Faster Spellcasting, Developing Simple Action Spellcasting (SR4) |
Faster Spellcasting, Developing Simple Action Spellcasting (SR4) |
Feb 28 2009, 07:21 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 116 Joined: 16-February 09 From: Seattle Metroplex, Tacoma District, UCAS Member No.: 16,883 |
I was thinking about Metamagic and came upon the idea of a Simple Action spell with the following points:
What do you guys think? |
|
|
Feb 28 2009, 07:36 PM
Post
#2
|
|
The back-up plan Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910 |
While I wouldn't use it in my campaign, a few other ideas would be:
Instead of 2's counting, treat spells cast with this metamagic as having a Spellcasting version of Gremlins. Rating equivalent to Force-Initiation Grade. Low Force spells are less likely to glitch this way, but casting a Force 6-12 spell is going to be very unfortunate unless the caster is a high Grade Initiate. (Example: Grade 3 Initiate casts a Force 5 Manabolt. The threshold of 1s needed to cause a Glitch is reduced by 2. [F5 - G3 = 2]) Have it be an Advanced Metamagic technique from Absorption. Power stored can be used to make a spell faster to cast instead of reducing the Drain Value. If the spell is cast at a higher Force than available stored power, increase the DV by 1 per point of uncompensated Force. Instead of having a higher glitch rate, the DV uses Force instead of (Force/2) |
|
|
Feb 28 2009, 07:40 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,336 Joined: 24-February 08 From: Albuquerque, New Mexico Member No.: 15,706 |
Obviously QUOTE
Huh? QUOTE
Obvoiusly QUOTE
To complicated QUOTE
Doable QUOTE
To complicated I have considered making such a metamagic myself, but it would be far to powerful in most situations, & multicasting is already allowed by the rules. With the "Rushing the Job" penalty to glitching, it might be doable, but is still at very high risk of being game breaking powerful. If I was to do it, I would instead use a Drain increase to any spells cast in a Standard action. Edit: My suggestion: "You may choose to cast spells as a Standard Action instead of a Complex Action. Doing so increases the spells Drain by +2." I might even decide to use this in my game, but am still concerned it would be a must-have, & to powerful. I would not increase the Drain modifier though, as that would quickly make it unusable. |
|
|
Feb 28 2009, 07:45 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,336 Joined: 24-February 08 From: Albuquerque, New Mexico Member No.: 15,706 |
Instead of having a higher glitch rate, the DV uses Force instead of (Force/2) No. I hate it when anyone brings this up for any reason. An increase to a spell's Drain due to a static change in the spell should never be based on the spell's Force. Such a change is understandable, if still stupid, if an effect scales based on Force, but a Standard Action casting time does not scale in this manner. |
|
|
Feb 28 2009, 07:46 PM
Post
#5
|
|
The back-up plan Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910 |
QUOTE The Metamagic would allow the caster to cut some of the excess out of a spell's formula. Huh?New Alternative: Addiction--the character can become addicted to the rush of power from spellcasting this way, and needs to constantly push himself harder and further as the addiction grows. Edit: QUOTE QUOTE Instead of having a higher glitch rate, the DV uses Force instead of (Force/2) No. I hate it when anyone brings this up for any reason. An increase to a spell's Drain due to a static change in the spell should never be based on the spell's Force. Such a change is understandable, if still stupid, if an effect scales based on Force, such as additional penalties to the target or something, but a Standard Action casting time does not scale in this manner. |
|
|
Feb 28 2009, 09:07 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 422 Joined: 14-August 08 Member No.: 16,237 |
i did something like this, aswell as allowing defensive casting but you could only use spell pool and bonus dice from focuses. im not sure how that would be handled in fourth seeing as i dont play it.
it worked rather well and it didnt cause any problems. |
|
|
Feb 28 2009, 11:52 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Old Man of the North Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 9,674 Joined: 14-August 03 From: Just north of the Centre of the Universe Member No.: 5,463 |
So, here we're basically looking at finding a way for a mage to cast up to 8 spells in a combat turn as opposed to only up to 4.
Is this really something folks want to have happen? |
|
|
Mar 1 2009, 12:00 AM
Post
#8
|
|
The back-up plan Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910 |
Is this really something folks want to have happen? Not at my table, but I'm willing to discuss it for someone else's table. If it bothers you, it'd be simple enough to limit the metamagic by still allowing only 1 spell to be cast per IP. This would allow casting and something else to be done. (And even under the normal rules, it's possible for a mage to cast 8 spells per combat turn by splitting their pools.) |
|
|
Mar 1 2009, 04:34 AM
Post
#9
|
|
Old Man of the North Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 9,674 Joined: 14-August 03 From: Just north of the Centre of the Universe Member No.: 5,463 |
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th April 2024 - 02:54 PM |
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.