[X] My Assistant

[Skynet]

as some have suggested, perhaps teamwork is the solution. each assistant who gets at least one hit on a test will add 1 to your limit. note that while there is a limit to how many dice can be added, there is no actual limit to how much your limit can increase (although at some point, extra assistants won't really provide meaningful assistance since you won't have the dice pool to benefit from it).

but anyways, that does change things dramatically. you can now start with a force 1 recipe, have 9-10 assistants, and reasonably expect a force 6 focus if your dice pool cooperates.

(mind you, it does say something in terms of usefulness to the PCs that i'm suggesting you have more assistants than the size of the typical shadowrunning team).

I was reading that at first too. But the limit-increase isn't for the final test itself, but for the team-leaders roll to increase the DP for the final test by the number of successes. Better than nothing, but you still need a higher formula than the desired focus-rating.

Guys, this is really bad. The changes to Foci-building and Rituals is the last straw for me. I got the PDF for the rulebook, but I'm not going to be investing anything else into SR5 unless they do a complete rewrite. These aren't issues that can be errata'd. Nothing short of a major rewrite will fix all of the issues across all the different mechanics. Guess I'll wait for SR5.5. For now, I might just houserule SR4 thusly:

• Change drain to Force instead of Force/2.
• Direct combat spells do NetHits for damage instead of Force + NetHits.
• Nerf spirit Edge somehow.

With that, I've got everything from SR5 that I actually like as far as the magic rules are concerned.

If you change the drain to force, don't forget the modfiers (for example -3 for a single target combat spell, -1 for an area -effect one).

[HugeC]

Here's my shot at house rules for Artificing. PEACH! (Please Evaluate And Critique Honestly)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s3xwI3d...dit?usp=sharing

I was trying for something that was more predictable, less punitive (I mean, Essence loss, really?), and that provides a PC who invests in it a nice discount on focus prices at the cost of large amounts of time. I do not expect that PC will ever actually exist, mind.

I included a little analysis to see if an NPC who makes foci could actually make a nice living. I mean, it's 12-hour days, but the money is good. Plus there is a house rule in there about harvesting reagents, again with some economic analysis.

[Jaid]

I was reading that at first too. But the limit-increase isn't for the final test itself, but for the team-leaders roll to increase the DP for the final test by the number of successes. Better than nothing, but you still need a higher formula than the desired focus-rating.

after all assistants have rolled, and potentially added to the leader's dice and limit, the leader attempts to perform the actual test.

there is no test by the leader to see how well the leader was assisted by the assistance. the leader only makes one test, and that test is the test to perform whatever task everyone was working together on. for the limit to apply to any other test, particularly one that never actually occurs, would be completely nonsensical.

[Draco18s]

• Change drain to Force instead of Force/2.
• Direct combat spells do NetHits for damage instead of Force + NetHits.
• Nerf spirit Edge somehow.

On 1 you'd still have to reduce drain by ~3 points.

F/2-1 for something like Stunbolt ended up as F-4 in SR5. It wasn't a strait "Oh, they changed F/2 to F."

[Skynet]

Here's my shot at house rules for Artificing. PEACH! (Please Evaluate And Critique Honestly)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s3xwI3d...dit?usp=sharing

I was trying for something that was more predictable, less punitive (I mean, Essence loss, really?), and that provides a PC who invests in it a nice discount on focus prices at the cost of large amounts of time. I do not expect that PC will ever actually exist, mind.

I included a little analysis to see if an NPC who makes foci could actually make a nice living. I mean, it's 12-hour days, but the money is good. Plus there is a house rule in there about harvesting reagents, again with some economic analysis.

I haven't calculated it, but it might become cheaper to buy a virgin telesma, than to do with an (initially cheaper) mundane telesma, due to the high demand of reagents per day (9000¥ worth of reagent for a power-focus per day).

Also did you consider the reduced follow-up rolls during extended tests (-1 cumulative die for each roll after the first). With an OR of 6 (mundane telesma) and a force 4 power focus (24 karma to bind) that's a threshold of 144. A threshold of 30+ is listed as extreme. Maybe apply the OR to the interval instead of the threshold.

after all assistants have rolled, and potentially added to the leader's dice and limit, the leader attempts to perform the actual test.

there is no test by the leader to see how well the leader was assisted by the assistance. the leader only makes one test, and that test is the test to perform whatever task everyone was working together on. for the limit to apply to any other test, particularly one that never actually occurs, would be completely nonsensical.

My bad, somehow I got it right at first and then thought I got it wrong on my second (but still rushed) reading.

[HugeC]

I haven't calculated it, but it might become cheaper to buy a virgin telesma, than to do with an (initially cheaper) mundane telesma, due to the high demand of reagents per day (9000¥ worth of reagent for a power-focus per day).

You don't spend reagents during telesma preparation, only during focus crafting. The higher OR was supposed to just make the telesma preparation step take longer and produce more drain (but see below).

Also did you consider the reduced follow-up rolls during extended tests (-1 cumulative die for each roll after the first). With an OR of 6 (mundane telesma) and a force 4 power focus (24 karma to bind) that's a threshold of 144. A threshold of 30+ is listed as extreme. Maybe apply the OR to the interval instead of the threshold.

Dorp! Forgot about that. Gonna have to fix that then. I wanted there to be little bits of drain throughout the day, rather than one big drain at the end of each day.

I'll think about that some more tonight and ping here when I've fixed it.

EDIT: House rules doc has been updated.

[null_void]

Was thinking about this the other day, since I had considered making a character who worked at as a minor talismonger as her "legitimate" cover. The only thing I could come up with that seemed to help with the limit on the final focus creation test was the "Special Work Area" lifestyle option (page 374). Unless you're not allowed to use that for magical crafting? Of course, that would introduce its own problems, as you could then hypothetically make a focus with force two greater than the formula. Not sure what the authors intended here.

[vladski]

Guys, this is really bad. The changes to Foci-building and Rituals is the last straw for me. I got the PDF for the rulebook, but I'm not going to be investing anything else into SR5 unless they do a complete rewrite. These aren't issues that can be errata'd. Nothing short of a major rewrite will fix all of the issues across all the different mechanics. Guess I'll wait for SR5.5. For now...

Well said. This is like crap icing on shit cake. Enough. Between this and the always connected matrix rules for cyber, the accuracy bonuses instead of +dice bonuses for smartlinks, the (IMO) horrible priority system for character creation, the revamp to the combat actions, the rather ramshackle proofing of the book... jsut enough. I, too, bought the PDF to see the new rules. I was intrigued by a lot of things mentioned prior to the release. I liked the idea of accuracy. Still do. But it's implementation sucketh. It turns out that the only thing I actually think is an improvement over 4th is the "new" (retro 3rd edition) Initiative system. And I already fixed the one I didn't like as well in my 4th games.

SR5 is full of great ideas and decent intentions. But, I really feel the core design team dropped the ball... massively. To me, these rules seem barely playable and I can't see anything but frustration coming from my players if I switch. I have issues with SR4, but they were all fixable easily enough. I definitely wasn't fond of a few things that came in the expansions and didn't really like some of the changes made going to SR4A. But the core of the game was completely playable with jsut a few tweaks on my part as GM. The game stands on it's own. I can enter into ANY game and play a stock character and play by the stock rules and have a blast. Not so with SR5. I am beginning to feel like I need to take half the book and the common elements of the system (combat, character generation, etc) and completely revise them. That is NOT a good game. I might as well have re-written 4th on my own if I have to put that much efffort into it.

This doesn't even address the opinion I hear frequently on this board from the supporters of the new system: "Change it for your home game. There's no SR police coming to your door." That's fine if i want to play solely home games. But if I want to play Missions, if I want to play SR games at conventions, I am completely stuck with these poorly thought out rules. They will be excluding me from the SR community (provided it survives the edition change.) That is not fun. I have been playing SR for over 15 years, played in many tournaments, played in many one-offs at conventions. ran my own games at conventions and figure I am personally responsible for bringing maybe 20-25 people to SR versions 3 and 4 and all the books, etc. those people purchased Not to mention myself owning nearly every SR book produced from FASA, Fanpro and Catalyst. After buying the PDF of 5th edition, I can sadly say I won't be purchasing anything else for SR as long as there IS a 5th edition.

I do want to say that my disappointment in the game itself is not a reflection of how I feel about the freelancers that worked on the system. I can tell from the many threads here, since release, that the game frequently did not go the direction they wanted it and they are rightfully proud of their individual work (as they should be!) I feel sorry for them as well, since they deserved something better for all their hard work.

Vlad

[Epicedion]

The focus creation rules aren't bad, they're just weird and a little counter-intuitive. To actually create a F6 power focus you need to have:

1) A F10 formula (27,000 nuyen -- reusable) and an OR3 telesma (~4 hits)
2) About 30 dice on the artificing test (~10 hits)
3) At worst 60 drams of reagents (1200 nuyen) per attempt
4) A F10 magical lodge (5000 nuyen -- reusable) -- a temporary lodge won't cut it since you'd have to spend too much time replacing it every day
5) A little luck
6) 6 Karma

Of course the focus is worth 108,000 nuyen, so the monetary outlay seems pretty low in comparison. It's the ridiculous amount of skill you need to craft such a thing that's the biggest investment.

Honestly you have to be about the best artificer in the known world to actually make a F6 focus. Considering 12 skill with an appropriate specialization you're still looking at Magic 16+ to be able to craft them semi-reliably.

I guess that's why their availability is 18R to 24R, making you have to be about the best negotiator in the known world to find one on the black market.

[Skynet]

EDIT: House rules doc has been updated.

(Link for reference)
Looks reasonable, though the threshold of [Force] might be a bit much (on the other hand high-rating foci should indeed be rare).
Is the final crafting-step an extended test or just a chain of independent tests?

Disenchanting: You can get a "maximum of one third of the total drams of reagents needed to create the focus". Since the amount of drams depends on the amount of time it took the artificer to finish the focus, this limitation can't be reasonably calculated.

Reagent gathering: Did you intend a limit on how much a given area can be 'milked' for reagents? The core book has a 'cooldown' of 2 days per dram for an area of around a hectare (p.319-320). So for 250 drams/month you'd need a harvestable area of about (250*2/30) 17 hectares per reagent gatherer.

[Moirdryd]

Just read through Artificing again and yep, as written it feels a bit... Odd. However there seems to be a failure to clarify some rules for intent in the writing. Apparently just like in SR3 the more you personally hand craft the object to be a Foci the easier it is to achieve. There's no actual rule for how that works but I'd go with (Crafting skill + stat [inherant limit] vs 2xObject Resistance <6hours>) net hits lower the targets object Resistence for the Artificing roll. Also I'd let Reagents be used to raise the Limit (max Force x 2, otherwise there's no point to the formulae).

So our chargen Mage with Magic 6 Enchanting 4 wants to make a Force 3 Foci. He also has the "Woodcarving" knowledge skill (professional category) at 4.

So he takes his natural hickory branch and then works with it himself for 10d6 vs 6d6 granting on average 1 net hit every 6hrs. He elects to spend 12hrs working on the wand. His 2 net hits reduce the OR by 2.

He then prepares the Reagents to make the Focus (required = Karasa cost to bond, min 3) and then spends 6 drams to set the Limit.

Now his enchanting roll is Magic + Enchanting (10) [limit 6] vs Force + modified OR (4). Granting on average 2net hits, so not quite the F3 he wanted but a working F2 foci none the less.

[HugeC]

(Link for reference)
Looks reasonable, though the threshold of [Force] might be a bit much (on the other hand high-rating foci should indeed be rare).
Is the final crafting-step an extended test or just a chain of independent tests?

I made it a chain of independent tests. Unlike an extended test where you can take a rest in between, you are supposed to keep doing these tests every day until the focus is finished. I will clarify that in the document.

Disenchanting: You can get a "maximum of one third of the total drams of reagents needed to create the focus". Since the amount of drams depends on the amount of time it took the artificer to finish the focus, this limitation can't be reasonably calculated.

For any crafting days where the threshold wasn't met, those reagents are wasted, so they don't count towards the amount of reagents in the focus, which is always Force times the value in the table. I've clarified that in the document.

Reagent gathering: Did you intend a limit on how much a given area can be 'milked' for reagents? The core book has a 'cooldown' of 2 days per dram for an area of around a hectare (p.319-320). So for 250 drams/month you'd need a harvestable area of about (250*2/30) 17 hectares per reagent gatherer.

Ah, I just thought it was 1 hectare per gathering test, not 1 hectare per dram. I should probably reduce the "regen time" to 1 day per dram harvested since I doubled the drams you get. Doc updated!

[Elfenlied]

My biggest complain is about spirits. They didn't update the spirits, which were the most broken things about magic in SR4. They've only done a half-assed fix for spirit Edge, which wasn't much of a problem. And the Movement power is now even more broken that it ever was.

Everything but spirits was nerfed for mages, so they will need to rely on them more than ever now.

[Skynet]

(...)
I just thought it was 1 hectare per gathering test, not 1 hectare per dram. I should probably reduce the "regen time" to 1 day per dram harvested since I doubled the drams you get. Doc updated!

It is 1 hectare per test, but the area needs (drams x2) days to 'recharge'.

[DerWish]

I was just about to start a SR5 game, I happily purchased my shiny new SR5 pdf and eagerly read through the whole book. High hopes and everything... and then I read the Artificing... and (IMG:style_emoticons/default/eek.gif)
I registered on dumpshock to tell you... I am the Common Joe, who buys SR products since SR2ED, and only reads forums to find pitfalls before encountering them in middle of a gaming session.
And now I feel seriously let down with SR5 Core book, but this thread is about Artificing so let me be on topic.

Artificing is one of the obviously and seriously broken rules in SR5.
After reading it once together with my regular group and after a short discussion, we quickly came up with an example, how to collapse the Focus market...

A bit-over specialized character ( Artificing 6 (+2 Craft Power focus) + Magic 6 ) can easily brake the rules as written.

1) Let's set up a Force 1 Lodge
2) Let's create a Force 1 formula for the Power focus, it takes 1 day only and it's easily done.
3) Now let's create that Power Focus:
We are starting with a Force 1 formula, so no worries drams cost is based on the Force 1 formula (6)... so it is still cheap.
Let's spend a day as it only takes 1 day as per the original lvl.
Base test would be 14(1) vs 4, but our Mage is a clever guy...

So he sets up his the artificing room in his apartment (buy that 1k (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) extra for that 2 limit increase) and calls over his 3 mage buddies (L4 contacts) for a day long enchantment party...
Four of them working together will make something, any writer could have seen a miles away...

2 talismonger contacts -> Enchantment 6 + Magic 4 + Edge 3-> 6(2)
A street mage contact -> Artificing 1 + Magic 6 + Edge 3 -> 1(1)

At the end it's 21(6)vs4... did I just created a lvl5 Power focus, on average... basically for the base karma cost?

Cost:
500 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) for the Lodge
1000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) for the specialized work area
6 drams for the lvl 1 Power Focus formula -> 120 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) & 5 Karma for the sealing.
A day worth of work from 3 other mages, who were happy to help out a friend for a day.

Gain: A Power Focus 5 = 90k (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) with normal availability: 20R
I don't even know what to say... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[Maelwys]

The extra hits from the specialized work area is kind of interesting, as is the teamwork. It might make it more possible perhaps.

Of course, it also looks like you could abuse it the other way as well (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Maelwys]

Another question.

Lets say my mage decides to wear a pair of glasses. Maybe they want thermal sometimes, maybe low light, whatever.

If I'm not using any enhancements at the time (such as thermal) then are the glasses still just...glass? Or is everything, including the normal view electronic in the first place, and thus I'd have to raise my glasses up each time I wanted to cast?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Another question.

Lets say my mage decides to wear a pair of glasses. Maybe they want thermal sometimes, maybe low light, whatever.

If I'm not using any enhancements at the time (such as thermal) then are the glasses still just...glass? Or is everything, including the normal view electronic in the first place, and thus I'd have to raise my glasses up each time I wanted to cast?

If you are not using the augments within the glasses to cast, then it should be no problem. Alas, It probably does not work that way, though.

[Critias]

Alas, It probably does not work that way, though.

What makes you say that?

[Ryu]

Base rule: Artificing + Magic [formula Force] v. formula Force + telesma’s Object Resistance

It is always nice to find stuff on both sides of the equation, and limiting hits on one side only certainly makes stuff easier to get.


Base statistics for dp 24 vs 12 dice (FF 9 + OR 3), not counting the limit:
(Sorry for the ugly tables)

CODE

Hits    Mage    Focus
0    0,01%    0,77%
1    0,07%    4,62%
2    0,41%    12,72%
3    1,50%    21,20%
4    3,95%    23,84%
5    7,89%    19,08%
6    12,49%    11,13%
7    16,06%    4,77%
8    17,07%    1,49%
9    15,17%    0,33%
10    11,38%    0,05%
11    7,24%    0,00%
12    3,92%    0,00%
13    1,81%    nada
14    irrelevant

Next step: Capping at the limit (formula force 9)

CODE

Hits    Mage    Focus
0    0,01%    0,77%
1    0,07%    4,62%
2    0,41%    12,72%
3    1,50%    21,20%
4    3,95%    23,84%
5    7,89%    19,08%
6    12,49%    11,13%
7    16,06%    4,77%
8    17,07%    1,49%
9    40,55%    0,33%
10    0%    0,05%

Next step: For each number of hits, multiply P(Mage:number of hits) with P(focus: at least (desired force=6) hits less). Add those numbers up. 6 hits required, 9 hits max:

CODE

6     0,10%
7     0,87%
8     3,09%
9    15,94%

Odds of creating a Force 6+ Focus: 20%.


Next step: doing it over and over, or odds of having 1+ foci of force 6+ after N attempts

CODE

1    20,00%
2    36,00%
3    48,80%
4    59,04%
5    67,23%
6    73,79%
7    79,03%
8    83,22%
9    86,58%
10    89,26%
11    91,41%
12    93,13%
13    94,50%
14    95,60%
15    96,48%

Any errors?


The underlying design (judged on nothing but the math) is that high force foci are truly special now. Look at the drain code of (Formula Force)+2*(Focus hits).

Edit: Epic Fail at adding up corrected.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

What makes you say that?

Rampant Cynicism, I guess. Look at all the threads that popped up about that very thing in SR4A. Bound to crop up again in SR5. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Base rule: Artificing + Magic [formula Force] v. formula Force + telesma’s Object Resistance

It is always nice to find stuff on both sides of the equation, and limiting hits on one side only certainly makes stuff easier to get.

[ Spoiler ]

Base statistics for dp 24 vs 12 dice (FF 9 + OR 3), not counting the limit:
(Sorry for the ugly tables)

CODE

Hits    Mage    Focus
0    0,01%    0,77%
1    0,07%    4,62%
2    0,41%    12,72%
3    1,50%    21,20%
4    3,95%    23,84%
5    7,89%    19,08%
6    12,49%    11,13%
7    16,06%    4,77%
8    17,07%    1,49%
9    15,17%    0,33%
10    11,38%    0,05%
11    7,24%    0,00%
12    3,92%    0,00%
13    1,81%    nada
14    irrelevant

Next step: Capping at the limit (formula force 9)

CODE

Hits    Mage    Focus
0    0,01%    0,77%
1    0,07%    4,62%
2    0,41%    12,72%
3    1,50%    21,20%
4    3,95%    23,84%
5    7,89%    19,08%
6    12,49%    11,13%
7    16,06%    4,77%
8    17,07%    1,49%
9    40,55%    0,33%
10    0%    0,05%

Next step: For each number of hits, multiply P(Mage:number of hits) with P(focus: at least (desired force=6) hits less). Add those numbers up. 6 hits required, 9 hits max:

CODE

6     0,10%
7     0,87%
8     3,09%
9    15,94%

Odds of creating a Force 6+ Focus: 19,9%.


Next step: doing it over and over, or odds of having 1+ foci of force 6+ after N attempts

CODE

1    19,90%
2    35,84%
3    48,61%
4    58,83%
5    67,03%
6    73,59%
7    78,84%
8    83,05%
9    86,43%
10    89,13%
11    91,29%
12    93,02%
13    94,41%
14    95,52%
15    96,42%

Any errors?

The underlying design (judged on nothing but the math) is that high force foci are truly special now. Look at the drain code of (Formula Force)+2*(Focus hits).

See, I Always considered High End Foci to be special to start with. Why would I need an unfriendly/unworkable mechanic to reinforce that?

[Ryu]

See, I Always considered High End Foci to be special to start with. Why would I need an unfriendly/unworkable mechanic to reinforce that?

Within the new skill range of 1-12 the mechanic is workable. I don´t like the loss in competence on behalf of starting chars, yet that could easily be corrected for a campaign.

In this case the compensation is that lower rated foci are more useful - as long as background count is only a negative dp mod you suffer on all magic activities anyway.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Within the new skill range of 1-12 the mechanic is workable. I don´t like the loss in competence on behalf of starting chars, yet that could easily be corrected for a campaign.

In this case the compensation is that lower rated foci are more useful - as long as background count is only a negative dp mod you suffer on all magic activities anyway.

Which is one of the things I hate about the new Background Count. It SHOULD affect Foci just as much as a Mage/Adept. I like that it is a double whammy in SR4A. BCG of 2, and you lose 2 magic, and all your foci lose 2 Magic as well. So, that Mage who relies upon his Foci can no longer rely upon them. If it is just a DP mod (like the proposed Errata in SR5), then that dynamic effectively goes away. I weep for the future. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[Ryu]

Which is one of the things I hate about the new Background Count. It SHOULD affect Foci just as much as a Mage/Adept. I like that it is a double whammy in SR4A. BCG of 2, and you lose 2 magic, and all your foci lose 2 Magic as well. So, that Mage who relies upon his Foci can no longer rely upon them. If it is just a DP mod (like the proposed Errata in SR5), then that dynamic effectively goes away. I weep for the future. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

My various characters use of magic is already ...watched. I´m afraid the group wouldn´t let me play the mage under SR5.