Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 21:30:28 -0400
I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
might need one of a different level. These should all be unified like
Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the different
levels.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 2
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 1997 21:45:55 -0400
> From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
> Date: Saturday, July 05, 1997 9:30 PM

> I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
> different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
> would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
> might need one of a different level. These should all be unified like
> Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
> to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the different
> levels.

I agree fully. I was just discussing this the other night. Thanks for
bringing it up, MC23. :)

Justin :)
Message no. 3
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 04:41:06 -0400
In a message dated 97-07-05 21:34:28 EDT, mc23@**********.COM (MC23) writes:

>
> I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
> different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
> would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
> might need one of a different level. These should all be unified like
> Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
> to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the different
> levels.
>
>
Okay, don't quote me on this, but I believe that when they changed the
Heal/Treat spells to the variable drain concept, they were just barely done
with testing it. I don't know how true that little rumor from way back is.

I agree with you though, and we've changed the rules a bit for the games
here. We kept the drain modifier though, to reflect some of the differences
that each type has between standard healing magic.
-Keith
Message no. 4
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 12:58:43 +0100
MC23 said on 21:30/ 5 Jul 97...

> I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
> different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
> would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
> might need one of a different level. These should all be unified like
> Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
> to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the different
> levels.

Remember that in SR1 the four different Heal spells all had their own
fixed Drain Code: if you used Heal Serious Wounds on someone who only had
a Light wound, you still took S2 drain, and you couldn't use that spell to
heal a Deadly wound.

Although since SR2 incorporated the eight different Heal and Treat into
two basic ones, it is strange that the same didn't happen with the other
health spells, yes.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> 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. 5
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 13:12:26 +0100
|
| I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
|different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
|would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
|might need one of a different level.

Eh? 2nd edition there ARE only 2 health spells for healing. Heal and Treat.
In 1st Ed, they had treat light/moderate/serious/deadly, but not in second.

And believe me, it worked. The drain increased with the level, so if you'd
only taken a light wound, treat light worked fine.

Casting treat serious on a moderate wound was asking for unneeded drain....

I imagine that's the way the toxin spells are. It's a but more expensive
force wise, but hey....


These should all be unified like
|Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
|to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the different
|levels.

Oh, I get you now....

Maybe.... (It's probably a carry over from 1st. All I can say is, if you
want your players to have more force to play with, give 'em the unified
spell)

--
______________________________________________________________________________
|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. 6
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 1997 11:06:41 -0400
Spike once dared to write,

>And believe me, it worked. The drain increased with the level, so if you'd
>only taken a light wound, treat light worked fine.
>
>Casting treat serious on a moderate wound was asking for unneeded drain....
>
>I imagine that's the way the toxin spells are. It's a but more expensive
>force wise, but hey....

<snip>

>Oh, I get you now....
>
>Maybe.... (It's probably a carry over from 1st. All I can say is, if you
>want your players to have more force to play with, give 'em the unified
>spell)

Now you see what I was talking about. All of those adjustable spells
should be one generalized spell with a sliding drain code for the
different levels. The drain could be perhaps slightly high than the
specific level spells to take in account the added versitility. For just
safety reasons now I don't know of any player that didn't take the
highest level of those spells anyway. In practice those lower level
spells were not being used.


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 7
From: Tim Cooper <z-i-m@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 12:54:32 EDT
On Sat, 5 Jul 1997 21:30:28 -0400 MC23 <mc23@**********.COM> writes:
> I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
>different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
>would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
>might need one of a different level. These should all be unified like
>Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
>to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the
>different levels.

Yup. Our group has always played Treat/Heal spells as having a drain
equal to whatever level of damage you were trying to treat/heal. That
is, you just learned Treat or Heal in general, and if you cast it on a
guy with a Light wound the drain was L, if the wound was S then the drain
would be S too, etc.. Much less of a headache and it made more sence to
us.

~Tim
Message no. 8
From: "Robert G. Brook" <rgb1@**.MSSTATE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 16:08:48 -0500
On Sat, 5 Jul 1997, MC23 wrote:

> I have never understood the need for separate spells for healing
> different levels of disease, poison, raise/lower attribute, etc. Why
> would anyone take the lower levels of these spells knowing that they
> might need one of a different level. These should all be unified like
> Heal and Treat were when 2nd edition came out. It just makes more sense
> to do so. They should be 1 spell with different drains for the different
> levels.

I also favor adding success thresholds for the increasing levels. For
example, a light (or +1) spell requires at least 1 success; a medium (or
+2) spell requires at least 2 successes; a serious (or +3) spell requires
at least 3 successes; and, a deadly (or +4) spell requires at least 4
successes. This tends to weaken the heal and treat spells a bit, but I
think that is necessary in my game to prevent the energizer bunny
syndrome.

--Glenn Brook
Message no. 9
From: "Bruce H. Nagel" <NAGELBH@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 1997 18:29:21 -0500
You wrote:
> I also favor adding success thresholds for the increasing levels. For
> example, a light (or +1) spell requires at least 1 success; a medium (or
> +2) spell requires at least 2 successes; a serious (or +3) spell requires
> at least 3 successes; and, a deadly (or +4) spell requires at least 4
> successes. This tends to weaken the heal and treat spells a bit, but I
> think that is necessary in my game to prevent the energizer bunny
> syndrome.

That's one thing they did away with in 2nd ed was thresholds for spells, which
might be another nice thing to bring back in 2nd ed...

losthalo
Message no. 10
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 17:24:31 +0100
|That's one thing they did away with in 2nd ed was thresholds for spells, which
|might be another nice thing to bring back in 2nd ed...

Are you sure? I thought thresholds were still used in the control
actions/emotions/thoughts category....

--
______________________________________________________________________________
|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. 11
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 22:32:31 +0100
Spike said on 17:24/ 8 Jul 97...

> |That's one thing they did away with in 2nd ed was thresholds for spells, which
> |might be another nice thing to bring back in 2nd ed...
>
> Are you sure? I thought thresholds were still used in the control
> actions/emotions/thoughts category....

They are used in some spells, but IIRC SR1 explained the concept of
thresholds somewhere in the general rules on spellcasting, and SRII
doesn't. Bringing them back to SR1 standards would be a very good idea,
IMHO.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Two words: therapy.
-> 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------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [SR3] Consolidated Health Spells, 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!