Geasa, And the flogging of shedding them... Options

[Dawnshadow]

Most people seem to think geasa have to be serious limitations or they're not valid. I'm curious about this mindset -- since it appears to me that geasa are brutal enough with a minor, 'virtual' limitation. One that potentially could appear, but the odds are against it (10 to 1, at least).

Magic loss is very easy to get.. you have to beat your magic score on 2d6. That means that someone with magic 7 (a single initiation), has a better than 50% chance of losing magic (58.3% chance, in fact).

Once you take a geas, there appear to be two possibilities: Your magic is at the level it was before, so long as you have the geas, or your magic is below the level.

The first means that any subsequent tests for magic loss are still at TN 7. The second means that you burn out if you take 7 geasa and have only initiated once. (Cast spells as if you have magic 7, real magic at 1.. lose a magic point, take a geas -- and you have real magic 0, so are burned out).

Now.. the sick part. Even assuming you've got geasa that aren't particularly limitting, except under unusual circumstances (Why would anyone EVER take a geas that's a brutal limitation?) -- you still should shed them, because if you don't, you're on the path of burning out. Either fast (the second example), or a little slower (the first interpretation).

Now, to shed a geas, you have to initiate. Your only benefit for the initiation is the lost geas. You don't get the metamagic or aura change. Your initiate grade goes up -- which is a very mixed blessing. Means you pay more karma every following initiation. You might be able to use a few things a little better -- invoking, divining and shielding come to mind. But you're still being really penalized for taking the geas.

It actually works out that every geas you shed, costs you 2-3 karma for every initiation following. 3 if you're initiating solo. 2 if you initiate in a group. (Averaged out, ordeals can drop it down by 0.5). That's a hefty karma cost, on someone who's already a karma sink, being awakened.

Anyone who wants to see it at its worst, play a magician's way adept. All magic loss is applied to spellcasting/conjuring, which is lower than your magic rating almost 100% of the time. So you wind up making magic tests against a high level rating, with a lower amount of magic that can be lost before you no longer have any mage abilities.

Beyond that, there's geasa as ordeals or for adepts to reduce power points, which can never be shed. Why, why, why would those EVER be taken as a serious limit?

So: Why do people think that geasa have to be serious limitations?
Even if you take them, you're closer to burning out.
Getting rid of them drains karma, long term and short.
They're fairly easy to wind up with.

[mfb]

i don't think geasa have to be a serious limitation. but they shouldn't be something the character can just forget about, or there won't be any reason to shed them. it really doesn't matter how hard it is to get rid of a geasa--like i said in the other thread, i'd have a pretty hard time getting rid of my own head; that doesn't mean having a head is a limitation.

your statement about adept geasa confuses the hell out of me. an adept with a voluntary geasa gets a 25% discount on the powers bought with that point--why in the name of god wouldn't you want that to be pretty limiting? otherwise, you're getting something for nothing, and there'd never be any reason to not geasa your power points.

they're only easy to end up with if you're checking for magic loss frequently. my adept is pushing 200 karma, and he has yet to have to make a magic loss check--and he's been played under something like 20 different GMs, so it's not that my GM is easy. checking for magic loss is something that should happen once or twice in a character's career; you make it sound like it happens once a month.

[toturi]

There is actually 2 types of geas for adepts. Voluntary and Involuntary. Voluntary geasa allows you to "purchase" more powers per power point. Involuntary geas is what you take to avoid magic loss.

It is voluntary geasa that people are having trouble with. GMs (usually) want the geasa to have real limitations, otherwise they feel that the player is just trying to get more powers than he is supposed to. Players(usually) on the other hand want to squeeze out as much of an edge as they can possibly get, otherwise the PC might not be able to handle whatever challenge the GM comes up with (something we all could relate to, we all want a good bargain).

Some GMs say that if they wanted to allow the PCs to be at a higher power level, they'd have used a higher BP limit or given more Karma. But they fail to consider that these measures are self-limiting/balancing within the game mechanic framework. BP does not give the PC a higher Magic. Karma, on the other hand, is either prohibitively expansive(20 per PP) or increases the risk of Magic loss(Initiation, which defeats the purpose of the higher Magic).

[Dawnshadow]

[LinaInverse]

My shaman just cracked the 120 Karma mark, and I have never had to make a Magic loss test. The closest I've come was a Serious wound. Bear in mind, this is a campaign that has killed 2 PCs in the last 6 months, and about 75% of the time, results in at least 1 PC taking Serious or Deadly damage at the end of the night, so I'd hardly call that an easy career. Also, we have had another mage (diff player) have to do 2 Magic loss tests, so again, the risks are real.

The diff between my char and most others (including said other mage) is that my char is mostly a support mage, not a combat mage, so she's normally not the person up front of a firefight. That said, our group is currently in the Arco right now, so it'll remains to be seen if my streak stays intact.

[Dawnshadow]

Our group (3 PCs) averages 0 to 1 not taking serious to deadly per run.

The second last run: Only one didn't take deadly. (The combat adept)

The last run: One took deadly, one burned 4 karma pool to avoid taking deadly. He wound up with only a moderate.. maybe not even that much. My MW Adept was the one who didn't, but he was hiding in 'disguised shadowrunner tank' for most of it, and had a 7 success improved invisibility spell when he went out.

The run before that, both involved PCs took deadly. NPC healed them, since they were incidentals.

The run before that, 2 of the 3 took deadly.

[Eyeless Blond]

[mfb]

the benefit of a geas should just about match the cost, otherwise you're getting something for less than its actual worth. you yourself pointed out the reason an adept would take a geas that affects him more than 25% of the time is, he thinks he can minimize the effects of that geas.

[Dawnshadow]

I question 'night-only' not being easy to exploit. It's harder to find out about (especially when it's not ALL of the person's magic), but it's easy to exploit in any sort of plot based game. A run, not so much, but anyone hunting the character? Find out the schedule.. character probably sleeps during the day, so attack him at home while he's in bed. It's a double handicap -- vastly reduced magic, and 'asleep'.

Um... I haven't had a called shot to the back of the mouth. I had someone cover his face saying 'Not the mouth!' when he was about to get punched for opening his mouth and causing problems.

It was the titanium bone lacing, pair of cyberlimbs, strength 7...

Edit: MFB, there's no way to minimize night-only. Taking the geas like that was thematic and because I took aptitude (edged weapons), ambidexterity (8 point), and had dikoted weapons..

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

[mfb]

[Dawnshadow]

MFB: Didn't help. He's still had a good number of runs or magic-would-be-REALLY-nice-here events during the day -- and a bunch under the open sun (direct light), which is just worse for him. He's got a hefty totem penalty then. In fact, most of the runs are at night -- except, of course, for the climactic events, and the blood sacrifices at dawn, and the random encounters while travelling through cocoa fields... you get the picture.

Crimsondude: I would suggest that anyone who can survive that type of game is someone who is not being exposed to a comperable degree of challenge. He may be that good (which is very impressive and worthy of applause), but the degree of relative challenge is less than a less dangerous game with less skilled players.

Also, while attacking peoples weaknesses is good (especially things like voluntary geasa), attacking involuntary geasa frequently, or even relatively frequently, is disconcerting, and extremely frustrating. Especially talisman geasa, but not exclusively so.

Voluntary geasa I understand it -- I despise the pricing system on them though. It would be better with variable price reduction depending on how limiting the geasa is, because if you can only use your killing hands Deadly under the full moon, it's not worth it. Your character might be a great werewolf theme, but you're being handicapped. Badly. For virtually no comparative benefit. Powers that only can be used 10% of the time, but don't give you much extra power?

That's akin to the psionic debate, where almost everyone house ruled them to 'not suck', because you aren't getting full build points from them. Why then is it acceptable for voluntary geasa to not get full power point value?

[mfb]

because you're getting more than your full power point value, with geasa. you're making a sacrifice in one area in order to make a gain in another. if the sacrifice isn't a sacrifice, then there's no reason for everyone not to do it.

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

[Dawnshadow]

[mfb]

sure. for a voluntary geas, ~25% of the time is the minimum i'd allow. i'm especially unsympathetic towards adepts who voluntarily geas their powers, because it was their choice.

[Edward]

For balance reasons believe a geasa should be limiting, not very limiting but a bit. The only one that really bothers me is “my cyber wear is my talisman” because it is almost unherdov for this to be lost.

Also you make it sound like if you don’t shed your geasa quickly you will be on the path of the burnout evry time.

I don’t think that is the case, in fact hitting the path of the burnout is something the player usually has to choose. You can use your magic without fulfilling the geasa, your at +2TN for magical actions and you use the lower magic rating. unless you chose very poorly when selecting a geasa you should be able to cope with this limitation on the occasions when it comes up. (the short time between the loss of a talisman and the acquisition of a replacement, the few times when you have to cast quietly and don’t want to speak lowly) I would rarely bother to shed a geasa buy any means.

What is causing you to have to test for magic loss every 2 months (game or RL months, how many runs)? A well executed run should not involve any character taking a deadly wound, its easy enough to always take stable precautions with drugs and medical care. If a character goes down we consider it a major error on the part of the players. And the fue times we have made a mistake that bad those that took the deadly wounds did not survive long enough to worry about magic loss. And Dawnshadow, if you expect to be that badly shot up why the hell is you character still running, if almost every job brings you to the point where you’re reaching out for the pearly gates would you not look for a new job. I know I would.

and you can minimise a night only geasa, you just never do a job during the day if you could do it at night.

Edward

[Dawnshadow]

2 game months.

Still running because there's an entire large scale plot that he's involved in, can't get out of, and whether or not he was running, it would still drag him further into it. Especially the 4+ grade blood mage hunting him. In fact, the MW Adept is the only one who absolutely can't get out.

Um... Let me count the runs.. I think the average is every other run? With the occassional pair, usually the damage being resolved by prompt magical healing. Sometimes from the ally spirit, sometimes by NPC teammate on the run.

If you consider a deadly wound a failure on the part of the players, then you would walk away from our group. A deadly wound on the part of the players is assumed to be an indication that the challenge level of the opposition is appropriate. It's not 'the fault of the players' so much as the level of force directed against us is such that we take that degree of damage. Even when trying to play it safe and cautiously.

And as for the burnout.. depends on the amount of magic loss you're suffering. If you're running at 50% or worse, at moderate to high levels of damage.. it takes a lot of karma to hold your own. And remember, mage geasa, you break one, you break them all.

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

Wow.

And here I thought Ellery was a bastard GM.

[nezumi]

To simply answer the original question, I think mages tend to quickly become more powerful than most other character types, and as they advance, that gap only widens. Geas allow a mage to be a mage AND the street sam (since now you can have magic and have cyber, making the sam pretty redundant). So there has to be something to keep the mage from doing that. I"ve seen adepts with practically all their power points geased away and 5 points of cyber, and they're absolutely vicious unless those geas mean something. So my voluntary geas should affect the PC about 50% of the time (oh yes, try the 'magical object geas'. I'll let you run without a problem for 6 months. Hehehe....)

That said, if it's an involuntary geas, I'm usually pretty kind, since there's no other benefit to it.

Geas have to be limiting to keep mages and adepts in check. The cost of getting rid of said geas don't even factor into the calculation.

[mfb]

that's incredibly abnormal, dawnshadow. it's hardly fair to hold other groups to the standards your group uses, when your group is so far outside of how most groups play.

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

Indeed. My idea of "fun" (you know, the standard I use to gauge my interest in X run/campaign) doesn't include my PCs suffering Deadly wounds in every run.

[Dawnshadow]

MFB: In a game where one of the big selling points is that combat is deadlier, how is PCs taking a lot of damage that puts them down for the count 'abnormal' or 'unexpected'? I'd expect PCs to take a lot of hits. Then again, I could be misinterpreting things -- maybe the unusual thing is that we don't get to avoid at least one hefty firefight, even if it's a violation of the plan.

CrimsonDude: He isn't. He inflicts a lot of damage, but he doesn't brutalize PCs outside of that, and is more reasonable then a lot of stuff I've seen GMs post about. Mistakes aren't instant fatalities, but they are painful. Opponents aren't unbeatable. No 'instant death' because the opponent is 'ungodly'. NPCs don't randomly upstage PCs (even when we wish they would). Neat possibilities and extrapolations of the rules are possible. So the mage is under improved invisibility.. he's on fire, and I know approximately where he is, so I shoot the empty void that looks like it's got flames dancing off it.

Nezumi: How is 15-30 karma not a factor? 2-3 runs at normal level and payout? How can it not be a factor?

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

Then something is definitely wrong if your 400 karma PC has, "had around 9 magic loss tests. About one every 2 months. Maybe a bit more often then that."

[Dawnshadow]

Lots of damage. The firepower is at a level to make it a threat to the Sam, which means it's devestating when it comes at the MW Adept. I don't consider the damage and magic loss tests to be the problem -- those make sense. It's the geasa rules that look atrocious. Especially under the interpretations that seem to be cropping up most often here.

And.. let me get this straight..

People find it fun when the GM abuses PCs with geasa, or get less value for their powers, but not when PCs take deadly damage?