Full Version: counterspelling
SO if I have a counterspelling of 4 and I have 5 freinds I want to protect can I? and does each one get 4 dice? I.E. do I have to assign each die to a person or do can I covr 30 allies each with 4 dice?
i see nothing in the book or the errata that talks about a limit on how many you can cover by counterspelling...
The only limit is that you take a free action to declare who you are covering and that they all be in LOS. Each person covered gets the full number of dice.
Agreed. The rules state that every protected character (as long as they are within LoS when the spell hits) gets to use the full amount of Counterspelling dice.
No, this is not a break considering that the casting Magician gets to roll Magic + Spellcasting while the target gets Attribute (+ Counterspelling if present). So, if the Counterspelling isn't there its 2 DPs vs. 1 DP. Counterspelling evens the odds for your team.
No, this is not a break considering that the casting Magician gets to roll Magic + Spellcasting while the target gets Attribute (+ Counterspelling if present). So, if the Counterspelling isn't there its 2 DPs vs. 1 DP. Counterspelling evens the odds for your team.
Of coruse, if you have two or more magicians in your party all providing counterspelling then it just becomes insane since you'll have to determine a primaty actor and then roll all the other magician's counterspelling pools to determine the modifiers the primary magician's pool and then have the spell's target roll the primary magician's modified pool + attribute and repeat for ver spell that is cast.
i cant find that LOS part. maybe im just reading it wrong or its written into the skill rather then the counterspell section of the magic chapter, but i cant find it (so far)...
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| i cant find that LOS part. maybe im just reading it wrong or its written into the skill rather then the counterspell section of the magic chapter, but i cant find it (so far)... |
Page 175, bottom right corner:
| QUOTE |
| A protected character must also stay within the magician's line of sight in order for Counterspelling to be used. Note that a magician can always user Counterspelling to defend herself, unless surprised. |
figures...
well i must say that i kinda like the new rules better then the old (the old being one stinking, impossible to understand, mess).
well i must say that i kinda like the new rules better then the old (the old being one stinking, impossible to understand, mess).
the old rules were definitely a heaping mess of dreckkkkkola on this issue, but the new system seems like I cvould throw my 5 dice on 1000- people?
| QUOTE (fool) |
| the old rules were definitely a heaping mess of dreckkkkkola on this issue, but the new system seems like I cvould throw my 5 dice on 1000- people? |
If it is all one spell it doesn't seem any sillier or more powerful than affecting the same 1000 people with one spell. Being able to defeat multiple spells as well as just one spell is really the big change. On the flipside using Spell Defense can now cause drain. I don't remember this being the case before?
RAW read one way drain is even very likely if your Counterspelling Skill is low and you don't have an appropriately aspected focus, as you only get the Skill dice to roll. However it isn't quite as bad if the resisting dice also get included for determining if it is a Glitch.
Counterspelling only causes drain if you're using it to dispell a sustained spell. I don't remember the exact dispelling rules from SR3, but I do recall them causing drain of a sort. Counterspelling simple to ... well ... counter spells does not cause drain.
| QUOTE ("p. 176") |
| Using Counterspelling to defend against a spell as it is cast does not cause Drain. |
| QUOTE ("p. 176") |
| After each dispelling attempt, the magician must resist Drain as if she cast the spell she was targeting, whether the dispelling succeeded or not. |
| QUOTE (Dashifen @ Mar 13 2006, 01:31 PM) | ||||
Counterspelling only causes drain if you're using it to dispell a sustained spell. I don't remember the exact dispelling rules from SR3, but I do recall them causing drain of a sort. Counterspelling simple to ... well ... counter spells does not cause drain.
|
Unless you Glitch. See the note on Glitches on page 176 immediately below the first line you quoted.
touché 
| QUOTE (Dashifen) |
| touché |
That is why I said might, because it doesn't always happen. It is also wierd that they state an absolute like that, but then immediately below have the exception without acknowledging it is an exception.
and having 1000 people coverd by spell defense gives you a whole lot of tests, and therefor a whole lot of chances to glitch. should be interesting 
True, but the glitch paragraph reads more like a list of suggestions for glitches and not hard and fast rules. Oh well. Thanks for mentioning it. I've tended to ignore the glitch paragraphs, preferring to come up with my own glitch effects on the fly.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Mar 13 2006, 01:41 PM) |
| and having 1000 people coverd by spell defense gives you a whole lot of tests, and therefor a whole lot of chances to glitch. should be interesting |
A GM insisting on making an individual roll for each of those 1000 people?
I don't mean from a danger to the mage point of view, I mean time it takes to roll. Even 2 seconds per roll and to identify is 1/2 hour of constant rolling, although I guess you could split the task up among multiple people.Ironically that is when the normally more risky procedure of rolling by himself would be less risky, especially if you have a high Counterspelling. Because the Counterspelling dice themselves are only rolled once. Either way Counterspelling dice are only rolled once, but the multiple rolls of the resisting dice would bring up the odds that at least one of them would be a Glitch.
Not to mention that unless the mage has a bird's eye view of the action, getting 1000 people in LOS is going to be kind of tricky.
--Bercilak
--Bercilak
As long as you could see them, then yes.
| QUOTE (Bercilak) |
| Not to mention that unless the mage has a bird's eye view of the action, getting 1000 people in LOS is going to be kind of tricky. --Bercilak |
Your average (foot/base/basket - take your pick)ball stadium during a game?
A large theatre, from a box on the wall instead of the regular seats?
Times Square on New Years Eve, while standing on a bench?
Well If it seems a bit to much, limit it to counterspell rating # of people and perhaps add the magic rating to it.
| QUOTE (SR4 @ p. 176) |
| If multiple protected characters are targetted by the same spell, the Counterspelling dice are rolled only once and each target is protected equally. |
versus:
| QUOTE (SR4 @ p. 195) |
| Handle these as an opposed test. The caster's Magic + Spellcasting is resisted by the target's Body (for physical spells) or Willpower (for mana spells), plus Counterspelling (if available). |
So there are two very different presented methods of using Counterspelling to stave off a manablast from killing everyone in a 6-meter radius in a dense theatre. But neither of them involves your character having to make a separate Counterspelling check for each target. In option one, you roll your dice once, and in option two you increase all of their dice pools by your Counterspelling skill and they roll.
Either way, defending 80 people from a manaball is no easier or harder than protecting one target from a manabolt.
-Frank
| QUOTE (neko128) | ||
Your average (foot/base/basket - take your pick)ball stadium during a game? A large theatre, from a box on the wall instead of the regular seats? Times Square on New Years Eve, while standing on a bench? |
Brings up an interesting concept of magical security. Put some counterspelling mages around the crowd or on second floors of surrounding buildings doing nothing but counterspelling all people in LOS. Take that terrorist mages
in some ways this have the same effect as the SR2 mage ability of intercepting a spell as its cast (if the mage was astraly projecting that is).
and franktrollman, i dont see those two as being exclusive. more that the latter quote should have stated that its the counterspelling hits thats applyable, not the number of dice (alltho, if its a non-area spell, those are one and the same).
and franktrollman, i dont see those two as being exclusive. more that the latter quote should have stated that its the counterspelling hits thats applyable, not the number of dice (alltho, if its a non-area spell, those are one and the same).
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.