Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: longbowrocks Aug 11 2011, 02:36 PM

BC reduces the magic of awakened characters inside it, and the force of pretty much everything else brought inside it. For spells, it's "any previously cast sustained spells brought inside". I see no mention of immediate spells though. I figure the reduction in magic is counted as plenty for those, so any spells cast within the BC do not have their force reduced. Might we then say the same for any spells cast into the BC from outside of it?
In other words, I'd say spells cast outside a BC are not affected by the BC. Opinions?

Posted by: DamienKnight Aug 11 2011, 02:39 PM

From this wording, spells cast within the background count are not reduced. I guess the penalty is the casters magic rating dropping, forcing them to cast lower force spells. This is a really good point, I had not noticed this before.

A spell cast outside the Background Count INTO (or that passes through) the BC would be reduced in force by the BC. They would be considered pre-existing because they were cast outside the BC, and entered the BC after their creation.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 11 2011, 02:58 PM

Actually, Instant Spells (Like Combat Spells) are unaffected by entering the Background Count if cast from outside of it. This is why the Negative Quality Astral Hazing is a Negative Quality.

Posted by: Ascalaphus Aug 11 2011, 06:31 PM

There was a thread about this a couple of months past... the writer of the BC rules said that idea was that to cast a spell, you use magic from where you're standing, not the target location. So only the BC (if any) around the caster matter - and Astral Hazing doesn't protect someone from combat spells!

Posted by: Nath Aug 11 2011, 07:36 PM

If the thread you're talking about is http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=35289, what Demonseed Elite actually said was something along the line "I intended Background Counts to work that way" and "Astral Hazing rules shouldn't be used at all because they're poorly written".

The problem being, Astral Hazing rules first reads "This astral haze affects all attempts to cast magic on, at, or in the vicinity of the character" and then that its only actual effect is to create a Background Count centered on the character, which by the BC rules as intended should only affect attempt to cast magic from within its area of effect.

Even if it doesn't protect against Combat spells, Astral Hazing remain one big ace in the sleeve when dealing with spirits (among other things, it's one hell of a protection against possession). So I still would not consider it as a flaw (which it wasn't originally, since the flaw text copies the Cybermancy side-effect). But I'm digressing.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Aug 11 2011, 08:41 PM

I hate BC in 4e. The TN modifier of previous editions provided smoother game play. I think it is especially stupid given how it works with spirits and adepts.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 11 2011, 09:03 PM

I like BC, and use it quite often at lower values (1 and 2), with the occassional 3, and rare 4. But, I've never had anyone trying to abuse Astral Hazing, either.

Posted by: Mardrax Aug 11 2011, 09:04 PM

I mostly think it's a shame most adepts don't really get to benefit from an aspected background count.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 11 2011, 09:13 PM

That is what Aspected Mana Static is for...
It would still boost any rolls the Adept makes that includes Magic Rating (which is not that many, admittedly).

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 11 2011, 09:20 PM

This is true, unfortunitely. Even with my house ruling Natural BC (Background counts that form without directed aid of metahumanity. For this purpose religious sites are concidered directed aid) to be able to be a positive or negetive modifier dependant on the emotional aspect.

For example: An old Growth forest might have a BC of 2, aspected towards entropy (fewer things grow and the old trees slowly die), and stability. Magical abilities that would return an object to a natural state or prevent changes (The Heal spell, Mystic armour adept power) would be able to get a boost, and so would things that reduce the flow of energy (Decrease [Attribute], Rooting Adept Power). Everything else, like Mana Ball, however, would still be reduced. (An adept would still suffer loss of powers, but those that would be enhanced cannot be chosen, and may get more powerful)

Posted by: Mardrax Aug 11 2011, 10:04 PM

This would require a broad interpretation of "Magical skill tests," since Adepts don't actually use the magical skills, just Magic + Power, mostly.
They get the drain resistance dice, at least. Which they need for eehrm... Attribute Boost? To resist a whopping 1 drain. (Because anyone who take more than 1 rank is silly)

Oh well. Pure Adepts tend to get the short end of the stick, anyway.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 11 2011, 10:46 PM

This is very true indeed...

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Aug 11 2011, 10:46 PM

I like the concept of BC just not the rules on how it is implemented. Quite often having BC of 1 or 2 means you took probably 20% of the phys adds power away from him, other types don't have to deal with this BS. It is also just a pain in the ass to use, I lose 1 point what goes, I lose 2 what goes now, 3 what now? It is mess of a rule system. A simple for these skills you lose 1 die per BC and the drain of magic goes up by 1 per 2 is easier to deal with and doesn't kick adepts an already weak choice in the balls. This also allows low force spirits to exist in the game world. Watchers where do they exist? I mean a BC of 1 is freaking almost everywhere. I understand that they wanted BC to effect phys adds this time but what they did breaks the game world once you start thinking about it.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 11 2011, 10:55 PM

I disagree... It is really not all that difficult to manage at all. And It SHOULD affect the Physad significantly, it does to all other Magically Active creatures.

Posted by: Irion Aug 11 2011, 11:12 PM

It is hard to make good rules for BC...

If you only reduce the hits and the force of spells, spirits do not react to BC as they should.
If you reduce the magic attribute you have the problem with the spells, which are brought out of the BC. (What force are they?)

Posted by: Mardrax Aug 11 2011, 11:20 PM

Well to be honest, a mage in a BC will just keep on spamming overcast stunbolts with impunity. Just two Force per BC count lower.
Until he gets to the point where he's better off just grabbing a pistol.

Posted by: Glyph Aug 12 2011, 02:23 AM

I have to admit that I fall into the camp that prefers the previous rules where adepts (who internalize their magical power) were not affected by background count. Just imagine how much worse it's going to be, figuring out which powers are lost, for all of those sparkly new adepts with Ways.

Posted by: Mardrax Aug 12 2011, 03:21 AM

Worse? Why? They just lose more.

Posted by: ggodo Aug 12 2011, 07:32 AM

I think that's what he meant by worse.

Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Aug 12 2011, 09:23 AM

With player choice, it is now smart to pick a few specially non-combat powers which you can lose when entering a BC to do combat. If you then need to talk to someone, leave, come back in, and disable the combat powers :

Posted by: Fortinbras Aug 12 2011, 10:17 AM

Does this mean that a mage with a telescope could cast a Fireball at the moon, even though it's out of the Giasphere where Magic shouldn't exist?


Which is such a thing was erased from the Symphony of Existence. Well, in the English speaking world, anyway.

Posted by: Doc Byte Aug 12 2011, 11:06 AM

The real trouble with BC starts in Astral Space. How does it affect a projecting mage:

1. Magic is reduced by the BC at the location of his physical body. (aka extend your time in Astral Space with aspected BC)
2. Magic is reduced by the BC at the location of his astral self. (aka enter a BC after being in Astral Space for a couple of hours and die spontaneously)
3. Magic is reduced by the BC at the location of both his physical body and his astral self. (aka Ouch!)

Posted by: Brainpiercing7.62mm Aug 12 2011, 11:26 AM

I'm fairly certain it's either 2 or 3, but I can't back that up with anything. Better safe than sorry, anyway .

Posted by: Irion Aug 12 2011, 11:28 AM

@Fortinbras

I do not know about that, because you are able to resist indirect spells with counterspelling (damage resistant test). So there has to be some magic there.
And I am quite sure, that it is magic until it sets other stuff on fire, which is burning with normal fire. (Because if a fireball would not be magic it would blow up in your face, the second you cast it. If we assume it is a ball flying from your position to the designated area. Which is not really stated.)

@Doc Byte

Thats the solution. Thats why it is such a bad Idea to go astral to the SOX. But well, the hole BC is in need of some houseruling it seems.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 12:58 PM

Indeed it does, see previous topics on said theory.



Well, I have it in my Street Magic Book. It really is not as powerful as most people make it out to be. All it does is Add Dice to the Benefactor, and is treated as a normal BGC for non-Aspectred Personnel. In an area equal to Caster's Magic Rating Radius. It is laughably Easy to avoid.

Posted by: Fortinbras Aug 12 2011, 01:59 PM

I get that thems the rules, but that still makes no sense.

I have it listed in the appendix of my Street Magic book, but without a description of the actual spell. I think you underestimate the possibilities of the spell.
In any event the thing was erased from Shadowrun so it's lack of existence is as solid in foundation as Magic in space.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 02:26 PM

If it is in the Book, it has not been erased. The spell creates an ASPECTED versaion of hte normal Mana Static Spell. So, as long as you know what taht means, you do not need any further exposition. I do understand its uses, but it is also very easy to avoid as well. Because of that, it is not as useful as other spells. In fact, it is generally a lot more useful in a static location than in a mobile location where the situation changes moment to moment.

Both Mana Static Spells are great for getting rid of opposition Spirits though. Probably better than Stun Bolt, dependant upon where you place it, though the Drain is a little more hefty.

Posted by: Fortinbras Aug 12 2011, 02:34 PM

Sorry, but no spell description means no spell. Otherwise it's just your assumption.

If we have to accept that spells work in space via telescopes, we have to accept it all.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 02:39 PM

So... You do not allow custom Spells in your game? Ever? Hmmmmm..... There is just as much description of the spell in there as there is for Swarm, or Physical Double Image, or Mass Agony. We all know what an Aspected Mana Field is (and how it acts, no assumptions involved at all). Do you really need to eat up additional Word count restating it? I don't. There is an entry in the Tables with the relevant information, that is enough for me.

Posted by: Fortinbras Aug 12 2011, 02:45 PM

I do, but we're not talking about my game.

Feel free to make up and ignore any rules you see fit. As long as there is an "Explosions in Space" understanding between party members it's five by five.
But if I am to accept that mages can cast fireballs on the moon, because thems the rules, then you must accept that Aspected Mana Static is not a spell in Shadowrun.
It's just a spell it your Shadowrun.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 03:11 PM

Hmmmmmmm, that's funny, since it is in my copy of the official Book... Seems like an official spell to me. And I treat it as such.

Posted by: Fortinbras Aug 12 2011, 03:26 PM

An appendix entry does not a spell make. Without a spell description it's just you assuming what the spell does.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 04:01 PM

There is a Spell Description. Look at Mana Static. All Aspected Mana Static does is add an Aspect to the base Spell's Mana Static. No assumptions are necessary at all. Apsected Mana Zones are described in great detail in the book.

Not sure why that is so difficult, but No Worries.

Posted by: Aku Aug 12 2011, 04:38 PM

Who installed pong over my DS forums?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 04:46 PM

Heh... Sorry, had to laugh.

Posted by: Irion Aug 12 2011, 04:50 PM

There is a spell description in the german book. *now running*

The spell is overpowered, but hey at least it is a permanent one. So no "I carry my own aspect mana static around with me so I never suffer from BC".
(But I am not sure of that,actually...)

Posted by: KarmaInferno Aug 12 2011, 05:09 PM

Personally, I think that Background Count should be adding either a dice pool modifier or an increased threshold, not reducing ratings directly.

As it is it's a little TOO harsh to be imposing with regularity.

And a pool or threshold modifier scales better, you can use a low count in a lot of places and really ramp it up for particularly bad spots.




-k

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 05:34 PM

Interesting Solution...

Posted by: Irion Aug 12 2011, 06:07 PM

If it would be a dice pool modifier only, foci would not deactivate. But I have to say, it would cause less problems...

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 12 2011, 06:18 PM

Which I think is the general idea they are going for, since they say it's "too harsh"

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 06:25 PM

For the record: I like Background Count as it is currently. But, it is an interesting idea being discussed.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 12 2011, 06:27 PM

I agree. I use it regularily. It might be interesting, but not as interesting as BC as is, which is not just a modifier, but something that has a kind of sense of life, to me. YMMV

Posted by: Ascalaphus Aug 12 2011, 07:48 PM

Background Count as-is seems to me to be a fairly straightforward system. Sure, it has a few problems, but on the whole it's easy to understand what it does.

You also don't really need a whole lot of it; 1-2 points make a location pretty edgy.

With more than that it becomes a plot device - that place where you'll have to make do without magic. Which can be interesting now and then.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 12 2011, 08:09 PM

Indeed...

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Aug 12 2011, 09:24 PM

I'm not generally concerned with the harshness except for adepts who already are vastly over costed for their powers. But, I do think it is a bit of a pain in the ass to deal with and also makes very little world sense. BC 1 is really effing common, watchers don't exist in way too many areas, how do kids train/learn they have magic when they can't start off at 1 magic in most places people live, spirits aren't just having a harder time they actually become dumber etc.

Posted by: Nath Aug 12 2011, 09:41 PM

Unless the type of magic Awakened character come to practice always is the one their local Background Count is aspected toward. Afterall, there are few Heka magician born in Redmond Barrens, just like there are few Amerindian shamans in Cairo. Just an idea though (which works better with Domain created by religion, rather than violent murders).

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Aug 13 2011, 12:35 AM

I'll give you that some traditions might work in BC areas, but whether it is the barrens or a corp enclave a BC of 1-2 is kind of common. Which in most cases would kick your budding magic down to 0 so you'd end up with no mages in most cases. The +X to the TN from previous editions made it harder so mages could kind of train up under harsh conditions. If it was -dice or +threshold budding mages could at least astrally perceive as a way for their magic to come out. And again it doesn't make much sense for spirit X to all of a sudden become dumber, have less will power, less charsima, less intuition, lost skills etc. Now the same spirit losing dice from his powers and actions, taking damage from being in a BC seems more fitting to me. Given how TNs scaled in previous editions I think BC was harder on mages before and I had no problem with that I just think the new BC hurts types who don't need to get hurt and makes less world sense.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Aug 13 2011, 02:11 AM

Background Count as written works if you want to scare your players, take em down a few notches.

But they don't have much granularity of application. It goes from "okay, that's not too bad" to "OMG we're screwed" extremely fast.

So, if you want to be at all fair, you can't really throw more than 1s or occasionally 2s with regularity. If nothing else, it starts to seem punitive to the magic-based players.

Making it a test penalty gives a lot more gradual slope of difficulty, allowing you to apply the penalties with greater regularity without making it seem like you're out to get the players. You can still ramp the harshness up to extreme levels if you need to, but you now have a lot more steps between "okay, that's not too bad" and "OMG we're screwed".




-k

Posted by: Neraph Aug 13 2011, 04:29 AM

I actually like BC just as it is. I guess it may be because I know how to utilize it though - I've Judo'd the mechanics.

EDIT:

Absolutely.

Posted by: longbowrocks Aug 13 2011, 08:50 AM

Don't you remember? Aspected mana static got errata'd out. It's not in the latest copies of street magic. Possibly because the very idea of being able to cast a spell like that is so OP that it would drive everyone and their mother to play riggers with R2 redundant manufacturing on milspec drones.

Posted by: Glyph Aug 13 2011, 09:11 AM

The notion that background counts of 1 would be everywhere is a common view on Dumpshock, but the rules give examples of things like an awakened bar, or the scene of a particularly violent crime. I don't really buy the extrapolation of "Wow, the barrens are like, a nasty place, so they would have a background count of 1 all over." Glow City, maybe, or the scene of a recent gang clash with lots of fatalities, or one of the "toxic castles". But the whole area? No.

Astral hazing opens up a can of worms, since normally you won't have a mage casting into a background count from outside of it. But it's pretty obvious from the description that it does affect incoming spells by reducing their Force. What a freelancer thinks that the rules should have been doesn't really have any bearing on the RAW.

Posted by: TheOOB Aug 13 2011, 09:14 AM

An unassailable rule of any RPG system is "Text Trumps Tables". Reference data tables(like spell lists in appendixes) don't actually contain game rules, they are just for reference. There is no actual rules for an aspected mana static spell(and for good reason), ergo it doesn't exist.

I must say, the cannon ruling that a background count only applies to the caster is a bit shaky to be. I understand it's word of god, but it doesn't make sense. If the magic came purely from the casters area, and not from the area around the target, then why does counterspelling work, because counterspelling is magic jamming, and you need LoS to the target to be protected, not the source of the spell.

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 13 2011, 09:28 AM

Counterspelling in this case is exactly as you said, jamming. It's causing a disturbance in the mana where the spell needs to travel through, to disrupt the spell. A bullet gets all it's mass and energy from what it is, and how it starts, not because of things it picks up along the way, but if it hits a few windows (or a wall) it'll lose some of it's damage capacity. That's the best analogy I could think of, so feel free to try ripping it apart.

Posted by: Ascalaphus Aug 13 2011, 10:33 AM

This is my take on it too. BC as reducing Magic is a nice, easy/quick to apply system. How common BC is in a setting is entirely up to the GM; the rules are (deliberately) vague about it. So as a GM you can decide how common BC should be, based on what's good for play.

Personally, I think a BC of 0 should be by far the most common - it's the middle of the scale for a reason. It's the level at which spells have their typical Force and Drain. Divergent ratings should be increasingly rare - you'll see BC +1/-1 fairly often, +2/-2 now and then, +3/-3 seldomly, +4/-4 almost never, and so on. A BC of 4 either way is basically a plot device. Compare it to a highly secure building, which scans people who enter for weapons and cyberware - that's to the Sam what a BC 4 area is to mages.

Of course, Adepts are rather screwed. More than they should be, really. Maybe there could be some Adept Metamagic to deal with that?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 13 2011, 02:56 PM

Why is it so opverpowered? You get a Dice Bonus to the Aspected Character, a Magic Penalty to those not of his tradition, and it is such a small area, that most people will not be affected at all. In the case of a Large Area Aspected Background count (Usually obtained through Geomancy and aspecting a Domain), you can circumvent it with Cleansing Metamagic. I see no overpowering advantage here whatsoever.

And again, It is in MY book (and even if it was not, it is easy to bring back into play through custom spell design). And the German Books actually have the spell description apparently. *Shrug*. I see it no more overpowering than having someone with Geomancy Metamagic.

Again, it comes back to the style of the game at your table. Even with it in play at our table, it has not altered (drastically, or otherwise) the way the world works. It is a nice bonus, but not really all that powerful in the grand scheme of things. Now, if it actually boosted your Magic in those places where it is encountered, it would be very powerful indeed, but alas, it does not.

Posted by: Shinobi Killfist Aug 13 2011, 04:49 PM

That is how I would read the initial street magic descriptions, but everything in the books since then has gone more towards the it is everywhere theory. It is a big corp building, oh the crushed emotions of the worker bees makes it a BC of 1, the barrens oh the violence and feelings of the poor outcasts give it a BC of 1-2 everywhere. And even if it were like that it still doesn't make sense that a persons magic goes away, or a spirit gets dumber.

Posted by: Irion Aug 13 2011, 07:42 PM

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
You may get yourself an easy +6 to all magic test and an +6 to drain. Thats quite good.
Not to mention it would stack with existing BC...

And I do not know if you can have a permanent spell sustained, if so it is really overpowered. (So the force of the BC is not reduced)

@Ascalaphus

Considering how cheap scanners are, this should be often however. Nearly any office building, high end restaurants etc. and of course airports and any government building.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 13 2011, 08:14 PM

You cannort sustain a Permanent Spell. Ever. It is not a Sustained Spell, thus cannot be put into a Sustaining Focus, nor can you sustain it past permanence, because at that point, the sustainment goes away automatically. And again, you are assumming that everyone walks around with a Magic Rating of 6 (Poor Assumption), and ALWAYS stay within the confines of that Non-Mobile Permanent Spell, with a Maximum Radius of up to 2x Force in Meters (another poor assumption).

Again, where is it overpowered?



Which is about as ubiquitous as the BGC of 1. And your point? They are both impacted about the same at that point.

Posted by: KarmaInferno Aug 13 2011, 10:08 PM

The way the rules are written, there's no good reason why most places wouldn't use cyberware scanners.

However, the way the fluff is written, most places still use the old MAD scanners.



-k

Posted by: Glyph Aug 13 2011, 10:19 PM

Yeah, and the countermeasures in Runner's Companion are mainly geared towards MAD scanners, too. The only real rationale to cyberware scanners not being used more is that they still draw complaints of being a "virtual strip search". It doesn't make quite as much sense in a dystopian future with fewer human rights, but Shadowrun demands a lot of hand-waving to explain away the discrepancies in its fluff.

Posted by: TheOOB Aug 14 2011, 05:49 AM

A version of mana static that didn't effect you would be overpowered, as would one that gave you bonuses without giving enemies penalties. The first basically allows the magician to take on all magical threats with little trouble, and the second makes you a god.

As it is, mana static is a very very powerful spell, it allows a less powerful magician to take on more powerful threats by sacrificing some(or all) of their magical abilities.

Posted by: Falanin Aug 14 2011, 07:02 AM

Hmmm, kung-fu adept in a similarly-aspected dojo. Could explain why those moves always seem to work better than when you're out on the street. It's all about the presence of the master.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 14 2011, 02:24 PM

As there are so few adept abilities that actually use their Magic rating, that effect you're talking about is probably due to the Home Ground positive quality.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 03:07 PM

But it really doesn't, and isn't. Lets assume a Mage with a Magic of 4 here. He casts his Aspected mana Staticd Spell so that he is at the center of its effects. The chances of the enemy mage getting in his area of Effect are nil, if they are an opposing Mage, as there is little reason to do so, and the +4 DP advantage the spell caster receives is negligible (it is a DP bonus, not a Bonus to Magic Atgtribute), becuase it does not make his spells any more powerful. He is still capped at his normal Magical attribute/abilities.

Now, lets cast that spell on the opposing mage. His magic goes down (maybe) for a single pass, as he moves out of the area of effect. Big deal, as he will not likely, again, be affected by the mana static. Not seeing how this allows the mage to take on all opponents with little trouble, nor how it makes him a virtual god. It MIGHT affect a Spirit such that he goes away, and honestly, this is the best use of the spell in a static location that everyone must pass through to get to the mage.

Additionally, you will always have the issue of not knowing the particular Tradition any given mage is a part of. It would really suck to cast Aspected Mana Static on an opposingt Mage to find out that he is also a part of your tradition. Hell, any good opposition may already have an entirely aspected domain surrounding them anyways. At whioch point, your either Aspecting your area, or cleansing their. It is a tool, nothing more. It does not make you godlike or invincible.



Limiting/Eliminating your Magic to take on More Powerful Threats is usually a losing proposition for the weaker opponent.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 14 2011, 03:09 PM

Home Ground is exactly the one. And is very similar in effect to Aspected Mana Static in the boost that it gives the caster. Especially since AMS rarely affects opposition mages due to it limited area of effect.

Posted by: TheOOB Aug 14 2011, 05:50 PM

Except you're completely wrong. Lets say a magic 3 magician is fighting a force 6 spirit. His weapons can't get through ITNW, and he's not likely to be able to kill it with manabolt before it kills him. He casts mana static at force 3, which eliminates his magic ability, but halves the force of the spirit. Now the spirit can be killed with a few good shots with a pistol, and it's damage output is nearly halved. This is especially useful if you have other team members with good guns.

By weakening your enemy's magic, you can make them easier to take out via mundane means.



I like how you took a very important part of the spell and completely disregarded it. There is a significant chance your opponent would be caught in the spell because you would attempt to ensure your opponent got caught in the spell, but unlike normal mana static, if you're in close quarters you get a net +2 DP bonus to all your magic checks instead of suffering the same penalty. If a +2 DP bonus is negligible, why do people use foci or get specializations, it's important and it does make your spells more powerful, and it gets worse if people cast the spell at higher force. It's like discounting the usefulness of stick-n-shock rounds because a few people might have electrical protection on their armor, it's silly.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 12:52 PM

Except that your wrong. Your spells do not get more powerful. You get more dice (equal to your Force of the Aspected Mana Static). This is a big difference. And I did not ignore the chance that the opponent would get caught, I just discounted it for the most part, becuase it is SO easy to avoid, it is Insignificant, rather than Significant, unless you are able to set up the area, which most shadowrunners do not have the luxury of doing (not being their home ground and all that). Spirits are the only entity that MAY have an issue, because most of their powers can be done at range as well, but all it takes is for you to cast it in the area that the Spirit occupies. Spirit may pop like bubble, but then again, spirit may get more powerful. All depends upon the Aspect of the Spirit's tradition as well.

Spells are not MORE POWERFUL because you use a Focus. Magic 6 can only cast what a Magic 6 character can cast, regardless of foci, Background Count (Aspected or not), or any other "boost" to ability. They are still capped at their Magic x2 for Force. Foci do not change that in the least.

Posted by: Irion Aug 15 2011, 01:06 PM

Come on, you get X more dices to any magic test and drain test. Thats quite a good thing.
And if the enemy mage targets you with a stunbolt the force gets reduced by X.

Sorry, but staying in an aspected zone makes one mage able to take on several other mages not having this advantage.
Yes, there is the way to overcast to magic*2 but overcasting manaspells or overcasting in general is a severe problem, which is known.
So one rule loophole trumps an other one.... Yeah, right. But it is not really an argument I guess.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 01:42 PM

It gives an advantage, yes, no doubt about that. It DOES NOT make you more POWERFUL.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 03:42 PM

True - it does not directly make it more powerful. However, getting more dice to cast and resist drain means you can cast more powerful spells yourself with less risk. It's an indirect power increase, but a power increase none-the-less.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 03:58 PM

I don't know about you, but I have rarely seen a mage that cannot handle the drain they incur. Not unless they get very unlucky. SO being able to roll more dice to handle the drain they were already handling is not reallly a bonus in my mind. It is also a rare thing to see a mage who does not ALREADY hit his Hit Cap anyways, so again, a few more dice to add to a pool that already hits its cap is pretty useless in my opinion. For those who are not quite so optimized, it is an advantage (as it is at our table). For optimised Characters (we have one of those too), it does not really mean a whole lot. The mages here on DS are mostly of the Optimised sort, so not as much of an advantage in my book. *Shrug*

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 04:08 PM

...

It encourages casting over what you normally can; IE: overcasting. If I know I can handle a F7 Stunbolt, then in BC I'll go up to F9 or 10. If I can handle a F6 Powerbolt, then in the BC I'll crank it up to 8 or 9.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 04:23 PM

But you have to admit, most casters here on Dumpshock can handle that F9-11 Stunbolt with no issue whatsoever. So it does not really matter all that much, does it? Which is my point. It will help the Non-Optimized Caster, but not really do much for the Optimized Caster.

Posted by: Irion Aug 15 2011, 04:53 PM

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
It will help any kind of caster.
Well, the non optimised kind of caster won't be able to use it, due to the high drain.
Force/2+4, meaning no matter the force you are in for a lot of drain...(So it does not matter if you cast it on high force anyway)

So yeah, for Stunbolts it does not matter due to the low drain. (What did I say about broken rules to start with?)
Still, you have X more dices on the casting test, which might help overcome the counterspelling test.

Actually the low end mage will hurt himself more, because he will suffer damage due to drain, the optimized mage won't.

Yes, there are a lot of situation it won't help. But there are also a lot of situation a DV 20 Holdout-deathray-pistol won't help, does not change the fact, that it is quite a nice thing to have...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 05:32 PM

Does not change that it is NOT overpowered... Which was always my point.

Posted by: Irion Aug 15 2011, 07:01 PM

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Which begs the question, what you consider overpowered...
(Since I guess you may have quite different approach to that)

Posted by: Neraph Aug 15 2011, 07:21 PM

I'd consider it powerful, but not overpowered. Of course, I have some very interesting materials I've posted about, so I may be a little biased. For example, it is no big issue for me to consider creating a spellcaster with a Magic (not dicepool, just Magic Attribute) obtainable of 14 on 400 BP, or having a character with at or above 200/200 armor.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 08:15 PM

These I would consider Overpowered !!!!!

Posted by: Elfenlied Aug 15 2011, 08:18 PM

Nosferatu/Vampire with their Essence Drain attribute boost + R4 Power Focus?

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 08:19 PM

POwer Foci do not add to the Magic Rating, ever...

Posted by: Irion Aug 15 2011, 08:19 PM

So I guess we agree to disagree...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 08:20 PM

Upon What? You do not think that a Starting Magic of 14, or Armor at 200/200 is overpowered? Or that Power Foci do not add to magic?Wow...

Posted by: Irion Aug 15 2011, 08:34 PM

Well, as a matter of fact I was talking about what we were talking about...
(And I was including Neraph)
I just realized it would take a while if we would need to find a definition of overpowered between my point of view and Neraphs.
Thats the needle in the in the needle factory.


Do not get me wrong I would engage in things like that, but this is only fun in person and with beer.

I mean for me even smartlink is kind of overpowered and only saved because it is so stongly supported by the fluff...

Posted by: HunterHerne Aug 15 2011, 08:42 PM

And so easily used by everyone. If you have a gun, and no smartlink, you are either really poor, really cheap, or really naive.

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 15 2011, 08:52 PM

Null Perspiration...
From what I understand, everything is better with Beer. Too bad I can't stomach it at all... Sometimes, I really want to like it, I just can't get by the taste.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 16 2011, 01:35 PM

Close, but no focus.

Posted by: Sephiroth Aug 16 2011, 01:57 PM

Got it. Awakened nosferatu (EDIT: or a mutaqua, if you're cheating) of some sort with hardcapped Magic of 5 with all 18 points of essence funnelled into Magic. Do I get a cookie?

Posted by: Irion Aug 16 2011, 04:11 PM

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein
Maybe you just have the wrong beer...

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 16 2011, 04:50 PM

Tried a lot of different kinds. Just no taste for it, I guess. I do like a good Cider, though. And I like some Wines. But beer, *shrug*

Posted by: Cheops Aug 16 2011, 05:22 PM

So Magic 4 = 4m radius? That is about 50 m2. Converting that to sq ft is about 540. My entire, two bedroom, two bathroom apartment is 812 square feet (or about 5m radius). Considering most runs happen in high-tech dungeons with constricted spaces that says to me that a 4m radius does not guarantee that the opponent won't be in the aoe. In fact most of the cubicle area I am currently working in is within a 4m radius. The enemy may be able to get out of the aoe but he'd need to spend time figuring out where to go (simple action -- no spellcasting that IP), getting there, and is then constricted in where he can move. If the opposing mage just spent his 1 IP to get out of my AMS that gives my Street Sam 6 IPs to wipe his buddies and the mage out.

The extra dice are good for reducing the expected value of any drain. It may not necessarily be game breaking but it helps remove the number one argument people on Dumpshock have for guns versus magic: "I can shoot my gun all day long without getting tired but your mage will eventually knock himself out with drain." Assuming a Willpower+Stat of 4+4 the expected value of 3 drain (F6/2) goes from 0.7 to 0.24. While that change isn't significant if you are only casting 1 or 2 spells if you are in an extended combat it is highly significant. Theoretically it lets you cast that spell 26 times before knocking yourself out (less the EV of AMS itself -- (10-3.33)/0.25 = 26.68).

Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Aug 16 2011, 05:54 PM

To get the Benefit, YOU have to stay within the AOE as well. Again, 4 Meter Radius is NOT that big, and is easily moved out of in less than 3 seconds. And you make yourself a great target if you are pinned to a single point in space.

It does have its uses, to be sure, and I have said so multiple times. I just do not see it being overpowered.

Posted by: Neraph Aug 16 2011, 06:09 PM

Yes. It took one of my friends about three weeks to figure it out.

Posted by: Elfenlied Aug 17 2011, 09:41 AM

Ah, forgot about Nosferatu having 3x the Essence instead of 2x. Guess you really don't need the focus after all.