Ok, who has to play the mage this time?, why magical support is hard to find |
Ok, who has to play the mage this time?, why magical support is hard to find |
Dec 10 2003, 09:20 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 228 Joined: 7-December 03 Member No.: 5,883 |
I just came to the forums to play some SR, and it seems like everyone needed magical support in their groups, and I thought "well I CAN play it, but I'd rather play something else." then I realized that's probably what everyone else had thought.
so my question is: why do people prefer not to play mages. If I had to guess, I'd say it's because mages are at their weakest when they're first made. they have to put high points into magic and resources to buy spell points. this leaves them with lessened atributes and skills, as well as a barely sufficient arsenal of spells. Now make a gunbunny, or a tank, or a physad, or a decker, or a rigger. you can make them into a powerhouse right at chargen. Mages take alot of karma to get going, and so you don't want to play a mage if you're only going to do a one-shot run. Many GMs make this problem worse by not allowing any change over between cash and karma. lets say the group gets 50,000 :nuyen: and 8 karma each (a big run). the Samies go for getting new cyber and some custom guns, and maybe a skill up. mages get a spell, and then... sit on 50,000. sure they could buy a couple elementals (thousands of nuyen which will have no lasting effect, unlike the sammie's new cyber). they could buy a focus, but they have no karma to bind it. They don't need much gear, so they sit on the money, or find ways to burn it uselessly. So while everyone else is increasing their gear and going up, the mage is barely able to keep up. Now of course, the mage keeps going up long after the sammie and the decker plateau out, but really, how many people know when they go into a game that they're going to be able to keep playing that long? Just a thought |
|
|
Dec 10 2003, 09:33 PM
Post
#2
|
|||
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Your mileage obviously varies, but I have exactly the opposite problem and have seen generally the opposite across my ~15 years playing SR. Mages and shamans are numerous, with typically two or three magical characters in each group, depending on the number of players. For example, the SR group (2 players) I'm currently GMing consists of a physad and a mage. There's no shortage of players, even newbies, who want to play mages in my groups. Depending on the game, the GM (me or others) may have to rewrite runs on the fly to adapt to (usually) fragile mages, or some of the players will have to pull out alternate, non-magical PCs (sighing and grumbling all the while.) |
||
|
|||
Dec 10 2003, 09:33 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,431 Joined: 3-December 03 Member No.: 5,872 |
well you'll always get the people who just like magic playing magic support. No amtter the system, no matter how sucky, a magician/supernatural power guy will be my 1st choice if it exists.
Besides I'm not so sure its a power thing. Mages can be potent, but I think you can micromanage character creation a bit more on the other archtypes. I find it fun at least to gimick characters all over the place. I can gimick on tons of different levels as a Sam, or a rigger, but as a mage the biggest thing I can usually mess around with; money is in short supply. Or IOW for me at least while I prefer a mage its more fun to build any other archtype. Its not more fun to play but its more fun to build. Now if you have just as much fun playing a mundane as a mage then you'd minds as well play the mundane who you had mor efun designing. |
|
|
Dec 10 2003, 09:43 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,222 Joined: 11-October 02 From: Netherlands and Belgium Member No.: 3,437 |
I'm with Cray on this, always a ton of magic users, but I think that's because our games last long time periods, and advancement of a mage is so much more interesting. They can be any and everything a Sammie can be, plus so so so much more. If you know you're going into a campaign, why would you play anything else? :P
Sphynx |
|
|
Dec 10 2003, 09:49 PM
Post
#5
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 518 Joined: 24-February 03 From: Tucson Member No.: 4,153 |
Ditto with Sphink and Crazy. If I know it's going to be a campaign, you can't go wrong with a mage. They never seem to reach a plateau and they are always improving... unlike sam's who sooner or later reach a point where they just can't get any better than they are and become karma banks. A short term game I don't know that I would play a magic character, since they are somewhat underscored compared to sam's and phys-ads. |
||
|
|||
Dec 10 2003, 10:35 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 4-August 03 From: Amidst the ruins of Silicon Valley. Member No.: 5,242 |
I've found quite the opposite in the group that I play with. Usually, I'm the only one who takes a non-magical character.
Currently, the party's makeup looks like this: * elf "Hummingbird" shaman (don't ask me for details, the player made up the totem and the GM approved it) * troll (fomori) Sun shaman "druid" * troll physical adept * non-magical SURGE'd human, with very little implantation (my character) * (in flux -- this player usually has a John Woo-ish two-guns-blazing human physical adept, but he's discovered an artifact which is slowly metamorphosizing him into some more "evolved". In the meanwhile, he has a temporary ultra-fast mega-samurai with 6 points of ambidexterity and dual-wielded katana. That character, which will shortly be retired, is to be replaced with a werefox shaman of, what else, Fox, until the original character comes out of his cocoon.) Total of four magical types and one non-magical. And we lost two players recently, both of whom also played magical types. |
|
|
Dec 10 2003, 10:46 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Project Terminus: Soul Hunters Group: Members Posts: 1,052 Joined: 6-November 03 From: Casselberry, Florida U.S.A. Member No.: 5,798 |
I have to go with everyone else magic seems to be the character of choice in a long game as to a short game then yeah you get fewer.
Now as for me I don't care long or short I like magical characters I have 8 magical characters as of right now. Do I play other types of course and I love to play them as well. But my main character type is and always will be a magical character. |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 01:46 AM
Post
#8
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
Ditto everyone else, everyone is magically active or near so. with most of them playing full mages.
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 02:02 AM
Post
#9
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 266 Joined: 16-April 02 From: DC Member No.: 2,605 |
It completely depends on the player. In my experience, I've had players that all they wanted to play were cybered up hack and slash characters. Those that actually get into the characters, and don't mind reading the extra rules, love playing mages. My group has the attitude Yum Donuts described regarding deckers. However two of my favorite characters have been a mage and a decker.
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 02:37 AM
Post
#10
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 32 Joined: 27-April 03 Member No.: 4,519 |
I tend to agree with the majority of posters on this board.
The two main varieties of characters that my group (which is Dim Sum's group and has already gone through a couple of incarnations) plays are gun-bunnies and Awakened. I'm the one usually stuck playing either the (combat) decker or, more recently, the (combat) rigger, though truth be told, I really don't mind it. My suspicion is that the rest of them are just too frickin' lazy to read the rules properly. :S I find that quite a number of Singaporean players like playing Awakened characters for some odd reason. |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 03:13 AM
Post
#11
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 228 Joined: 7-December 03 Member No.: 5,883 |
Well for the record, I wasn't counting Adepts among the magical ones for this discussion. I realize they're magical, but they can also come off the assembly line quite powerful.
But I've apparently learned that I have just been experiencing a statistical anomaly in my gaming time. oh well, point rescinded. |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 03:43 AM
Post
#12
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 280 Joined: 21-April 03 From: Singapore Member No.: 4,487 |
Personally, I tend towards mundane characters even if I'm playing in a long-term campaign. Of course, the munchkin in me recognises that on a strictly linear scale of progress, a mundane will be outstripped in terms of growth in the long run by an Awakened character whose growth potential is, essentially, limitless. However, I still like the "idea" of playing a non-magical character simply because of you can channel character growth in other ways, specifically into the role-playing aspects of a character, and I'm quite happy playing a "limited" individual. :D
Anyway, when I GM, it's true that the preference here is to play Awakened individuals but I usually limit the number to a max of two (in my group of four to five players) - statistically, that already far exceeds the number of skilled Awakened people in the world EVEN IF you toss in explanations like "Oh, that's 'cos you encounter more of them in our line of work." I don't want players to see deckers and riggers as useless (IMHO, they happen to be two of the most useful archetypes around) or play characters simply because powergaming sense tells them it's better to play Awakened characters. I want my players to play what they FEEL like playing without having to number-crunch their future. :D |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 04:09 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I like to play a mundane, because their growth potential is limitless, as opposed to mages, who after a certain point are either working for someone as essentially a slave or dead.
~J |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 04:35 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 280 Joined: 21-April 03 From: Singapore Member No.: 4,487 |
:rotfl: |
||
|
|||
Dec 11 2003, 04:59 AM
Post
#15
|
|
Chrome to the Core Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,152 Joined: 14-October 03 From: ::1 Member No.: 5,715 |
I like to play mundanes, because they aren't karma sinkholes like Awakened are. :P
Plus, if I do ever get a character to 250+ Karma, I'm usually bored with a series of "random runs" and want something else to play. i.e. a metacampaign that requires new characters and more interesting situations. |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 05:47 AM
Post
#16
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 139 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Cleveland-Akron Sprawl Member No.: 1,200 |
I think it's kind of interesting how people here seem to make mages, focusing on many spells and few skills. I am starting to gravitate toward the other side of things: great attributes/skills and only a few spells to speak of. The standard method is nice if you get all the spells you care to have, because then you can just dump karma into Sorcery and turn into a casting machine. Still, that gets really expensive, really fast. Wouldn't it be more efficient to make a character who started with great attributes and skills but dumped karma into spells, where it's cheap?
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 03:45 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 124 Joined: 21-November 03 Member No.: 5,837 |
I agree with you BW...Sdaly alot of people don't play that way...They don't think you are as uber out of the gate unless you can cast Force 8 powerball, manaball, stunball, lightning...etc etc
not meaning to insult anyone, I think a lot of that stems from a minor munchkin-esque play style. Sort of like the people who claim to start with str 15 trolls that "aren't even twinked" or 20+ die ina single combat skill at start... THat kind of power gaming is extremely close to munchkining in my book, and I find it funny how people think it is the system of d20 that allows for the worst munchkining...all games allow it if you you know you to exploit it. It isn't a problem with the system, its a problem with the player. |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 03:46 PM
Post
#18
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 14 Joined: 4-October 02 Member No.: 3,379 |
One thing people really seem to forget is that Mages can do everything a Mundane can do. Spend that "useless" money on a rocket launcher or AV ammo for an assault rifle! Then have someone tell you that mages can't handle a drone.. :P
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 04:01 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,428 Joined: 9-June 02 Member No.: 2,860 |
Indeed. I got a lot of mileage out of my long-running shaman's assault rifle, especially when drain had built up. |
||
|
|||
Dec 11 2003, 04:34 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 637 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,528 |
Given my (growing) dislike of mages: Yes, anything but a mage/magical being! Michael |
||
|
|||
Dec 11 2003, 04:59 PM
Post
#21
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 749 Joined: 22-June 02 From: Parts Without Member No.: 2,897 |
One trick to getting players to play magically active characters is to move away from the stereotypes of mage characters. By deliberately limiting one's sorcery abilities, for example, a run of the mill shaman can be forced by neccessity into a role as a conjurer.
I am playing what is (to date) my favorite (of 4) awakened characters in the form of a magically active parageologist. Sure, folks look at you funny when you tell them that your 4 best spells are detect gold, detect orichalcum, shape earth, and shape metal, but they sure are thankful when they learn that your only combat spell is spiritbolt (after you zap an elemental back to the fetid metaplane it came from) or when you reduce a blood-thirsty cyber-pirate crew to a mass of quivering blobs by yanking out all their (bling) gold teeth with a shape-metal spell. Not exactly your typical spellslinger, but great fun to play. |
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 05:07 PM
Post
#22
|
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
How do you get line of sight to all their teeth at the same time? :D
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 05:10 PM
Post
#23
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 749 Joined: 22-June 02 From: Parts Without Member No.: 2,897 |
Most scurvy cyber-pirates are mouth-breathers, so it's easy....
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 05:10 PM
Post
#24
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 749 Joined: 22-June 02 From: Parts Without Member No.: 2,897 |
That, or a quick control-emotion spell (happy) to make 'em all smile.
|
|
|
Dec 11 2003, 05:11 PM
Post
#25
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 280 Joined: 22-October 03 Member No.: 5,757 |
Hey I resemble that remark :cyber:
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th April 2024 - 04:05 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.