Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Stimulation spell
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 18:52:56 -0500
Could the Stimulation spell in the BBB (SR2, p 156) be used in an
offensive capacity? The description says that the subject should be a
volunteer, but am I correct in thinking that the spell could be cast on
an unwilling subject as well, using a Resisted test (Spell's force
versus the subject's Willpower, each using the other as the TN)?

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 2
From: Nexx Many-Scars <Nexx3@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Stimulation spell
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 22:49:04 EDT
In a message dated 06/08/98 18:52:38 Central Daylight Time, remo@***.NET
writes:

> Could the Stimulation spell in the BBB (SR2, p 156) be used in an
> offensive capacity? The description says that the subject should be a
> volunteer, but am I correct in thinking that the spell could be cast on
> an unwilling subject as well, using a Resisted test (Spell's force
> versus the subject's Willpower, each using the other as the TN)?

No. Voluntary subject is a specific liimitation on the spell, which makes it
easier on the mind to cast (lower drain), because the target's aura accepts
the spell, rather than attempting to fight it. You could design a version
that could be used offensively, but it wouldn't be as effective as, say,
overstimulation.

One option that D&D brings up, that you might be able to work into this, is
that if someone agrees to let you cast a spell on them, they forfiet their
saving throw. Now, SR doesn't have saving throws (as such), but could claim
that your healing spell requires a voluntary subject... and then cast
something a bit more potent (and lethal) once he accepts it? For example, you
say your version of Treat requires that they be willing. The guys says "Frag
yes, I'm willing", so you kneel beside him and lay your hands on him... and
instead cast, say, stimulation, to wrack his body with tremendous pain. Would
that work in the context of SR?

Nexx
Message no. 3
From: Bai Shen <baishen@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Stimulation spell
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 22:57:51 -0400
> One option that D&D brings up, that you might be able to work into this, is
> that if someone agrees to let you cast a spell on them, they forfiet their
> saving throw. Now, SR doesn't have saving throws (as such), but could claim
> that your healing spell requires a voluntary subject... and then cast
> something a bit more potent (and lethal) once he accepts it? For example, you
> say your version of Treat requires that they be willing. The guys says "Frag
> yes, I'm willing", so you kneel beside him and lay your hands on him... and
> instead cast, say, stimulation, to wrack his body with tremendous pain. Would
> that work in the context of SR?

I'd say no, because he's expecting healing, not stimulation. As soon as
he realized what you'd done, he'd resist.
--
Bai Shen
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
http://www.series2000.com/users/baishen
UIN 3543257 (Don't ask to join if you aren't going to send me anything.)
Message no. 4
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Stimulation spell
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 00:29:16 -0400
At 06:52 PM 8/6/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Could the Stimulation spell in the BBB (SR2, p 156) be used in an
>offensive capacity? The description says that the subject should be a
>volunteer, but am I correct in thinking that the spell could be cast on
>an unwilling subject as well, using a Resisted test (Spell's force
>versus the subject's Willpower, each using the other as the TN)?

Not having my Grimmy in front of me...

Might the offensive version simply be Chaos? At least mechanics-wise?

In anycase, I don't think the current version of Stimulation could be, but
I'm certain you could easily rewrite it so that it would. Probably have a
bit higher drain code though.

Erik J.
Message no. 5
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Stimulation spell
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 00:15:19 -0500
>You could design a version that could be used offensively, but it
>wouldn't be as effective as, say, overstimulation.

<smites self on forehead>

Duh...forgot about that one. Didn't have ye olde Grimoire with me. That
ought to fulfill the player's requirements nicely.

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 6
From: Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Stimulation spell
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 00:16:58 -0500
>Not having my Grimmy in front of me...
>
>Might the offensive version simply be Chaos? At least mechanics-wise?

Could be; Nexx also pointed me to the Overstimulation spell, which should
fulfill what my player is trying to accomplish quite nicely.

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.
Message no. 7
From: Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Stimulation spell
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 08:27:37 EDT
In a message dated 8/6/98 6:52:40 PM US Eastern Standard Time, remo@***.NET
writes:

> Could the Stimulation spell in the BBB (SR2, p 156) be used in an
> offensive capacity? The description says that the subject should be a
> volunteer, but am I correct in thinking that the spell could be cast on
> an unwilling subject as well, using a Resisted test (Spell's force
> versus the subject's Willpower, each using the other as the TN)?

I believe the resisted version of Stimulation is called Overstimulation ...

Oh, K bought a softback SR3 last night ... he says he is smiling ... but more
on that stuff once everyone is back from GC ... which reminds me ... I'll be
going up there Saturday afternoon sometime ...

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Stimulation 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!