From:	Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject:	Re: questions?
Date:	Wed, 26 Apr 1995 01:25:59 +1000

P Ward writes:

> > When casting a spell into a spell lock do you include magic pool dice?
> yup, why not; it's still a a spell isn't it.

I agree.

> > Could you use a fetish focus to gain more successes when casting into a
> Guess so, but make the Pc's pay through the teeth for it.

That's a good thought, I can't see why it isn't possible either. Now
magicians around the world actually have something to spend all that nuyen
they seem to accumulate on. Riggers, deckers and sammies are suddenly caught
short as the magicians call back in all those debts...

> > I assume spell locks still work after a shapechage spell Even with a
> I just let them have the same stat bonuses on top of their new physical
> stats.

I, too would leave the stat bonus the same.

> > What do you use to work out combat pool from when shapechanged
> Well, only quickness changes; work it out again, maybe even apply
> a penalty because you're not used to the new body.

Yup, I agree. Thogugh I probably wouldn't give the penalty (I'm a softy at
heart :-)). After all, it _is_ magic.

> > If shapechanged into a bear with strengh 9 and damage 6S should an
> I _think_ in the Critters section it says that damage codes remain the
> same even for critteres with increased size/stats. I personally boost the
> codes if the critter gets bigger, so you should do the same for the Stat
> increase. Just add the strength increase straight onto the damage code.

You're right, the damage codes do not change for the under/over sized
critters, so therefore alterations in stats do not affect the damage code.
But your house rule does make sense.

> > Can you use power foci, fetish foci, or magic pool to increase the
> The number of successes doesn't make any difference to a spell-lock, so it
> dont worry about it (they don't matter, do they Mr Guru?)

The number of dice would, in the case of a spell such as Combat Sense, where
the succeses earned determine the final outcome of the spell. I'd allow the
player to include the Power focus bonus, after all, the spell lock isn't
likely to stay around for long, so it won't matter all that much (and it
pays to keep players happy :-)).

> > Can you use exclusivity on a spell when casting it in a spell lock then
> Probably, it's just the casting that's exclusive, not the sustaining;
> check me here Mr Guru. Even so, the spell lock is doing the _exclusive_ job
> of sustaining, so it's OK, neh?

Well, the sustaining of an exclusive spell is an exclusive activity (if you
have an exclusive +4 Quickness spell, then when it is running you cannot
cast any other spells, nor call elementals etc). But fortunately, the spell
lock relieves the burden of sustaining from the magician, and he no longer
has to concern himself with it, so, like you said, no problem.

> > Can you have force 6 spells with exclusivity, fetish and totem1
> I think the maximum rating for spells at the start is 6, originally I
> ruled that that _included_ the force modifiers, now I think I am correct in
> ruling that they don't, so you can get a force 10 spell to start with (but
> make it something with a low drain modifier, won't you). NB. Totem
> modifiers add DICE ONLY, not force (check me again mr guru).

It is the option of the GM to allow restricted use spells to starting
characters. It is possible to learn a spell with both the exclusive modifier
and the expendible fetish modifier, thus gaining a +4 Force bonus. And yes,
totem dice are considered to be Magic Pool dice (so, it is not possible, for
example,afor a shamen with a Magic Attribute of 6 to lob a spell and add in 6
dice from his Magic Pool, _and_ also add in totem bonuses. The totem bonuses
are considered a "free" addition to the Magic Pool at the time of casting).
The rules are unclear as to if (assuming the GM allows) it is possible to
begin the game with a Force 6 spell with restricted spell modifiers. My
interpretation is that the total Force (including modifiers) cannot exceed
6, but I am not too sure on that (anyone know for sure?).

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong 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+