| From: | Unknown sender |
|---|---|
| Subject: | None |
| Date: | Unknown time and date |
> Conjuring Pool:
> The Conjuring Pool is similar to the Magic (which, for clarity,
> could be re-named the Sorcery Pool) Pool used in spellcasting and is
> based upon the summoner's Conjuring Skill. A Shaman's totem modifiers add
> or subtract from the Conjuring Pool. Spirit Foci add dice to the
> Conjuring Pool. Power Foci add their rating to the bonded magician's
> Magic Rating, and also to his/her Magic and Conjuring Pools.
Okay, a small problem I see with this is that while Magic Pool sometimes needs
to be saved to defend against spells, it's rare that you'd need to hold back
any of the dice in your Conjuring Pool, you'd rather pump as many as possible
into whatever you're doing. This method basically just gives more dive for
Conjuring-related tests. If that's what you want, that's fine, but I don't
personally think it's needed. The system's are closer to the procedures for
casting spells with Sorcery, so it does make the magic system a little more
similar and compatible, so that's one strength. I would just rather see less
dice supplements in the game overall.
losthalo
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 20:35:10 -0500
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: TEGTMEBC@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: Re: [SR3] Conjuring
In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Mon, 28 Jul 1997 18:36:49 -0500"
<Pine.SOL.3.91.970728183504.4235B-100000@******.tamu.edu>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
You wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 1997, John E Pederson wrote:
> > Summoning:
> > Summoning Drain is figured by replacing Magic with Charisma in
> > the chart on pg140 of SR2. Drain is resisted with Willpower and any dice
> > thrown in from the newly-created Conjuring Pool.
> > To summon a spirit, the magician rolls his/her Charisma, plus any
> > allocated dice from the Conjuring Pool, against a target number equal to
> > the spirit's force, modified only by wound modiiers or geas modifiers
> > (under SR2). The summoning magician may throw in up to his Magic Rating
> > in dice from his Conjuring Pool. Every two successes equals one service.
> Hold it; if you replace the conjuring "skill" with naked charisma, then
> what is the point of having that skill at all. I like this idea, but leave
> it as a skill test, and not as a charisma test.
You're right about not having any use for the skill if Charisma is used
in it's stead, but that's how it works with spellcasting. The Sorcery skill
doesn't do a whole lot of good except give you a good Magic Pool. That said, I
like the idea of the Conjuring Pool, so it is possible to conjure high force
elementals and spirits without having to be an elf. But I also have to agree
with Bill here, and say you should still use the conjuring skill for the test.
I personally think the sorcery skill should be used for something other than
giving a extra dice pool as well. In the case of the Conjuring Pool, maybe it
would be possible to reverse what you have listed for the test. Maybe you could
have the Pool be based off of the Charisma, while the test is still using the
Conjuring Skill. That sound too far out of whack to you?
-The Immortal Mental
PS- It's good to finally be back after summer.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 20:44:33 -0500
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: TEGTMEBC@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU
Subject: Re: Area Spells
In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Mon, 28 Jul 1997 10:45:14 -0600"
<199707281645.KAA10201@******>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
David wrote:
> Mike Elkins wrote:
> |
> | Here's another "thought experiment":
> |
> | A magician casts a physical area-of-effect spell
> | at a point in the middle of a wheat field. Does it
> | only effect the wheat stalks towards the front that
> | he can see well, does it effect a nice neat circle
> | in the crop, or does it effect a few dozen or so
> | stalks that happen to be the ones his mind
> | "noticed"? Substitute a crowd in a passing
> | subway car if you think a field of wheat is too
> | boring...
> I'm gonna say that the wheat that the magician can't see isn't
> affected by the combat spell (ditto for the people in the crowd).
> This is a rule that I've had to read a lot, cuz one of the players in
> my game keeps trying to use Fireball to affect targets around corners
> (We're playing SR, not AD$D! <sigh>). It doesn't matter what's
> blocking your sight.
OK, I have to bring this up, because it's just been bugging me. Now if
a spell isn't able to affect people that the magician can't see, as you
suggest, then how does the area of effect get handled? For example: The mage
that loves to hit people with fireballs from around corners is being chased by
a mob of angery people. He ducks around a corner, and whaits for his victims.
The moment the first person walks around the corner, he can now see them and so
lets loose with a fireball. The person he could see is obviously a dead duck,
but what happens in regard to the rest of the mob that was right behind him?
They are, for the sake of argument, still within the normal radius of the
spell. Are these people supposed to be affected by the spell or not? I would
say that they would be affected based on the fact that they weren't the targets
of the spell, they just got caught in the blast. But from your argument, it
would seem that they should be unaffected since the caster can't see them.
I'm not trying to shoot holes in your logic, I just want to know why
the people wouldn't be affected by a blast that is in the physical plane. After
all, once it hits the target, it changes form the astral to the physical plane.
At least that's how I think it works.
-The Immortal Mental
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 21:00:57 -0400
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Conjuring
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I just wanted to let you know that I really like the Conjuring rules the
way they are currently. They are clean and concise, and they don't allow
folks to whip up high force spirits without recourse.
Not that the suggestions made weren't nice, I just don't think the system
needs to be changed.
Justin :)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 21:06:12 -0400
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Area Spells
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> From: TEGTMEBC@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU
> Date: Monday, July 28, 1997 9:44 PM
<Snip>
> David wrote:
> > This is a rule that I've had to read a lot, cuz one of the players in
> > my game keeps trying to use Fireball to affect targets around corners
> > (We're playing SR, not AD$D! <sigh>). It doesn't matter what's
> > blocking your sight.
> OK, I have to bring this up, because it's just been bugging me.
Now if
> a spell isn't able to affect people that the magician can't see, as you
> suggest, then how does the area of effect get handled? For example: The
mage
> that loves to hit people with fireballs from around corners is being
chased by
> a mob of angery people. He ducks around a corner, and whaits for his
victims.
> The moment the first person walks around the corner, he can now see them
and so
> lets loose with a fireball. The person he could see is obviously a dead
duck,
> but what happens in regard to the rest of the mob that was right behind
him?
They are not in LOS, therefore they are not affected. Your area effect
spell just hit one person only.
> They are, for the sake of argument, still within the normal radius of the
> spell. Are these people supposed to be affected by the spell or not? I
would
No, because for area of effect spells (except for DMs), you must be able to
see anyone/thing you want to target by the spell. Area of effect has no
effect on this. Anyone that can be seen within the area of effect of the
spell will be effected.
> say that they would be affected based on the fact that they weren't the
targets
> of the spell, they just got caught in the blast. But from your argument,
it
> would seem that they should be unaffected since the caster can't see
them.
He is correct by stating this.
> I'm not trying to shoot holes in your logic, I just want to know
why
> the people wouldn't be affected by a blast that is in the physical plane.
After
> all, once it hits the target, it changes form the astral to the physical
plane.
> At least that's how I think it works.
It still grounds through their auras. If you can't see them, the spell
doesn't target their auras.
Damaging Maniputations (DMs) behave differently. They don't target auras,
thus a blast of flame or whatever fills the area of effect, effecting
everyone within it.
Hope that clears things up a bit. :)
> -The Immortal
Mental
Justin :)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 20:55:38 -0500
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: James Paulsen <lowfyr@***********.COM>
Organization: Northern Net
Subject: My New Campaign
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hey all, I need some input :)
I have decided to start a new campaign (as soon as the characters in the
current game retire), but I have sorta changed the premise of my game,
or at least the beginning of it.
Instead of having the players create characters who are already
shadowrunners, I want to try more of a roleplayed background. I have
done this before in just about every game I play, just never SR. I am
going to have them create fairly mundane characters (wageslaves, small
time corps, or, if I am feeling really charitable, maybe a cop, corpsec,
or a gutterpunk, but nothing heavy).
Anyway, the whole concept is based on easing them from their mundane,
tragically boring lives into the world of Big Scary Shadowrunners--make
them the innocents, and initially the victims (well...later too, but
that's another story ;).
To begin with they will have very few shadowrunish skills, mostly only
those that would be tied to a mundane character (i.e. Electronics B/R
for a repairman, etc.). The same will apply to both magic and cyberware.
If they want any, it will have to justifiable, legal, and rational for
them to get anything beyond a datajack.
Eventually they will become "full blown" runners, having a detailed and
thouroghly played out background of how they entered the biz. I am very
excited about this as are my players, but I was wondering if anybody had
ever done this sort of thing and if so how it worked out? Also, we
generally prefer the point based system (no mertis or flaws, however, as
I usually dole out the merits and flaws in their bg with out points
or benefits)so are there any ideas on how to restrict the system to keep
them from making a real kick-ass janitor?
Anyway...gotta stop blabbing,
Thanks in advance,
Jim
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 23:03:38 EDT
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Conjuring
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997 18:36:49 -0500 William Monroe Ashe
<wma6617@****.TAMU.EDU> writes:
<<Hold it; if you replace the conjuring "skill" with naked charisma, then
what is the point of having that skill at all. I like this idea, but
leave it as a skill test, and not as a charisma test.>>
The reason I did that was to keep from making Charisma the 'unused
attribute' and give it some practical use outside social situations (and
thus give a reason for a munchkin to have a Charisma greater than one). I
certainly see your point, If I can find a better way of keeping Charisma
important, I'll certainly go that route (maybe make the Conjuring Pool
based on Attriubutes?).
The whole idea behind this was to create a conjuring system that makes
sense, while not making Charisma a near-useless attribute. Hmmm...maybe a
modifier for Charisma depending on its rating.
<shrug> Got any ideas?
--
-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
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 23:03:38 EDT
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Conjuring
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997 20:22:31 -0500 "Wendy Wanders, Subject 117"
<KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> writes:
<<Okay, a small problem I see with this is that while Magic Pool
sometimes needs to be saved to defend against spells, it's rare that
you'd need to hold back any of the dice in your Conjuring Pool, you'd
rather pump as many as possible into whatever you're doing.>>
Well, the mage still needs to stay awake, or he loses the spirit, and not
resisting all the drain isn't going to do a shaman any favors (why bother
with a spirit in the middle of combat if it'll save your butt only so
that you can fall unconcious and get captured anyway?)
<<This method basically just gives more dive for Conjuring-related tests.
If that's what you want, that's fine, but I don't personally think it's
needed. The system's are closer to the procedures for casting spells
with Sorcery, so it does make the magic system a little more similar and
compatible, so that's one strength. I would just rather see less dice
supplements in the game overall.>>
:) I figured I'd get this complaint from you:) I really am against giving
more dice to the players, but I'm also trying to preserve the use of both
Conjuring Skill and Charisma, while still getting a system that makes
some sort of sense. I also wanted to allow the summoning magician a bit
more flexibility on his summoning (this would mean more to a shaman than
mage, though). It's not always easy to improve upon something, and I'd
certainly be more than welcome to input. If you've got any ideas, I'd
love to hear them...
--
-Canthros (Ah, well. The list was seeming kind of quiet anyway...)
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
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 23:03:38 EDT
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Conjuring
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997 20:35:10 -0500 TEGTMEBC@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU writes:
<<You're right about not having any use for the skill if Charisma is used
in it's stead, but that's how it works with spellcasting. The Sorcery
skill doesn't do a whole lot of good except give you a good Magic Pool.
That said, I like the idea of the Conjuring Pool, so it is possible to
conjure high force elementals and spirits without having to be an elf.
But I also have to agree with Bill here, and say you should still use the
conjuring skill for the test. I personally think the sorcery skill should
be used for something other than giving a extra dice pool as well. In the
case of the Conjuring Pool, maybe it would be possible to reverse what
you have listed for the test. Maybe you could have the Pool be based off
of the Charisma, while the test is still using the Conjuring Skill. That
sound too far out of whack to you?>>
No, it doesn't, and I'd even considered just such an idea, but it then
does the same thing to Charisma that what I've just proposed does to
Conjuring skill (how anyone would be able to plausibly conjure a spirit
without at least a little bit of Conjuring Skill [or some serious
defaulting], I don't know, and any GM that let a player do such a thing
had better have some good reasoning behind him:). As I said (or will say,
depending on what order these messages wind up in) in my reply to Bill,
I'm trying to set it up in such a way that Charisma remains important,
certain discrepancies that (IMO) exist in the rules as-is (Drain based on
and resisted by Charisma) get fixed and Conjuring skill doesn't get set
totally by the wayside. Keeping the skill involved is the only reason
there's a dice pool at all.
Plan B: Summoning is handled by a Conjuring(Force) test, successes from
this test may be applied to the Conjuring Drain resistance test.
<<PS- It's good to finally be back after summer.>>
_After_ summer? It's still July! That sounds a lot like summer (if you're
in the northern hemisphere, anyway:)
--
-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
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 23:03:38 EDT
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: [SR3] Conjuring
On Mon, 28 Jul 1997 21:00:57 -0400 Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
writes:
<<I just wanted to let you know that I really like the Conjuring rules
the way they are currently. They are clean and concise, and they don't
allow folks to whip up high force spirits without recourse.
Not that the suggestions made weren't nice, I just don't think the system
needs to be changed.>>
My only complaint with the system as-is is the way that Conjuring Drain
is handled, I don't think it should be based on Charisma and it doesn't
make sense that it would be resisted by it, either. Of course, that's
only my opinion, I'm not sure what the general list opinion on the idea
is.
--
-Canthros (you know, if it weren't for the useful feedback I'm getting
out of this, I think I'd be sorry I ever proposed it:) And Kumquat? You
were right. It _is_ like throwing raw meat at a pack of rabid animals:)
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
