From: oroboros@acca.nmsu.edu (The Wyrm Ouroboros)
Subject: Re: SRUN I: Questions from the Minotaur
Keywords: shadowrun, srun
Organization: The Clearing House, Ltd.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:23:46 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.055740.6993@ncsu.edu> jlperkin@eos.ncsu.edu (JERRY LEE PERKINSON) writes:
>|>1. Does an illusion that is seen through disappear or can it still
>|>   be a visual impairment. If not can an illusion protect a person(s) 
>|>   from a combat spell? (An illusion of a solid black wall that disables
>|>   the 'line of sight' requirement- even though the mage knows the image
>|>   to be false, it may still block their vision).
>|>
>IMHO an illusion remains whether or not people realize what it is.
>It would be a visual impairment just as a real wall would be.  If you
>can't see it, you can't hit it with ye old spell.

I think I would give it perhaps a +4 to the target number, 'Full Cover',
instead of the +8 'Blind Fire' penalty.  This would be, of course, for
Damaging Manipulations.

For other spells, I think I'd say you .could. cast the spell, although at
some penalty -- +2 to +4, because of the distraction the illusion is promoting.

(Of course, Mario keeps telling me that if an illusion is cast at somebody
who doesn't believe it at all, well, for them the damn thing isn't there.
Sheesh.  Shamans....)

>|>2. Our group has just had another magically active "awaken" on them. The
>|>   female ork in question is a sorceror adept. While trying to add spice
>|>   to the team, I came up with an idea, I considered making her a spider 
>|>   shaman. Naturally our group has yet to have an insect totem player;
>|>   but I was wondering what sort of problem this can cause; afterall, she
>|>   can never summon a spirit, nor a queen. She cannot access astral, etc.
>|>   In effect, I believe that adept status has removed the potential
>|>   disruption an insect shaman *could* cause. Anyone have any thoughts
>|>   on the matter? For those of you who agree that this is not too dis-
>|>   balancing, what sort of Advantages/Disadvantages/Environment/??
>|>   would you proscribe to Spider?
>|>
>My understanding of adepts had the following types: Physical, Enchanting,
>Sorcery, Conjuring, and Shamanic.  You seem to be suggesting a mixture
>of the Sorcery and Shamanic adepts.  Sorcery adepts are cut off from the
>Astral and get all spells.  Shamanic adepts have access to astral space
>but are limited with spells which they get bonuses for.  If you are meaning
>a true Shamanic adept, she would still be susceptable to the problems of
>eventually being taken over by an insect spirit and becoming a NPC.  Tend
>to make short lived PCs.  The big buggies come to infest the body.

From my business associate, Mario Greymist:
--------------------------------------------------------
No no no no NO.  Grimoire, p. 14

	"Like other magicians, magical adepts have to choose between
	the shamanic and hermetic traditions.  They follow the rules
	for that tradition in spell learning, and so on.  Shamans get
	totem benefits and penalties, if applicable to the skill."

This means that yeah, there can be a Panther Sorcery Adept that gets bonuses
to his Combat and Illusion spells, or a hermetic Conjuring Adept that can only
conjure Elementals...

And yes, PhyAds are supposed to choose, too.


As for the Spider Sorcery Adept, Maestro -- how about +1 or +2 to Detection
and Manipulation spells?  Perhaps a penalty to Combat....
--------------------------------------------------------

>|>3. Reference: Street Samurai Catalog pg. 20
>|>   Item: Browning Ultra Power
>|>   	"has a revolutionary chamber recycling system that moves a
>|> 	 new round into the chamber twice as fast..."
>|>   Question: Would this weapon then be able to Burst Fire if you were
>|>	     to add the all-too-common Reactive Trigger since it would
>|>	     be thenn capable of *at least* 3 bullets? Or does this imply
>|>	     that you could fire 2 shots of 2 so that the Power is +1 ?
>|>
>Again, my understanding was that the Browning Ultra Power was equivalent
>to the reactive trigger setup in method.  Even if it is not, the barrel
>can only turn so fast, so no matter how fast the trigger is, the bullets
>are limited to the slowest part of the mechanism.  2 shot limit.

The Browning was supposed to be the 'first' of the reactive triggered
weapons.  No Burst Fire, sorry.

>|>4. How do you folks resolve mages who have increased reactions spells
>|>   locked who subsequently de-activate them *after* initiative is rolled?
>|>   Right now I am unsure of whether the mage would reroll initiative, lose
>|>   all his/her actions after it is off, roll his new reaction and subtract
>|>   the number of actions used from the number gained from the second roll,
>|>   etc..
>|>
>First, I'm not sure why one would do that.  The easiest method would be to
>keep the initiatives the same as you are only supposed to determine initiative
>at the beginning of the round.  

I'd have to agree that it'd be the easiest.  That, or give them one more action
after the lock is turned off.

>|>5. Do dice allocated from fetish foci, or normal foci, receive the penalties
>|>   the magician does from damage, etc. For example, if a mage has taken
>|>   Moderate Stun, he/she is now at +2, then he/she yanks out a fetish foci
>|>   to incorporate into a combat spell. The target number is a base 4 
>|>   (victim's willpower =4) but is +2 due to stun, would thedice thrown for
>|>   the foci also be at +2?
>|>			
>Yes.  The foci simply augment the magician's abilities, and are not an
>intrinsic power.

More or less agreeing, here.  Somebody else gave a spiel about 'channeling'
the power of the foci which is my theory for it....

But hell, Mario uses those Fetish Foci for drain anyhow.  And .I. can't
toss a fireball..... (a grenade, on the other hand...)

>-Killjoy, eater of worlds

Ouroboros
The Wyrm of the .Net