NEWS

Question about Renraku Arcology defenses

  • 12 Replies
  • 3444 Views

Senko

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2485
« on: <09-14-16/0704:53> »
I've been reading about Arcologies recently and something struck me about the Renraku Arcology defenses. I'm wondering am I overthinking things or is this a glaring weakness in that kind of structure. They had anti-air defenses on the upper levels and sealed shutters on the lowers ones but they also had hundreds of floors of bullet proof glass windows. So what I'm wondering is there any reason a "Shape Glass" spell couldn't have been used to just reshape one of those into a great big entrance into any of those floors that aren't likely to be coverable with air defenses for an infiltration force?

RowanTheFox

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 714
« Reply #1 on: <09-14-16/0732:59> »
Annnnd this is why mages get geeked first.
It is better to be crazy and know it, than to be sane and have one's doubts.

"Nothing is wrong if no one can stop you."

Remember, you're only a genius when they need you. The rest of the time you're just an asshole.

Well, drek. Looks like Timmy fell into the Dissonance Well again.

Medicineman

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2310
« Reply #2 on: <09-14-16/1125:19> »
it wasn't so much a Problem to enter the Arcology ( wether by casting a Spell or attaching enough Mines  )
 the Reason the Army and Corptroopers didn't storm the Arcology was the 3 Fusion Reactors in the cellar of the Arcology that DEUS would blow up (and thus all of Seattle ;) )

HokaHey
Medicineman
http://english.bouletcorp.com/2013/08/02/the-long-journey/
---------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1V7fi5IqYw
---------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RYlAPjyNm8

Senko

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2485
« Reply #3 on: <09-14-16/1344:45> »
I see not so much a matter of can you do it as what happened next.

Magnaric

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 225
« Reply #4 on: <09-15-16/0919:22> »
The thing to remember about the Arcology under Deus' control was that it wasn't just static defenses you had to worry about, but mobile and VERY adaptable ones. In the Renraku Arcology:Shutdown book, it says that very quickly Deus had taken over the majority of the Red Samurai garrison(which I can't remember how many they had, but it was a fair bit, I'm guessing in the mid to high double digits). And each 5-man Red Sam team has an awakened member among them by default(usually magicians but sometimes adepts or mystic adepts). They had placed quite a few high-force wards and barriers around the upper floors, as well as other key floors and locations around the Arcology(again right from the book), so the important bits were magically protected as well.

Now, they can hardly ward/barrier the entire arcology obviously, but this is where the mobility and adaptability oif Deus' defenses came into play. If he didn't like the way something was shaped, or exposed, he could have spider drones and the Greens reshape the entire area, and then reinforce the walls using Leech constructs, which also detected magic and let out an ear-piercing wail when they did. Or, if he felt something made just a little too juicy of an entrypoint into the Arcology, he might deliberately leave it only lightly defended, so that anyone who got inside would get just far enough before Medusas, Blue Samurai, or even just Bumblebee drones/hives would take care of the intruders. Deus was incredibly devious and cunning like that, or at least that's how I always read into him.

And yeah, as Medicineman said, the UCAS military(and by extension Renraku in the local area) couldn't risk an all-out invasion, simply because the loss of life would be massive, and as a last-resort Deus could still overload the reactors in the sub-basement levels. And he absolutely would if he felt his defeat was imminent; Deus driving goal was to NEVER be captured and controlled by anyone again, even if that meant his own demise(though I imagine he'd plan for and attempt every other method to avoid that first). Or he could just use the obvious threat of killing every living civilian inside, and the UCAS wasn't willing to risk that either. This is getting a little off-topic, but my point is entry into the Arcology was essentially limited to surgical strikes and independent incursions by expendable assets(IE Shadowrunners). And knowing that, it wasn't the getting in that was difficult, it was surviving once inside that was...challenging.

Anyways, sorry for my tangent, but hope that lends some perspective.
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."
-Wyatt Earp

Opti

  • *
  • Freelancer
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 428
« Reply #5 on: <09-15-16/1114:09> »
Also, it is no longer the Renraku Arcology. It was taken over by the UCAS and houses (traps?) unwanted poor folk. Although the upper floors still remain a mystery. That is, until the next corp takes over....

Soylent Yellow

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 2
« Reply #6 on: <09-16-16/1615:23> »
I've been reading about Arcologies recently and something struck me about the Renraku Arcology defenses. I'm wondering am I overthinking things or is this a glaring weakness in that kind of structure. They had anti-air defenses on the upper levels and sealed shutters on the lowers ones but they also had hundreds of floors of bullet proof glass windows. So what I'm wondering is there any reason a "Shape Glass" spell couldn't have been used to just reshape one of those into a great big entrance into any of those floors that aren't likely to be coverable with air defenses for an infiltration force?

Firstly, Renraku was hardly likely to spend a fortune on physical defences without at least considering magical threats. I'm thinking a fair amount of stuff like FAB and bound spirits. As a gamesmaster, I would also say that thanks to all the things that have been going on inside, the background count would be through the roof.  Also, I'm sure Renraku would rather keep their dirty little secrets to themselves, and have several Red Samurai teams on standby to foil entrance attempts on the arcology.

Magnaric

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 225
« Reply #7 on: <09-17-16/1005:42> »
I wouldn't say the background count would be through the roof, at least not in all areas. The Arcology was a BIG place, and while there was certainly emotional trauma, horrendous violence, and an overall atmosphere of dread/fear/hopelessness, it wouldn't be enough to taint the Astral space everywhere beyond recognition.

For my part, I'd put it as a 50/50 between no background count and 1-2 for the majority.  Some places might be relatively untouched, whereas many others would be affected by the emotions of the trapped people there, or might even be the site where grisly deaths happened.

For select places I'd put it at 3-4, like the zombie rooms or Deus' experimental clinics. And a very small number of other places might have 5-6, like perhaps a labyrinth where a ton of people dies very horrible, agonizing deaths, or perhaps the aspected lodge of some of the Blue Samurai magicians.

Anyways, depends on what your definition of through the roof is I guess.  :)
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."
-Wyatt Earp

MijRai

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1845
  • Kane's Understudy
« Reply #8 on: <09-20-16/0233:30> »
I'd double those scores at the least; by the rules, a Background count of 1-2 is 'normal.'  A single murder or concert is a count of 4 temporarily.  The Arcology should be utterly hazardous to magical health in the zombie rooms and clinics, and worse in the labyrinths. 
Would you want to go into a place where the resident had a drum-fed shotgun and can see in the dark?

Tym Jalynsfein

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 208
« Reply #9 on: <09-20-16/0946:24> »
I really hate the way that Background count is handled in SR5. GIve me SR4A Background Count rules any day. :(
The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary. - James. D. Nicoll

MijRai

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1845
  • Kane's Understudy
« Reply #10 on: <09-20-16/1156:33> »
I like the scale of the current version (having a greater range is nice in my opinion), but I do agree that the fluctuations are annoying.  Background count (in my opinion) should not go up because of a kid's birthday party, or a single 'mundane' death.  It should be a result of pervasive, long-term things or momentous occasions.  As-is, if a mage kills someone with magic in a fight, they're basically tainting the local mana and making it that much harder to function.  I personally figure the reason they did it this way in 5th Edition was so GMs could easily fiat restrictions on mages, rather than putting in other forms of checks and balances or making other options comparable. 
Would you want to go into a place where the resident had a drum-fed shotgun and can see in the dark?

Magnaric

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 225
« Reply #11 on: <09-20-16/1317:05> »
For the actual numbers I was going off memory since I'm at work and don't have the actual book in front of me. It should be noted that I'm much more familiar with 4E background count rules and numbers than 5E, but again my memory may be faulty.

When I said 1-2 background count, I considered that pervasive in most areas. I get that higher numbers would result from a ton of deaths, a scene of particular torture or emotional trauma, etc. But the idea of someone having a really good day and creating a background count of 1 bothers me (an exaggeration, I know, but you get my point). A single murder being 4 for a while seems a bit strong to me. If it was a horrific, drawn-out, torturous murder, maybe. But those basic numbers seems a touch high, at least to me.
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."
-Wyatt Earp

Senko

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2485
« Reply #12 on: <09-20-16/1847:34> »
I like the scale of the current version (having a greater range is nice in my opinion), but I do agree that the fluctuations are annoying.  Background count (in my opinion) should not go up because of a kid's birthday party, or a single 'mundane' death.  It should be a result of pervasive, long-term things or momentous occasions.  As-is, if a mage kills someone with magic in a fight, they're basically tainting the local mana and making it that much harder to function.  I personally figure the reason they did it this way in 5th Edition was so GMs could easily fiat restrictions on mages, rather than putting in other forms of checks and balances or making other options comparable.

i agree the punishment mages get from background count if done per the rules is ridiculous "Happy surprise party Sally" followed by count spiking to 4 and the mage apologising they can't do magic in these conditions.