IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Two targets w/ two weapons, multicasting and ranged?
SaintHax
post Jul 6 2009, 08:23 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 301
Joined: 25-August 04
From: Tampa, FL
Member No.: 6,602



OK, if you are shooting two pistols, you split your pool for each pistol. If you have two targets, don't you have a -2 pool modifier? Is that before the split, or -2 to each hand (ouch!)?

How does this work w/ spells? I know the DV increases, but is it harder to multicast on two targets than one?


Thanks again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr. Mage
post Jul 6 2009, 08:57 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 427
Joined: 24-June 09
From: Earth...I hope...
Member No.: 17,317



I can't really help you with the melee/range weapon part....but I'm pretty sure it actually says explicitly what to do with spells...of course, I don't know off the top of my head, but I do remember that it seemed (to me atleast) as iff casting on two separate targets was the same as casting twice on the same target....I could be wrong though...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Generico
post Jul 7 2009, 01:40 AM
Post #3


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 30-June 09
Member No.: 17,337



The multi-target penalty for ranged combat is usually one target at a time but if you did two simulatiusly I would apply it to both pools post split.
Example: You have a dicepool of 20, you split it to attack 2 targets, the first target you have 8 dice (half 20 minus 2 for multi-target), the second you have 6 dice (half 20 minus 2 for multi-target minus 2 for off-hand shooting)

I'm not really familiar with the melee rules (they rarely come up for us) but I suspect it would be the same.

Now for magic the example for multi-casting has a mage casting levitate on two different people, and it doesn't list any sort of "multi-target penalty".
I'm inclined to believe its just half dicepool on that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DireRadiant
post Jul 7 2009, 03:44 AM
Post #4


The Dragon Never Sleeps
*********

Group: Admin
Posts: 6,924
Joined: 1-September 05
Member No.: 7,667



QUOTE (SaintHax @ Jul 6 2009, 03:23 PM) *
How does this work w/ spells? I know the DV increases, but is it harder to multicast on two targets than one?


You can find it, it's easy. Look for the Casting Multiple Spells section in the book!


"Casting Multiple Spells: In some circumstances, a magician
may seek to cast multiple spells simultaneously (including multiples
of the same spell—for example, targeting two different opponents
with a mana bolt in the same action). Multiple spells may be cast with
the same Complex Action, but to do so the magician must split her
Spellcasting + Magic dice pool between each target. Additionally, the
Drain Value for each of the spells is increased by +1 per additional
spell (Drain Resistance Tests are also handled separately). Multiple
spells are resolved in whatever order the caster desires. The maximum
number of spells a character can cast in a single Complex Action is
equal to her Spellcasting skill, and each spell must be allocated at least
one die."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
McAllister
post Jul 7 2009, 05:36 AM
Post #5


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 509
Joined: 16-June 09
Member No.: 17,282



So if I had something awesome like 24 spellcasting dice and I was swinging at a mundane with 3 Willpower, I could cast three stunbolts at force 5, resist 1, 2 and 3 drain, and deal at least 15 stun damage? Whereas if I cast one big one at Force 10 and got 8 hits (and allocated them all to damage), I'd deal 17 damage but resist 12 drain, which is likely to be physical?

Whereas if I had a more reasonable 18 spellcasting dice and I was swinging at a mundane with 6 Willpower, I'd overcast two Force 7 stunbolts, with a good chance of doing 14 stun damage and resisting a mere 2 and 3 drain. I wouldn't be guaranteed to hit with both of them, but even if I only hit with one, I'd probably only be one damage in the hole, compared to his 7.

This is interesting. All the more reason to geek the mage (because doublecasting at a target who isn't defended by counterspelling could probably result in reasonably high DVs with much more manageable drain)

EDIT: Clarity
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Generico
post Jul 7 2009, 05:49 AM
Post #6


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 30-June 09
Member No.: 17,337



QUOTE (McAllister @ Jul 6 2009, 10:36 PM) *
So if I had something awesome like 24 spellcasting dice and I was swinging at a mundane with 3 Willpower, I could cast three stunbolts at force 5, resist 1, 2 and 3 drain, and deal at least 15 stun damage? Whereas if I cast one big one at Force 10 and got 8 hits (and allocated them all to damage), I'd deal 17 damage but resist 12 drain, which is likely to be physical?

Whereas if I had a more reasonable 18 spellcasting dice and I was swinging at a mundane with 6 Willpower, I'd overcast two Force 7 stunbolts, with a good chance of doing 14 stun damage and resisting a mere 2 and 3 drain. I wouldn't be guaranteed to hit with both of them, but even if I only hit with one, I'd probably only be one damage in the hole, compared to his 7.

Both of these are incorrect. The full drain penalty for multi-casting applies to ALL the spells you cast simultaneously.

SR4A page 183
As per the example:
"Zoe and Atom are on a bridge that is about to collapse. Zoe whips up a quick Levitate
spell to fy her and Atom both of the bridge to safety. Zoe has a dice pool of 8
(Spellcasting 4 + Magic 4), so she splits it to roll 4 dice on herself and 4 on Atom.
Whether or not she succeeds, she must still resist Drain for both spells, each increased
by +1 DV."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
McAllister
post Jul 7 2009, 06:11 AM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 509
Joined: 16-June 09
Member No.: 17,282



Good catch, gentleman or gentlewoman (as the case may be). With Centering and a Centering Focus, a drain resistance pool of 12 is certainly achievable, but, as always with magicians, the bottom line is "magicians can do incredible things, just as soon as you sink a hundred Karma into them."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Jul 7 2009, 06:35 AM
Post #8


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



The ridiculous drain for the Force 10 applies only if the GM decides to use the optional (and IMHO stupid) rule to increase the drain of direct combat spells by the hits allocated to extra damage. Normally it would be 4 Drain for 17 damage. Or with that unneccessary rule use Force 10 and only use 1 Hit for extra damage. Still drops most mooks and is a lot less drain

Back to the original topic.
You split the dice pool without any modifiers. Then you add all modifiers to the applicable hand.
So with 20 dice in AGI+Weapon Skill you have 10 for each hand. The -2 for additional targets only applies from the second target on. One hand also gets another -2 if the character does not have the ambidextrous quality. Unless there are other modifiers (wounds, lighting etc.) the pools could be 10/6 or 8/8 depending on which hand shoots the second target. For ambidextrous characters it's 10/8.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
McAllister
post Jul 7 2009, 06:48 AM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 509
Joined: 16-June 09
Member No.: 17,282



I believe you're right about the drain-increase rule being optional (as well as it being stupid), except that in SR4A they decided to make it RAW. Which, of course, you're welcome to take with a grain of salt, but it's their intention.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Jul 7 2009, 07:24 AM
Post #10


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



Only SR4A made it optional. Before it didn't even exist.

Look here:
QUOTE ('SR4A Changes Reference Document')
Direct combat spells have a new optional mechanic: for each Net Hit applied to damage, the Drain Value increases by +1. For Area of Effect spells, use only the highest Net Hits applied to damage
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheOOB
post Jul 7 2009, 07:37 AM
Post #11


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 23-January 07
From: Seattle, USA
Member No.: 10,749



I just give direct combat spells +2 Drain, balance them a little with indirect spells. I don't like to encourage overcasting.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryu
post Jul 7 2009, 07:58 AM
Post #12


Awakened Asset
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,464
Joined: 9-April 05
From: AGS, North German League
Member No.: 7,309



As was quoted from SR4A:
"Zoe and Atom are on a bridge that is about to collapse. Zoe whips up a quick Levitate
spell to fy her and Atom both of the bridge to safety. Zoe has a dice pool of 8
(Spellcasting 4 + Magic 4), so she splits it to roll 4 dice on herself and 4 on Atom.
Whether or not she succeeds, she must still resist Drain for both spells, each increased
by +1 DV."


Now assume a mage with Spellcasting 5 (Manipulation spells +2), Magic 5, and a mentor bonus to Manipulation spells. Base dp 10 is 5 per spell, both modified by +4 is 9 dice per spell. Drain is +2 for both spells.


The interesting dp modifier is provided by a spell category focus. Do the above for combat spells, add a combat spell focus of force 5. If you don´t face counterspelling, cast 3 stunballs at once. It is only drain +2, so you should be able to use force 5 (not overcasting). 3* drain 5 might hurt - but so will the stunballs with 13/12/12 dice. Timid souls can go for the magic missile approach - 3 stunbolts of force 5 come with 3*drain 3.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Generico
post Jul 7 2009, 08:20 AM
Post #13


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 30-June 09
Member No.: 17,337



Wouldn't that trick work with a power focus?

I may need to re-think the usefulness of area spells.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryu
post Jul 7 2009, 09:28 AM
Post #14


Awakened Asset
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,464
Joined: 9-April 05
From: AGS, North German League
Member No.: 7,309



The argument runs so that a power focus increases all pools based on magic, and that those dice are divided, too, while category foci provide extra dice in specific situations.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Jul 7 2009, 10:04 AM
Post #15


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



Actually the trick either works with both types of foci, if dice pool modifiers are added after the split just like with two weapons, or both foci are added before. The rules however don't say when modifiers are added.

The point is both foci give a dicepool bonus only the conditions for this bonus are different. A power focus does not increase the magician's magic attribute it only provides a dice pool bonus to all tests involving the magic attribute.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryu
post Jul 7 2009, 11:40 AM
Post #16


Awakened Asset
********

Group: Members
Posts: 4,464
Joined: 9-April 05
From: AGS, North German League
Member No.: 7,309



The question is what you understand the "magic + spellcasting" dicepool to be. Power foci add to all magic tests, domains provide extra dice for all spellcasters of the right tradition. The interpretation of "basic magic + basic spellcasting" is of course also possible.

Modifiers for specific spell types are different, as they are not sufficiently described by "spellcasting dice" without the "for spell type X" part.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
McAllister
post Jul 7 2009, 05:09 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 509
Joined: 16-June 09
Member No.: 17,282



I'd say all modifiers are added before the split, with the stipulation that dice from source which specifies a spell type must be used for that spell type, and only one focus applies.

And Dakka, it's very interesting that the changes document words it that way, because I have the SR4a PDF, which says (on pg 204):

"Direct Combat spells involve channeling mana directly into a target as destructive and damaging energies rather than generating a damaging effect. Affecting the target’s being on this fundamental level with raw mana requires more focus and more power than producing basic effects; as a result every net hit used to increase the damage value of a Direct Combat spell also increases the Drain DV of the spell by +1. "

Doesn't sound optional. Weird inconsistency.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Jul 7 2009, 05:39 PM
Post #18


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



I only looked into the Changes Reference Dcoument and though I cannot quote anything, I'm pretty sure that in the next errata for SR4A or in the printed version it will be marked optional and the OR thresholds will be reduced to 1,2,3,5 as opposed to 1,2,4,6. You might want to search through the threads on SR4A here on dumpshock, that's where i remember to have seen this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RedeemerofOgar
post Jul 13 2009, 09:34 PM
Post #19


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 150
Joined: 5-April 04
Member No.: 6,219



QUOTE (Dakka Dakka @ Jul 7 2009, 05:04 AM) *
Actually the trick either works with both types of foci, if dice pool modifiers are added after the split just like with two weapons, or both foci are added before. The rules however don't say when modifiers are added.


I'm actually having trouble finding anywhere in the rules that states that modifiers are not simply part of the pool pre-split. Could someone point me towards the text that is generating this concept, please?

Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Jul 13 2009, 09:40 PM
Post #20


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



QUOTE ('SR4 p. 141/SR4A p. 150')
Doing so, however, requires that the character split his dice pool between the attacks. If two separate skills are being used (Pistols and Automatics), use the smallest dice pool. Split the pool before applying modifiers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mäx
post Jul 13 2009, 10:30 PM
Post #21


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,803
Joined: 3-February 08
From: Finland
Member No.: 15,628



QUOTE (McAllister @ Jul 7 2009, 08:09 PM) *
And Dakka, it's very interesting that the changes document words it that way, because I have the SR4a PDF, which says (on pg 204):

"Direct Combat spells involve channeling mana directly into a target as destructive and damaging energies rather than generating a damaging effect. Affecting the target’s being on this fundamental level with raw mana requires more focus and more power than producing basic effects; as a result every net hit used to increase the damage value of a Direct Combat spell also increases the Drain DV of the spell by +1. "

Doesn't sound optional. Weird inconsistency.

You should contact your PDF provider for an updated PDF.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
McAllister
post Jul 13 2009, 10:32 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 509
Joined: 16-June 09
Member No.: 17,282



Updated, eh? I appreciate the heads-up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Falconer
post Jul 14 2009, 12:06 AM
Post #23


Neophyte Runner
*****

Group: Validating
Posts: 2,283
Joined: 12-October 07
Member No.: 13,662



Umm... I'm reading this, I think it's been corrected by others.


20 dice pistols. Take out -2 for ambi, another -2 for first second target. Split the remaining 16 dice as you wish between the two attacks. (if you were to say drop both targets, then each ADDITIONAL target past the first in a single combat pass is an additional -2). So if you dropped 2 targets at -2 multitarget in the first simple action, the second simple action doing the same thing would be at -6 (plus double uncompensated recoil if you don't have RC1 on each gun).



As for spellcasting... if you were to cast two copies of a spell at the same force. Both copies would have the same drain code (+1 cumulative to ALL castings). The advantage is that each drain roll is rolled seperately using your normal drain pool. (so if you had 10 drain dice, you'd roll 10 dice twice). Downside is again, you need to split your spellcasting pool, but you don't take the multiple target penalty that firearms would get (good thing too... most spellcasting pools are half the size of firearms pools!).

EG: Mikey can't use his stunball as there's too many friendlies in the zone of effect, he has a combat pool of 13 dice. He instead casts two force5 stunbolts, putting 7 dice in one & 6 in the other. Both stunbolts would be cast w/ (5/2)-1 +1 == 2drain. He'd roll his full 9 drain dice against each.


There's other big risks in splitting dice pools as well... smaller dice pools are much more prone to glitching and critical glitching... so it's not without it's risks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dakka Dakka
post Jul 14 2009, 05:25 AM
Post #24


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,507
Joined: 11-November 08
Member No.: 16,582



As I wrote earlier all modifiers are added after the split. If you had a dicepool of 20 (e.g. AGI 7(10) + Automatics 7(10)), you can split the 20 dice anyway you like. The shot with the off hand gets -2 and any shot at an aditional target is at an additional -2
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mäx
post Jul 14 2009, 11:58 AM
Post #25


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,803
Joined: 3-February 08
From: Finland
Member No.: 15,628



QUOTE (McAllister @ Jul 7 2009, 09:11 AM) *
With Centering and a Centering Focus, a drain resistance pool of 12 is certainly achievable, but, as always with magicians, the bottom line is "magicians can do incredible things, just as soon as you sink a hundred Karma into them."

There's no need for Centering to get that kind of drain resistance pool, pool of 16 dice for drain resistance can easily be had at chargen( Just take a Dwarf chaos mage with Willpower 6 + Logic 5 + Cerebral Booster 3 + Fetish for the spell) or if you willing to seriously min-max the character that pool can be raised to 20+ using a blood fetish and gettin even higher Wil&Log.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 10:51 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.