My Assistant
Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)
  |
 Shouldn't Sorcery Default to Intelligence? |
 Oct 27 2004, 04:27 AM
Post
#26
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 476 Joined: 30-December 03 From: Fresno, CFS: taking out one durned furriner at a time. Member No.: 5,940  |
MitS also suggests that a child doing that is a rare event, and that it usually happens during a time of stress. My best guess as to what's happening is that the desire or Will reaches a point in which Knowledge isn't needed to direct the Will to accomplish what it wants since anything will satisfy that desire. The mage will have no control over the effects, but something will happen. To continue the car metaphor, it's akin to just getting into the car and driving, and there is no way to know where the mage will end up. This can lead to a host of very many interesting stories, but it is not a way in which to default to an Attribute in order to cast a specific spell. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 05:26 AM
Post
#27
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
[edit]
[/edit]
I've always had a little bit of a stiff with SR over it's direct seperation between hermetic and shamanic. That's all I'll say on that issue since it doesn't directly relate.... On topic: It seems justifiable to pose that eventual mages have a tendency to be able to feel, show, or in some form or another suggest the inate ability to use magic. Thus being the proposed case, could explain teachers and pupils, prodigies, and similar relations. Anyone can be a musician, but there are some who simply have a lean towards it more than others. However, both the common and the prodigy musician can both become better at music with formal learning. The natural ability in Magic: A more direct comparison is to say that anybody can pick up a guitar and make noise on it. It most likely will not be anything resembling music, but rather notatable sound in a rather crude and un-nerving fashion. The Prodigy: Some of these people who will pick up this guitar (not many and would be more like a heavy costing Edge to be a prodigy in magic) can pick up a guitar and start off making pure horrid noise but shortly thereafter begin to play formatable patterns of notes and continue on within the week to making whole parts of simple songs. The self learned mage: The great multitude of people out there tend to self teach guitar rather than attend a class right off the bat to learn. Their musicianship may turn out to be rather crude for a year or a number of years depending on their ability (defaulting), but eventually simply from practice (though not academically) they become a "lamen-master" like many rock guitar "heros" (Kurt Cobain is a prime example of such a self taught musician who became a "lamen-master"). These style of musicians will usually never be as capable or formatable as their scholastic counter-parts, but it should never be mistaken that their music is not good. (much to say that a "lamen-master" of magic would be dangerous to assume as not-dangerous.) The scholastic musician: The most powerful musician is the scholastic musician as they have the knowledge behind the simple desire and "tinkering" to learn every angle of their art that they can so that they can be more versatile in their ability. Having a teacher forces them to practice aspects of guitar that they would otherwise shy away from because perhaps they are a lazy student (scales are a good example). At the end of the training a normal musician will be a formatable guitarist and a prodigy will be a near legend amongst many. Conclusion So using this comparison, a mage could be seen to be able to cast spells without studying them, but I would propose that, much like guitar where most self-taught musicians will either only be able to play their own music or only be able to play their version of a song, the self-taught mage or non-educated mage would be casting spells that are player/GM created spells and if they are trying to cast a spell that they might have heard about or seen somewhere then they would be casting a variation of that spell at (at least) 2 levels below the original version of the spell. That's my study of the idea of this. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:25 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 139 Joined: 19-September 04 From: Charleston, IL Member No.: 6,676 |
The idea of this isn't to just miraculously pull spells the mage doesn't know yet out their butt. It is more of a game mechanic fix that gives another option that EVERY other non-magical skill has in the game. Granted this isn't something that would come up all too often. I like the analogy you made. The skill difference in scholastic and self taught works for me which is why defaulting gives a +4 anyways.
So, the majority say that defaulting isn't a big deal because of the heavy +4 penalties. The requirement to have a skill at all is still up to debate since you could still default to willpower to learn the spell even though the +4 penalty makes it extremely tough to learn any decent level spell. Any more ideas. This is good feedback. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:39 AM
Post
#29
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
I actually was hitting on two aspects in the same analogy. As Doc was saying earlier, which you are questioning now about needing skills,
I agree with Doc completely, but I'm seeing this ability to cast the spell in three levels. 1) No Skill. 2) Self-taught 3) Scholastic *While 1 is a completely defaulted version of 3 and has a pretty severe penalty (possibly even a little more than +4?) to casting and/or has missing elements to what the spell normally does and/or has a higher rate of doing something you may not have intended (perhaps you only need to return half of your dice rolls back as ones to make a critical failure instead of all of them?) *2 is where I reffer to the idea of a player/GM made spell because a self-taught spell is always going to be different than that of the Scholastic version. It is possible to make these spells less efficient in drain cost (because of the lack of "tips and tricks") as well so that no other balance system needs to be implaced to keep players from "ubermunching" Scholastic spells in a Self-taught version just so they can tweek an aspect. *3 is finally where we see the standard issue of a Skill in Sorcery and learned spells with a formatable education in magic that is what we are used to as the SR norm for magic. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 27 2004, 02:43 PM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Psst. If you want to give a better example, point to the Aura Reading skill. Anyone capable of astral perception has the uncanny ability to read anyone's aura just by looking at them -- no formal training required whatsoever. And in fact, even if you have formal training, it still doesn't compare to your gut instinct since they only provide one additional success per two successes rolled while your natural ability (Intelligence) grants you succcesses on a 1:1 ratio. Apparently, it's significantly easier to just sorta assume that a hazy blue pattern with sharp green spikes means so-and-so, but knowing that it means so-and-so is only half as effective. It's also easier to assume that than it is to follow the instructions listed for a spell formula and rely on your same natural instincts and ability to conjure it into existance. Go figure. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 03:16 PM
Post
#31
|
|||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
So Scholastic mages never learn a thing on their own? I've always just assumed type 3) mages, as you've described them, just have a higher Skill rating. It's not like you can't earn ranks in a skill through self-study; it's just not as easy as having a teacher. The little girl casting Powerbolt I'd say was defaulting to Willpower for casting--which I agree with the others that say you can do that--and is casting a spell that she, somewhere down the line, learned without ever knowing she learned it. How did she learn it? Who knows; maybe she defaulted with Spell Design and came up with it on her own; maybe a free spirit taught her in her dreams, who cares? The point is, by the RAW you can't cast a spell you don't know, and unless you allow one of these Path of Will mages as a house-rule there really is no basis for a mage casting a spell without knowing the spell. So she must have somehow known how to cast the spell, without ever actually learning it. This is why cases like that are so rare. As for the thought that spells can have different Drain codes and the like depending on the skill of the spell-crafter, I'm not sure I like that idea. Regardless of how skillful a mage is at crafting a spell, there is already an established minimum Drain for a spell; you certainly can't make a good roll on Spell Design and reduce, say, Improved Invisability's Drain Code to Light instead of Medium. I conjecture that spells, no matter how well or poorly worded, will always end up having the same--or at least, not noticably different--effects for the same amount of Drain. The backlash seems to be, in the RAW, a direct consequence of the spell itself, a law of magical physics that you cn't get around through art. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 03:32 PM
Post
#32
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
I answer with my proposed concept...
No. You are looking at 1, 2, and 3 as if they were a red brick, white brick, and black brick. I am looking at them as if they are child, teenager, and adult. The idea was based off of the analogy that I gave of the guitar learning. Comming from no skill at something but relying on raw natural ability and moving on up to self-teaching, and furthering that off with scholastic teaching. Could this be represented in the already present 1-6 skill ratings? Yes, of course it can. That was somewhat the aim I think. Can it be flurished better to what Gilthanis is looking for? Yes, it can. Quite easily if you change your perspective a little bit on what 1-6 skill level means. You just make it mean 1-6 Scholastic points (or rather years in formal learning type of concept.) Remember, no one is saying that SR is absolutely broken. A player is saying that they don't like the present way it exists in a given aspect and that they would like something else for it. We, as a helping community, simply have the ability and (personally I like to think "obligation") to help them figure out a positive, and functional alternative to the standard they don't like. My final point is this, "No" is not a valid reply to Gilthanis' threaded question simply because he wants a different system. You can't very well tell him "No, you can't have one.", but you can help him find the best one that makes credible sense in a comprimised manner between cannon and what he wants. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Oct 27 2004, 03:45 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Actually...you know what?
I challenge everyone who has said "No" to this thread to beat my proposal. Make a better alternative. If you think Gilthanis' idea is not possible...what is? Are you able to make such an alternative? |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:05 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
No, such a proposal is not Canon.
:P :D |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:13 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I don't think anyone is stating that he can't have a system that reflects what he wants as a house rule. I do think it's somewhat important to know what the canon ruling is first so that any house-rule has some basis of consistancy.
Personally, I don't like the idea of defaulting to Willpower to cast a spell that is not already known, but if it is already known, knock yourself out (literally :D). I think if it happened in my game, I might chuck a modifier to Drain on top to reflect the extra concentration/work required. One thing I definitely would not allow was the idea that was listed whereby the Mage assigns his Sorcery and Spell Pool to Spell Defence and then defaults to Willpower for spellcasting basically for free. That's just pure cheese! |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:15 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Usually book-burning represents a confinement of thought or oppression. But in this case... ...burn it. :vegm: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:22 PM
Post
#37
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
You're right...No one has said he can't have it. I went a little far there. But pretty consistant are the posts that simply restate the canon ruling on it basically implying that it can't be done because it's not canon. I agree with you on needing it stated...but over and over? Also, I'm keeping my personal choices on this rule out of it, as I usually like to do, so I won't say what I think of the idea itself.
Now we're getting somewhere. Discussion. Is there anyway that this concept could be made possible? (whether you like it or not personally...just look for balance ;) ) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:24 PM
Post
#38
|
|||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
On the contrary, it doesn't seem that he particularly wants to make a bunch of house-rules so much as he wants to make the rules themselves consistent with his perception of the SR game world. What I'm trying to show is that the rules themselves *are* already internally consistent, and that it's much easier to simply alter his own interpretation of the flavor text than it is to perform a rewrite of the rules.
As for considering your "proposal", well, what proposal? All you've offered up so far are a series of half-formed assertions which you're trying to pass off as flavor text for an alternate ruleset. You advocate no actual concrete alternate ruleset, and you provide no arguments as to why your absent ruleset is better than the canon one, or if it is at all. What is it you want us to consider? (Edit): Perhaps I should be more specific. You mention *maybe* changing the drain code one or two levels (Drain levels? Drain Power?) if a "self-taught" mage casts a spell he has received no formal trainning in. Does this mean your proposed self-taught mages can learn these inefficient spells for free? less/more Karma than "scholastic" mages? or do they not need to learn them at all in order to cast them? You also mention changing skill levels in Sorcery to "Scholastic points". What does this mean? What effect does it have? How/why is Sorcery or magic skills in general so special that self-teaching these are different than self-teaching other skills? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:29 PM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
I profess that my proposal is nothing better than canon, nor do I profess to have a completed set of rule for an alternative past anything on a conceptual level. So...it should be a pretty easy task to beat ;)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:39 PM
Post
#40
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Ah...great stuff, now discussion. The idea is not to let the "self-taught" mages learn the spells for "free", but to instead be ...alotted?...only a certain amount of them (maybe like adpets and powers????) ...(perhaps to complex on that...) anyways, the idea is for the spell to have a higher drain on the caster than it would normally have since the caster has no skill at controlling the spell. "Scholastic" was a term I was using to make a seperation between having a skill and not having a skill, where having a Skill 1 would be to have learned some taught form of magic. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 27 2004, 08:42 PM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 139 Joined: 19-September 04 From: Charleston, IL Member No.: 6,676 |
I personally don't like the idea of seperating self-taught and scholastic. There are some things that a teacher just can't give you or an establishment. Look back at the example of the guitar. If we all just learned from an institution to create music, we would only have a select few forms such as classical because anything else would be seen as uneducated and dumb. I personally have self-taught myself a great deal about computers (I have worked on them for years) and went to college and realized they were teaching me nothing and in fact many students teach the professors at times. So basing effectiveness of spells on scholastics is absurd.
Second, region can also severely impact how you are taught. Look at Voodoo. I don't know of many institutions that "blood magic" but some groups may. People have the potential to teach themselves to a higher degree. Where did lightbulbs come from again. I'm sure that the institution didn't teach that first. It was pioneered. The concept of a higher skill in sorcery is to be more effective at casting the spells you know. As my point earlier stated. I can shoot a gun the first time I try. It just becomes more accurate with practice (which is where skill and skill level comes in). So by having a skill it isn't specific to a spell but more how spells are controlled and manipulated for efficiency purposes. By defaulting to Willpower, that significantly reduces the chances of successes based off target number but possibly could (depending on your skill) be increased by the total possible dice. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 10:45 PM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Alright, so scratch the self-taught idea and mix it in with the pretitled "scholastic".
So effectively so far... No Skill = Defaulting with a penatly (+4 or more??) With Skill = as per norm The only question left is simply...besides the "+4", what happens to the spell? It's been discussed a bit in here, but is the spell the same spell, or a malformed version of that spell? Is there a "quick" way to 'malform' a spell from the books into what a no-skill magic caster would cast if we take that angle? |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 10:48 PM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
It's the same spell. Your skill (educated or self-learned) at casting it decides how effective and well its cast... and that doesn't change with defaulting.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 10:56 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 476 Joined: 30-December 03 From: Fresno, CFS: taking out one durned furriner at a time. Member No.: 5,940 |
Once again, casting spells is not analogous to shooting a gun. The assumption is wrong. A mage with no skill, a mage without the knowledge of how to direct the mana or how to beseech their totem properly, can not cast spells.
To address the tangent of self taught vs instruction: there is only one difference between a self taught skill and one learned "scholastically." One PC simply spends his Karma on his own while the other PC learns with the help of someone with the Instruction skill. That's it. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:04 PM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Doc: ok, makes sense.
tjn: read my sig. (and read abve) I was wondering though...should it be more possible for a no skill mage to critically fail considering that they are casting wildly powers without trained control? |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:08 PM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
That should be true with anyone defaulting. If you want to include it as a universal house rule, just change it so that if all the dice are five! (when defaulting to an Attribute) or less, you critically fumbled... but only if you failed to achieve the goal. Or modify it to some other number. Honestly, I'd go with 3's or less across the board, but that's just me.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:13 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 158 Joined: 19-March 03 From: Central IL Member No.: 4,278 |
By Cannon you can't but, I don't see a balance issue so I would allow it. But I would not allow the caster to apply any MM techs. to it.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:18 PM
Post
#48
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
:mad: :evil: :vegm:
ok...I can breathe...
Anyways. Doc. I'm thinking that 3 might be a bit steep because it limits the TN possibles. Rolling for 3's becomes dangerous and that's a simple TN to aim for. Perhaps 2's? Or perhaps say you only need to have half of your dice return as 1's? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:18 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 476 Joined: 30-December 03 From: Fresno, CFS: taking out one durned furriner at a time. Member No.: 5,940 |
Stumps, how do you make it possible to ride a bicycle without any wheels?
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 11:20 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
I make my own wheels rather than bowing to Huffy everytime. :D
The question is, did you even need the bike in the first place? Or can we just walk there? |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th April 2022 - 09:23 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.