Shadowrun
Shadowrun General => General Discussion => Topic started by: SmilinIrish on <09-25-14/1149:39>
-
Its here. 21 pages of material. Aboriginal Egyptian, Norse, and Psionic tradtions. Section of magical societies and magical threats. 41 new spells and 3 new rituals. 16 new adepts powers including keratin control, demara, living focus and heightened concentration (Well, the book says "heightened concern", but I think its supposed to be concentration. Lets you ignore a single modifier up to half your Magic.
I'm disappointed that Master of 1000 Faces isn't there. Was also hoping for Multitasking.
-
I thought all the adept powers were over costed and underpowered, AGAIN. I don't think there's a single one I would take. Haven't looked at the spells yet. Either way, it really takes balls to come out with this before the SG errata is done.
-
keratin control for 0.5pp seems excessive imho.
-
I thought all the adept powers were over costed and underpowered, AGAIN. I don't think there's a single one I would take. Haven't looked at the spells yet. Either way, it really takes balls to come out with this before the SG errata is done.
That kinda concerns me too. I mean, I've heard Shadow Spells is unrelated to SG, as in, different people worked on both, but the timing is unfortunate. It has the unpleasant taste of "Day 1 DLC", though not as bad.
-
The [Element] Grenade spell line looks like fun. 8)
-
The adept power Living Focus looked really cool till you get to the end. I'm not paying an entire power point for a power that inflicts me with a -2 dice pool modifier every time I use it. Pffft. :P
-
The [Element] Grenade spell line looks like fun. 8)
Reasons for Mages to learn demolitions. Don't have any handy explosives? Use your demo-mage to destroy that problem that needs demolitions! Also, Alchemical [Element] Grenades!
Summon a force 1 spirit! Hand them the grenade. 'Run into that room, little spirit'. BLAM!
-
I thought all the adept powers were over costed and underpowered, AGAIN. I don't think there's a single one I would take. Haven't looked at the spells yet. Either way, it really takes balls to come out with this before the SG errata is done.
Really? Eidetic memory? Extra health/stun damage boxes for a measly 1 pp? Enthralling performance for 0.5? Sustaining of Force up to you magic rating for 1 PP?
I thought that the adept powers were pretty awesome - some of them too powerful and cheap. Differing opinions on the internet! Who knew?
-
The [Element] Grenade spell line looks like fun. 8)
Reasons for Mages to learn demolitions. Don't have any handy explosives? Use your demo-mage to destroy that problem that needs demolitions! Also, Alchemical [Element] Grenades!
Summon a force 1 spirit! Hand them the grenade. 'Run into that room, little spirit'. BLAM!
Instantaneous negative Astral reputation?
-
The [Element] Grenade spell line looks like fun. 8)
Reasons for Mages to learn demolitions. Don't have any handy explosives? Use your demo-mage to destroy that problem that needs demolitions! Also, Alchemical [Element] Grenades!
Summon a force 1 spirit! Hand them the grenade. 'Run into that room, little spirit'. BLAM!
That's just being mean. Besides unless you have a crappy drain stat getting 3 hits on Magic + [Drain Attribute] should be fairly reliable.
-
Alchemical [Element] Grenade sounds a bit redundant. Of course I have no idea what separates the already grenade-like AoE spells from that new spell. By the way, did SG add any new elements beyond the core and the "obviously not for PC use" radiation/toxic? Did Shadow Spells?
-
Not in SG as far as I know. There's spells combining Fire and Water, but that's pretty much it. Of course given how some spells are anti-element, that makes it a bit easier to... Wait, there's Smoke Walls? But there's no Smoke element...
-
I thought all the adept powers were over costed and underpowered, AGAIN. I don't think there's a single one I would take. Haven't looked at the spells yet. Either way, it really takes balls to come out with this before the SG errata is done.
Really? Eidetic memory? Extra health/stun damage boxes for a measly 1 pp? Enthralling performance for 0.5? Sustaining of Force up to you magic rating for 1 PP?
I thought that the adept powers were pretty awesome - some of them too powerful and cheap. Differing opinions on the internet! Who knew?
I have to say, I'm a little surprised that people think things are too expensive. I'll grant that Power Swimming is niche, but the other powers have tons of potential, especially for non-combat adepts. Living Focus seems like it would be monsterous with the right mage.
-
Alchemical [Element] Grenade sounds a bit redundant. Of course I have no idea what separates the already grenade-like AoE spells from that new spell. By the way, did SG add any new elements beyond the core and the "obviously not for PC use" radiation/toxic? Did Shadow Spells?
Shadowspells has cold based spells (single ranged target and ranged AOE) which IIRC were not in the core book. As to grenade spells they don't go off until triggered by the mage (simple action) or the end of the combat turn, whichever comes first.
-
SG errata:
http://cdn.shadowruntabletop.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/E-CAT27003E_SG-Errata.pdf?4713c7
-
I thought all the adept powers were over costed and underpowered, AGAIN. I don't think there's a single one I would take. Haven't looked at the spells yet. Either way, it really takes balls to come out with this before the SG errata is done.
Really? Eidetic memory? Extra health/stun damage boxes for a measly 1 pp? Enthralling performance for 0.5? Sustaining of Force up to you magic rating for 1 PP?
I thought that the adept powers were pretty awesome - some of them too powerful and cheap. Differing opinions on the internet! Who knew?
Yes, really. One dmg box is in no way worth 1pp. Living focus is useless, was in 4th too. Why not just have your Mage sustain it? 1pp is a lot!
SG errata:
http://cdn.shadowruntabletop.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/E-CAT27003E_SG-Errata.pdf?4713c7
Noted. Which still makes me think it'd have been better if they waited a day, or a week.
Also, it's only half an errata. They apparently didn't feel a need to fix the power costs or the ways, which are a wrong.
-
You seem to have mistaken "I don't like X" for "they didn't intend X".
-
Cost effectiveness can be relative. I think the cost for Supernatural Toughness is fine. It is two boxes BTW (one stun, one physical) per level. But my pys adept concept is a living wall. He doesn't dodge damage, he eats it for breakfast and keeps going. For other adept templates it not such a great deal though if you consider there really isn't any other way to add to you condition monitor so cheaply.
Personally I do agree with you about the Living Focus though as I've already stated. But some seem to think its great. YMMV I guess.
-
You seem to have mistaken "I don't like X" for "they didn't intend X".
If what they did with adept powers and Ways in SG was intended, son, there's a problem.
-
You seem to have mistaken "I don't like X" for "they didn't intend X".
If what they did with adept powers and Ways in SG was intended, son, there's a problem.
Don't call me son, and don't use a topic about errata, which are by definition corrections for errors, to complain about the book itself.
-
You seem to have mistaken "I don't like X" for "they didn't intend X".
If what they did with adept powers and Ways in SG was intended, son, there's a problem.
Don't call me son, and don't use a topic about errata, which are by definition corrections for errors, to complain about the book itself.
I have a better idea -- please stop trying to tell me where and how to say something.
They pretty clearly left things out of SG to put it in this book. They also haven't errata'd half the things in SG they should have. And I'll complain about both wherever I like.
I bought this. I was hesitant to, because of the problems with SG, and the fact that (this morning) the errata wasn't out yet. I did anyway cuz it was only $7. I'm pretty regretful about this, now, and I would reccomend that you don't do the same.
-
They pretty clearly left things out of SG to put it in this book. They also haven't errata'd half the things in SG they should have. And I'll complain about both wherever I like.
As one of the people who's been working on Shadowrun for Catalyst said;
Say what you'd like about the quality of the product, share your opinion about the material itself, etc, etc, all you want to. But please don't start this sort of rumor/misinformation. The e-book line and the core book line are, by and large, entirely separate from each other (which is often bemoaned by those who complain about miscommunication and miscues between the two lines). The e-books have their own line developer, in fact, and as I understand it, they own budget, pay rates, you name it. Individual writers will often work for both, over time, but the two branches are separate enough they have individual google groups and lines of communication, in fact. E-book writers often have an idea of what's coming down the pipeline elsewhere in Shadowrun, and may try to coordinate enough to go "Hey, there's a magic book hitting, let's do some magic stuff!" or something similar, but it's actually pretty rare for projects to share writers, except occasionally as folks proofing or contributing small snippets here and there.
So, no. It's not material "cut" from anywhere.
I'd suggest you read what the person who has first-hand knowledge of the system has to say (as I'm reasonably certain they have both a better perspective and more solid information than you). Even if you don't trust the company, Critias has been active and helpful around here, which is a credit to his word, at least. I'm personally aggravated a bit by this product, even if I do like the stuff put out with it, but that doesn't mean I'm telling everyone they're trying to gouge us all for extra money.
By the way, as mentioned in their blog post, the errata for Street Grimoire (and Run & Gun) are living documents, which are supposed to be updated as time goes on. You'll get more of the (many, I agree) issues fixed in time. Here's the link: http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2014/09/run-gun-and-street-grimoire-errata-is-happening-now/
-
What he said
-
They pretty clearly left things out of SG to put it in this book. They also haven't errata'd half the things in SG they should have. And I'll complain about both wherever I like.
As one of the people who's been working on Shadowrun for Catalyst said;
Say what you'd like about the quality of the product, share your opinion about the material itself, etc, etc, all you want to. But please don't start this sort of rumor/misinformation. The e-book line and the core book line are, by and large, entirely separate from each other (which is often bemoaned by those who complain about miscommunication and miscues between the two lines). The e-books have their own line developer, in fact, and as I understand it, they own budget, pay rates, you name it. Individual writers will often work for both, over time, but the two branches are separate enough they have individual google groups and lines of communication, in fact. E-book writers often have an idea of what's coming down the pipeline elsewhere in Shadowrun, and may try to coordinate enough to go "Hey, there's a magic book hitting, let's do some magic stuff!" or something similar, but it's actually pretty rare for projects to share writers, except occasionally as folks proofing or contributing small snippets here and there.
So, no. It's not material "cut" from anywhere.
I'd suggest you read what the person who has first-hand knowledge of the system has to say (as I'm reasonably certain they have both a better perspective and more solid information than you). Even if you don't trust the company, Critias has been active and helpful around here, which is a credit to his word, at least. I'm personally aggravated a bit by this product, even if I do like the stuff put out with it, but that doesn't mean I'm telling everyone they're trying to gouge us all for extra money.
By the way, as mentioned in their blog post, the errata for Street Grimoire (and Run & Gun) are living documents, which are supposed to be updated as time goes on. You'll get more of the (many, I agree) issues fixed in time. Here's the link: http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2014/09/run-gun-and-street-grimoire-errata-is-happening-now/
I READ WHAT HE SAID. I flat out do not to believe it. Which is not to say I think Critias is lying, I just don't think it was a decision he was party to. It can be two separate writing teams and all that, that doesn't stop content from being withheld from SG just to appear in SS.
It's really, really clear this is Day One DLC. Several things that were in Street Magic (not digital grimoire) were not in Street Grimoire, only to appear in this thing a couple months later.
-
You weren't party to any decisions either, but you are more than willing to spread unfounded gossip and rumor. Here's the thing, of all the folks posting Critias is the most likely to actually know what's going on. So I am going to take his word over someone prone to overreaction.
-
Hey buddy, it's super obvious. Pointing out how obvious it is, is not spreading out rumors or gossip, it's pointing out something obvious. And Critias seems like a nice guy, but his saying it isn't so doesn't make it not so.
It's not all that obvious, actually, seeing as a lot of people don't agree with you. Critias saying it isn't so (as a person who works for Catalyst) has more validity than your saying it isn't so (with nothing but your purchase of the product, last I checked), and you claiming it is Catalyst just trying to gouge us is in fact gossip and rumor until you can either show evidence or a trend, not a single incident.
-
It's strange that the same people who have two distinct product lines that managed to come up with different versions of the same power in separate publications are somehow also so coordinated that they can play a shell game across two books with traditions.
-
It's strange that the same people who have two distinct product lines that managed to come up with different versions of the same power in separate publications are somehow also so coordinated that they can play a shell game across two books with traditions.
Evidently it's as obvious as a yellow firetruck.
-
It's strange that the same people who have two distinct product lines that managed to come up with different versions of the same power in separate publications are somehow also so coordinated that they can play a shell game across two books with traditions.
Is it? Because one of the problems with SG was that it had references to power as prereq's that didn't exist.......that now appear in SS (and the SG erratta). Sounds to me like those powers were in SG to start with, and they took them out to print them later.
ANd just because they mess up on some things doesn't mean they can't coordinate on others, I mean I'd actually hope their was some organization, generally, just not in a mercenary way like this.
-
@ Sir_Prometheus
You are seriously getting paranoid with the amount of coordination you are suggesting. If it is true, then these two lines are completely separate that don't work (that) closely with each other.
Not only is there no evidence for your, dare I say, accusations, but even if it were true, what are you going to do? It's already said and done, there are 2 separate pdfs/books that cover very similar subject matter. That's like accusing one person of writing a thesis on history and intentionally leaving out Ancient Rome, while his best friend writes a thesis that covers only Ancient Rome. Sure, the subject matter is very similar and could easily be incorporated into one document, but do you seriously believe multiple writers to be conspiring to leave stuff out of each other's works?
If it really pisses you off that much, just leave it alone (too late to not buy it from what I understand, you already have it), but since this is currently the only way to get this information, then some people find buying it worth it. If you have no more positive or negative criticisms on the product and you just want to rant about Catalyst taking your 7 dollars that you willingly spent, then go get yourself a drink and I suggest you leave the book alone and move on. From what I've read, you offered no more reason whether to get this or not other than "it should have been in Street Grimoire". Who cares if it was supposed to be in Street Grimoire? It wasn't, and I want this information so I'm willing to spend 7 dollars to buy the pdf for the options it gives me.
I'll just state this as my final line if you don't want to read this. You willingly spent the money to buy the product because you believed in the company enough and wanted the product badly enough. If it doesn't meet your expectations, then you're disappointed, I understand. You were not duped into spending money is the point; you did so because you wanted to. People are allowed to make decisions they regret, but that doesn't mean you should accuse everyone who created the product of all sorts of things because you are upset.
-
I think there's some fanboys about these parts.
Why don't we look at evidence, rather than testimony:
@ Critias
Could You please explain why 4 Traditions that are in SR4A where omitted in the SR5 Street Grimoire only to be printed in the Shadow spells PDF ?
For Me as an outstanding Person this looks exactly like CGL has been withholding some of the Material just to make extra Cash with this PDF.
From what I've read from You I consider you as a sincere Person and Freelancer and If you say that the two branches ( E-Books and Standard Books) are working seperately I take your Word ! But from my Point of View this looks extremely either like Money grubbing or extreme lack of communicating between those two departments and more than just a coincidence that exactly those 4 Traditions that are missing in Street Grimoire now apppear in Shadow Spells....
with a wary Dance
Medicineman
I'm sorry, but the fact is that quite a few things, not just Traditions but spells and powers that were in SM were not in SG, and wind up in SS just a couple months later. That looks like withholding content to sell a $7 .pdf to me.
Believe what you want, I guess. But it's pretty clear to me, and several others, what happened.
Saying "nuh uh, they said it was two different writing teams!" is a little laughable, too.
Fanboys? I fully admit I love the Shadowrun setting, for the most part (CFD has been something of an issue with me). However, I have some pretty serious issues and qualms about Catalyst and Shadowrun 5th Edition right now. At the same time, it's not because of them trying to rip me off, it's with the quality of their work. In my opinion, there shouldn't need to be multiple pages of errata, or dozens of typos in a single 300-400 page book. There should be consistency.
Medicineman, despite his familiarity and experience with Shadowrun, isn't 'evidence' that Catalyst is gouging it's fan-base. In fact, the quote you took has him saying he believes Critias. That means he doesn't agree with you. In fact, he mentions that it could be an 'extreme lack of communication'. We know that's been going on for a while over at Catalyst. Stolen Souls and Street Grimoire having the same power, with wildly different interpretations? The sheer amount of errors that haven't been rectified before going to print? People haven't been talking, that's obvious (and is supposedly being fixed).
Furthermore, print-books have size-limits in comparison to e-books (and cost a lot more on both sides), and Street Grimoire was 40 pages or so longer than Street Magic. It costs money to add more pages, both for the writers, the ink/paper, the binding, the weight for shipping, etc. It's definitely possible that they couldn't fit everything in.
Instead of saying 'I think they're ripping us off', you're saying 'They're ripping us off, and anyone who disagrees is oblivious'. It's both claiming something you have no proof for, and belittling the people who disagree. That, and when a person who works for Catalyst says what's going on (which has plenty of proof if you look over the forums), you say they are wrong.
Now, since it keeps coming up, what would proof be? Now, there's two big options here; either you have a quote or something from Catalyst indicating their intent to gouge us, or you have a trend showing multiple 'Day 1 DLC'-type situations (to use your phrase for it). This has happened once, now. Once is not a trend. There's no pattern, no indication that this was anything more than an isolated event or a mistake. If, when the augmentation book comes out, two months later a 7 dollar 'extra cyber and bioware' book comes out, or after Run Faster comes a 7 dollar 'here's some extra splats to play' book, then you may be right.
-
So maybe this debate could start its own thread. Was really hoping to see discussion about specific adept powers or spells and so forth.
-
I don't think it really takes conspiracy level coordination, it's one company, it's commonly used tactic -- it's just slimy and they're gouging us, is all.
I also believe Critias, he seems nice enough -- but he wasn't necessarily informed, and having two separate teams of writers in no way keeps it from happening.
As to what I'm going to do about -- for one thing, I don't don't plan to shut up about it.
I also gave both products a 1 star reviews on Drivethrurpg.com.
-
So maybe this debate could start its own thread. Was really hoping to see discussion about specific adept powers or spells and so forth.
I'm not entirely certain it needs three threads, personally.
-
it's a big hairball of a mess, it just makes the team look hapless.
commanding voice multiple cockups, revisions and retconing is laughably amateurish.
we saw it start in core 5e and it has continued unabated, perhaps even gotten worse.
i don't whether to laugh or cry.
-
Oy with the kibbitzing, already! Here's some fatherly advice for Sir Prometheus and the silent majority represented by his bickering. Stop wasting money on Shadowrun products you've already judged a waste of time and money. ::) Now put the aluminum foil hat back on and hide those dice before Catalyst sends the Underwear Gnomes to your house to steal them and laugh, as you cry to the heavens. And don't be surprised if they send a rep to lick your tears with pleasure at your grief. :'(
-
See, here's what I did: I decided to wait and see what people say about the thing, before deciding whether to get it.
As for the Norse tradition, I simply plucked that from SR4 for the NPC* that follows it. Strangely enough Shadow Spells switched it to Logic. I should read its description better, see whether the switch from Charisma (which all the religions with Guardian spirits use) to Logic makes sense. Honestly, from what I read about them negotiating with their Spirits, I kinda don't see it making sense but eh, easy enough to houserule. Heck, we houseruled SR4 Chaos Magic since SR5 Chaos Magic is actually significantly different from Hermetic Magic but the player wanted to keep his SR4 tradition for fitting with his character.
*: Technically the NPC is a Free Spirit so it doesn't really matter. ^_^ It's just weird.
Now, just in case people haven't read the other topic, here's an important quote and link and honestly, we can just leave it at Critias' perfect answer.
@ Critias
Could You please explain why 4 Traditions that are in SR4A where omitted in the SR5 Street Grimoire only to be printed in the Shadow spells PDF ?
For Me as an outstanding Person this looks exactly like CGL has been withholding some of the Material just to make extra Cash with this PDF.
From what I've read from You I consider you as a sincere Person and Freelancer and If you say that the two branches ( E-Books and Standard Books) are working seperately I take your Word ! But from my Point of View this looks extremely either like Money grubbing or extreme lack of communicating between those two departments and more than just a coincidence that exactly those 4 Traditions that are missing in Street Grimoire now apppear in Shadow Spells....
with a wary Dance
Medicineman
You guys remember how Commanding Voice showed up in both Stolen Souls and Street Grimoire? That's an example of how the various mini-branches of the game company don't always coordinate very well. It is, in part, evidence of the lack of communication between groups working on different projects. One could also point to, for instance, the general chaos of the last few years. There's thread after thread of problems that have erupted due to a lack of communication, coordination, and cohesion within the game line. It is, in fact, a little ironic to me, here, that I'm now having to point out this sort of thing to some of you.
We've had thread after thread about Jackpointers posting after their death, powers being replicated in more than one book, pieces of gear that immediately make other gear obsolete, and dozens -- maybe hundreds -- of similar SNAFUs due to a lack of communication within the company...and yet here we are, suddenly, with folks insisting I prove that there's a lack of communication within the company. I hope the cometragedy of that isn't lost on everyone but me.
What may have happened, believe it or not, was the e-book line developer trying to improve on all that, and coordinating with the main line developer, basically saying "Hey, has anyone called dibs on _____ yet? Have you got the word count for it in your book? No? Okay, I'll add it to mine." Peter got in a little work on Grimoire, as I understand it, and that would've given him the opportunity to keep an eye on that book's progress, see what material was going into it and what wasn't, and then to try and squeeze what he could into his e-book. This would be a sign of improved communication, one of those changes Jason promised a few months ago, arguably when these errors and inconsistencies were at their worst, amidst the chaos of convention season.
Print books have limits on space that e-books flatly don't, and the e-book line -- in general! -- exists specifically to pick up that slack (it's how Way of the Adept got written, not to mention Land of Promise; they're cheaper to produce, we get paid less to write them, they don't have printing costs, artwork's often recycled and as such free, etc, etc). Something not making it into a print book is not the same thing as something being cut from that print product; Jason's not in the habit of green-lighting folks to write stuff, and then not using it.
You're free to disbelieve me if you want. My name's not in the credits of either book, I didn't have anything to do with 'em, directly (and I think the costs of Adept Ways kind of show you I wasn't writing them). I'm just telling you how the line has worked, traditionally (hardly anyone took a look at my e-books before they were published, unless you count me coordinating with myself between Land of Promise and Elven Blood, a Missions product).
You're free to think there's a well-coordinated conspiracy going on in CGL, where our editor's got the time to go through and snip stuff out of one book to include it in another, where we've got multiple design teams working together so smoothly that we're seamlessly cutting material from one book and creating another, whole-cloth, in order to get extra money from you (all just a few weeks after us tripping on our dicks and putting one power, in two very different forms, into two completely unrelated books).
Think what you want to think. Just make it clear you're only sharing your personal opinion when you do so. I'm just doing what I can to clear things up, and ask you to at least state it's your opinion, not describing it matter-of-factly, when you have no evidence of such wrongdoing (and when, in fact, writers and line developers are trying to be open with you about the design process).
Being a PDF e-book though, this would not be Missions legal correct?
Unless something has changed, it's specifically the "Options" line of e-books that are, well, optional (and as such not Missions-legal). Not every e-book.
-
Please remember, you can dislike the products and Catalyst as much as you want and make comments about them, but do not post criticisms and put-downs about other posters.
-
Obvious typo: according to the book the Mana Ebb ritual cannot be successfully performed in an area with a positive background count.
-
Yes, really. One dmg box is in no way worth 1pp. Living focus is useless, was in 4th too. Why not just have your Mage sustain it? 1pp is a lot!
Then I assume you feel Pain Resistance is too expensive & that just removes the penalty from 1 Damage Box ?
Maybe the Mage isn't interested in Sustaining spells on you & taking that -2 themselves & reducing their own dice while trying to cast Fireballs.
Question about Living Focus for all.
Is it just ONE spell up to Magic Rating, or can it be up to Magic Rating in Force of spells?
Because while it might be expensive, I'm thinking you could buff the **** out of someone with Force-1 + Reagents spells.
Adept w/ Intuition, Body, Willpower, Combat Sense, Armor, Reaction, Reflexes......... I see them bursting with aura light like they just went all Super-Sayan (sp), before kicking in a door.
-
Is it just ONE spell up to Magic Rating, or can it be up to Magic Rating in Force of spells?
Because while it might be expensive, I'm thinking you could buff the **** out of someone with Force-1 + Reagents spells.
Adept w/ Intuition, Body, Willpower, Combat Sense, Armor, Reaction, Reflexes......... I see them bursting with aura light like they just went all Super-Sayan (sp), before kicking in a door.
...With a -12 to all actions.
It seems like it's only one spell though, and all it does it make the Adept take the penalties instead, really.
-
Question about Living Focus for all.
Is it just ONE spell up to Magic Rating, or can it be up to Magic Rating in Force of spells?
Because while it might be expensive, I'm thinking you could buff the **** out of someone with Force-1 + Reagents spells.
Adept w/ Intuition, Body, Willpower, Combat Sense, Armor, Reaction, Reflexes......... I see them bursting with aura light like they just went all Super-Sayan (sp), before kicking in a door.
It reads to me as a single spell, not unlike a spell focus (which it is directly compared to) and focused concentration quality.
That said, without reagents, I don't see any balance issues to splitting up the capacity (as it were) between multiple spells. With reagents.... it leads to all sorts of mayhem as you point out.
-Ariketh
-
*reads Shadow Spells*
*starts cackling*
My players are going to 'enjoy' this...
-
yeah, i got some ideas for some seriously nasty vampires lol
-
yeah, i got some ideas for some seriously nasty vampires lol
That brings a smile to my face...and I didn't even have anything to do with the book.
-
yeah, i got some ideas for some seriously nasty vampires lol
That brings a smile to my face...and I didn't even have anything to do with the book.
Noted! I'd wondered if you had a say in it, advisory or otherwise.
Because WAMPYRS. OMG scary wampyrs.
-
yeah, i got some ideas for some seriously nasty vampires lol
That brings a smile to my face...and I didn't even have anything to do with the book.
Thoughts in my head included "Patrick will like these" when reading them.
-
Couple things I'd like confirmation on…
Is the Adept Power Enthralling Performance just making Artisan and Gymnastics capable of doing what the "Performance" skill does in the core book? Or is it something different?
Also: Has anyone else found the Jackpointer discussions in Shadow Spells a little out of character? I mean Man of Many names putting an entry in Street Grimoire was a bit unlikely but they do have a fun tongue-in-cheek response about that in the aboriginal tradition description.
Elijah seemed unusually combative in a few of his comments, especially towards Sticks and Netcat.
And then there was Bull coming back at Man of Many names with a "get with the modern technology" type comment on clocks. That one felt more Slamm-O! appropriate to me.
-
Thoughts in my head included "Patrick will like these" when reading them.
Patrick still needs to read them. Maybe tonight....
-
Elijah seemed unusually combative in a few of his comments, especially towards Sticks and Netcat.
Due to events in Shadowrun: Fire and Frost
-
It's strange that the same people who have two distinct product lines that managed to come up with different versions of the same power in separate publications are somehow also so coordinated that they can play a shell game across two books with traditions.
CGL is a big company. Or is it a small company? I guess it depends on the what the excuse-of-the-week needs to be.
-
Back on the actual topic for a bit...
What is up with the [Element] Grenade spells? It says it uses Magic + (Tradition Attribute) (3) to put the spell on target. Why isn't this a Magic+Spellcasting test? Do you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then roll Magic + Attribute? Or do you skip the Spellcasting roll entirely?
Either way, this makes [Element] Grenade an amazingly potent spell. If you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then you're adding net hits to damage unopposed. If you don't roll Spellcasting at all, then it's a spell any magician build can take, even if they don't bother with the Spellcasting skill, like dedicated conjurers.
Also, [Sense] Link really needs a line that says you can't target spells through it. Without that line, that is immediately what a mage will want to use it for.
-
Back on the actual topic for a bit...
What is up with the [Element] Grenade spells? It says it uses Magic + (Tradition Attribute) (3) to put the spell on target. Why isn't this a Magic+Spellcasting test? Do you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then roll Magic + Attribute? Or do you skip the Spellcasting roll entirely?
Either way, this makes [Element] Grenade an amazingly potent spell. If you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then you're adding net hits to damage unopposed. If you don't roll Spellcasting at all, then it's a spell any magician build can take, even if they don't bother with the Spellcasting skill, like dedicated conjurers.
Especially since a dedicated Conjurer is most likely a Charisma tradition and an Elf with maxed out Charisma. That's Magic (usually 6) + 8. Pretty strong if you ask me.
-
So, my thoughts on the new Adept powers.
Demara: Both interesting and useful. Being able to grab any skill at 1 has all sorts of applications, but the time required versus the duration keeps it from getting out of hand. Seems just right price wise too.
Eidetic Sense Memory: Overpriced. Seriously, remembering stuff comes up very rarely in most games. In Shadowrun, where everyone and their mother walks about with recording equipment active? This is a niche power. Needs to be dropped down to 0.25, though I'd suggest lower if that were actually possible.
Enthralling Performance: Useful and reasonably priced. Again, sensible limits on the effect keep it from being too powerful whilst still allowing you to use it to great effect. Anyone who can't think of a use for the highly distracting adept isn't trying hard enough. I particularly like the open ended range of skills that can be used with it.
Heightened Concentration: Spelling error in the name. Could do with clarifying the duration. Useful, though the complex action required to activate it keeps Adept Centering as the preferable option and roughly in line with it's cost.
Indomitable Will: Another niche power, though at least it's priced reasonably. To be honest though, most Adepts are going to have no room to take this. I'd recommend adding some sort of minor secondary effect to this, something to either give a bit more general applicability or make it cool enough that people will want to take it anyway.
Iron Gut: See Natural Immunity in the core book? See how it gives the same bonus, for the same price but also works on other stuff as well and is thus more likely to come up? See how even then not many people will take it because it still doesn't come up much and has cheap gear that does pretty much the same thing or better? Yeah, this is a waste of word count.
Iron Lungs: Niche but cheap again. Still, even 0.25 is a substantial commitment and this is pretty minor. Perhaps boost the time you can hold your breath for and have it confer immunity to decompression sickness or something? A lot of these niche passive powers suffer from the fact that they're just too minor even at minimal cost and for 0.25 you can get more active powers that both do cooler things and are more likely to come up.
Iron Will: Why on earth is this 0.5 per level? Yes, mind control is nasty, but it's now the same price as Spell Resistance, which covers the majority of mind control and every other spell as well. Having it cover adept powers and non-spell critter powers is not worth making it so expensive. It'd be justified at 0.25.
Keratin Control: This is a very niche but flavourful ability, weighed down by taking longer than the mundane alternative unless you half kill yourself with stun damage and costing 0.5 PP. Seriously, you're growing your hair and nails out, you can get extensions quicker than this power and to do much it needs other powers and skills to back it up.
Living Focus: Pretty cool. It's expensive, and that penalty is harsh, but Adept Centering coverth a multitude of sins and it's a powerful effect. You won't see this commonly but for certain concepts or in a Ki Focus? Worth it. One thing I would like cleared up is who controls the effects of the spell? If the mage casts levitate on an adept with this power, who determines where the adept moves? And how does this affect the astral signature? Because if the Adept is fueling the spell now, should he be in control of it? Otherwise you could just buy your mage buddy another sustaining focus.
Maintain Warmth: Minor, niche, but for once they did the sensible thing and made it a static effect instead of a scaling +1. Most characters won't use this, but it's strong enough when it does come up for me to see someone taking it if it fits their character.
Memory Displacement: See above. These niche 0.25 powers are a lot better than the scaling ones, simply because they make up for the rarity of their use by actually having a substantial effect.
Piercing Senses: Or you could take Spell Resistance. At least it's better than Iron Will in that it's actually cheaper than Spell Resistance.
Power Swimming: Seriously? 1 PP? This is a pretty hefty effect, true, but how often will it actually come up? Not often enough to justify that sort of price tag. Make it 0.5 and it fits into the realm of powerful but niche. Right now it's just a waste unless you're playing a campaign that regularly cares about how fast you can swim.
Rooting: You might have gotten the idea that I dislike these ultra-niche scaling powers. This is still true. This is going to come up so infrequently that it's hard to justify spending more that 0.25-0.5 PP on it, and the benefits at that level aren't really going to make too much difference even if they come up. At least it's not just a +1 dice bonus. I will point out that it penalises Block, Dodge and Parry, but not Full Defence or your normal defence test. Apparently you can still dodge bullets perfectly well while rooted to the spot.
Supernatural Toughness: There aren't many ways to give extra damage boxes. It could stand to be a bit cheaper, maybe 0.75 or something, but it's not completely unreasonable as is. Someone is going to want to take it at least.
-
Didn't 4th Edition Iron Gut reduce Lifestyle costs by a percentage or something? Basically, by making a character able to eat more things, it cut down on food costs?
-
Personally I do agree with you about the Living Focus though as I've already stated. But some seem to think its great. YMMV I guess.
I'm thinking if you go all the way & pick up Heightened (Concern) Concentration its not so bad at all.
Sure its 1.5 power points total, BUT, if you basically have your mage cast a Combat Sense spell w/ 4-5 successes on you then that is 2-2.5 point of power. And the ability to change that power to whatever buff spell is on hand can't be ignored either.
True its only while your awake on the mission but its a solid boost for the most important time to be using it, at the cost of not having it while your at the grocery store.
-
I thought all the adept powers were over costed and underpowered, AGAIN. I don't think there's a single one I would take.
I see the Adepts Powers of Eidetic Sense Memory, Enthralling Performance, Heightened Concentration + Living Focus, & Supernatural Toughness as all being solid options.
-
What is up with the [Element] Grenade spells? It says it uses Magic + (Tradition Attribute) (3) to put the spell on target. Why isn't this a Magic+Spellcasting test? Do you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then roll Magic + Attribute? Or do you skip the Spellcasting roll entirely?
Seems like its in place of spellcasting.
As for a Conjurer using it, don't think Conjurer's can learn a spell. If now RAW its certainly RAI.
-
What is up with the [Element] Grenade spells? It says it uses Magic + (Tradition Attribute) (3) to put the spell on target. Why isn't this a Magic+Spellcasting test? Do you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then roll Magic + Attribute? Or do you skip the Spellcasting roll entirely?
Seems like its in place of spellcasting.
As for a Conjurer using it, don't think Conjurer's can learn a spell. If now RAW its certainly RAI.
I'm 90% sure he means someone is a full magician who mainly focuses on conjuring.
-
Good point on Living Focus, the multiple ways to reduce penalties would allow an Adept to get a really nice buff-spell without caring. Mages running out of casting dice when using illusions repeatedly happens here, so this would really help. Heck, the Mystic Adept may want to take this one in the future.
-
Good point on Living Focus, the multiple ways to reduce penalties would allow an Adept to get a really nice buff-spell without caring. Mages running out of casting dice when using illusions repeatedly happens here, so this would really help. Heck, the Mystic Adept may want to take this one in the future.
Also some of the nastier health spells. But yeah, getting to most out of Living Focus requires the adept to coordinate with someone else at the table, but assuming that's done effectively, it can be awesome. As a GM, I *love* the idea of henchmen with Living Focus. For the WoD fans out there, think a Tremere with a pack of Blood Brothers.
-
I'm silly. Mystic Adept can simply use Adept Centering, doesn't need Living Focus. ^_^' MA just said he's likely taking that as his fourth Initiation, so he can use Adept Centering (rather than Centering) and keep 4 spells active.
(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)
Living Focus is nice for an Adept though. Psyche also helps there, imagine a few Adepts with Psyche, Living Focus, X Initiation Grades and X buff-spells on them, such as Combat Sense and Increase Strength.
-
CGL is a big company. Or is it a small company? I guess it depends on the what the excuse-of-the-week needs to be.
The company's small. The freelancer pool who writes all this stuff is somewhat broad, however, and while we try to talk to each other...we're not always successful.
For example: I wrote up versions of the spells One Less, Slay, and Slaughter for Sail Away Sweet Sister. Someone else wrote the spell section for Street Grimoire, and I mentioned this to that person. After that...I wasn't in that loop. Frankly, I didn't have time to be in that loop because I was working on another project and had a lot more Real Life happen to me than I really needed, but that's a separate issue. The point is...we don't always coordinate like we should. And that's as much on us as it is on CGL. And we're working on it.
Another point is...sometimes people need the same thing for their work, and they don't know the other guy's working on it, and they put it together, and they both get published. This is a CGL thing, but sometimes it can't be helped. Depending on where/when in the cycle things happen, one version of a thing might be in layout or on the way out the door before the other is turned in.
We're all human. Even the guys at CGL. I'm not making excuses for anyone but myself...and believe me, I'd love things tightened up, especially if my name's in the credits or on the cover. But I accept that things happen, and I know that there's a real effort being made to make things better. Whether it works out or not is a separate question that's yet to be answered.
-
(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)
I'm thinking the same thing.
Heightened Concentration for 0.5 PP is basically going to be the same as having Focused Concentration, at least that is what it is looking like to me.
-
(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)
Living Focus is nice for an Adept though. Psyche also helps there, imagine a few Adepts with Psyche, Living Focus, X Initiation Grades and X buff-spells on them, such as Combat Sense and Increase Strength.
I'm an idiot. Had the whole Mystic Adept in my head so forgot that Living Focus only allows 1 spell, the way it's formulated. So only 1 spell would work, but you could take Psyche to reduce the penalty or probably use Heightened Concern to ignore that 1 penalty, and Adept Centering is still an option.
-
Yeah, I hadn't read it in full yet, so I wasn't sure on the multiple spells.
Still, if you know your group has a good mage the 2 dice penalty v/s getting 4-5 dice off the spell isn't a bad trade off.
Heightened Concentration I'm thinking will cancel out those 2 dice.
And for a Mystic Adept, as you mentioned, Heightened Concentration is a solid alternative to Focused Concentration.
-
If you have Adept Centering the Living Focus penalty is especially not that bad, or Psyche for just a -1. That spell could be +4 melee damage, or Agility at a solid base, or extra defense dice, or even invisibility for catching enemies unaware, so quite nice.
-
Back on the actual topic for a bit...
What is up with the [Element] Grenade spells? It says it uses Magic + (Tradition Attribute) (3) to put the spell on target. Why isn't this a Magic+Spellcasting test? Do you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then roll Magic + Attribute? Or do you skip the Spellcasting roll entirely?
Either way, this makes [Element] Grenade an amazingly potent spell. If you roll Magic+Spellcasting first, then you're adding net hits to damage unopposed. If you don't roll Spellcasting at all, then it's a spell any magician build can take, even if they don't bother with the Spellcasting skill, like dedicated conjurers.
Also, [Sense] Link really needs a line that says you can't target spells through it. Without that line, that is immediately what a mage will want to use it for.
My read is that it requires two rolls. The first is a standard spellcasting roll followed by the second roll as described in the spell to "fire" it at the target. Mechanically speaking I think it would still be a single action though I think that part may be a little vague.
-
Here's an interesting question: If you Reckless cast Grenade, is it an attack action that will not let you detonate in the same IP?
-
Here's an interesting question: If you Reckless cast Grenade, is it an attack action that will not let you detonate in the same IP?
That is a good question. If you were firing a grenade launcher and intended to set off the grenade wirelessly, would you be able to do that in one IP? It seems like the answer should be yes though I generally let my grenades go boom on contact so it isn't something I've looked at closely. I'll have to read through the grenade rules again when I get the chance.
-
It seems to me the magic + tradition drain stat roll takes the place of the throwing roll. You would still have to roll spellcasting to determine its success, DV and glitching. Otherwise you're throwing a ball of nothing for no reason.
I re-read the spell, and it actually states that that roll replaces the throwing roll grenades require for placement. The Magic + Tradition stat roll doesn't affect the base DV/create the spell because the spell has it's own DV (Magic + Spellcasting) in the same way that the throwing roll doesn't affect a Grenade's base damage because it has it's own DV. (I'm not taking scatter and the distance from the explosion into account here).
I don't think creating the spell and throwing it into position counts as an attack, either. Nothing has been done yet. It's the difference between potential energy and kinetic energy. The threat is there, but it's not an attack yet. Also, like others have said there is the option to detonate grenades on contact. I've never GM'd, but I'd let my player take the extra drain to get it off that turn. Of course, that mean's my NPCs could too...muahahahaha...
-
It adds the interesting advantage where a Grenade spell will have 3 more damage than the equivalent Indirect Combat Area Spell, since you don't lose 3 hits to the threshold. On the other hand it requires activation, meaning that if you cast it as a Complex action people can run away from it without sacrificing Initiative for it.
-
It adds the interesting advantage where a Grenade spell will have 3 more damage than the equivalent Indirect Combat Area Spell, since you don't lose 3 hits to the threshold. On the other hand it requires activation, meaning that if you cast it as a Complex action people can run away from it without sacrificing Initiative for it.
Yeah, I thought that too. If they had made it a free action to detonate it would work pretty much like mundane grenades (wireless) in practice. Of course timing can make this work for you too. Hold an action to go last and then toss the grenade so the end of the turn detonates it. That has the added benefit in that most everyone has used up their initiative by that point so using the run away rule isn't an option. Making them run even has its own benefits under certain circumstances like flushing targets out from cover, for example.
-
You activate Command Preparations as a Simple action, right? Assuming you are allowed to detonate it in the same pass, that'd give them a surprising edge with those spells as the only way to do that otherwise would be with Reckless Casting like Michael said. Pretty awesome.
Is Shadow Spells going to be usable in missions later? Because if so, I have the feeling the answer will be "No, you can't." for missions.
-
Now I'm wondering about overlapping spell explosion damage values...
-
Now I'm wondering about overlapping spell explosion damage values...
Can [Elemental] Grenade do chunky salsa effect?
-
Now I'm wondering about overlapping spell explosion damage values...
Can [Elemental] Grenade do chunky salsa effect?
If I'm reading the description correctly, yes. It says use the rules regarding blasts against barriers on page 183 of the core book.
-
Does anyone actually use chunky salsa rules? They are pretty freaking awful.
-
(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)
Is Background Count a situational modifier?
-
(Hm, now I wonder if Heightened Concern would technically work with multiple Sustaining Penalties for Mystic Adepts? Not entirely sure what counts as situational modifier, but it's basically Wounds, Environmental, Recoil (if applicant) and Situational, so that sounds as if sustaining penalties would count. Next question is whether it'd be "all sustaining penalties combined" or "a single sustaining penalty" if read like that... Ahwell.)
Is Background Count a situational modifier?
I would say so. It is a type of environmental modifier.
Now I wonder if you have to specify what type of specific penalty you are negating when you activate the power. If not you could just change what modifier you need to ignore depending on what you are dealing with (or trying to do) at any given moment.
As far as multiple sustaining penalties I don't know. I think it would be reasonable to interpret all sustaining penalties are lumped into one culmative negative dice pool modifier. It depends on if you think of it as a -2 for sustaining spell A, -2 for sustaining spell B or -4 for sustaining two spells.
-
Is Shadow Spells going to be usable in missions later? Because if so, I have the feeling the answer will be "No, you can't." for missions.
I already asked the question in the relevant topic for Missions, so we'll likely know within a month. :)
As for Background Count, Environmental Modifiers are those things that combine into a single modifier, so Background Count isn't one of those. Which makes it a Situational Modifier, so yes, RAW that'd apply to Heightened [Concentration]. And that makes it interesting for Mystic Adepts, since unlike Adept Centering it isn't limited to Physical&Combat Skills but likely would apply to your Magic skills as well. Which makes this a really nice thing for the Mystics...
-
Is Shadow Spells going to be usable in missions later? Because if so, I have the feeling the answer will be "No, you can't." for missions.
This might help. It's Timothy Patrick's latest effort (http://criticalglitch.com/?page_id=578), and he works with the Missions crew a lot.
-
So here's some more E-Grenade questions
What table used for Scatter ? It says "Throwing Weapons" & "Same as Grenades" in the description.
But the Range is Grenade Launcher, which is "Heavy Weapons".
So, what table is Scatter? Launcher, Regular Grenades, Aerodynamic ?
I don't see it being Aerodynamic but I could see arguments over Regular v/s Launcher based on the Skill named.
Does the spell decrease damage w/ distance?
If so, what is the Decreasing Damage rate used? HE v/s AP?
I guess it doesn't have too since the returning blasts will eventually run out w/ Distance, but the way the spell keeps saying "same as grenades" it makes you wonder if its supposed to be weaker on the edges & strong in the middle.
Either way if it did decrease it would really give this spell very different feel than your typical "Ball" spells.
What is the AP of this spell ?
Is it Force like the regular AE Indirect spells ?
Or is it based on the Element used ?
Or is it a combination of both ?
Thoughts ?
Edit:
Also, I'm not finding it in CRB atm, but, do you scale up damage w/ Grenades after the 3-Threshold is hit ?
I'm not seeing where you would but don't recall if you don't either.
-
I can answer some of those questions.
The spell says just "determine scatter as grenades" long after it mentions the launcher, and it explains you're using Drain Attribute + Magic to replace Throwing Weapons and Agility specifically, so using the normal Grenade Scatter (1d6 - Hits) would be what you use. If it was going to be Grenade Launcher scatter, the sentence would have mentioned the Heavy Weapons skill.
Since it isn't mentioned otherwise, the spell would use the same stats as any Indirect AoE spell-- A radius equal to Force meters, with a damage value of Force and an AP of -Force. It is listed as an indirect spell. I can see why you'd wonder, but the spell doesn't say it breaks the usual rules for AoEs in this regard, so it's reasonable to assume it still uses them like all the other spells.
-
The spell says just "determine scatter as grenades" long after it mentions the launcher, and it explains you're using Drain Attribute + Magic to replace Throwing Weapons and Agility specifically, so using the normal Grenade Scatter (1d6 - Hits) would be what you use. If it was going to be Grenade Launcher scatter, the sentence would have mentioned the Heavy Weapons skill.
Long after? Its the same paragraph. 4 sentences later, which are all describing the launch test. I'm not convinced yet.
I'm wondering if Throwing was in error after they mention the range of "Launcher".
But if it is Throwing, then its still not 100% clear that it would be regular scatter v/s aerodynamic scatter.
Since it isn't mentioned otherwise, the spell would use the same stats as any Indirect AoE spell-- A radius equal to Force meters, with a damage value of Force and an AP of -Force. It is listed as an indirect spell. I can see why you'd wonder, but the spell doesn't say it breaks the usual rules for AoEs in this regard, so it's reasonable to assume it still uses them like all the other spells.
Agreed, I went back after posting & was rereading things & I'm getting the same conclusion.
-
In general I like the intro fluff it's fun, very classic. I like the spells, some interesting stuff, the Critter spells, have me wondering if the designers for seeing a rush of ghoul characters with the release of Running Hard? I agree with sentiment on adept powers, I mean Super Swimmer for a whole pp really? Come on now, someone would actually take that epicly useless power for .5 point, maybe. Whoever got the adept hate on, on the editing staff seems to be winning in this edition. The Ritual stuff is nice. Why did the Norse Tradition stop being Possession? I'm not complaining just curious. The Gods list some we know (Sun God), some we don't (Temple Guardian?). Where is the Tasking, spirit type listed?
The Upside it doesn't leave me scratching my head like SG did, it's much more coherent, and opens up a list good spell option, alter memory and pulse for example. Both are great spells. Downside the Adept stuff is nearly useless. The only powers that are interesting are living focus and Supernatural Toughness, the rest are marginal, and many are still over costed.
-
Why did the Norse Tradition stop being Possession?
Huh? In what edition was it Possession?
-
Why did the Norse Tradition stop being Possession?
Huh? In what edition was it Possession?
4th.
-
Street Magic p39; Norse is not listed with the "Note: X is a Possession tradition".
-
And it's not in the pdf printing I got. Don't have a physical book at hand so can't check there, but it's not listed as Possession in the pdf. Qabbalistic, Witchcraft, Vodou are. Witchcraft didn't make it into SR5, whereas the other two are still Possession. Meanwhile, Shadow Spells has Psionic and Egyptian for Possession traditions, which weren't in Street Magic.
Meanwhile, Shadow Spells has as non-Possession traditions Aboriginal and Norse, both from Street Magic and both not Possession in Street Magic.
-
I just checked the physical book, and apparently I'm mistaken, though I swear we had a norse mage who used it in a game a couple years back.
Hmmm I still want to know what tasking spirits are.
-
Tasking Spirit? I cannot find any use of Tasking in Shadow Spells. Do you mean the Task Spirits of Psionic, which are described in Street Grimoire as one of the 4 new Spirit types?
-
That's the one. I recalled Guardian and Guidance, but task escaped me. Hmm Task plus possession.
-
That's the one. I recalled Guardian and Guidance, but task escaped me. Hmm Task plus possession.
that is a cool idea. It's like magical skillwires!
-
What tradition gets both Task spirits and Possession?
-
What tradition gets both Task spirits and Possession?
Qabbalism, Voudou, and Psionic. The only possession tradition that doesn't get it is Egyptian.
-
Amongst others the one I mentioned, Psionic. :)
Of course someone could always take Channeling with a non-Possession tradition. After all, Possession has as downside that you sacrifice Immunity right now (and this may very well be RAI on top of RAW), so Materialization is rather important to have if you want to let Spirits fight for you.
-
Time for a new jack of all trades build.
-
Possession NOT giving Immunity is rather confirmed as RAI by Bull now, as balancing factor. And preparing a vessel for Possession is rather expensive, a car costs you 50k + average 10k per failed attempt if I recall correctly.
-
*wave* Just to add in another comment, since it got brought up regarding Missions...
Shadow Spells will be Missions Legal (on October 25th, at least :)). And I did include one single piece of SS errata for the latest update that I finished last night (and which is currently awaiting final approval so I can post it). For the moment at least, I'm ruling that you can cast and detonate on the same turn. It's equivalent to throwing and remotely detonating a grenade, so I have no issue with it. It doesn't break the game anymore than grenades already do, at least. And hell, do to Force limitations and the like, I imagine that most spell grenades will be less broken than their normal physical counterparts, since they won't have as high a base DV.
-
Bull,
Are you saying they can do this WITHOUT the Reckless Casting option that was first mentioned above on how it might be possible to do it?
Are your saying that with Reckless Casting it would be possible & not count as 2 different attack actions in the same turn.
-
Bull,
Are you saying they can do this WITHOUT the Reckless Casting option that was first mentioned above on how it might be possible to do it?
Are your saying that with Reckless Casting it would be possible & not count as 2 different attack actions in the same turn.
Not entirely sure what you're asking here. The "detonation" is just an action. So you don't need a second spell or anything to make it go boom. So one action to cast, one to blow it up?
Or am I missing something here.
-
Bull,
Are you saying they can do this WITHOUT the Reckless Casting option that was first mentioned above on how it might be possible to do it?
Are your saying that with Reckless Casting it would be possible & not count as 2 different attack actions in the same turn.
Not entirely sure what you're asking here. The "detonation" is just an action. So you don't need a second spell or anything to make it go boom. So one action to cast, one to blow it up?
Or am I missing something here.
Detonating is a Simple Action, which means you'd need to cast the spell as a Simple Action (+3 on the Drain Value) in order to be able to cast and detonate it in the same IP.
-
AHh yeah. RIght. Sorry I wasn't clearer. Yes, you would still have to recklessly cast in order to do this. Otherwise it simply goes off at the end of the current combat pass.
-
AHh yeah. RIght. Sorry I wasn't clearer. Yes, you would still have to recklessly cast in order to do this. Otherwise it simply goes off at the end of the current combat turn.
A small fix before someone misunderstands. ^_^
-
Do (timed) grenades not go off on the subsequent combat turn at the ... thrower's? ... Initiative when thrown?
-
Normal timed grenades yes, however the [Element] Grenade spell notes it explodes at the end of the current combat turn, if not set off sooner with a Simple Action.
-
Aha. Thank you for clarifying.