 SR5 magic |
  |
 Jun 21 2013, 03:53 PM
Post
#76
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 697 Joined: 18-August 07 Member No.: 12,735  |
QUOTE (apple @ Jun 17 2013, 04:43 PM)  Yes, maybe, but on the other side we are talking now 2-3 damage for the good/competent PC player. Compared to 8-15 damage for the normal gun (pistol to rifle). Wouldn´t it be the ... better way to improve indirect spells than in effect abolish direct spells (as indirect combat spells were not used in SR1234)? Raise one, destroy the other, because it was too powerful in the previous edition? Why should now anyone take direct combat spells? What´s their selling point? SYL You get to dodge and soak a gunshot.... you get to stand there with Willpower 4 and resist a direct spell. Give the force back to mages... so long as they don't get to learn dodge or gymnastics and can't wear or cast armor... and it's the same basic concept. |
 |
 
|
|
Jun 21 2013, 04:14 PM
Post
#77
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 697 Joined: 18-August 07 Member No.: 12,735 |
Did folks forget Accuracy on the pistols in all these examples?
The average accuracy is 5... if the gun is 5P gun... that's a max of 10P for a gunshot +2 perhaps for EX/EX that's also a max of 5 hits...not net... 5 hits... then target dodges and then resists. At least that's how I read the new BBB |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2013, 04:36 PM
Post
#78
|
|
|
Prime Runner Ascendant Group: Members Posts: 17,568 Joined: 26-March 09 From: Aurora, Colorado Member No.: 17,022 |
QUOTE (cryptoknight @ Jun 21 2013, 09:53 AM) You get to dodge and soak a gunshot.... you get to stand there with Willpower 4 and resist a direct spell. Give the force back to mages... so long as they don't get to learn dodge or gymnastics and can't wear or cast armor... and it's the same basic concept. Willpower 4 plus any available Counterspelling, Magic Resistance, Spell Resistance. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2013, 04:59 PM
Post
#79
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,803 Joined: 3-February 08 From: Finland Member No.: 15,628 |
QUOTE (cryptoknight @ Jun 21 2013, 06:14 PM) Did folks forget Accuracy on the pistols in all these examples? The average accuracy is 5... if the gun is 5P gun... that's a max of 10P for a gunshot +2 perhaps for EX/EX that's also a max of 5 hits...not net... 5 hits... then target dodges and then resists. At least that's how I read the new BBB Smartlink raises the accuracy by 2, so that +2 potential damage. Also even a holdout pistol is 6P and it only goes up from there. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2013, 06:15 PM
Post
#80
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 697 Joined: 18-August 07 Member No.: 12,735 |
QUOTE (Mäx @ Jun 21 2013, 10:59 AM) Smartlink raises the accuracy by 2, so that +2 potential damage. Also even a holdout pistol is 6P and it only goes up from there. ACC 4... so a Smartlinked Holdout pistol stops at 6 hits... you dodge that.. say you get 3... now you soak 9P The Sniper Rifles seem a bit obscene though. Honestly, they probably would have been better off leaving the gun damage codes at 4a levels |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2013, 08:25 PM
Post
#81
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,962 Joined: 27-February 13 Member No.: 76,875 |
QUOTE (cryptoknight @ Jun 21 2013, 11:15 AM) ACC 4... so a Smartlinked Holdout pistol stops at 6 hits... you dodge that.. say you get 3... now you soak 9P The Sniper Rifles seem a bit obscene though. Honestly, they probably would have been better off leaving the gun damage codes at 4a levels Not quite. Basically, how the math works now is that you get hit fewer times, but when you do get hit it's more serious by far - melee is now full Strength to damage, for example, rather than half. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2013, 01:14 AM
Post
#82
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,431 Joined: 3-December 03 Member No.: 5,872 |
QUOTE (cryptoknight @ Jun 21 2013, 02:15 PM) ACC 4... so a Smartlinked Holdout pistol stops at 6 hits... you dodge that.. say you get 3... now you soak 9P The Sniper Rifles seem a bit obscene though. Honestly, they probably would have been better off leaving the gun damage codes at 4a levels Well it seems they went with a flat 50% damage boost, the problem is when you go by %s things that already had a decent base become obscene. Basically since the soak part is roughly 3 dice for 1DV, a 50% DV with 50% armor boost the damage outpases your soak and at a high enough level(grenades, sniper rifles etc) become instant death for non-tank characters. It seems to work at the pistol level, past that and just be glad edge refreshes quicker becaue getting shot b base 11DV and up weapons means you will be using it all the time to live. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 06:11 PM
Post
#83
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 |
So, I wrote a small python program that would compare the efficiency of an Ares Alpha, a flamethrower spell and a direct combat spell in terms of odds to hit and damage, in various combinations of body, defense test, armor, attacker dice pool and spell force.
In almost every configuration, the Ares Alpha (fired in short bursts) is appreciably more damaging and has better odds to hit. And I'm using standard ammo here. Sure, recoil's going to kick in on pass 3, but the point remains that combat magic is somewhat weaker than an assault rifle. Things turn around for a maxed out mage with a rating-3 power foci and a natural magic attribute of 7 casting at force 10, but the drain becomes really large. Direct combat spells are way behind, unless you are facing someone with insane armor or dodge - the definition of 'insane' grows as the force of the spell grows: for a force 4 spell, direct combat spells are not uncommonly better, for force 10 spells they've become useless. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 06:19 PM
Post
#84
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 705 Joined: 3-April 11 Member No.: 26,658 |
QUOTE (Werewindlefr @ Jun 24 2013, 06:11 PM) So, I wrote a small python program that would compare the efficiency of an Ares Alpha, a flamethrower spell and a direct combat spell in terms of odds to hit and damage, in various combinations of body, defense test, armor, attacker dice pool and spell force. In almost every configuration, the Ares Alpha (fired in short bursts) is appreciably more damaging and has better odds to hit. And I'm using standard ammo here. Sure, recoil's going to kick in on pass 3, but the point remains that combat magic is somewhat weaker than an assault rifle. Things turn around for a maxed out mage with a rating-3 power foci and a natural magic attribute of 7 casting at force 10, but the drain becomes really large. Direct combat spells are way behind, unless you are facing someone with insane armor or dodge - the definition of 'insane' grows as the force of the spell grows: for a force 4 spell, direct combat spells are not uncommonly better, for force 10 spells they've become useless. Is this also accounting for the elemental secondary effects? ie flamethrower lighting people on fire and dealing extra damage? |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 06:32 PM
Post
#85
|
|
|
Douche Group: Banned Posts: 1,584 Joined: 2-March 11 Member No.: 23,135 |
Also consider that we're not entirely sure on what some of your expendables like Reagents might do to this, what Fetishes do, and what you can accomplish with Foci and Enchanting.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 06:54 PM
Post
#86
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 |
I didn't take elemental effects into account, but I didn't take drain, special ammo, and other features into account. I was just trying to create an accurate hits/limit/damage soak model.
I'm putting the code in spoilers for anyone wanting to tinker with it (warning: it's very raw and I don't often use python, I didn't pay attention to good coding practice) [ Spoiler ]
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:22 PM
Post
#87
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 705 Joined: 3-April 11 Member No.: 26,658 |
QUOTE (Werewindlefr @ Jun 24 2013, 06:54 PM) I didn't take elemental effects into account, but I didn't take drain, special ammo, and other features into account. I was just trying to create an accurate hits/limit/damage soak model. I'm just going to throw out there that the elemental effect is going to be a much bigger deal than ammo. If it's anything like SR4, having element fire added basically doubles your damage. Ammo will probably at best be +1 DV. Failing to account for half the spell is of course going to get you something that is less effective. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:31 PM
Post
#88
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: 13-July 09 Member No.: 17,386 |
If the damage output of a mage is slightly less that the gun bunny isn't that good thing for game balance? I mean the mage can also make the party invisible, levitate them to that second story balcony, Scout the building with impunity, heal any wound taken, and if none of that is useful fall back on his spirits. I fail to see the problem with a damage nerf.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:33 PM
Post
#89
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 525 Joined: 20-December 12 Member No.: 66,005 |
I think it's more like people are upset that the Combat Mage build suddenly became a lot less attractive.
Granted, a Fireball still has the potential to deal a hell of a lot of damage, even though it's Dodge-able and can be resisted with armor. And Direct spells are still un-Dodgeable and can bypass armor, so that alone is still kinda awesome. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:39 PM
Post
#90
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: 13-July 09 Member No.: 17,386 |
QUOTE (tasti man LH @ Jun 24 2013, 11:33 AM) I think it's more like people are upset that the Combat Mage build suddenly became a lot less attractive. Granted, a Fireball still has the potential to deal a hell of a lot of damage, even though it's Dodge-able and can be resisted with armor. And Direct spells are still un-Dodgeable and can bypass armor, so that alone is still kinda awesome. I think they may be stretching the term "A Lot less attractive" a little bit. They are still effective and dangerous opponents, and will likely still be the primary target due to the other advantages they bring to the table. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:43 PM
Post
#91
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 |
QUOTE (Seerow @ Jun 24 2013, 03:22 PM) I'm just going to throw out there that the elemental effect is going to be a much bigger deal than ammo. If it's anything like SR4, having element fire added basically doubles your damage. Ammo will probably at best be +1 DV. Failing to account for half the spell is of course going to get you something that is less effective. An item is set on fire if it fails a armor - spell AP test with a threshold of net hits. Damage is 3P on turn 1, 4P on turn 2, etc., subject to damage resistance. (By the way, turns, not passes!) It's not negligible, but it's not huge either. Certainly not a 'major effect', and certainly not on the level of APDS/Ex rounds QUOTE If the damage output of a mage is slightly less that the gun bunny isn't that good thing for game balance? I'm not making a comment on game balance, although I will probably houserule away the "only one attack per pass" rule into "only one shot per pass - multiple bullets are handled using bursts", and letting mages recklessly cast themselves into unconsciousness with multiple flamethrowers per turn if they so choose. Drain is large in SR5, and 2 force 6 flamethrowers deal quite limite damage when you take into account that the caster has 6S to resist twice (with 10 dice or less, I would say)Anyway, I was just exposing some facts about the direct damage values of these attacks, not factoring a great deal of context details (elemental effect, sammies' IPs, drain, etc). I didn't show this to make a statement about what ideal balance is. Edit: also, summoning is really powerful in SR5, and if you're not scared to face some powerful drain, a force 10 fire spirit isn't that hard to summon at chargen with the right foci and some edge. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:46 PM
Post
#92
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: 13-July 09 Member No.: 17,386 |
QUOTE (Werewindlefr @ Jun 24 2013, 11:43 AM) I'm not making a comment on game balance, although I will probably houserule away the "only one attack per pass" rule into "only one shot per pass - multiple bullets are handled using bursts", and letting mages recklessly cast themselves into unconsciousness with multiple flamethrowers per turn if they so choose. Drain is large in SR5, and 2 force 6 flamethrowers deal quite limite damage when you take into account that the caster has 6S to resist twice (with 10 dice or less, I would say) It seems that the basis of the discussion here revolves around that concept however. So in order to effectively discuss it we need to address it. If it is simply an exercise in math with no judgment attached that is another matter, but there seems to be quite a bit of judgment in the posts. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 07:52 PM
Post
#93
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 |
QUOTE (Daedelus @ Jun 24 2013, 03:46 PM) It seems that the basis of the discussion here revolves around that concept however. So in order to effectively discuss it we need to address it. If it is simply an exercise in math with no judgment attached that is another matter, but there seems to be quite a bit of judgment in the posts. There's no judgement in a quick computer simulation. I'm giving the results of these simulations - whether the relatively weaker combat spells are made up for with summoning, utility or anything else is up to everyone to debate and decide. Then I'm saying separately (that's a personnal judgement, indeed, which is why I separated the statement from my initial one) that I will let mages recklessly spellcast 2 combat spells per pass - but in truth, part of the reason for my wanting that is because I think the "1 attack per pass" thing is gamey and wasn't given any plausible justification, and if a mage can recklessly cast 2 spells, then I won't put arbitrary restrictions as to what kind of spells he can cast. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:08 PM
Post
#94
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 598 Joined: 12-October 05 Member No.: 7,835 |
I think my next magician build is going to specialize in Increase and Decrease Attribute spells. I could reduce an enemies strength to make their +Armor reduce their Agility and Reaction. I could lower their dice pools, Limits and Initiative scores. Assuming these thing exist, the devs had better make the drain on them really steep. Attributes seem more important now. So the magician could give herself the best initiative possible for PCs, cast early in the combat round and call out who her teammates should focus on first. And since dodge and armor shouldn't be a factor in the resistance of those spells, splitting dice for multiple targets should be no big deal, because who wants a boatload of drain anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:13 PM
Post
#95
|
|
|
Runner Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,039 Joined: 23-March 05 From: The heart of Rywfol Emwolb Industries Member No.: 7,216 |
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Jun 24 2013, 03:08 PM) And since dodge and armor shouldn't be a factor in the resistance of those spells, splitting dice for multiple targets should be no big deal, because who wants a boatload of drain anyway? Don't oversplit your pools to much though as its the number of hits that determines how much your decreasing the stat. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:15 PM
Post
#96
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 598 Joined: 12-October 05 Member No.: 7,835 |
QUOTE (Sendaz @ Jun 24 2013, 04:13 PM) Don't oversplit your pools to much though as its the number of hits that determines how much your decreasing the stat. Yeah, I thought about that. I think I can make a pretty large pool for health spells if I focus on just that. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:19 PM
Post
#97
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: 13-July 09 Member No.: 17,386 |
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Jun 24 2013, 12:08 PM) I think my next magician build is going to specialize in Increase and Decrease Attribute spells. I could reduce an enemies strength to make their +Armor reduce their Agility and Reaction. I could lower their dice pools, Limits and Initiative scores. Assuming these thing exist, the devs had better make the drain on them really steep. Attributes seem more important now. So the magician could give herself the best initiative possible for PCs, cast early in the combat round and call out who her teammates should focus on first. And since dodge and armor shouldn't be a factor in the resistance of those spells, splitting dice for multiple targets should be no big deal, because who wants a boatload of drain anyway? This has always been a very effective group of spells that was way underutilized IMO. the STR decrease spell got a big buff with the armor stacking rules. Not only do you directly reduce the characters armor on a 1:1 basis but you give a penalty as well. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:23 PM
Post
#98
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,803 Joined: 3-February 08 From: Finland Member No.: 15,628 |
QUOTE (Daedelus @ Jun 24 2013, 10:19 PM) This has always been a very effective group of spells that was way underutilized IMO. the STR decrease spell got a big buff with the armor stacking rules. Not only do you directly reduce the characters armor on a 1:1 basis but you give a penalty as well. They don't lose the armor, they just get a penalty same as if they din't have high enough strength,for the amount of +armor their using, to being with. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:23 PM
Post
#99
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 598 Joined: 12-October 05 Member No.: 7,835 |
QUOTE (Daedelus @ Jun 24 2013, 04:19 PM) This has always been a very effective group of spells that was way underutilized IMO. the STR decrease spell got a big buff with the armor stacking rules. Not only do you directly reduce the characters armor on a 1:1 basis but you give a penalty as well. It's still not completely clear to me if the armor bonus disappears. That would be icing on the cake, causing many GMs to simply be conservative with the +Armor enemy combatants wear. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 24 2013, 08:28 PM
Post
#100
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 4-April 08 From: Detroit, MI Member No.: 15,844 |
QUOTE (Shemhazai @ Jun 24 2013, 04:23 PM) It's still not completely clear to me if the armor bonus disappears. That would be icing on the cake, causing many GMs to simply be conservative with the +Armor enemy combatants wear. Bull said you lose part of the benefit of +armor items. Then again, not many runners carry a ballistic shield arround, so aside from the helmet's +2, I don't see this being such a big deal (even though that rule seems quite silly to me). |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 5th June 2025 - 08:13 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.