Foci and multiple spells Options

[Raiden]

If you cast 2 spells in the same combat turn, and have a power focus, do you add the power focus dice before or after splitting the pool? I remember something about gunfire where I think it said to split the pool BEFORE adding modifiers, I dont know if this carries over to spells or not, and another question, why do the spells like lighting bolt, and flamethrower cause so much more drain, but usually do LESS damage then the direct ones? if they didnt have the chance to "dodge" them it would be at least a little better, but, fighting someone with decent reaction, body and armor and they are useless it seems

[Thanee]

When casting multiple spells with a Power Focus, I would think that you actually add the Power Focus Rating twice. You have to split Spellcasting + Magic dice pool between the spells, and the Power Focus dice are neither Spellcasting nor Magic. Also, the Power Focus says, that you add its Rating to any test involving Magic. Since there is no test, yet, until you actually roll the dice, the split must have happened previously.

And yeah, the indirect damage spells are not that great. The Drain is high because of the elemental effect, but it is simply too high in comparison, since the elemental effects, while nice, are not as good as they needed to be with such high Drain Values.

Bye
Thanee

[Xenefungus]

While technically Thanee is indeed correct, many agree that it's too strong that way. With additional dice pool modifiers such as Specialization and Mentor Spirit, you are easily at +8 to all those pools. Which is kinda too much, really.

[Aerospider]

Re: Direct vs Indirect

This is one of the more contentious issues on DS and you should have no trouble finding more than one very lengthy debate on the subject. The most recent is 'Direct and indirect spells question' which is still on the front page and is 11 pages long so far. Some advocate adjusting the drain codes. Some say that's unnecessary, mathematically undesirable or contrary to fluff. Some say RAW is fine so long as the GM plays up the elemental effects.

[Falconer]

By strict RAW, situational modifiers both positive and negative are added after the split.

That said, there was a potential errata that was being worked on at the time of the FAQ which didn't make it in. That is reflected in the FAQ and is one of the points where the FAQ contradicts the RAW. And two of the tables I play at add everything prior to splitting specifically because in the case of magic... there are far too many post split dice available. (power focus, specialization, mentor, aid sorcery service for spells less than or equal to the spirits force). It's very easy to run into the other optional rule of magic+skill == dice cap.

So it's a house rule to do these things before the split, but not necessarily an uncommon one in my experience. The problem with the FAQ is that it tries to create a pre-split modifier and post-split modifier... when the RAW never covers this at all... every single modifier in the game would need to be redefined to whether it's post or pre split.

Compare splitting dice for spells to splitting dice for multiple guns at once... practically everything which adds dice as a situational modifier is forbidden by the firing two guns at once. Merely illustrating the problem.


Don't even try to address indirect/direct in this thread please.

[Mäx]

And two of the tables I play at add everything prior to splitting specifically because in the case of magic... there are far too many post split dice available. (power focus, specialization, mentor, aid sorcery service for spells less than or equal to the spirits force). It's very easy to run into the other optional rule of magic+skill == dice cap.

How do you handle the resulting case of casting a force 1 lighting bolt at the nearby wall easily potentially doubling someones dicepool for casting a healing spell for example.
In other words, modifiers for something being abliable to a completely different thinks.

[Raiden]

By strict RAW, situational modifiers both positive and negative are added after the split.

That said, there was a potential errata that was being worked on at the time of the FAQ which didn't make it in. That is reflected in the FAQ and is one of the points where the FAQ contradicts the RAW. And two of the tables I play at add everything prior to splitting specifically because in the case of magic... there are far too many post split dice available. (power focus, specialization, mentor, aid sorcery service for spells less than or equal to the spirits force). It's very easy to run into the other optional rule of magic+skill == dice cap.

So it's a house rule to do these things before the split, but not necessarily an uncommon one in my experience. The problem with the FAQ is that it tries to create a pre-split modifier and post-split modifier... when the RAW never covers this at all... every single modifier in the game would need to be redefined to whether it's post or pre split.

Compare splitting dice for spells to splitting dice for multiple guns at once... practically everything which adds dice as a situational modifier is forbidden by the firing two guns at once. Merely illustrating the problem.


Don't even try to address indirect/direct in this thread please.

well I would say mentor spirit and spec. would apply to your dice pool, so would be applied before splitting. power foci and the like apply to each of your spells individually. as for the gun men, they are plenty strong with or without that excessive dice pool ( wide= you rarely miss) and assault rifle, long burst someone down, short burst another one. you lose a total of 2-3 dice, I would theorize ( of course dont we all?) that they figured common sense would tell us whether something was pre pool (IE skills and att) or post pool (foci or the like). which is shoddy in my opinion but given how much tis game covers, eh your bound to be ambiguous in some areas. on another note, im falling into a run atm and playing a mage, the GM as recomnded i "limit" my spells, where can I find this in a book, and what does it do? also, what book are fetishes discussed in?

[Mäx]

im falling into a run atm and playing a mage, the GM as recomnded i "limit" my spells, where can I find this in a book, and what does it do? also, what book are fetishes discussed in?

Rules for limited spell can be found in the corebooks magic chapter.

[Falconer]

Max:
I have no idea what you're talking about.... I said 2 local GM's enforce a add before split rule, subtract after split similar to what's in the FAQ (the failed errata).

You're not going to more than double any single casting pool... you won't get any better at healing just because you multi-cast ever!


Raiden:
I'm 100% opposite of you... if I had to define pre & post split... I'd limit positive qualities and skill specializations to the post split pools. All other positive mods I'd stuff into the pre-split dice pool.

Both mentor spirits and specializations are very narrow... and if someone really wants say +4 combat spells... to help him multicast... more power to him. That means he's not tossing more effective spells like mental mindfucks and other support spells. It's the single *LARGE* bonuses which are problematic.... an ally spirit aid sorcery on everything for example... +6 on all your spells under force 6. Or a force 4 power focus on everything... That said, more often than not I see people get a mentor spirit +2 in one class of spells and a +2 specialization in another... so I don't see a problem if they cast two *DIFFERENT* spells and get +2 to each after the split (2 from mentor, and 2 from spec).

That's little to no different than the gunnery case where just about the only reliable bonus dice to post split attacks on a pistol adept firing both at once is his specialization in pistols. Just about everything else after the split is a negative mod. (range, visibility, wound penalty etc.)



So to recap if it was up to me... with the exception of positive qualities (mentor spirit, codeslinger, etc.), skill specializations, and all the negative situational mods. I'd treat everything else as a pre-split modifier added to the pool then split with the skill + attribute. House rule territory... but it limits the problems with large amounts of positive dice situational modifiers available to spellcasting.

[Raiden]

I see the point, I also understand the reason, Power focus of 4 would be +4 dice to each pool, (if done right, the pools are already 9-11 ea.) though, what if they used it for the DV resistance? would it only be usable for one? or both? RAW it seems to be add after, but it can get to the extent where its broken (thats when I say, OH by the way, roll to see if you get addicted >:3) but for the game im dropping in he is saying that it can be used on both pools separately, we also have the add all net hits added to DV to drain rule.

[Halinn]

I see the point, I also understand the reason, Power focus of 4 would be +4 dice to each pool, (if done right, the pools are already 9-11 ea.) though, what if they used it for the DV resistance? would it only be usable for one? or both? RAW it seems to be add after, but it can get to the extent where its broken (thats when I say, OH by the way, roll to see if you get addicted >:3) but for the game im dropping in he is saying that it can be used on both pools separately, we also have the add all net hits added to DV to drain rule.

Simple answer to that: you can't add power focus to a drain resistance pool.

[Falconer]

Oh yeah, the ONLY focus that can add to drain anymore is a centering focus used with the metamagic.

The ability to withhold dice for drain was completely removed in the original SR4 errata. And that ability only applied to spell and summoning foci, not to power foci.

If you used a free action to center while multicasting... the centering focus would add to each drain test. Each one is a seperate drain soak test.

[Raiden]

welp, good to know that then. id still say power foci R can be added to both dice pools, (if this is abused to much, like I said, call for an addiction roll)

[Falconer]

Addiction has nothing to do with it unles you're using too much force worth of foci.

By strict RAW yes the power focus is added to casting pool for each spell after the split. (though I agree with the attempt to errata it to be pre-split addition). If you're talking about drain, power foci have never helped with drain.

[Xenefungus]

Do you really want pre- and post-split modifiers? I sure as hell don't.

[Mäx]

Max:
I have no idea what you're talking about.... I said 2 local GM's enforce a add before split rule, subtract after split similar to what's in the FAQ (the failed errata).

You're not going to more than double any single casting pool... you won't get any better at healing just because you multi-cast ever!

Oh really, let me illustrate using my combat caster mysad build(cos she very good at illustrating this point):
Magic for spell casting 2
Spellcasting(combat) 4
Spellcasting foci(combat) 5
Mentor spirit +2 to combat spells

Dice pool for casting a non combat spell 2(mag)+4(skill)=6 dice
Pool multicasting a lightning bolt and heal at the same time, presplit:
2+4+2(spec)+5(focus)+2(mentor)+2(the wall the lightning bolt is cas is point blank) + 2(the wall is a huge target)= 19 dice
Splitting that 1 dice for the lightning(as i dont really care about how well it does), leaves 18 dice for the heal, thats a 200% increase in casting pool size.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Oh really, let me illustrate using my combat caster mysad build(cos she very good at illustrating this point):
Magic for spell casting 2
Spellcasting(combat) 4
Spellcasting foci(combat) 5
Mentor spirit +2 to combat spells

Dice pool for casting a non combat spell 2(mag)+4(skill)=6 dice
Pool multicasting a lightning bolt and heal at the same time, presplit:
2+4+2(spec)+5(focus)+2(mentor)+2(the wall the lightning bolt is cas is point blank) + 2(the wall is a huge target)= 19 dice
Splitting that 1 dice for the lightning(as i dont really care about how well it does), leaves 18 dice for the heal, thats a 200% increase in casting pool size.

Except that by the RAW (failed FAQ aside) you add your Mentor Bonus, Focus, Point Blank, and Huge Target modifiers after the split (they are dice pool modifiers, not Skill + Magic). SO it is really 2 spells with a Base 6 Dice in Split, with bonuses as follows.

Lightning Bolt = 1 (per your Split) +2 (mentor) +2 (Spec) +5 (Focus) +2 (Point Blank) +2 (Huge Target) = 14 Dice for the Lightning Bolt
Heal = 5 Dice (per your split). = 5 Dice for Heal

Note that Heal is less effective due to the split of casting 2 spells, and both spells do +1 Drain. So, not so useful. So, Yes Really... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Now, had you chosen to split 2 Lightning Bolts evenly (3/3 base Dice), you would have looked like this...

Lightning Bolt 1 = 3 (per even Split) +2 (mentor) +2 (Spec) +5 (Focus) +2 (Point Blank) +2 (Huge Target) = 16 Dice for the Lightning Bolt (F Capped)Lightning Bolt 2 = 3 (per even Split) +2 (mentor) +2 (Spec) +5 (Focus) +2 (Point Blank) +2 (Huge Target) = 16 Dice for the Lightning Bolt (F Capped)

A DEFINITE increase in your capabilities. Assuming you added your Foci for both Spells. And an Additional Drain of +1 (so 2 rolls at 5+ Each, depending on Force), and a Base Damage of Force. *shrug*

[Mäx]

Except that by the RAW (failed FAQ aside) you add your Mentor Bonus, Focus, Point Blank, and Huge Target modifiers after the split (they are dice pool modifiers, not Skill + Magic).

Did you actually read the topic at all or did you just choose a random post in a random topic to respond at.
We're specifically talking about situation under a ruling that all modifiers are added before splitting.

[Aerospider]

I assume Max was offering a proof by contradiction (of sorts) and one that I agree with - it cannot be agreeable to have dice for a specific category of spells be used for another category. Consequently, if added pre-split they must be automatically allocated to a viable pool (on top of the 1 die minimum). This is the same as adding post-split with the caveat that each die is only added to one viable pool.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Did you actually read the topic at all or did you just choose a random post in a random topic to respond at.
We're specifically talking about situation under a ruling that all modifiers are added before splitting.

I did not see that it was a specific ruling that all were added pre-split. ESPECIALLY since a number of Posts are discussing the differences between Pre and POST split.

Point is... Pre split is JUST as stupid (if not more so... See your "Proof") as POST split.

Get off your high horse.

[Mäx]

Get off your high horse.

Sorry, but it's annoying ass hell when some one goes all RAW on when i'm quite clearly not talking about RAW situation(I know quite well how the RAW rules work, thank you very much)

And yes obviously i agree that add all pre split is quite silly without additional house rules, witch is ofcource why i asked how Falconers GM:s handle this particular problem.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Sorry, but it's annoying ass hell when some one goes all RAW on when i'm quite clearly not talking about RAW situation(I know quite well how the RAW rules work, thank you very much)

And yes obviously i agree that add all pre split is quite silly without additional house rules, witch is ofcource why i asked how Falconers GM:s handle this particular problem.

No Worries...

[Falconer]

We haven't had the need to address your problem because no one has been stupid enough to try it. I agree it's stupid to have a bound spirit or spell focus which can only add to one class of spells give it's bonus to another simply because multi-casting was used. I understand your reading... but I never gave a rule, only a guideline and mentioned that the powers that be did have an errata in the work which mirrored the FAQ which did split dice modifiers into pre & post categories. So you twist the guideline to it's worst possible case, which the GM would beat someone silly if they tried.

More or less no one has been dumb enough to bound 'spell foci' instead opting for power foci. I'm generally the only one who multi-casts at all or makes regular use of aid sorcery.


But when I pointed out that my force 12 ally (aid sorcery any type of spell under force 12), plus force 5 power focus. That's automatic +17 dice on any spell or summoning test. Even if I make multiple at once and split my starting 19 dice up.

Yes it's a ludicrously high power game I don't enjoy playing much; we were also all forced to be drakes so my prime interest in the game has been avoiding draconic entanglements/enslavement). He also learned I wasn't shy about multicasting 2-4 single target spells at once instead of tossing area effects. And wasn't shy about using powerbolt to wreck military vehicles at OR7 starting. (I've mentioned elsewhere we used the RAW OR5+ as published, to increase vehicle OR by 1 point per grade, OR5 commercial, OR6 security, OR7 military.)

The lower power game picked up real quick that it was trivially easy to pick up +10 or more dice per spell cast so also opted to follow the FAQ's guidance and declare foci & aid sorcery to be pre-split).



The problem is lets say you're multi-casting two of the same spell at the same time... you have two guards. You know control thoughts (+2 drain). You have +8 in assorted bonuses to manipulation spells. Your base magic + spellcasting is 10. That's one at 18(+2drain), or two at 13(2x +3drain). Still rather good. Another good example is using 'influence' + 'alter memory' at the same time. (implant the suggestion and make them think it's their own idea).


Another way to go at it would be simply rule, that they stay post split, but alter the rule as regards foci & bound spirit aid sorcery. You can only use it once per test per complex action. That would mean.. you cast multiple spells, you still add it afterwards, but can only add it once, not twice to each dice pool test. Personally, I think that's the best way to handle it. It's simpler and more elegant.

But again, I don't see a problem with specialization or mentor spirit being post split... they're small and they are what allow you to make a moderate power mage who's still effective 'in his niche'. A street combat mage... master healer... mindraper, etc.

[Raiden]

here is a thought. your using the opt. rule for direct spells. every +1 net hit you add to your base DV gets added to your drain. there you go, now casting 3 spells at once even with a power foci is not near as tasty. its a "oh shit" button. say they use indirect spells. that's still easily 5-7 drain per spell. say they overcast the direct at force 9-11 maybe casting 2-3 spells. I am still fine with that because that's 4-5 (not counting the additional +1 per spell drain) drain from a manabolt that deals lethal damage to the caster. and hey have to resist it for evey extra casting. PLUS the extra drain for additional spells cast. It is not Broken because even though they can dish out A LOT of damage and death, the drain can hurt and even KILL them. most people will have anywhere from 9-13 maybe 14 dice to resist that drain with. also, if they do poorly and take more than 3 damage resisting the first spell, they are at another -1 to resist the other one or two. I would reason letting power foci be post-split. if they NEED to do that much damage that quickly, exp. to save half the party, an Important NPC, or just to be freaking stupidly heroic. let them have that boost to actually get it done.

[Falconer]

We do use the optional direct drain rule Raiden. And I can't make heads or tails out of anything you've written! But If you're saying what I think you're saying... that the optional rule on it's own is enough to limit this. You have this dead wrong. If the optional rule for increasing direct combat spell drain by net hits used for damage. You never use net hits for damage... that's just being stupid.


Your contrived example is awful. It doesn't address the fact that shortly out of chargen for a exceptionally specialized mage, I can multi-cast force 10 spells at +16 dice each post split (not even including pre-split skill + magic dice).


I've gone over the math numerous times in multiple threads where I defend the optional rule as accomplishing the ends of balancing directs vs indirects. I'm not going to do it again here.


Even the game's authors realize this is a problem with the sheer amount of post-split dice available in this case. If they didn't they wouldn't even consider an errata to address it. The current line dev has a huge aversion to any kind of errata to fix anything though. JMHardy only believes in breaking the system more, not fixing anything.

Every other case where you can split dice to make multiple attacks the post-split positive dice are far far more limited to no more than +2 to +4. I believe that the game would be better if spellcasting was the same limited to +2 to +4 max for a specialist in post-split dice.