Magic Charactors Better than Mundane?, A discussion comparing mundayne to magic Options

[SinN]

Ive been playing for a year, and sort of developed my own oppinions about certain types of charactors. One of which, being that I beleive that awakened charactors have a bigger advantage over mundayne charactors. Anyone agree?
I've always followed one rule in SR combat, "Kill the mage first."

fistandantilus3.0 - Edit:Title Spelling Corrected. :)

[Ranneko]

Mundane, the word you are looking for is mundane.

Mages are one of the first things to go for, but in a sustained fight, they can damage themselves trying to take out opponents, whereas a street sam needs to use grenades and the like to do that.

[De Badd Ass]

[SinN]

No, i mean kill the mage first. Its worked out for me since the beggining. But i like your way of putting it.

[Konsaki]

I like how everyone always thinks that the mage stands out like Gandalf in a firefight. Come on, people. You really expect it to be that easy to see a mage?

1 - A mage doesnt have to gesture to cast a spell
2 - A mage doesnt have to speak to cast a spell
3 - A mage wears normal cloths just like your standard mundane
4 - He can use a pistol or other weapons just like any other meta-human
5 - Unless you yourself are awakened, odds are, you wont recognise someone as a mage.

It's not like D&D where you can just do the quick checks for Robes, Staff and Pointy hat...

[mfb]

doesn't SR4 have rules similar to SR3 for noticing a spell being cast? if not, spotting a mage isn't too hard; your mage will have to spot them astrally, then mark them in VR. if so, spotting mage will be easy--he'll be the guy you notice casting a spell.

as for advantages... well, i've heard lots of people complain that mages and adepts are too powerful in SR3. i haven't encountered that problem myself; i find both character types to have strengths and weaknesses that make them different from, but not better than, other character types. the arguments i hear about mages and adepts being overpowered in SR4 are very similar to the ones i hear about relating to SR3, so i'm not inclined to give them much credence.

[De Badd Ass]

I agree with Konsaki about mage spotting. The only thing that gives the mage away is the lack of obvious cyber, or a katana. A runner is either a sammi or a mage, right?

Another possibility, you are meta-gaming, and recognize the mage because the GM is using DnD miniatures. :spin: Or maybe you just announce, "I shoot the mage", and your GM doesn't ask you, "which figure is the mage?".

OR!!! maybe your game is like the one I am playing in. The last few runs, ALL the opponents were either mages or spirits; bug shamans and bug spirits, blood mages and blood spirits; etc. You say, "I shoot the mage", and the GM responds, "Which one?" :D

[psykotisk_overle...]

My upcoming campaign will have half or so of the players awakened, I think they'll see a lot of magical opposition. Geek the mages first indeed.

Actually for combat alone, is magic really that much better than mundane? It seems to me that if you can carry a few big guns to the fight you get bigger bangs than with most spells, of course spells are easier to sneak past security with than big guns.

[SinN]

Thats the point I was trying to make. Also, if you had the choice, would you take really big guns that go bang? Or spells?

[dog_xinu]

it is all personal opinion. In my campaign, there is not one "mage" in the bunch. We have street sammies, TM and adepts (physical/gun/charisma). So what is better? it all just depends. mages are better at countering other mages. Mages vs Sammies? it just depends.

I normally play non-mages. Either cybered sammie or adept (physical/gun). But I do on the occasion play the mage type.

so the question is "what" do you want to do? "how" do you want to accomplish it?


there are sooo many options...

dog

[SinN]

And the award for most dramatic speach goes to....

[ElFenrir]

[Konsaki]

You are correct ElFenrir, TMs are on the low end of combat prowess compared to everyone else. Though they can be gods in the matrix given enough time, and can perform combat through a drone or through drone hoards. Of course, if a TM were to sacrafice 1 point of resonance for Synaptic Boosters II, discounting how the TM got 160,000 cred, their combat ability goes up drasticly, but that can be said of any PC.

[ElFenrir]

Yeah, it's kind of strange in a way. Ok, speaking straight defense ability...you can make a hacker, mage, or face with the ability to defend themselves if necessary(ie, they dont suffer from that classic 'gotta stay in the center of the party' syndrome of varied fantasy systems. ;)) But technos seem to need a lil extra protection. I guess this can simply go toward the number of BP that must be spend on a techno to make them really effective. While hackers can get Electronics and Cracking Group and call it a day(and some resources...thankfully no longer needing gobs and gobs of nuyen like deckers did), Technos need the above plus Tasking, and the big BP sink are the complex forms...technically speaking, a hacker can spend 80 BP for groups to max his skills and have a ton left over, if a techno wants to max the skills(groups), its 120 BP and at least 40 for the complex forms...thats coming dangerously close to half.

Ive also heard that even IN the matrix Technos have a little bit of a harder time against straight hackers...but i suppose after karma and submersion happened they'd catch up. I'd like to see a technomancer with grades of submursion under his belt...talk about nightmare to anyone with assets. :grinbig: I actually like technos alot.

Hmm...got a little derailed with magic vs. mundane..maybe because i just cant help but consider Resonance as the 'Tech Magic'.

As for pure magic...its power balance i suppose will be relative. If a campaign takes place in a part of the Barrens with gangs that wouldn't know magic if it shot em in the ass, one mage in the party can really shift the balance. If a campaign takes place dealing with Austrailian Awakened Creatures, mages in the party won't make it that much more powerful. If anything, it'll make it survivable. :D

[mfb]

even if a mage has high Dodge, they tend to lack the attributes to back it up. they can't wear as much armor as a street sam, because a) a street sam generally has higher Body, allowing more armor; and b) a street sam can have cyberware and bioware that increases their armor even further. not to mention that the lower Body of the mage means less soak--another place that enhancement can give the sam an edge.

and, yes, mages can sustain an armor spell--thus decreasing their effectiveness at other magical activities. that's the key to why mages aren't overpowered: just about everything they do draws from a single pool of resources, meaning that increasing their defense (physical or magical) detracts from their offense, and vice-versa. a street sam might have a lower maximum defense or offense, but he's got a higher average level of both than a mage can maintain. the amount of offense/defense a mage can maintain can be increased by sustaining foci and the like, but but by that point, a street sam can up his general level of effectiveness even further.

[Zak]

I really prefer playing magicians over mundanes. But mainly because I love spellcasting and interaction with spirits (that being powerful helps ;)).

However, looking at starting characters and maybe at the first 100-150 karma mundane runners might have the edge over a caster. After that, it goes downhill pretty fast. That wasnt different in SR3 and did not change much to SR4. Alot of good comparisons have been done in this threat and there isnt much too add without repeating myself, so i wont :D

[ShadowDragon]

In my last group (before an unfortunate TPK), the sammy was by far the biggest threat in a gun fight. He rarely took any damage, and routinely had the most kills. Though it helped that he had 7 edge and well optimized cyber, and the group mage usually acted more as a buffer than spellslinger.

So I wouldn't say that magic characters are better than mundanes. They both can fill their roles well.

[ElFenrir]

[Butterblume]

The baddest magician out there is a strong mind controlling one. Luckily, my players don't exploit this because it's not fun.
(They might command the security guard on the other side of the door to open it, but they don't charm half the oppononents and command them to kill the other half).

That face adepts can be on the far side has been proven.

But on the stealth monkey... I am pretty content with my mundane, she is imo on par with an adept, unless the adept is build exclusively for that role (For my char it's only one facet, alltough the biggest one). Mages ore mystical adepts are better, if they don't trip astral security.

[Charon]

It's not always about killing the mage first.

It's about getting the best ratio of effort expanded versus threat neutralized.

For exemple, even though a mage sniping at you safely from behind enemy line with great cover is a major nuisance and possibly the gravest threat you are facing, you're a full blown moron if you put all your effort into killing him at the expense of very dangerous and more readily accessible mundane threat firing at you with heavy ordinance at close range.

You are far better off containing the mage (Minimizing or breaking LOS by using the terrain and various technique to reduce visibility such as smoke grenade) and staying within LOS of your own mage to get counterspelling protection while eliminating the closest and most readily available targets as fast as possible and work your way to the mage.

Now if the mage does you the courtesy of starting the combat 10 meter away from you in the open, then by all means kill him in the first IP.

When you are in a fight, the objective isn't to kill the mage. It is to win the fight. Be efficient.

---

Spotting the mage : Damn easy if he is within LOS and using decent power spell.

If he's casting force 2 manaball at you it might be troublesome, but since the threshold for the perception test if 6 - force, you'll spot him readily enough if he's casting serious stuff at you within LOS. Even with -2 for being distracted most observant runner will see which member of the opposition cast a Force 4 or 5 spell.

If the mage is hidden like a sniper, life is a lot tougher and your team's mage will likely have to earn his pay.

[Sren]

As a general rules, the balance between awakened and mundane characters is kept by the GM. In games where karma is easier to come by, awakened characters have the advantage because they can improve their specialty, plus improve other magical abilities, and have a nearly unlimited range of abilities to choose from. In a game where tech toys (and cash) are more plentiful, cybered characters have the advantage, because the toys they use are directly related to their party role, and don't cost karma to start using.

There is no real way to perfectly balance availability of tech and karma that keeps the awakened perfectly balanced with the sleepers unless the players accept the GM awarding more karma to awakened characters and awarding expensive cyber with installation to non-awakened characters. No cash/karma trade ends up being perfectly fair, but GMs can attempt to create a story that gives each character a chance to shine both individually and a as group, so each player feels he belongs in the party and has an equally important part to play. (Something hard to do without a lot of cooperation with the players)

[toturi]

[Charon]

[De Badd Ass]

[Jaid]

if the mage casts a force 6 or higher spell, the threshold to notice it is 0. even with a dice pool of 0, it is highly probable (to say the least) to achieve a threshold of 0. therefore, the mage is probably either handicapping himself pretty heavily, or is likely to be spotted, because i don't think it's too unreasonable to suppose that, out of a group of, say, 4 runners, at least one will have a 12+ dicepool for perception...