Your houserule canon Options

[Fatum]

A rule which requires that kind of handwave is a poorly thought-out rule.

A houserule that requires houseruling is a bad houserule? You don't say.

Fatum, how are they getting 2 PP per initiation? do you mean getting 1 PP for the initation & 1 potential PP for raising their Magic?

Yes - that's exactly what'd make them capable of raising their PP count by 2 per initiation grade.

If thats the case may I ask how you handle Mages who have 60 spells?

In my experience, the measure of a mage's ability is by far not the spell count, but how well those are chosen and used.
A mage can ruin your day with direct combat, illusion or mind-control spells at any time, and he only really needs one of each to do that.

Skill groups: Skill groups comes with 1 Specialization for free. Additional ones has normal cost, and max. 1 per skill remains.

So you not only handwave "no specializations with skill groups", but actually add a spec for free? What's the reasoning?

[ggodo]

Availability for Mind Probe Formulae is not 4R. Try 24F instead. Each spell has a separate Availability code.

This is amazing. Why did I never think to give spells an availability at character creation?! I'd put Mind Control at like 30F. Others would be around 20, to require Restricted Gear to take. This would make characters who take the skills to write spells actually worthwhile. It also effectively removes a lot of spells I hate from common play. I love it.

Now I just have to make a list of spells and their availability. Unless you would be kind enough to post yours.

I too would like to request Nath's list. I dislike Mind Probe.

[FriendoftheDork]

That makes light pistols do the same damage code as heavy pistols - the only advantage that heavy pistols have is the -1 AP, which is not really worth the hit to Concealability. Okay if moving the PC's from heavy pistols to light pistols is your intention.


I like these two. It always bugged me a bit that buckshot and flechette were lumped in together price-wise and effectiveness-wise. And the AP one makes sense.

Heavy Pistols retains it's Armor Penetration, also some have higher base damage. AP -1 may be the difference between life and death for a runner, especially when facing a Spirit. The -2 Concealability mod doesn't do all that much difference against trained eyes, and every runner worth his salt has a concealable holster anyway. At least, in my games and in every game I've played with Light Pistols have been ignored. If you really want a concealable gun you go for a hold-out with Stick&Shock anyway.
SO yes, it's intentional. My NPCs will keep using Heavy pistol against the PCs when appropriate still (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

So you not only handwave "no Specializations with Skill Groups", but actually add a spec for free? What's the reasoning?

Why so confrontational? I'm not hand-waving anything, It's a house rule. The reasoning is:
1. Specializations are so powerful that losing access to them is generally not worth it. Players were always splitting up the groups after chargen anyway.
2. If you train excessively with a lot of different weapons you are likely to develop a preference and higher aptitude with one kind. Why can't SEAL teams be Specialized in Automatics just because they have Firearms 6?
3. Skill groups seemed overpriced compared to simply raising the skills you need - Shadowrun already rewards specialization (with lowercase s) too much. This makes it easier to be an all-rounder.
4. Giving skill groups to NPCs makes things easier, and the extra 2 dice really help.

Now, if you only want one skill out of a group, you take the skill. If you want 2 you may already consider getting the third or fourth really cheap. If you wanted 3 you would have gotten it without this house rule anyway, and simply splitting it up to Specialize later.

[Fatum]

Why so confrontational? I'm not hand-waving anything, It's a house rule.

Beg your pardon, never meant it to sound confrontational. Of course it's a houserule, but one I don't understand.
Skill groups are meant to represent generalist knowledge, and already cost less than taking skills individually. Do you really feel that price difference is not sufficient as it is?

1. Specializations are so powerful that losing access to them is generally not worth it. Players were always splitting up the groups after chargen anyway.

Have you considered just letting them split them up on chargen?

2. If you train excessively with a lot of different weapons you are likely to develop a preference and higher aptitude with one kind. Why can't SEAL teams be Specialized in Automatics just because they have Firearms 6?
4. Giving skill groups to NPCs makes things easier, and the extra 2 dice really help.

Wait, you not only use player character creation rules for NPCs, but you don't break up their skill groups at creation either? Why? Do you use mathematically precise approach, with the BP you spend per NPC strictly limited?

3. Skill groups seemed overpriced compared to simply raising the skills you need - Shadowrun already rewards specialization (with lowercase s) too much. This makes it easier to be an all-rounder.

I am not sure getting four skills for the price of two and a half is all that overpriced, but that is a matter of taste of course.

[Nath]

Sorry, I have yet to write down a list. I came up with that rule only after the current PC were created (previously, it just was a yes/no at chargen). So far, I decided Availability on the fly whenever a player asked for a particular spell.
Spells that threaten public safety (Invisibility, Mask, Levitate, Ignite...) have been 8R. Combat spells stood at 8F (as per the rules). Spells that can threaten national security (Mind Probe, Control Thoughts, Control Actions) are 24F. Basically, if you find such formula, the guy selling it is a rogue CIA agent or something like that.

I did not want to forbid many spells at chargen, but the use of the Restricted Gear quality for spell that would have Availability in the 9-20 range is an interesting idea. It would force player to make an extra effort to have ubiquitous spells like Invisibility at chargen. But it's not going to be popular with those who play mages I guess.

[FriendoftheDork]

Beg your pardon, never meant it to sound confrontational. Of course it's a houserule, but one I don't understand.
Skill groups are meant to represent generalist knowledge, and already cost less than taking skills individually. Do you really feel that price difference is not sufficient as it is?

Have you considered just letting them split them up on chargen?

Wait, you not only use player character creation rules for NPCs, but you don't break up their skill groups at creation either? Why? Do you use mathematically precise approach, with the BP you spend per NPC strictly limited?

I am not sure getting four skills for the price of two and a half is all that overpriced, but that is a matter of taste of course.

Alright. The price difference would be sufficient if you could get all useful skills in one group, but quite often you are "dumped" a less useful skill into the group. And some skill groups only have 3 skills anyway.

Now, as it seems you let them split them at chargen, why not just let them keep their group and their specialization(s)?

Also, I think you misunderstood: I Don't generally use PC chargen rules for NPCs, I usually assign points wherever I see fit. And it really speeds it up by taking skill groups when appropriate. Gangers? Close Combat group fits nicely, and the added specialization means they won't lose out any because of it either. The premade Mooks in the book has skill groups, and I can't really see why they would give up 2 dice like that.

I think skill groups are wonky in the first place of course. At character creation it makes sense to invest in some initially, then break them up right away. By RAW you can't reassemble it, so after chargen you are basically simply improving whatever skill you need the most. If it was just a chargen tool, there wouldn't be karma costs for it though. So it is assumed silly character such as the Weapons "Specialist" keep improving these hugely expensive groups and still miss out on specialization. The only skill group I routinely take for my chars is the Influence group, where 3/4 skills are very useful for their category. You only really need 1 melee skill tho, and you can make do with Automatics, and maybe pistols alone. It might seem like a bargain for 3 skill for the cost of 2.5 the cost of one, but not at lower skill levels with specialization. I'd rather have Automatics 4, Pistols 3 and Longarms 2, all with each own specialization (50 karma) than Firearms 4 (55 karma). Each of these skills gives as many dice as just having the skill group or more. And yes, you CAN usually stick to your specialization fairly easily. Semi-Auto? SMGs or ARs?) Sniper Rifles? Yes please.

Now, you can get all of these guns, don't have to fuzz about getting the best of them to mod to heck, with less bookkeeping and slightly more karma. I used to consider simply removing Specializations, but decided to do this instead.

Now you may not understand the need for this, but do you think it will be unbalanced somehow? Will single skills stop being attractive? I think not.

[Makki]

Sorry, I have yet to write down a list. I came up with that rule only after the current PC were created (previously, it just was a yes/no at chargen). So far, I decided Availability on the fly whenever a player asked for a particular spell.
Spells that threaten public safety (Invisibility, Mask, Levitate, Ignite...) have been 8R. Combat spells stood at 8F (as per the rules). Spells that can threaten national security (Mind Probe, Control Thoughts, Control Actions) are 24F. Basically, if you find such formula, the guy selling it is a rogue CIA agent or something like that.

I did not want to forbid many spells at chargen, but the use of the Restricted Gear quality for spell that would have Availability in the 9-20 range is an interesting idea. It would force player to make an extra effort to have ubiquitous spells like Invisibility at chargen. But it's not going to be popular with those who play mages I guess.

I do play Awakened almost exclusively, and I like the idea very much!

[Dakka Dakka]

Spells that threaten public safety (Invisibility, Mask, Levitate, Ignite...) have been 8R. Combat spells stood at 8F (as per the rules). Spells that can threaten national security (Mind Probe, Control Thoughts, Control Actions) are 24F. Basically, if you find such formula, the guy selling it is a rogue CIA agent or something like that.

I don't think that fits well with the fluff. Especially at the beginning of the 6th many magicians had to be self-taught, and few of them would have been in the intelligence services. So the information is out there. I agree that a lot of spells should be forbidden to be sold and the punishment should be severe for buying or selling them, but they should not be harder to get just because they are more of a head-ache for the GM.

@Not all spells at Char Gen: This sounds pretty much just like a BP tax. Either the mage has to invest in the Arcana skill and then be out of the game to research the useful spells himself or he has to pay 8BP instead of 3 BP and can get a maximum of three such spells. Alternately he could spend the BP on a Black Market Pipeline and never have to worry. If you don't want some spells in your game just tell your players beforehand and they can decide whether they want to play in your game.

[Marwynn]

- Halve Essence Costs for all cyberlimb-related 'ware. We get far more interesting characters this way, I actually used a cyberweapon.
- Essence can be regenerated by spending Karma. Magic/Resonance is not recovered.
- SnS deals Stun (E) damage equivalent to the weapon it is being fired from. The primary advantage is range compared to tasers.
- Grenades don't suck.
- Battle Rifles have AR ranges and retain their damage codes. They're Full Auto, uncompensated recoil is doubled.
- Skill Groups can have one specialized skill at chargen. It just makes sense: if you have the Influence Skill Group you're still bound to be a better Liar/Negotiator/etc.


SPELLS
We're treating spells a bit more like Programs. They degrade and they can have options. You don't expend Karma to update Spells (and it's all or nothing), just a bit of nuyen perhaps or a lot of time meditating. Penalty is they become easier to Counterspell.

Spell Options include stuff like: Cast at 1 Force higher than normal max without suffering Physical Drain. +1 Dice on Multi-Cast, etc. These options cost nuyen instead of Karma. Spells don't have to be re-learned either with these new options, just added on to it via the monthly update. That is, as long as you have Arcana.

Oh, and Arcana uses your Tradition's second drain attribute.


Despite all this, our games are traditionally "low power" games.

[Draco18s]

- Grenades don't suck.

Meaning?

[Spells] degrade

Whut.

[Marwynn]

Grenades (Thrown): Less bounce, much more accurate. I don't have the rules on me, but with just 1-2 hits you can get pretty good results. Of course, this is for the damaging grenades. The smoke/gas stuff just gets even better by being more accurate.

Spell Degradation
The thinking behind it is that Spellcasters are all pretty in tune with the manasphere. So the more a spell is used, the more common it becomes in their "general awareness". Wagemages and Street Mages sling a lot of spells, so they gotta stay more current.

If a Mage doesn't update his spells that month by burning up some telesma or spending some time meditating or whatever's traditionally appropriate, then his Spells are treated as being 1 Force lower for Counterspell purposes (including for any Spell Barriers, etc) for each level of degradation.

It's a nuyen sink, basically. But only Runners can afford to regularly burn telesma to keep their stuff up-to-date.

[Bearclaw]

I think a lot of arguments about adepts and initiating would be fixed if the concept of a "power point" was done away with. At my table there is no "buying a power point", there is "raising your magic attribute". With a magic attribute of x, you can buy x points worth of powers.

So, when ANY magical character initiates, at my table, they:
1. Increase their maximum magic attribute by 1 point.
2. Either
a) learn a metamagic feat, or
b) get a point added to their magic attribute.

No problem, no confusion.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I think a lot of arguments about adepts and initiating would be fixed if the concept of a "power point" was done away with. At my table there is no "buying a power point", there is "raising your magic attribute". With a magic attribute of x, you can buy x points worth of powers.

So, when ANY magical character initiates, at my table, they:
1. Increase their maximum magic attribute by 1 point.
2. Either
a) learn a metamagic feat, or
b) get a point added to their magic attribute.

No problem, no confusion.

You don't have to actually purchase that Magic Point? Wow...

[ravensmuse]

- Halve Essence Costs for all cyberlimb-related 'ware. We get far more interesting characters this way, I actually used a cyberweapon.

I was thinking of doing this myself, after I started building a hacker with double cyber-arms and wires and discovered just how "ouch" the Essence costs could be. I realize that thematic element to it, but still, ouch!

- Grenades don't suck.

I'll admit, this cracked me up.

Oh, and Arcana uses your Tradition's second drain attribute.

This I really dig.

I'm getting all sorts of really good houserules from this thread.

[Thanee]

2. Either
a) learn a metamagic feat, or
b) get a point added to their magic attribute.

Yeah, why not make those mages even more powerful! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Bye
Thanee

[Bearclaw]

So far, the things that break the game are still drones, wired reflexes, and sustaining foci, specifically sustaining increase reflexes. Not letting the mage add a couple of extra dice to his magic skills.
This is at my table of course, YMMV.

[lorechaser]

I don't think that fits well with the fluff. Especially at the beginning of the 6th many magicians had to be self-taught, and few of them would have been in the intelligence services. So the information is out there. I agree that a lot of spells should be forbidden to be sold and the punishment should be severe for buying or selling them, but they should not be harder to get just because they are more of a head-ache for the GM.

@Not all spells at Char Gen: This sounds pretty much just like a BP tax. Either the mage has to invest in the Arcana skill and then be out of the game to research the useful spells himself or he has to pay 8BP instead of 3 BP and can get a maximum of three such spells. Alternately he could spend the BP on a Black Market Pipeline and never have to worry. If you don't want some spells in your game just tell your players beforehand and they can decide whether they want to play in your game.

@Not all weapons at Char Gen: This sounds pretty much just like a BP tax. Either the Sam has to invest in the Armorer skill and then be out of the game to make the useful weapons himself or he has to pay extra BP for the weapon, and can get a maximum of three such weapons. Alternatively he could spend the BP on a Black Market Pipeline and never have to worry. If you don't want some weapons in your game just tell your players beforehand and they can decide whether they want to play in your game.

Re: Harder to get - same as above. Why is it harder to get a Full Auto LMG than a Predator? Because the Full Auto LMG has more restrictions on it based on the danger. I can't imagine a government is going to regulate guns down to the model and firing type, but allow any and all spells to have the same level of availability and legality.

Tl;dr: Great rule!

[Tanegar]

So far, the things that break the game are still drones, wired reflexes, and sustaining foci, specifically sustaining increase reflexes. Not letting the mage add a couple of extra dice to his magic skills.
This is at my table of course, YMMV.

Wired reflexes? Really? When the whole combat system is structured around having multiple passes, wired reflexes break the game?

[Dakka Dakka]

@Not all weapons at Char Gen: This sounds pretty much just like a BP tax. Either the Sam has to invest in the Armorer skill and then be out of the game to make the useful weapons himself or he has to pay extra BP for the weapon, and can get a maximum of three such weapons. Alternatively he could spend the BP on a Black Market Pipeline and never have to worry. If you don't want some weapons in your game just tell your players beforehand and they can decide whether they want to play in your game.

Re: Harder to get - same as above. Why is it harder to get a Full Auto LMG than a Predator? Because the Full Auto LMG has more restrictions on it based on the danger. I can't imagine a government is going to regulate guns down to the model and firing type, but allow any and all spells to have the same level of availability and legality.

The difference between spells and military hardware however is that spell formulae can be written down and copied on any sheet of paper*. A picture of such paper could even be distributed via the matrix. Military hardware on the other hand has to be produced, bought or stolen. The relative rarity of the item is responible for the number before the legality letter

* I know that not all traditions would find a sheet of paper an appropriate medium for a spell formula but what is appropriate varies by tradition not by spell. So spell formulae for certain traditions could be more difficult to (re)produce but not certain spells within the same tradition.

[Nath]

I don't think that fits well with the fluff. Especially at the beginning of the 6th many magicians had to be self-taught, and few of them would have been in the intelligence services. So the information is out there. I agree that a lot of spells should be forbidden to be sold and the punishment should be severe for buying or selling them, but they should not be harder to get just because they are more of a head-ache for the GM.

Usually, the fact that something is forbidden to be sold, and the punishment for buying or selling it is severe, does make it harder to get, fluff-wise.

My problem is spells like Mind Probe and Control Thought do not fit well with the fluff either. They're a headache for a gamemaster that tries to tell most any story of espionage black ops. That is, the very thing the game is about. I don't see why Johnson would waste their time and money on street sams, adepts and hackers, except as bodyguards for the mages who know Mind Probe, Control Thoughts and Influence and complete all missions by himself. And there should no such thing as meeting the Johnson face to face either. I don't see how any mage could be allowed in a 20 miles radius around the Washington Mall and the Pentagon and any other sensitive building if anybody could learn those spells.

I'm not saying it's impossible. There's the Arcana skill and spirit mentors and all that. I'm saying people are not going to openly teach or sell it. It can be printed on a sheet of paper. So do the schematics for a nuke or the formulae for chemical weapons. Sell those on a website and see what happens (actually, nothing you would notice for a while, and that's precisely the point...).

Regarding the beginning of the Sixth World, the fluff does not say the entire spells list of the 1st edition was available to any mages in 2011. Daniel Coleman only cast Armor and Ram or something similar when he escaped Abilene. To us, Arcana is just modifiers, thresholds and rolling dice, but maybe totems and immortals refused for a long time to teach the Mind Probe spell, and it took decades before someone actually designed and teach it before FBI or corporate security stormed his labs.

@Not all spells at Char Gen: This sounds pretty much just like a BP tax. Either the mage has to invest in the Arcana skill and then be out of the game to research the useful spells himself or he has to pay 8BP instead of 3 BP and can get a maximum of three such spells. Alternately he could spend the BP on a Black Market Pipeline and never have to worry. If you don't want some spells in your game just tell your players beforehand and they can decide whether they want to play in your game.

Well, the character creation system is all but BP tax. Positive and negative qualities have a cost solely based on how useful or detrimental they are. Contacts cost depends on Loyalty and Influence. Skills cost depends on whether they're considered as active or knowledge, and their range varies greatly: cost is the same between Running or Pilot Aircraft (actually Pilot Every-Godamn-Aircraft-In-The-Creation). Spells, on the other hand, all have the same exact cost. Makeup costs the same than Invisibility.

Introducing a houserule and an actual cost would allow a player who wants to play a ninja-trained mage to have Invisibility and Levitate, but at a higher cost than his teammate who wants to play a explosive ordnance disposal mage with Magic Fingers and Analyze Device. The first is going to get advantage of his spell a lot more often than the later, much like Running versus Pilot Aircraft.

At which point people should start arguing that SR is made for optimization and that pussies shouldn't get a discount for being weak and silly things as "character concept."

[Fatum]

Minding that most initial magic research was done by the shamans of an anti-government group, do you really think there are old spells whose formulae haven't leaked into the Matrix? Or that anyone is capable of suppressing the info that has already leaked?
Rules-wise, I like the rule, or at least the intention behind it. Fluff-wise, eh, it's not that great.

I'm not saying it's impossible. There's the Arcana skill and spirit mentors and all that. I'm saying people are not going to openly teach or sell it. It can be printed on a sheet of paper. So do the schematics for a nuke or the formulae for chemical weapons. Sell those on a website and see what happens (actually, nothing you would notice for a while, and that's precisely the point...).

Nothing happens. Hell, go to Darknet, there's CP in HD on their imageboard mainpages, and nothing's happening to them.

[Jareth Valar]

I allow extra specializations.

Skill 1-3 = 1
skill 4-6 = 2
Skill 7 = 3

More when I have more time to post. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Dakka Dakka]

I allow extra specializations.

Do they stack? For example SCUBA diving in caves with specializations SCUBA and cave diving.

[Jareth Valar]

Do they stack? For example SCUBA diving in caves with specializations SCUBA and cave diving.

Never come up before, but I would probably say use the most appropriate spec. No double dipping. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Bearclaw]

Wired reflexes? Really? When the whole combat system is structured around having multiple passes, wired reflexes break the game?

Only in that most of the mooks don't have it. And if any of the players don't have it, they end up waiting 20 minutes before they get another turn. It doesn't make it unplayable, but it makes it so everyone has to have some type of initiative booster if they want to play. It's been a problem since 1st edition. Not really much to do about it. Even the silly "everyone goes on the first pass" rule just makes sure that the non-boosted get 1 action before they're forgotten about.