Magic House Rules, Enhancing Flavor, Removing Problems Options

[Seth]

I totally don't mind if the party mage feels a little weak in combat. He's got Spirits (which are awesome), he's got battlefield control, and he can whip out his lightning bolt in situations where even tasers are problematic.

My experience with mages in any game is that they dominate the game.

• They have awesome social effects (charm / mind control / detect lie / increase charisma ...)
• They have awesome movement powers (levitate / gecko walk )
• They can invisibly spy (astral scan / clairvoyance)
• They have utterly awesome pets (spirits)

I think its much better if they don't dominate combat as well! To "nerf" them in combat I do the following:

• No multicasting
• Direct combat spells do the mages magic base damage instead of the force of the spell
• I have the threshold rules from the old shadowrun where to mind control someone you need a number of sucesses equal to their willpower (otherwise mod mind is an "I win spell")
• I reduce the drain of elemental indirect spells by 1 point

With these rules the mages are still very good but the gun bunnies are far better. Elemental direct spells are very good. The mage still have a lot of tactical spells that can change the scenary: physical barrier, elemental wall, shape [material], mist. But stun ball doesn't just become "force 11 stun ball. 5 successes. Can every NPC please fall unconscious".

[Draco18s]

Direct combat spells do the mages magic base damage instead of the force of the spell

What stops a mage from just casting F1 stunbolts then? 1 Drain (1/2-1, min 1) -> Magic DV.

[Nifft]

Direct combat spells do the mages magic base damage instead of the force of the spell

Hmm. I wonder if I should use this as an opportunity to boost the utility of Charisma (since in my game I remove access to Increase Ability (mental)), and have Direct combat spells deal damage equal to your Charisma.

Unlike the Magic attribute, there's a hard cap on Charisma.

[Nifft]

What stops a mage from just casting F1 stunbolts then? 1 Drain (1/2-1, min 1) -> Magic DV.

You still need to overcome the target's Willpower. Force 1 = 1 hit maximum, no matter what your dice pool was.

[Draco18s]

You still need to overcome the target's Willpower. Force 1 = 1 hit maximum, no matter what your dice pool was.

Force 2 then. Gives you 2 hits, and the target rolls their (max 6) willpower.

[Teryon]

@Draco18s
Indeed, much to many player's dismay. But, my point is (and the major reason I remove that spell) how does the spell know
what is explosive and what is not? Especially, when cast by a mage who knows nothing about explosives, chemistry or physics.
Magic cannot make decisions on it own, I thought.

It wouldnt have to 'know' anything. All explosive materials(hell, batteries and such as well) are tightly bound bundles of energy on a molecular level. Most explosives are also unstable in some manner(shock, heat, electricity, etc). So what I figure is such a spell just detects an unstable bundle of energy nearby and lights it up, pure and simple.

Course, in some ways that description could apply to mages too...

[Adarael]

On the subject of gaiasphere vetos and nukes:

As I said in the other thread, this is something I harp on. Also as I said in the other thread, observing that many nuclear reactions have gone oddly or been less powerful than normal is simply an observed fact. You can't argue with it. But claiming that nuclear reactions work unpredictably due to the gaiasphere's will, or because the laws of physics are unpredictable, is flat out revisionism. None of the canon nuclear reactions have any real explanation as to why they were 'off', because there are *tens of thousands* of nuclear reactions that go off every day in the 6th world without a hitch. Every nuclear sub or ship. Every nuclear power plant (which are the majority for most nations). Every science experiment involving fission or fusion.

To assume that the gaiasphere "chooses" which work normally and which don't is an interesting theory, one that I do not ascribe to. It is only a theory, and is - in canon - as valid as "some nukes didn't go off because of movers and shakers behind the scenes manipulating things."

[Ascalaphus]

Nuclear power is widely used in SR; I guess the very existence of magic in general doesn't alter nuclear physics that much. And occasionally nukes have worked normally (I vaguely recall Israel nuking Libya off the map).

In most of the cases where nukes were used and didn't work, there was some extra factor at work; we can guess some of them.

Lone Eagle incident: probably manipulation by the IEs/Horrors who were backing SAIM. They wanted an incident to stir things up, not global thermonuclear war.

Cermak blast: it bumped against the warding used by the hives.

Winternight: they'd enchanted some of the nukes to intensify the EMP effects. Behind the scenes, it appears at least Lofwyr and Horizon had foreknowledge of the upcoming events..



My guess is that there exist spells/metamagics that can prevent nuclear detonation, which have occasionally been applied by the IEs and GDs when their interests were at stake.

[Slide7X]

Hmm...How about changing the damage of direct combat spells to simply Net Hits on the casting test.
Instead of Force + Net Hits. And keep the Force limit on number of hits.

As a mage advances himself and gets more dice to roll, the spell gets more potent. So the player can fell advancement.

Direct spells ignore range, armor, cover and are soaked with willpower (max 6).
So the damage they do, despite these advantages, has always been the problem.

Making damage equal to Magic might work in the early bit, but with initiation raising Magic I don't like the idea of
high guaranteed damage. For example, I have a mage in a group with magic 9. I like the idea of purely magically attacks
being more random.

[Ascalaphus]

Removed:

• Analyze Device - problem spell
• Shapechange - problem spell, just take Critter Shape
• Increase [mental attribute] - because Drain should be a problem
• Ignite - just take Flamethrower
• Hush
• Control Thoughts, Mob Mind - problem spell

I think I'd have made some different choices. I rather like Ignite, and it's different from Flamethrower. The idea of combusting something from the inside out is nice. Also different is that Ignite takes some time before it becomes Permanent, at which point it starts doing damage. That buildup time makes it different from instant-attack combat spells enough for me.

Shapechange - it needs some rewriting and clarification, but the flexibility is very nice, so I wouldn't go for the Critter Form style one-animal-only solution. I'd probably split it into Animal Form and Metahuman Form spells and pound some sense into the attribute-increases.

The rest of the spells are best killed off yeah.

Added (from Street Magic):

• Borrow Sense, Animal Sense, Eyes of the Pack
• Diagnose
• Mindnet (+Extended)
• Enabler
• Healthy Glow - functions to remove or suppress bruises, abrasions, cuts, and other bodily evidence of recent combat
• Chaff/Flak
• Foreboding
• Calm Animal, Calm Pack -> as Illusion
• Alter Memory -> as Illusion
• Element Aura
• Fashion
• Makeover
• Mana Static
• Mist
• Sterilize

(Why: part of the reason I wanted to take nice things away from Manipulation was so I could give it other nice things. Street Magic has a bunch of sweet Manipulation spells.)

I like to allow as many spells as possible (after removing the problem spells). Supposedly by now hundreds of spells have been invented after all. So go for a "Yes, Unless" approach to Street Magic.

Indirect Combat Spells - You can create a version of these with a range limitation of 10 yards to reduce the drain by -1. (Why: I want to encourage the use of Indirect combat spells. I'm not sure this is sufficient.)

Direct Combat Spells - This fascinating branch of magic is actually a hybrid of ritual and tactical spellcasting. These special rules apply:

• When attacking a foe with both a body and a spirit, you need both a "tactical" link (line-of-sight) and a "ritual" link (fresh blood, hair, favorite emotitoy) to target an enemy at range. For Touch spells, the Unarmed roll counts as establishing both links.
• When targeting something with only a body (like a Drone), you only need a "tactical" link, but you must deal with object resistance.
• When targeting something with only a spirit (like a Spirit, or a projecting Mage), you only need a "tactical" link.
• If the spell requires a "ritual" link, you must roll the lower of Spellcasting or Ritual Spellcasting.

(Why: I want to make Direct combat spells more tactically interesting, and I don't want them to remain strictly better than Indirect combat spells. Now they're more potent as plot elements and fight-enders than as boring staples used every single fight.)

That just feels like a very awkward way to stop people from using them.

I suppose the philosophy behind Direct spells was that they're "cheaper" because they have no elemental frills, but the elemental effects aren't actually better than the Direct spells.

Maybe it's more balanced to say "directly killing it with pure power is harder than with elemental power", and switch the drain for direct and indirect spells.

I'd also change the magic detection rules a bit; make Direct spells hard to detect. At that point, mages have a choice:
A) Elemental: cheap
B) Direct: expensive, but sneakier and harder to protect against

That would give mages good reason to have several different spells and use the one that fits the particular situation best.

'Ware for spellcasters. You cannot target spells using cyberware enhancements, period. Bioware works fine. (Why: clears up a lot of corner-cases with occular drones / sonar / etc., and gives bio-eyes a reason to live.)

I personally like the blending of cyber and magic. Loss of a point of Essence and Magic is pretty expensive, there's something to be said for staying pure too. And the rules questions aren't all that hard;
* Only bioware eyes and cybereyes give LOS (Ultrasound and radar aren't allowed in cybereyes!)
* Ocular drones outside the body don't count
* Cybereye on a different body part counts
See? That wasn't too hard.

[Mäx]

@Mäx (how do you get that "a" without Copy/Pasting?)

Thats for me to know and you to find out
(in all seriousness it in my keyboard with all the other letters as it's part of Finnish alphabet)
Guide to inputting special character
Alt+0228 will produce ä

as a side question ,did you read the first part of my post?

[Nifft]

I think I'd have made some different choices. I rather like Ignite, and it's different from Flamethrower. The idea of combusting something from the inside out is nice. Also different is that Ignite takes some time before it becomes Permanent, at which point it starts doing damage. That buildup time makes it different from instant-attack combat spells enough for me.

The problem for me isn't that it's identical to a combat spell, it's that it steps on the toes of combat spells. Basically, Manipulation is the ultimate do-everything category (in Core and even more so in Core + SM), and I don't like that. IMHO each category should provide value, so specialization is a genuine choice.

I like to allow as many spells as possible (after removing the problem spells). Supposedly by now hundreds of spells have been invented after all. So go for a "Yes, Unless" approach to Street Magic.

The problem for me is that there are so many great Manipulation spells in SM, and so few good spells of any other category.

Hmm, perhaps Elemental Aura should be a Combat spell. It's sort-of a sustained Touch version of the Indirect elemental combat spells.

That just feels like a very awkward way to stop people from using them.

I suppose the philosophy behind Direct spells was that they're "cheaper" because they have no elemental frills, but the elemental effects aren't actually better than the Direct spells.

Well, I don't want to stop people from using them. But I want them to be a strategic choice with their own benefits & restrictions, so that they're not such a giant no-brainer. I absolutely agree that Direct spells are currently superior to Indirect elemental combat spells.

Maybe it's more balanced to say "directly killing it with pure power is harder than with elemental power", and switch the drain for direct and indirect spells.

I'd also change the magic detection rules a bit; make Direct spells hard to detect. At that point, mages have a choice:
A) Elemental: cheap
B) Direct: expensive, but sneakier and harder to protect against

That would give mages good reason to have several different spells and use the one that fits the particular situation best.

That's a similar set up to what my rules do:
- It's easy to fire off an Indirect elemental spell but they're obvious (and specialized armor enhancements defend against them);
- It requires some preparation or teamwork to use a Direct attack spell but they're not obvious (and they're harder to defend against).

I personally like the blending of cyber and magic.

So do I. What I don't like are no-brainers, like how cybereyes are just plain better than meat eyes for nearly everyone.

Even with my restriction in place, though, there are still mages who would benefit from cybereyes:
- self-buff mystical gun adepts;
- "bad-touch" martial arts magi;
- medical magi (since all Health spells are Touch);
- summoners.

What I want are tough decisions which involve weighing trade-offs. If you want the most possible Perception dice, you lose access to a bunch of spells. Is the benefit worth the price? That's the kind of thinking I want to see.

Cheers, -- N

[Ascalaphus]

The problem for me isn't that it's identical to a combat spell, it's that it steps on the toes of combat spells. Basically, Manipulation is the ultimate do-everything category (in Core and even more so in Core + SM), and I don't like that. IMHO each category should provide value, so specialization is a genuine choice.

The problem for me is that there are so many great Manipulation spells in SM, and so few good spells of any other category.

The spell categories are rather uneven yeah, but is that actually a problem? Most mages are going to have only 8-20 spells during their whole PC career anyway. And there are a bunch of important things that Manipulation doesn't do, like instant-speed damage. You have to choose whether (Mentor, Specialization)bonus dice will be applying to Manipulation or Combat for example, and a bonus to Combat is juicy too.
If you really think Manipulation's size is a problem (instead of just a peculiarity), split it up into two or more new categories instead of banning nice spells just to prune Manipulation.

Well, I don't want to stop people from using them. But I want them to be a strategic choice with their own benefits & restrictions, so that they're not such a giant no-brainer. I absolutely agree that Direct spells are currently superior to Indirect elemental combat spells.

That's a similar set up to what my rules do:
- It's easy to fire off an Indirect elemental spell but they're obvious (and specialized armor enhancements defend against them);
- It requires some preparation or teamwork to use a Direct attack spell but they're not obvious (and they're harder to defend against).

It would be way too hard to use Direct spells that way. They would basically only be useful if you were expecting to fight that particular person, in which case a sniper rifle shot is probably just as good and actually easier.

In cases where you meet an enemy without warning, acquiring a ritual sample is bullshit. If you have time to do that, then the enemy wasn't a challenge anyway. If you have the time to collect ritual samples for an AOE Direct spell - that's just ridiculous.
Really; you would first have to get close to the target, wound them and collect blood, then bring it back to the mage. That's 3IPs if all goes well; in that time the gunbunny is long done killing the target anyway. Many combats don't last that long.

It basically means Direct spells are so nerfed they're useless. You should focus on making Elemental spells better than grenades instead.

So do I. What I don't like are no-brainers, like how cybereyes are just plain better than meat eyes for nearly everyone.

Are they? You trade in a point of Magic (10-25BP, or roughly 25-30 karma worth) for an occasional reduction in visibility penalties by about 3 for Thermographic vision and perhaps another 3 if you're using Vision Magnification for very long range spellcasting. But a majority of combats take place on short ranges where the distance penalty doesn't matter that much anyway.

Cybereyes are a viable choice, they're not mandatory at all. Losing the ability to cast the majority of the spells is ridiculously harsh.

[Ascalaphus]

Another thing about Cybereyes: if they don't provide LOS anymore, that also means you lose Counterspelling.

If I'm not mistaken Banishing also requires LOS. A summoner who can't Banish or 'Bolt spirits that go wild - is that really what you want?

[Irion]

So do I. What I don't like are no-brainers, like how cybereyes are just plain better than meat eyes for nearly everyone.

Even with my restriction in place, though, there are still mages who would benefit from cybereyes:
- self-buff mystical gun adepts;
- "bad-touch" martial arts magi;
- medical magi (since all Health spells are Touch);
- summoners.

But this is true for any other class as well. So what?

As a matter of fact I dislike this ruling, because it opens a big crate of cans of worms.
To start with the cyber arm and touch spells.
In the end we finde the Will bonus of the pain editor(I think this was the correct pice).

I always thougt that houseruling should streamline or add complitly new areas.
F.e I would be ok with a houserule concerning riding roules. Or roules about different kind of horses.
This is one of the rules you may use when needed.
But I do strongly dislike rules, which introduce new exotic mechanism in existing rules.

Some thing goes for the indirect spells. Yes, they have to be nerfed. But introducing a hole new concept. I dislike the idea.

One way to flesh out the differance between the indirect and the direct combat spells would be to revisit the rules about counterspelling and background count. (Making indirect spells much more resistant to this influences)

[Muspellsheimr]

Problem Spells
While there are some spells that don't function particularly well, there are incredibly few "Problem Spells" (defined as spells that require a functional rewrite or removal). Ignoring WAR! (which I have not yet read, but heard many very bad things about), I would limit this list to Petrify & Turn to Goo.

Petrify, as written, literally breaks the laws of magic defined in the system; it affects a living body without also affecting any Essence-paid implants that body has. This is an easy fix - remove that section.

Petrify and Turn to Goo are both functionally identical, and are both "you loose" spells. Functional rewrite to make these spells "work" would be to use the system the Petrification critter power uses - each Net Hit reduces the target's Agility & Reaction by 1. If both Agility and Reaction are reduced to 0, the target turns to stone/goo. Additionally, Petrify retains it's +1 Barrier Rating (changed to +1 Damage Resistance for ease of use), while Turn to Goo changes to -1 Barrier Rating (changed to -1 Damage Resistance for ease of use).

Mental control magic would fall under quasi problem spells for me. They are (essentially) "you loose" spells, but not quite as automatic as Petrify or Turn to Goo (neither of the latter require additional actions from the caster, or allow additional resistance tests for extended sustaining periods). The easiest fix, apart from removing them, would be to reduce the interval additional resistance tests are allowed, such as to 1/2 Force Combat Turns, or 1 Combat Turn. While I am not yet convinced such a change is necessary, I am also not yet convinced such a change is unnecessary.



Shapechange is only a problem because, as written, it is functionally stupid. Go read it again - it allows you to change into something with a Body attribute 2 points greater or lower than your own. Not "up to" 2 points. 2 points.

Personally I changed it to allow a new form with a Body of up to Force greater or lower than your own. While the additional attribute boost is not really a problem in itself, it is probably to much & strikes me as out of flavor for the spell. Remove the attribute increase entirely. Your Physical Attributes are replaced with the Physical Attributes of a typical creature of your new form. Note: As this is a replacement effect, not an augmentation, augmented maximums of your original form do not apply.




Direct Combat Spells are overpowered. I am not going to argue this. The amount by which they are overpowered, however, is so low as to make little or no difference in most games. Guns are often just as effective (sometimes moreso), & do not require Drain Resistance.

The problem with Direct Combat magic is that they are made to appear "better" because of their comparison to the incredibly shitty Indirect Combat magic, & their use of a different resistance system than all other forms of combat.

Fix:
First, we need to unify the spells with the rest of combat. When casting a Direct Combat spell, the caster makes an opposed Spellcasting + Magic + Modifiers test vs. the target's Intuition + Counterspelling + Modifiers. If the caster achieves at least 1 Net Hit, the target must resist Force + Net Hits damage using Body (Physical) or Willpower (Mana) + Astral Armor. Each Hit reduced the damage taken by 1.

Next, we increase the usefulness of Indirect Combat magic. Something hit by an Indirect Combat Spell suffers the full elemental effects. This means removing such things as "The acid quickly evaporates in the turn following the spell's casting". Some elemental effects may need revision to actually be mechanically useful - elemental effects like fire.

Additionally, Indirect Combat Spells can use the Blind Fire rules, sans the Intuition instead of Agility bit.




Spirits, while not included on your list, are probably the single most overpowered part of a magician's capabilities. They can easily come to dominate a game by themselves.

The primary "balancing" factor is "role playing" - aka if you treat your spirits like shit, they might use Edge to resist summoning. This fails on a number of levels, the most blatant being the use of role playing & "GM's discretion" as mechanical balancing factors.

Here are the changes I have made to balance spirits with great success:
Attributes: The Mental & Physical attributes of a conjured spirit are equal to Force ÷ 2 (round up), plus modifiers (minimum attribute of 1).

Edge: Conjured spirits do not possess an Edge attribute. The controlling magician may use their own Edge on any tests the spirit makes, following all other normal rules for Edge use.

Immunity & Hardened Armor: Immunity grants the critter (not spirit specific) Hardened Armor (or equivalent for armor-less attacks) equal to the creature's Magic attribute vs. the Immunity's type. Normal Weapons means all attacks with non-magical sources, as normal.
Hardened Armor provides a flat reduction to the Damage Value of attacks equal to it's rating. It is still subject to Armor Penetration as normal.




Ware & spellcasters. Unnecessary. Unjustified. The rules are very precise (if sometimes convoluted). Any visual enhancements paid for with Essence can be used for spell targeting. If the effect is based on non-visual means (Ultrasound) or provides a digital overlay (Ultrasound or Radar), it does not work.



Again not on your list, but Stun vs Physical Damage is one of the biggest balancing gripes about Direct Combat spells. The problem is not actually with Direct Combat spells, but with the seperation of Stun & Physical damage tracks making Stun damage almost always superior. I suggest merging the Stun & Physical damage tracks & using a method similar to White Wolf's, described below.


Characters possess a number of boxes on their Condition Monitor equal to 8 + (Body ÷ 2, round up)

Characters possess a number of boxes on their Overflow Monitor equal to their Willpower.

If a character's Condition Monitor is filled with Physical Damage, the character is unconscious & bleeding out (Physical Damage overflow rules).

If a character's Overflow Monitor is filled with Physical Damage, the character is dead.

If a character's Overflow Monitor is filled with Stun damage, the character is unconscious & any additional Stun Damage instead converts an existing point to Physical damage.


Tracking Damage
/ denotes 1 point of Stun damage
X denotes 1 point of Physical damage

Damage is tracked from the upper left to the lower right, with Physical damage being listed before Stun damage.

Any time the character takes damage, it is tracked from the left & "moves" any previously existing damage to the right.


Example:
Ashley has a Body of 5 and Willpower of 4, giving her 11 boxes on her Condition Monitor and 4 on her Overflow Monitor. She has already suffered 2 Physical and 1 Stun damage. Her Condition Monitor is marked as follows:

CODE

|X|X|/|   | | | |

| | | |   | |

| | | |

| | |

She then takes another 5 Physical damage from a gunshot. Her Condition Monitor is updated as follows:

CODE

|X|X|X|   | | | |

|X|X|X|   | |

|X|/| |

| | |

The next time she is attacked, her armor reduces the incoming damage to Stun. She takes 3 Stun damage.

CODE

|X|X|X|   | | | |

|X|X|X|   | |

|X|/|/|

|/|/|

When she is struck next, she takes 4 Physical damage.

CODE

|X|X|X|   |/|/|/|

|X|X|X|   |/|

|X|X|X|

|X|X|

Her Overflow monitor is now filled with Stun damage, rendering her unconscious. Her Condition Monitor is filled with Physical damage, also rendering her unconscious (redundant) and bleeding out.

She then takes another 1 Physical damage, putting her condition monitor at

CODE

|X|X|X|   |X|/|/|

|X|X|X|   |/|/

|X|X|X|

|X|X|

Because the Physical damage pushed 1 stun beyond her Overflow Monitor, it instead converts 1 existing Stun to Physical, as follows

CODE

|X|X|X|   |X|X|/|

|X|X|X|   |/|

|X|X|X|

|X|X|

At this point, anymore Physical damage, or 2 more Stun damage would be enough to kill Ashley.



Effects on Gameplay:

• Physical Damage (alone): The lethality of Physical damage remains the same; no change.
• Stun Damage (alone): Stun damage has become less dangerous by itself, and is now strictly worse than Physical damage. Any 'reductions in cost' for something using Stun damage (such as the Drain reduction for spells) is now justified, & incapacitating someone without killing them is more difficult.
• Physical & Stun Damage (combined): Because the damage now effectively stacks, taking a combination of Physical & Stun damage is now much more harmful than it was previously.

Overall, lethality is increased slightly, but is balanced by the greater resilience armor provides by reducing incoming damage to Stun. Little or no net change.

[Muspellsheimr]

If you really think Manipulation's size is a problem (instead of just a peculiarity), split it up into two or more new categories instead of banning nice spells just to prune Manipulation.

Just wanted to comment on this.

I am currently constructing a high fantasy game system, and the spellcasting aspect uses 5 "Orders" of magic with a layout similar to Shadowrun's. The key differences are in Evocation (combat magic) including a little bit more, such as all elemental effects & raw magical manipulation (dispel magic & such), and with Enchantment (Illusion) and Alteration (Manipulation) being divided a bit differently; Enchantment includes all forms of mental manipulation & effects that alter what is perceived (mental illusions), while Alteration has effects that alter what is being seen (physical illusions).

A similar division of effects in Shadowrun would be remarkably easy, & is something I have seriously considered doing but just never quite got around to.

Edit:
Simply move all Mental Manipulation spells to Illusion, and move all Physical Illusion spells to Manipulation. Any spell with an Elemental Effect (or possibly Environmental) is moved to Combat. Mana Static & similar could also be moved to Combat, if desired.

The only real problem with this is fluff - the category names don't quite fit what is now included in those categories.

[Draco18s]

Note about spirits and Immunity to Normal Weapons and Hardened Armor:

Is a spirit's Magic equal to "half force" like all its Mental and Physical attributes? If so, then no change required. If not, then I suggest that the Immunity is "half the critter's magic" as it provides a flat reduction in damage (as opposed to rolling X dice and getting about a third of them in hits*)

*Eg:
Spirit F6 (current) -> ~2 damage reduction
Spirit F6 (suggested) -> 3 Hardened Armor -> 3 damage reduction

[Muspellsheimr]

Magic is not reduced. Initially, I cut Magic in half as well (with Immunity & Hardened Armor functioning as explained above), but that proved to be stupidly underpowered & was quickly changed.

Keep in mind that while the Hardened Armor is a flat reduction, it is [i]also/i] still affected by Armor Penetration. Without reasonable protection, even moderate to high Force spirits would be nothing more than cannon fodder. My alterations significantly weaken spirits, while keeping them as a viable & powerful tactic.

[Draco18s]

The problem, though, is when you get Normal Armor stacking with Hardened Armor.* Which is effected by AP first?

What about AP -half?

Alternatively, what if Hardened Armor provided half its rating in direct damage reduction? That would allow the 6 -> 3 conversion, but retain some power against AP (6 - 2 = 4 -> 2 vs. 6 -> 3 - 2 = 1).

*Drake with Mystic Armor (adept power) or the Armor spell. Spirits with the Armor spell. Cybersams being granted ItnW by a Spirit with Endowment.

[Muspellsheimr]

The "Average" result of a test is 1 Hit per 3 dice. However, because the chance of rolling more than 1 Hit per 3 dice is greater than the chance of rolling less than 1 Hit per 3 dice, the "Expected" result is much closer to 1 Hit per 2 dice (It is a ~45% chance of 1 Hit or more per 3 dice, if I remember correctly. Unfortunately I lost the excel probability calculator I had set up in the last reformat so I can't currently give an exact chance).

As such, 1 Hit per 2 Dice is the basis of all my related changes.

What this means in terms of Immunity to X and Hardened Armor. The expected total damage reduction remains the same. Armor penetration becomes moderately more effective. Higher end extremes are significantly reduced ( DV>12 attack to bypass Magic 12, 12 point damage reduction vs DV>24 attack to bypass Magic 12, ~12 point damage reduction).

Overall it generates a more consistent effect that functions better within the system's rules, & weakens Immunity on the high end.



As for Armor Penetration vs. Armor and Hardened Armor, it follows all the normal rules for such cases. If I remember correctly, these "normal" rules are nonexistent outside of -half effects (all forms of armor are halved), so I would suggest applying Armor Penetration to "worn" armor first, "natural" armor second. In case of "Normal" & "Hardened" armor overlap, just be consistent on which applies first & it doesn't really matter. Personally I would apply Hardened armor first, so final order would look like this:
1st: External Hardened Armor
2nd: External Normal Armor
3rd: Natural Hardened Armor
4th: Natural Normal Armor


Edit:
Cleared a typo regarding Hit chance.

Edit:
Just ran some binomial probability calculations. At lower levels, the chance of getting at least 1/3 Hits is 60% to 75% chance, while the chance of getting at least 1/2 Hits is about 30%. These numbers both drop slowly as the total dice pool increases, meaning that at higher levels, my changes increase the power of Hardened Armor, assuming the attack is strong enough to pass the RAW Hardened Armor.

I think making Hardened Armor better at reducing the DV of an attack at higher values is a fair trade off of increasing the number of attacks capable of doing damage at all.


As I said earlier, I have played with these rules quite a bit. There has not been any problem with them during gameplay, and they are defiantly a significant improvement to the Rules as Written for spirit balance.

[Nifft]

To start with the cyber arm and touch spells.

Ah, this is a good point.

You're right, this does add complication, which is the opposite of my goal.

I'll edit my initial post.

Thanks, -- N

[Nifft]

Just wanted to comment on this.

I am currently constructing a high fantasy game system, and the spellcasting aspect uses 5 "Orders" of magic with a layout similar to Shadowrun's. The key differences are in Evocation (combat magic) including a little bit more, such as all elemental effects & raw magical manipulation (dispel magic & such), and with Enchantment (Illusion) and Alteration (Manipulation) being divided a bit differently; Enchantment includes all forms of mental manipulation & effects that alter what is perceived (mental illusions), while Alteration has effects that alter what is being seen (physical illusions).

A similar division of effects in Shadowrun would be remarkably easy, & is something I have seriously considered doing but just never quite got around to.

Edit:
Simply move all Mental Manipulation spells to Illusion, and move all Physical Illusion spells to Manipulation. Any spell with an Elemental Effect (or possibly Environmental) is moved to Combat. Mana Static & similar could also be moved to Combat, if desired.

The only real problem with this is fluff - the category names don't quite fit what is now included in those categories.

That's pretty much exactly what I did:
- move Influence, Control Emotion / Mob Mood and Alter Memory to Illusion;
- remove Control Thoughts entirely;
- Manipulation retains Control Body.

IMHO Manipulation should be obvious.
You want subtle? You want Illusion.

Cheers, -- N

[Draco18s]

As such, 1 Hit per 2 Dice is the basis of all my related changes.

Your entire post just said what I said, only with more math. I was suggesting that if hardened armor was direct damage reduction ("autohits" on damage resistance tests) then the value of the Hardened Armor should be half of the current values (i.e. half Force-of-spirit).

Which is why I asked if a spirit's magic was based on Force, or Half Force, as your change to ItnW made the Hardened Armor value equal to Magic.

You first said it wasn't halved, therefore a force 6 spirit would have 6 hardened armor.

Now you say that the hardened armor is halved (F6 spirit has 3 hardened armor), due to the binomial distribution on hits, etc. etc ("2:1 trade").

[Muspellsheimr]

No. I was explaining why I didn't halve the Hardened Armor value after the change, with a comparison of Rules as Written with my listed House Rules.

Rules as Written, Force 6 spirit has 12 Hardened Armor. An attack requires a modified DV > 12 to damage the spirit. Spirit has an expected ~6 Hits on the resistance test (~40% chance of 5 or more Hits).

House Rules, Force 6 spirit has 6 Hardened Armor. An attack requires a modified DV > 6 to damage the spirit. Spirit has 6 "Hits" on the resistance test.



With the House Rules, the spirit is significantly easier to damage, & Armor Penetration is more effective than normal. If an attack is capable of damaging the spirit, the Hardened Armor provides a generally superior (by a small margin) damage resistance.