Mystic Adept better than Magician?, Quick question about the rules Options

[The Wrestling Tr...]

I've noticed that mystic adept only costs 10 BP but you get (almost) full magician privileges. The only thing you can't do is astraly project but everything else is doable!

Isn't the mystic adept superior because of that? Nowhere in the rules it says that you can't just use your full magic attribute ONLY for magician and 0 for adept (until later with initiation etc). Thus opening new combos with positive qualities for magic users?

[Larsine]

Except the rule that the GM should only allow this quality to players that will actually play a mystic adept.

So if you intend to play a magician, then you should take the magician quality, not the mystic adept.

As a GM, I would just end up giving you less karma, since you do not roleplay your character, but rather try to abuse the system.

[Makki]

you're not just loosing projection, but also Astral Perception, which is HUGE.

[Aerospider]

It's not just projection but perception as well which is exceptionally useful. You can buy the adept power for that, but there's an effective BP cost in doing so.

The rules don't straight out say that 0 in adept powers is forbidden, but it is made clear that the mystic adept quality is only for characters who actually are going to be a mystic adept and not for players trying to take advantage for the sake of numbers. It's up to the GM to police this, so if they're happy then go nuts.

EDIT: Damn, took too long

[The Wrestling Tr...]

What if I want to play a mystic adept that gains his adept powers only with initiation?

Would work fluff and by RAW (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[Kesendeja]

Presently I'm playing a mystic adept that has no idea she can cast spells. My GM agreed to let me put everything in physical abilities and my spell casting will come later. He's already docked me the points for my initiation, and will determine in game a suitable awakening.

So starting with an imbalance isn't necessarily bad for a concept, I just think the intent to branch out later is important, otherwise you're just trying to cheat the system.

[The Wrestling Tr...]

Isn't shadowrun chargen min-maxing almost always rule-crunching and loophole searching (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) ?

[_Pax._]

Nowhere in the rules it says that you can't just use your full magic attribute ONLY for magician and 0 for adept (until later with initiation etc).

It may not directly say "YOU CAN NOT DO THIS", but it does advise GMs to make sure that it isn't done. As a GM, I would never allow a character to split their Magic rating so that either side had a 0. And I would strongly urge the player to never let either side be more than twice the other - IOW, I would frown on a 1-5 split; 2-4 is about as unbalanced as I'd be willing to allow, without a LOT of backstory and player/GM "discussion" (by which I mean: convince me you're not just trying to leverage the system to your advantage; a little of that is fine, but too much ... well, it isn't fine).

Also: a Mystic Adept does not get Astral Perception. Nor can they Astrally Project. They can't even learn the skills Assensing or Astral Combat - not without buying the Adept power "Astral Perception", which requires splitting their magic pool. And even then, they will never be able to astrally project. Period. End of story.

What if I want to play a mystic adept that gains his adept powers only with initiation?

Would work fluff and by RAW (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

As a GM, I would probably require you to buy a Way, that didn't help your spellcasting nor counterspelling, during CharGen. Basically, "Put some BP on the line, BP that will only benefit you if/when yu really do add Adept powers 'later on' ..."

Presently I'm playing a mystic adept that has no idea she can cast spells.

Since Mystic Adept costs more than just Adept, I'd be less worried about an imbalance that strongly favored Adept abilities like that.

[Ears]

Feels like déjà vu all over again.

Just sayin' (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Xenefungus]

Feels like déjà vu all over again.

Just sayin' (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

+1

Yes indeed, already wondered why no one else mentioned that thread. It's all in there...

[Aerospider]

Isn't shadowrun chargen min-maxing almost always rule-crunching and loophole searching (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) ?

Benefitting from GM fiat (serious, rule-breaking fiat in this case) is not a loophole, it's a bona fide game variant. It's like being given 500 BP to play with instead of 400 - you get a much more powerful character but you can hardly attribute it to min-maxing.

[Samoth]

And even then, they will never be able to astrally project. Period. End of story.

Deepweed

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Deepweed

Shade, actually... Doesn't Deepweed allow you to perceive only?

[Mäx]

Since Mystic Adept costs more than just Adept, I'd be less worried about an imbalance that strongly favored Adept abilities like that.

And then there's the fact that one has to buy skills and the spells ingame before she can get any benefit out of the magician side of the mysad, where as the one with all points in the magician side only has to but a magic point toward adept powers to get instant benefits.

[_Pax._]

Deepweed

Addiction.

[Samoth]

Addiction.

You must be projecting a lot.

[_Pax._]

You must be projecting a lot.

Every meet, and every "job site", you will probably want to run an Astral Recon; as a full mage, there's precious little reason NOT to, after all. Since the typical run is "Meet Mr. J and get a job; Do the job; Meet Mr. J to get paid", that's three times per run. And probably more often than that, at least now and then. So, at 2-3 doses minimum, I think it'd be entirely reasonable to start calling for an addiction test at the end of the second "job", and every other "job" thereafter. Perhaps sooner, if the character uses the drug more often.

(The actual drug in question is Shade, btw, not Deepweed.)

...

Then there's the issue of cost. Shade costs 1,000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) per dose ... and even more, magical drugs have a shelf-life of only 1d6 weeks, so the character will need a Contact to act as their regular supplier.

[Falconer]

Actually addiction doesn't necessarily require a test. You make heavy abuse of a drug and the GM doesn't need to make you roll. He can just saddle you with the addiction. (p256 SR4a)



Though I disagree with pax and others that a 0 split is a sign of abuse. (to me taking any 'race' like pixie which allows assensing without spending a power point). A character could just be a phys ad who hasn't realized their magical gifts yet. He's spent 5 points more than a normal phys ad. The added bit doesn't say to ban it, it says to watch it for abuse. Something a GM should be quite capable of doing on his own. If you're GM look at the character and figure out if it's going to be a problem or not... the reason mystic adepts are potential trouble is because they have the pick of the litter in everything except for technomancy... (magic, cyber/bio, skills, etc. makes them easy to powergame if you know what you're doing). Though they're also massive karma sinks.

To me the biggest sign of abuse is someone who takes something like pixie then goes mystic adept because they get astral perception for free already. And lack of astral perception is the single biggest drawback to mystic adepts.

[_Pax._]

Though I disagree with pax and others that a 0 split is a sign of abuse.

But it is a sign. Only a sign, of course - not a guarantee that there is any actual abuse. Nonetheless, it is one thing among many to look for, and if you find it ... look closer.

To me the biggest sign of abuse is someone who takes something like pixie then goes mystic adept because they get astral perception for free already. And lack of astral perception is the single biggest drawback to mystic adepts.

Yes, that too would be a sign. But IMO, that's somewhat less of a sign than an X/0 split.

[Falconer]

Poor choice of words... it's a sign, but not a reason in and of itself of abuse. You understand what I meant, I meant the character as a whole needs looked at to see if it's just powergaming and fits you and your other players power levels in game. If so, great, if not... apply screws.


As for the latter though. Going pixie is and mystic adept means I'd apply screws tightly to everything else including a 5/0 split. Because the Pixie has a full PP worth of goods built in with assensing and is only one step short of full mage. The concealment as well is worth quite a few adept points in stealth skills as well. Toss in the stupidly good and elevated scores across the board in everything except bod/str... and it's a powergamer pick.

[_Pax._]

Poor choice of words... it's a sign, but not a reason in and of itself of abuse. You understand what I meant, I meant the character as a whole needs looked at to see if it's just powergaming and fits you and your other players power levels in game. If so, great, if not... apply screws.

The problem is, you apparently didn't understand ME. Because what you just said? has been my position on that, all along.

[...] the Pixie has a full PP worth of goods built in [...]

And presumably paid-for in their racial cost (not to mention, the drawbacks of being a pixie - Vanishing, uneducated, and exotic enough to suffer the drawbacks fo Distinctive Style just for being what they are).

[...] it's a powergamer pick.

I disagree. Oh, sure, it CAN be used that way. But not always.

[Makki]

sometimes it's impossible to split. And impossible to know, whether you're an adept or a mystic adept.
When you only have Magic 1

imagine the confusion, the time you awaken as an adept with magic 1 and the Astral Perception power (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Midas]

As Ears and Xenefungus said, this topic has been lengthily debated very recently, please refer to that thread.

Astral recon (via projection) has its uses, although is not without its dangers (patrolling spirits and/or wage mages, dual-natured critters etc). Astral Perception is necessary for mages to clean their signatures after spell use (as Falconer pointed out in the other thread). As others have noted, drugs have their drawbacks (cost, contact source, addiction), and going dual-natured race seems cheesy and rings those "abuse alert"! alarms to me.

As per SR4a p185, the GM is entitled to ban anyone who takes the Mys Ad quality who does not explore their full nature, and like Pax I would not allow a -/0 split for that reason (unless it was for a non-power gaming RP reason such as the one Kesendeja outlined). From the concensus of other thread we seem to be in the minority, but our position is entirely RAW-valid.