Resisting Direct Combat Spells Options

[Maximum]

My group has been debating how direct combat spells are handled, and I wanted to see what you guys think.

Okay, its clear that direct combat spells are cast as an opposed test of Magic + Spellcasting versus Body or Willpower, plus counterspelling if available. And the net sucesses raise the damage value of the spell. What happens next is what we are debating.

Once you know how much damage the spell is gonna do, do you get to roll your body to lower the damage? Or does the spell just nail you?

[Kyoto Kid]

...unfortunately after the initial Body/Willpower Resistance roll (aided by Counterspelling if available), whatever damage is left goes directly to the character's stun/physical track. There is no other resistance test. Yep, getting hit with a combat spell is a bitch as the spell's force is added to the net successes.

...so always, always make sure to have a mage on the team with counterspelling.

[Maximum]

Thanks for clearing it up for me, Kyoto

[Kyoto Kid]

...there are a couple other "defences" a character can take. The most obvious is the Magic Resistance quality however that also kicks in against "friendly" spells (such as healing) as well. An Adept can get Spell Resistance (which adds dice x the rating against all spells) and Iron will (gives her extra dice against any spell and some critter powers that target Willpower). I also believe that the two adept powers do stack.

[Glyph]

Remember, though, that the spell's successes - and that's total successes, not net successes - are capped by the Force of the spell (unless the spellcaster is using Edge). So, for example, if a mage casts a Force: 5 manabolt, his successes are capped at 5.

It's actually better for mundanes in some ways. Direct combat spells are not insta-kill any more unless you get really lucky, use Edge, or overcast them, while mundanes have the option of using their own Edge to help them resist a spell. In SR3, you had bigger dice pools (yes, even though SR4 went to skill + Attribute from just skill, SR3 mages could empty out their Spell Pool, and had access to Force: 6 foci), plus casting a spell at Deadly meant you could kill with only one net success. The only advantage mundanes had in SR3 was that a Willpower of 6 really meant something, as a TN of 6 could stop a lot of magical attacks cold.

[BFaolan]

Do you have a page number on that success limit Glyph?

I don't recall seing that rule before.

[djinni]

Do you have a page number on that success limit Glyph?

I don't recall seing that rule before.

off the top of my head pg 174, four lines under the object resistance table.

[cryptoknight]

Do you have a page number on that success limit Glyph?

I don't recall seing that rule before.

Pg 174

The hits scored on the Spellcasting Test may not exceed
the spell’s Force (see Force, p. 171).

Note, they don't say The net hits, they say The hits.

[Fortune]

Also keep in mind that when resisting Direct Combat spells, you only need to match the spellcaster's 'hits' in order to fully shrug off the spell. Unlike Indirect Combat spells, where you need to totally stage down the damage.

[djinni]

Also keep in mind that when resisting Direct Combat spells, you only need to match the spellcaster's 'hits' in order to fully shrug off the spell. Unlike Indirect Combat spells, where you need to totally stage down the damage.

indirect spells are the same if they beat the hits you don't hit them

[Fortune]

indirect spells are the same if they beat the hits you don't hit them

While this is true of the initial Reaction test to avoid the spell itself (which is the test you don't get with Direct Combat spells), I was referring to the actual Resistance test itself. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Method]

Also keep in mind that when resisting Direct Combat spells, you only need to match the spellcaster's 'hits' in order to fully shrug off the spell. Unlike Indirect Combat spells, where you need to totally stage down the damage.

I think this is why even a few extra Edge or Counterspelling dice really make all the difference.

[Kyoto Kid]

...unless the mage rolls really poorly (or glitches), a mundane with no counterspelling assistance is still going to get whacked pretty seriously, especially by mana spells like Manabolt and Stunball as most characters usually have only a 3 WP (which equates to one hit on average). A mage with a 5 MA, 5 dice in spellcasting and a force 2 power focus (not inconceivable at charagen) has 12 dice to throw which yields an average of 4 hits. So, just using the averages means the target still eats 8 (spell force + net hits) boxes of damage.

Furthermore, based on average hits, the mundane with a three WP will never be able to match the Spellcaster's hits (unless she throws edge into the roll).

BTW I also thought it was Net Hits that were limited by Spell force.

[DTFarstar]

I don't think I have ever built a mundane character that has had less than 6 or so, if not more, dice to resist spells. Just like I have never had someone with less than that to dodge bullets. Just good business.

Chris

[Kyoto Kid]

...be interesting to see how without sacrificing BPs that would go to other attributes/skills.

[Lord Ben]

I don't think I have ever built a mundane character that has had less than 6 or so, if not more, dice to resist spells. Just like I have never had someone with less than that to dodge bullets. Just good business.

Sure, but even if you have 6 dice a mage is probably going to have 10 dice. So he'll always be at the advantage. And that's spending a good amount of your XP on an edge that also has a downside. Which I find annoying.

Like any other spells you should also be able to absorb the damage or get armor with bacterial sacs that give it's rating in dice to resist direct spells similiar to the various other armor protections.

[Whipstitch]

5 Will and some Daredrenaline's enough to do it. It's not really -that- difficult to afford. But regardless, yes, mages are on top of the magical arms race. Not sure what exactly it is people expect to do about it.

[Daier Mune]

i was trying to figure this out with my co-GM (our group's unnofficial magic expert):

you have two spells, Flamethrower and Powerbolt.

Flamethrower, as an indirect spell, is subject to a reaction test by the defender, and then a soak (1/2 impact + body) test by the defender.

Powerbolt, as a direct spell, is only a single opposed test, with no opportunity for the defender to reduce damage, but the attacker can still stage up damage.

Flamethower, as an elemental spell, is subject to (F/2)+3 drain. Powerbolt is only (F/2)+1.

so you have two spells, doing essentialy the same thing (physcial damage), one of which requires a higher drain and has less of a chance to do damage, the other more drain efficient and a significantly higher chance of hitting the target.

now normally i wouldn't have a problem with this, except for the fact that BOTH spells do the SAME ammount of damage, and cost the SAME ammount of karma to learn.

so...why would you bother with elemental spells?

[Lord Ben]

so...why would you bother with elemental spells?

To affect things like doors, etc. Also fire has a chance to start people on fire which could do more damage to be fair. But yeah, your points are very good ones.

[toturi]

i was trying to figure this out with my co-GM (our group's unnofficial magic expert):
now normally i wouldn't have a problem with this, except for the fact that BOTH spells do the SAME ammount of damage, and cost the SAME ammount of karma to learn.

so...why would you bother with elemental spells?

Both spells do the same type of damage, not the same amount of damage, elemental spells also come with their own elemental effects.

[Daier Mune]

To affect things like doors, etc. Also fire has a chance to start people on fire which could do more damage to be fair. But yeah, your points are very good ones.

i thought Powerbolt could effect inanimate objects?

Both spells do the same type of damage, not the same amount of damage, elemental spells also come with their own elemental effects.

don't both spells do Force as thier damage value? (which i guess i had made the assumption that the two spells i was using in my example were cast at the same force, but didn't state)

and yeah, i realize that elemental spells have secondary effects, but honestly? unleashing tidal waves of acid, megawats of energy, and gouts of flame? that's just as likely to be a liablity as helpful.

[arathian]

My group has house-ruled that characters get to resist the damage from direct combat spells with Body.

The result has been that if you want to one-shot someone you need to overcast, which seems fine to me.

This brings direct combat spells more in line with shooting (opposed test followed by damage resistance test if needed) with taking drain being balanced by bypassing armor.

The only popular indirect combat spell in my group is lightning bolt, since it has a useful elemental effect.

[toturi]

don't both spells do Force as thier damage value? (which i guess i had made the assumption that the two spells i was using in my example were cast at the same force, but didn't state)

and yeah, i realize that elemental spells have secondary effects, but honestly? unleashing tidal waves of acid, megawats of energy, and gouts of flame? that's just as likely to be a liablity as helpful.

You must realise that Powerbolt, like all Direct Combat spells, is all(or more) or nothing. Also area effect elemental spells can affect targets not within LOS. Remember the OR of the more complex technological objects are 4+. You'd need 12+ dice so that you can beat the OR. OR 4+ stuff such as drone which the sec drone rigger might be sending against you.

[Daier Mune]

You must realise that Powerbolt, like all Direct Combat spells, is all(or more) or nothing. Also area effect elemental spells can affect targets not within LOS. Remember the OR of the more complex technological objects are 4+. You'd need 12+ dice so that you can beat the OR. OR 4+ stuff such as drone which the sec drone rigger might be sending against you.

*shrug* i guess i'll have to see it more in practice to form a better opinion. the mages in our group haven't brought out direct combat spells that much. on paper, though, it seems like direct spells are so much better than indirect elemental spells.

[Glyph]

When you are facing heavy counterspelling, indirect spells are better. Against direct spells, counterspelling adds directly to the target's Body or Willpower test, and can completely negate the spell by getting its net successes down. Against indirect spells, counterspelling adds to the damage resistance test after the spell has hit, meaning that the target has to soak the damage all the way down to nothing.

Example:

Mage casts Force: 5 manabolt with 4 successes. Target gets 2 successes, and counterspelling gets 2 successes. Sorry, no damage.

Same mage casts Force: 5 lightning bolt with 4 successes. Target gets 3 successes (Reaction tends to be higher than Willpower, at least for sammies). Now the target has to use 1/2 impact armor plus Body to soak damage of 6 (5 + 1 net success). The same counterspelling with the same 2 successes knocks it down to 4 damage, but the target will need 4 more successes on that 1/2 impact armor plus Body roll in order to soak it completely. Plus, the target must resist the elemental effects - Body + Willpower +1/2 impact armor (3) or be incapacitated, and suffer a -2 penalty from disorientation even if successful.

So direct combat spells are more generally useful, but indirect combat spells can be useful in certain situations.