IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Spell Cost, Are there actually freebies
Azryl
post Nov 20 2003, 10:18 PM
Post #1


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 7-September 03
From: Holiday,fl
Member No.: 5,595



I have a player that wants to fetish-limit force 1 spells and claims they are freebies, as in they don't cost spell points at character creation. This has my spider sense tingling, I swear there is a rule somewhere that says a spell cannot cost less then 1 spell point but I cant seem to find it. Anyone know if there is a rule and where to find it? Thanks in advance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Herald of Verjig...
post Nov 20 2003, 10:22 PM
Post #2


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,066
Joined: 5-February 03
Member No.: 4,017



This rule has been debated, an option is to house rule that all spells must total at least 1 karma. Otherwise, you can assume that every mage can cast every spell as force 2 exclusive. (don't even need to buy a fetish)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Nov 20 2003, 10:22 PM
Post #3


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,006
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



No. Slap him. Fetishes and exclusivity just provides a virtual increase to the spell's Force rather than reducing the cost.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rev
post Nov 20 2003, 10:23 PM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 675
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Seattle
Member No.: 2,034



I think you are right, but even if you aren't you are the gm. Lay down the law now. Tell him you think there is a rule, but even if there wasn't a moment ago there is one now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Nov 20 2003, 10:48 PM
Post #5


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



When this question came up before, I emailed Rob about it:
QUOTE
Question: Some people think it is possible to learn a spell at Force 2, with the Exclusive limitation for no Karma (or Spell Point) cost. This would mean that at chargen, a mage could have every single spell (at the maximum legal level for spells without a permit) at a Force of 2, and still have all his starting Spell Points.
Rob's Answer: To play devil's advocate first, it clearly says that when you learn a limited spell you reduce the Karma cost by the modifier, so there is nothing that says you must pay a "minimum of 1 Karma/Spell point."

Does this mean a GM should allow magicians to start off the game knowing every spell at Force 2, with the exclusive limitation? Of course not. Sure, sometimes there are loopholes in the rules mechanics like this, but the GM always has final say and shouldn't allow players to exploit them.

In my opinion, there are two ways to handle this:

1) Simply say all spells have a minimum cost of 1 Karma to learn, no matter the limitations (this could also apply to spells learned via astral quest).

2) Allow some spells to be learned at 0 Karma, with limitations. In most cases, this will be fine, since the spell is low Force and limited in how it can be used (and a good GM can make those limitations count). This certainly does not mean you should allow starting characters to abuse this and begin with every spell at Force 2 (exclusive), though--that's just ludicrous. Has the character really devoted that much time in his or her life to learning a bunch of piddly spells? Unlikely. That's a situation where the GM just needs to draw the line and say no.

I personally lean towards option 2. It makes sense to me that magicians had to spend time to develop their skills, and so they probably learned a minor, limited spell or two as training somewhere along the way. Y'know, before they learned that Force 6 mass-murder fireball.

:: Rob Boyle ::
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anymage
post Nov 21 2003, 02:21 AM
Post #6


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 85
Joined: 28-August 03
Member No.: 5,551



I know this is just my house rule, but since the official answer is kind of weak, you may as well snag it.

All spells bought at chargen cost at least one spell point. If you really see your character having that force 2 exclusive Healthy Glow spell, drop the spell point on it and don't fret. If you're buying spells like that at character generation, you're not so tweaked out that the loss of a spell point is any great shakes.

After chargen, if you can get a spell's karma cost down to nothing via limitations and/or astral quests, good for you. It's a freebie. You still have to spend time and money learning the spell, and the spells you'll pick up that way will almost invariably be cantrippy, either by dint of inherent fluffiness or else by dint of low power and limited utility. The residual costs still prevent all but the most dedicated of munchkins from abusing this mechanism, though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eindrachen
post Nov 21 2003, 05:27 AM
Post #7


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 8-November 03
Member No.: 5,802



I limit it in my games by saying that if you put a limitation on a spell, that the limitation can not reduce the cost of the spell to 0.

Didn't the main book mention something that you choose whether or not a limitation reduces cost, or reduces Drain, when you took it? If so, you could just say that all limitations at character creation can be used only to reduce Drain, or something like that...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ol' Scratch
post Nov 21 2003, 05:33 AM
Post #8


Immortal Elf
**********

Group: Validating
Posts: 7,999
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,890



I've always allowed players to select "cantrips" at character creation for no Spell Points by taking a limitation on them. They're allowed up to one cantrip for every full spell they purchase above Force 3. Since most of these cantrips are spells like Healthy Glow, Fashion, Makeover, and Trid Entertainment -- all spells even I would choose as a regular Joe Schmoe if magic were real and worked like it does in Shadowrun -- they're mostly just there for flavor purposes.

Sure, Increased Reflexes and Oxygenate might make their way in there, but by and large, there's very few game breaking spells that are just as useful to a runner at low Force as they are at a higher Force.

And yes, I know the various different spells that can arguably be good at low Force, so no need to go on some quest to list them all as some of you normally do when a topic like this shows up. Every rule can be abused. You just have to trust in your players not to do so and to create a character based on a concept rather than a demonstration of how the rules are broken.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spookymonster
post Nov 21 2003, 12:27 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 22-April 02
Member No.: 2,638



I was going to say 1 cantrip per Magic point sounds reasonable, but I think I like Doc's idea better....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lilt
post Nov 21 2003, 12:43 PM
Post #10


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,965
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Member No.: 2,032



Low level nutrition and fast would also be particularily useful for surviving in the wilderness... Increace reflexes (fetish limited) and oxygenate would be indespensible too. Aside from that there aren't many spells that would be important. Maybe if your GM let you make a create water spell based on the create food spell... Water is extremely useful almost anywhere.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spookymonster
post Nov 21 2003, 01:56 PM
Post #11


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 22-April 02
Member No.: 2,638



QUOTE (Lilt @ Nov 21 2003, 08:43 AM)
Aside from that there aren't many spells that would be important.

I can think of a few: Trid Phantasm, Improved Invisibility, Camoflage, Mindlink, and Mindprobe. None of them tie their Force into the number of successes you can throw. As long as you can throw more dice into the attack than your target can throw in their defense, you're just about guaranteed success.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zazen
post Nov 21 2003, 02:39 PM
Post #12


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,685
Joined: 17-August 02
Member No.: 3,123



I use a mimimum cost of 1. I figure if people want to be able to lift skirts from across the room or light cigarettes on the end of their nose, they can pay a measly 1 karma for the priviledge.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spookymonster
post Nov 21 2003, 04:07 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 22-April 02
Member No.: 2,638



I wouldn't quite call 1 karma measly when talking about mages. Out of all SR 'classes', mages have the most karma sinks. Not only do they have to pay karma to improve their skills and attributes like everyone else, but there's also spells, initiation, focus bonding, magical groups, wards and spirits. When a samurai pays karma for another level of skill or attribute boost, that's theirs forever (barring injury or illness). Compare this to karma spent on focuses that are easily lost/destroyed, Wards that disappear after a few weeks, and spirits that will inevitably turn against them someday.

Street sams can always ask the Johnson to pony up some SOTA tech before a run, but when's the last time you heard a shaman ask for 6 karma so they could get a better Fireball?

Not a flame - just a different perspective :).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sphynx
post Nov 21 2003, 05:20 PM
Post #14


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,222
Joined: 11-October 02
From: Netherlands and Belgium
Member No.: 3,437



Although this will be debated to no end, I just want to point out that since the book says you can spend spell points to buy spells, I think it's pretty obvious (by my interpretation of that) that if you don't spend any spell points, you don't get any spell. Regardless of reduction in karma for learning a spell, you have to 'spend' something to get a spell.

Sphynx
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moosegod
post Nov 21 2003, 05:29 PM
Post #15


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,047
Joined: 12-November 03
From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation.
Member No.: 5,818



I would also like to point out that the idea of getting free spells= twink!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fortune
post Nov 21 2003, 10:36 PM
Post #16


Immoral Elf
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 15,247
Joined: 29-March 02
From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat
Member No.: 2,486



QUOTE (moosegod)
I would also like to point out that the idea of getting free spells= twink!

And yet perfectly legal within canon rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eindrachen
post Nov 22 2003, 05:03 AM
Post #17


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 8-November 03
Member No.: 5,802



QUOTE (Spookymonster)
I wouldn't quite call 1 karma measly when talking about mages. Out of all SR 'classes', mages have the most karma sinks. Not only do they have to pay karma to improve their skills and attributes like everyone else, but there's also spells, initiation, focus bonding, magical groups, wards and spirits. When a samurai pays karma for another level of skill or attribute boost, that's theirs forever (barring injury or illness). Compare this to karma spent on focuses that are easily lost/destroyed, Wards that disappear after a few weeks, and spirits that will inevitably turn against them someday.

Street sams can always ask the Johnson to pony up some SOTA tech before a run, but when's the last time you heard a shaman ask for 6 karma so they could get a better Fireball?

Not a flame - just a different perspective :).


Right on the friggin' money. I feel for magicians in most games; the GM usually screws them by handing out big cash, but never enough Karma. Adepts aren't so bad off; they don't have to initiate to get Power Points, but still, anyone playing an Awakened PC is going to be starved for Karma most days...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moosegod
post Nov 22 2003, 05:11 AM
Post #18


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,047
Joined: 12-November 03
From: Perilously close to the Sioux Nation.
Member No.: 5,818



The reasoning (as a GM) is it's a whole lot easier to take nuyen then Karma. I mean *boom! The whole building explodes! There goes the damage deposit and you next 4 months of lifestyle!*

I mena, how do you realistically take away karma?

I tend to award plenty of cash, then allow Cash-for Karma if the PC's give me a good use of them. You know, specifically what Charity they give it to? Who do they talk to? What does the charity do? THis also takes some pressure of the GM as they PC's work on it, gets the players more involved in the game worlds, and gives plenty of plot hooks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tanka
post Nov 22 2003, 05:12 AM
Post #19


Chrome to the Core
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,152
Joined: 14-October 03
From: ::1
Member No.: 5,715



I would personally allow any free spell. You spend some time and effort on learning the spell (Which, in my perspective, is what Karma represents), as well as money for the teacher and any items you need.

Sure, mages are Karma sinkholes, but Deckers and Riggers are nuyen sinkholes. Does this mean we should allow them to reduce SOTA costs for free? I think not.

And, yes, this is what several people would argue, since you've gone on to how big-time Karma sinkers mages are.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eindrachen
post Nov 22 2003, 05:31 AM
Post #20


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 8-November 03
Member No.: 5,802



Well, SOTA does balance it out a bit; most people who can convert Karma into money would do so quickly, in order to make ends meet for that wiz gear they carry. But keep in mind that there is some differences. For example, when a rigger wants to change something on his/her drone, they just spend money and time, and by and by they do it. If a mage wants to increase the abilities of a spell, they have to fully relearn a whole new spell, and it takes Karma, money and time.

Never think that mages don't spend money, too. Perhaps not as much as more technologically-inclined people, but every time they want a new focus, a new and/or better spell, a new spirit to conjure up, etc., they have to spend money for it, in addition to any other considerations.

All I'm saying is most GMs think that each character's needs are the same, and don't consider that every PC is an individual, and has individual needs for advancement and whatnot. I try to make sure that all of my PCs keep up with each other in their various ways, so that they all feel they have accomplished something after a while.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
6thDragon
post Nov 23 2003, 01:15 PM
Post #21


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 266
Joined: 16-April 02
From: DC
Member No.: 2,605



A while back my players discovered the rule on pages 94-95 of MiTS about reducing the karma cost for learning spells. This got so abused and stalled game time because all the players wanted them. I had to make a house rule that you could only reduce the karma cost by half.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spotlite
post Nov 23 2003, 01:37 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 611
Joined: 21-October 03
From: Yorkshire Toxic Zone
Member No.: 5,752



I let them do metaplane quests for spells. No worries. The only caveat is that they have to be fully roleplayed ones, not dice roll ones which we occasionally allow where Real Life ™ time is short.

This means that a: the quests are generally harder, as the player has to roleplay and over come things beyond a single test, and they have to use their head as well as re-rolls to get through all the Places, and b: they do less of them because there's only so many days in the week!

A rating 5 quest to learn a F6 spell is no picnic beleive me! When they want to do low force ones then they're pretty easy, but then they have a low force spell or pay more Good Karma. you often find them spending good karma on the quest as well! by the end of it its debatable how much they've really saved in order to reduce the karma of the spell and get some extra dice for the test - which they can STILL fail and not manage to then learn the spell.

I think that in terms of character development, the fact that Awakened eat more karma then everyone else is just part of the drawback of that character type, just as being a rigger or decker makes you a financial liability. Street sams, once kitted out, don't usually require that much cash or karma to maintain except medical bills but they can't do as much unless they learn Computer skill and get a datajack and a cyberdeck. This is in fact what I've found a lot of sammies do when they run out of things to spend karma or cash on - they learn new skills and take on other duties for the team, even if only to be used as a backup.

I don't think anything needs to be tweaked for the different 'types' of characters - the beauty of shadowrun is that there are no character classes - you can, if you want, play a rigger/decker/street sam/mage, its just got lots of drawbacks until you're sufficiently advanced to overcome them (never mind how much THAT little combination goes through karma!). If mages want more karma, they'll have to try that little bit harder during the runs and try to get as many points as they can from roleplaying, driving the plot forward, and so on. This has a knock on effect on the other players who start to see the Awakened character getting more karma at the end of a run and they start doing the same. Win win situation if you ask me!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th April 2024 - 12:45 AM

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.