Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Am I ruling spells wrong?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Gort
I've managed to get quite confused about basic spellcasting. I'll illustrate my confusion with examples.

Say a mage is casting a stunbolt at an average guy.

The mage rolls his spellcasting+magic, the target rolls his willpower to resist. If the mage rolls more hits than the target, he gains the net hits as a damage bonus.

EG: Mage casts force 6 stunbolt, rolls 3 hits, the target rolls 1 hit, so the target takes 8 boxes of stun.

That's simple enough. But what if the target gets lucky and rolls more hits than the mage? Does the spell fail entirely? Or does it go through with reduced effect?

EG: Mage casts force 6 stunbolt, rolls 1 hit, the target rolls 3, so the target takes 4 boxes of stun.

So, tl;dr version: Do spells fail entirely if the target rolls more hits than the caster, or do they still work with reduced effect?
Jaid
if the target rolls more hits than the spellcaster (unlikely without counterspelling, but technically possible), the spell just fizzles into nothingness, and the target is entitled to mock the spellcaster as a free action wink.gif
Gort
Wow, so counterspelling is REALLY good, then? Lemme just make sure I've got that straight as well, while we're here.

Say a mage is casting a stunbolt at an average guy, who is protected by counterspelling from another mage.

Mage rolls spellcasting+magic, mage who is counterspelling rolls counterspelling+magic, PLUS the target gets to roll his willpower as well?

Kill the mage first, indeed.

I have another question as well. Since counterspelling requires line of sight, do mages take vision penalties (such as cover or darkness) when using it, or is it all-or-nothing?
Cold-Dragon
Well, that's a good question now actually. Technically you sustain counterspelling once you set it up, but as far as I recall, people have to stay near you to get the benefit (can't run down a corridor and leave you for example).

My guess is that if those you're protecting get significantly hidden from you, they lose the protection, whereas confusing the mage might make it a 'chance' of not protecting at a moment...I'd follow the usual rules for dice penalties, but on the counterspelling roll against hte particular person.
Slithery D
QUOTE (Gort)
I've managed to get quite confused about basic spellcasting. I'll illustrate my confusion with examples.

Say a mage is casting a stunbolt at an average guy.

The mage rolls his spellcasting+magic, the target rolls his willpower to resist. If the mage rolls more hits than the target, he gains the net hits as a damage bonus.

EG: Mage casts force 6 stunbolt, rolls 3 hits, the target rolls 1 hit, so the target takes 8 boxes of stun.

That's simple enough. But what if the target gets lucky and rolls more hits than the mage? Does the spell fail entirely? Or does it go through with reduced effect?

EG: Mage casts force 6 stunbolt, rolls 1 hit, the target rolls 3, so the target takes 4 boxes of stun.

So, tl;dr version: Do spells fail entirely if the target rolls more hits than the caster, or do they still work with reduced effect?

First, mages roll spellcasting + Magic, not Logic. Mages (the tradition) do use Logic (+Will) to resist drain.

Second, yes, for direct combat spells (nonelemental), more defensive successes complete negates the spell. Consider it like dodging a bullet. For indirect spells (elemental), it's a little different. They get to avoid the spell entirely if they beat it with Reaction (just like a bullet), but after that it's a straight damage resistance test that can only reduce damage.

So mage rolls 3 successes on his spellcasting test for a Force 6 Flamethrower. Target rolls one success for reaction, so 2 net hits. Target then rolls, say, 5 hits on the damage resistance test from a combination of body, (half) armor, and counterspelling dice. Instead of negating the spell, the defenders (2-5) 3 net successes reduce the base damage of the flamethrower spell to 3 points of damage. If that's not higher than half the target's armor, it's also stun damage, just like a ranged attack with a gun.

Tactically, this means that a Flamethrower at high force is more likely to do some damage to a guy with lots of counterspelling than a manabolt would, because he may dodge the manabolt entirely. Strategically, high force indirect spells have very, very high drain, so you're better off using a gun. But if you have to use a spell to hurt someone with lots of spell defense, that's the way you've got to.
Slithery D
QUOTE (Gort @ Sep 5 2006, 10:14 PM)
Mage rolls spellcasting+magic, mage who is counterspelling rolls counterspelling+magic, PLUS the target gets to roll his willpower as well?

No. Target rolls willpower + counterspelling. Magic attribute never helps you resist spells. Basically you're setting your spellcasting skill against his counterspelling skill, and your Magic attribute against his Willpower (or Body for physical spells). It's a neutralizer, but not an invulnerable shield. You'll get through sometimes. (Shielding metamagic with a few grades of initation is when counterspelling starts to favor defense, just as pushing your Magic higher than a target can get his Willpower is when offense starts to win.)

To be sure to get through all the time (allowing for normal Reaction, no Dodge actions, and no massive armor), toss a high force indirect spell, as explained above.
Demerzel
Yea, even better take a Insect Shaman with a high counterspelling (say 7), toting around 4 force 6 Soldeir spirits with Magical Guard, and good merges into trolls, and then they each get 12 points of hardened armor plus the 1 troll normal armor, plus whatever they are wearing normally. Then an opposing mage casts a nuke of any sort. Counterspelling goes:

4 force 6 spirits all get to aid counterspelling so that's 24 dice, take the successes as extra dice for the Shamans roll (Say 8ish a third of 24). Then the shaman gets 15 dice of counterspelling.

Moral:
Never tell the GM your team is invincable. vegm.gif
Jaid
QUOTE (Gort)
Wow, so counterspelling is REALLY good, then? Lemme just make sure I've got that straight as well, while we're here.

Say a mage is casting a stunbolt at an average guy, who is protected by counterspelling from another mage.

Mage rolls spellcasting+magic, mage who is counterspelling rolls counterspelling+magic, PLUS the target gets to roll his willpower as well?

Kill the mage first, indeed.

I have another question as well. Since counterspelling requires line of sight, do mages take vision penalties (such as cover or darkness) when using it, or is it all-or-nothing?

counterspelling only adds your skill to defense, not skill + magic.

so it's the target's (willpower or body) + counterspell for direct spells, IOW. this is considerately better than he would otherwise be, because without the counterspelling, it would be the caster's attribute+skill vs the target's attribute only. since the magician is likely to have at least double the dice pool of the target (not to mention the possibility of bonus dice from a focus, a spirit aiding them, or whatever), it is unlikely to resist a spell without counterspelling assistance.

anyways, as far as counterspelling LOS is concerned, i would probably apply the same rules as to mages... the mage must be able to succeed on a perception test. if successfull, full counterspelling. if unsuccessfull, no counterspelling.

which could certainly make for interesting effects if you blind the mage =D
Gort
Heh, what this game needs is a "Big Book O Examples" so fools like me can grasp it better...

This is really helpful. I'll throw another question in here as well, less basic this time.

Shadowrun team is sneaking up to a corporate building. There are no life forms except the runners and the mage in the vicinity, not even grass. Corp mage is astrally projecting to about fifty feet above the building, looking down. Is it just a straight perception+intuition for the mage, opposed by the shadowrunners infiltration+agility? Or is spotting people on in the real world from the astral so trivial in this situation that no roll is required?
Jaid
if the runners are using their infiltration skill, i would make it an opposed roll.

if the runners are just walking along, making no effort to hide, then i would rule it does not need any roll... any more than you would make a regular guard roll to spot them if they were dressed all in dark colors walking across a white floor.

of course, it should be noted that if any of the runners are astrally perceiving, it is likely about as easy for them to spot a mage floating in the air wink.gif that corp mage should definitely be closer to something he can hide behind.
Gort
Okay, so what if the corp mage is a bit lower down, looking over the edge of the building, trying not to be seen, and one of the runners is looking in his direction while astrally perceiving? Perception+intuition for the runner, infiltration+logic (astral equivalent of agility) for the corp mage?
Demerzel
Also a mage's time is worth a lot, having him hover for extended periods of time is not the best use of those resources. A spirit patroll is more cost effective, and much more likely from a security perspective.
Mahali
QUOTE (Slithery D)
No. Target rolls willpower + counterspelling. Magic attribute never helps you resist spells.

I and my group read it just like any other skill check.

You roll your SKILL + LINKED ATTRIBUTE which for "Counterspelling" is Counterspelling + Magic.
Ryu
Well, that is wrong. The linked attribute is really whatever attribute of the protected person is used to resist.

Magic is only used as linked attribute if you are trying to banish a spell.
SCARed
and for the opposed perception test i would give the corp mage a hefty bonus modifier. because even if the runners are trying to sneak around without beeing seen, for the mage it's like detecting some colorful spots in a black-and-white movie.
Slithery D
QUOTE (Mahali)
QUOTE (Slithery D)
No. Target rolls willpower + counterspelling. Magic attribute never helps you resist spells.

I and my group read it just like any other skill check.

You roll your SKILL + LINKED ATTRIBUTE which for "Counterspelling" is Counterspelling + Magic.

It's not possible to read the rule that way. It is possible to not read the rule at all and assume that it's a normal skill check.
2bit
QUOTE (Slithery D)
Tactically, this means that a Flamethrower at high force is more likely to do some damage to a guy with lots of counterspelling than a manabolt would, because he may dodge the manabolt entirely. Strategically, high force indirect spells have very, very high drain, so you're better off using a gun. But if you have to use a spell to hurt someone with lots of spell defense, that's the way you've got to.

Indirect stun spells are the way to go vs. protected enemies:

Mage KO Blow (F/2)-3
Stun, Touch Range, Indirect damage
Affects only Awakened characters, but you may substitute this for any restricted target of your choice (humans, trolls, males, etc.)

Overcast this to Force 9 and your drain is still only 1. High probability of complete KO and zero drain. Overcast higher as Magic permits. Force 13 = 3 drain. Extremely effective against protected targets.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012