[SR5] Direct combat spells and Errata Options

[DeathStrobe]

So, a Street Sam is allowed to drop an opponent consistently and easily, but a Magician cannot?

You make it sound like it is super powered craziness, though, and it isn't. My experiences in SR4A are very different than many others (no Uber Spirits, and no need for Magic 6 Spellcasters at character creation), and I really do not think that magic is overpowered (even with the Force + Net Hits of Directs, though I think the drain could be adjusted for both Directs and Indirects a bit). My biggest comlaint in SR4A is that Overcasting is just too convenient and easy (which is honestly where I hear most of the complaints of overpowered effect coming from). Too many casters default to Overcasting as a standard Practice. The argument goes that if you are not overcasting you are intentionally gimping yourself. And I find that a highly offensive position. I don't think that Overcasting should go away, by any means, but there should be more of a cost associated with it (Drain Adjustments all the way around would likely fix that issue).

I really do not like the solution that SR5 uses for overcasting, either. I can cast at Force 10 and only suffer Physical drain if my Hits go over my Magic Rating. I think that is not a good solution, since I can restrict my hits using reagents. I do like the Drain Mechanics (F +/- Modifier), though I think that they could have balanced Directs vs. Indirects better than they did.

What I kind of like about over casting in SR5 is that in SR4, I had a friend that'd cast an eat a few stun drain, but when his stun track was starting to fill, he'd just resort to over casting to start to fill his physical. While this does add some strategy, now its much more uncertain if he'll overcast and need to soak physical drain or if he doesn't get enough hits and will now be sleeping on the job. I think its a bit more interesting of a choice, but I can see how the unpredictability could be a problem.

[RHat]

So, a Street Sam is allowed to drop an opponent consistently and easily, but a Magician cannot?

That's dodging the question, though.

And I've gotta figure that once you get the Force up, a Lightning Bolt is gonna be pretty great for dropping an opponent. But with the defense values in SR5, I'm not sure "consistently and easily" works for anything but area indirects and grenades.

[DWC]

Except that you can't Overcast by accident. You only overcast if you choose to cast at a Force above your Magic rating, or you choose to use Edge to bypass your limit. Casting drain is only physical if the player of the caster chooses to make it physical.

[Ard3]

Even if the Force was greater than magic, it is still stun if hits <= Magic and physical only and only if hits > Magic. You can't choose to make it physical.
Force 1 with reagents or edge can do physical. Force 12 can still be stun.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

What I kind of like about over casting in SR5 is that in SR4, I had a friend that'd cast an eat a few stun drain, but when his stun track was starting to fill, he'd just resort to over casting to start to fill his physical. While this does add some strategy, now its much more uncertain if he'll overcast and need to soak physical drain or if he doesn't get enough hits and will now be sleeping on the job. I think its a bit more interesting of a choice, but I can see how the unpredictability could be a problem.

See, that situation for Overcasting really bothers (and even angers) me... I hate it when the metagame is that present. NO ONE SHOOTS THEMSELVES in the Head because they are tired of getting punched. Or takes off their armor because they are tired of being bruised. That is just ignorant. Not tolerated...

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

That's dodging the question, though.

I don't think it is, really. I think it is a very valid question. And one I noticed you did not answer.

There has been a Hue and Cry against the Hacker in SR4A because he apparently lacks ability in combat, and so they augment him.
There has been a Hue and Cry because the mage is apparantly TOO POWERFUL in combat, and so they Gut him.

The fact is that those situations were never truly the issues (or at least were not the real issues) underlying those archetypes. It is action/reaction and the developers fixed the wrong things...

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Even if the Force was greater than magic, it is still stun if hits <= Magic and physical only and only if hits > Magic. You can't choose to make it physical.
Force 1 with reagents or edge can do physical. Force 12 can still be stun.

Exactly... It is a non-issue if you want it to be.

[RHat]

I don't think it is, really. I think it is a very valid question. And one I noticed you did not answer.

There has been a Hue and Cry against the Hacker in SR4A because he apparently lacks ability in combat, and so they augment him.
There has been a Hue and Cry because the mage is apparantly TOO POWERFUL in combat, and so they Gut him.

The fact is that those situations were never truly the issues (or at least were not the real issues) underlying those archetypes. It is action/reaction and the developers fixed the wrong things...

I'm trying to establish something, TJ - specifically, the value placed upon being able to circumvent all ability to dodge and all armour. You elected not to answer that question at all. And while I did respond to your question - the response simply wasn't an answer because I refused to grant the premises that the Mage is less able to drop opponents and that the Sam can consistently and easily do so in SR5's high defense environment.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I'm trying to establish something, TJ - specifically, the value placed upon being able to circumvent all ability to dodge and all armour. You elected not to answer that question at all. And while I did respond to your question - the response simply wasn't an answer because I refused to grant the premises that the Mage is less able to drop opponents and that the Sam can consistently and easily do so in SR5's high defense environment.

Let me ask you a question...

If the target cannot defend, should both archetypes be able to deal the same damage? I would say yes. My guess is that you will say No... Which is it?

The Sam can attack a target, who has no defense, and then deal up to a 15p Attack (Sniper Rifle Damage, Right? If not, use whatever is equal) Base, which is then augmented by Net Hits (to Limit, if not bypassed with Edge) and is resisted by possibly Armor (if not eliminated through Targeting - you can still do that rigth?). Yes, it is Armor + Body (which can conceivably be stupid high as a DP, I understand that), with the only consequence of 1 expended round.

So... WHY would you limit a Mage to the Palrtry damage (net hits only), in the same circumstance (Yes, they soak with only Body or Willpower only, I do get that), for the crippling 15p base Drain (PHYSICAL, assuming the mage is capable of attaining that many hits, and their Magic was high enough to even have a chance in hell of that capability to start with) for the same POSSIBLE equivalent damage as the Sniper STARTS with before Net Hits?

See... I have no Issue with a Mage casting at Force 6 and getting his 5-6 net hits for 12 Damage (yes, I know, The Overcasters are throwing Force 12, with 10 Net hits, but does that really matter from my example?) in that circumstance (with the commensurate potential 5-6 Base Drain (of SR5 for Force 6), depending upon Direct Spell), and yet you apparently do. In both cases, the target is likely dead. In both cases that is an Extreme Example. The counter to the Sniper is to have decent Body Armor and pray they do not eliminate it through targeting... The counter to the Mage is to have Counterspelling defense and pray that it helps (much like they pray that the Armor helps)... Same circumstances and similar situations. And yet, in SR5, someone decided that that was just too powerful (I do think Drain needed adjustments from SR4A, however). I tend to disagree with that philosophy. No, I do not Munchkin my builds to be Capable of such things on a routine basis (I know that some do, and more power to them, I guess).

That being said... I have never had the problem with a Mage who spams Max-End Direct Spells, always overcast, as a solution to the problems he is facing. On Occasion, when I have absolutely no choice, my characters may cast an overcast spell, and sometimes that may even be a combat spell. But it is in no way game breaking when that occurs. Like I said, I do not tend to hyper-optimize for Best in Best of the World. That particular fact may make all the difference in actual play. But I do not play (or plan) with that mindset (becasue I find it very un-fun), so... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Draco18s]

I'd just like to point out this:

If the mage can hit a single defenseless target for 15P without making their head explode, then they can also, as a result of the same change that made the former half of this sentence true, hit everyone in a 10 meter radius for 12P at the same personal expenditure of resources.

A sniper, conversely, cannot.

[RHat]

If the target has no defense, TJ, why are you not using an Indirect spell?

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I'd just like to point out this:

If the mage can hit a single defenseless target for 15P without making their head explode, then they can also, as a result of the same change that made the former half of this sentence true, hit everyone in a 10 meter radius for 12P at the same personal expenditure of resources.

A sniper, conversely, cannot.

Sure he can, it is called a Greande Launcher....

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

If the target has no defense, TJ, why are you not using an Indirect spell?

Subtlety...
And you still did not answer the question put forth to you. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Isath]

The defense, that a mudane character would have against direct spell, is one attribute (in most cases willpower). The mage has every advantage here. The typical goon, merc or even samurai does not come with a high willpower. So it is most likely something along the line of 10 - 14 dice (without fancy extras) versus something along the lines of 3-4 as defense (and no soak). Drain would probably be resisted with 10 - 12 dice. Having only 3 - 4 dice as defense, I would not like to be confronted with a gun-like basedamage.

Faced with a gun even the eventual passerby would have 6 dice of defense and then 3 soak (still won't help much of the shooter is a professional). If we put armor on that passerby, he easily adds 12 dice to soak up some damage. Defending against a direct combat spell is not that easy, and that is why it comes without nasty basedamage.

Should an opponent be lucky to be a bit better protected and thus not so susceptible to direct spells, well... I guess then it is time for a different approach. Maybe you should use indirect combat spells then or maybe something else entirely.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The defense, that a mudane character would have against direct spell, is one attribute (in most cases willpower). The mage has every advantage here. The typical goon, merc or even samurai does not come with a high willpower. So it is most likely something along the line of 10 - 14 dice (without fancy extras) versus something along the lines of 3-4 as defense (and no soak). Drain would probably be resisted with 10 - 12 dice. Having only 3 - 4 dice as defense, I would not like to be confronted with a gun-like basedamage.

Faced with a gun even the eventual passerby would have 6 dice of defense and then 3 soak (still won't help much of the shooter is a professional). If we put armor on that passerby, he easily adds 12 dice to soak up some damage. Defending against a direct combat spell is not that easy, and that is why it comes without nasty basedamage.

Should an opponent be lucky to be a bit better protected and thus not so susceptible to direct spells, well... I guess then it is time for a different approach. Maybe you should use indirect combat spells then or maybe something else entirely.

My premise did not presume a defense test... And any good Shooter can bypass armor if there is no defense (I have not actually looked at 5th for called shots though, so it is a supposition, I know it can be offset in SR4A).

My position is that both should be able to eliminate a target surreptitiously, with a single attack (Sam using a Gun, and Mage using a Direct Spell). SR5 does not allow that for a Mage. I think it should.

[Draco18s]

Sure he can, it is called a Greande Launcher....

Longarms != Heavy Weapons
as compared to
Spellcasting == Spellcasting

[Dolanar]

so Isath, you suggest we need to rework Deckers as well? Because there are several Decker moves that give a person only a single attribute to roll for defense.

as far as Called shots, no TJ the one to bypass armor is no longer there.

[thorya]

See, that situation for Overcasting really bothers (and even angers) me... I hate it when the metagame is that present. NO ONE SHOOTS THEMSELVES in the Head because they are tired of getting punched. Or takes off their armor because they are tired of being bruised. That is just ignorant. Not tolerated...

So you've had a change of opinion? Because this topic has definitely come up before and you've definitely argued that the metagame of S vs. P is not a problem in overcasting or in any other situation. So I'm just trying to figure out if something caused you to change your mind or if you were previously just taking the contradictory position to continue debating.

[Chinane]

My position is that both should be able to eliminate a target surreptitiously, with a single attack (Sam using a Gun, and Mage using a Direct Spell). SR5 does not allow that for a Mage. I think it should.

You're still under the delusion, that under SR5 the direct combat spell is the gun's equivalent. It's not, that's the indirect combat spell.

Direct combat spells are the goto spell for situations when guns and indirect spell both are not a realistic option.

(And can we please stop comparison to grenades? You cannot take a grenade everywhere and i have yet to see a grenade that can switch AOE off - quite apart from the fact that the absence of a defense roll is ridiculous and should be houseruled anyway, IMO.)

[Isath]

My premise did not presume a defense test... And any good Shooter can bypass armor if there is no defense (I have not actually looked at 5th for called shots though, so it is a supposition, I know it can be offset in SR4A).

My position is that both should be able to eliminate a target surreptitiously, with a single attack (Sam using a Gun, and Mage using a Direct Spell). SR5 does not allow that for a Mage. I think it should.

Direct combat spells always have a "defense" as it is casted as an opposed test, one does not get to resist the damage though. In SR5 (as far as I see it) there is no way for the shooter to just bypass the armor (aside from AP value). This option is no longer available.

Also I do not share your position. In my book, direct combat spells, do not have to do the same under the same circumstances, they are ment to work different angles. Indirect combat spells are more compareable to guns & co, as they work somewhat from the same angle. Still I do not think, that even indirect combat spell should be the exact match as they have more than just damage to show for. The AP scales rather nicely, elemental sideffects can be nasty and spell damage is perfect to hurt and kill the supernatural, where "normal" weapons are very reduced in usefulness. Sure spells may cause drain, but they do not have to, if you are trained and prepared. You also can not be easily disarmed and magic usually is easier to carry around and sneak into places, than guns tend to be. Last but not least magic in general and especially spellcasting is a very universal talent / skill to have - one serve all.

If I get the pistol skill, I can shoot pistols... not rifles, not automatics, just pistols. If I have spellcasting, I can cast destructive spells along the lines of pistols, rifles or even grenades, aswell as heal, levitate, read and control minds, build barriers, buff up, turn incisible and so on. Sure, one hast to buy the spells, but even with 10 spell out of char.gen I'd be quite well off. Maybe spells do not need to be quite as destructive as guns, after all.

so Isath, you suggest we need to rework Deckers as well? Because there are several Decker moves that give a person only a single attribute to roll for defense.

Of the top of my head I am not sure what you are referring to... I do however, not suggest to rework direct combat spells.

[Isath]

Direct combat spells are the goto spell for situations when guns and indirect spell both are not a realistic option.

Indeed, and quite handy at that. On mudane targets, damage is almost assured.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

So you've had a change of opinion? Because this topic has definitely come up before and you've definitely argued that the metagame of S vs. P is not a problem in overcasting or in any other situation. So I'm just trying to figure out if something caused you to change your mind or if you were previously just taking the contradictory position to continue debating.

You must have me mistaken for someone else. I have never advocated Overcasting via Metagame. It has ALWAYS displeased me. And I have always argued against it. It just doesn't happen a lot at our table, because we all think that it is an ignorant position. Not having to deal with it is not the same as accepting it as a viable option. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

You're still under the delusion, that under SR5 the direct combat spell is the gun's equivalent. It's not, that's the indirect combat spell.

Direct combat spells are the goto spell for situations when guns and indirect spell both are not a realistic option.

(And can we please stop comparison to grenades? You cannot take a grenade everywhere and i have yet to see a grenade that can switch AOE off - quite apart from the fact that the absence of a defense roll is ridiculous and should be houseruled anyway, IMO.)

I am under no delusion. I am disgusted with SR5, for the most part, because they fixed the wrong things. It was never Direct vs. Indirect in my opinion. It was the drain values that were assigned to them, and the ease with which overcasting is accomplished.

[Machiavelli]

If i ever hear the argument "spellcasting is too universal" again, i WILL scream. If spellcasting is so unviversal, what the hell is the automatics skill then? Most of our sams don´t even have other weapon-skills, because this one covers absolutely every imaginable situation. Instead of a pistol you can use an automatic-pistol (yes you get a licence for it), the SMG is already the common weapon of choice for the SAM and if you need more power or a better range you switch to an Assault Rifle. Now you add all the different ammunitions, weapon add-ons and rebuilding options and suddenly the sky is the limit. And with all this in mind some of you even DARE to say crap like "the mage is already mighty enough"? Do you believe the sh**it you are talking by yourself or are these just the SAM-players that always got outclassed by the mage and now finally see their time for revenge coming? If you have a problem with a mage being too powerful, your GM is doing something wrong. That is the lever you should switch.

Ok, let us - just for one moment - agree that the indirect combat spells are the gun of the mage. They do equal damage, they have equal AP-abilities, everything is fine. BUT you can only cast once, if you want to take somebody out you risk drain and your location is clearly visible. Where the hell do you see "equality"?

[Trismegistus]

If i ever hear the argument "spellcasting is too universal" again, i WILL scream. If spellcasting is so unviversal, what the hell is the automatics skill then? Most of our sams don´t even have other weapon-skills, because this one covers absolutely every imaginable situation. Instead of a pistol you can use an automatic-pistol (yes you get a licence for it), the SMG is already the common weapon of choice for the SAM and if you need more power or a better range you switch to an Assault Rifle. Now you add all the different ammunitions, weapon add-ons and rebuilding options and suddenly the sky is the limit. And with all this in mind some of you even DARE to say crap like "the mage is already mighty enough"? Do you believe the sh**it you are talking by yourself or are these just the SAM-players that always got outclassed by the mage and now finally see their time for revenge coming? If you have a problem with a mage being too powerful, your GM is doing something wrong. That is the lever you should switch.

Yeah, I've been using the Automatics skill to heal people and turn invisible since 2nd Edition, and it's even harder to do in SR5.