Gaming Outpost Discussions » Tag: bias

Gaming Outpost Discussions » Tag: bias - Recent Topics http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/tags/bias Gaming Outpost Discussions » Tag: bias - Recent Topics en-US Thu, 24 May 2012 10:26:51 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 <![CDATA[Search]]> q http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/search.php Tadeusz on "David Weber and Linda Evans and Bias" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/david-weber-and-linda-evans-and-bias#post-14518 Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:19:41 +0000 Tadeusz 14518@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ I'm reading "Hell Hath No Fury" by Weber and Evans right now, and it had an interesting bit on bias. In 'HHNF', there are two multiversal civilizations which use interdimensional portals to expand out into virgin Earths. And they bumped into each other, and things went south dramatically. One side has psionic Talents, and the other side has what they call magic Gifts. One of the Talents, a Voice (aka a long-range and short-range mindreader and mindsender) and her husband were captured by the opposing side, and are being brought through many dimensions and across tens of thousands of miles of 'railroad' to the home dimension. And one of the features of a Voice link is that the Voice can pick up a little of the emotions and such, the sideband, of the true message. This sideband is weakening after they got deeper into enemy territory. The protagonists' initial off the cuff theory was that Talents got weaker after a prolonged exposure to the Gifted. I, of course, instantly thought of Bias, of the rules in dimensions changing. "HHNF" could be similar to the Triverse in this, but with a more subtle breakdown and rebuilding of bias that stretches over a dozen dimensions between the two areas most amenable to their own type of power. ========== Also, they did something like what you did with TK, where you broke it up into varying parts. There are Voices, and there are Sifters (who can tell if you lie), and some other type of talent which lets you feel the type of person the other person is, and their general leaning at that time. As the character in the book puts it...He feels like he's about to stick a dagger in your ribs and get away with it. And you have Distance Viewers who are the top, and then there are Mappers who can show an area, and Plotters who can show the living in an area. ======= This is in large part an FYI post. johnosevens on "Biasing out" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/biasing-out#post-8209 Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:50:13 +0000 johnosevens 8209@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ Mostly this is a question for Scott, as I need one of his amazingly perfect and concise "I wish I had seen it before he said it" answers. How does biasing out tech devices actually work? In fact, how does biasing out anything actually work? I get that I can't cast a Possession spell in a world with a 2@5 Mag bias, but in a 2@18 I can - I understand the concept of bias curve. What I'm not clear on is how bias level and bias curve interact with devices. If the Tech bias is 5@3, can you turn on a computer? If I have one of those invisibility cloaks from Dancing Princess (I don't, but that would be cool) what conditions must exist in order for me to use it, and what happens if I try to use it where those conditions aren't met? WilliamTWodium on "Curving out electrical applications" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/curving-out-electrical-applications#post-5769 Mon, 23 Jun 2008 05:42:28 +0000 WilliamTWodium 5769@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ I know next to nothing about electrical and electronic technology, and when I try to read over the skill descriptions for Tech levels nine and ten I find myself crossing my eyes to make the words form interesting designs. I can understand what each skill is, while I'm looking at it, but I absolutely fail at trying to extrapolate from what it is to what can be done with it. Is there any way, aside from biting the bullet and doing the research, that I can tell with reasonable expedience which electrical applications and devices are possible under a bias of, say, T9@4 and which are not? Tadeusz on "Seals of Creation" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/seals-of-creation#post-2421 Mon, 03 Dec 2007 00:43:58 +0000 Tadeusz 2421@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ This could be a magic limitation (I'm not using it as such in this world.) The question is this: What about Shadowrun or some other place where Magic Bloomed? Well, the idea is that an archmage can make a powerful enough spell to either bind the bias levels, or a step down dispel all magic above a certain level for the next thousand years. The second probably works better. But such Seals of Creation are vulnerable to very few things. The erosion of time and faith may bend them or wear them away. But frequently, they can last for thousands of years. Sometimes tho',they become increasingly brittle. There are of course Unwinding Spells which tend to be enormously complicated, and quite powerful in their own right. And there is certain trigger events, some of which might not be foreseen. And last, but not least, there is simply a huge wash of magic might batter them down. Something like a Planetary Full Heal, for example. So, if Tad and Ed were on such a planet, the result of the spell could be A)Everyone and everything is healed. Praise the Creator! B)Hungry dragons rising with the dawn sun to hunt as the true bias of 15@10 is reasserted from behind the facade. johnosevens on "Rants on Telekinesis - Debate or Ignore" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/rants-on-telekinesis-debate-or-ignore#post-2654 Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:54:24 +0000 johnosevens 2654@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ Feel free to ignore this if you feel I'm beating a dead horse, or if you'll be easily offended by being quoted in my rant, but I'm sufficiently annoyed that I feel the need to soapbox a little. "It was pointed out to me on page three of Men of Psience that, firstly, P4@ telekinesis only effects whole objects, and secondly, that it exerts no force on its targets." -- If it exerts no force, then it cannot cause movement, period. Unless this is in utter ignorance of the laws of physics to the point where you're basically moving the entire universe along with it. After all, in one sense electrostatic forces make it so nothing is actually touching, and on the other hand, gravitational forces make it so everything in all the infinite multiverse is basically "touching" in the same way. Force imparts movement, movement begets momentum. "The thread would not prevent someone from lifting or moving the car within the limits of the length of the thread, but you could not pull the stake from the ground or break the thread." "The first is because of the delicacy factor. " --That's ridiculous. I can "delicately" lift a ten-ton shipping truck, but I can't use the same amount of TK (it is an amount of energy whether you call it a force or not) to destroy a quarter-ton Geo Metro? I call shenanigans, sir... "The second is because it makes force generatives necessary for any skill that would break one object into two" --Well, yeah. You move something, you're generating a force. Sir Isaac Newton would spontaneously combust in his grave if you honestly argued that you could cause motion without generating a force. "and thus gives a solid and clear bias distinction between worlds in which you can move independent objects and worlds in which you can break objects. " --Why? I cause a force. If the thing I'm handling can survive that force, it moves. If it can't, it crumples like a beer can. My telekinetic third limb is the same either way. "The TK pulse that can shift the pebble a few feet can shift the sun a few feet just as easily." --Obi-Wan Kenobi can force-push half a dozen battledroids. Why does that imply he can move a star? Even Yoda would swallow himself in astonishment. "On the other hand, I tend to think that simple TK does not, and that suggests that heavy TK does not, either. If you move an object "as fast as your hand can move it" to a particular point, and then release it, you are deemed to have brought it to rest by releasing it. It would fall straight down from there, barring any other interference. So it depends on the skill." --So you're saying releasing it is automatically akin to forcing it to stop? (Force, again...) You can't use Light or Heavy TK to pick something heavy up and fling it, even though they're more complex skills? I'm envisioning this as using TK to pick up a giant rock, swing it like a meteor-hammer, and let it go... and instead of flying off like the fist of an angry god, it drops... well... like a rock. If I saw that happen I think I would just blink my eyes in abject shock and then stand there till whatever I was throwing it at came over and smushed me into the next Verse. WilliamTWodium on "Robots and Bod" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/robots-and-bod#post-2376 Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:42:35 +0000 WilliamTWodium 2376@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ Hypothetical: Verser Velma meets a nice android named Andy and decides to take him with her as an associate. In her next verse, she and Andy come to in the cargo hold of the Mary Piper Alpha. When they stand up, they need make skill checks to see how well they can walk under these challenging conditions. Velma rolls her B2@4 Walk at Walking Speeds. What does Andy roll? Is this T12@3 Operate Self (Android)? Can I call it B2@4, because it's his body, organic or in-? Or should I keep it tech, but knock the operation down to 12@0 out of charity? If I take one of the tech options, what do I do when Velma decides to teach him martial arts? WilliamTWodium on "A couple of questions on Magic" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/a-couple-of-questions-on-magic#post-821 Tue, 09 Oct 2007 03:13:41 +0000 WilliamTWodium 821@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ I've got two colors of question for this thread. One is "bias & mag devices across sub-universe boundaries," and the other is "which way shall we run a werecoyote." Edit: I'm saving the werecoyote for another thread, like I always seem to do. With magic devices: I understand that while magic device operation is under level one, a device which is operated successfully while the skill it performs is above the bias curve automatically botches. I have questions concerning indigs vs. versers. Consider two devices, a Potion of Healing (performs M2@1 Limited Damage Repair) and Aladdin's Ring (performs a high-intensity 11@ summoning). Let us say that the bias is 1@11 - high enough to support any device, low enough to curve out all summonings above @1, and leaving all healing above the level but within the curve. Now, if anyone successfully uses the Ring, he botches. But can the verser use the potion? I think he can, because he'd be capable of a healing spell of that caliber. Next the bigger question: can the indig use the potion without botching? I believe he cannot - but then again, its effect is within the curve, and the only skill the indig himself is performing is within both the level and the curve. The wording in the rules doesn't resolve this directly, so I'm asking here. The questions I'm more interested in have to do with sub-universe boundaries and how they interact with these restrictions. In brief: *Can a 1@10 Piggyback Device activate contingent on the operation of a device in another sub-universe? *Can a device activated in one sub-universe take its effect in another in which that effect is above the curve? *I know it's possible to travel by time machine to a time in which the bias does not support the return trip; is it possible perform a similar feat with magical teleportation? (Technological teleportation?) To spy on an area with magical clairsentience where the bias is too low to support clairsentience (given that the location from which the spell is cast does support it)? I'm exploring methods by which beings from adjacent sub-universes can be "summoned" into locales with very low (but positive) magic bias, and answers to these questions will help immensely. WilliamTWodium on "Bias of M/MI use, games" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/bias-of-mmi-use-games#post-803 Sun, 07 Oct 2007 06:39:42 +0000 WilliamTWodium 803@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ I'm curious about the biases of a few skills I can't place in the bias trees. Firstly, Mind-Machine interface. The rules address design, construction, installation, analysis, sabotage, and repair, but not the actual use of devices that operate via M/MI. An example would be 'Mech piloting in the Battletech universe, where neo-feudal 31st century knights control multi-ton bipedal battle machines with the aid of a Neural Net. Is this T13@1 Operate M/MI? The rules clearly state that the bias level doesn't obey the standard repair rule, so I can't go by that. Should operation be differentiated by the type of M/MI (hard-wired, external, scanning)? By the actual device (Battlemech, memory-extension database, thought-steered jetpack)? Both? Neither? I was also curious about the biases of various games. The only games specifically listed are "Role-Playing Games," at M0@0, and "Computer Game Play," at T11@0. I'm thinking most games should be @0 - which leaves bias area and level. Sports are easy enough. I'm thinking most would be B3@0 (through running) or B5@0 (up through jumping), unless throwing and catching things requires a shift to level seven. It's chess that has me stumped. On one level, I want chess to be a psi game - mind to mind competition. I can't make it fit, though, and I really want Intellect to be a relevant attribute for chess. Because, really, it's relevant. That leaves Tech and Magic (Bod was never in the running). RPGs are magic, and there's some appeal to games falling into that realm, but somehow, I can't see a chess wiz winning a game by force of his animal magnetism. Magic seems wrong. But is it really Tech? Manipulation of pieces with symbolic meaning as a method of honing strategic skill - treating the game as a kind of "competition simulation device"? Tech 0@0? Help me out here. WilliamTWodium on "Animals and Tech Bias" http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/topic/animals-and-tech-bias#post-616 Fri, 28 Sep 2007 03:42:16 +0000 WilliamTWodium 616@http://gamingoutpost.com/discussions/ When I ran Men of Psience (playtest archived <a href="http://discussions.gamingoutpost.com/index.php?showtopic=82912">here</a>), I ran it with a Tech bias of 0@3 - that is, nothing higher than wilderness survival and ambush techniques. I'm wondering now if that was the correct call. After all, Graham heard birdsong while he was wandering the forest; presumably, those birds had nests. If we'd played longer and Graham had gone exploring, I might even have made the mistake of including a beaver, complete with beaver dam. Isn't that level two Woodworking? And isn't the bird using level two Weaving skills to build that nest? It's one thing to include finding food and water and knowing enough to sleep in a cave under "unspecified tech skills," but saying that the ability to dam a river falls until T0@1 Survival seems like a stretch to me. What do you think? Am I right in thinking I was wrong? Should I have excised all nesting birds, beavers, and other tool-using animals from my scenario to preserve the tech bias?