 Essense Loss and Magic Increase, Where has the magic gone? |
  |
 Jan 16 2008, 12:01 AM
Post
#26
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 861 Joined: 27-November 07 Member No.: 14,397  |
Sorry for the double post, but forgot about this little thing. The rules spesificly state you can only use HoG once per character period, so it doesn't matter if they have 2 edge or 2000 edge, it only happens once. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Jan 16 2008, 12:24 AM
Post
#27
|
|||||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I know that was certainly true for SR3, but I don't recall any such rule applying in SR4. Can you give me a quote for that? In the Edge section, Under Burning Edge, it states ...
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 16 2008, 12:42 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 861 Joined: 27-November 07 Member No.: 14,397 |
Odd, could have sworn I read that, and I know I've not read the SR3 book nearly that much to have caught it. Of course I'd think it compleatly within the GMs right to make such a rule or simply disallow the person using it too much "something the spirits are rare to provide. " being all the backing the GM needs to justify it. Of course in the case of spending 3 Karma for a critical success, I honestly don't see much problem with it. 3 Karma is enough of an expence to make it a decently sized investment, and of course that means most of the time the person is going to have only 1 edge most of the time, and 0 edge fairly often, which is a fairly large disadvantage.
Anyway, no more on the subject I think, not what the OP was about. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 03:38 AM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,650 Joined: 21-July 07 Member No.: 12,328 |
I think the 'rules as written' support the 'pay less' because like edge you actually loose points in the stat.
To me that is stupid/broken, and it is an overwhelming argument that you need a linear costs system in the game, that is the same before and after character generation, and Build points do that and we should get right on it. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 04:17 AM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,089 Joined: 4-October 05 Member No.: 7,813 |
.... you're going to make Frank link to his BP character advancement rules again? bah, just to save frank some time, i'll link you myself =P (he's busy with school and all, you know ;) ) Here you go. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 16 2008, 06:03 AM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Cybernetic Blood Mage Group: Members Posts: 3,472 Joined: 11-March 06 From: Northeastern Wyoming Member No.: 8,361 |
In Fourth Edition "Hand of God" is something that NPCs can do only once, and at a heavy price.
Which of course is a rule that I promptly threw out. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 10:32 AM
Post
#32
|
|||
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
The rules as written have only one price for a given attribute level after chargen. They do not differentiate why you have to raise that attribute in the first place, replacement or first time training to that level. And that is fine IMO, not broken at all. The other issue, the base for Franks houserules, is differences in cost between chargen and afterwards. Linear costs do solve the equality issue you have, but also take the meaning of high attributes and skill (IIRC he removed or increased the caps). What you could do is to have a virtual magic rating, with constant costs for removing the magic reductions. Say getting one point of magic back always costs 10 karma. Be prepared to see more augmented mages. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 16 2008, 10:36 AM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,650 Joined: 21-July 07 Member No.: 12,328 |
I'm playing in a game using frank's rules atm in the 'welcome to the shadows' forum, they do power up the game slightly because skills a cheaper, but eh.
But yeah the problem is it's more effective with the differential costs to wait until after character generation to spend karma, advance, install cyber, go backwards, spend karma, because in many places 1 BP = 1 Karma, so spending BP at a ratio of 2 BP = 1 karma (the effectiveness of advancing a stat from 1 to 2 with karma) is clearly silly. This is further compounded by the non linear costs system of karma advancement. Thelack of clarity in the rules about how essence loss via magic works though is also an issue. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 11:23 AM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
Oh, the rules are quite clear. Implants lower essence, loosing essence reduces magic. Attribute increases cost new level*3 karma. The whole virtual magic rating idea is an SR3 thing only. If you like the way SR4 handles things - thats another point.
I´d personally walk down the other road (one Frank takes care to post via Serbitars rules), and have karma-based costs at chargen. I very much like systems that give incentives for broad skillsets and balanced attributes. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 09:23 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 689 Joined: 16-September 03 From: Colorado Member No.: 5,623 |
Well all I can say is my group seems to be suffering a disconnect some where. The way it has always been presented to me by various gm's is that if you have a magic rating of 3 and you get some nifty bit of cyber ware that drops you a point you can increase the stat by 3*rating. However the rating is what it would have been without the magic loss. In effect even though you lost a point of magic, you did have it at one point so the cost for the next point is still going up. Are we way off here or am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 09:28 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Not way off, as what you describe is how it worked in previous editions. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 16 2008, 09:44 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 689 Joined: 16-September 03 From: Colorado Member No.: 5,623 |
Ok, so I am not nuts just behind the times. So 4th edition lowers your max. magic attribute possible for the implimentation of cyberware. Does it do anyhting else to the mage?
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2008, 10:00 PM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
One point of Essence loss (from whatever source) ... - Lowers your current Magic Attribute by one. - Lowers your Magic Attribute maximum by one. That's about it. No automatic Gaesa or anything either. But! And it is a big but ... there is no offsetting the Essence loss from implants through the use of Gaesa in SR4, as there was in previous editions. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 16 2008, 10:08 PM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
Note that Karmagen does not by itself dispel the tomfoolery of lowering stats to repurchase them rather than vice versa in order to save Karma. I think that Serbitar's rules in particular have a thing about virtual magic rating to universalize magic costs. BP Advancement does not have that issue at all. --- An intersting thing about both Karmagen and BP Advancement is that both of them incentivize purchasing attributes over skills at the book costs. Skills are too expensive in the basic book, but they are more too expensive with Karma than they are with BP. This means that on a straight Karmagen system you purchase skills only as a last resort, and in BP Advancement the incentive "better buy them now because it will really suck if you buy them later" no longer exists. Thus it is unsurprising that both Serbitar's system and my own have a reduced Skill cost mechanic built in. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 2nd December 2024 - 07:24 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.