See the rules:

"A single net hit is enough to form the bond and admit
the character to the group."



The problem is that a Shaman with Arcana has no hope of ever joining a lodge.

2 Logic + 6 Arcana = 8 dice.

Less than even odds to get 3 hits, which is:
1 (base) + 1 (5 members or less) + 1 (nethit)

I'd advocate the test using Drain Stat + Arcana or Ritual Spellcasting*

I would also ignore the -3 penalty for gease when the group has any geas in their strictures as well as off a +1 bonus if the geas matches with what the character has ("HEY GUYS, I do the same things you do! We're perfect for each other!")

*Ritual casting needs some love.

Haven't looked at the group rules lately. Great they introduce a new mechanic for one test. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/silly.gif)
Also the rules don't say what happens if the test succeeds with 0 net hits.

Who said that Shamans may only have LOG 2? Who said that they may not cast Increase LOG beforehand?
If the shaman is the third member he will only need 2 hits.
BTW as I read it the members only add to the threshold if they are 5 or more. 2-4 Members are less than five so the threshold does not increase since there are no five members.

While I understand your sentiment this would make as much sense as using Attribute+Knitting

Agreed.

Silly indeed.



Possible that they'd have higher, yes, but likely not as high as a Logic-drain tradition. And Increase Logic is kinda...cheap. There's no reason that would work (fluffwise) and its munchkin at best (crunch wise).



You are correct, which means no group (especially shamanic) would ever be capable of increasing beyond ~13 members without splitting. Getting above 18 would require much edge and other boosts which is silly. It should not take Edge to join a magical group.



Why would a joining shamanic lodge require Logic? It seems appropriate to me that it would use Charisma. Each to his own, though.

Except "street" knowledge or that handed on in verbal traditions relies more in Intuition than Logic which is for Academic knowledge skills. Arcana is mainly about creating spell formulae, which Shamans don't do.

Also I don't like the fact that it's in street magic thus often overlooked by new players of SR4.

Why can't this Arcana check be based on Magic? Or does some people here think that Magic and joining Magical Groups is as appropriate as Knitting?

...You mean you guys don't knit your spell formulas into tapestries? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

Not cheaper than using drugs. What fluff reason would there be for drugs or 'ware to work? Don't remember though how much Logic-boosting ware there is.

Agreed

I was referring to the use of the Ritual Spellcasting skill instead of Arcana. The Attribute is chosen quite arbitrarily, I agree. Maybe the authors didn't even think about the implications and just thought, since Arcana is usually used with Logic, why not use it here as well.

They don't? How do they develop new spells? It won't be a complex equation as for Hermetics but shamans also rely on Spell Formulae, in the form of statues, dreamcatchers or even written down dance steps etc.

Basing it on Magic sounds like a good idea to me.

Based on this line from SM:

It is a ritual yes, but it isn't a spell. So Arcana is applicable, but Ritual Spellcasting isn't IMHO.

I was going to suggest this myself, after all Arcana + Magic and Enchanging + magic are both used in other tests, why not here?

Or perhaps the test should be 1/5 members, Minimum one Hit.

Or allow Deeds for bonus dice?

The only problem I see basing it off Magic is that in the fluff presentation of the world there aren't that many people with Magic 6. Most would be joining a group to learn about magic in the first place* and would likely have Magic 3 or so. Likewise, they wouldn't have much in the way of Arcana either.

*Even though the only mechanical benefit a character gets is a lower initiation cost, but that's not why groups are set up...

Shamans seems to learn spells from teachers alot more often than Mages. Sure it might be possible to somehow write down instructions and mystical rituals in Shamanic tradition as well (even if it's really an oral tradition), but I suppose this is much less common.

Changing to Magic makes it less traditon biased, but the fact is simply that the difficulties are too high.

I say keep it as Logic based for arcana(though the group rules are borked). Let logic traditions have something worth a damn.

It would be cool if everything just fell under your stat. Like when I am playing a hermetic, I'm like why can't I bind 3 more spirits it should be based on logic. what do you mean I only have 6 dice in my assensing pool it should be based on logic. So if other parts of magic are okay to be under different stats, let arcana fall under logic, or are you guys actually bumping into the focus limit very often and you think logic is too awesome as is.

Hermetics have to raise their intuition and charisma to decent levels if they want to pull off some basics in the magic arena, so don't be surprised if your shaman or intuition based spellslinger has to drop some points into logic.

as has been pointed out, shamans DO create spell formulae. they DO design focuses. they have just as much use for arcana as any other magician.

arcana is listed right in SR4A.

and why should it be based on magic? is there some sort of horrible injustice that the shaman *gasp* actually has to have more than 2 good attributes? oh, the horror, that poor shaman, not being able to have 6 dump stats. quickly, everyone, let's all get together for a pity party for the poor, mistreated shaman.

seriously? if any tradition has a right to complain, it's *intuition* based traditions, who's only synergy with drain attribute is in assensing. which is much less likely to be a big deal than, say, getting more spirits, or being able to use more focuses.

magic is powerful, but expensive, in shadowrun. get used to it. it's a balancing feature of magic that you pay for it, and it isn't cheap.

and again, what's this nonsense about 8 dice making it impossible for a shaman to join because of a threshold of 3? have you even DONE any math on this? the dice do occasionally roll something other than the average result, you know. i heard a rumor the other day that someone even managed to roll a 5+ on a single dice, even though the average tells us he should only get 0.33333 hits. imagine that. (and for that matter, getting 8 dice only requires log 2, skill 3, and 3 bonus dice from teamwork... which, assuming we have only 2 other members in the group, with 5 dice in their pools, gives a dicepool of 10 to make 3 hits for the teamwork test... pretty good odds of giving 8 dice for that easy). and note that it's +1 threshold per 5 members. which means that a group with 2-4 members (which quite obviously does not have 5 members) has an effective threshold of 2 (actually 1, but requiring 1 net hit). which means that our theoretical dicepool of 8 (for that poor, mistreated shaman) actually has a really good chance of making the threshold, and even more so when you consider that he gets 2 chances at it.

if you want to change something, about the only thing that i see needing to change is some wording to clarify what the actual threshold is (since requiring 1 net hit is essentially increasing the threshold) or removing the 1 net hit required (if that is a typo) and paying the karma only on a successful attempt.

edit: just to give an example of the fact that it is entirely possible: http://invisiblecastle.com/roller/view/2506808/

13 out of the (relatively small) sample of 20 rolls generated 3 or more hits on a dicepool of 8 (though one glitched, could be a problem if you don't have a spirit using guard. still, sufficient for a group of 5-9 people). 7 out of 20 from the sample rolls made a threshold of 4 or more (sufficient to join a group of 10-14 people). 19 out of 20 had 2 hits (sufficient to join a group of 2-4 people), with only one roll failing to make the 2 hits required. that was with only one attempt, mind you. if we let them reroll on a failure, it would of course improve. 3 and even 4 hits on 8 dice is not some sort of impossible task.

This post has been edited by Jaid: May 5 2010, 08:41 PM

Which is to say little to no use for any magician who doesn' create spell formulae or design focuses, which is the brunt of magicians.

The point, I think, is that you have a great chance of paying karma for nothing if the group isn't preposterously small.

After consideration it's pretty clear house rules or founding your own group is the cure...and a group over time saves so much in initiation karma the 5 to join and BP/karma spent on a really soft skill like Arcana are paid for in the savings.

Some ideas I've had:

If the founders get bonus dice for each stricture, why not latter applicants?

IIRC, the founders do NOT forfeit the 5 karma for unsuccessful attempts but only pay when they succeed at founding a group.


Muspellsheimr, I'm not seeing where Teamwork is allowed in joining an existing group. It is allowed for founding however (and yet another feather in the cap of founding as opposed to joining).

Zeropoint, that is an excellent rationale for dealing with groups in the 20s/30s, but looking at a write-up of the Mystic Crusaders (33 members) doesn't really lead me to believe they do operate in cells.

My end result is that the runner group I'm joining will have 3 Awakened (2 mages, 1 Adept). Even with three different traditions, each char will have a 4-6 dp from Arcana/Logic and with about 5 strictures and teamwork it shouldn't be too hard to form the group.

so you're saying there's a problem with people who have shown absolutely 0 desire to understand magic having a hard time joining a group dedicated to the study of magic when the probability of said person adding anything to the group's knowledge is very low?



the solution to this is to pay karma when you succeed instead of when you attempt, not to modify the attempt.

show where it says that you can't. the default rule is that you can use teamwork on tests, provided it's reasonable. i see no reason why you couldn't have help in the form of others participating in the ritual with you, so it's perfectly reasonable that you could benefit from a teamwork test.

i mean, seriously... you're thinking they have to include explicit statements telling you when they allow teamwork tests? why even bother having a general rule for teamwork tests if you're going to have to include specific rules for every possible time you could use teamwork?

I dunno, this seems awfully straightforward to me...

No, because that's not what Arcana is. That's what knowledge skills like Magic Background are for. Arcana is a niche skill for niche roles. There's no reason at all that people should be effectively locked out of joining a group just because they're not interested in researching and developing new types of magic. What does that even have to do with bonding with a group at all?

It's like saying everyone has to know Ritual Spellcasting in order to join a group, even if the group doesn't have the Exclusive Ritual restriction or is limited only to Conjurers or Adepts. And even groups that thrives on or even outright encourages the use of geasa and foci (like one based on Hedge Witchcraft might) still suffer penalties because some other groups don't like geasa and foci reliance. That's literally the only reason for that stupid penalty. Because some damn groups don't like them. "Most magical groups frown upon applicants too dependent on geasa or suffering from focus addiction. Both are seen as signs of weakness and inability to control one’s Talent. Characters with either Negative quality apply a –3 modifier to the dice pool."

These rules are all asinine and idiotic. In a nutshell, they're effectively saying that if you're not a staunch Republican mage who practices Hermetic Magic and possesses a Th.D. in Applied Thaumaturgical Research, you don't deserve to be in a magical group.

Intersting point RAW I guess. I just viewed magic group joining like taking SATs.

Setting: Totally appropriate magical lodge, with a variety of stern/apathetic/bored/encouraging mages sitting in an examiner's circle.

"We welcome you, Adolfus Kreigsmeir, in your petition today to join the mighty order of The Mystic Crusaders. Do you stand ready for your examination and prepared to pledge your loyalty and dedication to us...the sole bastion of magical righteousness present on this Earth? What say you?"

"I am and stand ready to pledge, Archmagus."

"We shall begin."

Professor Snape-type stands with a scowl. "Excuse please, but who the $%^& is that beside you?!!?"

"Him? My friend Bob. Here's here to help."

Depending on the type of ritual assistance might be reasonable, common, expected, or even necessary. I'm thinking back to all the tv shows I've seen where someone "anchors" or tags along in a Vulcan Mind Meld or whatnot. Depending on the tradition and the fluff involved in the ritual, a "second", or "anchor", or "guide", etc might be very reasonable. Just my take.

the applicant makes the test. just like a hacker makes a test in the matrix. is the hacker somehow constrained from getting a teamwork benefit? no. no he isn't. because that would be an asinine interpretation of the rules.

who helps the applicant? why the group he's trying to join, of course. each of whom have the arcana skill, based on the fact that they tried to join the group.

as far as what arcana is, well, "Arcana governs the practical aspects of a tradition’s magical theory and the application of magic in creative new ways." according to my copy of street magic. knowledge skills are not for practical aspects, they're for theoretical aspects. an engineer is trained to know all kinds of useful information about different welds, how strong they are, what materials they work on, etc. but if you want to actually weld something, well, you get a welder.

and no, that isn't the only reason for the penalty. notice that's a separate sentence. note that there is nothing that says "because of this..." or "as a result of this..." or "this means that..."

it just tells us that some groups don't approve of those negative qualities. full stop. they see those qualities as weaknesses. full stop. those qualities cause a -3 penalty to the arcana attempt to join a group. full stop.

and again, consider what a magic group is: they're a group dedicated to studying the deeper mysteries of magic (ie initiating). if you can't even write a damn spell down (or craft a proper sculpture, or whatever your tradition does to create spell formulae) then what the hell do you expect to contribute to such a group?

Whatever.

And stuff like this is why, in fact, SR requires a GM to interpret the rules, and is not a "choose your own adventure" book (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)