|
Rockopolis posted:...Heal, for irony! ... Now wait a minute, this doesn't seem like that bad of an idea. A player can't use a medkit after receiving magical healing, or any further magical healing, so go ahead and throw a Dagger with Level 1 Heal at him, and confine him to bedrest for a week.
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
Okay, for Enchanting...do I use Force one spells and a bunch of Reagents to make for big zaps with little drain?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Okay, for Enchanting...do I use Force one spells and a bunch of Reagents to make for big zaps with little drain? The force of the spell acts as a hard limit on the power, soooo... I really wouldn't. Just choose low drain spells with a range of touch to ameliorate the inherent limitations of enchanting spells on stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 02:24
|
|
|
Yeah, but it also says that using Reagents changes the limit to the number of drams used?  Also, is anyone else irritated by how the PDF zoom is messed up because they decided it was necessary to put the old covers side by side at the end of the PDF? EDIT EDIT: Aspected Magicians do not start out with any spells, right? Rockopolis fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Sep 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:For normal spells, 'touch' explicitly works through clothing and heavy armor. Applying that rule to touch triggers would make them exclusively for making traps. That's probably the best way to eliminate magic bullets with minimal collateral damage, although it also takes out magic arrows and throwing daggers. To follow this with some long-term, multi-edition fluff perspective, 'touch' spells are actually touching the person's aura, not the person. The same goes for targeting mana spells at living beings, generally. That's why if you're a brain in a jar built into a giant cyberbody, touch and mana spells don't work on you. Now, this is only for full on Krang action. If you've got main book cyberstuff, your cyberskull is still filled with meat, and so is your cybertorso, which is enough to cause you to have an aura of non-negligible quantity, even if it is hosed up and grayed out. Similarly, that's why your clothes go invisible when you go invisible via a spell. Your aura is projecting out beyond your skin and the spell is covering anything within it by affecting your aura.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:EDIT EDIT: Aspected Magicians do not start out with any spells, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
Maaaaan, I've been getting a crapton of ideas for characters lately. I had one at work for a sammy named Foulmart that has a penchant for chemical warfare, but I had a few questions before I continued with the idea. Can I put spurs in cyberlegs? Speaking of which, can Unarmed Combat in general be used for kicks, or is it all about punching? Can I mount dart guns in cyberlimbs? I kinda like the concept of a guy with a Super Squirt full of Pepper Punch, Seven-7 grenades out of one arm, Narcoject darts out the other, and  feet blades. Also, has anyone taken a look at seeing how well Arsenal translates into SR5, or should I wait for the next gun supplement to start using Warp and Atropine or giving my gunslinger adept a Cavalier Deputy for his gel round option?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 04:37
|
|
|
Nyaa posted:They do if you are capable of the skill like taking sorcery aspect. Pg 69 Those aren't free spells, that's just the maximum number of spells/formula/etc. you're limited to at character generation. A full Magician with Magic A, for example, doesn't start with 22 spells (10 from his karma, 12 from Magic 6 * 2).
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
Cabbit posted:Those aren't free spells, that's just the maximum number of spells/formula/etc. you're limited to at character generation. A full Magician with Magic A, for example, doesn't start with 22 spells (10 from his karma, 12 from Magic 6 * 2). 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
Doc Dee posted:Maaaaan, I've been getting a crapton of ideas for characters lately. I had one at work for a sammy named Foulmart that has a penchant for chemical warfare, but I had a few questions before I continued with the idea. Until they do the martial arts rules in the new Arsenal/Cannon Companion book, unarmed is generalized and would include punches, kicks, headbutts, ets. As such, you can load up your legs with blades and get the same effect. Later on those extra rules do hit, you'll probably get kick as a maneuver that does something like +damage, -defense until next action. Of course, that poo poo's optional anyway, so your GM will probably let you regular unarmed attack cyberkick people to your heart's content even then. MilkmanLuke fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Sep 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
I'm building a rigger for a game, and sensors are becoming a point of confusion: sensors/sensor arrays are rating from 2 to 7. The book says vehicles come with a stock sensor array. The stock sensor rating on my GMC Bulldog is.. rating 1. Was this supposed to say that most vehicles come with a stock sensor housing? Because that would make more sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
Tried to make a cat burglar, would love some feedback. (The gear is kind of long, but it's because I spent a lot of money on BnE gear and I wouldn't mind some feedback on that, too.)pre:CHARACTER Name. Spades Metatype. Human [D] Nuyen. 327 + 3d6x60 Karma. 3 Noteriety. 3 ATTRIBUTES [A] Body 4 Agility 6 (8) Reaction 5 (6) Strength 3 (5) Willpower 2 Logic 4 Intuition 3 Charisma 5 Edge 5 Magic/Res - Essence 2.33 QUALITIES (25 - 31 + 17 => 11) Photographic Memory (6) Catlike (7) Natural Athelete (7) Quick Healer (3) Blandness (8) Allergy (-10) Bad Rep (-7) SKILLS [C] Automatics 1 Demolitions 4 Electronic Warfare 3 Escape Artist 3 Free-fall 2 Gymnastics 2 Industrial Mechanic 1 (spent Karma) Intimidation 1 Locksmith 4 Palming 1 Perception 2 Running 1 (spent Karma) Sneaking 4 SKILL GROUPS Influence 1 Electronics 1 KNOWLEDGE/LANGUAGE Infiltration Techniques (Prof.) 3 Artwork (Academic) 2 Jewelry (Prof.) 3 Corporate Sec. Systems (Prof.) 4 Building Layouts (Prof.) 2 English N GEAR SIN (4) + Licenses x 13 (3 each) Cybereyes 2 Alpha Image Link, Camera Flare Compensation Thermo Vision Smartlink Cyberears 3 Alpha Balance Augmenter Damper Select Sound Filter 1 Datajack Alpha Muscle Replacement 2 Alpha Synaptic Boosters 1 Transys Avalon Commlink Voice Modulator 2 Used Streetline Special Ingram Smartgun X 5 Spare Clips Smargun Firing Platform Chameleon suit Thermal Damping 2 Nonconductivity 2 Chemical Protection 2 Explosives + Det. Caps 4 x Glue Solvent, 4 x Glue Sprayer, 2 x Climbing Gear, Gecko tape gloves, 2 x Rappelling gloves Gas Mask, Survival Kit, 2 x Magnesium Torch, 3 x Flashlight, Biometric Reader, 2 x Bug Scanner Data Tap , Jammers, Tag Erasers, etc. Autopicker , Lockpick Set, Maglock Passkey, Sequencer, etc. Grapple Gun QuantumNinja fucked around with this message at 10:27 on Sep 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
MilkmanLuke posted:Until they do the martial arts rules in the new Arsenal/Cannon Companion book, unarmed is generalized and would include punches, kicks, headbutts, ets. As such, you can load up your legs with blades and get the same effect. Later on those extra rules do hit, you'll probably get kick as a maneuver that does something like +damage, -defense until next action. Just to double-clarify something, the section on implant blades in SR5 makes it sound like they're arm only, but this basically goes against the precedent set in earlier editions where you could put spurs pretty much anywhere vaguely sensible (forearm, elbow, leg, stuff like that, no head-spurs though) and since, as he says, Unarmed Combat is utterly abstracted and generalized like the rest of Shadowrun's combat it doesn't matter where you put them, they all work off the same skill. So tl;dr yes spurs can go in legs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:The equipment to modify a vehicle to have a weapon mount is always F and standard weapon mounts are not at all subtle or concealable. So putting a weapon mount on the motorcycle you ride around town is not at all okay, but a bunch of gangers could travel with their machine gun-equipped motorcycles in a semi or big van and roll out down the ramp. That's cool and we should do nothing to discourage it. I have to dispute this. There is nothing in the rule book saying that a weapon mount cannot be hidden, and there is a short story that explicitly demonstrates a rigger using hidden mounted weapons (unless the author had a tow truck driver taking her work vehicle all over town with illegal weapons on it). I can see making players pay to have the weapons be concealed or be better concealed, but saying that something the size of a submachine gun can't be hidden or easily concealed inside of a vehicle is just a bit extreme.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 07:21
|
|
|
We're 26 pages in to a new RPG thread, and already we've managed to clearly forget this is precisely why we have a GM - To enforce common sense over slavish adherance to the rulebook. You ask your GM to do something not explicitly in or vaguely against the rules, you come up with a justifiable explanation, he says yes or no, gives you the extra cost/effort you need to go to, and you just play the game. Why is this even difficult? (This is also why you shouldn't be putting Heal 1 onto thrown Daggers, or put 25 sheets of paper to stop sniper rifle rounds; Because yes, the RAW might let it work, but it makes no sense and breaks suspension of disbelief through absurdity.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 09:32
|
|
|
Shockeh posted:We're 26 pages in to a new RPG thread, and already we've managed to clearly forget this is precisely why we have a GM - To enforce common sense over slavish adherance to the rulebook. Oh okay, see I thought why we had a GM was so someone could, y'know, make NPCs and adventures and run the game for people rather than having to play Common Sense Interpreter because the designers couldn't be arsed to ask themselves "hey, is this stupid or not?" when they were making the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 10:19
|
|
|
So the Decker/Matrix book is next to be released, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Oh okay, see I thought why we had a GM was so someone could, y'know, make NPCs and adventures and run the game for people rather than having to play Common Sense Interpreter because the designers couldn't be arsed to ask themselves "hey, is this stupid or not?" when they were making the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 11:12
|
|
|
Shockeh posted:I'm happy to be called out if you can find a single RPG without at least some level of abusive 'If I put x and y obscure mechanics together, this breaks the game' habits in it. I mean, that's so endemic to not just RPG's, but trying to make a pen and paper ruleset that covers every possible action a person might want to do. Expecting rules to be watertight for every eventuality with such a broad target is impossible, and I think you'd be crazy to NOT expect some level of interpretation required by the GM. Or the book is terribly edited, contradictory, and missing stuff that should be there? I'm not requiring watertight, but it's hard to ignore this big gaping hole in the floor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 11:25
|
|
|
QuantumNinja posted:Tried to make a cat burglar, would love some feedback. (The gear is kind of long, but it's because I spent a lot of money on BnE gear and I wouldn't mind some feedback on that, too.) It looks fine, but you'll want Hardware as a skill as well. paragon1 posted:So the Decker/Matrix book is next to be released, right? Sorry, the next books to be released are the guns/combat book and the Runner's Companion since both will largely be copy/paste jobs. The Matrix book will be released next year, maybe, along with the ware and magic books, and the rigger book will be released sometime between next year and never.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 11:33
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:I have to dispute this. There is nothing in the rule book saying that a weapon mount cannot be hidden [...]  That's what a standard weapon mount looks like. You're not going to conceal that short of putting a canoe over the top of your van and telling people you're on a vacation. Sure, Hidden mounts have existed in every previous edition and I'm sure they'll be brought back with the 5E Arsenal, but until then you can't assume they'll exist or be allowed into any given game. For example, they will definitely not be allowed into a Missions campaign. As a point of reference, in 4E a vehicle could have 4 "slots" worth of upgrades or their body, whichever was higher. A motorcycle had about body 6, a small car 8, an SUV 13, and a FedEx-style delivery truck 17. A standard weapon mount was 1 slot and 1.5k while a heavy turret was 2 and 4k. In either case, it could only shoot straight forward unless you spent another slot to be as good as a standard SR5 weapon mount. A concealed pop-out turret was +3 slots and +4k. Concealed weapon mounts that could be remotely controlled or could be aimed were out of the availability range of starting characters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 11:45
|
|
|
Shockeh posted:I'm happy to be called out if you can find a single RPG without at least some level of abusive 'If I put x and y obscure mechanics together, this breaks the game' habits in it. I mean, that's so endemic to not just RPG's, but trying to make a pen and paper ruleset that covers every possible action a person might want to do. Expecting rules to be watertight for every eventuality with such a broad target is impossible, and I think you'd be crazy to NOT expect some level of interpretation required by the GM. You came into the thread to chide everyone for "forgetting precisely why we have a GM" which is apparently to apply "common sense" to a game of cyberelfs and guntrolls. Setting aside for a moment the typical gamer kneejerk response of absolving game designers of all responsibility by blaming the GM/players/anyone but the designers for a game's shortcomings, "common sense" is a ridiculously vague and meaningless thing to try and apply to a game like Shadowrun in the first place. Common sense by whose standards exactly? Remember, this is a game where wearing an armored vest that only covers your chest protects you better than a full suit of armored clothing that covers your entire body, and only happens to be 25 dollars more expensive. My version of common sense says that that's some dumb bullshit but apparently that's the game working as intended, so what do I know about common sense? You think sticking a heal spell on a throwing knife is dumb and should be "common sensed" out but how do you know the game designers didn't actually mean for that to be a thing? "But it's stupid!" So are orks with cyberware and Native American shamans breaking into Aztec Haliburton to steal energy drink formulas for a dragon. You don't know what the game designers intended to be possible or not...except through the rules of the game. And since most game designers don't devote any wordcount to explaining their intentions and/or why they designed rules the way they did (a notable exception to this being Reign by Greg Stolze), the only thing anyone has to go on is the game itself, and when you're dealing with an incredibly abstracted game full of rules that have a tendency of falling apart under the slightest scrutiny even when they are working as intended, then the onus isn't on GMs to try and divine the designers' intentions and separate what they truly meant from what they wrote, it's on the designers to make a game that means what it says and says what it means without having to resort to dumb platitudes about "oh, well a good GM would"
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 11:52
|
|
|
Well, no, I came into the thread to read about SR5 before considering picking it up, I chided (and without malice, I've not a clue where the reaction came from) the crazy interpretations of those specific posters.  I'm not absolving them of anything, I'd love rulesets to be better designed, and in the same vein, setting aside that having a debate on 'what common sense is' is probably entirely futile, it doesn't matter what the game designer intended, because if I'm running a game for my group, the very basis of the GM is the players have to trust them to some extent; He's not against them, he's there to provide an entertaining, believable world that's at least internally consistent. I really have no interest in sitting and divining what the designer meant - I'm going to do what 'feels' right in my eyes, and gets on with having an enjoyable game.To use both a 'positive' and 'negative' example from this thread: If a player has a vehicle and wants to have a hidden weapon mount, I don't give a monkeys what the rulebook says, I'm going to look at the weapon he wants to hide, the vehicle he wants to hide it in and make what is hopefully a reasonable call on it. Likewise, if he tries to build a reinforced bunker out of a ream of paper 'Because it's a series of minor barriers', I'm going to warn him in advance that that won't do jack poo poo when the rounds start flying. It's perfectly fine (and indeed, sometimes encouragable!) for a game to have absurdity, or weirdness; But in the Shadowrun universe, a Heal Spell dagger being more dangerous overall is inconsistent with my personal view of the game world, whereas taking jobs to steal energy drink formulas for dragons isn't, and that's why I wouldn't allow it. If you want to, fair enough, but my original point was to expect the rulebook to handle every possible interpretation is unrealistic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 12:17
|
|
|
We discuss the rules as written in this thread, but that doesn't mean you have to follow them to the letter in your own games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 12:26
|
|
|
Shockeh posted:If you want to, fair enough, but my original point was to expect the rulebook to handle every possible interpretation is unrealistic. A lot of the things people keep bringing up aren't some incredible mind-bending "only a truly insane person could ever possibly conceive of these" scenarios though. "What happens if you put a healing spell on a weapon and hit someone with it?" is poo poo I've been seeing people try for nearly two decades now. Stuff like the cover/barrier rules, the grenade rules, Jesus the driving rules, there's all this stuff in SR5 that's hardly so incredibly outlandish that it's unrealistic to expect the designers to have encountered it at some point during the development process that still nonetheless remains a hot mess. At the same time, it's virtually impossible to distinguish "this nonsensical thing that isn't working as intended" from "this nonsensical thing that is working as intended." Like, Gobbeldygook has a point, but it's the sort of point that only someone who's familiar with previous editions of Shadowrun is really going to be familiar with without an explanation; Shadowrun does traditionally handle weapon mounts on vehicles as by default being blatantly obvious unless you specifically buy a concealable weapon mount of some sort. Does the book bother to explain this poo poo? Of course it doesn't. Is it common sensical? By Shadowrun standards of common sense the answer is "yes," your mileage may vary. But "I'd like to put a concealed weapon in my vehicle" is like Roleplaying Games 101 over here, so you'd imagine at some point somebody...a designer, a playtester, some random dude who's friends with someone who's cousins with one of the designers' nephews...would have been like "hey, I want to put a concealed machinegun in my car, that's cool right?" and this would have filtered its way into the game rather than being consigned to the vague realm of "welp, can't handle every eventuality I guess."
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 12:34
|
|
|
I think in the long run we're agreeing more than disagreeing.  As sad as it sounds, I don't think in all the years I've played SR, I've ever, ever used the driving rules as written. They're always this weird eclectic mix of super low level, detail rules for specific eventualities or activities, then suddenly back 'up' into abstracted, it's just bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 12:41
|
|
|
Shockeh posted:I think in the long run we're agreeing more than disagreeing. Yeah okay, fair enough. I don't disagree that there's always a place at the table for a GM to bring what they feel are "sensible" interpretations into a game if it's better for them and their players but with stuff like Shadowrun it's pretty much impossible to know whether something is meant to work a certain way or not. Like Shadowrun 4E had trolls with bows shooting through armored vans, was that intentional or people playing dumb tricks with the rules? Now we've got hand grenades that are capable of instantly killing even people wearing heavy-ish armor and the heal-knife, is that intentional or a cause for "common sense?" I would have suspected that the way cyberlimbs work would have been hit with the common sense stick but nope, they're the same as in 4E albeit more expensive. So who knows, maybe somebody at Catalyst thinks the healing-spell-on-a-throwing-knife trick is totally awesome and that's gonna be a thing now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 12:53
|
|
|
The healing dagger is silly, but I like the general idea of special attacks that are harder to heal from. -Nanotech or poison ammunition/melee coating/gas that prevent first aid and/or apply penalties to healing checks. -Bullets/weapons with a special coating (call it a FAB derivative or modern alchemy) that don't allow or severely interfere with magical healing on the wounds. Maybe also available as a gas. -Direct damage or health spells that prevent magical healing. Those all sound plausible to me. I can think of few situations when PCs would go for them, but they'd be a great tool for messing with PCs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
Hey, they did the paper armor on Burn Notice, stuffed phonebooks into a car body for makeshift armor. I don't know if Mythbusters tested it, though. I like the Heal Knife, actually, it's clever. I was originally thinking of a healing shiv or Woundhealer, but this actually makes sense; you only get the one Heal, and if someone fraks it up, accidentally or otherwise, that's it for assisted healing. Think I'm going to have a Knife Enchanter up later today, hope I'm done in time to submit for that game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 14:12
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Hey, they did the paper armor on Burn Notice, stuffed phonebooks into a car body for makeshift armor. I don't know if Mythbusters tested it, though. They did test it on Mythbusters, it worked... okay. Also the knife with the Heal spell on it is kind of ridiculous, but then again, Shadowrun has always worked in the kind of the ridiculous area.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 14:38
|
|
|
Heal knife and sheaf paper armor both fall under my "No that sounds dumb" rule. I mean, I don't even care about realism arguements and such. It sounds dumb. That's the end of that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 14:39
|
|
|
The stacks of paper stopping a sniper bullet is a bad analogy, but it should work for increased rows of brick, concrete, wood, etc. so you can't snipe through an underground bunker just because it is technically only one barrier. Knife with heal spell sounds stupid to me but by the rules it works. I don't know why you wouldn't just kill the guy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 14:49
|
|
|
Because not everyone is an Aztechnology Blood Mage deriving power and enjoyment from slaughter? It's a good way to weaken opposing forces for a long time without actually murdering people. Speaking of crazy evil spellslingers, Novacoke boosts your Charisma, which helps Shamans resist drain. Therefore, Snowflame the Toxic Shaman of Cocaine!
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Because not everyone is an Aztechnology Blood Mage deriving power and enjoyment from slaughter? If this character's appearance isn't a picture of Doctor Rockso, the Rock and Roll Clown, I don't want to know you. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
Deviant posted:If this character's appearance isn't a picture of Doctor Rockso, the Rock and Roll Clown, I don't want to know you. You know, I had forgotten about him, but he's almost a bit much, even for maximum pink mohawk. "He used to be a small time dealer, but he Awakened after snorting an entire dram of Novacoke. Now, he is a missionary spreading the glory of his mistress Cocaine, and a crusader against the foul heresy of BTLs"? I could see him getting a big (cocaine) Aspected Domain as he got more and more people hooked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 16:25
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Because not everyone is an Aztechnology Blood Mage deriving power and enjoyment from slaughter? But this doesn't weaken someone. If anything, it's the tool of someone who is trying to slowly draw out as much blood as they can. I mean it's a knife that then heals a small amount, preventing them to heal more later. When would this actually be useful? What situations are you going to be in where you want to a) injure someone, b) not kill them, and c) make them suffer long term?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:What situations are you going to be in where you want to c) make them suffer long term? I don't know what SR game YOU'RE playing in, but this is incredibly useful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
Bigass Moth posted:The stacks of paper stopping a sniper bullet is a bad analogy, but it should work for increased rows of brick, concrete, wood, etc. so you can't snipe through an underground bunker just because it is technically only one barrier. For the record, when I discovered the crazy barrier thing, I did not mean for anyone to actually use it/apply it that way in game. It was just a way of pointing out that the barrier rules were quite amusing. If you want more sensible barrier rules, the main thing is for a thicker barrier or multiple barriers to count as a better barrier rather than separate barriers. You could also have the armor of barriers just scale linearly in proportion to the thickness, which would eliminate shooting inside bunkers, because no one's bunker is going to be just 10cm of "hardened" material. Edit: Pointing out where the rules go haywire and suggest ridiculous things is nothing more than alerting players and GMs so they'll be aware that house rules or a judgement call must be necessary when such things come up. To my knowledge, nobody is actually suggesting that we should follow the rules that cause flashbangs to instantly kill entire rooms or the one that causes a series of windows to stop a bullet that would get inside a concrete bunker. If people are not aware of such rules oddities until they come up in the game, it can result in a lot of boring arguments and bullshit. (This isn't only directed at you, btw, more at the other guy who was surprised when he came into the thread.) MiltonSlavemasta fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Sep 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
Halfway through chargen. Quick question, any opinions on having a rope dart weapon focus? (Or flying claws or flying guillotine) Too cheesy? Reaches too far away from user's aura even though you're hanging on to the rope? And can you enchant a Focus?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
Bleh, no way can I pick out gear on a phone, but here's what I have so far. How bad is it? Might switch Skills for Nuyen? I might buy a focus to bind later when I get karma. "Knives" Lau Elf A Attributes B Aspected Mage C Elf (3) D Skills E Nuyen BOD 4 AGI 7 REA 4 STR 4 WIL 5 LOG 5 INT 3 CHA 3 EDG 3 MAG 5 Ambidextrous Catlike Mentor Spirit (Firebringer) Bad Rep (Something appropriate for a pirate nicknamed [i]Knives[/i ] Distinctive Style (pirate, Chinese coin jewelry) Incompetent (firearms) Spirit Bane (water) Enchanting Skill Group 4 Throwing (knives) 6(8) Sneaking 5 Gymnastics 5 Running 2 Palming 1 Lockpick 1 First Aid 1 Knowledge Skills 26000 Nuyen 16 Karma
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2013 22:42
|
|