Is magic broken, let's keep it simple Options

[pbangarth]

I also firmly believe NPC's should NOT be permitted to burn edge. Spend sure, burn, HELL NO!!!

What is your reasoning behind this opinion?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

What is your reasoning behind this opinion?

I too would be interested to hear the reasoning... My philosophy is what is good for the goose is good for the gander... though I would not use this overmuch, it would still be a viable option...

[suppenhuhn]

I believe neither PC'S nor NPC's should be permitted to burn edge.
This whole 1up aspect of it is pretty sucky and only promotes suicidal behaviour.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I believe neither PC'S nor NPC's should be permitted to burn edge.
This whole 1up aspect of it is pretty sucky and only promotes suicidal behaviour.

Though not supported by RAW, your view is certainly your choice... Mileage varies on the suicidal rate in our game... it is generally used to compensate for a generally poor outcome that should not have happened (the critical glitch that kills you for no other reason than because you failed a roll)... Generally, in my experience... a good death in shadowrun is just that... a Good Death... and we generally leave it at that... but sometimes, the death is just lame and begs to be compensated for... Not that there are not other consequences, but them are the breaks...

YMMV

[Cain]

What is your reasoning behind this opinion?

Because in the case of NPC's, it's an infinite resource they're burning. In the case of PC's, it's karma. You're essentially forcing the PC's to burn karma, while you waste nothing.

Not that long ago, I was in a game facing a Nataki with an Edge of 8. He burned Edge on critical successes on the attack, forcing us to burn back or die. He also burned Edge on critical successes on soak rolls, making it impossible to hurt him. It wasn't until the pet NPC's came in that we were able to kill him.

That was, IMO, amongst the worst GM cheese possible. The only answer to a NPC burning Edge is for a PC to burn Edge right back. You, as a GM, have infinite karma to throw around. The PC's do not. It's cheese to force the PC's to waste their karma like that. The GM can throw more karma at a NPC. It's like throwing a 10,000 karma NPC at a team: it's just not fair at best, and GM cheese at worst.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Because in the case of NPC's, it's an infinite resource they're burning. In the case of PC's, it's karma. You're essentially forcing the PC's to burn karma, while you waste nothing.

Not that long ago, I was in a game facing a Nataki with an Edge of 8. He burned Edge on critical successes on the attack, forcing us to burn back or die. He also burned Edge on critical successes on soak rolls, making it impossible to hurt him. It wasn't until the pet NPC's came in that we were able to kill him.

This is an example of very poor GMing... The story should be about the Player characters... if you want to tell a story about Pet NPC's... Write A Book.

That was, IMO, amongst the worst GM cheese possible. The only answer to a NPC burning Edge is for a PC to burn Edge right back. You, as a GM, have infinite karma to throw around. The PC's do not. It's cheese to force the PC's to waste their karma like that. The GM can throw more karma at a NPC. It's like throwing a 10,000 karma NPC at a team: it's just not fair at best, and GM cheese at worst.

Gouda.....

This is exactly why I would NEVER allow the burning of Edge for a Soak of Damage (for NPC's or PC's)... This is Completely broken in this regard... you wanna burn Edge to Survive... Fine, you still take enough damage to put you down... eventually you will regain consciousness... somewhere... It might be on your own terms (your team helped you out) or it might not be, but you are alive... But you will never use edge to just NOT TAKE DAMAGE...

Rant Over...

[Ragewind]

I voted that I do not think that Magic is broken but I also admit that I've seen magic break a game. This only seems like a contradiction (as the popular votes match) until you think about it this way:

I've seen magic break a game. I've seen different tech builds break a game. There are MANY options that can break a game, therefore I don't feel that magic is any more broken than them and therefore I don't consider it to be 'broken' by itself.

I second this

[pbangarth]

Because in the case of NPC's, it's an infinite resource they're burning. In the case of PC's, it's karma. You're essentially forcing the PC's to burn karma, while you waste nothing.

Not that long ago, I was in a game facing a Nataki with an Edge of 8. He burned Edge on critical successes on the attack, forcing us to burn back or die. He also burned Edge on critical successes on soak rolls, making it impossible to hurt him. It wasn't until the pet NPC's came in that we were able to kill him.

That was, IMO, amongst the worst GM cheese possible. The only answer to a NPC burning Edge is for a PC to burn Edge right back. You, as a GM, have infinite karma to throw around. The PC's do not. It's cheese to force the PC's to waste their karma like that. The GM can throw more karma at a NPC. It's like throwing a 10,000 karma NPC at a team: it's just not fair at best, and GM cheese at worst.

I understand your distaste for the situation you describe, and I agree that forcing PCs to burn Edge because the NPCs continually do so is wrong.

However, the situation we are discussing here is one in which a PC chooses to burn Edge first to do something impossible or next to impossible, and the results of which action include extreme imbalance in play and destruction of fun in the game. If I recall correctly, you have argued vociferously elsewhere against such behaviour by players (as well as GMs). Yet here is presented a way to warn against / prevent players from cheesing the game, using a mechanic that fits the fluff, fits the RAW and is fair.

I don't understand why you don't like it. It is a response to a player trying to be "too big for his britches", not a demand for the player to throw away his karma. No one is forcing the player to have his PC summon a Force gajillion spirit. If he does so, and dies for it, it is in fact a Good Death as far as the game and the SR world go. A player seeking the limits to which her PC can push her luck would be a fascinating and exciting side plot to a campaign. Protecting her from the consequences of overreaching herself only invites further abuse of the game, the rules and her teammates.

[The Mack]

A player seeking the limits to which her PC can push her luck would be a fascinating and exciting side plot to a campaign.

Would make for a good story though, with an NPC of course.

The players have to stop a lunatic mage who has found a way to sacrifice the souls (and edge) of others to summon a titanically powerful great form spirit. What's worse, the mage is possession tradition with channeling, with the end goal of setting him/herself up as a living god.

They track the mage and cult deep into the arctic circle, where the mass suicide & summoning ritual is to occur.

[Ryu]

Burning edge is a tangent here, but how would everyone react if a PC burns a (now slightly more expensive) ressource in order to kill that mega-enemy?

Even at lowish edge scores, you are giving away the karma reward for at least one run, likely more, to succeed at an ingame task. One-shot characters may be different, but I consider any run were that happens "mission accomplished". The player in question is sufficiently motivated to go for mechanically inefficient choices.

[Shilaleagh]

The players have to stop a lunatic mage who has found a way to sacrifice the souls (and edge) of others to summon a titanically powerful great form spirit. What's worse, the mage is possession tradition with channeling, with the end goal of setting him/herself up as a living god.

They track the mage and cult deep into the arctic circle, where the mass suicide & summoning ritual is to occur.

*yoink*
lil bit of adapatation and that's gonna fit quite nicely! TY!!

[suppenhuhn]

Though not supported by RAW, your view is certainly your choice... Mileage varies on the suicidal rate in our game... it is generally used to compensate for a generally poor outcome that should not have happened (the critical glitch that kills you for no other reason than because you failed a roll)... Generally, in my experience... a good death in shadowrun is just that... a Good Death... and we generally leave it at that... but sometimes, the death is just lame and begs to be compensated for... Not that there are not other consequences, but them are the breaks...

YMMV

I normally use a screen for rolls, so i can cheat a bit to keep players alive who just happen to have bad luck.
The ability to survive virtually anything by spending some karma just causes things like that binding mentioned above.

[Stahlseele]

Would make for a good story though, with an NPC of course.

The players have to stop a lunatic mage who has found a way to sacrifice the souls (and edge) of others to summon a titanically powerful great form spirit. What's worse, the mage is possession tradition with channeling, with the end goal of setting him/herself up as a living god.

They track the mage and cult deep into the arctic circle, where the mass suicide & summoning ritual is to occur.

isn't this more or less what blood magic and the sacrifice metamagic tech are all about? O.o
Main Problem i see with this luck attribute, is players KNOWING how much they have . .
a Human can start out with 7 edge max, that means 7 times certain death.
it's been mentioned in hitchhikers guide to the galaxy in a fitting way:"if you have done 6 impossible things before breakfast alone, then why not do the seventh impossible thing and take your breakfast at milliways, the restaurant at the end of the universe and be back before you left?"
Rolling those Edge dice to accomplish something, i can live with . .
just saying:"i will get rid of this one and do x and i fucking succeed no matter the consequences" is just wrong.
Long-Shot rules may allow you to roll up to 7 dice on a test where you would have, due to circumstances, -50 to your usual dice pool . . but it's still rolling dice.
so luck while using luck. you can roll well and have luck and accomplish whatever it was, or you have no luck while rolling your lucky dice while using your luck attribute.
so you fuck up and don't succeed . . that is luck, that can happen with or without edge attribute at whatever occassion you are rolling dice at.

[The Mack]

isn't this more or less what blood magic and the sacrifice metamagic tech are all about? O.o

Yeah basically, but the way I read Sacrifice it's directed at a single target as opposed to a whole cult of people at once. So maybe an advanced metamagic technique, with sacrifice as a pre-requisite.

[pbangarth]

Would make for a good story though, with an NPC of course.

The players have to stop a lunatic mage who has found a way to sacrifice the souls (and edge) of others to summon a titanically powerful great form spirit. What's worse, the mage is possession tradition with channeling, with the end goal of setting him/herself up as a living god.

They track the mage and cult deep into the arctic circle, where the mass suicide & summoning ritual is to occur.

*yoink*
lil bit of adapatation and that's gonna fit quite nicely! TY!!

Santa Claus has gone rogue, and is sacrificing his elves to become Shiva, the Destroyer.

[Mordinvan]

I too would be interested to hear the reasoning... My philosophy is what is good for the goose is good for the gander... though I would not use this overmuch, it would still be a viable option...

Mostly because Pc's have a finite edge pool, NPC's have an infinite edge pool, ie an unlimited number of NPC's

Given the reasons for burning edge, it should be impossible to kill an NPC until they run out of edge cause they'd just keep burning it to make their dodge rolls, or soak rolls with. Any and every assassination attempt would fail because the NPC would just burn edge, get enough successes ignore the damage completely.
I kinda have a bit of an issue with that.
Because there is NO reason for them not to if it is a life and death matter for them, they ALWAYS should if able.
And that would be irritating in the extreme.

[Mordinvan]

Burning edge is a tangent here, but how would everyone react if a PC burns a (now slightly more expensive) ressource in order to kill that mega-enemy?

Even at lowish edge scores, you are giving away the karma reward for at least one run, likely more, to succeed at an ingame task. One-shot characters may be different, but I consider any run were that happens "mission accomplished". The player in question is sufficiently motivated to go for mechanically inefficient choices.

If your character REALLY wants them dead. Like they murdered your whole family kinda dead, then I'd let them go for it, so long as the story won't suffer for it.

[Cain]

I understand your distaste for the situation you describe, and I agree that forcing PCs to burn Edge because the NPCs continually do so is wrong.

However, the situation we are discussing here is one in which a PC chooses to burn Edge first to do something impossible or next to impossible, and the results of which action include extreme imbalance in play and destruction of fun in the game. If I recall correctly, you have argued vociferously elsewhere against such behaviour by players (as well as GMs). Yet here is presented a way to warn against / prevent players from cheesing the game, using a mechanic that fits the fluff, fits the RAW and is fair.

I don't understand why you don't like it. It is a response to a player trying to be "too big for his britches", not a demand for the player to throw away his karma. No one is forcing the player to have his PC summon a Force gajillion spirit. If he does so, and dies for it, it is in fact a Good Death as far as the game and the SR world go. A player seeking the limits to which her PC can push her luck would be a fascinating and exciting side plot to a campaign. Protecting her from the consequences of overreaching herself only invites further abuse of the game, the rules and her teammates.

Basically, I think anytime a GM burns Edge like this is cheese. The mechanic doesn't fit the fluff, and it's not fair. With the exception of Hand of God (which is a totally other mechanic), NPCs have no business burning Edge. You're only doing it because the PC *succeeded* in conjuring a spirit bigger than you can handle. Rather than let his karma go to waste, you should figure out a way of dealing with the spirit. In my case, a honest discussion with the player solved matters.

A player should get *something* for burning Edge, and not a thumb to the nose as the NPC burns Edge right back.

Given the reasons for burning edge, it should be impossible to kill an NPC until they run out of edge cause they'd just keep burning it to make their dodge rolls, or soak rolls with. Any and every assassination attempt would fail because the NPC would just burn edge, get enough successes ignore the damage completely.
I kinda have a bit of an issue with that.

See my post above. Something like that actually happened.

[pbangarth]

Basically, I think anytime a GM burns Edge like this is cheese. The mechanic doesn't fit the fluff, and it's not fair. With the exception of Hand of God (which is a totally other mechanic), NPCs have no business burning Edge. You're only doing it because the PC *succeeded* in conjuring a spirit bigger than you can handle.

I believe that in Shadowrun as in other games and as in real life, there are things one should not try because they are too difficult, too dangerous ... too stupid. If a player has a 'succeed no matter how stupid' card to play, then the aspect of game play that involves judgment is eliminated. Some actions deserve a Thor shot.

Rather than let his karma go to waste, you should figure out a way of dealing with the spirit. In my case, a honest discussion with the player solved matters.
A player should get *something* for burning Edge, and not a thumb to the nose as the NPC burns Edge right back.

Yes, honest discussion between player and GM, before game play begins, or at least before certain actions are undertaken, to outline parameters and consequences and develop a cooperative approach to game play is greatly to be desired. As a GM, I would caution a player that if his magician tries to summon a really high Force spirit, he will have a really high Force snit to deal with. All magicians should know this from Summoning 101, even if their players do not. I would do this before the dice are rolled. If the player continued in that course of action, then I would play the spirit according to what I and others believe is the right way. And yes, there is judgment involved in determining what constitutes a too high Force spirit. That too can be talked over before the dice are rolled.

This is simply a matter of natural consequences. I don't see any need as GM to contest with the players. The GM has ultimate power over the whole universe. The GM wins... if he wants to. What's the fun in that? I get my kicks GMing by seeing the satisfied, exhausted, begging-for-more looks on the faces of the players at the end of the session. You don't get that from smashing their PCs with overwhelming force. You do get it, in part, by making a world in which they can lose if they play stupidly, arrogantly, carelessly.

And if someday they were able to grow in skill and power to the point where they could summon a Force 16 spirit legitimately, I would be proud of them as if they were my own children.

[Cain]

I believe that in Shadowrun as in other games and as in real life, there are things one should not try because they are too difficult, too dangerous ... too stupid. If a player has a 'succeed no matter how stupid' card to play, then the aspect of game play that involves judgment is eliminated. Some actions deserve a Thor shot.

You must really hate the Escape Certain Death clause, then.

And if someday they were able to grow in skill and power to the point where they could summon a Force 16 spirit legitimately, I would be proud of them as if they were my own children.

Considering that my player legitimately summoned and bound that Force 16 spirit, without burning Edge, there was no call for me to suddenly have the spirit burn Edge to get away. He scored a critical success on the summoning test, too. But to be perfectly clear: while he spent Edge like there was no tomorrow, he did not burn any.

But even if he had burned Edge, there would be no call for the spirit to burn Edge right back. I cannot emphasize this enough: he treated his spirits well, and even had Spirit Affinity for they type in question. Furthermore, you only burn Edge when you know you haven't scored a critical success. So, the only time I could call for an Edge burn would be *after* he had succeeded. That's just cheap and wrong. He's made his roll, spent his karma, he should get a fair reward.

[ornot]

Having an NPC burn edge to stay alive is not reasonable, unless you really want the NPC to come back later. Even then, it should be the end of the combat. If a lucky shot takes out a recurring villain, the GM should have a recourse to have them survive.

If my players decide to burn edge to deliberately screw up my carefully constructed plot they ruin my fun, and the fun of the other players, since I have to then ad lib things, which makes it hard to consider all the angles, and weakening the whole game. In such a circumstance I see no reason not to burn my infinite gm edge to push things in the direction I want to go. Similarly I see no reason to allow a PC to burn edge in a non-stressful situation, simply to succeed at some task they othewise would have no hope for (eg. Summoning and binding a high force spirit without rolling, or sourcing a cyborg body and brain jar, or electively implanting the street sam into said CCU, and having the aforementioned spirit possess the combined entity). That's an abuse of the system.

[Shilaleagh]

Santa Claus has gone rogue, and is sacrificing his elves to become Shiva, the Destroyer.

Damnit, now you've gone and ruined the deliberately vague wording on it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)
and yes, im serious.. but less shiva.

[pbangarth]

You must really hate the Escape Certain Death clause, then.

No, particularly as it is explained in SR4A, as the character suffers major consequences for their actions, or the actions visited upon them.

Considering that my player legitimately summoned and bound that Force 16 spirit, without burning Edge, there was no call for me to suddenly have the spirit burn Edge to get away. He scored a critical success on the summoning test, too. But to be perfectly clear: while he spent Edge like there was no tomorrow, he did not burn any.

But even if he had burned Edge, there would be no call for the spirit to burn Edge right back. I cannot emphasize this enough: he treated his spirits well, and even had Spirit Affinity for they type in question. Furthermore, you only burn Edge when you know you haven't scored a critical success. So, the only time I could call for an Edge burn would be *after* he had succeeded. That's just cheap and wrong. He's made his roll, spent his karma, he should get a fair reward.

The issue I have is not with the character being successful, it is with the player attempting to sneak past the laws of physics (or whatever other frame of reference is in effect) in order to avoid consequences for his actions, AND expecting that only he has the right to do so. If gauss rifles are available to characters, they are available to NPCs as well. If burning Edge is available to characters, it is available to spirits as well.

In the scenario you describe above, I would not use Edge to respond to the character's phenomenal success in a Summoning (also Binding?). Not just because of his treatment of spirits in general or the Spirit Affinity bonus. A Force 16 spirit has mental stats higher than a Great Dragon. He may be pissed of at being sucked away from his card game by a piddly little metahuman (Cute though he may be!), and at the same time willing to put up with the inconvenience because it is only temporary. He KNOWS that if this arrogant little shit keeps up this act, sooner or later his face will melt off from the Drain. And that will be very satisfying.

The burning of Edge, whatever metaphysical effect it represents, is something the spirit should be aware of, if for no other reason than the spirit-summoner link. Even if the spirit doesn't burn Edge to resist the first summoning, that 16 LOG and 16 INT will instantly understand that permanent servitude will ensue if the metahuman continues to burn Edge to enthrall the spirit. And it could be permanent because the summoner can rebuild Edge. Even if you argue the spirit should not be able to perceive the burning of Edge, it will be able to assess the capabilities of the summoner and his tools to a very fine degree. "Wait a minute. Why is this little shit continually surviving something that should be burning him away?"

It would appear to me that you are suggesting that an entity with a personality and intelligence more forceful than Lofwyr's would put up with the possibility of an INSECT bossing it around forever, refraining from freeing itself from servitude because it isn't 'fair' to fight back with all its powers.

How does that make sense to you?

[Draco18s]

Quick and easy change to bring edge back to a reasonable level for NPCs:

Only named reoccurring NPCs have edge.

Dragons (all) have edge because they're fucking dragons and should be major NPCs, if not reoccurring ones.

If you need edge on your mook NPCs, then they only get the two common uses of edge: adding to a die pool and rerolling failures. The amount of edge they have is limited by their critter section in the book, or to 4 for metahumans.

I don't know what to say about spirits. An Edge equal to force is just stupidly high.

[AllTheNothing]

Dragons (all) have edge because they're fucking dragons and should be major NPCs, if not reoccurring ones.

Fragging dragons, pleas. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)