Aspected Mages..., ...really look crappy Options

[Mäx]

Damm you forums and your lack of spamming reventation.

[Thanee]

The biggest problem I have with Aspected Magicians so far is the lack of free spells compared to a full Magician.

I can understand this somewhat, because they are not useful for Conjurers or Enchanters, so maybe there needs to be one package for each of them?

If you compare the Priority B, you get the same amount of Karma worth in options as the Magician or Mystic Adept... but you are only an Aspected Magician, so you really should get more out of it.

Priority C is even worse, as they get a bit less here.

KarmaGen will likely fix those issues, however.

Bye
Thanee

[Mäx]

I can understand this somewhat, because they are not useful for Conjurers or Enchanters, so maybe there needs to be one package for each of them?

Actually only useless for conjurers, enchanter can just take alchemy preparations.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

there's no handling issue or rules problem. There's just chargen discremination towards Aspected. It is cheaper to be a full mage and not take any sorcery skills than being a conuirer aspect magician.

Except that those two characters are fundamentally different. If you are wanting a Conjurer Aspected Mage, you don't take Magician and then just not take Sorcery skills (that is just a Magician who has not yet acquired Sorcery skills, and can do so in the future). You take an Aspected Conjurer (who will NEVER have access to Sorcery). Fundamentally Different. Choosing Magician over Aspected (using that particular concept) is gaming the system at that point, rather than playing to concept. *shrug*

[Mäx]

Except that those two characters are fundamentally different. If you are wanting a Conjurer Aspected Mage, you don't take Magician and then just not take Sorcery skills (that is just a Magician who has not yet acquired Sorcery skills, and can do so in the future). You take an Aspected Conjurer (who will NEVER have access to Sorcery). Fundamentally Different. Choosing Magician over Aspected (using that particular concept) is gaming the system at that point, rather than playing to concept. *shrug*

Its not gimping yourself for no reason.

[Makki]

Except that those two characters are fundamentally different. If you are wanting a Conjurer Aspected Mage, you don't take Magician and then just not take Sorcery skills (that is just a Magician who has not yet acquired Sorcery skills, and can do so in the future). You take an Aspected Conjurer (who will NEVER have access to Sorcery). Fundamentally Different. Choosing Magician over Aspected (using that particular concept) is gaming the system at that point, rather than playing to concept. *shrug*

No. I take Magician and Incompetent (Spellcasting). And roleplay an Aspected Conjurer, yes I can do that.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Its not gimping yourself for no reason.

You are correct, the Aspected Magician is not Gimped. *shrug*
Comparing Aspected Conjurer to a Full Magician is Plums and Nectarines. They are not the same thing.

[DoomFrog]

Makki's idea is actually good. If you want tot be an aspect magician, either sorcery or enchanting, it is better to take full magician and two incompetent qualities for the other two magical skill groups than taking aspect magician.

As for a conjuration magician it would be better to take aspect magician as the spells for full magician would be useless.

Now when I say better i only mean it tems of karmic value at character creation. So rp vaule or being looked down upon at your table for munchkining is not accounted.

Personally I would always take full magician and just ignore the other skills as I think astral projection is an invaluable skill (and not just because deepweed is the only other way to get it). In my games the magician's number 1 way of supporting the team is astral recon and surveillance.

[Wired_SR_AEGIS]

I'll let you guys know how Sophie, a character in one of my stories that I hope to have see the light of day sometime soon, comes out when I do her stats. She's a conjurer; there's just a couple of things I have to figure out how to do for her particular concept, but that should be easy enough.

I don't see a big issue with how aspected mages are handled, myself, but it might just be me.

Sure. Keep us posted, Mr. Goodman.

My primary objection is that it appears that a campaign of any serious length will probably present an Aspected Character with the position that the cost of the things they traded away to be Aspected exceeds the benefit they've gained from it.

In SR 3 (The last time a Priority System was presented in the core book), the choice to be a Full Mage required Priority: A. That had a fairly major opportunity cost between it and the next highest priority: 3 Attribute points stacked on top of already high Attributes (Thus reaping larger rewards), or over half a million Yen, or additional skill points stacked on top of already high skill points.

Aspected Mages, meanwhile, were effectively trading their Full Magic capabilities for the equivalent of a small fortune if they so desired, in addition to additional spells points. It was unquestionably a valid trade for a number of archetypes.

But the entry cost into being a Full Magician is very low, in SR: 5.

Hrm. It almost makes me wonder if the best way to be an Aspected Magician in SR: 5 is to take Priority 'D' for Magic. A Priority 'D' Groggie w/ C in Skills has 2 Magic, 28 skill points, and 2 skill groups for anything. Flipping that around, Magic C has Magic: 3, 2 "free" skill groups, and 22 skills. So 6 skill points = 1 point of magic, sidestepping that the skills from priority 'c' can be spent anywhere.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

[Ricochet]

I'll let you guys know how Sophie, a character in one of my stories that I hope to have see the light of day sometime soon, comes out when I do her stats. She's a conjurer; there's just a couple of things I have to figure out how to do for her particular concept, but that should be easy enough.

I don't see a big issue with how aspected mages are handled, myself, but it might just be me.

Actually, aspected conjurers aren't too bad. It's aspected sorcerers who are terrible.

What is the difference?
Aspected conjurers don't need any spells, so when comparing to a full magician who gets free spells, you aren't actually losing out on anything.
Aspected sorcerers can get their spells pretty much for free by changing from a sorcerer to a full magician, instead of having to pay a bunch of karma for them. Those spells are worth more (in karma) than the skill group vs individual skills that the sorcerer gets.

(Added disadvantages that are situational...sorcerers can't have 7 sorcery or a specialty unless they waste their skill group bonus by taking something non-relevant. Skill groups are also harder to raise if you don't have the right skill priority group to have skill group points to match up with your free skill group.)

[Shemhazai]

If it's a question of how much Karma the various priorities are worth, then we need to take everything into account.

For an aspected magician at priorities B and C, you get one magical skill group at 4 and 2, respectively. Now look at the skills column. Priorities A and C give you 10 and 2 skill group points, respectively. You can combine these so that magic B and skills C give you 6 skill group points for one maxed out magical group. Magic C and skills A give you 12, for one maxed out magical group and one other maxed out group, which for my concept I would choose Influence. Notice how these maxed skill groups would have cost more Karma to develop.

Now check out the how the aspected magician magic levels stack with elf metatype priorities. Magic B, C and D give 5, 3 and 2 points of magic, respectively. Elf metatype gives 8, 6, 3, and 0 for A, B, C, and D, respectively. Thus:

Magic B, metatype A maxes Magic and Edge, but with 2 points wasted. Getting Acceptional Attribute (Magic) or Lucky reduces this waste to just 1 point. This can be combined with skills C to give you a maxed Conjuring skill group! The cost is low attributes and resources.

Magic B, metatype C can max Magic, leaving Edge at 3. The total Karma cost to max out Edge is 75. This can't take advantage of the skill group synergy of Magic B and skills C

Magic B, metatype D leaves Magic at 5 and Edge at 1, costing 130 to max both, but only 25 to bump Edge up to 3. You can combine this with skills C to max out the Conjuring skill group. Edit: Note that this leaves priority A free for attributes, or possibly resources, but I think that's too much money. I haven't seen what gear you can get.

Magic C, metatype A maxes Magic and Edge perfectly! The problem is that this can't be combined with the skill group synergy of magic C and skills A. Also, you can't max both special attributes with points if you choose Exceptional Attribute (Magic) or Lucky.

Magic C, metatype B can max either Magic or Edge, leaving the other at 4. The total Karma cost to max both is 55. You can add this to skills A to get maxed Conjuring and Influence skill groups.

Magic C, metatype D leaves you with Magic 3 and Edge 1. This also works with skills A for both maxed skill groups, and raising Edge doesn't cost that much. This option leaves priority B open for either 20 attribute points or 275,000 nuyen for focuses.

I didn't notice anything particularly compelling with Magic D, except for a higher slot for other stuff.

So in some cases, you might be able to squeeze more Karma value out of an elf aspected conjurer shaman. Maybe Exceptional Attribute just isn't worth it. I'm going by the chargen preview, so of course there's stuff I haven't seen, particularly qualities. People are saying that mystic adepts are just mind blowingly better. Almost everything magic costs Karma, so you'll never be awesome at everything.

[Wired_SR_AEGIS]

Well, consider:

Magic: B and Skills D -- Magic: 5, 1 Rating 4 Magical Skill Group, 22 Skill Points.

Skills B, Magic: D -- Magic: 2, 36 Skill Points, 5 Skill Group Points

Raising Magic from 2 --> 5 costs 15 + 20 + 25 Karma for a total of 60 karma.

Meanwhile, raising a Magical Skill group from 4 to 5 costs 25 karma.

Additionally, there are 22 vs. 36 skill points to distribute. Optimal distribute for 22 is 6,6,6,4. Optimal distribution for 36 is 6,6,6,6,6,6. The difference would involve raising one skill from 4-->6. Then raising two skills from 0-->6.

So 22 Karma to go from 4->6. Then 84 karma to grab an addition 2 skills at rating 6.

Totals below:

106 Karma (from Skills) + 25 Karma(Skill Group) - 60 karma = 71 karma difference.

EDIT: I'm liking that Initiate out of Chargen option for Aspected. Should they be able to raise Magic to 7 out the gate w/ Special Attribute Points?

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

[Roy Fokker]

Is initiation an option at character generation? If so, it's a benefit that aspected magicians that don't have too much magic use for karma can take advantage of. I'm just not sure whether you can take metamagic at character generation.

[phlapjack77]

EDIT: I'm liking that Initiate out of Chargen option for Aspected. Should they be able to raise Magic to 7 out the gate w/ Special Attribute Points?

Yeah I'd say so. It'd be similar to taking the Exceptional Attribute: Magic quality. Although this again brings up my other gripe about Priority gen and linear attribute points...

Is initiation an option at character generation? If so, it's a benefit that aspected magicians that don't have too much magic use for karma can take advantage of. I'm just not sure whether you can take metamagic at character generation.

I think it's unclear whether initiation is an option at chargen.

[Wired_SR_AEGIS]

Hrm. Across the board Magic and skill group bumps may be another alternative. And maybe instead of a free Mentor Spirit quality that doesn't count against qualities, perhaps Spirit Affinity would be another good one as an option. All of that could either stand alone, or be combined with the above.

Let's see, combining all of the above into one super awesome, highly favorable package with stepped benefits would look something like...

Priority B -- Aspected-Magic: 6, Rating: 5 Magical Skill Group, Mentor Spirit or Spirit Affinity(Free), Initiate Grade 1
Priority C -- Aspected-Magic: 4, Rating: 3 Magical Skill Group, Initiate Grade 1
Priority D -- Aspected-Magic: 3, Rating: 1 Magical Skill Group

I think that actually looks fairly playable.

The traditional Aspected with a very modest bump exists at Priority-D, while Priority C and above can leave Chargen with a Metamagic ability and a Magic Rating of 7. Not too shabby. And of course, taking Priority-B is probably frequently worth consideration and actually stands up fairly well against a full Magician at Magic Priority: B who gets, by contrast, 2 less Magic, is not an initiate, no free qualities, though does have 7 free spells.

Also at Priority 'C', the full magician is 1 less Magic, is not an initiate, and does not have a free magical skill group, though does have 5 free spells.

I don't know... Being a full mage (Or Mystic Adept) still seems fairly dominant, but putting those additional features on the table certainly makes the Aspected route more tempting.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

[phlapjack77]

Hrm. Across the board Magic and skill group bumps may be another alternative. And maybe instead of a free Mentor Spirit quality that doesn't count against qualities, perhaps Spirit Affinity would be another good one as an option. All of that could either stand alone, or be combined with the above.

Let's see, combining all of the above into one super awesome, highly favorable package with stepped benefits would look something like...

Priority B -- Aspected-Magic: 6, Rating: 5 Magical Skill Group, Mentor Spirit or Spirit Affinity(Free), Initiate Grade 1
Priority C -- Aspected-Magic: 4, Rating: 3 Magical Skill Group, Initiate Grade 1
Priority D -- Aspected-Magic: 3, Rating: 1 Magical Skill Group

I think that actually looks fairly playable.

The traditional Aspected with a very modest bump exists at Priority-D, while Priority C and above can leave Chargen with a Metamagic ability and a Magic Rating of 7. Not too shabby. And of course, taking Priority-B is probably frequently worth consideration and actually stands up fairly well against a full Magician at Magic Priority: B who gets, by contrast, 2 less Magic, is not an initiate, no free qualities, though does have 7 free spells.

Also at Priority 'C', the full magician is 1 less Magic, is not an initiate, and does not have a free magical skill group, though does have 5 free spells.

I don't know... Being a full mage (Or Mystic Adept) still seems fairly dominant, but putting those additional features on the table certainly makes the Aspected route more tempting.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

This table looks good - I'm too lazy to at the moment to "run the numbers", but just looking at it makes it seem like it makes Aspected Mage an attractive alternative.

[Irion]

@phlapjack77
They will never be a real alternative, unless you give them an real big bunch of boni. The problem is the core ruling of shadowrun.
Everything is governed by one attribute (magic). The more things you can do with this attribute, the better the investment in the attribute is. (Logical)

In general the only way to make aspect magicians better is to give them a boost to their attribute or make raising it cheaper. For example: Aspect magicians get a dice pool modifier of +3 for their aspects or their magical attribut is considered to be 2 points higher or they only pay rating*4 instead of raiting*5.

While they might be worth it at the start now, add some karma and things will shift. It is the same thing with the new mystical adepts or cyber-mages. While they might have tradeoffs at the start, as soon as you add karma the drawbacks will be reduced and the boni will increase.

[phlapjack77]

@phlapjack77
They will never be a real alternative, unless you give them an real big bunch of boni. The problem is the core ruling of shadowrun.
Everything is governed by one attribute (magic). The more things you can do with this attribute, the better the investment in the attribute is. (Logical)

In general the only way to make aspect magicians better is to give them a boost to their attribute or make raising it cheaper. For example: Aspect magicians get a dice pool modifier of +3 for their aspects or their magical attribut is considered to be 2 points higher or they only pay rating*4 instead of raiting*5.

While they might be worth it at the start now, add some karma and things will shift. It is the same thing with the new mystical adepts or cyber-mages. While they might have tradeoffs at the start, as soon as you add karma the drawbacks will be reduced and the boni will increase.

I see your point. A dp bonus seems simpler (less book-keeping) but seems like it can suffer from not being "special" enough, with the veritable flood of other ways to get dp bonuses. The magic att. considered 2 points higher is interesting - what are the ramifications? Able to cast spells at a higher force...would the increased magic attribute also count towards all tests (so in effect, also a +2 dp bonus)?

[Irion]

@ phlapjack77
Simply consider the magic attribute two points higher in all purposes. The only expetion would be every rule considering raising the magical attribute.

So an aspected magician could leave chargen with an effective magic attribute of 8. (And for things like having only one single spell I would even go further.)

[Rystefn]

You're doing it again! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) You're admitting there's a problem with the rules, then you go on to say "but it doesn't matter because I ignore the problem."

Since everyone agrees there's actually a problem with the Aspected Mage rules (the problem was in SR4 too), how about giving ideas about fixing it?

As another suggestion, I think some alternate Aspected rules written by (Frank? AH?) mentioned giving the aspected mage a starting init grade of 1. I like this idea (along with the suggestions above), it says (to me) that the aspected mage, while not as "broad" as a normal mage, is much more powerful in his focused area.

Nothing wrong self-limiting options, so long as they are clearly noted to be such so people don't accidentally gimp themselves. Some people like playing on hard mode.

[Wired_SR_AEGIS]

Nothing wrong self-limiting options, so long as they are clearly noted to be such so people don't accidentally gimp themselves. Some people like playing on hard mode.

Right. Maybe a subsection underneath the 'Choose Magic & Resonance' section that clearly states: "Choosing to make an Aspected Character will permanently gimp you."

Nothing flashy. Straight forward and easy to understand.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Right. Maybe a subsection underneath the 'Choose Magic & Resonance' section that clearly states: "Choosing to make an Aspected Character will permanently gimp you."

Nothing flashy. Straight forward and easy to understand.

-Wired_SR_AEGIS

*Sigh* (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[tangmcgame]

*Sigh* (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

Let me see if I can put this a way that might be more palatable for you. My problem is not that Aspected Mages are worse than full Magicians. It's not even that the Aspected option isn't optimized (no spells for 2/3rds of the specializations without dumping karma, a nasty hit). It's that the character acquires these weaknesses at an inflated Priority value. At any given Priority level, the Aspected Mage does not receive benefits worthy of that Priority cost yet they still retain all of the penalties of Aspecting.

So, while playing an Aspected Mage should be an interesting alternative to a full Mage, it is too suboptimal and punishing for anyone except Conjurers (and even then, the tradeoff is not equitable), and the superior alternative is to use the same priority level, pick the Magician option, and then focus on a single skill group. I'm not even talking about full optimization. I'm talking about immediately obvious (and, honestly, baffling) discrepancies.

[Sendaz]

Yes, that argument could work for a gamer looking at pure numbers.

Sir Jalynsfein, however, is of the old breed that still does things because of the flavour and style and does not see small faults as a discrepancy or lack, but rather an opportunity to exceed and overcome.

[tangmcgame]

I feel there's a difference between a challenging concept and a mechanical penalty. Playing a Street Sam with low starting resources? An Adept with low starting magic? A hacker with mediocre mental stats? A weapon specialist with a lame leg? Challenging concepts, sure, but they're fair.

Starting with 25 less karma than everyone else at the table, though? That's not a challenging concept and it's not fun. Essentially, that's what I believe playing an Aspected Mage does to a character.