Another try to balance direct combat spells, With a new skill that determines how trained you are at resisting them Options

[Mardrax]

Yes, but this also opens other doors. As a magician you may go astral. This alone is nearly worth the 15 BP (compared to other qualitys).

Again this has a lot of other uses. This would be like asking the gunbunny to buy every ranged weapon skill in the book. Because he just might not have a pistol at hand.

You do realise Agility, which a gunbunny relies on, is arguably the best attribute in the game, barring perhaps Reaction?

Well, and with ware it is easy to boos reaktion but very hard to boost willpower.

Like it's easy with 'ware to boost gunbunny ability, while it's tough to really stack on the spellcasting modifiers?

So what? I think the gunbunny should outperform the mage three two four times if it comes down to kill other people.

He does. Again: seeing this, how can you argue any combat spell is overpowered?

Yes, because I get a Sniper inside, lets say, an airport. Stunbolt? No problem. Powerbolt? No Problem.

Getting a ceramic/plasteel SM-4 past aiport security really shouldn't be much of a problem. Use palming to hide the little bits. A gunbunny is bound to have the agility do some great palming, even when defaulting. The guns actually meant for this kind of purpose are even easier. Requiring just an investment in nuyen as well. Not karma.

Everyone who opserves. If a squirrel blasts somebodys head in a back ally, who would know?

By RAW? Not everyone who observes. Noticing magic skills being used takes a perception test with a threshold of 6-F. Anything 6 or over will be obvious and not require a test. Anything under 6, anyone eligible should still be allowed a test, with the standard -2 modifier for being distracted. If it's "far away", add another -3. Anything over 6 will not require a test at all though, so penalties are moot. And since it's a Perception test, which is in no way specified as needing sight, saying that casting an F12 spell is noticeable by the entire block, regardless of circumstances isn't much of a long shot.

[Slide7X]

Only 9 dice, even for a starting character that's low.

Specialization, Spell Focus, totem bonuses, are all available out of character generation.
Now we are up to 10 to 12 dice.
In almost every case, without outside magical assistance, the dice used in the attack are far greater then the dice used for the defense.

4 success on the opposed test to average that the target would need..
a 12 Willpower, not even possible for a standard metatype. or a 12 Body, very hard even for a Troll.
But a mage can easily start with 12 dice for a casting test.

What can your 3 Will sammie do, for himself, to boost his ability to defend agianst Indirect Combat Spells?
You have already set the visibility, so nothing.
The only non-magical impairments to casting Direct Combat Spells are visibility and wound modifiers.
And there are very few non-magical ways to boost your resistance to a Direct Combat Spell.

Before you start rambling about Qualities, they are not something you can simply do in the moment to help yourself.
And purchase after character generation should be rare, and come with a good reason.
Neither can you elect to raise your Willpower attribute then and there, just because it'll be useful at the moment.

Background Count should be rare. But in SR4 it can be positive as well as negative, from -12 to +12.
Positive means more magic, but too positive and things get weird.

[phlapjack77]

Background Count should be rare. But in SR4 it can be positive as well as negative, from -12 to +12.
Positive means more magic, but too positive and things get weird.

You're losing the battle, in my book.

Positive background count won't help the mage, it will actively hurt them just like a negative bg count. Unless it's aspected to the mage's tradition, and the chances of that are slim (GM dependent, of course).

Background Count and Magic
Whether positive or negative, in game terms background count reduces a character’s Magic attribute by its absolute value.

[TheOOB]

Specialization, Spell Focus, totem bonuses, are all available out of character generation.

Yes, but an important thing to note about specializations, foci, and whatnot is that there are not as good as gun bonuses. You can say, the "assault rifle" spec in automatics, and have it apply to 90%+ of all your attacks, and never lose anything for it. A combat spellcasting specialization is different, because there are several schools of magic, and choosing combat as your spec is actually one of the weakest options. Foci are expensive and way too inefficient to start with, and require tons of both nuyen and karma during play, as compared to mundane options like smartlinks, weapon mods, and even things like reflex recorders which are far cheaper. Mentor spirits cost BP, have drawbacks, and don't always raise combat...and once again the combat ones are kind of the worst ones.

Aside from a few circumstances, direct combat spells are weaker than guns, in fact, for the 18 BP is costs to get Pistols(Heavy Pistols) 4(+2), a magician will get far more combat ability than they could get with 18 BP of spells. If you think magicians are broken, direct combat spells are not the problem...and if they are becomming a problem, it's likely your other characters are too weak.

[Slide7X]

You're losing the battle, in my book.

Positive background count won't help the mage, it will actively hurt them just like a negative bg count. Unless it's aspected to the mage's tradition, and the chances of that are slim (GM dependent, of course).

Background Count and Magic
Whether positive or negative, in game terms background count reduces a character’s Magic attribute by its absolute value.

Not always. Positive Background Count can help a mage
If a GM uses 'Bad' Background Count, he should use 'Good' background count as well.

Positive Background Count areas form domains, occur naturally and can provide big bonuses to spell casting and other things.
This is probably to represent the "Places of Power" thing common to a lot of mythologies.
The "Background count is always bad" thing is from older editions. Where, indeed it always seemed to be bad.

see SM pg. 118 Aspect, which includes ...

... If the character works magic in the same paradigm (or
one that is sufficiently similar) as the domain’s aspect, it is advantageous.
In this case, the background count does not reduce
Magic as described above. Instead, the Awakened character
receives a dice pool bonus for any Magical skill tests
and Drain Resistance Tests performed in the domain’s area of
influence equal to the background count (up to a limit equal
to his Magic attribute). ...

And when your GMing 4th for older edition players familiar with the old BC system, Mana Surges can be fun.
Witches Mark for the win!, well GM entertainment value anyway.

[CanRay]

Positive background count won't help the mage, it will actively hurt them just like a negative bg count. Unless it's aspected to the mage's tradition, and the chances of that are slim (GM dependent, of course).

Oh yeah, big time! My group found that out the hard way when they tried to extract an Orphan from a Catholic Orphanage run by Nuns, one of whom was a Magician.

Jesus was watching them. And, boy, was he PISSED!

[TheOOB]

Generally speaking, positive background counts are either a)non-aspected, or b)aspected to a very specific kind of magic. You generally only get tradition aspected BCs when geomancy comes into to play

[CanRay]

Generally speaking, positive background counts are either a)non-aspected, or b)aspected to a very specific kind of magic. You generally only get tradition aspected BCs when geomancy comes into to play

Or in areas that have a strong connection to the aspected type of magic. Like religious magic, which finds power in areas of worship. That much true faith and belief affects the astral plane.

[phlapjack77]

Not always. Positive Background Count can help a mage

Did you read my whole post? It's not very long.

As TheOOB pointed out, unless your GM is being very PC-friendly, chances are that the BG count won't help you...it almost always hurts mages.

[phlapjack77]

Oh yeah, big time! My group found that out the hard way when they tried to extract an Orphan from a Catholic Orphanage run by Nuns, one of whom was a Magician.

Jesus was watching them. And, boy, was he PISSED!

Sounds like a great run (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[CanRay]

Sounds like a great run (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

They seemed to enjoy it.

...

Well, aside from the Jailbait Elf Stripper Ninja. She wasn't too happy about being stopped in the street for carrying a pair of Katanas by a cop and being put into the system as she was a Minor.

[Irion]

@Mardrax

You do realise Agility, which a gunbunny relies on, is arguably the best attribute in the game, barring perhaps Reaction?

But long beaten by Magic and (high) Edge.

He does. Again: seeing this, how can you argue any combat spell is overpowered?

It depends on the GM. If you are running with a GM putting grade 3 BC everywhere you are lost.

The point is: For 3 BP or 5 Karma you get an possibility to do damage, based on your power to do tons of other stuff.
You may not be disarmed and you are able to get this weapon close to everywhere. (Besides the points where a mage would not go)
This "weapon" does not need any ammunition. It never jams. It is useable no matter what form you are. If your hands are tied or not.
And it has the damage code of a hunting rifle.


So if you are running with: BC 1 is very rare, you will outperform the sam if heavy weapons are not a way in.

By RAW? Not everyone who observes. Noticing magic skills being used takes a perception test with a threshold of 6-F. Anything 6 or over will be obvious and not require a test.

Come on. Would you please apply a bit of sense to that?
So everyone goes: And again a spell was cast, maybe in China.
If you want to play it like that good. But still my squirrel stays unnoticed between all this spells from China.

@Slide7X

Not always. Positive Background Count can help a mage
If a GM uses 'Bad' Background Count, he should use 'Good' background count as well.

Carefull what you wish for. Maybe if you are hermetic you may meet positiv backgroundcount, which would be helping you. Otherwise it is just helping the opposition.


@CanRay

Oh yeah, big time! My group found that out the hard way when they tried to extract an Orphan from a Catholic Orphanage run by Nuns, one of whom was a Magician.

Jesus was watching them. And, boy, was he PISSED!

This is a good one. I like this idea very much for beeing a dange to be anticipated but probably not to be confirmed untill it is too late.
@TheOOB

You can say, the "assault rifle" spec in automatics, and have it apply to 90%+ of all your attacks, and never lose anything for it. A combat spellcasting specialization is different, because there are several schools of magic, and choosing combat as your spec is actually one of the weakest options.

This is not true. The spec on assault rifle won't apply to 90% of your other skills too.
As a matter of fact, the spec. in Spellcasting is a bit better for it applys more often.
Your argument is: Spec combat is weaker because Spellcasting is so vertile. Well, guess what: Spellcasting is just way superior to automatics. This does not make sense.

[Mardrax]

If you are running with a GM putting grade 3 BC everywhere you are lost.

Actually, if you're doing the "endles wave of mooks at 50 meters distance, and no obstacles in the way" thing, the sam will likely outperform the mage by combat turn 2. Without even having to resort to suppressive fire rules.

The point is: For 3 BP or 5 Karma you get an possibility to do damage, based on your power to do tons of other stuff.
You may not be disarmed and you are able to get this weapon close to everywhere. (Besides the points where a mage would not go)
This "weapon" does not need any ammunition. It never jams. It is useable no matter what form you are. If your hands are tied or not.
And it has the damage code of a hunting rifle.

Of a SS hunting rifle. Without Ex-Ex rounds. Or SnS.
Also, 900 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) gets me an SA puzzler, which does most of that, at slightly lower damage value. Not all, of course, but options need to stay different. In this though, they're totally balanced. And that's without even modifying the gun.

So if you are running with: BC 1 is very rare, you will outperform the sam if heavy weapons are not a way in.

Nonsense. For reasons provided.

Come on. Would you please apply a bit of sense to that?
So everyone goes: And again a spell was cast, maybe in China.
If you want to play it like that good. But still my squirrel stays unnoticed between all this spells from China.

If you veer away from RAW, that's your choice. But don't increase something's effectiveness by doing so, and then claim it's too strong, as you partly have yourself to blame.
Defining "far away" is GM fiat, of course. But I tend to rule in favour of at least the entire block knowing something happened when someone's slinging F12 spells around. Like the entire block will know if you start blowing stuff up by mundane means.

Well, guess what: Spellcasting is just way superior to automatics. This does not make sense.

Considering being any good at spellcasting takes an inherently far larger dip in BP than with Automatics, while using Spellcasting has some drawbacks its adversary doesn't have, while lacking options its adversary does have, if it's better at all (which I still dispute) this is indeed justified.

[Warlordtheft]

Have a mage buddy with counterspelling.. yet more "only magic can counter magic crap"

My problem with this philosophy is that is the same answer one could give about hackers/drone riggers against opposition with no hacker/rigger support.

Since 1st ed this game has had 3 areas for a team to exploit:
1. Physical (Faces, Gun bunnies/riggers/hackers/mages/technos all participate here)
2. Matrix (Hackers/technos dominate here)
3. Astral (Magicians dominate here)

Any opposition without support any of those areas should get pawned by the stereotypical runner group (face, gun bunny, hacker, mage and rigeer).

BTW-Combat spells are the least utilitarian of all the mage's spells. This isn't a dugeon crawl (ok unless you are sporting a pink mohawk (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) ). As stated before the spell is also limited to by force for total hits, so yeah I could probably put out force 4 mana or stun bolts all day no sweat, but I'd be doing only 8 damage max.

[Irion]

@Mardrax
So what should happen? Shall some angels appear and chant Maaaagic?
Some beam of light striking from the sky?
Waves of energy bursting from the mage?

The way I have always read it is:
Mage and two other guys are standing in an ally.
Mage cast a force 4 mind probe on dude 1, dude two gets to roll a perception test withTR of 2.
If he succeed he goes like: MAGIC!

[Mr. Unpronouncea...]

What can your 3 Will sammie do, for himself, to boost his ability to defend agianst Indirect Combat Spells?
You have already set the visibility, so nothing.
The only non-magical impairments to casting Direct Combat Spells are visibility and wound modifiers.
And there are very few non-magical ways to boost your resistance to a Direct Combat Spell.

Right...nothing.

nothing such as:

• smoke grenades, flash paks (because you CAN change the visibility modifiers)
• using willpower/body increasing combat drugs
• taking full cover or using a chameleon suit & stealth - a mage who can't spot you can't target you...even with AoE spells (yes, they get astral perception, but if they take an action to use it, they aren't casting a spell this round, are they?)
• anticipating his own vulnerability and buying an extended magical guard service
• or the ever popular: beating the mage's initiative, & shooting him first (the mage needs two maintained spells to try to match wired reflexes)

[Mardrax]

@Mardrax
So what should happen? Shall some angels appear and chant Maaaagic?
Some beam of light striking from the sky?
Waves of energy bursting from the mage?

The way I have always read it is:
Mage and two other guys are standing in an ally.
Mage cast a force 4 mind probe on dude 1, dude two gets to roll a perception test withTR of 2.
If he succeed he goes like: MAGIC!

There was a discussion on this a few weeks back. A few pages of it, IIRC. Go for search-fu f you'd like.

Noticing if someone is using a magical skill requires a Perception Test (p. 135) with a threshold equal to 6 minus the magic’s Force. More powerful magic is easier to spot with the gathered mana normally appearing as a disturbance or glowing aura in the air around the caster. The gamemaster should apply additional modifiers as appropriate, or if the perceiver is Awakened themselves (+2 dice), astrally perceiving (+2 dice), or if a shamanic mask is evident (+2 dice).

Note "normally" and "disturbance". The first just says what's following are examples of what's "normal". The latter says effects aren't necessarily purely visual. Also note that a F10 spell could not be considered 'normal' by any means. For optimised runners perhaps, but they're well out of the purview the average mage.

Not everyone agreed on perception being automatic at F over 6, since there is no RAW way of handling a threshold lower than 1. A single success should suffice otherwise though. And by RAW, a perception check can still be made in full darkness(which shouldn't matter that much, since it's not a purely visual thing you're trying to percieve), while far away and distracted, with interfering sights and sounds, while using VR.

You choose to deviate from that, that's your call. But it's not RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

[Irion]

The quote you offered seems quite clear to me.

Noticing if someone is using a magical skill requires a Perception Test

So this strongly implies you see this somebody.

The use of the word perceiver actually nails the coffin. This stats you are perseiving the act of casting.

You choose to deviate from that, that's your call. But it's not RAW.

I would really appreciate if people would start reading the words between the numbers...

As a matter of fact my ruling IS RAW, clearly stated by your quote.

But as it would not be enough it also stats:

with the gathered mana normally appearing as a disturbance or glowing aura in the air around the caster.

Well, you sparkle of some sort.

[phlapjack77]

So this strongly implies you see this somebody.

Perception tests are not limited to vision.

The use of the word perceiver actually nails the coffin. This stats you are perseiving the act of casting.

Perceiving something doesn't imply that you have a direct LOS to the target. I perceive that you think magic is overpowered. There, see? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Muspellsheimr]

Not everyone agreed on perception being automatic at F over 6, since there is no RAW way of handling a threshold lower than 1. A single success should suffice otherwise though. And by RAW, a perception check can still be made in full darkness(which shouldn't matter that much, since it's not a purely visual thing you're trying to percieve), while far away and distracted, with interfering sights and sounds, while using VR.

You choose to deviate from that, that's your call. But it's not RAW. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smokin.gif)

The ruling that I use (which is technically RAW, as well as several other possible rulings), along with what I strongly suggest others use, is as follows:

Rules as Written, you automatically succeed on Perception tests made to locate something "obvious". I define "obvious" as anything with a Threshold of 0. Note that I revise the Perception threshold tables to accommodate this with a 0-1-3-6 scale.

Rules as Written, you cannot make a test if your Dice Pool is reduced to 0 (or less). You cannot succeed on a test you cannot make.

Conclusion: If the Perception threshold is 0 or less, and your dice pool is 1 or greater, you automatically notice. While the rules do not accommodate negative thresholds effectively, I would suggest using the "Object/sound stands out in some way" visual modifier; this is enough to counteract the "Perceiver is distracted" modifier, usually resulting in a positive perception pool (barring other interferences).

So this strongly implies you see this somebody.

As already noted, Perception Test =/= Visual Perception Test.

Get your fucking sparkles out of my Shadowrun (unless of course the mage wants his magic to be 'shiny', in which case he should usually be shot. Multiple times).

[toturi]

Rules as Written, you automatically succeed on Perception tests made to locate something "obvious".

Get your fucking sparkles out of my Shadowrun (unless of course the mage wants his magic to be 'shiny', in which case he should usually be shot. Multiple times).

IIRC, you automatically succeed on Perception tests made to locate something "immediately noticeable".

And a sparkly mage deserves to be shot multiple times in the groin.

[Irion]

@phlapjack77

Perception tests are not limited to vision.

So you are able to hear stop signs?

As a matter of fact a perception test is only able to go one way: Visual, acustical etc.

Or are you going to stack everything? Cybereyes, cyberears, nose etc. ? This would make specs. on this kill very good.

And if it is said, that the mage sparkels, well I would go with optical.

@Muspellsheimr
Perception test are not only to locate somthing but also to notice something.
For example if the arm of that guy is a Cyberarm. If the girl at this table is wearing a blue handbag etc.
If I do not see the guy, I am not able to locate his cyberarm with a threshold of 2.

This is how this test is supposed to work:
Question: Does my char percieves, that this guy is casting a spell?
Yes or No?

If you do not succeed in the perception test you may still realize that there is some magic going down from secondary effects. (But you could not say who is making you dance on the table.)

[phlapjack77]

So you are able to hear stop signs?
As a matter of fact a perception test is only able to go one way: Visual, acustical etc.

You could also feel a stop sign, smell it, and if so inclined, taste it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

SR4a, page 136
"Gamemasters may call for Perception Tests for any situation that involves sight, hearing, smell, touch, or taste."

Unless the GM calls for a specific sense, perception tests are a general roll of all the combined senses. It's always situational.

[Mardrax]

SR4a, page 136
"Gamemasters may call for Perception Tests for any situation that involves sight, hearing, smell, touch, or taste."

The +2 from being Astrally perceiving also implies a part of the perception is none of those, since astral perception dependant on none of the natural senses.
Which is the part I'm relying on to say the guy in the apartment two walls over just gets this indefinable feeling that 'something' is happening.

The ruling that I use (which is technically RAW, as well as several other possible rulings), along with what I strongly suggest others use, is as follows:

That's the ruling I use as well. Again though, it's not strictly RAW, as there is no specific definition of either what constitues obvious or how to handle a <1 threshold. This seems to make most sense to me though. I actually tend to give a bonus depending on how far 'in the negative' the threshold would be.

Or are you going to stack everything? Cybereyes, cyberears, nose etc. ? This would make specs. on this kill very good.

Well yes. if someone if sneaking around, using Infiltration, you would generally get to use bonusses from optical, aural and olfactory means. Not to mention ultrasound, wideband radar and whatnot. Taste and touch would be rather impractical in this case.

Unless you want to make a separate test out of every sensory organ you have, of course. I prefer not to make my game grind down like that though.

[Muspellsheimr]

Well yes. if someone if sneaking around, using Infiltration, you would generally get to use bonusses from optical, aural and olfactory means. Not to mention ultrasound, wideband radar and whatnot. Taste and touch would be rather impractical in this case.

Incorrect. Vision Enhancement provides a modifier to visual Perception tests. If the test is not stated as visual (such as being audio, or even just Perception), the modifier does not apply.

Keep in mind that any reactive Perception test (called for by the GM) is made at a -2 Penalty for "Perceiver is distracted", and uses whatever sense the GM calls for, if any (again if unspecified, specific sensory modifiers do not apply).
Any active Perception tests use whatever sense the player decides on - visual, audio, unspecified, etc - and takes a Simple Action to perform.