|
2 years ago ::
Jan 13, 2011 - 4:21PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
From the rules Q&A forum FAQ (if desired):
"Is a mount considered an ally? Yes."
Essentially, the writer's have stated that mounts are allies (they have also said that your aura, good or bad, affects your mount). fwiw: those that don't want to use D&D clarifications probably won't be using mounts to begin with (as that's where we're getting the mounted combat rules). Also, I have just now added the following to the Gamma World forum FAQ: "Can a pyrokinetic turn off his fiery aura? Yes. Auras can be turned off (GW p.105), and a pyrokinetic would have a rough time say, eating if he could not."
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 14, 2011 - 4:02AM
#12
|
|
|
Just let'em burn
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 14, 2011 - 9:51PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Feb 11, 2006
|
From the rules Q&A forum FAQ (if desired):
"Is a mount considered an ally? Yes."
Essentially, the writer's have stated that mounts are allies (they have also said that your aura, good or bad, affects your mount). fwiw: those that don't want to use D&D clarifications probably won't be using mounts to begin with (as that's where we're getting the mounted combat rules).
Also, I have just now added the following to the Gamma World forum FAQ:
"Can a pyrokinetic turn off his fiery aura? Yes. Auras can be turned off (GW p.105), and a pyrokinetic would have a rough time say, eating if he could not."
Just want to clarify that those are community-generated FAQs, and therefore unofficial answers/opinions.
Here is another valid answer to the second question, since we don't yet have official clarification: No. Despite its name, Fiery Aura does not behave according to the rules for monster auras on GW p. 105, because it does not have the Aura keyword. Rather, it behaves exclusively according to its stated text absent GM discretion.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 15, 2011 - 6:35PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
Just want to clarify that those are community-generated FAQs, and therefore unofficial answers/opinions.
Right... I mentioned that I just now added the 2nd item so that if anyone wanted to debate it, now would be a good time. I had thought a concensus would be fairly forthcoming... but let the discussion begin 
As for the first item, the writers themselves provided the answer (as mentioned), so that's pretty reliable.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 16, 2011 - 9:07AM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Feb 11, 2006
|
Right... I mentioned that I just now added the 2nd item so that if anyone wanted to debate it, now would be a good time.
How about this?
"Can a pyrokinetic turn off his Fiery Aura?" No. Gamma World does not define the Aura keyword for PCs, so Fiery Aura behaves according to its stated text. However, it is typical to allow a pyrokinetic to turn off its aura according to the rules for monster auras on p. 105.
I think an entry like that is faithful to both RAW and the common-sense DM workaround.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 17, 2011 - 3:22PM
#16
|
|
|
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 17, 2011 - 5:06PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2007
|
Agreed.
I disagree. GW doesn't use the term 'Keyword'. It just calls Aura a 'trait', both in the monster section and in the PC section. A DM is free to make the call either way.
Also, I thought it was discussed before that a pyrokinetic having to keep his fire on all the time would be pretty lame from a roleplaying point of view?
But more importantly, presenting that lameness as the expected result seems counter-productive.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 17, 2011 - 5:17PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2004
|
fwiw: as soon as it was apparent that we didn't have universal agreement, I removed the "Yes" from the FAQ answer so it read:
"Can a pyrokinetic turn off his fiery aura? per GW p.105 Auras can be turned off as a minor action, and a pyrokinetic would have a rough time eating or interacting with NPC's if he could not."
While the statement now appears technically true, it is also probably misleading, so I'm awaiting the concensus from this discussion. Mainly, I want to avoid providing poor advice in the FAQ. Shall I remove this statement until the discussion is resolved then?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 18, 2011 - 3:36AM
#19
|
|
|
I believe not being able to turn off the pyrokinetic's fiery aura is an intended disadvantage.
Yes is it is harder to interact with other people and objects with a fiery aura just as plants have a hard time with there vulnerability to fire which can not be turned off either.
Both the pyrokinetic's and the plant's powers are written the same way.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jan 18, 2011 - 10:32AM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Feb 11, 2006
|
I disagree. GW doesn't use the term 'Keyword'. It just calls Aura a 'trait', both in the monster section and in the PC section. A DM is free to make the call either way.
Yeah, I guess that is a little misleading. There isn't technically an aura "keyword" in D&D either. So let me tweak my earlier definition:
"Can a pyrokinetic turn off his Fiery Aura?" No. A PC's aura does not have generally defined characteristics in Gamma World, so Fiery Aura behaves according to its stated text. However, it is typical to allow a pyrokinetic to turn off its aura according to the rules for monster auras on p. 105.
@mvincent Without being too hasty, I'd say that the above passage best reflects the general consensus and should be added to the FAQ. As I mentioned before, it's both faithful to RAW and provides the most common alternative for those who wish to tweak the rule.
@Billdownawell That's a really good point about it being an intended disadvantage. We see similar disadvantages with other origins, such as the Seismic origin's –1 to speed and, more recently, the Entropic origin's –2 to defenses upon regaining hit points. Your point is great evidence in support of the stated text.
|
|
|
