Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask a simple question, Awakened edition

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OK it seems that Dave has implied it's Resistant Damage. So thank for the help.

    Comment


    • It wasn't implied, it was actually quite explicit.

      "The lethal damage from Scouring is resistant. You can't heal it with Knit. "

      Comment


      • My book isn't with me. Prime Mage Armour protects against purely supernatural attacks, that I recall, without a physical component (a blast of ethereal fire yes, werewolf claws no). Does that include purely supernatural supernal attacks? Would Prime Mage Armour apply against the practice of fraying for example? Unmaking?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Solar View Post
          My book isn't with me. Prime Mage Armour protects against purely supernatural attacks, that I recall, without a physical component (a blast of ethereal fire yes, werewolf claws no). Does that include purely supernatural supernal attacks? Would Prime Mage Armour apply against the practice of fraying for example? Unmaking?
          That's specifically what it's for, yes. It would probably provide less protection against Unmaking though since those frequently bypass Health and Armor, and deal with Withstand or CoW, success equals death.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post

            That's specifically what it's for, yes. It would probably provide less protection against Unmaking though since those frequently bypass Health and Armor, and deal with Withstand or CoW, success equals death.
            Cool, as I thought. Much appreciated. Do you think Prime 5 could provide more effective protection against making and unmaking? Increase withstand against such practices maybe? Like a kind of extended duration unmake spell, er, spell.

            Comment


            • Prime Armor would protect against all damage spells regardless of Practice. A damaging Weaving or Perfecting spell would be countered just as much as a Fraying spell just as long as the spell deals damage. It would not protect against Unmaking because Unmaking doesn't deal damage. It succeeds or it does not succeed at unmaking something.

              Edit: Bluuuh. I tend to open up several tabs and read them in order. That's why I miss replies.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Solar View Post
                Cool, as I thought. Much appreciated. Do you think Prime 5 could provide more effective protection against making and unmaking? Increase withstand against such practices maybe? Like a kind of extended duration unmake spell, er, spell.
                Wards and Signs already increases Withstand, it's Shielding.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 21C Hermit View Post
                  Theoretically yes, but I'd be very interested in how the spirit or Goetia got that Influence in the first place.

                  And by interested I mean, "How the hell are you justifying it within the narrative?!"
                  An Adept Re-Weaving an existing Spirit, or a Master Making one whole cloth?


                  “Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever.” ~ Aristophanes
                  "Virescit Vulnere Virtus" ~ Stewart Clan Motto

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Pale_Crusader View Post

                    An Adept Re-Weaving an existing Spirit, or a Master Making one whole cloth?
                    Now that you mention it, Spirit mages can already cast Shape Spirit (Spirit 4).

                    This is why the Uratha get antsy when they hear about Spirit mages. Even when you think you know all about them, they still manage to catch you off guard, and the next second they're wrecking the Shadow!

                    Comment


                    • It's weird to think about a mage being able to create a being with intrinsic powers that the mage could not grant to himself.

                      Comment


                      • Combined Spell question:
                        Devouring The Slain SET TO HEALTH SCOURING plus Rotting Flesh equals no no?
                        Devouring The Slain SET TO WILLPOWER DRAIN plus Rotting Flesh equals yes yes?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by WHW View Post
                          Combined Spell question:
                          Devouring The Slain SET TO HEALTH SCOURING plus Rotting Flesh equals no no?
                          Devouring The Slain SET TO WILLPOWER DRAIN plus Rotting Flesh equals yes yes?
                          Kind of?

                          My rationale:
                          No matter the fluff saying how the damage is done, Devouring The Slain does deal damage directly, which doesn't combine-stack with other damage. Apply highest damage and resolve the rest of the effects normally. It's ... not a no no, in that you can cast it, it's just not useful for damage, but you do get the mana and deal damage and, if Reach used for Rotting Flesh, apply penalty to Social rolls equal to Potency for the Duration of the combined spell (which, I don't know, a round? a scene if you're into overReaching? seems like a Potency-heavy combo)

                          The Willpower version has no overlap, rott'n'drain away

                          Comment


                          • That's my train of logic, yeah.

                            Another Shifting Sands question:

                            I cast a spell preventing someone from dying [let's say from bleeding, it's not that important]. That spell is only thing keeping them alive. Or they are one turn away from bleeding out.
                            I cast Shifting Sands on them, sending them back X time. My spell gets canceled due to Shifting Sands rules. Or they bleed out in the past, doesn't matter. What's important, they die in the past.
                            ...what's now?

                            EDIT
                            And a variant:
                            I cast Shifting Sands combined with Weight of Years. It's damaging enough to kill the subject, and it has enough Reach to send it, dunno, few hours back in time. Do I kill them in the past?
                            Last edited by WHW; 03-21-2017, 09:29 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Actually, it someone inhabits their past self, you could just target theur corpse after its died and send it back in time. It now occupies the same space as the alive person.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by WHW View Post
                                That's my train of logic, yeah.

                                Another Shifting Sands question:

                                I cast a spell preventing someone from dying [let's say from bleeding, it's not that important]. That spell is only thing keeping them alive. Or they are one turn away from bleeding out.
                                I cast Shifting Sands on them, sending them back X time. My spell gets canceled due to Shifting Sands rules. Or they bleed out in the past, doesn't matter. What's important, they die in the past.
                                ...what's now?

                                EDIT
                                And a variant:
                                I cast Shifting Sands combined with Weight of Years. It's damaging enough to kill the subject, and it has enough Reach to send it, dunno, few hours back in time. Do I kill them in the past?
                                If they die in the past they stay dead and the timeline accepts it as a Lasting change when the corpse catches up to the present. So the same as if you sent yourself back and died.

                                Not sure about Weight of Years, the principle of a spell not being able to exist before it existed might still apply. I think I'd prefer to rule it that way.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X