From:	Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject:	Re: Allies for Physical Adepts
Date:	Sun, 9 Apr 1995 19:45:06 +1000

Bob Ooton writes:

> I did. I made a phys ad straight by the "rules" and a samurai as well.
> Only books used were SR II, Grimmy II, and Street Samurai Sourcebook. Oh,
> and the NAGM (didn't help my samurai out much as you can guess). And they
> aren't anywhere near even. My samurai ended up getting betaware/bioware,
> etc. And I guess I'll spend the karma to initiate my phys ad. But overall,
> the samurai gets better stats for the karma/buck.

The only major difference I could see in the comparative abilities of
starting sammies and phys adepts is the phys adepts lack of speed (he can't
quite compare with wired reflexes). Otherwise the phys adept can get
everything (+ more) that the sammy can get.

> Once again (as if it needs to be said again) it's the player that defines
> the character.

Very true, I agree, but a bit off the point in question.

> Please don't send generalized crap over this list.

Generalisations are a fact of life. It _is_ true that phys adepts are
generally better at stealth and HTH than samurais. Sure individual examples
can be pointed out, but over the whole, it is right. And it is true that
phys adepts _can_ specialise a heck of a lot better than any samurai can.
The physical adept is a lot more suited to HTH than a samurai. You can see
this simply by comparing the relative costs of extra skill dice for the
different skills. Due to the relative cheapness of extra HTH skill dice,
more players will go for the close combat phys adept than will not. Hence a
majority of physical adepts will be HTH specialists, hence it is valid to
make a generalisation. And a generalisation is just that, a GENERALisation,
it will have exceptions, it is defined that way.

Also note that "But overall, the samurai gets better stats for the
karma/buck.", is rather a generalisation too. No? :-)

> which strangely became Magic VS. Tech, still not pleased about that

<chuckle> You created a monster! :-) It got out of control. Magic & Tech
debates tend to do that, they quickly degenerate into Magic vs. Tech. Quite
similarly to how many "Magic" discussions end up as arguments over the nature
of "Real Magic". It's just the way things flow. :-)

> How many spirits (that a mage can get power over) are there that are...
> a) Force 8
> b) Possessing Immunity to Normal Weapons
>
> I'm also curious as to what spirit of yours had this power? (doesn't
> remember any spirits that had it...)

Well, they all do, in an indirect fashion. They have Manifestation, and if
you read the description under Manifestatin, you'll see it says they get the
Power of Immunity to Normal Weapons, but with a few restrictions.

> So? No mages with spells to cast or even a weapon focus? (likes to point
> out that mages can use weapon foci too)

Yeah, one of my players has a mage who is a HTH specialist (he specialised
in Pool Cue(!), a type of staff. Very humerous, but still effective enough.)

> Go somewhere where the spirit has no influence. (i.e. don't play in the
> swimming pool when the water spirit is angry...)

Fine with nature spirits, but kinda hard with elementals (and it is
elementals which players will probably run up against more often :-().

> Sure it's harder to heal a samurai, but it REALLY sucks to take a
> serious/deadly wound as a phys ad or a mage.

I'd rather lose a Magic Point than die.

> Also there's those stim patches and trauma patches that work wonders for
> the magically challenged.

Note that Trauma patches have no effect on Magic loss.

> And yes, Phys Ads can use cyberware too (look at Teachdaire in Prime
> Runners)

Yeah, but he's a 9th level Initiate or something. But you are right, Phys
adepts do have a lot more capacity to expand if they want to (they can get
all the cyber a samurai can, _plus_ their phys adept powers).

--
Damion Milliken Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

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