NEWS

SRM Combined FAQ Discussion

  • 101 Replies
  • 16339 Views

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #45 on: <05-29-18/0124:49> »
No, Redwulfe brought up the totally undefined "in the area" language.  Which is fair for SRM, given the core rulebook left it completely to GM discretion.  He's absolutely right that it'd be nice for SRM to set a standard for our shared organized play campaign... whether it's touching, Force x meters, in the same room... it should be standard across SRM.

Arguing that Sustained spells shouldn't be noticeable based solely on whether they had been in prior editions isn't appropriate for this thread.  It's not SRM related and we've already got the lively thread dedicated more or less to that exact thing.  You brought THAT here, so I obliged you and asked SRM team to say if the paragraph that doesn't have an exclusion for sustained spells is going to be understood for SRM purposes as if it did have an unstated exclusion for sustained spells.  We'll get an answer, or we won't.

As you're very well aware I'm not arguing it solely upon that bases. The language of "in the area", only matters if you change the accept definition so at best that's a meaningless distinction.  If you honestly think this inappropriate place then don't argue it here.  I'm pointing out the simple facts. I didn't post the thread referencing it here. I didn't start this whole mess, and I didn't make the two threads already covering it. 
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4514
« Reply #46 on: <05-29-18/0155:45> »
Everything you argued about Sustained spells shouldn't be perceptible is moot if "all magic without exception" is ruled/clarified to not give an exception to Sustained Spells.

So pretty much everything hinges on whether "all magic without exception" gives an exception to Sustained Spells.
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #47 on: <05-29-18/0210:01> »
Everything you argued about Sustained spells shouldn't be perceptible is moot if "all magic without exception" is ruled/clarified to not give an exception to Sustained Spells.

So pretty much everything hinges on whether "all magic without exception" gives an exception to Sustained Spells.

SSRD if what you were purposing wouldn't wreck half of magic, I would try my very best to meet you half way with it. But the changes you're advocating for have serious consequences. I don't know what they all would be, but I know it will wreck all subtle magic as we know it. That's not hyperbole or any kind of exaggeration, it's just a fact. So I will continue to argue against it where ever and for however long I have to. I seriously didn't have any interest or intention of bringing that thread up in here, or reviving it.
« Last Edit: <05-29-18/0214:32> by Marcus »
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Redwulfe

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
« Reply #48 on: <05-29-18/0216:06> »
I didn't bring it here. Red did.

I feel that I need to clarify, once more. I don't feel rehashing this debate here is appropriate. My intention was to clarify my intentions.

you said:
No. The area of detection does not exist. What you want a ruling on is,

I said:
No, what I want is a ruling for how we are going to use it in SRM so that players have consistency between tables.

This is true:
Marcus.  It would have been better to leave the arguing in the thread devoted to that topic.

This was bringing the debate to here.
No. The area of detection does not exist.

As well as this.
Red the point of the debate is the area does NOT exist, b/c for it to exist the interpretation that you can ONLY detect spell with normal perception when they are cast...

I know what the debate is. The fact that it is a debate means their are more than one side to it or else it would be called an agreement instead of a debate. What I would like is to leave the debate in the debate thread.

Like I said here:
I don't see any reason to rehash the debate here. The SRM FAQ committee can just look there and make their decision. I am happy to follow it either way.

and I fully agree with this:
Arguing that Sustained spells shouldn't be noticeable based solely on whether they had been in prior editions isn't appropriate for this thread.  It's not SRM related and we've already got the lively thread dedicated more or less to that exact thing.  You brought THAT here, so I obliged you and asked SRM team to say if the paragraph that doesn't have an exclusion for sustained spells is going to be understood for SRM purposes as if it did have an unstated exclusion for sustained spells.  We'll get an answer, or we won't.

Though I would just cut it down to this.
Arguing ... isn't appropriate for this thread.

and leave it at that.

Sorry for modifying your quote SSDR, and +1 you understood me perfectly.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't

Red

*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #49 on: <05-29-18/0220:42> »
I the next updated FAQ could we get a ruling on this https://forums.shadowruntabletop.com/index.php?topic=27292.0 in the FAQ as well as what SRM defines as the area of detection?

I would just like to be consistent for the players.

Quote me in Full or Don't Quote me Red. You can intended what you like, but you Asked and that is where it began.
« Last Edit: <05-29-18/0225:41> by Marcus »
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Redwulfe

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
« Reply #50 on: <05-29-18/0224:24> »
I will apologize for only quoting part of the posts from you I simply did not want to fill the post with a ton of block for only parts of messages, but under that same note I would ask that you do not assume my intentions in the future.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't

Red

*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #51 on: <05-29-18/0234:15> »
I will apologize for only quoting part of the posts from you I simply did not want to fill the post with a ton of block for only parts of messages, but under that same note I would ask that you do not assume my intentions in the future.

I can't read your intentions. I can read your posts. I keep my responses short for a reason, your method is purposefully misquoting and I'm not OK with it. Fix it or just admit you're distorting my words.
« Last Edit: <05-29-18/0247:26> by Marcus »
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Jayde Moon

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Ace Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2464
  • Shadowrun Missions Developer
« Reply #52 on: <05-29-18/0342:09> »
Further discussion of that topic in this thread will be deleted.  If you guys want to quibble over stuff that's actually in the FAQ, by all means!

But you already have a thread to quibble about sustained spells and bickering about who raised the issue can be done on... I dunno, discord or something.
That's just like... your opinion, man.

Marcus

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2802
  • Success always demands a greater effort.
« Reply #53 on: <06-02-18/0026:53> »
So back on topic, is there any movement on the Code of Honor stuff? With hooding come out soon(TM), can we get ahead and see if we can find a away to fix the issues with Codes in Missions play. Folks have any thoughts on the subject?
*Play-by-Post color guide*
Thinking
com
speaking

Jayde Moon

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Ace Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2464
  • Shadowrun Missions Developer
« Reply #54 on: <06-06-18/1744:00> »
Alright, so with everything coming down to crunch time, its been really busy.  We needed to get everything Origins ready.  But I've definitely been keeping an eye on things here and, without further ado:

Quote from: Lormyr
If they are able to play in any CMP of 2017 or older, any PM, and any SMH, then the wording is just fine

The wording is just fine.  :)

Quote from: Redwulfe
Under addiction Legal-Strength SIM, Ie Cold-SIM, and Skill wires are still addictive. Is this correct. It seems that they should be removed as well.

We'll look at it, but I'm inclined to agree.

Quote from: Hobbes
New Character for Season 9-12 accumulates 150 Karma could keep playing SRMs and CMPs if they didn't play any Prime Missions?

So players can dust off Chicago characters for NT Prime runs?

Also, nice work on the Social Negative Qualities.  "Can't I just stay in the Van?"  "No.  Now get in there and screw things up for the face!"  Much approval. 

And Adept powers flat out don't create any signature (Adept Spell/Barehanded Adept the obvious exceptions...).  Ninja's everywhere are pleased.  Thank you for the clarity on the Astral patrols as well.

Yes, Yes, Thank you, No problem.

Quote from: Marcus
Codes of Honor.

Maybe.  The reason some were allowed and others weren't have a lot to do with applicability of the mechanics to SRM.  Some Codes of Honor end up being freebies that provide little risk while others might be overly punishing.  The rest were allowed.  We can relook some of them,

But, for example, take Bushido 2.0... in any given Missions scenario, who is your superior?  Mr. Johnson?  We presume everyone wants to get the job done.  Another character?  Which one?  How do you decide?  Maye this could work when you sit at a Missions table with the same 4-6 people and one is the Face and you accept them as the leader.  But what about a Convention Table where it's 6-8 people randomly thrown together?

Wuxia.  Um.  Have you ever worked for Mr. Johnson?

Others, like Code of the White Hat are perfectly fine for you to RP, but since the downside is negligible in Missions (you'll never have an enemy decker looking for vengeance if you left him alive, for example) it's not going to be worth any points.

If there are specific Codes of Honor you think should be allowable, feel free to open up a thread in this forum and bring up your arguments.

Quote from: Various
Leave him in the van/Social Neg Quality concerns

The intent here is that all characters are in the meet and that all characters are contributing as applicable.  GMs are expected to manage their groups in such a way as to keep metagame issues from spoiling the fun.  Missions is targeted at getting players playing the game, especially newer players.

If you want to run your homebrew campaign using Missions runs, by all means play it how you like.  But at a CDT Missions table, you don't exclude anyone.  So if it was unclear, there is no choice.  EVERY player character will be at the meet.  You don't get to leave someone out and dock any/everyone's pay accordingly.  The In Character handwave that "the team at the table is the team doing the job" is just that, a handwave.  If that needs to be clarified for folks who don't understand the applicability of Wheaton's Law, we can add that in.

It's a touch railroadey.  But again, Missions is a different beast than home brew play.  Some metagamey measures are taken to keep things even across the board and to ensure that there are repercussions for certain choices.

Quote from: SSDR
Contact Loyalty Caps

We will look at this.  There may be some possibility for higher than loyalty 4 Missions contacts.

I am looking at codifying a means of raising the loyalty of your self-chosen contacts as well.  Just another means of keeping things even.

As for the chargen loophole, the way to close that is not having a catch-all fence.  We'll look at it.

Quote from: Various
Traditional Japanese Weapons, please!

Bull has the right of it.  That said, I'm not opposed to adding a little fancy chart into the FAQ if you guys want to open a thread and quibble on the details.  We're talking reskins, so don't make up new stats, just figure that a wakizashi seems like it would be equivalent to... Cougar Fineblade or whatever.  You can start with tequila's list and roll it around for a couple weeks.

I'm OK with a bokken using blades.

Quote from: Redwulfe
Detecting sustained spells

So I made my stance fairly clear in the thread where this was discussed.  But, i'm just one man and I have a team that I will check back with.  But I suspect they will be of relatively the same mid.  Detecting 'sustained' spells in the same way as perceiving spellcasting is beyond the scope of Missions and there is no test for it.

-------------------

Alright, that brings us up to date.  Again, thanks for all of your input.

« Last Edit: <06-06-18/1746:15> by Jayde Moon »
That's just like... your opinion, man.

Slamm-O!

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 149
« Reply #55 on: <06-06-18/1755:49> »
Any talk on getting Bloody Business goodies legal ?  I really want to nab Body Sculpt for my Adept.  Some other fun things in Bloody Business that arn't legal as well. 
Mess with the best.  Die like the rest !

tequila

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 194
« Reply #56 on: <06-06-18/1757:33> »
Thanks for the update!
#thistasergoesto11

Quote from: Tarislar
ArmTech MGL-12: Nothing says love like a 3 round burst of HE Grenade to hit something for 32P
Nuff said.  :-X

KarmaInferno

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1886
  • Armor Stacking Cheese Monkey
« Reply #57 on: <06-08-18/1506:42> »
Are we posting questjons here or on the stickied questions topic?

Stainless Steel Devil Rat

  • *
  • Errata Coordinator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 4514
« Reply #58 on: <06-09-18/1252:31> »
I hope it's not too late for another suggestion for the Combined FAQ.

I got to thinking at least one of the regulars at my SRM table is pretty well an evil "go die for me, spirit!" overlord to the things he makes his spirits do.  And that in of itself is fine.. if the game mechanics allow you to literally conjure up a resource-free NPC to go do any hazardous task you'd rather not, why not make use of them?

In a home game I can eventually have the spirit world start to decide this guy has too many "black marks" and have potentially have conjuring start to get a little more interesting.  Not so much in SRM.

Any way we could add for SRM a 4th tracked "social tally" akin to Street Cred, Public Awareness, and Notoriety that's applicible to interacting with denizens of the Astral?  (The kind of "Black Marks" discussed in SG on pg 186) so that one GM to the next has a bit of an idea about how big of a jerk a PC has been to his spirits in the past... so that "karma can indeed be a complete bitch" as warned by SG? :)
« Last Edit: <06-09-18/1255:13> by Stainless Steel Devil Rat »
RPG mechanics exist to give structure and consistency to the game world, true, but at the end of the day, you’re fighting dragons with algebra and random number generators.

Sphinx

  • *
  • Errata Team
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 861
« Reply #59 on: <06-09-18/1613:14> »
Any way we could add for SRM a 4th tracked "social tally" akin to Street Cred, Public Awareness, and Notoriety that's applicible to interacting with denizens of the Astral?  (The kind of "Black Marks" discussed in SG on pg 186) so that one GM to the next has a bit of an idea about how big of a jerk a PC has been to his spirits in the past... so that "karma can indeed be a complete bitch" as warned by SG? :)

This is exactly what Spirit Index does, isn't it? See Street Grimoire, p. 206.