Fixing Geasea for SR4, Do they need changing? Options

[Eyeless Blond]

I've noticed a lot of people seem to have problems with geasea as defined in MitS, and some are taking a stance against having them in SR4. I don't really have a problem with geasea as they currently stand, so long as the geasea are *meaningful*. Saying that throwing a punch is a Gesture Geas on your Killing Hands power is *not* a properly de-munchkinized Geas. Such a Geas, not really being a restriction, doesn't really boost the mage/adept's ego enough to allow him to act as if he fufilled a Geas, and so it wouldn't actually work.

Really IMO geasea don't need to be changed (except maybe the Talisman Geas), so much as the interpretation refined a little to make them more meaningful as restrictions. As I see it, geasea are primarily psychological; it's about fufilling a self-imposed restriction, and using the ego-boo gained from fufilling that restriction to cast spells/use powers that you may have lost. If the player insists on actively trying to avoid fufilling a geas or trying to be munchkiny about his geasea then you just point him out to the second column of p. 33 in MitS: basically he's deliberately ignoring the restrictions imposed by his own geasea, meaning he gives them up and starts on te path to becoming a burnout. If the verbage is strengthened in the SR4 magic book then I predict that there would be much less complainning about "easy" geasea for magic loss.

Remember, at least for mages, breaking a geas means a +1TN to all magical skills, as well as losing access to that magic point; that's a pretty significant drawback so long as it comes into play once in a while.

Adepts, though, I think should have a more significant drawback for breaking an involuntary geas than "just" losing access to that power and its Magic Point for the duration. Maybe something like -1 die to all Active Skill tests for each geas broken? That's not as bad as a +1TN, but it applies to more stuff so it kinda balances.

Another thing I'd like to see is voluntary geasea for mags, similar to the voluntary geasea for adepts. Maybe you could apply them to spells and get the same bonuses you get for a fettish-limit under the current rules. For instance, a mage could take a Gesture geas on his Force-6 Levitate spell, and be able to resist Drain as if it were Force 5? What do you think?

[Bigity]

Bring back spell locks and grounding ;)

Seriously though, I don't have any real beefs with the geasa system. Some of them seem kinda unbalanced, but it's more of a player/gm thing then a rules thing, IMO.

I don't like applying geas to individual spells, that is what fetishes and exclusive use is for.

Geasa apply to the entire magical ability.

[DrJest]

I don't like geasa for avoiding the Magic loss that comes from implanting Cyberware. Never have done, to be honest. For one thing, it's a slap to the mundane cybered characters - "all this and adept powers too!". Heck, why play a mundane?

EDIT: I'm fine with the original purpose of Geasa, btw, of dealing with burnout from wounds, stimpatches, etc.

[Backgammon]

[Eyeless Blond]

[DrJest]

[Eyeless Blond]

Well, except you *are* out 25 build points. But yeah, it's not really all that great that there is effectively no downside to geasing off magic loss for adepts. Mages are usually going to think twice even about their first geas, and probably won't take more than two without really thinking hard about it; those TN mods stack up quick. For adepts it's such a no-brainner that any adept who gets cyber is not going to even consider whether or not to geas it off, but just think about what geas he *will* take.

[Dizzo Dizzman]

Simple way to fix that. Allow adepts to take a geasea to avoid magic loss due to damage, but not to buy powers at a reduced cost.

[mmu1]

Unless they design a mechanic that'll make geasa a significant and unavoidable disadvantage some of the time, I say get rid of them.

Loosely defined rules that grant a huge bonus either end up getting badly abused, or require the GM to be a hard-ass all the time, which tends to be annoying for player and GM alike.

Currently, geasa pretty much amount to "Hey, everyone! Free magic!", and cybered-up adepts with a talisman geasa are just an insult to anyone playing a cybered mundane.

[Vuron]

A formative idea for fixing Geas

Rather than having geas be ritual behavior that requires roleplaying and GM adjudication I could see Geas becoming a series of restrictions that require regular karma expenditures to maintain magic capabilities.

So perhaps 1 out of every 10 or 20 good karma learned is effectively erased from the character development. So in order to function at your previous level of badassness you are effectively slowing down your karmic advancement. Add in enough geas restriction/penalties and you are pretty much just treading water.

Of course this type of geas would make using initiate grades for erasing geasa an extremely useful option. Further if the mage/physad wants to go the way of the burnout it actually becomes a definite tradeof.

[Nikoli]

Not a hard ass, just not be stupid.

Remember, the GM has a say over every chracter in the game. Had a player submit a talisman geasa to wear gloves. I disallowed this, because she'd normally be wearing gloves as a thief, thus no restriction. Suggested Nocturnal, she liked it and it fit her concept just as easily and gave her more RP style for in game conflicts with meetings during daylight hours.

[GunnerJ]

Spell Geasea:

The base Drain power is equal to the Force of the spell, not Force/2. Every spell can have two geasa on it. These will lower the effective force for the purposes of Drain only. If the geasa is not fulfilled, the spell cannot be cast.

Exclusive (-2): cannot cast this spell while maintaining another magical operation.
Fetish (-1): must have a fetish of the appropriate type to cast.
Soft chant (-1): mast say certain words of power that can be overheard from nearby to cast.
Loud chant (-2): must yell words of power so loudly that anyone within 50 meters can hear in order to cast.
Simple gesture (-1): must make a motion with one or two hands in order to cast.
Elaborate gesture (-2): must move one's whole body in a ritual manner (spinning, dancing, etc.) inorder to cast.
Minor sacrifice (-2): must kill a small animal or cause one box of physical damage to a metahuman to cast. Requires sacrificing metamagic.
Major sacrifice (-4): must kill a metahuman in order to cast. Requires sacrificing metamagic.

You get the idea; this would also make the common Drain power = Force house rule slightly less crippling.

EDIT: How about conjuring gaesea?

[frostPDP]

I have to say most of SR's geasa system works well. Drawing on both real-world occult stuff (Since that's what a lot of this is based on) and sensible game physics, the severity of the geas must first of all be equivalent to the geasa requirements.

The Talisman is a basic one, one-point, but its not just a trinket. My 1 point chick has a pair (one backup) of 5,000 nuyen necklaces. They take an hour to associate with her as well, so if she somehow lost both of them she would effectively be without for at least one hour, plus the time it would take to make a replacement. (and yes, I do play a female character yet I'm male. My main character fell 6 stories next to the Novatech building while kidnapping a Tir princess and only just got broken out of jail and karma-hookered by the "rescuing" free spirit.)

Medtiation, daily or every-other-day, or even weekly (obviously, an hour meditation a day is tough, and every twelve hours is even tougher) is another geas I'd find as not too intrusive but still worth a point. Combinine the above two and you get a relatively decent pair of requirements, both monitary and time consuming, without terribly hampering oneself.

Much of the other geasa almost appear to be self-aspecting. That just kind of weakens the point of full-mage, and as for an Aspected mage (let's say a fire-elementalist), taking a geasa against water magic is just pointless.

Gestures are fine, but they might well be less prohibitive than a talisman unless you're bound with hands behind your back or, umm, the like. The same with chanting. I personally want my chick to become a night-club raver and initiate to get some centering with raving, but in the end it becomes just a geas in disguise.

Not that I mind. I think the system works well, and it even addresses the "voulentary geas" issue. You want to increase power? Dance around a little - Be it to make up for that cyber-arm or to raise your mojo a little.

[Rieal82]

[Nikoli]

Right, sorta like Kung-fu movies ubiquitous gratuitous puching/kicking nothing sequences.

[Sandoval Smith]

I have no problem with the Geas system as it stands. All it requires to work is a little back and forth between the GM and the player. One of my PC adepts had his astral perception ability geased to humming tunelessly. A surgeon/shaman, who had gotten a heavy load of cyber and bioware in order to keep her professional edge, ended up having to geas two points of magic: a shot of alcohol every hour (her growing alcoholism was one of the reasons she was losing her edge in the first place), and having to speak in rhyme to spellcast. Another adept has a geas to his grandfather's gold rimmed spectacles. He has to be wearing them in order to use his social powers. If he ever loses them, I expect that the GM will require more than a roll and some etiquette to locate another pair just like them.

[Cain]

[Fortune]

[DrJest]

I've got to say, I've not come across even a majority of references on here to GM's who do that. As far as I can tell, it's most common to allow the player to choose their geasa.

[toturi]

Frankly, I have no problems with "munchkin" geasa. I see it a sort of modern equivalent of how some gong fu styles trumped others in those Chinese martial art novels. You know those novels that one faction or factions are always fighting each other over some dusty manual or some treasure map to some uber-long lost martial art? Yes, I see the uberness as a result of some ultramunchkin geas built into the martial art style.

I would like to see is a list of geasa. A few canon examples for each type of geas, so there can be no argument.

[Ol' Scratch]

[DrJest]

Random geas question - Improved Ability: Edged Weapons, could that be geased to (eg) Knives Only? Well, okay, of course it technically could, I was thinking more is it reasonable? Unlike the firearms skills, there's kind of a broad spectrum of coverage in Edged.

[Nikoli]

Personally, i would choose the Talisman geas for that sort of thing DrJest. Such as a handforged knife, wrapped in real leather, with certain markings on the blade, perhaps a blessing of some importance to the character. that kind of thing.
Geasaing it to knives only isn't a great deal of a restriction. Especially if the player never intends to use anything other than a knife.

With Geasa, I always judge on one thing. Does the player intend this to be an impairment? If not, then it's not a valid Geas. The player has to give up one thing to restore their magic, if there is no sacrifice, there is no restoration.

I like the idea of the shot of whiskey that was used earlier, but there aren't any good rules for alcholism that don't involve a dirt nap in 5 months time.

[GunnerJ]

Personally, I'd just take Edged with a specialization in Knives and use IA on Edged.

[Vuron]