The Gaming Den

FrankTrollman wrote:

virgil wrote:What's the main/biggest RPG that uses the resolution system where you roll multiple dice, but only keep the highest; against a difficulty that does the same thing (rather than a fixed TN)? It's not a proper dice pool, like Shadowrun, since you're not counting hits. It's not Deadlands or Savage Worlds, since that's a fixed TN.

5th Edition Dungeons and Dragons.

I'm fairly certain that 5E still has fixed DCs though - your attack roll is against an AC, not a dodge roll(s). I mean for the system to be where you generally don't have a TN or DC or whatever, but instead you describe the difficulty as "highest of 2d8."

How many decks is too many for a non-collectable party card game, of the Cards Against Humanity/Apples to Apples play style?

I found this thread awhile ago, and found it a pretty interesting read.

Has anybody actually tried to implement any of the ideas there? If so, how'd it go?

Bump, and more specific questions/information:

I need help/a refresher creating a Shadowrun 3rd ed character

Rules:
all 3rd ed rule books allowed
max availability of items is 8
No self-designed spells, vehicles
Beta-Cyberware, cultured Bioware available, but only legal ones for characters who had a SIN
Character Creation Priority system, double-selection possible (something like A,A,D,D, E or 123 Build points)
Weaponless Fighting: rules from ARsenal
No Deckers
Astral Projection is ok, Deckers, drone riggers specialised in electronic warfare are not.

The group currently uses the example characters, there are three other players, I know one of them is a shaman.

Since I'm a roleplay veteran and the other players aren't, I would prefer something that doesn't overshadow them - but pure support roles don't seem to exist in the system?

I thought about a High-Charisma elf aspect shaman focused on conjuring spirits of the man for Concealment and Confusion. Is that a viable tactic?

However, that would synergize with being the face -> lots of screen time -> overshadowing the other characters

I have a fondness for magic, but if other builds work better for my goals (support role, not too much screen time), I would take those, too.

The game takes place saturday afternoon, already giddy

Original Post:

Aharon wrote:Not exactly one annoying question, but I figured here's the best place to ask (didn't find anything useful on Dumpshock or Reddit):

What general principles should I keep in mind to get an optimal result in character creation in Shadowrun 3e?
Are there any trap options?
What are some strong choices, what are weaker choices for characters?

Anyone who is at this point playing "SR3," a game which was concluded 12 years ago, is so deeply into their own house rules at this point that I don't think anyone outside the group can give you meaningful advice.

Obviously your character is going to be more powerful if they use the SURGE rules, because the points costs for some of those advantages and disadvantages are amazingly high or low, and picking the right advantages or redundant disadvantages can leave you in the black. But if your prospective group straight up refuses to allow Riggers, then you're clearly operating on a level of self censorship that only makes sense to the group. And of course there are a lot of bullshit magical traditions that are explicitly more powerful than the normal ones in various supplements - but I would be very surprised if they let you be an Irish Path Mage.

I would suggest not being a spellcaster if you aren't familiar with SR3. There are spells that are Force Dependent and spells that are not, and you have to pick your spells at specific Forces, so it's really easy to end up making a fail character. But being a Shamanic or Voudoun Aspected Conjurer can have a lot to offer without having to learn that many new subsystems before chargen.

But basically your question amounts to "What number is this guy you've never met thinking of?" Because what you are literally asking is for us to tell you what the most powerful character that is allowed by the social contract of a bunch of grognards who play a heavily houseruled version of an old version of Shadowrun is. Without asking those people a whole lot of questions, we can't tell you.

-Username17

What kinds of things, features, &/or creatures will not show up with a casting of commune with nature? This isn't counting whatever magic may be in effect to mess with their results.

virgil wrote:What kinds of things, features, &/or creatures will not show up with a casting of commune with nature? This isn't counting whatever magic may be in effect to mess with their results.

No one ever casts Commune With Nature because it is one of the spells whose effects aren't well defined. You instantly know "something." But the quantity, quality, and even topic of that information aren't well defined. What is an unnatural creature? What is a woodland creature? What if you're in a fucking desert or on the high seas? What the actual fuck?

It's a legacy spell, and one which still reads like it's one of those Gygaxian railroad spells from AD&D because it basically is. And it's high enough in level that no one has ever bothered to fix or explain the fucking thing. You'd think that the 3.5 Revision would have been a great time to go over spells with poorly defined effects like Commune With Nature (to 3e's credit, this is a rather small and manageable list), but that is of course not what happened.

-Username17

Does Shadowrun have SABOT dart guns? They're usually called flechettes but Shadowrun uses that term for little metal flakes instead of high velocity single darts

OgreBattle wrote:Does Shadowrun have SABOT dart guns? They're usually called flechettes but Shadowrun uses that term for little metal flakes instead of high velocity single darts

Shadowrun calls sabot dart weapons "APDS" and called fragmentation rounds "Flechette." Don't worry about it. They are completely silent as to whether APDS rounds are fin stabilized or not, and that's probably for the best.

-Username17

If there are X encounters on a random encounter table, how many encounters will it be before repeat content shows up? The reverse is probably obvious if you know the first, but if not, I also need to know how big a random encounter table has to be in order to most likely avoid repeats for Y amount of encounters.

Somewhere from 2 to X obviously. Are you wanting when the probability hits 50%?

You could just use cards to generate opposition randomly and don't reuse cards. Then weight the deck if you actually want some to repeat.

The general chance of going with no repeats is:

(X-1) * (X-2) * (X-3) ... * (X-{Y-1}) / (X^{Y-1})

So for example, if you wanted the chance of no repeats with X = 100 and Y = 10 you'd do:

99*98*97*96*95*94*93*92*91/(100^9)

Which is a 63% chance of no repeats or a 37% chance of at least one repeat. For any set where Y > X you get a zero in the numerator and there is no chance of getting no repeats.

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote:The general chance of going with no repeats is:

(X-1) * (X-2) * (X-3) ... * (X-{Y-1}) / (X^{Y-1})

So for example, if you wanted the chance of no repeats with X = 100 and Y = 10 you'd do:

99*98*97*96*95*94*93*92*91/(100^9)

Which is a 63% chance of no repeats or a 37% chance of at least one repeat. For any set where Y > X you get a zero in the numerator and there is no chance of getting no repeats.

-Username17

However, this is only true if all the encounters are equally likely. If they are not, then things get more confusing.

virgil wrote:What's the main/biggest RPG that uses the resolution system where you roll multiple dice, but only keep the highest; against a difficulty that does the same thing (rather than a fixed TN)? It's not a proper dice pool, like Shadowrun, since you're not counting hits. It's not Deadlands or Savage Worlds, since that's a fixed TN.

Ironclaw 1e does exactly this except you count hits on damage rolls.

Does the spell nondetection work against see invisible?

virgil wrote:Does the spell nondetection work against see invisible?

Yes and No.

A straightfoward reading of the actual language would tell you yes, BUT, that same reading would also mean that Mindblank works to prevent someone with True Seeing from detecting you as well. So what some people try to do is say "See invis (or True Seeing) doesn't effect you, it effects the person it's cast on"

Which is a shitty RAW argument, because Contact Other Plane doesn't effect you either it gives someone else knowledge about you.

What should you do? Fuck if I know? I usually rule that Mindblank doesn't prevent True Seeing and See Invis, but that Non-Detection does, since that way someone can at least get a role.

Also I ban Superior Invisibility with it's arbitrary "this is immune to Invisibility Purge and Glitterdust and Faerie Fire" language.

vezidoroga wrote:

tussock wrote:Silent Image (and so on) is a Figment, so it only shows something that isn't there (and specifically not voids in place of things that are there)

That sounds right now that I think about it, because otherwise silent image is much stronger (and adding a fake visual impression is plausibly distinct from suppressing a real visual impression). Did you read the "no voids" somewhere specific? I'd be interested in the explanation.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview ... m#illusion

I assume the categories are exclusive except where stated otherwise, so Glamours make things look different or even disappear, and Figments do not, which is consistent with the statement in Figments that "Figments cannot make something seem to be something else."

So Silent Image creates an "object, creature, or force", and so do all the spells that reference it.

And what does that mean if the thing you're trying to hide something the audience can't see anyway? In the light example, your rogue puts out a lamp in a hallway, and you project the illusion of a dimly-lit, empty hallway.

That's not a thing. You can't Figment a hole because a hole is a word meaning a space where there isn't a floor and you can't disappear the floor with a figment, and a hall is a word meaning a narrow space surrounded by walls, and you can't disappear stuff in the real hall with a figment of it not being there, because that's not a Figment, it's a Glamour.

You can figment up a wall in front of your Rogue. You can figment up a cloud in front of your Rogue. You can figment up a curtain in front of your Rogue. That might be a black curtain in a dark hallway so they can't see it, but you can't Figment a void in place of your Rogue, because that would be a Glamour cast on the Rogue.

The guards can't actually see the rogue with or without the image, nor would they be able to see the dark hall. Is that not allowed because you're showing a "void" in place of what's actually there (the rogue), or because you're showing a "void" in place of the darkness (which is a void, but probably not the kind the rules mean)?

A figment of nothing is not an object, creature, or force, it doesn't look like or feel like anything and people can't see it or feel it, instead seeing whatever is really there, even if that's darkness they can't see into.

If you want to create actual Light or Darkness, those are evocation spells.

In Palladium games, what are relative must-have abilities? Auto-dodge comes first to mind, as well as access to techno-wizardry via magic and/or psionics, immunity to magic(e.g. the splugorth bird people slave races), psionics, or forms of damage (like a vampire in a Glitterboy), and maximizing number of attacks/round.

The answer is a very solid "lol I dunno". There are no real benchmarks, and in some games just being an MDC creature will be completely broken, and in other ones that is as obvious as "having arms" (more obvious really, there are playable telekinetic snakes that have MDC but no limbs).

Auto-Dodge sounds handy, but apparently it doesn't use your Dodge Bonus, it uses your Auto-Dodge Bonus. Which is basically nothing. You may as well use your Parry - if you have something that lets you parry mega-damage bullets and beams, then even at the -10 it's probably better than the Auto-Dodge Bonus.

If it's a game that uses MDC, I generally suggest "never leave home without it". If the MC says "We're doing a low-combat RIFTS (TM) game, you don't need MDC", just declare "Bullshit" and walk away before he simply kills the entire party in one go, masturbating all the while.

Blanket immunities are handy. To be honest, "energy attacks" covers a big chunk of things, so that's worth the immunity. Immunity to "all spells ever" or "all of the psionics" are handy, but I can't say for certain that such a thing will actually come up more than "being shot by fire/lightning/plasma/lasers/mystic blasts".

You want to be magic, psionic or similar, because yes, access to TW items is just really good. There are all sorts of weird things that will help you out.

If you can get an extra attack per round, you fucking do it. No, eleven attacks per round at first level is not excessive, what gave you that idea?

Save-or-Lose abilities are just as good as ever, even with the shitty old AD&D rules for saving throws, so get a bunch of them. Bio-Manipulation, Toxic Breath Weapons, Body Tackle, Stun Bolt spells... Hell, convince the party to wear gas masks then throw tear gas canisters everywhere.

But it's basically a big game of Calvinball so there's no concrete answer to what you should always try to have or even realistically expect to be allowed to have.

Nebuchadnezzar wrote:In Palladium games, what are relative must-have abilities? Auto-dodge comes first to mind, as well as access to techno-wizardry via magic and/or psionics, immunity to magic(e.g. the splugorth bird people slave races), psionics, or forms of damage (like a vampire in a Glitterboy), and maximizing number of attacks/round.

Extra melee attack actions and a gun that does a lot of damage.

Auto dodge is less important than stacking fat piles of MDC.

Shadowrun's playerbase has this massive assumption that SR is the definition of cyberpunk.

Are there rules in any of the editions of Shadowrun that are not the antithesis of cyberpunk that is the consumerist masturbation over corporate products that seems to fill every SR book; and are closer to the actual ("the street finds its own uses") definition of cyberpunk, that this is an example of?

Australian Bush Mechanics

=========

OgreBattle wrote: Auto dodge is less important than stacking fat piles of MDC.

Slightly edging out fat piles of MDC is being able to manage fast MDC regeneration. A character with 200-ish MDC & fast regen is going to be overall tougher than one with 600-800+ MDC. The first might regen in 20 minutes; the other is going to take days or weeks to fully recover/heal; if not need to be repaired/refitted.

Which is a big part of why dragons are so tough to kill in Rifts. It's not just that they have MDC; it's that they can keep bringing their full MDC to a series of ongoing combats, running away when they get badly damaged; and be more than capable of grinding down even a column of MDC military vehicles.

The Triax & NGR book introduced Uranium rounds (no, not depleted uranium rounds, maximum radioactive Uranium) to deal with this. Unless you're working for the NGR army, on a special mission to fight dragons; you're not likely to ever see it though.

JE wrote:Shadowrun's playerbase has this massive assumption that SR is the definition of cyberpunk.

Are there rules in any of the editions of Shadowrun that are not the antithesis of cyberpunk that is the consumerist masturbation over corporate products that seems to fill every SR book; and are closer to the actual ("the street finds its own uses") definition of cyberpunk, that this is an example of?

Every so often you say something so crazy that I wonder whether I should be buying drugs from you. Masturbation over consumer goods is very much not the antithesis of Cyberpunk. A lot of Cyberpunk has heavy themes of consumerism run amok.

-Username17

While it'd be cool if it was easier for your hipster runner to only use guns from indie labels I would say that for the most part I agree with Frank here. Overall consumerism is portrayed in a negative light by cyberpunk but that doesn't mean that all or even most of the characters involved are in on the joke. Shadowrunners are oftentimes bad people so it's not really a huge thematic point in consumerism's favor when PCs shoot up security guards with blinged out custom assault rifles.