I will seek council from the Dumpshockians..., Debate on I. Reflexes v.s. D. Reflexes Options

[The Red Menace]

During our last game session a few players got into a lengthy discussion about the spell Increased Reflexes (SR4 Source book) and Decreased Reflexes (Streets of Magic). One of the players felt that Decreased reflexes has a clear and unfair advantage over Increased Reflexes in a couple of ways.

-First off, the Decreased Reflexes spell is cheaper on DV.

-Next, when given an example in which an ally casts Increased Reflexes on a teammate and sustains the spell in a sustaining foci, then an opponent casts Decreased Reflexes on that same teammate...Though the foci is being consistently used each Initiative Pass, the Decreased Reflexes spell spoils any use that the foci has so long as the opponent caster sustains the spell.

-Some players thought this was unfair and feel that if both Increased Reflexes and Decreased Reflexes are used, both spells net hit successes should be recorded and the higher net hits should be able to exist while the other spell cancels.

-Another suggestion was that no matter what, the last person to cast their spell should be the one to have the appropriate affect on the host.

What I am looking for is any aid,references or evidence anyone may be able to find that could help resolve the matter. We attempted to search for some, but a gridlock of translation put us at a dead end.

My only request is that if you are going to chime in with a suggestion, factoid or any other aid...PLEASE be respectful when answering as I plan on showing the players any and all replies.
Thanks for any help,
The Red Menace

[Ryu]

So the always useful, cheaper than any other form of +3 IP spell is countered by another spell. How unbalancing *sarcasm*

- Decreased reflexes is another type of spell, therefore it has a different DV. No argument here. You´ll hardly ever cast Increase Reflexes on an opponent.

- Sustaining a spell puts the opponent at a -2 distraction modifier, so the Increase Reflexes focus has a desireable effect, if not the choosen one.

- Casting a special counterspell should have a better effect than just using counterspelling against the spell.

- I don´t want to be disrespectful, but I consider the attitude a bit on the whiney side. One spell chancelling another is par for the course for any game system. Heal can be used on manabolt damage, too. If I had invested in Decrease Reflexes, my spell would be countered by Increase Reflexes, wouldn´t it? See the mechanics from both sides.

[Whipstitch]

The question should be "Is Decrease Reflexes worth using at all?" rather than "Is it fair that Decrease Reflexes counters Increase Reflexes (and Increased Reflexes certainly IS worth using)?" Debuffs and indirect effects are great and all in other games, but to work in the fast paced combat system of Shadowrun they typically need to make someone useless immediately (the other Decrease Attribute spells, Turn to Goo) or be capable of immediately hindering many people for modest drain (like Stench). I mean, let's look at what Decrease Reflexes does; it has a pretty mild effect compared to other offensive spells and is +1 Drain code despite being touch range; a pretty bad start considering this is something only of use against your enemies. Of course, it also helps to know whether they have extra passes or not in the first place, lest the spell be an even bigger waste of time than it usually is. Honestly, it's just a bad spell; the goal isn't to reduce your opponent's initiative passes to one, it's to reduce them to zero via incapacitation and at touch range there's a whole mess of far superior options and most of them even take less drain.

[Karaden]

I've got to agree with Ryu, I don't see a real problem here. Decreased Reflexes has a lower DV because a mage can cast the Increased Reflexes days or weeks before actual combat, the DV isn't usually a huge issue, whereas Decreased Reflexes -must- be cast in mid combat, so of course it should have a lower DV.

I also agree there is no reason it shouldn't cancel out. Why should Increased Reflexes have -even more- advantages over the cyber/bioware counterparts? Also, why would anyone used Decreased Reflexes over simply using a counterspell if you did it the way you are thinking of it.

You also have to take into consideration that it is a -touch- ranged attack, that needs to be used on enemies. That is very difficult to pull off, so shouldn't really come up all that often anyway.

All in all I don't see that there is any problem to be resolved here. Oh, and also keep in mind that afterwards the enemy mage has to sustain the spell, meaning the Increased Reflexes spell at least has some kind of benifit.

[FrankTrollman]

Even if Decreased Reflexes was castable on an area for the same drain it would hardly ever get used.

Why remove some of their IPs with strange occultism when you can just fragging kill them and remove all of their IPs with the same action by a number of means.

-Frank

[Whipstitch]

Heh, my mages would be puzzled if someone tried it; for one thing, I tend to use Jazz for passes more than anything else (and even then not often) so I'm not even the terribly biggest fan of Increase Reflexes for non-combat mages. Carden from the Impending Doom game would lose his whole extra initiative pass and probably respond with a "YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!" before casting a Turn To Goo or a Force 5+ Stunbolt.

[The Red Menace]

I appreciate the input.

Subquestion which came up: If a street samurai using Wired Reflexes Rating 2 (giving him 3 I.P.'s) is hit with a Decreased Reflexes spell that drops him down to one I.P. and in an attempt to counter the spell takes a drug that adds an additional I.P., should the effects work even though the spell is still being sustained to drop the host down to one I.P.?

[Whipstitch]

Wired Reflexes isn't really compatible with other forms of Initiative enhancement so a lot of people would probably rule that the drug doesn't really have any effect to begin with. To look at a straight Increase Reflexes vs. Decrease Reflexes contest though, I'd say you should treat the Decrease Reflexes spell as suppressing a number of Initiative Passes equal to the number of net hits on the test and that where those passes are coming from shouldn't matter too much. So even if you dropped Increase Reflexes and cast it again it shouldn't do much good untill the Decrease Reflexes spell is dropped. A Force 4 Decrease Reflexes with 4 net hits will be prepared to suppress 4 Initiative and up to 4 passes (which is typically excessive, btw) until it ends.

[Ryu]

He gets IP boni, he gets an IP malus. Add them up, cut at four IPs.

Other way to put it: Depends on the successes of the Decrease Reflexes spell.

[knasser]

[Gelare]

[FrankTrollman]

But he loses points for using the word "boni" which is not an English word. The plural of bonus is bonuses. The Latin word bonus is an adjective, which only becomes Boni for modifying plural nominative masculine nouns. Used as a noun, as it was in this case, it would be 4th declension and the plural would be Bones.

-Frank

[Mercer]

My next character will be Bones Malus.

[Jaid]

[FrankTrollman]

I'm a doctor, not a surgeon.

-Frank

[Glyph]

Decrease reflexes is a horrible choice to use against a street samurai.

First, from the FAQ:

[Ryu]

[Moon-Hawk]

[Jhaiisiin]

[Karaden]

[Whipstitch]

Too bad giving it LOS range would change the spells drain code from excessive but manageable to outright nasty. :dead:

[Jhaiisiin]

It's a balancing factor though. Heck, when the spell design rules came out, the first thing my group did was bring back LOS heal/treat/cure spells. Having to run out to the bullet-ridden samurai amidst a deadly firefight was *not* a desired method of healing in my group. LOL

[Moon-Hawk]

[Jhaiisiin]

I'm not certain that's even being argued. There are *tons* better ways of dealing with fast samurai, the primary one being to attack their Willpower attribute, because that's the least protected, generally speaking. We're just hashing over the viability of using a non-optimized spell to tilt things in your favor, I think.

One thing I've noticed here is that far too many people instantly dismiss an item, spell, character concept or whatever if it doesn't min/max or optimize to the fullest and thus give the best benefit. Sometimes you choose non-optimal on purpose just to give you something to roleplay and have fun with. If I wanted to lay waste to an area with impunity, I'd be packing stun spells, mana ball/bolt, and a nice spirit army to just kill whatever is in my way. Sometimes super-optimization isn't fun, at least for some people.

That's my 10nuyen anyway...

[Stahlseele]

Levitation is minmaxed up to nowhere . . it is the most usefull spell EVER O.o