Jump to content
ThatGuy

Shadowskin and Spellcasting

Recommended Posts

With my understanding Shadowskin protects after Magical Armor/Physical Armor, so that the first few hits flay off any armor, then you get to call No Effect.

 

Spellcasting is stopped and you must restart the incant if you get hit and take damage, even if that damage is to your physical or magical armor. Only the No Effect call stops this.

 

So, is my understanding correct that someone wearing armor casts Shadowskin, and then while in a fight tries to cast Silvershine and gets hit, the armor takes the blow the spell is stopped, even though the person under it can call No Effect to the damage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With my understanding Shadowskin protects after Magical Armor/Physical Armor, so that the first few hits flay off any armor, then you get to call No Effect.

 

Spellcasting is stopped and you must restart the incant if you get hit and take damage, even if that damage is to your physical or magical armor. Only the No Effect call stops this.

 

So, is my understanding correct that someone wearing armor casts Shadowskin, and then while in a fight tries to cast Silvershine and gets hit, the armor takes the blow the spell is stopped, even though the person under it can call No Effect to the damage?

 

Shadowskin gives you DR: Silver which means that only silver and Elven Steel damage type can hurt you, including armor and magic armor. With DR you call "no effect" on any damaging hit against you that does not qualify, and none of your layers of defense take damage. This means that spellcasting is not disrupted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowskin adds a DR.

 

Magic Armor and Physical Armor are affected normally. DR falls between Physical Armor and Body in the dange order.

 

One hand aint talking to the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Experience tells me Bob's definition is how it's always been played, but if the eratta changed this I don't remember it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh. It's also why you get differing accounts from GMs on how Magic Armor works on things like Kazvaks (Some say it becomes Monstrous, some say it does not. I've heard both over the years) or that we've removed the ability of Monstrous creatures to break free of bonds, but it's in the Rulebook.

 

Abomination

Level: 5

Type: Necromancy

Duration: ten minutes

Range: touch

Dispel: yes

This spell causes the recipient to become resistant to damage as they take on some undead traits. The target gains the Monstrous type...

 

....Monstrous creatures possess super strength. Normal and magical restraints often prove too weak to restrain a monstrous creature. A monstrous creature with super strength can rip free of ropes or chains by taking two points of body damage. A monstrous creature with super strength can rip free of a Pin spell (or similar effect) by taking five points of damage.

 

Experience tells me Bob's definition is how it's always been played, but if the eratta changed this I don't remember it.

 

 

And, Drew, seeing as Bob wrote/posted the Errata if he's wrong...

 

I'm not trying to be an ass here, just getting a few things right in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

General rule of thumb in my short experience in game (as I've been told) is that simplicity trumps complexity.

 

Rather than having to beat through armor to get shadowskin working, I think it would be simpler to apply it to everything.

 

Reason being: Let's say you have chainmail armor (3 points) and 4 body and cast shadowskin. Someone hits you for 4. Do you call no effect but secretly take the 3 damage? It adds to confusion, I think.

 

Same for monstrous (eg. abomination)... I would think it'd be easier to just say "i can take 7 hits" instead of trying to figure out how much goes to your armor versus your body. Such as...If you have 2 point leather armor and 2 body with abomination, and get hit for 4.... do you take 3 damage? or what?

 

*shrug*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I agree, but then I understand what happened last game. Put a werewolf in chain and all of a sudden the chain does not become immune to all damage but silver.

 

I can see how this can go either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final Answer:

Confirmed by Rules and Balancing. Endorsed by Masters of Enchantment everywhere.

 

For simplicity (even though it is a lil' silly) we ought to use the bubble method. That way Shadowskin and Abomination are on the same playing field.

 

Abomination makes everything in the stack monstrous. Shadowskin makes everything in the stack DR Sliver.

 

If you cast Shadowskin it goes over everything you are packing in your defenses that take actual damage. This is only includes Body, Physical Armor, and Magic Armor /Improved Magic Armor. All of those become DR Silver in the same way that Abomination makes all of those Monstrous.

 

Good night. The end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Shadowskin...

 

If you cast a spell like Devastation and channel it through a mageblade, does it have the same affect vs. Shadowskin? Or does it become negated when it's not a tag bag.

 

I'm curious because I see a chance for some NPCs getting passed the Shadowskin buff more if this is the case. Which wouldn't necessarily be good or bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stuff that works VS tagbags also works VS "strike"

Ergo, shadowskin is weak VS magebladed damage spells.

 

At the same time, your mageblade Devastation could get reflected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×