Modified Increase Reflexes spell, Makes Force matter Options

[Phasma Felis]

The current Increase Reflexes thread has mostly turned into a flamewar, so I'm posting this in its own thread. Part of the issue there was that, unlike most other powerful spells, the Increase Reflexes spells had no intrinsic power gain from increased Force (although the Force still affects vulnerability to dispelling, wards, and so forth). Here's a possible solution.

Okay, in First and Second Edition, a lot of (currently) single spells were divided into three or four levels--e.g., Mana Dart/Missile/Bolt instead of Manabolt, or Heal Light/Moderate/Serious/Deadly Wounds instead of Heal. In Third, almost all of these were merged into one spell, with either a variable drain level or scaled effects depending on number of successes, capped by Force. The Increase Reflexes spells were the only ones not merged, that I can think of.

So, why not merge them into a single spell? Give it +1(D) drain (the same as Increase Reflexes +2, if anyone's counting) and say that every two successes increase the subject's Initiative dice by one, to a maximum of half the Force of the spell (rounded down), and by no more than three in any case.

This is modeled off the Increase Attribute spells, which add one to the target for every two successes and cap at the spell's Force. I've halved the cap and given it a hard maximum, given how powerful extra initiative dice can be. For the record, it now takes a Force of 5, Drain of 5D, and 6 successes to achieve +3 init dice, rather than a Force of 1, drain of 3D, and 1 success. Does that seem balanced?

[Adarael]

Hmm. That's a decent idea - mostly because in my experience, adding to the force of a spell solely so it's harder to dispel is incredibly wasteful. If the enemy mages are trying to dispel your stuff and not actually kill you, they're screwed (in general) - and any mage worth his salt oughta suppress or shatter a ward before moving through it.

Personally, what I've done this this: each extra die is a separate spell, and in order to be effective at its' maximum level, it must be learned at a force equal to twice the extra dice it'll give you, and you must gather at least two successes per extra die you wanna get. I.E. if you learned Increase Reflexes +3 at force 6 (so you could gather the absolute bonus, given enough successes), and got four successes, you'd nab an extra two dice, but not three. The only reason to learn these spells at less than their required 'maximum effectiveness' force is so that you can later increase the force with a minimum of research (I.E. house rule - it's easier to increase the force of a spell you already know, research wise, than to research an entirely new spell.)

[John Campbell]

Problem is, you're trying to fix something that isn't actually broken. While making the spell dependent on Force is more elegant, the solution you propose actually cripples the spell. You're increasing its cost while decreasing its effectiveness. As I pointed out in the other thread, when you figure up the resource costs of starting with Increase Reflexes +3 at Force 1, and a sustaining focus for it, it slots fairly neatly into the cost structure of cyber reflex enhancements. With your proposal, in order to get the same effect, you have to get Increase Reflexes at Force 6... which means paying six times as much for the sustaining focus, and using six times as many Spell Points to bond it, and six times as many Spell Points for the spell itself. And it uses up half of the Spell Points a Priority A full mage gets. If you want to have anything like a decent spell selection, you have to replace those... at 25,000Y a pop. Add in the price of the focus hardware, and you've just spent 390,000Y of your starting resources on a magical reflex booster that's inferior to Wired 2, which only costs 165,000Y. Hell, you can go alphaware on the Wired 2 and still come out ahead.

And consider that, if you're a full mage, you don't have that 1,000,000Y A Resources priority available to pay for all this, so that huge price tag is even more painful than it is for sammies...

[Glyph]

I agree with John. The increase reflexes spell is not close to the level of speed that a sammie can get (especially if you allow bioware - which most GMs do). It lets the mage have a slightly better chance of surviving and an opportunity to do a few extra actions such as ducking under cover. A Force: 1 increase reflexes spell and a sustaining focus for it let a low-resource mage have a chance, and are only part of the arsenal that a high-resource mage needs to buy. Increasing its cost gimps the mage too much for what is a second-rate initiative boost.

[TinkerGnome]

The solution I always look at as most likely is this:

Increase Reflexes
Type: M * Target: Reaction * Duration: S * Drain: +1(S)
This spell increases the reflexes of a voluntary target. For every two successes in casting, the target gains one extra initiative die to a maximum number of additional dice equal to the force of the spell or three, whichever is lower.

Which means you now need a force 3 spell for +3 dice of initiative. The drain is lower, but you're also going to be rolling fewer dice to resist it because you need more dice on the casting. A force 3 sustaining focus is 45,000 :nuyen: and permit only. Six spell points run you 150,000 :nuyen: for a "cost" of 195,000 :nuyen: for the lot. This compares fairly well with the closest equivalent (wired reflexes 2 with a reflex trigger, for 178,000 :nuyen:), particularly considering the cyber equivalent represents fully 1/2 of a sammie's available essence whereas this represents approximately 1/4 of a mage's starting spell points (of which more can be purchased cheaply, unlike a samie's essence).

[Fortune]

[Polaris]

Guys,

First of all I am going to do my utmost to discuss the issue without any emotional context and I am asking everyone else here to do likewise.

That said, I rather like Phesma's house rule and I add that our table uses a rule very much like it (except you get +3d6 at force 5 rather than six but that is the only real difference).

Let's compare Increased Reflexes +3 to Wired Reflexes 2 (the closest cyberware counterpart), and I think you will quickly see why a fix is in order.

Increase Reflexes +3:

Benefit: +3d6 initiative anywhere (even astral) [average of +10.5 init]

Cost: 15,000 nuyen and two spell points.

Legality: Legal


Wired Reflexes 2:

Benefit: +4 reaction, +2d6 initiative [average +11 init]

Cost: 165,000 nuyen and three essense

Legality: 4P-Q

Please note that I broke apart the opportunity cost (spell points and essense) and the actual cost you pay in nuyen. I do so because not all mages in fact pay 50,000 nuyen for the spell and focus.

For example, if a mage simply allocated the two spell points without replaceing them, then the actual cost is merely 15,000 nuyen. There is an opportunity cost of 2 spell points but that doesn't have an exact nuyen value.

In another example, it is quite possible with Pointbuy (a canonical char-gen system) to have both 1 million starting nuyen and be a fully awakened mage. In such a case you will probably buy the maximum (50) spell points anyway and so again you don't have any extra nuyen cost for this combination (other than the focus), just the opportunity cost.

Likewise the street-sam doesn't just pay nuyen for wired reflexes. He also pays three essense and while there isn't a canonical way of buying essense with nuyen (which is a good thing btw), it does reflect a severe opportunity cost since the street sam only gets six essense to start with. Indeed the opportunity cost is actually steeper for the street-sam (50%) than the mage (4-8%)

So let's look at it:

Gross Benefit: This is nearly a tie with the edge going to wired reflexes two because the +4 reaction is generally better than the extra die of initiative.

Nuyen Cost: The magical way wins by a mile here by 150,000 nuyen which is no joke.

Opportunity Cost: Again the magical way comes out way ahead. The mage has to dedicate 4-8% of his starting spell points while the street-sam has to dedicate 50% of his essense.

Net Benefit: The magical way is clearly and overwhelmingly better. The reason mundanes don't use it is because no mage (with any sense and most have it) will cast the spell/focus on them because the focus represents a material link.


Now let's repeat the analysis if you need a force 6 spell to get the same effect:

New Improved Init Force 6:

Benefit: +3d6 Init [+10.5 init average]

Cost: 180,000 nuyen

Opportunity Cost: 12 spell points

Wired Reflexes 2:

Benefit: +4 reaction, +2d6 Init [+11 init average]

Cost: 165,000 nuyen

Opportunity Cost: 3 essense

Now the analysis shows that the two are nearly balanced with the street-sam having a slight edge (which is good because speed is a street-sam speciality)

Gross Benefit: Again almost a tie with the wired reflexes coming out slightly ahead.

Cost: Now the wired reflexes has a slight (15,000 nuyen) edge but the two are nearly the same.

Opportunity Cost: The mage still has the edge in this category since this combo only takes 24-48% of the starting spell points while the wired reflexes will still take 50% of the street-sam's starting essence. The gap is much closer but the mage still has the edge.

Net Benefit: The street sam has the edge in two categories (slighly) while the mage has the edge in one (slightly). Thus I would say that this is nearly balanced with the nod going to the street sam.

Conclusion: This is a good houserule at least on first analysis and seems to be balanced.

-Polaris

[John Campbell]

Tinker: That's better, but still problematic.The two successes for one Initiative die thing is painful (this actually applies to the previous variants as well, but I forgot to mention it earlier).

Consider if you've got what I'd say is a fairly standard starting combat mage, reasonably min-maxed without being ludicrously excessive: 6 Int, 6 Will, 4 Quickness, 6 Magic, 6 Sorcery. This gives 5 Reaction and 6 Spell Pool.

With 12 dice to throw at your Increase Reflexes spell and a TN of 5, you can expect 2-3 successes, which'll give you +1Initiative, maybe +2 if you're lucky. And that's if you dedicate the entire Spell Pool to the casting, which leaves you with no margin of error for soaking S Drain. Even with a drain resistance TN at the minimum 2, you'll be taking L Drain more often than not. If you've got only a 4 Reaction, you can probably make the +3 the majority of the time, if you use your entire Spell Pool, but that still leaves no margin of error on the Drain. If you play it safe on the Drain, you're back down to the +2.

If you really think the spell needs fixing (I don't think it's broken, personally... as it stands, it's not pretty, but it works), I'd suggest bonus Initiative dice equal to Force (max 3... and capping the useful Force that way is also not pretty, but is necessary to avoid munchkinism), but either only one success necessary for full effect, or one success per bonus die. Requiring two successes per bonus die makes it too ineffective.

[BitBasher]

I don't have any issue with the way the spell is in the book now, and I don't mind the suggestions listed above.

I simply like the unified single spell instead of the three separate spells becuase that's consistent with the way spells were changed in SR. Almost all other spells were unified... treat and heal, all combat and damaging manipulations spells. I just want to see this one make sense incontext by seeing it as one spell.

Since noone in my game has yet taken this spell I haven't had it come up, but some of the suggestions I have seen are good.

The fact or the matter is that virtually all the opponents a SR team will face will have no reflex enhancements. Due to the permanence of cyberware and the costs of anchoring magic on mndanes 99.9% of all corp security and police just dont use it. The people that do use it, if you're competent and stealthy you can nearly always avoid them. But hey, everyone's game is different.

[Sunday_Gamer]

I've never had a big problem with the spell in general, the only thing we changed is that a force 2 spell cannot give you +3 anything, ever.

But you do compare it to wired reflexes which is not terribly fair. For starters, your force 2 spell is a joke for any mage to take down and I do mean, a joke.
Also, you forget that mages don't do anywhere near as much with their actions as samurai for one simple reason: sorcery dice get used up, firearms dice don't.

Other than that, I don't have a big problem with reflex spells, it depends on the GM, like most other things. My current shaman for instance, is waiting to get rank 3 before getting a force 3 reflex booster tattooed, spending 6 karma will give me force 12 for purposes of resisting people messing with it and my masking and rank 3 will enable me to conceal the spell.

I'd say that whole show is gonna run me a little more than 15k and 2 spell points.

Sunday.

[Polaris]

Sunday Gamer,

How is the comparison unfair. I already discussed (and pretty convincingly showed) in the prior thread that you can pretty much insure that the focus is down until you need it (such as passing through wards) and up when you do.

Even Cain admitted that dispelling is not an issue in this case.

Because of that, you are looking are a 2 spell point investment (one for the spell and one for the foci) and 15000 nuyen.

Also, sorcerery dice do not get used up. Spell Pool dice do, but there is nothing in the rulebook that says that you have to use sorcerery dice for spell defense. You get to use sorcerer dice and/or spell pool dice. That means you can cast with your full sorcerery skill at every pass....and even use it to fight elementals (if astral).

As for your plan, have at it, I suppose. Personally, I would have that pretty far down on my list of priorites especially if I had the masking metamagic technique (which I almost always take early).

-Polaris

[TinkerGnome]

[Zazen]

[Curugul]

[Zazen]

[Sphynx]

Back to the original topic, what you should do is use the MitS to 'create' the spell. If you do, you end up with a spell that has the same drain as the +1D6 spell (+1S), that works exactly like the attribute spells in regards to every 2 successes grants a +1 dice. Exception being that now a Force 6 spell could get to +6Dice for +1S drain.

That's the one and ONLY reason I agree that the exception to an increased Reflex spell should be limited ot Force/2, and why I'd allow a Force 8 spell to have +4D6 and a Force 10 to have a +5D6, etc, etc.

PS, there was a Poll started on this topic, by me, some time back, might wanna go read the comments in there.

Sphynx

[TinkerGnome]

[The White Dwarf]

The ideas here are along the lines that most people think of when trying to make this spell fit the context of the others. I personally dont use any house rule on it, because the way our games pan out its not considered a "must have" and even when taken is hardly broken. But thats us.

If youre going to make the (inevitable) comparison to cyber enchancements, one must also consider the "non-stat" aspects. Basically that the spell version does NOT add to reaction, CAN be negated by the enemy, and DOES have issues with wards. The cyber version DOES boost reaction, and while it gets through wards okay I suppose a cyberscanner could be problematic (although I see that as very rare compared to wards, at least for consideration on a run).

Those instances alone, coupled with the average total initiative curve of both (I posted a comparision in the other thread but it was overlooked) make the spell version weaker IMO, relative to the cyber.

Another thing to consider is that in order to make the most use of the force 1 sustaining focus, masking can come into play. When this is added to the cost it balances out well as is. This is of course, very style dependant (not everyone will "need" masking for this) but Im just pointing out that if you extrapolate the cost/use out some it can balance whereas before maybe it didnt. The comparison is very situationally dependant for cost to benefit.

[Sphynx]

I dont think anyone (other than Polaris) ever worries about the 'balance' issue between spell and cyber. The purpose of all these threads (up until someone de-rails it by trying to prove balance issues) is to ask a simple question of 'how to standardize the obviously non-standard way of the reflex spell". Cyber having nothing to do with it at all.

Making it like all the other attribute spells is a VERY common idea that people pick up on, though apparently don't always stick too according to the Poll earlier. It makes ALOT more sense to convert it to a single spell with Force and Successes being the factor on how many dice you get. The need for Force and Success aren't because it's unbalanced otherwise, but rather to 'clean up' the last of the spells.

There was a time when ALL attribute spells were learned in the same manner, I recall my first +4 Body spell. The cap of 4 was removed and the Force/Success was added in its stead. Why not the Reflex Spell? And although I imagine in a 4th Edition it will be done the same as the attribute spells, for now everyone who goes through it eventually asks the 'why' and a few of us who have create our House Rule to make more sense and 'clean up' the last of the Attribute spells in the process.

Sphynx

[The White Dwarf]

Rofl, true enough. I think if it was changed to a sliding scale (not that it needs to be imo, but it would make sense to fit it in with the others), something such as "2 successes = +1 die, up to a bonus = to spell force" would work well enough. Its similar to a lot of spells but doesnt ream you into needing double the force of the bonus, and I cant think of any spells off the top of my head that limit the bonus to half the force. That would up it to a force 3 minimum for the full bonus, and be difficult enough to cast that, while doable, its hard enough you couldnt just recast all the time. However, it would also make the spell far less useful; I mean we almost never take any "buff" spells as is, and this one only rarely. Changing it would probably cross it off the lists in our game for good.

[TinkerGnome]

While this method makes it harder to cast, it also makes it significantly easier to resist the drain for. A force 3 version of the spell would have a drain of 2S. Compared to the 3D you currently face when trying to get +3, it's a far sight easier to resist, which means you can throw more dice to successes and probably come up with +2d6 reliably :)

[Polaris]

Guys,

Even if you include the reaction bonuses, Magic still comes way out ahead with the rules as written. I can show this by comparing these two combinations:

Magic:

Increased Reaction Force 6 w/Force 6 Sustaining Foci
Increased Reflexes +3 Force 1 w/Force 1 Sustaining Foci

Cyber:

Wired Reflexes +3


Magic:

Gain: +3d6 Initiative, +6 Reaction

Cost: 195,000 nuyen

Opportunity Cost: 14 spell points


Cyberware:

Gain: +3d6 initiative, +6 Reaction

Cost: 500,000 nuyen

Opportunity Cost: 5 essence


Gross Gains: These are identical in both cases.

Gross Cost: Magic is miles ahead here with a 305,000 nuyen advantage

Gross Opportunity Cost: Magic is again miles ahead since the opportunity cost for a mage is 28-56% of your starting spell points while the opportunity cost for the street-sam is 78%(!!) of his starting essence.

Again, magic is overwhelmingly superior which means some sort of house rule is badly needed.

-Polaris

[Zazen]

:please:

[Polaris]

Zazen,

I make a cogent, topical, and perfectly fair comparison and you just roll your eyes. 'nuff said.

-Polaris

[Zazen]