Shadowrun
Shadowrun Play => Character creation and critique => Topic started by: Dracain on <04-28-12/1016:54>
-
Simple question really. Should a combat mage get powerbolt+ball if they have stunbolt+ball. Same question for more generalized mages.
-
The reason to get powerbolt/ball is mainly if you are concerned about being able to fight things that don't take Stun - mostly drones and vehicles, occasionally someone with Pain Editor.
I think it's generally worth having at least one attack that works on drones unless you are really hard-up for spells or points, and especially you should if you claim to be a combat mage - if you can't hurt a drone at all, that's not good.
Whether you want Powerbolt/ball or an Elemental spell depends on how many dice you have. Drones are OR 5, so you need at least 15 dice to affect them on average, and closer to 20 to be able to work reliably. If you have a heavy enough combat focus then Powerbolt/ball are good, because against high body/armor vehicles, they're way better than elemental spells if they work at all. If not, use elemental spells instead.
-
The character rolls 20 dice to spellcasting and has an elemental single and AOE. Should I bother with powerbolt+ball?
-
Probably not; it's generally better to diversify, rather than have a ton of spells that do the same thing but are slightly better under different circumstances. Powerbolt/ball will be better against vehicles that have high body/armor/ranged defense, and worse against less well-defended vehicles.
If the character is already in play, I would probably not pick up powerbolt/ball and would instead focus on being better at magic in general. If you regularly find yourself needing to blow up things like tanks, Ares Citymasters, armored helicopters, etc then I would think about Powerbolt. Otherwise, I would prioritize other things (initiating, binding foci [Centering focus in particular is good for a combat mage], more Magic) first.
-
For the mage I'm playing in a PbP I took Lightning Bolt for vehicles, but I'm starting to think maybe Powerbolt might have been better...not sure though.
-
If you mean Frostmane, I'm counting 15 dice on Combat spells for that character. That's about a 40% chance for Powerbolt to fail to get OR 5. I'd rather have the more reliable lightning bolt; 40% failure is just too unreliable, IMO.
-
If you mean Frostmane, I'm counting 15 dice on Combat spells for that character. That's about a 40% chance for Powerbolt to fail to get OR 5. I'd rather have the more reliable lightning bolt; 40% failure is just too unreliable, IMO.
Yeah, she's the one, and you are counting correctly on her spellcasting dice pool. Question is, wouldn't any vehicle shrug off the piddly damage of Lightning Bolt with ease?
-
Generally you want to go with powerbolt or some other elemental spell for vehicles (acid maybe?). Lightning Bolt doesn't actually damage vehicles (it deals stun damage, and vehicles don't take stun damage), it can just temporarily short them out. They still get a test against shorting out though and it's unlikely to happen on larger vehicles barring extreme luck.
At fifteen dice, you'll get about five hits average. Meaning odds are in your favor for vehicles or drones with a Body+Armor less than fifteen.
-
Stun damage? What? Lightning Bolt does Physical.
Lightning Bolt (Indirect, Elemental)
Type: P • Range: LOS • Damage: P • Duration: I • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 3
Ball Lightning (Indirect, Elemental, Area)
Type: P • Range: LOS (A) • Damage: P • Duration: I • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 5
These spells create and direct vicious strikes of electricity that cause
Electricity damage (p. 163). Lightning Bolt is a single target spell. Ball
Lightning is an area spell.
Emphasis mine.
-
Depends - they get only half armor against it. Keep in mind that "vehicle" is pretty broad. Drones in particular are plenty dangerous, but are still OR 5; you're almost always better off with Lightning Bolt against them (if you want to get mathematical, Lightning Bolt is better when (Armor + 2xBody - 2xResponse*< 30); so for example a Body 4, Armor 12, Response 4 drone is much more likely to go down to a lightning bolt than to a Powerbolt. A body 20, armor 20, Response 4 APC probably can just laugh off your lightning bolt.
*or Command if it's being remote controlled.
Crash: all other sources of electrical damage do Stun. Lightning Bolt and Lightning Ball explicitly do not. SR4A 205. For my money I prefer Frost/Blizzard for vehicle zapping because it forces Crash tests.
-
I am making a character now (400BP), so should I grab powerbolt+ball or should I just stick to the elemental (I wanna keep it for a secondary effect and the out of LOS AOE, otherwise I would replace elemental with power). So if chargen should I keep powerbolt+ball or drop it and maybe pick it up later if I need it?
-
Straight from Electricity Damage that Lightning Bolt/Ball references.
Electrical damage is treated as Stun damage and resisted with half Impact armor (rounded up)—metallic armor, however, offers no protection. The nonconductive armor upgrade (p. 327) adds its full rating to the armor value.
-SNIP-
Electronic equipment, vehicles, and drones can also be affected by Electricity damage. They never suffer Stun damage, but they do roll Body + Armor (drones and vehicles) or Armor x 2 (other objects) to resist secondary effects.
Electrical damage is always treated as stun damage. A spell can either do physical damage or it can do electrical damage, but it can't do both. Doing electrical damage automatically changes it to being treated as stun damage. So the chain of events goes to spell starts physical, triggers electrical element, and immediately gets converted to stun.
Most likely an oversight on the dev who wrote it's part, but the bolded part specifically states Electrical Damage is treated as stun. It doesn't say all electrical damage but that caused by Lighting Bolt/Ball, and Lighting Bolt/Ball specifically state they deal Electricity Damage and reference the section my quote is taken from. You can claim that the Electricity Damage segment is wrong, but honestly which is more likely, the electricity segment being wrong (and impacting all current electrical sources to physical) or a single letter in the spell description.
If the vehicles armor is completely metallic, then it's going to be rolling considerable fewer dice to resist against the lightning bolt which is a point in it's favor (most vehicles should have some shielding to electrical attacks in 2072, but I'd probably throw in an extra 25% reduction). Lots of military/law enforcement drones should have non-conductive as a special armor mod. Especially anything that flies (as common as stick and shock is, it would be a hazard not to). Yes, most drones are going to get toasted by it, but decent sized vehicles probably won't.
It really just comes down to play style and preference. If you run into lots of vehicles, take an elemental spell like Frost or Acid. If you don't run into them often, power bolt is nice and you always have edge for when you absolutely must one shot that damn drone/chopper. Or at least, hopefully you have edge. I highly recommend edge, it's a runners best friend.
-
I am making a character now (400BP), so should I grab powerbolt+ball or should I just stick to the elemental (I wanna keep it for a secondary effect and the out of LOS AOE, otherwise I would replace elemental with power). So if chargen should I keep powerbolt+ball or drop it and maybe pick it up later if I need it?
While my mage only has the two combat spells, I can't imagine that only one more would hurt too badly to have. I wouldn't suggest Ball Lightning (the area version of Lightning Bolt) though half Force plus five does seem like ridiculous drain to me.
-
That's the thing though, I have stunbolt+ball, an elemental single+AOE, and some other spells. Now should I get Powerbolt+ball or something else useful, like heal, or levitate?
-
heal is always useful but remember you can use first aid then heal but no the other way around.
-
Straight from Electricity Damage that Lightning Bolt/Ball references.
Electrical damage is treated as Stun damage and resisted with half Impact armor (rounded up)—metallic armor, however, offers no protection. The nonconductive armor upgrade (p. 327) adds its full rating to the armor value.
-SNIP-
Electronic equipment, vehicles, and drones can also be affected by Electricity damage. They never suffer Stun damage, but they do roll Body + Armor (drones and vehicles) or Armor x 2 (other objects) to resist secondary effects.
Electrical damage is always treated as stun damage. A spell can either do physical damage or it can do electrical damage, but it can't do both. Doing electrical damage automatically changes it to being treated as stun damage. So the chain of events goes to spell starts physical, triggers electrical element, and immediately gets converted to stun.
I think it was ment to do phyiscal damage the formila does not have a reduction in damage for doing stun. Most weapons that do electrical damage are ment to stun, the spell is ment to do physical damage. The refernce for it doing stun is for tasers and what not. And spells can do two types of damage at once. such as fire water spell does both fire and water damage.
-
I thought of something. It could be possible that it was listed as doing physical expressly for the purpose of harming vehicles. That said, if someone wanted to rule that it did stun to metahumans, I wouldn't complain too much. In fact, that would be a very good compromise.
-
The issue is that even if it does physical, being electricity damage means it is treated as stun damage. Vehicles don't take stun. Electrical damage specifically states that. When looking at whether the vehicle is damaged, you look at the damage type. Even though it has a P in the listing, the S is what is going to stick out because Electrical damage is always treated as stun.
You can say that this is because of all the non-lethal electrical damage out there, but the passage makes no distinction. Taser, High Voltage fence, stick and shock, natural lightning, a dangling electrical line, they are all treated as stun damage. Lighting Bolt is no different.
-
The issue is that even if it does physical, being electricity damage means it is treated as stun damage. Vehicles don't take stun. Electrical damage specifically states that. When looking at whether the vehicle is damaged, you look at the damage type. Even though it has a P in the listing, the S is what is going to stick out because Electrical damage is always treated as stun.
However, there is a bit of quivocality in that to my mind.
Yes, it's "treated as" stun damage but that, to me, means more along the lines of things like whether it affects barriers, how Trauma Damper alters the total damage, and other such things. If the damage code is "P(e)" then, at the end of the day, it would still fill boxes on the Physical track after all the resistance calculations are done.
Now, normally that would still mean that it splashes against Drones, since Drones don't take stun, but there's a special exception in SR4A (p164) that says "Electronic equipment, vehicles, and drones can also be affected by Electricity damage." That exception would allow the few cases of "P(e)" damage to still blow up hings that would realistically be perma-fried with electricity without letting you use Lightning Bolt to take down a plascrete wall.
-
If you keep reading that same section you quoted from though, the very next part is that they are not affected by stun damage. Electrical damage is treated as stun damage. It then goes on to show exactly how they are affected by electrical damage (which does not include damage, but shorting out).
-
I think that the specific overrides the general. Electrical damage is treated as stun, but Lighting Bolt/ball explicitly say they do Physical. So they are special snowflake electrical powers that inflict P instead of S. Why else would the statblock for Lighting Bolt/ball say P?
-
I think that the specific overrides the general. Electrical damage is treated as stun, but Lighting Bolt/ball explicitly say they do Physical. So they are special snowflake electrical powers that inflict P instead of S. Why else would the statblock for Lighting Bolt/ball say P?
Also all Elemental Spells are Physical Spells.
If a machine with no defences for it gets hit with a lightning spell in my game it's sure as hell rolling to resist damage next, P, M and S be damned
-
I think that the specific overrides the general. Electrical damage is treated as stun, but Lighting Bolt/ball explicitly say they do Physical. So they are special snowflake electrical powers that inflict P instead of S. Why else would the statblock for Lighting Bolt/ball say P?
Because elemental combat spells are templated. They use the exact same stats for the original spell that are then manipulated by the elemental effect. So yes, all elemental single target spells start out doing Physical damage, but if their elemental effect only does stun, that manipulates the damage of the spell. Lightning Bolt isn't the only one, Screech and Steam both get converted to stun as well.
Straight from Street Magic (pg. 168):
Most Combat spells with elemental effects have the same game characteristics; the only difference is the elemental effect (Acid Stream, Flamethrower, and Lightning Bolt, for example, are all the same). To create a spell with a different elemental effect such as Ice or Sand (see pp. 164–165) is very easy—simply use the same spell statistics, apply the rules for the new elemental effect, and rename it.
This shows blatantly that elemental effects are supposed to modify the spell's characteristics.
Of course, that isn't to say a GM wouldn't let one hell of a Lightning Bolt fry a vehicle (I've done it before), but it doesn't by standard RAW, and if the vehicle had any sort of protection at all (such as non-conductive insulation or something similar) it probably shouldn't be doing damage unless the damage just ridiculously exceeds what it's Body+Armor would be.
-
So your argument is that Lightning bolt/ball has a typo caused by copypasta?
-
It's not a typo really, just the way the spells work. It has a P in it's damage, but if you read how elemental spells work, the elemental affect applied to the spell's stat block. In other words, elemental effect overrides spell block rather than spell block overriding elemental effect as you've suggested. To simplify, what I'm saying is:
Elemental Effect (A)
Spell Block (B)
When using an elemental spell, you take (B) and apply (A) to it. In the case of Lighting Bolt, this changes (B)'s damage listing of P to an S because Lighting Bolt's (A) only does stun damage and it's (A) is applied to the (B).
Another way to look at it is similar to the FAQ. If the FAQ contradicts the rules, the rules win. If the spell block contradicts the elemental effect, the elemental effect wins.
I say this, because it says to apply the rules for the elemental attack. It makes no mention of damage being exempt from this.
-
*Doo, do do do dooo, I am just going to copy this spell format right here, and change the name from flamethrower to Lightning bolt, do do do doo. Now copy it again, make it AOE....man it has been a long day, I am so tired. What do i have left? I yeah, I still have to do telekinetic punches, wouldn't they have less drain since they lack an element? Yep, OK, let's drop the Drain. Yawn. Man, I think it is time to hit the hay. Bye guys!*
-
Most likely what happened to be honest.
-
I think that the specific overrides the general.
This. This is the case in just about every game I've seen.
-
Why does Lightning Bolt get special treatment over, say, a real Lightning Bolt straight from that be, or grabbing hold of a dangling electrical line? Both of which are easily considered more lethal than a taser.
More importantly, how is letting it remain physical, applying the elemental effect? After the fluff, the first line in the Electrical Damage section is "Electrical damage is treated as stun damage ..." If it's an important enough part of the effect to be the very first thing said about it mechanically, it should be a no brainer that applying the effect will include that line. It doesn't say "apply only the beneficial parts of the elemental effect".
-
Why does Lightning Bolt get special treatment over, say, a real Lightning Bolt straight from that be, or grabbing hold of a dangling electrical line? Both of which are easily considered more lethal than a taser.
More importantly, how is letting it remain physical, applying the elemental effect? After the fluff, the first line in the Electrical Damage section is "Electrical damage is treated as stun damage ..." If it's an important enough part of the effect to be the very first thing said about it mechanically, it should be a no brainer that applying the effect will include that line. It doesn't say "apply only the beneficial parts of the elemental effect".
You don't think getting struck by lightning would be physical damage? The people who survive that drek are very VERY lucky individuals, and even then they're likely to be in the hospital a couple days at minimum for the damage done to their bodies. Sounds like physical damage to me using game terms.
-
In real life yes, but in the game it deals stun damage by the RAW. Just like Lightning Bolt. All electrical damage is treated as stun, not just some of it.
-
In real life yes, but in the game it deals stun damage by the RAW. Just like Lightning Bolt. All electrical damage is treated as stun, not just some of it.
Again, a specific spell-text ruling would trump a general rule.
-
Sure would, if it says it trumps the standard rule, which is not the case here. In fact, as I've shown, it is stated the spell block does not trump elemental effects.
-
Why does Lightning Bolt get special treatment over, say, a real Lightning Bolt straight from that be, or grabbing hold of a dangling electrical line? Both of which are easily considered more lethal than a taser.
More importantly, how is letting it remain physical, applying the elemental effect? After the fluff, the first line in the Electrical Damage section is "Electrical damage is treated as stun damage ..." If it's an important enough part of the effect to be the very first thing said about it mechanically, it should be a no brainer that applying the effect will include that line. It doesn't say "apply only the beneficial parts of the elemental effect".
You don't think getting struck by lightning would be physical damage? The people who survive that drek are very VERY lucky individuals, and even then they're likely to be in the hospital a couple days at minimum for the damage done to their bodies. Sounds like physical damage to me using game terms.
As true as that is, we are discussing this from a mechanical standpoint (he even said that he has let strong lightning bolts be physical). And it does say that the elemental effect changes the spell, with no exception on that matter. I would honestly just houserule it so that electricity was stun up to a certain point, then it was physical. However, RAW it would be stun, according to the rulebook.
P.S. Any more thoughts or opinions on if powerbolt+ball should be kept if stunbolt+ball and an elemental single+AOE spell is already known.
-
Why does Lightning Bolt get special treatment over, say, a real Lightning Bolt straight from that be, or grabbing hold of a dangling electrical line? Both of which are easily considered more lethal than a taser.
To me it basically boils down to the DV of the spell:
Indirect + Elemental + Physical Damage = F/2 + 3
Indirect + Elemental + Stun Damage = F/2 + 2
Lightning Bolt = F/2 + 3
therefore
Lightning Bolt = Indirect + Elemental + Physical Damage
So, to comply with the known rules of spell construction, either Lightning Bolt's DV needs to come down to (F/2)+2 or it needs to still actually sling Physical damage if the target isn't immune to Electrical damage.
EDIT: Just reviewed the spell-construction rules in Street Magic and noticed that Elemental Effect has the clause "must be Physical spell with Physical damage"... which means there is pretty much no reason on earth to take Lightning Bolt under RAW, since Sand and Water have similar short-circuit effects and do Physical.
-
Well, then according to Street Magic, all elemental spells do Physical damage, so two things relating to lightning bolt agree on Physical, one thing does not. I guess it is an exception to the general rule on electrical damage.
Of course, Electrical damage is "Treated as Stun damage", not "Is Stun damage", so another argument could be made...
-
I'mma put a big [GM'S DISCRETION] stamp here then.
-
I may be able to help you out.
The german street magic states that
a) the damage type is stated in the spell description - physical for lightning bolt, and that
b) elemental spells usually have SECONDARY effects of the given element.
So while it does physical damage it still has the stun/stagger effects of electricity damage.
-
I may be able to help you out.
The german street magic states that
a) the damage type is stated in the spell description - physical for lightning bolt, and that
b) elemental spells usually have SECONDARY effects of the given element.
So while it does physical damage it still has the stun/stagger effects of electricity damage.
So the official German response is for it to do physical damage and stun damage, in one casting? Or am I misreading?
-
I may be able to help you out.
The german street magic states that
a) the damage type is stated in the spell description - physical for lightning bolt, and that
b) elemental spells usually have SECONDARY effects of the given element.
So while it does physical damage it still has the stun/stagger effects of electricity damage.
So the official German response is for it to do physical damage and stun damage, in one casting? Or am I misreading?
Slightly. It does the normal amount of Physical spell damage, -Half AP, and makes them make a Don't Taze Me Roll.
-
What JustADude said.
I shouldn't have used the word "stun"...
-
The issue is that even if it does physical, being electricity damage means it is treated as stun damage. Vehicles don't take stun. Electrical damage specifically states that. When looking at whether the vehicle is damaged, you look at the damage type. Even though it has a P in the listing, the S is what is going to stick out because Electrical damage is always treated as stun.
However, there is a bit of quivocality in that to my mind.
Yes, it's "treated as" stun damage but that, to me, means more along the lines of things like whether it affects barriers, how Trauma Damper alters the total damage, and other such things. If the damage code is "P(e)" then, at the end of the day, it would still fill boxes on the Physical track after all the resistance calculations are done.
Now, normally that would still mean that it splashes against Drones, since Drones don't take stun, but there's a special exception in SR4A (p164) that says "Electronic equipment, vehicles, and drones can also be affected by Electricity damage." That exception would allow the few cases of "P(e)" damage to still blow up hings that would realistically be perma-fried with electricity without letting you use Lightning Bolt to take down a plascrete wall.
have you ever seen concrete that's been hit wih lightning? there's currently a hole in my driveway where a powersurge (from lightning) jumped from one rib-iron to another through the concrete. if a player wants to blow a hole in some concrete with a lightning bolt, then i'd side in support of the "P(e)" damage. it's right there in the book, specific beats genera, and it could happen IRL. but i'd say t's ultimately up to the gm on that...
-
I may be able to help you out.
The german street magic states that
a) the damage type is stated in the spell description - physical for lightning bolt, and that
b) elemental spells usually have SECONDARY effects of the given element.
So while it does physical damage it still has the stun/stagger effects of electricity damage.
That's how I'll play it. Makes sense to me. Thanks!
-
I may be able to help you out.
The german street magic states that
a) the damage type is stated in the spell description - physical for lightning bolt, and that
b) elemental spells usually have SECONDARY effects of the given element.
So only part of the Electrical Damage effect is applied to it then? I don't read german (and don't have a german version of Street Magic for any tranlating), but the english is extremely clear that it is treated just like any other electrical attack. I do have some questions though for the german version:
a.) Is the damage type said to be stated in the spell description or the spell code/stat block. If the former, does it actually say physical in the description or does it use electrical damage and just have physical in the spell code/stat block?
b.) Does it state that they deal all secondary effects or part of them? On a related note, does it state that the secondary affects apply to damage or just that they have an effect on the environment.
First you have lightning bolt (205 SR4A):
These spells create and direct vicious strikes of electricity that cause Electricity damage (p. 163). Lightning Bolt is a single target spell. Ball Lightning is an area spell.
Then you have the Electrical Damage section(163-164 SR4A):
Electrical damage is treated as Stun damage
...SNIP
Keep in mind that this is a part of the electrical damage effect just like the incapacitation check. Both are equally parts of the effect. Nothing says to pick and choose or only take part of the effects.
Next you have Spell Damage (204 SR4A):
Each spell description notes whether damage is Stun (S) or
Physical (P).
Note, here it says spell description, not stat block. Lightning Bolt's spell description states it does Electrical Damage which is Stun (S) always. Note that many of the other element damage spells state what elemental damage they do rather than stating Physical (P) or Stun (S) while non-elemental spells actually state physical or stun specifically.
Now, you have Spell Design's elemental effect descritpion (163 SM):
Combat spells
Elemental eff ect (must be Physical spell with Physical damage) +2
This shows us that it doesn't matter what damage the spell does, if it's elemental it is designed (and most likely recorded in the book) as a physical spell with physical damage.
Last we have the elemental spell section from Street Magic (162 SM):
Elemental spells use the elements of nature to inflict damage
...SNIP...
These elemental spells inflict special types of damage that may also have secondary effects (starting fires, melting equipment, etc). Some of these elemental damage types (Acid, Cold, Electricity, and Fire) are described on pp. 154– 155, SR4.
This shows us that the spell does not do physical damage with an electrical element tagged on to it. It does electrical damage straight up. Similarly, the spells don't create a magical representation of the element, they summon up pure natural element that is then forced toward the target. Lightning from a mage is no different than natural lightning (other than your percent chance of getting hit in doors at least).
Well, then according to Street Magic, all elemental spells do Physical damage, so two things relating to lightning bolt agree on Physical, one thing does not. I guess it is an exception to the general rule on electrical damage.
The street magic clause in a table for drain modifiers. It doesn't state they have to actually do physical, it notes that that is how they must be designed. Elemental spells are stated to do special types of damage (appropriate to the element in question). Hopefully I've made a clear case.
have you ever seen concrete that's been hit wih lightning? there's currently a hole in my driveway where a powersurge (from lightning) jumped from one rib-iron to another through the concrete. if a player wants to blow a hole in some concrete with a lightning bolt, then i'd side in support of the "P(e)" damage. it's right there in the book, specific beats genera, and it could happen IRL. but i'd say t's ultimately up to the gm on that...
There point here is that completely natural lightning that comes from the sky like what put the hole in the driveway does stun damage blatantly according to the book. However, people want to claim that the completely natural lightning that a mage summons up does physical damage despite the fact that it's the same exact lightning according to description.
I'm not saying that in real life lightning is just a mild stun setback, but in the SR rules it is. Then again getting shot in the SR universe is pretty tame too compared to real life, so it's about on the same page really.
-
I believe the main difference here is that the stat block is part of the spell description, at least in german.
Spell description: stat block + text. It states physical for lighting bolt/ball/touch.
I also didn't find any reference to a separate spell "stat block". I may have overlooked it though, so if you have an example I can double check it.
Under elemental effects it is stated that elemental attacks usually have secondary effects related to their damage type, while under "damage code" it says its damage is in the spell description.
So in general the rules are clear in terms of wording.
Lightning Bolt specifically is irritating though, as they refer to SR4A for electricity damage, which (the german version is no different) is - of course debatable, but at least clear in terms of rules - treated as stun damage with secondary effects. So it could be an oversight or some copy/paste error, as it seems to be the only combat spell that contradicts with core rules.
Personally, going by the rules of street magic, I see no room for interpretation, but I guess if you really, really want it to deal stun damage you could put both rules in relation to each other:
"Lightning Bolt deals physical damage (as per spell description) which is electricity damage (as per spell description). Electricity damage is treated as stun damage, therefore Lighting Bolt deals physical damage that is treated as stun damage." But how would you treat physical damage that is treated as stun damage?
Way too much rule fuzz for my liking, I'd just ask my group how they would like to handle it and pick one option.
P.S. I do not necessarily agree with electricity damage being stun damage, but I don't like exceptions to the rule, so personally I'd favor either all electricity damage being physical OR lightning bolt dealing stun damage.
-
"Lightning Bolt deals physical damage (as per spell description) which is electricity damage (as per spell description). Electricity damage is treated as stun damage, therefore Lighting Bolt deals physical damage that is treated as stun damage." But how would you treat physical damage that is treated as stun damage?
Seems pretty simple to me. As I mentioned before, you just follow all the rules and procedures for stun damage but at the end of the day, when you've got the final DV it comes off the Physical track. Only way that could possibly make sense, in my mind.
-
Again, straight from Street Magic "These elemental spells inflict special types of damage that may also have secondary effects (starting fires, melting equipment, etc). Some of these elemental damage types (Acid, Cold, Electricity, and Fire) are described on pp. 154– 155, SR4."
It is inherently (e) damage first and foremost. (e) is always stun. The spell code has to say Physical Spell/Physical damage because it is an elemental spell. Every elemental spell has to list it that way no matter what type of damage it actually does because of the rules for building elemental spells.
If you build Screech, you will get the exact same spell as Lightning Bolt, but it's sonic and does sonic damage because the damage is of the sonic type, not Physical with some Sonic elements.
Again I ask, how is taking the damage off the physical track treating the damage as stun? Stun damage comes off of the stun track.
-
Could you check what the english version defines as "spell description"?
German version includes the Stat Block, as I stated 2 posts above.
Apart from that I think I answered all your questions. Coming from the english wording there seems to be no definite answer - at least if the stat block is not included in the spell description.
German wording is pretty clear but the colliding rules don't make much sense either :D .
You're wrong about the "The spell code has to say Physical Spell/Physical damage because it is an elemental spell" though. The rules do not state that elemental spells always have to do physical damage. The same goes for all combat spells.
On the physical damage that is treated like stun damage issue, I don't think this is solvable without creating additional problems.
Given that we're not talking about a tabletop game that features tournaments and such, but a pen & paper game played in groups of 4-6 people (rough guess) I can only advise everyone that stumbles across this issue to talk to their group about it, pick one option and stick with it.
There are many GMs that banned Stick'n'Shock for example or the Slow spell from WAR, so house rules are nothing special.
Playing on conventions could be different, but in that case each GM should just decide for himself.
-
If you keep reading that same section you quoted from though, the very next part is that they are not affected by stun damage. Electrical damage is treated as stun damage. It then goes on to show exactly how they are affected by electrical damage (which does not include damage, but shorting out).
Now this is really LOL
Spell says it has P damage
It also causes elemental effect, which, in case of drones/ vehicles/other machinery is resistance test described in Electricity damage. If Electricity attacks DO CALL for this resistance test, it means that Elemental effect - Electricity AFFECT drones etc.
So result is: Physical damage with Elemental effect, that could short out device.
-
Just a quick question: What Attribute would you use to Resist Lightning bolt? Would it be Willpower, or Body + Half Armor?
-
Just a quick question: What Attribute would you use to Resist Lightning bolt? Would it be Willpower, or Body + Half Armor?
Physical typed spells are always resisted with body. Elemental spells always halve impact armor. So Lightning Bolt is resisted by Body + Half Armor + any modifiers for electrical damage (meaning no armor if it's metal or +Nonconductive rating).
Now this is really LOL
Spell says it has P damage
It also causes elemental effect, which, in case of drones/ vehicles/other machinery is resistance test described in Electricity damage. If Electricity attacks DO CALL for this resistance test, it means that Elemental effect - Electricity AFFECT drones etc.
So result is: Physical damage with Elemental effect, that could short out device.
All of the following are part of the Elemental effect for Electrical Damage:
1.-Electrical Damage is treated as stun damage
2.-Electrical Damage is resisted with half impact armor
3.-Metal armor does not offer protection
4.-Nonconductive armor adds full value to the resistance
5.-Successful attack can incapacitate target
6.-Non-incapacitated targets take a -2 for 2+net hits Combat Turns
7.-Electronic vehicles, equipment and drones can be affected
8.-They never take stun damage but must make a resistance vs. shutdown
The very first part of the effect is a shift to stun damage. Yes, it can affect vehicles by causing them to cease functioning for a while (exact rules are detailed in the book), but it does not deal damage since they don't take stun from it and damage is shifted to stun by the first part of the effect (even if you argue it does physical, the first part clearly causes the damage to be treated in all ways as stun which would pop number 8 into being since it's going to check and see a T value for stun since the damage is treated as stun).
Just tacking on parts 2-8 is not applying the elemental effect. It's applying only the beneficial parts of the elemental effect which is not what it said to happen.
Could you check what the english version defines as "spell description"?
German version includes the Stat Block, as I stated 2 posts above.
"Each spell has the following characteristics: Category, Type, Range, Threshold, Duration, Drain Value, and Effect."
All these characteristics make up the spell code except Effect, which is the spell's description. It's just like any other item or quality description.
You're wrong about the "The spell code has to say Physical Spell/Physical damage because it is an elemental spell" though. The rules do not state that elemental spells always have to do physical damage. The same goes for all combat spells.
Uhm...No, I'm not. I included a quote already on this part. I'll repost it for convenience, "Combat spells - Elemental eff ect (must be Physical spell with Physical damage) +2". This is from the table for determining designing spells and determining drain. During design, every single elemental spell has to follow these rules. The rules never state that the damage dealt by the element chosen (the special damage type chosen for the spell) has to be physical, only that the damage code during design must be physical (for the purposes of determining drain). This allows all elemental spells to use the same template when being designed. Whatever the damage type ends up being is going to vary from element to element, because the spell is modified as appropriate by the elemental effect. This is all laid out extremely clearly in Street Magic. If you want to disagree, please provide a source that disputes it.
Just to be extremely clear though, Lightning Bolt was specifically in mind when the Electrical Damage rules were written. I say this because if you bother to check the line right before the notice that all Electrical Damage is treated as stun, it states "Spells and critter powers such as Lightning Bolt and Energy Aura cause similar effects" If by similar they meant everything but the damage switch over, it would be in the text. At the very least, there would be a mention that some types of weapons/attacks can override the treated as stun clause. I can find none of these in the text.
-
Since spell is described as doing Physical damage, I dont need to care about damage type any more. And for elemental effect Ill read that part of Electricity damage that fits to what I need...means everything but that part that says that Electricity damage is always and only stun..wait!
Trying to apply this wordplay is just riddiculous, since I will rather follow real life examples, than bad wording in text. And real life example told me, that if you got hit by Lightning or High voltage, you will be extremely lucky if you survive with just burns on half of your body. When I will see tree cut down by lightning, I wont consider it stunned, but physicaly destroyed. And when lightning hits the Jumbo Jet, I will suppose that only because it was robust enought (and created farraday cage for passengers also) it has overcame the damage, when electric systems malfunction may still apply.
It is really good that we dont have any Tesla Gun in Shadowrun, since this debate would be uch more heated...
Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEpvppljNFM&feature=related
but maybe its just another fake :P
Reminds me good joke Ive heard once (IDN if the translation to english is that funny either...)
Q: What it is: The Jumbo Jet, laying down on the sea floor, with the lawyer buckled up in every seat?
A: Good starting point.
-
Again I ask, how is taking the damage off the physical track treating the damage as stun? Stun damage comes off of the stun track.
I agree. You have to treat it as stun damage the whole way. Not stop at 99% and then decide its physical again, lol.
Trying to apply this wordplay is just riddiculous, since I will rather follow real life examples, than bad wording in text. And real life example told me, that if you got hit by Lightning or High voltage, you will be extremely lucky if you survive with just burns on half of your body.
If you like real world examples that much, i have here two for you.
http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/grounders/lightningsafety.html (http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/grounders/lightningsafety.html): Of 373 people hit by lightning only 73 died.
http://www.wsaz.com/blogs/askjosh/92183024.html (http://www.wsaz.com/blogs/askjosh/92183024.html): Meteorologist says only 10% of people struck are killed by lightning.
So the fatality is around 10-20%, stun damage seems very real for lightning.
-
And for elemental effect Ill read that part of Electricity damage that fits to what I need...means everything but that part that says that Electricity damage is always and only stun..wait!
Which is fine if that's what you want to do, but it isn't the way the game is written to work. You can take everything else and be happy with it, but by RAW Lightning Bolt takes everything, not just what you think fits. That everything includes it being stun damage.
Trying to apply this wordplay is just riddiculous, since I will rather follow real life examples, than bad wording in text. And real life example told me, that if you got hit by Lightning or High voltage, you will be extremely lucky if you survive with just burns on half of your body. When I will see tree cut down by lightning, I wont consider it stunned, but physicaly destroyed. And when lightning hits the Jumbo Jet, I will suppose that only because it was robust enought (and created farraday cage for passengers also) it has overcame the damage, when electric systems malfunction may still apply.
No wordplay is needed at all for lightning. Lightning has no stats to state it's physical. By the RAW, it would be straight electrical damage which is dealt as stun damage. The only reason people try to claim lightning bolt is physical is because it uses the same spell code that every elemental spell does. If you let Lightning Bolt become physical, then Lightning Bolt is not actually lightning but some new and improved lightning which kind of kills the "element of nature" description for elemental spells.
-
So how do you resolve the spell when one elemental component is Stun and the other is physical? Some elements have a wonderful mental synergy like mixing Smoke and Fire but figuring out the mechanics are frustrating aside from just saying "No" how would you Interpret it?
-
RAW simply doesn't cover it. You can argue theoretically over which element is added first in the design process and what not, but anyone with a decent sense of game balance would be able to say that shouldn't matter in the least. Bottom line is we don't have indication of one way or the other.
Personally, I'd rule with the physical elemental effect overriding the stun elemental effect, but that's by no means an official interpretation of it. The other one would be that it does both, but that's is pretty broken mechanically. Keep in mind that it wouldn't be smoke and fire, it would be smokefire/firesmoke. The multi-element spells lob one thing that is both elements. So it would be a smoke that literally ignites things. Technically a gas mask would protect against it fully, but the gasmask might catch fire.
I think my favorite multi-element spell so far was Thunder Clap (Lighning/Sound) for one incapacitating, nauseating, deafening bolt of pure disablement.
-
Lightning has no stats to state it's physical.
CODE MEANING
Type:
P Physical spell
M Mana spell
Range:
LOS Line of sight
T Touch
V Voluntary targets only
A Area spell
Damage:
P Physical damage
S Stun Damage
Duration:
I Instant
S Sustained
P Permanent
Dv (Drain value):
F Force
Lightning Bolt (Indirect, Elemental)
Type: P • Range: LOS • Damage: P • Duration: I • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 3
Ball Lightning (Indirect, Elemental, Area)
Type: P • Range: LOS (A) • Damage: P • Duration: I • DV: (F ÷ 2) + 5
These spells create and direct vicious strikes of electricity that cause
Electricity damage (p. 163). Lightning Bolt is a single target spell. Ball
Lightning is an area spell.
Meteorologist says only 10% of people struck are killed by lightning.
So the fatality is around 10-20%, stun damage seems very real for lightning.
Well. You got me with this. Good work ;)
-
I'm still having it work on drones.
-
Just to be clear, I'm not arguing for lighting bolt to do physical damage.
I'm just not convinced of this clearness you speak of.
I found the part about elemental attacks in the drain table. About the only place I didn't look :D . Although I'd say it is stated that way to make sure a clever spellcrafter doesn't try to get elemental spells with stun damage & mana spells drain modifiers, I agree now, elemental spells have to be both physical spells and do physical damage.
However I see no evidence that this is only there to allow for easier template use. It's quite possible that the intention rather was to make sure every elemental spell also does physical damage (which leads to said rules contradiction).
The same goes for your definition of "spell description". If the damage-type section was only referring to the part not written in the spell code why not just write "the damage can be found under spell effects". Moreover I have yet to find any evidence that the spell code is not part of its description. In german a description is defined as "a summary of information/details about something", which is exactly what spell code + effect do. Leaving one of them out just makes the spells description less complete.
I doubt that this is the intention and doubt the english definition of description is any different from the german one.
This of course leads to the "spell description vs. electricity damage" contradiction debate, which is just not so easily solved.
Even the part about the lightning bolt spell in the electricity damage just states "similar".
Similar ≠ the same.
In short, while from a logical point of view I'd agree with your argumentation, as it makes sense to keep exceptions to the rule down to a minimum, I still have to say your interpretation of the rules is just not as clear as you'd like it to be - especially as you argue "by the rules" in terms of wording and such.
As I've already written the closest you could come to "overruling" the physical damage from the spell code is by saying that even physical electricity damage is treated as stun damage. Then again a lightning bolt is only "similar" not the same... .
P.S. I don't want to sound nitpicking here, in fact I'm all for clearness, but rules wise it just ain't clear.
Also, I don't think real life examples do this discussion any good.. While I personally think that every pen & paper group should at the very least be inspired by how things work "in real life", the rather abstract rules set of shadowrun tends to crack when confronted with certain real life examples.
Take "Electricity damage" for example.
In real life leaves electricity burns due to the heat set free when it hits a human body which would fall into the "physical damage" category.
But Shadowrun doesn't take notice of that.
So when you go on, the whole set of rules gets questioned and crumbles.
Therefore it's much better to just stick to the rules, they work quite well in most situations and when they don't just pick the option your group likes best, or change whatever you don't like. After the rules are just a means to experience stories in playing your character in the shadowrun universe.
-
Sichr, if you read my quote that your referenced, I said lightning (not lightning bolt) had no stats. It was is response to the claim that lightning (again, not lightning bolt) does physical damage in real life and in shadowrun so lightning bolt should to.
It's quite possible that the intention rather was to make sure every elemental spell also does physical damage (which leads to said rules contradiction).
However, in spell design we also have this part here: "Most Combat spells with elemental effects have the same game characteristics;
the only difference is the elemental effect (Acid Stream, Flamethrower, and Lightning Bolt, for example, are all the same). To create a spell with a different elemental effect such as Ice or Sand (see pp. 164–165) is very easy—simply use the same spell statistics, apply the rules for the new elemental effect, and rename it."
So the breakdown goes like this effectively:
A.) Copy/Paste the standard elemental spell code for Single Target or AoE.
B.) Apply elemental rules.
C.) Rename it.
The elemental rules kick in after the spell code, so the stun conversion happens after spell design as well. Even if you think the spell code is part of the description (in which case they should have just said damage would be in the spell characteristics which are defined to include the spell code), it's still fairly clear.
I completely agree about the RL examples. Shadowrun has become an action movie already for the most part. RL doesn't compare well to it in any part, trying to force this one part to is like trying to strap horns to a cow and call it a bull.
-
Actually no need to convince me, I am with you on that.
The physical damage turns electricity damage turns stun damage (because it is electricity damage) argumentation chain is quite logical after all.
Its just that its wording is not precise enough to convince those who want lightning bolt to do physical damage.
That is why I keep writing "play it the way your group wants to play it". One could even give both versions a try and see if it fits. My group tried Stick'n'Shock too, and after one run we just dropped it. Didn't fit our play style.
-
I'm pretty well convinced that the way the RAW works it's going to end up as Stun... though "is treated as Stun Damage" seems like nothing more than pure, needless word-bloat when they could just say "is Stun Damage".
It really, really hurts my head, though, that you have to pay the DV for Physical Damage while ending up with Stun. If I ever GM again, I'm house-ruling that Stun elements use the Stun DV +2 and Physical elements use the Physical DV +2.
-
Any proper rules nazi can tell you why it's forced to be that way. If it weren't, you'd just choose stun then add an elemental effect that does physical damage. The elemental effect would override the stun and you'd have a stun cost physical spell.
Really the only time it comes up is vs. objects, and you might as well just take powerbolt or fireball for those. Shock still incapacitates enemies (and ignores metal armor), smoke ignores all armor except for inhalation blocking gear, and sound ignores everything but dampners/silencing spells and nauseates. Of course lightning bolt still has the chance to cut out electronics which, for expensive gear, may be preferable to straight up destroying.