Arcane Arrester says that when affected by a spell, she treats Force based effects at half actual strength.

Pretty straightforward it seems. But then it lists examples... and they are all offensive effects. My initial assumption was (and is) that it affects every spell that is dependent on force that affects the character. Is this correct?

Second part. If the above is true, and assuming that characters with a Magic attribute can take arcane arrester, this means that, to get the same effect, a mage casting spells on himself needs to cast the spell at twice the normal force. Right?

Third. It's not a typo that characters with a magic attribute can take it. I assume?

Thanks.

The Arcane Arrester kicks in when someone casts a HARMFUL spell at the character. It could be an illusion for example.

A good rule of thumb would be if the spell demands a voluntary target.

If the character have no wish to be affected then the arrester kicks in.

As for No.2 yes. Also keep in mind that you are at a +4 to drain as well regardless of the drain value.

3. yes, magically active characters can have it.

Where is Arcane Arrester described, please?

Peter

Runners Companion, pg. 111.

Thanks.

Peter

Characters wish have nothing to do with it, arrester kicks in every time a spell affects the character, whether the spell is harmful or helpful.

The Jopp Why +4 drain?

Chris

Arcane Arrester is an innate, uncontrolled ability and affects all spells cast at/on the character.

Thanks Synner.

DOH ignore me, i was thinking Astral hazing

By RAW you are correct but since it is a positive quality it should be limited to only:

Non-Voluntary Spells
Harmful Effect Spells

A good rule of thumb is the "Magic Resistance" quality that literally states that it works against beneficial spells and that quality is incompatible with the Arcane Arrester.

After playing with it several sessions in a row, even with you having to take SURGE III to get it, if it did not effect beneficial spells as well, then it would be overpowered. My opinion of course, and I do run a semi-magic heavy games, but our samaurai tank character has it and so far he really hasn't had a damn thing magical effect him at all. Then again he does combine it with Astral Hazing(and is never allowed within 3 meters of the mages- they tolerate him because he is really useful, but barely. So, maybe it is just the combination that makes it so insane. I don't know, just my thoughts I have been up way too long.

Chris

Well, combined they are horrible as they give two effects towards mages casting spells gainst such a character.

Casting spells into the area with background count gives a +4 to drain value AND the force of the spell is halved.

every mage will want you dead, but as long as they stay with magical means, wanting is in effect pretty much all they CAN do ^^
finally a way to not have to rely on the pesky know it all mage to cover your shiny metal behind against magical bothers O.o

Lets take a generic spell with F/2 as drain and cast it at force 12 at sucha character.

The poor mage would have a base force of 6 that can be increased with net successes and then a drain code of 10 (And most likely physical...)

Still, the character will still hurt.

The problem does come partly when they are combined because that makes that maximum force 4 or 2 instead of 6(I think 4, would enter background count, reduce in force then hit character and get halved. so 12-4=8/2=4) but still, with a decent mage(counterspelling 4(spec combat) + a decent willpower(4), he can reliably get it to 1 net success, and sometimes make himself immune( getting 4 hits to resist makes you immune to force 4 spells)

Chris

Actually no.

A spells force is not affected by the background count - only the difficulty in casting into such an area. The exception to this are already SUSTAINED spells that the character walks into.

You could say that the caster "force" mana into the area unlike an already sustained spell that would drop in force.

I could agree on that the mage could choose to get either effect:
1: Non-Forced spell: Drain as usual but F-4 of spell
2: Forced spell: +4 to drain.

With option 1 then you would indeed have F12-4/2= F4

Actually Jopp, it all depends on location. If the mage is in the background count... Magic 6 reduced to magic 2 by rating 4 background count. Max spell force able to be cast = force 4. (Drain is at +4 for this spell). When spell hits character, damage is halved. (Arcane arrester does not actually half force of the spell).

I would like to point out that the description of Arcane Arrester states that only the target character sees the "half force" effect. So in the above example, although the effect as resisted by the target would appear to be a Force 6 spell, the Magician casting it still treats it as a Force 12 spell. This means that if the attacking Magician happens to roll exceptionally well on the Spellcasting Test they can get in excess of 6 hits to add to the spell's effect. Now, when resisted the "base" DV would start at 6 for the "adjusted" Force of the spell, but all of the casting Magicians hits would still count, even if there were more than 6.

This could cause a curious backfire on the Arcane Arrester character where (under normal circumstances) the Magician would have cast at Force 6 and had their hits capped at 6, instead they casted at Force 12 and thus were able to add more net hits, thus resulting in even more damage than they would have received if they hadn't have taken Arcane Arrester in the first place. Ironic.

How would the mage even know though? I don't think there is any "backfire" as there is no indicator of having arcane arrestor (other than being fomori or gnome).

So, I don't think it'll cause you to get higher force spells cast on you, because they won't know to do so.

Fizzling spells that shouldn't fizzle would be one clue. Astrally perceiving a small dead zone around the character would be another.

This would appear to be a situation in which the magician's special buddies, spirits, come in handy. The Arcane Arrester Quality would only affect the Innate Spell power of a spirit, leaving only the background count to deal with. This assumes that the background count would affect the Force of the spirit for effects projected into the area, eg. Confusion, Compulsion, etc. A tough spirit could still close for melee and Engulf, etc.

Peter

Not on the first couple spells, no, but after that they might start upping the Force when they see that nothing seems to be slowing the guy down. That is, assuming they live that long. I know my PC's to do the same thing when encountering a high-powered NPC so it stands to reason that NPC's should have the same logic.

That would the the background count, not the arcane arrestor.

As far as spirits being able to close... they have to be force 5+ and are reduced by 4. So a force 6 spirit, comes running up to engulf, or melee, and is now force 2. Not so great.


Did you not notice that a full hits force 6 manabolt does 9P still? The mage would probably just think the guy got a couple of hits on his resistance test.

They can't, actually. When the force of the spell is reduced, excess hits are discarded.

RC, 111, "When affected by a spell (including a critter’s Innate Spells), the character—and she alone—treats Force-based effects (damage, paralysis, etc.) at half (round down) actual strength."

Spell force is not effected, but the cahracter treats force based effects at half.

From the example given, it appears this is only the base damage, as it says taht the spellcaster will still add hits to improve the effect.

Wouldn't the number of hits be directly tied into the concept of 'damage', which is affected by the Arcane Arrester power for the one target?

How would you separate damage from the number of hits?

Peter

Read the description. It explicitly states force based effects (such as damage or paralysis) are halved. It then says the mage still adds hits as normal.

It does not, however, day how many net hits the magician can add. Furthermore, it says that the spell is resisted as if it were half of its force (round down). Resistance tests are entirely dependent on net hits, which force only factoring into it as a limiting factor for net hits.

Though if you want to split hairs, it appears as if they might be suggesting that net hits over Force are discarded for the purpose of resistance but not for the purpose of causing damage.

[EDIT] deleted till I think through the two above versions. Replying quickly isn't always a good idea.

Peter

Lets do an example.
Force 6 manabolt, 6+ hits (capped to 6 because of force.
Our gnome resists. He has 6 willpower, and gets 2 hits. Net hits are now 4.
He didn't completely resist the spell, So now the arcane arrestor kicks in. Force based effects are base damage. 6 in this case. Halve that. 3. Now add net hits, 4. = 7 damage taken.

Since it doesn't specify how many net hits can be added, the normal amount can. Since it also explicitly states the force of the spell is not lowered, it does not cap the hits the spellcaster can get.

Arcane Arrester affects all spells.

For the purposes of the character with the quality (& only that character, in the case of Area effects), the Force is treated as half for everything dependent on Force, such as Damage & Hits. The caster still suffers Drain as appropriate for the 'normal' Force of the spell.

Arcane Arrester does not increase the Drain value of spells.

There is no restriction on an Awakened character having Arcane Arrester.

Spells cast in the area of background count have their Drain increased by the background rating, but are otherwise unaffected (the magician suffers reduced Magic as normal).

Spells cast into the area of background count have their Force reduced by the background rating. Drain & casters Magic are unaffected.

Following on this example, let's say the Magician really wants to take down that annoying Gnome right now.

Manabolt is cast at Force 12, with 9 Hits (the Magician used Edge, he's really quite ticked off).
Again the Gnome rolls his Willpower of 6 and gets 2 hits, leaving 7 Net Hits.
Now comes the damage, because of Arcane Arrester the base Force for damage resistance is 6 + 7 Net hits = 13. Ouch.

Note the very specific wording.

Correct. But, if the gnome got 3 hits on the resistance test, the spell would be fully resisted, because it is treated as a force 3 spell for the resistance test.

And Malachi, that isn't specific wording, That is very vague wording. There are umpteen different ways to rephrase that to make it more clear, one one or the other. Few add significantly to the word count and some actually reduce it.

What that says is yes, Hits are calculated normally for the spell. However, for that character, the Force is lower, & thus the maximum Hits against that character are also lower.

No, it isn't. The force is not reduced, and as such, hits are not capped. You treat the effects of the spell as halved. Not the spells force itself. He would have to have had 6 hits to fully resist the spell.

Negative. It says that force based effects are treated as halved. And gives examples such as damage, or paralysis. If the force of the spell was actually halved, I would agree with you, but it explicitly is not. Thus, there is no capping of hits able to be achieved.

http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...t=0&start=0

Yes, there is currently room for you to rule it that way, but it can easily be ruled as I explained it, & that seems to be the intent.


As there will be an entry in the FAQ for something that only matters under the ruling that the adjusted Force limits Hits, it seems likely that the errata will clarify the issue.

But it is also resisted at half force. Regardless of net hits, a force 3 spell is fully resisted with three hits, with the excepton of indirect combat spells

But it seems that it will be only to limit damage done and not reduce net hits for purposes of actually hitting with the spell. From synners reply.

Yes, & as such a distinction needs to be made for Indirect spells, & will be in the FAQ, this is not true for Direct spells, which thus means Hits are limited by the adjusted Force, not the original Force.

Why should it make any affect at all? Indirect and Direct combat spells have hits capped by force. They do not work separately in this regard. So why should the arcane arrester cap hits for one type and not another? It shouldn't. If it does, it'll go on my list of stupid and badly thought out FAQ rulings that just cause more complexity in the rules for no benefit and yet another reason pointing to why the FAQ is worthless.

The key is when hits are capped. Indirect spells have two tests, only one of which involves an interaction between the target and the spell.

Indirect get a damage soak after the to-hit roll. Direct don't.

Why should indirect not be hampered on their to-hit roll?

Direct spell: Spellcasting + Magic vs Willpower/Body + Counterspelling. Damage dealt is Force + Net hits. If 0 net hits, no damage.

Indirect: Spellcasting + Magic vs Reaction. If 0 net hits, no damage. Else, Damage dealt is Force + Net hits, resisted by Body + (Impact armor modified by elemental effect) + counterspelling.

If arcane arrestor reduces force including net hits for direct spells:
Force 6 mana bolt with 6 hits. Reduced to force 3 and 3 hits. Target needs only 3 hits to negate all damage. Otherwise damage potential is 3-5P.
Force 6 flamethrower with 6 hits. All 6 hits count aganist targets reaction to hit with spell, target needs to make 6+ hits on reaction to avoid damage all together. Force is reduced to 3 for damage resistance. Resisted damage is Force 3 + net hits 3 + half impact + counterspelling. Damage range between 4-6. But defender gets considerably more dice to soak the hit.

The way I think it was intended, in that it only halves the damage aspect:
Force 6 manabolt, 6 hits. Target needs 6 hits to negate all damage entirely with willpower. Damage potential is 4-9P.
Force 6 flamethrower, 6 hits. Target needs 6 hits to negate all damage with reaction. Damage potential is 4-9P.

Against someone wtihout arcane arrester:
Force 6 manabolt, 6 hits. 6 hits to negate damage w/willpower. Damage range of 7-12P.
Flamethrower, 6 hits, 6 hits to negate with reaction. Range of 7-12P.

I think giving it the bonus of capping the magicians effective hits is not how the ability is worded, and causes significant reduction in the power of a mage against such a character.


To simplify this... All spells force 6.
No arcane arrestor:
Direct spells, damage range 7-12P
Indirect spells, damage range 7-12P elemental effects.

Arcane arrestor the way hyz and co. see it:
Direct spells, damage range 3-5P
Indirect, 4-6P elemental effects.

The way I see it working:
Direct spells, 4-9P.
Indirect spells, 4-9P elemental effects.

100% times 1,000 agree with you Tarantula. If Arcane Arrester caps the amount of hits at the moment of casting, it instantly moves into the realm of ridiculously over-powerful.

I believe the key sentence in the explanation is that "the actual Force of the spell is not reduced."

No, with it limiting the raw Hits, it moves into the realm of worth the cost. Without it limiting the Hits, I would never pay more than 15 points for it, and would estimate its value at around 10 BP.

If it does not limit Hits to the adjusted Force, it does little more than provide a highly circumstantial damage reduction - while undoubtedly useful, not particularly good. While the potential reduction is higher, I would in most circumstances much prefer a simple Platelet Factories implant. It would be more beneficial overall, & is a lot cheaper.

If it does limit Hits to the adjusted Force, it is now worth the cost, because it has a tangible effect on all hostile spells. It is not overpowering or a must-have by any means, because it costs 25 BP, & also significantly reduces the benefit if Heal, Armor, etc.

Compared to magic resistance, which for 20BP gives you a +4 dp against resisting things. Arcane arrestor as I see is quite worthwhile. Its a guaranteed reduction.

It is a circumstantial damage reduction, for a variable amount, with effects on a select few other spells.

Magic Resistance (which I consider crap, by the way), is indirect damage resistance vs. spells, with an increased chance of resisting the spell entirely. Out of how you believe Arcane Arrester works, & how Magic Resistance currently works, they are at best equal - I would still prefer Magic Resistance in nearly any circumstance - even if Arrester cost 10-15 BP.


At 25 BP, it is not overpowering if the adjusted Force is the limit on spellcasting Hits, & is actually worth taking.

Get a Fomori. SURGE II - Magic Resistance and Astral Hazing. Make him a technomancer.

Damn tough against magic, damn tough physical, Matrix is his battleground. What more to ask?

make him an mystic adept to get counter spelling and adept powers and make him a hacker . . aside from face pretty much unbeatable no? O.o

The backgrount count from the Astral Hazing would be bad for Awakened related stuff. If you go the technomancer route, you avoid all the complications and open up a whole new arena to do attack your enemies. Astral Hazing, Arcane Arrester and Magic Resistance is bad enough without Counterspelling.