superdec.uni.uiuc.edu) version had a misprint."
----------------------- - Rimmer, Red Dwarf (The Last Day)
Message no. 4
From: "J.W.Thomas" <cm5323@***.AC.UK>
Subject: new spell
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 14:53:04 +0100
Dispel Magic
tired of innitiates having all the fun?
want to smash other casters spells?

DISPEL MAGIC...
line of sight
drain F/2+3 S or something like it

Effect
oppose force of spell vs force of spell directed against, till
one is destroyed.

can be targettted astriallly

CHOPPER
scary monsters
why are all the cows lying down?
Message no. 5
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: New Spell
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 12:53:44 +0100
Holograghic side-step

Type: Physical
Dur: Sustained
Range: Personal
Target: ?

Effect: Your image is shifted 1 metre in a random direction. If the image
is hit it disappears and reappears in a different location.

---------------------

Two questions: What would be the game effect and can it be design as a
manipulation so the image is actually shifted, rather than an illusion.

- David
Message no. 6
From: "Brian A. Stewart" <bstewart@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 09:02:43 -0700
>Holograghic side-step
>
>Type: Physical
>Dur: Sustained
>Range: Personal
>Target: ?
>
>Effect: Your image is shifted 1 metre in a random direction. If the image
>is hit it disappears and reappears in a different location.
>
>Two questions: What would be the game effect and can it be design as a
>manipulation so the image is actually shifted, rather than an illusion.
>
>- David
--------
I do not have my grimmy-thing with me, so I wouldn't try to design the
spell, but as far as effects.

I would say the spell would need to be an illusion. When you say actually
shift the image, I am presuming you mean you want a tangable image shifted
from the actual location of the person, similar maby to a dispacer beast
form **&*. In SR, people can not exist physically in two places at once,
yet (that is mage the ascension). So, that leaves just the image which
would be an illusionary construct. Now, just because it is an illusion does
not mean there can not be some substance to it. Several illusion spells
seem to have some substance to them in order for them to produce the
necessary sensory effect (i.e. stink). The drain would probalby be higher,
but the image must last better vs. contact.

Just my $.02.:)
Enjoy.
Brian

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Essence: It is a descending stream of pure activity which is the dynamic
force of the universe.
-Kabbalah (B.C.E.~1200-~700 A.C.E.)
*****************************************************************
"Nurse Wratchet": bstewart@***.uug.arizona.edu
or brian-stewart@**.arizona.edu
*****************************************************************
Message no. 7
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 17:42:25 +0100
On Fri, 18 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:

> >Holograghic side-step
> >
> >Type: Physical
> >Dur: Sustained
> >Range: Personal
> >Target: ?
> >
> >Effect: Your image is shifted 1 metre in a random direction. If the image
> >is hit it disappears and reappears in a different location.
> >
> >Two questions: What would be the game effect and can it be design as a
> >manipulation so the image is actually shifted, rather than an illusion.
> >
> >- David
> --------
> I do not have my grimmy-thing with me, so I wouldn't try to design the
> spell, but as far as effects.
>
> I would say the spell would need to be an illusion. When you say actually
> shift the image, I am presuming you mean you want a tangable image shifted
> from the actual location of the person, similar maby to a dispacer beast
> form **&*.

There's no need to be offensive. :)

The spell is actually from Ars Magica - Re "Wizards Sidestep"


>In SR, people can not exist physically in two places at once,
> yet (that is mage the ascension).

White Wolf`s wonderfully well structured Magic system.

> So, that leaves just the image which
> would be an illusionary construct.

The trouble here is that illusions are near useless the way my GM plays
them. One success in the perception test and your seen and if they have
thermographic no test is required. I don't know how within the rules this
is but I'am not going to make an issue of it.

> Now, just because it is an illusion does
> not mean there can not be some substance to it. Several illusion spells
> seem to have some substance to them in order for them to produce the
> necessary sensory effect (i.e. stink). The drain would probalby be higher,
> but the image must last better vs. contact.
>


Why can't a manipulation distort light it this way. It may be hard to
come up with a scientific explanation for what the spell is doing but is
that needed, surely the magic will find a way (aka Ars Magica).


- David
Message no. 8
From: "Brian A. Stewart" <bstewart@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 11:07:17 -0700
>> So, that leaves just the image which
>> would be an illusionary construct.
>
>The trouble here is that illusions are near useless the way my GM plays
>them. One success in the perception test and your seen and if they have
>thermographic no test is required. I don't know how within the rules this
>is but I'am not going to make an issue of it.
>
>>
>Why can't a manipulation distort light it this way. It may be hard to
>come up with a scientific explanation for what the spell is doing but is
>that needed, surely the magic will find a way (aka Ars Magica).
>
>
>- David
-----------
Ah, I see. In the group I played, illusions could be quite effective (evil
gm grin). As an minipulation spell, I would say a it could distort the
image of a person (similar to a mirage from the heat rising off the road,
the road seems flat or rising up while it actually dips down [another desert
reference]) away from the actual location. By infusing this image with a
little mana (very specific, weak barrier [ok, weak description, but I'm
brainstorming here:) ] ) the image may be able to withstand the contact.
The drain (from a guess) would be in the S area maby |}.

Any help?:)
Enjoy.
Brian
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Essence: It is a descending stream of pure activity which is the dynamic
force of the universe.
-Kabbalah (B.C.E.~1200-~700 A.C.E.)
*****************************************************************
"Nurse Wratchet": bstewart@***.uug.arizona.edu
or brian-stewart@**.arizona.edu
*****************************************************************
Message no. 9
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 23:14:54 +0100
On Fri, 18 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:

> Ah, I see. In the group I played, illusions could be quite effective (evil
> gm grin). As an minipulation spell, I would say a it could distort the
> image of a person (similar to a mirage from the heat rising off the road,
> the road seems flat or rising up while it actually dips down [another desert
> reference]) away from the actual location. By infusing this image with a
> little mana (very specific, weak barrier [ok, weak description, but I'm
> brainstorming here:) ] ) the image may be able to withstand the contact.
> The drain (from a guess) would be in the S area maby |}.

Whats this about contact? I don't understand.

- David
Message no. 10
From: "Brian A. Stewart" <bstewart@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 13:15:36 -0700
>On Fri, 18 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:
>

>Whats this about contact? I don't understand.
>
>- David
-------
I was refering to touching the image generated by the spell. Simply bending
light via minipulation would be intangable, your hand/bullets would pass
right through it, thus people would know it was just an image. If a bit of
mana was infused in the image to make it solid, people would continue to
attack the image (till they wondered why it was not reacting to the
bullets). Sorry about the confusion.

Enjoy.
Brian
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Essence: It is a descending stream of pure activity which is the dynamic
force of the universe.
-Kabbalah (B.C.E.~1200-~700 A.C.E.)
*****************************************************************
"Nurse Wratchet": bstewart@***.uug.arizona.edu
or brian-stewart@**.arizona.edu
*****************************************************************
Message no. 11
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 00:53:23 +0100
On Sat, 19 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:

> >On Fri, 18 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:
> >
>
> >Whats this about contact? I don't understand.
> >
> >- David
> -------
> I was refering to touching the image generated by the spell. Simply bending
> light via minipulation would be intangable, your hand/bullets would pass
> right through it, thus people would know it was just an image. If a bit of
> mana was infused in the image to make it solid, people would continue to
> attack the image (till they wondered why it was not reacting to the
> bullets). Sorry about the confusion.
>

But in my spell description I wrote that if hit the image dissappears and
reappears in a random position within 1 metre of the caster. This spell
is designed to confuse people. They have no way of knowing where you
truely are. Hopefully by the time they have worked out that your image is
not where you are they'll be geeked :) .


As for game effects how about +6 TN to hit, near to being blind?

- David
Message no. 12
From: Sebastian Wiers <seb@***.RIPCO.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 19:23:33 -0500
>
> On Sat, 19 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:
>
> > >On Fri, 18 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:
> > >
> >
> > >Whats this about contact? I don't understand.
> > >
> > >- David
> > -------
> > I was refering to touching the image generated by the spell. Simply bending
> > light via minipulation would be intangable, your hand/bullets would pass
> > right through it, thus people would know it was just an image. If a bit of
> > mana was infused in the image to make it solid, people would continue to
> > attack the image (till they wondered why it was not reacting to the
> > bullets). Sorry about the confusion.
> >
>
> But in my spell description I wrote that if hit the image dissappears and
> reappears in a random position within 1 metre of the caster. This spell
> is designed to confuse people. They have no way of knowing where you
> truely are. Hopefully by the time they have worked out that your image is
> not where you are they'll be geeked :) .
>
>
> As for game effects how about +6 TN to hit, near to being blind?
>
> - David
>
A bad modifier, Imho. If the Shooter hits the image, he/she misses the mage-
unless the image was in line (behind or in front of ) the mage. Say roll a
D6, with the image apearing in one of six "hexes" around the mage. One third
of the time, it will be inline. Still, it would take luck, not skill, to hit
the mage when aiming for the image. The other 2/3 of the time, it is more
like badly aimed suppresive fire. Now, if the shooter realized the image was
bogus, +6 might not be all bad- the mage is more or less invisible.

seb
Message no. 13
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 16:42:09 +1000
About the holographic sidestep spell. As far as I see it, there are two ways
to look at it, both compariring it to an invisibility spell. The first is
that it's similar to an invisibility spell since it makes you invisible, but
its easier because it doesn't have to get rid of your image entirely, just
displace it. The second is that it is similar to an invisibility spell, but
harder, because it has to remove your image like an invisibility spell, and
it also has to generate a copy of your image somewhere else. I'd take the
second approach.

I'd say that it would have to be an illusion spell, as it is very similar to
invisibility (another illusion spell), and there is really no precendent for
it being a manipulation spell. Here's how I'd construct and rate it:

HOLOGRAOPHIC SIDESTEP

Category: Illusion
Type: Physical
Range: Self
Target Number: 4
Duration: Sustained

Very Realistic or Very Complex Illusion: Base Drain S
Physical Spell: +1 Drain Target
Sustained Spell: +1 Drain Target
Illusion Spell modifier: -1 Drain Level
Personal Spell: -3 Drain Levels
Bonus Game Effect (Perception Test, 2 x successes): +2 Drain Levels
Bonus Game Effect (Creation of, and shifting of image): +1 Drain Level

For a final Drain code of [(F/2)+2]M

This spell renders the caster of the spell invisible, while simultaneously
generating an exact replica of the casters image a short distance (1m) away.
The image will duplicate and display the actions and movements that the
(now) invisible caster makes. To determine the whereabouts of the generated
image, roll 1D6 and consult the Grenade Scatter Diagram on page 97 of SRII.
If an image is attacked in any way, it will dissapear, and a new image will
imidiately reappear in another random position. To determine the image is an
illusion requires a successful perception test against a target number equal
to twice the successes generated upon casting. Also, there is a chance that
the invisible caster will be spotted, again, with a target number equal to
twice the number of succeses rolled upon casting. Note that this spell
affects technological sensing devices such as vidoe cameras and also affects
thermographic vision (unlike invisibility). Devices relying on principles
other than light (eg ultrsound sights) are not fooled, however.

If the illusionary image is attacked with a a ranged weapon (eg gun), and
the image lies between the attacker and the invisible magician, then there
is a chance that the shot may still (accidently) hit the magician. If such a
situation arises, use the Stray Shot rules on page 93 of SRII.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GE d- s++:-- a19 C++ US++>+++ P+ L E W(+) N o(@) K? w(+) O(@) M- V? PS+ PE(@)
Y+ PGP@>+ t+ 5 X+(++) R+(++) tv--- b++(+++) DI? D+@ G++(+) e h(*) !r y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 14
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 10:18:50 +0200
>But in my spell description I wrote that if hit the image dissappears and
>reappears in a random position within 1 metre of the caster. This spell
>is designed to confuse people. They have no way of knowing where you
>truely are. Hopefully by the time they have worked out that your image is
>not where you are they'll be geeked :) .

I don't think it would really work -- sure, at first you're able to fool
them, then they hit your image and it disappears, only to appear 1-2 meters
away from where it first was. At that point (after the first bullet fired,
that is), they start thinking something strange is going on. Now they hit
the second image (hey, it might just be the _real_ person), and it also
disappears. At this point I'd say they start hosing down into your general
area with an automatic weapon...

>As for game effects how about +6 TN to hit, near to being blind?

This is the eternal invisibility question... If it bends light around you,
how can you see? I'd say just leave the TN modifier away, Invisibility
doesn't have it either :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The Teddy Pugh Interview
GC3.0: GAT/! dpu s:- !a>? C+(++) U P L E? W(++) N K- w+ O V? PS+ PE Y PGP-
t(+) 5 X R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G++ e h! !r(--) y? Unofficial Shadowrun
Guru :)
Message no. 15
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 14:30:45 +0100
On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, Gurth wrote:

>
> This is the eternal invisibility question... If it bends light around you,
> how can you see? I'd say just leave the TN modifier away, Invisibility
> doesn't have it either :)
>

It's MAGIC it doesn't have to be logical. How about if the firer knows the
image to be false he would have to use the suppression fire rules. And a
close combatant would be flighting blind?


- David
Message no. 16
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 14:38:04 +0100
On Sat, 19 Aug 1995, Sebastian Wiers wrote:

> > As for game effects how about +6 TN to hit, near to being blind?
> >
> > - David
> >
> A bad modifier, Imho. If the Shooter hits the image, he/she misses the mage-
> unless the image was in line (behind or in front of ) the mage. Say roll a
> D6, with the image apearing in one of six "hexes" around the mage. One
third
> of the time, it will be inline. Still, it would take luck, not skill, to hit
> the mage when aiming for the image. The other 2/3 of the time, it is more
> like badly aimed suppresive fire. Now, if the shooter realized the image was
> bogus, +6 might not be all bad- the mage is more or less invisible.
>
> seb
>

The image would rarely be directly infront or behind the caster. A third
of the time the caster and image may overlap but the caster would IMHO get
a easier time to dodge and the firer a modifier to TN. You could create
rules for this but how much complication can you take?

- David
Message no. 17
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 1995 15:00:02 +0100
On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, Damion Milliken wrote:

> HOLOGRAOPHIC SIDESTEP
>
> Category: Illusion
> Type: Physical
> Range: Self
> Target Number: 4
> Duration: Sustained
>
> Very Realistic or Very Complex Illusion: Base Drain S
> Physical Spell: +1 Drain Target
> Sustained Spell: +1 Drain Target
> Illusion Spell modifier: -1 Drain Level
> Personal Spell: -3 Drain Levels
> Bonus Game Effect (Perception Test, 2 x successes): +2 Drain Levels
> Bonus Game Effect (Creation of, and shifting of image): +1 Drain Level
>
> For a final Drain code of [(F/2)+2]M
>

This is OK, and a good application of the rules but it offers no
advantage on invisiblity. It fact it gives the viewer two opportunities
to percieve the illusion. Better to recreate an invisiblity which has
"Perception test, 4 x successes", with no marks for imagination :(

Just because they is no president for manipulations creating illusionary
effects doesn't negate the possiblity. I'll get my grimoire and work out
the details.

- David
Message no. 18
From: Steffen Lassahn <SL@*****.DE>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 13:35:43 GMT+0100
> HOLOGRAOPHIC SIDESTEP
>
> Category: Illusion
> Type: Physical
> Range: Self
> Target Number: 4
> Duration: Sustained
>
> Very Realistic or Very Complex Illusion: Base Drain S
> Physical Spell: +1 Drain Target
> Sustained Spell: +1 Drain Target
> Illusion Spell modifier: -1 Drain Level
> Personal Spell: -3 Drain Levels
> Bonus Game Effect (Perception Test, 2 x successes): +2 Drain Levels
> Bonus Game Effect (Creation of, and shifting of image): +1 Drain Level
>
> For a final Drain code of [(F/2)+2]M
>
> This spell renders the caster of the spell invisible, while simultaneously
> generating an exact replica of the casters image a short distance (1m) away.
> The image will duplicate and display the actions and movements that the
> (now) invisible caster makes. To determine the whereabouts of the generated
> image, roll 1D6 and consult the Grenade Scatter Diagram on page 97 of SRII.
> If an image is attacked in any way, it will dissapear, and a new image will
> imidiately reappear in another random position. To determine the image is an
> illusion requires a successful perception test against a target number equal
> to twice the successes generated upon casting. Also, there is a chance that
> the invisible caster will be spotted, again, with a target number equal to
> twice the number of succeses rolled upon casting. Note that this spell
> affects technological sensing devices such as vidoe cameras and also affects
> thermographic vision (unlike invisibility). Devices relying on principles
> other than light (eg ultrsound sights) are not fooled, however.
>
> If the illusionary image is attacked with a a ranged weapon (eg gun), and
> the image lies between the attacker and the invisible magician, then there
> is a chance that the shot may still (accidently) hit the magician. If such a
> situation arises, use the Stray Shot rules on page 93 of SRII.

I like it. I think my players and my GM will like it too.

Mad Eagle, Flyboy

+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Steffen Lassahn sl@*****.de |
| Tel: +49-40-2507298 lassahn@*******.uni-hamburg.de |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 19
From: Steffen Lassahn <SL@*****.DE>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 13:42:39 GMT+0100
> I don't think it would really work -- sure, at first you're able to fool
> them, then they hit your image and it disappears, only to appear 1-2 meters
> away from where it first was. At that point (after the first bullet fired,
> that is), they start thinking something strange is going on. Now they hit
> the second image (hey, it might just be the _real_ person), and it also
> disappears. At this point I'd say they start hosing down into your general
> area with an automatic weapon...
>
I don't think so. In a fight everything is happening very fast. Do
you think they (whoever "they" may be) have enough time to figure out
that there is something happening? And how should Joe KonCop know
that the image appears within 1 meter of the caster?

Mad Eagle





+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Steffen Lassahn sl@*****.de |
| Tel: +49-40-2507298 lassahn@*******.uni-hamburg.de |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 20
From: Vincent Pellerin <Vincent.Pellerin@***.GMC.ULAVAL.CA>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 13:58:34 ADT
On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, David M Woods wrote:

>It's MAGIC it doesn't have to be logical. <snip>

WHAT! HARGGGHHH!!! You are a Shaman right? You must Be? Magic IS logical,
and follows rules as any sciences do.. (Yes, i play an hermetic mage) :-)

Seriously, The thing i love about SR is the magic system and
environment, it is logical and "follows" almost scientific rules. Saying
that "it is magic" is not an excuse when facing something that is
irrationnal. Hell I tought most of the fun when designing spells was to
make the thing look logical or find a way to make it that way.

PFFF! Magic doesn't have to be logical, next time you are gonna to
tell us that your totem is not part of your subconscious mind and is really
teaching you about magic :-) (sorry i coud'nt resist)

_________________________________________________________________________
| _____ "You are yong only once....... |
| \ \ / ......... but you can be immature all your life !" |
| \ __/ / -heard somewhere, i don't remember |
| \ / |
| \_/ Vincent.Pellerin@***.gmc.ulaval.ca |
|________________________________________________________________________|
Message no. 21
From: "Brian A. Stewart" <bstewart@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 09:58:39 -0700
Damion Milliken writes:

>I'd say that it would have to be an illusion spell, as it is very similar to
>invisibility (another illusion spell), and there is really no precendent for
>it being a manipulation spell. Here's how I'd construct and rate it:
>
>HOLOGRAOPHIC SIDESTEP
>
---------
Nice design. I should ask you to design spells for me. $)

In regards to the the spell being illusion or minipulation, I agree that it
seems most appropriate as an illusion, but the problem was that illusion
spells were all but useless in the game David was playing (his gm was very
harsh on ilusion, i.e. easily seen through even invis.). Thus, the thought
of making it a possible minipulation spell was discussed :).

After, considering this point all weekend. I think a transformation
minipulation would not be possible, at least at the level of magic currently
known in SR. Transformation minipulations change matter and energy, this
spell does not change anything, just shifts an image (just a thought but
creating an image by changing energy into a solid or semi solid form may be
possible <i.e. creating multiple images of oneself>, but as for concealing
the mage I still think this is the realm of illusion). TK minipulation,
would not work since the spell is not a telekinetic function. But mind
minipulation might work. Making someone/or mass think you are in a
different local than another (doesn't work vs. remote viewing, only those
minds in the area).

Any takers for designing this?
Comments? Suggestions? Retorts? $)

Enjoy.
Brian
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Essence: It is a descending stream of pure activity which is the dynamic
force of the universe.
-Kabbalah (B.C.E.~1200-~700 A.C.E.)
*****************************************************************
"Nurse Wratchet": bstewart@***.uug.arizona.edu
or brian-stewart@**.arizona.edu
*****************************************************************
Message no. 22
From: Sascha Pabst <Sascha.Pabst@****.INFORMATIK.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 22:09:50 +0200
Vincent Pellerin wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, David M Woods wrote:
> >It's MAGIC it doesn't have to be logical. <snip>
>
> WHAT! HARGGGHHH!!! You are a Shaman right? You must Be? Magic IS logical,
> and follows rules as any sciences do.. (Yes, i play an hermetic mage) :-)
Well, Mr Logic, then tell me what happens to the weponfocus taken from
a projecting magician (yes I asked this before, thanks, I know :-)

> Seriously, The thing i love about SR is the magic system and
> environment, it is logical and "follows" almost scientific rules. Saying
It folows rules, all right, and has some kind of logic within it, but there
are many things yet to be revealed by the totems and spirits (*wolvish grin*)
about it and some flaws (hm, how does a sorc adept who can't see the living
planes, sorry, astral space you would call it (*another grin*) ground a
combat spell into a living's aura? Just wondering...)

> that "it is magic" is not an excuse when facing something that is
> irrationnal. Hell I tought most of the fun when designing spells was to
> make the thing look logical or find a way to make it that way.
Yeah, go on and draw chalk circles on the ground and go and babble about
"energies administered inside n-sided objects where n = 4" and even tell
me you can calculate magic with a palmtop... just don't expect me NOT to laugh!

> PFFF! Magic doesn't have to be logical, next time you are gonna to
> tell us that your totem is not part of your subconscious mind and is really
> teaching you about magic :-) (sorry i coud'nt resist)
Yeah, go on, tell me your totem is geometrics and "Analysis 2". You follow
the way of higher mathmysterics...

Um, after reading my note, I see I lost a few Smileys. Here they come:
:-) :-} 8-/ 8-) ;-* :-)

Sascha
--
+---___---------+-----------------------------------------+------------------+
| / / _______ | Jhary-a-Conel aka Sascha Pabst | The one does not |
| / /_/ ____/ |Sascha.Pabst@**********.Uni-Oldenburg.de |learn from history|
| \___ __/ | or | is bound to live |
|==== \_/ ======| Westerstr. 20 / 26121 Oldenburg | through it again.|
|LOGOUT FASCISM!| *Wearing hats is just a way of live* | |
+---------------+-----------------------------------------+------------------+
| Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some |
| die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to |
| deal out death in judgement. -- Gandalf |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Message no. 23
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 00:23:19 +0100
On Mon, 21 Aug 1995, Brian A. Stewart wrote:
>

[snip]
> After, considering this point all weekend. I think a transformation
> minipulation would not be possible, at least at the level of magic currently
> known in SR. Transformation minipulations change matter and energy, this
> spell does not change anything, just shifts an image (just a thought but
> creating an image by changing energy into a solid or semi solid form may be
> possible <i.e. creating multiple images of oneself>, but as for concealing
> the mage I still think this is the realm of illusion).
[snip]

A new type of spell, The Control Manipulation, which can control energy
(ie light) the way TK controls matter perhaps? Something to research maybe?

- David
Message no. 24
From: David M Woods <spuwdsda@*******.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 00:37:44 +0100
On Mon, 21 Aug 1995, Vincent Pellerin wrote:

> On Sun, 20 Aug 1995, David M Woods wrote:
>
> >It's MAGIC it doesn't have to be logical. <snip>
>
> WHAT! HARGGGHHH!!! You are a Shaman right? You must Be? Magic IS logical,
> and follows rules as any sciences do.. (Yes, i play an hermetic mage) :-)
>

What I meant was that Magic works beyond mundane science. Its very
existence in SR defies modern science.

> Seriously, The thing i love about SR is the magic system and
> environment, it is logical and "follows" almost scientific rules. Saying
> that "it is magic" is not an excuse when facing something that is
> irrationnal. Hell I tought most of the fun when designing spells was to
> make the thing look logical or find a way to make it that way.

Magic only cares that is looks cool :)

>
> PFFF! Magic doesn't have to be logical, next time you are gonna to
> tell us that your totem is not part of your subconscious mind and is really
> teaching you about magic :-) (sorry i coud'nt resist)


- David

"You can no break the Laws of Physics Captain!" - Scotty
Message no. 25
From: "Brian A. Stewart" <bstewart@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:09:55 -0700
>A new type of spell, The Control Manipulation, which can control energy
>(ie light) the way TK controls matter perhaps? Something to research maybe?
>
>- David
>
------
Now that is an idea. Minipulation spells just keep growing and growing and
growing.

Thanks
Brian
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Essence: It is a descending stream of pure activity which is the dynamic
force of the universe.
-Kabbalah (B.C.E.~1200-~700 A.C.E.)
*****************************************************************
"Nurse Wratchet": bstewart@***.uug.arizona.edu
or brian-stewart@**.arizona.edu
*****************************************************************
Message no. 26
From: Mark Steedman <RSMS@******.EEE.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 08:44:37 GMT
> From: "Brian A. Stewart" <bstewart@***.UUG.ARIZONA.EDU>

> Damion Milliken writes:
>
> >I'd say that it would have to be an illusion spell, as it is very similar to
> >invisibility (another illusion spell), and there is really no precendent for
> >it being a manipulation spell. Here's how I'd construct and rate it:
> >
> >HOLOGRAOPHIC SIDESTEP
> >
> ---------
> Nice design. I should ask you to design spells for me. $)
>
> In regards to the the spell being illusion or minipulation, I agree that it
> seems most appropriate as an illusion,
>
> Any takers for designing this?
> Comments? Suggestions? Retorts? $)
>
> Enjoy.
> Brian

This is a nice idea just difficult to justify directly.
However, i have been using a spell called 'Displace self' in ED.
[Page 188 odd 6th Wizard for those with ED] what this does is to
'teleport' the caster 1D4 feet out of the way of incomming physical
attacks! [this has caused problems in ED as its so powerful]. This
would obviously be a manipulation spell in SR but would need a linked
[by Anchoring] detection spell to set it off, oh and it keeps working
for a duration!

Just wondering if this info might help the discussion. The purely
Holographic version should really be illusion, the problem becomes
setting the penalty to hit the caster.

Mark
Message no. 27
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:41:09 -0500
I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell which
would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.

I thought for a moment, and said "Sure, but it'd have to do damage like a
normal spell, with non-deadly results representing bruising and tissue
damage of the attempt."

Then I tried to design it....

The problem is that it would have to be a manipulation spell....which are
only allowed to deal direct damage through elemental effects.

I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.

Comments?

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 28
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 00:01:03 +0000
|I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
|I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.

Here we go again with the teleportation spells....

And the reason why there aren't any....

<childish>

MUNCHKINS!!!
MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!
MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!
MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!MUNCHKINS!!!

</childish>
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 29
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 22:05:31 -0500
Spike enlightened us with these words of wisdom:
>|I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
>|I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.
>Here we go again with the teleportation spells....
>
>And the reason why there aren't any....

Excuse me! I said I wanted to STAY IN THE RULES AND NOT BE MUNCHKY!

Basically, I'm just designing another way to kill someone. If it is a
little graphic, that's the point. The runner is will to take a little more
drain.

What did my post have to do with "Teleportation"? If you are refering to
making a new spell, DEAL WITH IT! The thought of making a new spell that
DOESN'T break the magical theory rules or unbalance the game isn't MUNCHKIN!

-=SwiftOne=-
(Thoroughly pissed)
Message no. 30
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 00:13:03 +0000
|
|Spike enlightened us with these words of wisdom:
|>|I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
|>|I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.
|>Here we go again with the teleportation spells....
|>
|>And the reason why there aren't any....
|
|Excuse me! I said I wanted to STAY IN THE RULES AND NOT BE MUNCHKY!
|
|Basically, I'm just designing another way to kill someone. If it is a
|little graphic, that's the point. The runner is will to take a little more
|drain.

But you said you wanted to "remove someones heart and place it in your
hand", only causing bruising etc.....

If it's not being "ripped out" it must be teleported.

|What did my post have to do with "Teleportation"? If you are refering to
|making a new spell, DEAL WITH IT! The thought of making a new spell that
|DOESN'T break the magical theory rules or unbalance the game isn't MUNCHKIN!

Don't you want critisism then?
And don't take things so personally!
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 31
From: 'Spaceman' WD Lee <spaced@*.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:39:53 -0800
On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, Spike wrote:
#
# But you said you wanted to "remove someones heart and place it in your
# hand", only causing bruising etc.....
#
# If it's not being "ripped out" it must be teleported.
#

Gotta call you on this one Spike, He said that _if it fails_ it
only causes bruising, probably from the tugs on the heart. If it succeeds,
it floats the to casters hand, with appropriate amounts of gore from being
ripped out of the target's chest cavity. And I've never designed a spell,
so I can't help you. Just make the target to succeed be horrendously high.



The Spaceman |The universe runs through the complex
spaced@*.washington.edu |interweaving of energy, matter, and
Check out the Bill Page! |enlightened self-interest - G'Kar
http://weber.u.washington.edu/~spaced/bill.html
GCC/GL d- s:++ a-- C++ U+ P+ L>L++ !E W++ N++ o+ K w !O M-- V--
PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5++ X+ R+ tv b+++ DI+ D+ G+ e+ h r z+
MPA/SH/TA S G Q+ 666 y W C++ N+ PEC+++ Dr
Message no. 32
From: Shawn Baumgartner <Breakdown@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:45:51 -0500
To remark on the heart removal spell, 1)How do you get line of sight to
the heart? (the part the spell is manipulating) and, 2)How do you affect
just one part of the total lbody as a system (the old powerbolt to the
face discussion, if anyone recalls that one). I have to agree about the
horrendous difficulty, too.
Message no. 33
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:36:16 EST
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 21:41:09 -0500 Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU> writes:
>I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell
>which
>would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.
>
>I thought for a moment, and said "Sure, but it'd have to do damage
>like a
>normal spell, with non-deadly results representing bruising and tissue
>damage of the attempt."
>
>Then I tried to design it....
>
>The problem is that it would have to be a manipulation spell....which
>are
>only allowed to deal direct damage through elemental effects.
>
>I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y
>otherwise), but
>I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if
>possible.
>
>Comments?
>
>-=SwiftOne=-
>
Base Drain: S
Major Physical Control or Manipulation
Physical +1PL
Limited Range -1
Bonus Game Effect +2
Very Involved/Very Complex
for <drum roll>.....

[(F/2)+1]D! hmmm...seems way too light. Where did you see the bit
about DMs and Elemental effects? This really doesn't seem to be a DM,
more like a very malignant version of telekinetic manipulation. I would
suggest A) upping the drain code if you like the way it's laid out above
(I used the minimum value for it)...but I'm wondering what exactly one of
your players could possibly want with such a spell...must be a pretty
sick puppy...


--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, canthros1@***.com
let him prepare for war. lobo1@****.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 34
From: L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:01:56 EST
On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 00:13:03 +0000 Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
writes:
<snip>
>
>But you said you wanted to "remove someones heart and place it in your
>hand", only causing bruising etc.....
>
>If it's not being "ripped out" it must be teleported.

I think he meant that it would cause bruising, etc, if it didn't succeed
in ripping the guy's heart out.


>
>|What did my post have to do with "Teleportation"? If you are
>refering to
>|making a new spell, DEAL WITH IT! The thought of making a new spell
>that
>|DOESN'T break the magical theory rules or unbalance the game isn't
>MUNCHKIN!
>
>Don't you want critisism then?
>And don't take things so personally!

I think you maybe went a little overboard with the M*******
proclamation...perhaps you could simply say it once, next time:)

--
-Canthros
If any man wishes peace, canthros1@***.com
let him prepare for war. lobo1@****.com
--Roman proverb
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/
Message no. 35
From: Tim P Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:04:59 EST
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 22:05:31 -0500 Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU> writes:
[snip]

>
>Basically, I'm just designing another way to kill someone. If it is a
>little graphic, that's the point. The runner is will to take a little
>more drain.
>

Just design a telekinitic damaging manipulation ("bonus effect" modifier
?) ...if it kills the target then you are holding his throbbing heart in
your hand.

I imagine things like wearing full military grade armor, and etc..,
might hinder it's effectivness.

[snip]

>
>-=SwiftOne=-
>(Thoroughly pissed)
>

~Tim
Message no. 36
From: Tim P Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:15:20 EST
On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:36:16 EST L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM> writes:
> Base Drain: S
>Major Physical Control or Manipulation

Change this to a DM with a base damage level of "D"... after all it most
certainly is a 'manipulation' (to the heart, and it's proximity to the
rest of the body) that does a great deal of 'damage'.

> Physical +1PL
> Limited Range -1
> Bonus Game Effect +2
>Very Involved/Very Complex
>for <drum roll>.....
>
> [(F/2)+1]D! hmmm...seems way too light. Where did you see the
>bit about DMs and Elemental effects? This really doesn't seem to be a
DM,
>more like a very malignant version of telekinetic manipulation. I
>would suggest A) upping the drain code if you like the way it's laid
>out above (I used the minimum value for it)...but I'm wondering what
>exactly one of your players could possibly want with such a
>spell...must be a pretty sick puppy...

Isn't there a Voudoun spell called "Boil Heart" (in the White Wolf
magazines) ? And I distinctly remember one called "Full Stomach" that
caused the unlucky victim to VOMIT INSECTS for the duration...

>--
>-Canthros

~Tim
Message no. 37
From: Adam Treloar <s777317@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 11:26:03 -0500
>I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell which
>would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.

A very simple reason for in not to work - you have to go thru living tissue
to get to the heart. Spells can't do that. Never mind that spells affect
the entire aura, not specific parts of it.

Guardian
Message no. 38
From: "M. Gotthard" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:53:37 +1000
> |Basically, I'm just designing another way to kill someone. If it is a
> |little graphic, that's the point. The runner is will to take a little more
> |drain.
>
> But you said you wanted to "remove someones heart and place it in your
> hand", only causing bruising etc.....
>
> If it's not being "ripped out" it must be teleported.
>
*sigh* read the description a bit better.

That's non-deadly damage that does bruising, which implies that you
didn't quite succeed in actually pulling his heart out.


The spell sounds plausible, though its very bloody... and probably very
close to blood magic, Indiana Jones style.

I wouldn't use it personally, but I can see the use for it.

Put the whole spell, and stats up for us to look at.

Bleach
Message no. 39
From: "M. Gotthard" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:59:25 +1000
> To remark on the heart removal spell, 1)How do you get line of sight to
> the heart? (the part the spell is manipulating) and, 2)How do you affect
> just one part of the total lbody as a system (the old powerbolt to the
> face discussion, if anyone recalls that one). I have to agree about the
> horrendous difficulty, too.
>

You don't need exact LOS to the heart for a manipulation spell; Witness
the rules for area effect and other manipulations...

Think of making a magical auger and sticking it into their chest cavity
and then digging their heart out.... With a manipulation spell you don't
need to see the target, just need to know where it is. Witness firing an
acid bolt through a car windscreen; It'll still hit the driver (with a +8
blindfire modifier though)

Hell, I'd say you can do it, but

1. The drain starts at (F/2)+3 D (or whatever; that's spur-of the moment)
2. The force of the spell is reduced by FULL impact armor
3. The Damage starts at L and is resisted by body

Bleach
Message no. 40
From: "M. Gotthard" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 15:01:44 +1000
Along the lines of new, sick and twisted spells....

Anyone up for designing 'Skin Twist', from the Horror power of the same
name?

*BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA*

Here little wormskull, nice little wormskull.

Bleach [ horror smiley; :::::::) ]
Message no. 41
From: "M. Gotthard" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 15:03:49 +1000
> >I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell which
> >would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.
>
> A very simple reason for in not to work - you have to go thru living tissue
> to get to the heart. Spells can't do that. Never mind that spells affect
> the entire aura, not specific parts of it.
>

Like I said before; That's combat spells only... Manipulation spells
work exactly like guns, or grenades, or your common garden Auger.

I'm beginning to *like* this spell.

Bleach
Message no. 42
From: GRANITE <granite@**.NET>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 23:37:43 -0700
How about something like helping hands on acid?? OR perhaps combined
with acid...This should get through armor and flesh and then
transport the heart back to your waiting hand....
-------------------------------GRANITE
=================================================================
Lord, Grant Me The Serenity To Accept The Things I Cannot Change,
The Courage To Change The Things I Can,
And The Wisdom To Hide The Bodies Of Those People I Had To Kill
Because They Pissed Me Off.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ShadowRunner's Serenity Prayer
Message no. 43
From: Gavin Lewis <lewis@**.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 17:42:54 +0800
>I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell which
>would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.
>
>I thought for a moment, and said "Sure, but it'd have to do damage like a
>normal spell, with non-deadly results representing bruising and tissue
>damage of the attempt."

Good idea!

>Then I tried to design it....
>
>The problem is that it would have to be a manipulation spell....which are
>only allowed to deal direct damage through elemental effects.

True, so it would have to involve some sort of "blast" elemental effect PLUS
a minor physical manipulation (to transport the heart into a players hand).
I would make it the following...

Damaging Manipulation (serious damage) DRAIN = S
Elemental effect of blast Drain = +1
Physical Spell Drain = +1
IN addition

Minor Physical manipulation DRAIN = M
Elemental effect of air DRAIN = +1
Physical spell Drain = +1

OVERALL result

Spell: "Remove Heart"
Type: Physical
Duration: Permanent
Range: Limited
Target: 4 (Resolve as per ranged combat - extra successes can be used to
stage up damage - IMPACT ARMOR CAN BE USED TO DEFEND AGAINST THIS
SPELL)
Drain: [(F/2) + 4] D
Base Damage: Serious

People might think the drain is a bit tough, BUT dont forget that the net
result is that a player is trying to kill someone and rip out the heart (at
least 2 spells) and transport the heart into his hand (another spell).
Effectively, he/she will be casting three spells in one.

>I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
>I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.

The above is basically SPOT on the rules! Basically! ;)

Gav
Message no. 44
From: Gavin Lewis <lewis@**.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 17:44:29 +0800
>|I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
>|I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.
>
>Here we go again with the teleportation spells....

NO, it wouldnt be teleport BUT it would work like Magic Fingers - if it is
allowed. Personally, I would look into it!

Gav
Message no. 45
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 11:18:23 -0500
>|Basically, I'm just designing another way to kill someone. If it is a
>|little graphic, that's the point. The runner is will to take a little more
>|drain.
>
>But you said you wanted to "remove someones heart and place it in your
>hand", only causing bruising etc.....
>
>If it's not being "ripped out" it must be teleported.

IF it wasn't clear, I apologize, I DO mean it was "ripped out"....sort of
levitation on the heart.

>Don't you want critisism then?

Chanting "Munchkin" isn't criticism, it's childish.

>And don't take things so personally!

Sorry, I posted looking for help, and your post was just annoying and
useless. Sorry about over-reacting.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 46
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 13:39:30 GMT
Brett Borger writes

> I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell which
> would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.
>
> I thought for a moment, and said "Sure, but it'd have to do damage like a
> normal spell, with non-deadly results representing bruising and tissue
> damage of the attempt."
>
> Then I tried to design it....
>
> The problem is that it would have to be a manipulation spell....which are
> only allowed to deal direct damage through elemental effects.
>
> I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
> I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.
>
> Comments?
>
> -=SwiftOne=-
>
Ok
Damaging manipulation.
Physical spell : +1 Drain TN
Range LOS
Target 4
Base Damage : D : base code D (ripping somebodys heart out
is fatal! )
duration : insant.

Bonus game effects
Looks very gory and intimidating to anyone watching
Being kind, +1 Drain TN
levitating a small specific item from Target to you
Being kind, +1 Drain TN
Blast elemental effects, to smash into the persons rib cage with a
great blast of force, lay open their heart and rip it out. :
elemental effect is +1 drain level.

so D, +1 TN, +1TN, +1 TN, +1DL, = D+5

Drain ((F/2)+5)D and i'd say that was kind, up to ((F/2)+7)D could
be justified by the rules, but +6 is probably more balanced as for
((F/2)+7)D i built a spells that can 'can open' mobmasters, and have
players that wouldn't mind knowing how the NPC that used it did it!
(but i have a player on here, so secrets will remain)

Mark
Message no. 47
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 13:21:09 +0000
|
|On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, Spike wrote:
|#
|# But you said you wanted to "remove someones heart and place it in your
|# hand", only causing bruising etc.....
|#
|# If it's not being "ripped out" it must be teleported.
|#
|
| Gotta call you on this one Spike, He said that _if it fails_ it
|only causes bruising, probably from the tugs on the heart.

Ok, I misread it...

Thwap me.

If it succeeds,
|it floats the to casters hand, with appropriate amounts of gore from being
|ripped out of the target's chest cavity. And I've never designed a spell,
|so I can't help you. Just make the target to succeed be horrendously high.

Or make the number of successes required be the amount that would cause
DEATH anyway.

I think it would have to be a multipart spell. One to cause some damage.
(Enough to equal the persons BODY attribute)

The second part to cause the full 10 boxes. Thus 10+body = death.

It's the only way you could do it, unless it's a sustained spell doing
damage each round....
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 48
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 13:28:12 +0000
|I think you maybe went a little overboard with the M*******
|proclamation...perhaps you could simply say it once, next time:)

Oh come one....

I did put the <childish></childish> jokey HTML tags in...

When I do the HTML gag, Smilies are superfluous....
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 49
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 11:53:35 -0500
>Think of making a magical auger and sticking it into their chest cavity
>and then digging their heart out.... With a manipulation spell you don't
>need to see the target, just need to know where it is. Witness firing an
>acid bolt through a car windscreen; It'll still hit the driver (with a +8
>blindfire modifier though)

>1. The drain starts at (F/2)+3 D (or whatever; that's spur-of the moment)

Well, I was thinking it'd be this high, but I was hoping to figure out how
to calculate the drain by the rules.

>2. The force of the spell is reduced by FULL impact armor

Makes sense.

>3. The Damage starts at L and is resisted by body

I agree with the resistance....the Damage Level would be calculated by the
spell formula though...

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 50
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 12:14:22 -0500
>True, so it would have to involve some sort of "blast" elemental effect PLUS
>a minor physical manipulation (to transport the heart into a players hand).
>I would make it the following...

Someone suggested a levitation/telekinesis effect of digging into the chest
snd rippin gout the heart. (You can see why the player wants this for the
visual effect). Perhaps that could avoid the Elemental effect. After all,
the Clout Spell doesn't use an elemental effect....

>Spell: "Remove Heart"
>Type: Physical
>Duration: Permanent
>Range: Limited
>Target: 4 (Resolve as per ranged combat - extra successes can be used to
>stage up damage - IMPACT ARMOR CAN BE USED TO DEFEND AGAINST THIS
>SPELL)
>Drain: [(F/2) + 4] D
>Base Damage: Serious

Hmm. Maybe I redesign it without the Physical Effects, and throw in some GM
discretionary modifiers to keep it balanced....

>>I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise), but
>>I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.
>
>The above is basically SPOT on the rules! Basically! ;)

I was feeling all smug too. Here I had figured out all the acronyms the
others couldn't. But I can't figure out SPOT. "Smack ? On Target?"

-=Swift=-
Message no. 51
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:31:26 +0000
|need to see the target, just need to know where it is. Witness firing an
|acid bolt through a car windscreen; It'll still hit the driver (with a +8
|blindfire modifier though)

Well.... It would hit the windscreen, not the driver.....
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 52
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 12:48:01 -0500
> Base Drain: S
>Major Physical Control or Manipulation
> Physical +1PL
> Limited Range -1
> Bonus Game Effect +2
>Very Involved/Very Complex
>for <drum roll>.....
>
> [(F/2)+1]D! hmmm...seems way too light. Where did you see the bit
>about DMs and Elemental effects? This really doesn't seem to be a DM,

Agreed. The DM's bit was in the Maipulation spell design section of the
Grimmy, but they contradict themselves with the Clout Spell anyway.

>more like a very malignant version of telekinetic manipulation. I would
>suggest A) upping the drain code if you like the way it's laid out above

I like it. Good breakdown. I'll look into upping the Drain a bit.

>(I used the minimum value for it)...but I'm wondering what exactly one of
>your players could possibly want with such a spell...must be a pretty
>sick puppy...

Yup. But if you think of it as a scare tactic....imagine being attacked by
a gang...you could Powerball them all to death, or use this and frighten the
others away (except the poor schmuck you just offed). Why not Stun you ask?
Good question....but then why most people don't use Stun. _I'd_ use Stun,
but then my characters have been accused of being too goody-goody.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 53
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:57:26 +0000
|>Don't you want critisism then?
|
|Chanting "Munchkin" isn't criticism, it's childish.

*sigh*
Why do you think I put in the jokey childish HTML tags????

|>And don't take things so personally!
|
|Sorry, I posted looking for help, and your post was just annoying and
|useless. Sorry about over-reacting.

Just joking.
SMilies are superfluous when jokey tags are being used.....
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 54
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 13:00:36 -0500
>1)How do you get line of sight to
>the heart? (the part the spell is manipulating) and,

Point taken...I like the one person's suggestion that you "dig"
telekineticly through the chest....imagine seeing their chest tear open,
followed by the heart flying out.
Indiana Jones/Temple of Doom?

>2)How do you affect
>just one part of the total lbody as a system (the old powerbolt to the
>face discussion, if anyone recalls that one). I have to agree about the
>horrendous difficulty, too.

Others have said it, so I'll repeat: Manipulation effects can be targeted.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 55
From: Shawn Baumgartner <Breakdown@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 10:07:55 -0500
In regards to the Heart-Attack From Hell spell:

Evryone else has piped up, so I guess I will. This spell is simple. Look
at Death Touch. It does D damage with a (F/2)-1D drain (-1 for touch, D
for D damage). Now look at the heart ripper spell.

D damage=D drain
Physical=+1
LOS=no mod
Blast effect (required; damaging manipulation)=+2
Very simple game effect (heart flies to hand; very specific target,
instant)=+1
Total Drain=(F/2)+4
Target #-victim's essence
Damage Resistance (Body, as opposed to Death Touch's
willpower)=Body+dermal armor mods+1/2 impact armor rating+hard cover
rating.

Of course, the victim dies if the spell succeeds, but the blast has to
defeat whatever bodyparts, cyberware, armor, pocket protectors, etc.
that are between the inside and outside of the victim's body in order to
get the gore effect.

Not too different from Death Touch on the technical side; easy to crunch
the numbers involved. It's just the imagery involved that tends to throw
people. But magic don't care; dead is dead. The details are just side
matters to the killing.

Oh yeah, and we can't forget that the magician has to feel emotional
enough to toss a damaging spell at the target. (Either psychopath or
truly, insanely pissed in this case)

Shawn
Regreting ever finding out how easy making this sick crap really is.
Message no. 56
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 13:34:43 -0500
>|Chanting "Munchkin" isn't criticism, it's childish.
>
>*sigh*
>Why do you think I put in the jokey childish HTML tags????

Again, sorry about over-reacting. I was carefully trying to avoid any
resembelance to the M* word, plus I've had far too many arguments against
the teleporation wanters myself, so I just let loose.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 57
From: Steve Kenson <TalonMail@***.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 11:50:18 -0500
Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU> wrote:
>I was talking with some runners, and they wanted to design a spell which
>would rip out the targets heart and bring it to their hand.

Eww. Well, such a spell would be possible, albeit nasty. I tend to dislike
"one-kill" spells personally, where the spell instantly kills the target if
successful. There's especially unpleasant when used against you, but what
they hey, here goes:

The spell is most likely a telekinetic manipulation that does damage. Let's
be nasty and set the base damage for the spell at Deadly, making the base
drain (F/2) D. The spell has to be Physical, so that's +1 Drain TN and we'll
give it the Bonus Effect "ignores armor", worth at least +1 Drain Level,
IMHO. That pushes the Drain above Deadly so we'll add +2 Drain TN instead.
There's the Bonus Effect "ignores overflow damage" (normally you have a
chance to survive Deadly damage, but this spell kills you instantly with no
Body Test for survival) for +1 Drain TN. Add in a minor Bonus Effect to cause
the target's heart to leap into the caster's hand (a nice and intimidating
effect), say +1 Drain TN and here's what you've got:

EVISERATE (Telekinetic Manipulation)
This spell allows the caster to telekinetically reach into the target
and rip their heart out, causing it to fly to the caster's hand. The caster
rolls the Force Success Test against a Target Number equal to the target's
Body. The target of the spell rolls Body dice against the spell's Force to
resist. If the caster gains one or more net successes, the target's heart is
torn from their body and they are instantly killed. If the target gets equal
or greater successes than the caster on the Resistance Test, there is no
effect. This spell is used occasionally by Aztlaner blood magicians but is
rare due to it's Drain.

Type: Physical
Range: LOS
Target: Body (R)
Duration: Instant
Drain: [(F/2)+5]D

So you've got your spell for the about same Drain as Hellblast, which seems
about right to me. Far easier (on the magician) to simply cast manabolt on
the poor sod, but definitely not as spectacular or gory. The spell's Drain
could be knocked down by making it a Touch Only spell (allowing the caster to
reach in and pull out the subject's heart) or by reducing the Base Damage and
requiring the caster to get more than one success to do Deadly damage and rip
out the heart. Pretty nasty spell, all in all, but not too efficient.

Steve K.
Underworld Sourcebook, coming soon (featuring little or no eviseration...)
Message no. 58
From: Ray & Tamara <macey@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 08:02:55 +1100
<snip>

> Spell: "Remove Heart"
> Type: Physical
> Duration: Permanent
> Range: Limited
> Target: 4 (Resolve as per ranged combat - extra successes can be used to
> stage up damage - IMPACT ARMOR CAN BE USED TO DEFEND AGAINST
THIS
> SPELL)
> Drain: [(F/2) + 4] D
> Base Damage: Serious
>
> People might think the drain is a bit tough, BUT dont forget that the net
> result is that a player is trying to kill someone and rip out the heart
(at
> least 2 spells) and transport the heart into his hand (another spell).
> Effectively, he/she will be casting three spells in one.
>
> >I force my new spells to stick to the rules closely (too M*y otherwise),
but
> >I'd love to figure out how to do this one....By the rules, if possible.
>
> The above is basically SPOT on the rules! Basically! ;)

Except that you cannot target individual parts of a target seperately (ie
no spell to just blow someones head off). This limitation may not apply to
manipulation spells though.

Also you must be able to see your target to actually target it, and unless
they have a see-through chest, this is not going to happen.

How about making a spell that makes the target rip his own heart out
instead?

Ray
Message no. 59
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 08:53:19 GMT
"M. Gotthard" writes

> Along the lines of new, sick and twisted spells....
>
> Anyone up for designing 'Skin Twist', from the Horror power of the same
> name?
>
It's called 'skin shift'. And there is an ED spell thats pretty
similar to the power. In SR the drain would be outrageous, it's not
main rulebook, and those reach stuff that converts at ((F/2)+double
figured)D


> *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA*
>
> Here little wormskull, nice little wormskull.
>

th
thwa
thwapth <---1000 YEAR OLD CARP
thwapthwa
thwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwa
thwapthwapthwapt
thwapthwapthwapthw
thwapthwapthwapthwapt
thwapthwapth thwapthw
thwapthwpath wapthwap
thwapthwapthwa wapthwapth
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwa
(thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwap)
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthw
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthw
apthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapt
ththwpthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwthwap
apthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwap
thwapthwapth thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwa hwapthwapth
thwapthw thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthw thwapthwap
thwap thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthw thwap
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwapt
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapthwa
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwapthwapthwa
thwapthwapthwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwapthwap
thwapthwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwpt
thwapthwapthw
thwapthwapt
thwapthwa
thwapth
thwap
thw
thwap
thwapth
thwapthwap
thwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwap
thwapthwapthwapth
thwapthwapthwapthwa
thwapthwapthwapthwapt
thwapth thwapthw
thwapt thwapth
thwa thwa
thw thw
th th


> Bleach [ horror smiley; :::::::) ]
>
I have rather bitter experience of those things, but we won, JUST,
both times. They look really silly when trying to beat a
'counterspell' that nearly trimmed for 3times step, was 60odd rolled!
Message no. 60
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 13:36:49 GMT
>
> How about making a spell that makes the target rip his own heart out
> instead?
>
> Ray
>
It's called 'control actions' :), see SR2. Admittedly its a real pain
to cast but even more 'he's a mage, oh my frag!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
effect.

Decidely not nice but rather appropriate for some elements in SR.

Mark
Message no. 61
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 21:22:03 -0500
>> How about making a spell that makes the target rip his own heart out
>> instead?
>It's called 'control actions' :), see SR2. Admittedly its a real pain
>to cast but even more 'he's a mage, oh my frag!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
>effect.

I still think Heart-Attack-from-Hell is more effective :).

Question for all regarding Control Thoughts: Why does Mob Mind, an Area
Effect Control Thoughts, have a totally different drain code? It's a higher
target _S_ while CT is _D_?!?!

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 62
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 11:30:45 GMT
Brett Borger writes

> >> How about making a spell that makes the target rip his own heart out
> >> instead?
> >It's called 'control actions' :), see SR2. Admittedly its a real pain
> >to cast but even more 'he's a mage, oh my frag!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
> >effect.
>
> I still think Heart-Attack-from-Hell is more effective :).
>
Yes, i would from an 'ease of achieving result' perspective recon the
DM version i posted would work more easily, TN fixed at 4, only need
to hit and not have the so and so stage it down. However for
intimidation value getting the target to remove it himself is more
effective, and the drain code is somewhat more reasonable.

> Question for all regarding Control Thoughts: Why does Mob Mind, an Area
> Effect Control Thoughts, have a totally different drain code? It's a higher
> target _S_ while CT is _D_?!?!
>
Vagaries of FASA's drain code calculations. There are a fair number
of errors, mostly of the typographical variety in the spell lists.
If in doubt get out the spell design system and recalculate, that
seems to be error free. The various errata going about correct the
worst of the drain miscalculations.
The other thing that effects stuff is that when drain level exceeds
D a drain level converts to +2 dran TN, this can cause tradeoff
between drain level and TN. (note correctly level should reach D
before any conversions of levels to drain TN changes) depeding on how
you calculate the drain codes. Note the compiled drain code chart for
bonus game effects has the odd error which might not be helping.

I know this isn't a real answer specifically but no GR2 handy, i
could solve it all in 2 mins with the book, but.

> -=SwiftOne=-
>

Mark
Message no. 63
From: mike.paff@*****.COM
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 15:54:11 -0800
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
>
> Question for all regarding Control Thoughts: Why does Mob Mind, an Area
> Effect Control Thoughts, have a totally different drain code? It's a higher
> target _S_ while CT is _D_?!?!
>
It's been a while since I read that one, and I don't have my Grimmy handy, but
I seem to remember that Mob Mind doesn't allow as fine a control over the
targets as Control Thoughts. Perhaps Mob Mind is an area effect version of
Control Emotions instead of Control Thoughts?

Mike
Message no. 64
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 21:30:44 -0500
>It's been a while since I read that one, and I don't have my Grimmy handy, but
>I seem to remember that Mob Mind doesn't allow as fine a control over the
>targets as Control Thoughts. Perhaps Mob Mind is an area effect version of
>Control Emotions instead of Control Thoughts?

Nope, that's Mob Mood. And the description says nothing about less control.
It doesn't say much at all. Only "allows the caster to control the thoughts
of everyone within the area of effect" followed by rules about having
pedestrian vs. NPC vs. PC resistance.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 65
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 16:59:39 +1100
> > Question for all regarding Control Thoughts: Why does Mob Mind, an Area
> > Effect Control Thoughts, have a totally different drain code? It's a higher
> > target _S_ while CT is _D_?!?!
> >
> It's been a while since I read that one, and I don't have my Grimmy handy, but
> I seem to remember that Mob Mind doesn't allow as fine a control over the
> targets as Control Thoughts. Perhaps Mob Mind is an area effect version of
> Control Emotions instead of Control Thoughts?

Naw, that's Mob Mood you're thinking of...

Lady Jestyr

-----------------------------------------------
A titanic intellect in a world full of icebergs
-----------------------------------------------
Elle Holmes jestyr@*******.dialix.com.au
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1503/
-----------------------------------------------
Remember, no matter what they say, you can
never have enough sugar. - Michael
-----------------------------------------------
Message no. 66
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: New Spell
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 21:02:12 +0500
I need some help. I am having trouble with the spell creation part of
the Grimoire.

I am trying to create a "Force Dart" spell. Basically, it brings into
existence a small "force dart" and flings it at a target. I want it
to be a damaging manipulation, so I can target specific parts of a
target, like a gun in a hand, or a knee, etc. I would like it to also
have the elemental effect of blast. Base damage is M.

Could someone help me design this? Step by step would be helpful. The
examples in the book are for more basic spells.

Thanks!

--

==DREKHEAD=======================================================
drekhead@***.net --- http://users.aol.com/drekhead/home.html ---
=================================================================
=================================================================
Do mages run spell checkers?

Message no. 67
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 00:04:19 -0400
In a message dated 97-06-26 22:58:14 EDT, drekhead@***.NET (Drekhead) writes:

>
> I am trying to create a "Force Dart" spell. Basically, it brings into
> existence a small "force dart" and flings it at a target. I want it
> to be a damaging manipulation, so I can target specific parts of a
> target, like a gun in a hand, or a knee, etc. I would like it to also
> have the elemental effect of blast. Base damage is M.
>
>
Okay, so there will be lots of others...but here's mine...

Force Dart (Telekinetic Manipulation)
Damage : M (Drain Base M)
Range : LOS (No Modifier)
Type : Physical/Instantaneous (Physical Modifier of +1/Not Sustained)
Target # : 4 (allows for Impact Armor to resist the wound potential which is
based upon the Willpower of the Caster OR the Force of the Spell (GM's
Option))

Makes the spell (F/2) + 1 M

That wasn't very difficult...now if you were looking for something
interesting...say a Force Dart with Penetration (halves Impact), then a +1
Category Modifier is thrown in. Question arises that since it is a
Telekinetic Manipulation...can you then throw it through cameras and such
like Magic Fingers???

Just some thoughts and evil-minded ideas...
Message no. 68
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:46:25 +0000
On 27 Jun 97 at 0:04, J. Keith Henry wrote:

> In a message dated 97-06-26 22:58:14 EDT, drekhead@***.NET (Drekhead) writes:
>
> >
> > I am trying to create a "Force Dart" spell. Basically, it brings into
> > existence a small "force dart" and flings it at a target. I want it
> > to be a damaging manipulation, so I can target specific parts of a
> > target, like a gun in a hand, or a knee, etc. I would like it to also
> > have the elemental effect of blast. Base damage is M.
> >
> >
> Okay, so there will be lots of others...but here's mine...
> Makes the spell (F/2) + 1 M

What about the blast effect? Would that make it [(F/2)+2]M or
[(F/2)+1]S ?

--


=DREKHEAD========================================================
drekhead@***.net --- http://users.aol.com/drekhead/home.html ---
=================================================================
=================================================================
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot
stomping on a human face...forever. -George Orwell
Message no. 69
From: Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 14:48:36 GMT
Drekhead writes
> I am trying to create a "Force Dart" spell. Basically, it brings into
> existence a small "force dart" and flings it at a target. I want it
> to be a damaging manipulation, so I can target specific parts of a
> target, like a gun in a hand, or a knee, etc. I would like it to also
> have the elemental effect of blast. Base damage is M.
>
> Could someone help me design this? Step by step would be helpful. The
> examples in the book are for more basic spells.
>
category : damaging manipulation.
type : physical (rather than mana, its creating magical
matter/physical disturbance)
+1 drain TN
range : LOS base drain, no mod
TN : 4 off the master TN table for a simple brute
force manipulation spell
damage : M base drain level M = (F/2)M
elemental effect blast + a drain level
duration : instant base again no modifier
drain : ((F/2)+1)S adding the +1 TN and +1 DL to the base.


But this is hopeless ! :) [well good for the drain code but]

go for deadly damage base, go on :)
and factor in some more armour penetration and you can cause oh so
much more grief, but the drain code will rise to nasty levels.

Mark
Message no. 70
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:45:19 EDT
On Fri, 27 Jun 1997 21:02:12 +0500 Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET> writes:
>I need some help. I am having trouble with the spell creation part of
>the Grimoire.
>
>I am trying to create a "Force Dart" spell. Basically, it brings into
>existence a small "force dart" and flings it at a target. I want it
>to be a damaging manipulation, so I can target specific parts of a
>target, like a gun in a hand, or a knee, etc. I would like it to also
>have the elemental effect of blast. Base damage is M.
>
>Could someone help me design this? Step by step would be helpful. The
>examples in the book are for more basic spells.
>
>Thanks!
Pwr. level
Base Damge: M
Physical +1
Elemental Effect +1
(Blast)
________________________

Drain code=[(F/2)+1]S

Target number would be a base of 4
<shrug> that one's really pretty simple.

--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 71
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 10:54:37 +0000
On 27 Jun 97 at 10:45, John E Pederson wrote:

> ________________________
>
> Drain code=[(F/2)+1]S
>
> Target number would be a base of 4
> <shrug> that one's really pretty simple.

Yea, your right, that is why I thought I was doing it wrong. I was
over complicating the process for some reason.

Thanks to everyone who has responded.

--

=DREKHEAD========================================================
drekhead@***.net --- http://users.aol.com/drekhead/home.html ---
=================================================================
=================================================================
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot
stomping on a human face...forever. -George Orwell
Message no. 72
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 00:12:13 +0100
Drekhead said on 9:46/27 Jun 97...

> > Okay, so there will be lots of others...but here's mine...
> > Makes the spell (F/2) + 1 M
>
> What about the blast effect? Would that make it [(F/2)+2]M or
> [(F/2)+1]S ?

S, since an elemental effect adds +1 to the Damage Category, not the Drain
Target.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
All I need is a little oblivion.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.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. 73
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 00:29:48 -0400
In a message dated 97-06-27 20:23:03 EDT, drekhead@***.NET (Drekhead) writes:

> > Okay, so there will be lots of others...but here's mine...
> > Makes the spell (F/2) + 1 M
>
> What about the blast effect? Would that make it [(F/2)+2]M or
> [(F/2)+1]S ?
>
>
The version that I made would only be M+1 because it has no other real
"elemental" effects, including Blast (elemental Air)...if you included it,
yes, it would go to S+1...
Message no. 74
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 10:55:34 -0400
In a message dated 97-06-28 04:51:28 EDT, M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk (Mark
Steedman) writes:

> category : damaging manipulation.
> type : physical (rather than mana, its creating magical
> matter/physical disturbance)
> +1 drain TN
> range : LOS base drain, no mod
> TN : 4 off the master TN table for a simple brute
> force manipulation spell
> damage : M base drain level M = (F/2)M
> elemental effect blast + a drain level
> duration : instant base again no modifier
> drain : ((F/2)+1)S adding the +1 TN and +1 DL to the base.
>
>>>[By the way everybody, you don't have to factor in the "Blast"
effect if
you don't want too...look at Clout for an example...]<<<
Message no. 75
From: Jyster Cap <jyster007@*****.COM>
Subject: New Spell
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 22:36:59 -0800
Here is a new spell I started to design after

getting screwed to many times by my GM. Every

run we do someone has thermographic vision,

watchers, or able to perceive. So using

imp. invisibilty is out because of thermo,

sustaining a spell is out because of mages or

watchers. So I decided that I had to make a

permanent spell that would alter my shape and

appearance. The good part is that it changes

your body and appearance to whomever you want,

minus retinal, DNA, or fingerprints, if that

info is not known. Bad part is that the spell

is permanent and changing back you will lose

some part of your uniqueness.

So here is the spell:

Spell Name : Havn't decided

Spell Category : Manipulation

Spell Type : Physical

Range : Touch

Target # : 4

Duration : Permanent 15 Turns

Spell Resistance: Willing Target

Drain Code : (F/2)S
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 76
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 16:56:16 +1000
Jyster Cap writes:
>Here is a new spell I started to design after
>getting screwed to many times by my GM. Every
>run we do someone has thermographic vision,

Fair enough too... certainly even if the opposition don't like dwarves and
trolls, and are too stingy to pay for cybereyes, mechanical thermo sensors
are cheap and easy.

>watchers, or able to perceive. So using
>imp. invisibilty is out because of thermo,
>sustaining a spell is out because of mages or
>watchers.

Initiate and use Masking to hide your sustained spells (or spell locks at
least).

> So I decided that I had to make a
>permanent spell that would alter my shape and
>appearance. The good part is that it changes
>your body and appearance to whomever you want,
>minus retinal, DNA, or fingerprints, if that
>info is not known. Bad part is that the spell
>is permanent and changing back you will lose
>some part of your uniqueness.
>So here is the spell:
>
>Spell Name : Havn't decided
>Spell Category : Manipulation
>Spell Type : Physical
>Range : Touch
>Target # : 4

Should probably be like the healing spells... 8/10 - (Essence).

>Duration : Permanent 15 Turns
>Spell Resistance: Willing Target
>Drain Code : (F/2)S


Should probably be a Deadly drain (drastic physical manipulation and all
that). As a general rule, you should post the figures you used to work out
the drain code.

OTH, you could probably get this effect by taking Mask and whacking a
Permanent option on that. Alternatively, take Mask (again), initiate, put it
in a spell lock or anchor, and use Masking to hide it from astral observers.

Just my two cents.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 77
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 10:36:01 +0000
And verily, did Jyster Cap hastily scribble thusly...
|So I decided that I had to make a
|
|permanent spell that would alter my shape and
|
|appearance. The good part is that it changes
|
|your body and appearance to whomever you want,
|
|minus retinal, DNA, or fingerprints, if that
|
|info is not known. Bad part is that the spell
|
|is permanent and changing back you will lose
|
|some part of your uniqueness.

Another bad part is that is CAN'T change your aura.
No spell can, so a watcher would see you for what you are/where anyway.


--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 78
From: Jeremiah Stevens <jeremiah@********.EDU>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 13:11:06 -0500
>
> Another bad part is that is CAN'T change your aura.
> No spell can, so a watcher would see you for what you are/where anyway.

Not true. Health spells effectively change a person's aura. A gunshot
wound, for example, would show up in a person's aura and if a mage were to
heal the wound, then it would no longer register in the aura. True, a
spell cannot directly affect a person's aura, but changes to the body will
be reflected in the aura. Thus, a permanent physical change would produce
a changed aura.
Message no. 79
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: New Spell
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 20:17:13 EST
In a message dated 98-02-02 01:36:57 EST, jyster007@*****.COM writes:

Hey Jyster007, why the spaces????

> Here is a new spell I started to design after
>
> getting screwed to many times by my GM. Every

That is always something nice to run into....

> run we do someone has thermographic vision,
>
> watchers, or able to perceive. So using
>
> imp. invisibilty is out because of thermo,
>
> sustaining a spell is out because of mages or
>
> watchers. So I decided that I had to make a
>
> permanent spell that would alter my shape and
>
> appearance. The good part is that it changes
>
> your body and appearance to whomever you want,
>
> minus retinal, DNA, or fingerprints, if that
>
> info is not known. Bad part is that the spell
>
> is permanent and changing back you will lose
>
> some part of your uniqueness.
>
> So here is the spell:
>
> Spell Name : Havn't decided

I remember designing a Health Spell that was Ritual only with these
intentions...

> Spell Category : Manipulation
>
> Spell Type : Physical
>
> Range : Touch
>
> Target # : 4
>
> Duration : Permanent 15 Turns
>
> Spell Resistance: Willing Target
>
> Drain Code : (F/2)S

Don't take this wrong, but for what the spell is doing, the drain is too low
IMHO. I remember "Major Transformation" being base "S" drain,
physical +1,
Sustained +1 (which is needed for Permanent magic, at least here), Permanent
magic (+1 Drain Level).

That would make the spell at least D2 (that is [F/2]+2D for those who don't
know our shorthand). That is without the GM attempting to "dick you over"
again...

-K
Message no. 80
From: John W Thornton <whitewolfplayer@****.COM>
Subject: New spell
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:53:55 -0500
Take the combat spell Redirect and make it Mana instead of Physical so
that instead of redirecting physical attacks you instead Reflect the
spell energy back. the Damage code of the reflect is the same as the
original spell and the drain is the Damage code -1 ans -1 to the drain
target..ie someone launches a light ray. It's damage is an S. If it's
successfully Reflected the damage is an S resisted at the force of the
Reflect or the Original spell<whichever is lower> and the drain for it
would be M-1.

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about New Spell, 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!