| From: | run@***********.com (run@***********.com) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Lightning Ball vs Vehicle. Uber Spell or How Does It Work? |
| Date: | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:01:21 -0400 |
>take a person, even an armored person, from healthy to the brink of
>death or beyond can't even scratch a paint job on a car because that
>is balanced? I understand your answer, but that is IMO a very cheap
>caveat. Even a little bit of common sense pokes holes in the game
>balance argument.
I think it is meant to show the resilience of a vehicle. 1 the object is
inanimate
so some cosmetic damage will not necessarily affect it. ie, a bullet hole
in the trunk is not
going to make it crash., but blowing off a toe will affect a metahuman.
It was a quick fix instead of going and redoing all of the body ratings of
vehicles.
I think you are being overly dramatic when it comes to the lack of damage.
The paint will definitly suffer, you might punch a hole through the panel,
but actually doing structural damage to a vehicle is not easy with a weapon.
>A LAW is anti-vehiclular. What are the drawback to using it? High
>availability. Expensive. Illegal. Obvious to any observer.
>A Force 8 manipulation spell is going to be difficult to come by,
>probably cost a lot, be highly illegal to use, and after one goes
>off, "geek the mage" becomes the rallying cry of every NPC. In
>addition, casting the spell will have a good chance to leaving the
>caster halfway to unconscious.
if you want to affect a car ... use the ram spell. When it comes down to
it when lighting hits a car, it doesn't do much damage physically.
It will blow some circuits on a new car... but an old model T would not really
be affected. A force 8 acid blast or fireblast will destroy some panels but
the vehicle should keep running.
>Manipulation spells have high drain. That is the game balance right
>there. Declaring that the full force of the spell is calculated
>against the vehicle does not strike me as more game imbalancing that
>the existance of the spell in the first place.
>
>If you do stay with the 1/2 Force against vehicles, you need to apply
>another (game balancing?) rule. How much of the vehicle's armor is
>conductive, would you guess? Because metallic armor is useless
>against Lightning Bolt/Ball. So suddenly, maybe the vehicle only has
>a couple of points of armor against the spell.
The trick is to develop anti-vehicle spells.
> > Ah... I see what's going on here. You're using your own
> > imagination, based on what you've seen and what you know to
> > discredit the game effects.
> >
> > That's backwards. Let me explain:
>
>[SNIP]
>
>I kind of hope you are joking. Game mechanics exist to provide an
>abstract method of vicarious interaction with an imaginary world.
>Shadowrun's setting happens to be largely based on the real world.
>Hence, the laws of physics as we know them still apply. And
>metaphysics should be as internally consistant. The best guage of
>consistancy is common sense. Common sense, for me, says that the
>spell's Force (8) is not enough to penetrate the vehicle's armor
>(12). However, the secondary effect of the spell does some
>peripheral damage. Tires go bye-bye. Metal warps and some parts get
>melted. For the most part the vehicle is fine (not enough structural
>damage to warrant even an L wound). However, it is suddenly without
>external sensors or functional tires, and it has probably picked up a
>Stress point or two.
Game mechanics are meant for speed with a huge element of being realistic.
in the end, Shadowrun is a fantasy game. Your GM should come up with some
cosmetic damage. Tires are very insulated and not likely to blow.
[snip] game comment info[/snip]
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.6/59 - Release Date: 7/27/2005
