[X] My Assistant

[BlueMax]

If its an attack on a group of people, is it a personal attack?

Worst of all I agree, the spellcaster should be slinging spells. Some of us however get tired of the spellcaster knocking out two Citymasters a turn. And not even using specialized spells.

While your examples carry some validity for a well funded corporate facility, thats only one class of location in the game.

And no, I will not attribute something derogatory your direction.

BlueMax

[Yerameyahu]

There's a difference between have access to powerful magic, and using it constantly. If you don't know why casting constantly is a problem, there isn't much anyone can say to explain it. Even the bunnies use up ammo.

[Lanlaorn]

I said that doubling the drain on spells because you feel like it is lazy GMing, and I stand by that assertion. If you consider that a personal attack I don't know what to tell you.

[Yerameyahu]

In fairness, that's not the only thing you said. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I think I saw the word 'fascist', as well.

[fistandantilus4....]

I sincerely hope I never play with any of you "magic fascists".

Wow, cool man. Not only are you throwing about some nice insults and blanket "personal attacks", but you also threw it out at a moderator. Very nice. Good form.

Why shouldn't a Magician be casting constantly? That's the whole point of the character concept, he's a spellcaster. You might as well impose some insane penalties on gun bunnies and street samurai so they can't use their guns and melee "on a whim" as well, after all firefights and close quarters combat need to be made dangerous again. Right?

Guns are regulated. They're illegal and easy to spot. They also run out of ammo. They also have a set damage value. Oh, and you can wear armor. Hard to do against a mana bolt. Oh yeah, and just about every other guy can get a gun and shoot back. Sorry for the snarky tone, but fascists get that way.

Railing against magic is just a sign of an unimaginative GM, there are tons of examples of magical security, especially in Street Magic. Any lowly corporate office could have a wage mage in the security department who comes by every other month and sets up a gauntlet of multiple types of wards and patrolling spirits, when signs of magic are detected various levels of response could be deployed, such a Drones (the direct damage spells you hate so much must first overcome their Object Resistance, which the table merely lists as "6+" so use your discretion) or a wage mage miles away sending a spirit out on a remote service to magical guard duty in response to a SOS.

There's a lot you can do with magical security and countermeasures, sure. You're assuming that's the only place shadowruns take place.

and fucking with it because you don't like it and/or are lazy just ruins other people's fun in the name of your ego.

No, its a matter of preference. I'm not right. Neither are you. It's just opinions.

[Critias]

Hahahahah! Magic fascists.

[Lanlaorn]

I recommend some of you buy a dictionary, "magic fascists" was in quotes for a reason, I wasn't saying you thought Benito Mussolini was a great leader I was referring to this aspect of fascism:

a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism

And certain GMs are like that about their pet causes, say their apparent stance towards magic at their table.

Guns are regulated. They're illegal and easy to spot. They also run out of ammo. They also have a set damage value. Oh, and you can wear armor. Hard to do against a mana bolt. Oh yeah, and just about every other guy can get a gun and shoot back. Sorry for the snarky tone, but fascists get that way.

And yet despite all that they still can drop grunts in a heartbeat and they (and their ammo) barely cost anything. It's a game of glass cannons, why do you hate this particular one?!

There's a lot you can do with magical security and countermeasures, sure. You're assuming that's the only place shadowruns take place.

Maybe those gangers live in a warehouse with a background count that drops your caster's magic a point or two and makes things a pain all night.

No, its a matter of preference. I'm not right. Neither are you. It's just opinions.

And in my opinion the changes you all propose reduce fun for no apparent reason. Why not have people manage the heat buildup of their guns? It's so realistic and if they "overshoot" you could have their LMG's barrel melt.

[Critias]

I said that doubling the drain on spells because you feel like it is lazy GMing, and I stand by that assertion. If you consider that a personal attack I don't know what to tell you.

What if you double it because it's an optional rule, suggested right there in the rulebook?

[toturi]

There's a difference between have access to powerful magic, and using it constantly. If you don't know why casting constantly is a problem, there isn't much anyone can say to explain it. Even the bunnies use up ammo.

Well, the mages have to constantly resist Drain if they keep casting spells. Sure, most of the time, Drain isn't an issue if the mage has enough Drain resistance but the more they roll, the more they risk not resisting the Drain completely.

If your mage can constantly cast powerful spells and soak the Drain, then the player must have designed his character to do so. If he hadn't want his character to be able to do so, the character wouldn't be likely to be able to do so.

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, see, I don't actually have much of a problem with the magic rules. Like Toturi, it doesn't particularly bother me a lot of the time when a character is capable of doing something outside the bounds of other characters or archetypes. I just think that drain as a limiting factor is largely a polite fiction in regards to spellcasting.

[Lanlaorn]

What if you double it because it's an optional rule, suggested right there in the rulebook?

Even if it were an optional rule, it's still a bad and lazy idea. But FYI I just checked SR4A and SM and neither has this optional rule. SR4A has Simplifying Spell Drain which still use F/2, it just has you precalculate the values for max normal force and modify from there to speed up gameflow. Street Magic has Optional Rule: Acquiring Gaesa During Play, Optional Rule: Learning Metamagic, Optional Rule: Aid Enchanting, Optional Rule: Exotic Reagent Requisites and Optional Rule: Corps Cadavres and Living Dolls.

I even tried searching for every instance of the word "drain" but that quickly grew tiresome and I started skimming, let me know the book and page number if I missed it. While there are certainly some (IMO) bad optional rules suggested in the rulebook since they are, of course, just semi-popular houserules not considered good enough to be part of the core gameplay, I would be genuinely surprised if this was one of them.

[Yerameyahu]

Toturi, it's hardly a question of the player wanting to be able to constantly cast powerful spells. Obviously, they'd want that. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[fistandantilus4....]

And in my opinion the changes you all propose reduce fun for no apparent reason. Why not have people manage the heat buildup of their guns? It's so realistic and if they "overshoot" you could have their LMG's barrel melt.

It's a simple fix:If you don't like it, don't use it. That's the point of this thread. Someone has a problem with the way it is. We proposed some solutions. If you don't like them, don't use them. That's what you should do.

What you shouldn't do is go railing off on how everyone else is wrong and you're right because you feel 'x'. That's cool. Feel 'x'. Feel 'XYZ'. Don't come in here saying that the collective posters on the thread are all wrong and fascists (which is generally accepted as at least an impolite thing to say to a person) because they don't do or think the way you do.
*snip*

forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism

And certain GMs are like that about their pet causes, say their apparent stance towards magic at their table.

Goes both ways.

[Ol' Scratch]

And yet despite all that they still can drop grunts in a heartbeat and they (and their ammo) barely cost anything. It's a game of glass cannons, why do you hate this particular one?!

There's this idea out there. It's called "game balance." It's an obscure, rarely mentioned idea, I know... but it does indeed exist. And under this idea -- a crazy notion though it may be -- is the concept of making sure the primary options in a game are relatively balanced amongst each other. Unfortunately, magic isn't very well balanced, particularly against the amount of resistance a target can muster against it. There's two major ways of correcting for that imbalance; either giving defenders more ways to resist those types of attacks, or reining in the attacker so that he has to think twice before going all out.

Personally, I think it's a far better idea to go with the former than the latter. Magic is supposed to be strong and powerful and feared. When you can barely match a 35-nuyen grenade without causing major arteries in your body to burst, that's a BadThing™. If you just allow people to resist those attacks a bit better, however, you get an end result where magic is still as potent as it should be, but people can actually have a chance of surviving the assault. There is no magical Armored Jacket or Magic Dodge skills in the game. And that's where the problem lies.

[fistandantilus4....]

There is no magical Armored Jacket or Magic Dodge skills in the game. And that's where the problem lies.

Not any more *Goodbye spell locked mana barrier*

[FireHand]

There is no magical Armored Jacket or Magic Dodge skills in the game. And that's where the problem lies.

Okay, it's late and I'm tired, so if this doesn't make sense, chalk it up to fatigue. But what is the difference between magic that you cannot defend against and a narcojet pistol? With the pistol, if the needle penetrates the armor you get stuck with 10S. Same with a stunball... if you don't resist the casting, you take the damage.

[Lanlaorn]

There's this idea out there. It's called "game balance." It's an obscure, rarely mentioned idea, I know... but it does indeed exist. And under this idea -- a crazy notion though it may be -- is the concept of making sure the primary options in a game are relatively balanced amongst each other. Unfortunately, magic isn't very well balanced, particularly against the amount of resistance a target can muster against it. There's two major ways of correcting for that imbalance; either giving defenders more ways to resist those types of attacks, or reining in the attacker so that he has to think twice before going all out.

Personally, I think it's a far better idea to go with the former than the latter. Magic is supposed to be strong and powerful and feared. When you can barely match a 35-nuyen grenade without causing major arteries in your body to burst, that's a BadThing™. If you just allow people to resist those attacks a bit better, however, you get an end result where magic is still as potent as it should be, but people can actually have a chance of surviving the assault. There is no magical Armored Jacket or Magic Dodge skills in the game. And that's where the problem lies.

Well "magic dodge" is counterspelling and "magic armor" is "be a highly processed object". I'm saying that PCs using magic against NPCs is balanced, the Mage may be throwing out combat spells while his menagerie of spirits rampages about but that's cool, this is a game where the other characters have enough firepower to solo a platoon or are almost-cyborg ninja assassin or control a small army of robotic death machines. Despite all this over the top lethality can you still challenge your players? Certainly, many tools have been explicitly created towards that end. If security is being hammered by a spellcaster maybe the standard operating procedure is to pump FAB III into the room and dispatch the drones. There are options to let players have their fun, feel powerful and yet still have proper, well thought out in game defenses for such scenarios.

I completely agree that NPC vs. PC magic is very powerful, even with counterspelling if you have a Mage NPC with 6 magic say "Oh what the hell" and overcast a Force 12 Powerball, it would be dangerous and you would have no real defense. But there are so many other things that are in the same category, at the very least:
- Snipers. Firing from long distances in unseen positions and easily dropping characters with their high powered rifles, ammunition and aim. It's perfectly realistic and there's zero defense against it. You might as well say "As you're running to your vehicle a sniper drops you" because the dice will be a formality.
- Explosives. With the abundance, quality and "chunky salsa" there's any number of "and that drone that flew through your fire into your midst was a kamikaze full of explosives" or "the room was rigged to explode if the alarm was triggered". TPK

At least you can geek the mage.

I just don't understand what is supposedly so unbalanced here. All character styles are powerful. As the GM you can defend against them all with the tools provided. All those same player character abilities when turned against the players are FAR too effective, and it's up to you to refrain from murdering everyone just because you can. Are your games featuring some kind of player vs. player combat? Because as addressed earlier that's also a matter of "who wins initiative". So I don't get it, why not let the mage play like a mage?

It's a simple fix:If you don't like it, don't use it. That's the point of this thread. Someone has a problem with the way it is. We proposed some solutions. If you don't like them, don't use them. That's what you should do.

What you shouldn't do is go railing off on how everyone else is wrong and you're right because you feel 'x'. That's cool. Feel 'x'. Feel 'XYZ'. Don't come in here saying that the collective posters on the thread are all wrong and fascists (which is generally accepted as at least an impolite thing to say to a person) because they don't do or think the way you do.

It's a forum, the whole point is discussion. I'm going to tell the OP I think his problem is a non-issue. I'm going to tell everyone who agrees with him that, in my opinion, they're wrong and the game is fine. I eagerly await counter-arguments, posit theories, concede points or provide new arguments. I think you're wrong and I'd like you to explain your reasoning, I want to understand why you think the way you do. Currently all I'm seeing is a lot of vague "magic SHOULD be dangerous!" that seems to be typical tyrannical GM prejudice fucking with mechanics. There's been no serious reason provided what-so-ever, everyone agrees that there's no magical defense that a player can independently acquire, and even with counterspelling they're nowhere as protected as when they twink out their 20+/20+ armor builds. Why does that mean a PC playing a Mage shouldn't be able to be amazing in combat? Everyone else can. Trying to make a caster refrain from casting seems to me to be as balanced as trying to force the gun bunny from shooting his guns, and for no other reason than "I don't like it".

Oh and if you don't like it? Don't reply. What you shouldn't do is try to tell me that I can't say that someone is wrong. That's the "suppressing opposition and criticism", btw. What I'm doing is a little thing called "debate and discourse".

P.S. If an analogy written in air quotes truly offended you then I pity you.

[FireHand]

Lanlaorn, let me first start by saying that if you read my previous posts you'll realize I agree with you fairly completely. I see no reason to nerf mages or the system as written. That being said, I think the issue some of the other folks on this board has had with you isn't your content, but your tone. Swearing isn't called for and, although you are absolutely correct in its definition, using the word "fascist" was probably unwise as it does have a certain social negative quality. It would be like me calling someone ignorant: by its very definition it simply means, "lacking in knowledge or training," (a fairly neutral word in and of itself) however socially most people take it to mean "stupid."

I like your arguments, however I'd caution you (as well as anyone who may get heated on this board) to not fall to the easy temption of social callousness the annonymity of this board offers.

[Critias]

Okay, it's late and I'm tired, so if this doesn't make sense, chalk it up to fatigue. But what is the difference between magic that you cannot defend against and a narcojet pistol? With the pistol, if the needle penetrates the armor you get stuck with 10S. Same with a stunball... if you don't resist the casting, you take the damage.

Mostly that with a Narcoject you can attempt a dodge against the initial attack, the needle has to penetrate armor, and you get to make a Toxic Resistance test against that damage.

With a Stunball, there's no dodge attempt, there's no armor that can help you, and then there's no damage resistance test. You and all your buddies match a single attribute against a mage's favorite attribute plus the mage's favorite skill, and then he stabs you all in the brain with his ego.

Now, do I think the problem is as bad as some folks make it out to be? Not in the slightest. In fact, I think recent rules have gone a long way towards helping the issue, and I can fairly say that in-character I've never felt overwhelmingly threatened by an enemy mage, in any edition of the game (if they were sustaining a slew of defensive spells, their offense doesn't hurt so much...and if they weren't, I shot them in the face until they were dead).

For those that do have issues balancing their game, however, a frustrated GM should be able to come to an internet message board and ask for advice without being called a fascist.

Oh and if you don't like it? Don't reply. What you shouldn't do is try to tell me that I can't say that someone is wrong. That's the "suppressing opposition and criticism", btw. What I'm doing is a little thing called "debate and discourse".

If you can't see the irony in typing those lines of text that close to one another, I really don't know what to say.

edit to add: For those that are continually poo-poo'ing the "using magic should be dangerous" thing, I'm just genuinely curious here, but how long have you been playing the game? This isn't some silly e-peen thing, of "I've been playing longer than you have, so I know better!" or some sort of post-count contest, I'm just really wondering when you were introduced to the game. Personally, I know a lot of my "casting spells should kick your ass" mentality is a holdover from previous editions, where it really did take a whole lot out of a mage to sling mojo very often, at least until you snagged Centering or a good couple of Foci to ease the pressure a bit. I feel like that's not the case so much in 4th Edition any more, so it seems like folks that are just getting into the game more recently may not have the same emotional holdover towards the good ol' days of passing out after a good Fireball.

[IKerensky]

Obviously there is another problem in assessing Magic power :

What the GM expect it to be at their table. Reading the full thread (that quickly derailed as if you carefully read my first post you will see that my comment was "Magic is strong, did I miss something", definitely not a call for nerf of anguish cry for overpower, just a basic constat ) I think there is basically 2 kind of people talking here :

1- Magic is powerfull, and it should be that way with no need to any modification.

2- Magic is powerfull, but it need additionnal defense or cost because currently some spells are quite over what the other players or the opposition can sustain.

Interestingly the premise is the same and everyone agree on it.

More interestingly is that in my original example it was the PLAYERS that were wipped out by a single and basic NPCs wich make me think if there is something wrong in my ruling (and it was, in part).

There is definitely some gray areas in the spell definition: how could something be direct then area ? I need to be able to see anyone into the spell area or not ?

The players were careless and not used to fighting magic user, but I still had to cheat on them because I said the ork blow his mind with the casting while in fact he did survive. This basic NPC overcast twice in a row and survive quite neatly and with his Energy Condition Monitor unscatted.

I thing the people that dont feel that changes are not needed in the way magic behave (specifically Drain and Overcast) should still admit that Magic have advantage over other Combat system (basically no armor, and lower resistance roll, anyway to defeat magic usually defeat other methods too) but this is fine for them.

The people that feel it need change should admit Magic work correctly now and isn't too powerfull, it is just lacking enough drawback or cost in their opinion.

IMDNSHO, I feel magic is too strong too easily, a bit like my opinion on wireless Matrix, that doesnt go with the idea I have on Magician feed from the novels and sourcebook. I think the magician could cast a lots of their smaller spells at no cost, and only suffer drain from bigger spell (bigger not massively overpowered). I think that when a magician try to cast a spell largely above his level he put his very own life into it (sustaining it by Life Magic) wich is corroborated by the way magic work (Great Ghost Dance). Every time I read a magician ressort to Overcasting it basically take him out of play and often nearing death.

This isn't really what I get from the current rules, Phys Drain from overpowered spells doesnt exactly replicate massive exhaustion and I think it need tweakings (some E Drain should be added by example). The way Drain is mitigated now make it too easy to control/expect/sustain, you now what you will face and handle, you are not just pourring everything you have and pray.

So in conclusion :

I am fine with the current spellcasting power. I feel the standard drain is basically OK. I feel there need to be harder/different rules on Drain from Overpowered spells.


P.S. Calling a GM a Fascist is very rude, unpolite and silly. Of course a GM is some kind of autoritarian and dictatorial figure, he is the one in charge of the rules and making all the decision about what is or not possible into the game and the world he is creating. You cant expect a gaming session to work as a Democracy, because with one vote each I fear the players would hardly ever encounter any opposition nor trouble...

[toturi]

Every time I read a magician ressort to Overcasting it basically take him out of play and often nearing death.

This isn't really what I get from the current rules, Phys Drain from overpowered spells doesnt exactly replicate massive exhaustion and I think it need tweakings (some E Drain should be added by example). The way Drain is mitigated now make it too easy to control/expect/sustain, you now what you will face and handle, you are not just pourring everything you have and pray.

Can you please tell me which of the canon stories (English fiction, I can't read German) does this happen?

[FireHand]

Here's a wacky idea... what if instead of net hits increasing the DV of the spell, the DV was simply the Force the spell was cast at? It would certainly encourage more overcasting, but then that means more potential for a mage geeking himself!

[IKerensky]

Can you please tell me which of the canon stories (English fiction, I can't read German) does this happen?

I am currently reading 2XS, in wich the Elvish magician basically burn himself to shoot out the Bug Spirit in the first fight, he drop unconsious but is still alive. It was the only spell he casted of all the fight.

In "Choose Your Ennemies Carefully" last fight Hart goes very close to die, but she use other magic before, same for Hart and Sam's Sister in "Find Your Own Truth".

In Novels nearly everytime a Magician cast a spell he suffer from obvious drain, the drain suffered being directly in touch with the spell power, combat spell seeming far more draining that basically utilitarian ones.

Of courses thoses novels are back from SR1 era, but it is what I expect at my gaming table. Someone talk about a Glass Cannon and I think Mages should be just that : Tremendous power in very vulnerable package with the potential to very hurt themselves when ressorting to maximum power.

[Lanlaorn]

I like your arguments, however I'd caution you (as well as anyone who may get heated on this board) to not fall to the easy temption of social callousness the annonymity of this board offers.

In my opinion as long as you refrain from ad homiem tactics then it's perfectly polite. I didn't say anyone was an idiot for believing what they did, just that I'm not a fan of the stereotypical arbitrary houserules GM that's as much a RPG persona as the min/maxing powergamer.

For those that do have issues balancing their game, however, a frustrated GM should be able to come to an internet message board and ask for advice without being called a fascist.

No, I'm saying GMs that wield their houserules with an iron fist based on their whims were the "fascists". Let me know which part isn't analogous.

If you can't see the irony in typing those lines of text that close to one another, I really don't know what to say.

Do I really need to specify "don't reply telling me to shut up"? Because I'd love a reply that didn't consist of "lol you said 'fascist', not cool dude, that has negative connotations".

edit to add: For those that are continually poo-poo'ing the "using magic should be dangerous" thing, I'm just genuinely curious here, but how long have you been playing the game? This isn't some silly e-peen thing, of "I've been playing longer than you have, so I know better!" or some sort of post-count contest, I'm just really wondering when you were introduced to the game. Personally, I know a lot of my "casting spells should kick your ass" mentality is a holdover from previous editions, where it really did take a whole lot out of a mage to sling mojo very often, at least until you snagged Centering or a good couple of Foci to ease the pressure a bit. I feel like that's not the case so much in 4th Edition any more, so it seems like folks that are just getting into the game more recently may not have the same emotional holdover towards the good ol' days of passing out after a good Fireball.

You're probably correct with this theory, I've literally only been playing for weeks. We played a few sessions to get a feel for the mechanics where I played a Street Samurai and now going for a real campaign and I'm playing a Mage. While I love the Mage for it's versatility as I'm operating as the team medic with a high Logic (hermetic mage) and the Heal spell, carrying lots of utility and support buffs with spells like Levitate, Influence, Imp Invis, Armor etc. and still able to hold my own in a fight with Stunbolt, etc. But that Sammy I made? That was a combat monster and I probably didn't even min/max it correctly, 4 cyberlimbs and some martial arts left me with extremely high armor, tons of physical condition boxes
and called shot "kicks to the face" annihilating anyone, even pistol shots from my humble Preds were incredibly potent simply thanks to the high agility. So yes I have a high dice pool for my Stunbolt/Powerbolt and can cast it safely even at relatively high levels of Force, and it's remarkably effective. But so what? Everyone's a badass it's just a matter of what style badass you want to be. I didn't really feel like my gymnastic cyber skating kickboxing waif was any less a potent character than my booksmart reserved Combat/Manipulation Mage.

I literally cannot understand a proposal like "turn F/2 into F" as that would leave me taking complex actions for less than pistol damage or ramping up the damage to what everyone else was doing at the cost of giant fractions of my health. Why?

[Blade]

Personally, I know a lot of my "casting spells should kick your ass" mentality is a holdover from previous editions, where it really did take a whole lot out of a mage to sling mojo very often, at least until you snagged Centering or a good couple of Foci to ease the pressure a bit.

I remember having trouble with my shaman in SR2, but the GM wasn't using the magic dice pool so I don't know how it really was. But in SR3, most spellslingers I've seen could cast most spells all day long without getting more than a L wound (which the most munchkinized PC ignored thanks to a trauma dumper).