Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Please clarify some magic stuff
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Gray Vagabond
I'm new at this Shadowrun stuff and GMing, and I've had a few questions about magic things. I hope I can ask all of them in this post and not have to bother everyone after this, but... Here goes.

First, the Shamanic Mask. The only thing the RAW says about it is that some magical traditions have it, and it makes it easier for others to notice that the mage is casting spells. (+2 dice to perception test). What determines whether or not your mage has a shamanic mask -- is it just possessing a mentor spirit? Is the shamanic mask then just a disadvantage built into having a mentor spirit?

Then I have a question about the Heal spell. It says the Drain value is (Damage Value) -2. What is the Damage Value, is it the number of boxes of Physical damage the target has taken? Or is it the number of boxes the mage is trying to heal? Since you use the Drain value to determine how long you must concentrate to make the healing permanent, it could make a big difference.

Thanks for all help you can provide.
Ol' Scratch
Shamanic Masks: This is a trait of the Shamanic Tradition (SR4 p. 170) and is assumed to exist whenever a Shaman uses their magic. It's only really noticable when they throw out high Force magic, however. But it's only really really noticable when someone succeeds at on the Notice Spellcasting test. Other traditions with a mentor spirit do not have a Shamanic Mask, though, unless they specifically mention it in their description.

Heal: Yes, the Damage Value it's referring to is the total number of boxes the target currently has (not total damage healed). It's completely separate from the amount of damage the spell actually heals. And yes, the duration required to make the effect varies based on the Drain Value. So if someone has five boxes of Physical Damage, the Drain Value is based off those five boxes even if the spell only heals two.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Gray Vagabond)
What determines whether or not your mage has a shamanic mask -- is it just possessing a mentor spirit? Is the shamanic mask then just a disadvantage built into having a mentor spirit?

That's how I rule it: It only shows it you actually use your mentor spirit boni when doing magic.
Ryu
IIRC its up to the shaman if he wants to have a mask. Major coolness, but less sneaky. Rotbarts suggestion is a middle ground I could live with.
Ravor
Personally I even allow non-shamans to have one if they want, but then again I figure that a semi-invisable "mask-like" effect is part of what mundanes are actually sensing when they make the perception test to detremine if they notice who is casting magic.
Buster
A 5 BP negative quality "Shamanic Mask" would be a perfect buyoff for the Mentor Spirit quality.
Dashifen
That's not a bad idea, Buster....
Moon-Hawk
If you want to make it even more tempting, you could make an alternate Mentor Spirit w/ shamanic mask as a 0 point quality.
Same final cost but doesn't contribute to the 35 point limit on qualities. That is, if you wanted to make the shamanic mask even more tempting without actually changing the cost from what was already suggested.
Gray Vagabond
Thanks for the feedback, omaes.
...and that's another question, how do you pronounce "omae?" I've been sticking with "chummer" just because I don't know.
Fortune
Oh-may. biggrin.gif
Strobe
QUOTE (Gray Vagabond)
Thanks for the feedback, omaes.
...and that's another question, how do you pronounce "omae?" I've been sticking with "chummer" just because I don't know.

I have always pronounced it OH-MAY (like the month or something you might yell out when you are with May…).

I could be wrong though.

-Strobe
Talia Invierno
Depends.

Colloquial among more or less equals, it's a diphthong -- o-mah-e (as in "air"). Try for pure vowels in each part (difficult for native English speakers, I've found).

A slightly ruder variant is omee -- o-me (again as in "air", but lengthened).

Both are slightly iffy for women: the original intent is to an equal or light subordinate, with the "o" prefix "polite-ening" it.
Ol' Scratch
How are you translating "e" or "me" into sounding anything even remotely like "air?" I'm just not getting it.
Talia Invierno
How would you pronounce the "e" in "effing", or "endure", or "men"?
Ol' Scratch
"A soft E," "eh," or by using any of the examples you just cited. smile.gif Thanks for the clarification, I didn't understand what you meant. biggrin.gif
Talia Invierno
It's the nasty thing, in English, about just saying "it's pronounced like an 'e'." Even soft "e" wouldn't completely cover it ... and very technically, the "e" sound in those examples isn't the same.

But, as the professor explaining Xeno's paradox using a male and female co-ed said, it's close enough for practical purposes.
Gray Vagabond
Thanks for the replies -- here's another question I had, concerning casting from astral projection:

If I'm reading the RAW correctly, p 173, an astrally projecting magician can cast spells on things with an astral presence only (including dual-natured characters/critters). They cannot cast spells on targets in the physical world at all. I have been telling my player that he can cast spells on physical beings if he manifests (p 184, an astral form can interact with the physical plane if it manifests, though it cannot make physical attacks) -- after re-reading p173 though, I think I was wrong about this, and the astral caster can't cast spells on the physical plane at all, even when manifesting. Which is right -- can they cast spells on purely physical forms when manifesting, or no?
odinson
QUOTE (Gray Vagabond)
Thanks for the replies -- here's another question I had, concerning casting from astral projection:

If I'm reading the RAW correctly, p 173, an astrally projecting magician can cast spells on things with an astral presence only (including dual-natured characters/critters). They cannot cast spells on targets in the physical world at all. I have been telling my player that he can cast spells on physical beings if he manifests (p 184, an astral form can interact with the physical plane if it manifests, though it cannot make physical attacks) -- after re-reading p173 though, I think I was wrong about this, and the astral caster can't cast spells on the physical plane at all, even when manifesting. Which is right -- can they cast spells on purely physical forms when manifesting, or no?

The answer would be no. They are still astral and can only effect astral even when manifesting.
Buster
QUOTE (Gray Vagabond)
If I'm reading the RAW correctly, p 173, an astrally projecting magician can cast spells on things with an astral presence only (including dual-natured characters/critters).  They cannot cast spells on targets in the physical world at all.  I have been telling my player that he can cast spells on physical beings if he manifests (p 184, an astral form can interact with the physical plane if it manifests, though it cannot make physical attacks) -- after re-reading p173 though, I think I was wrong about this, and the astral caster can't cast spells on the physical plane at all, even when manifesting.  Which is right -- can they cast spells on purely physical forms when manifesting, or no?

Sort of. The astral caster can target anyone using astral perception or who is dual natured. However, that spell does not "ground" into the physical plane, it attacks that dual natured being only. In other words, if the astral mage tosses an area-effect fireball at an astrally perceiving adept, only the adept gets hit even though his (non-astrally active) cybersam buddy is standing right next to him.
Buster
Also, remember that manifesting is not the same thing as materializing. Manifesting is a purely astral phenomena. Materializing is only for spirits with the Materializing power. A materialized spirit would cast spells into the physical plane, but a manifested spirit would cast spells into the astral plane.
BookWyrm
OK, how does one pronounce "corp" when refering to Corporations? Is the 'p' at the end silent or not? (and you can just forget the obvious jokes that brings up, tyvm)
Ancient History
With p.
Buster
Fun with English:

Corps (more than one corp) is pronounced "corps".
Army Corps or Corps cadaver is pronounced "core".
Corpse (as in a dead body) is pronounced "corps".

And don't get me started on the tomb/comb/bomb nonsense. Harry Harrison promised we'd all be speaking Esperanto by now!
Ophis
Damn our languages creolised routes. Thats a proper linguistic term that.

QUOTE (Buster)
QUOTE (Gray Vagabond)
If I'm reading the RAW correctly, p 173, an astrally projecting magician can cast spells on things with an astral presence only (including dual-natured characters/critters).  They cannot cast spells on targets in the physical world at all.  I have been telling my player that he can cast spells on physical beings if he manifests (p 184, an astral form can interact with the physical plane if it manifests, though it cannot make physical attacks) -- after re-reading p173 though, I think I was wrong about this, and the astral caster can't cast spells on the physical plane at all, even when manifesting.  Which is right -- can they cast spells on purely physical forms when manifesting, or no?

Sort of. The astral caster can target anyone using astral perception or who is dual natured. However, that spell does not "ground" into the physical plane, it attacks that dual natured being only. In other words, if the astral mage tosses an area-effect fireball at an astrally perceiving adept, only the adept gets hit even though his (non-astrally active) cybersam buddy is standing right next to him.


Pretty much right bar one point. When in astral you can only cast Mana spells, Fireball is Physical.
BookWyrm
Thanks. smile.gif
Gray Vagabond
Sorry to be a bother asking all these questions, but...

In the book, p 195, it says the Drain Value of a spell can never be less than one. OK, all fine. One of my players casts Stunbolt at Force 5 (Magic of 5). The Drain is (5/2 rounded down)-1 = 2-1 = 1. Then he rolls Will + Charisma to resist Drain, as a shaman. Thing is, this looks ridiculously easy, as all he has to do is roll one hit and take no Drain damage. Am I interpreting this right, is it possible to take no Drain damage (even though the rule says the Drain [/I]Value[/I] can never be less than one?) In every example in the book of taking Drain, the hapless caster rolls fewer hits than the Drain they took. If they had included one, just one, example of someone rolling more hits, this wouldn't have confused me.

Oh, and just to clarify an earlier question: So when astral, you can only cast Mana spells, and you can only cast them on someone with an astral presence (that is, astrally projecting or astrally sensing), even if you're manifesting? That is, you can't manifest and then toss off a Stunbolt at some ordinary, non-Awakened Joe. Correct?

much grass
Fortune
QUOTE (Gray Vagabond @ Aug 18 2007, 10:49 PM)
Sorry to be a bother asking all these questions, but...

That's why we're here. smile.gif

QUOTE
In the book, p 195, it says the Drain Value of a spell can never be less than one.  OK, all fine.  One of my players casts Stunbolt at Force 5 (Magic of 5).  The Drain is (5/2 rounded down)-1 = 2-1 = 1. Then he rolls Will + Charisma to resist Drain, as a shaman.  Thing is, this looks ridiculously easy, as all he has to do is roll one hit and take no Drain damage. Am I interpreting this right, is it possible to take no Drain damage (even though the rule says the Drain [/I]Value[/I] can never be less than one?)  In every example in the book of taking Drain, the hapless caster rolls fewer hits than the Drain they took.  If they had included one, just one, example of someone rolling more hits, this wouldn't have confused me.


You are reading it correctly. The shaman would only need one hit to take no Drain in that particular case.

QUOTE
Oh, and just to clarify an earlier question:  So when astral, you can only cast Mana spells, and you can only cast them on someone with an astral presence (that is, astrally projecting or astrally sensing), even if you're manifesting?  That is, you can't manifest and then toss off a Stunbolt at some ordinary, non-Awakened Joe.  Correct?


Correct again. smile.gif
Bira
I've got a simple question about the damage of combat spells such as Powerball or Manabolt: are they "all or nothing", or do they work somewhat like ranged attacks?

For example, Joe Mage casts a Force 5 Manaball at punks A and B, with 3 hits on his test. Both roll Willpower for resisting: A gets 0 hits, B gets 2. What happens next?

A) Do A and B automatically take 5 damage?

B) Or do A and B nor have to resist 8P and 6P damage, respectively?

It seems to me that A is the correct answer, but I'd like to know for sure.
FrankTrollman
QUOTE (Bira)
I've got a simple question about the damage of combat spells such as Powerball or Manabolt: are they "all or nothing", or do they work somewhat like ranged attacks?

For example, Joe Mage casts a Force 5 Manaball at punks A and B, with 3 hits on his test. Both roll Willpower for resisting: A gets 0 hits, B gets 2. What happens next?

A) Do A and B automatically take 5 damage?

B) Or do A and B nor have to resist 8P and 6P damage, respectively?

It seems to me that A is the correct answer, but I'd like to know for sure.

Direct spells are all-or-nothing. Indirect spells work like ranged attacks.

In your example the answer is "C": A takes 8 boxes of damage, B takes 6 boxes of damage.

As to why you would want to use a spell with variable resisted effect rather than an all-or-nothing which will explode anyone if it gets even a single hit - remember that in large engagements counterspelling stacks to a limited degree and spellcasting does not "stack" at all.

-Frank
Crusher Bob
QUOTE (Bira @ Aug 20 2007, 11:27 AM)
...

A) Do A and B automatically take 5 damage?

B) Or do A and B nor have to resist 8P and 6P damage, respectively?

...

Option B. Punk A takes 8, Punk B takes 6.

If Punk A had gotten 0 hits and Punk B had gotten 3 hits, then Punk A would take 8 boxes and Punk B would take nothing as direct spells need one net hit to do anything (page 173-174, step 5).

Also note that max hits on a spell are capped by the force of the spell.

So if Joe mage cast a force three manaball at the two punks, and rolled 5 hits on his spellcasting test, only 3 of them actually count.

So (vs the manaball):

If Punk A had gotten 0 hits and Punk B had gotten 3 hits, then Punk A would take 6 boxes and Punk B would take nothing as there are no net hits on the spell (even though the caster actually got 5 hits on the spellcasting test, as the spellcasters max hits were limited to 3 by the force of the spell).

Note that indirect spells work differently:
[edit]
erm, note that max hits are still capped by force
[/edit]
(see example on p 196)

Joe mage casts Blast force 5 at the two punks. All the punks have reaction three and dodge 3. Joe mage gets three hits on the spellcasting test. (This makes the base damage of the blast 8.)

Punk A decides to go on full defense and resists with reaction + dodge (6 dice)
Punk B had been shot once at by Sally Sam previously so he uses (Reaction -1) to try to get out of the way.

Punk A gets lucky and gets 4 hits on his dodge test. Punk B gets nothing.

Punk A is looking at 4 damage. Even though he got more hits on his defense test that the mage, he still takes some damage.

Punk B takes is looking at the full 8.

and now both punks resists with body + half armor

We'll say both punks are average orks (body 5) wearing armored jackets (armor cool.gif

This means that each punk gets 9 dice to soak (5 + 8/2)

Punk A is looking at 4 damage and rolls 3 hits for his soak. So he actually takes 1 damage.

Punk B is look at 8 damage. He gets a bit lucky here and gets 4 hits on his damage resistance test. So he takes 4 damage.

--------------

So, against stuff unlikely to resist your spells, direct combat spells are the best, they have lower drain don't have the additional resistance of body+1/2 armor. If the targets are likely to resist your spell, indirect is the way to go. Even if they get more hits, you might can still slip some damage through.

-------------

[additional edit]
Also note that spending edge on the spellcasting test removes the limit of net hits based on the spell's force. So if Joe mage had used edge in the force 3 manball example (where he got 5 hits on the spellcasting test), then Punk A would have taken 8 damage and Punk B would have taken 5.
Ol' Scratch
Bah! Magic needs a minimum of 600 dice on the table per action or else it's totally unrealistic. Google and Wikipedia told me so.
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