First Question:

SR4A
and

What exactly does this mean? When do I have exactly choose which hits or net hits I use?

1) I can choose to use several net hits to increase the chance that my spell is not resistet in the opposed test but after the opposed test I can use less net hits for not increasing my drain.
Example: Stunbolt, magic+sorcery vs will+counterspell, 4 net hits, I choose that only one net hit is used => drain and damage only goes up by +1

2) I must choose the number of net hits used in the opposed test *before* the opposed test is made to determine my drain
Example1: Stunbolt, magic+sorcery = 8 hits, I choose only to use 2 hit, will+counterspell = 1 hit => 1 net hit, drain/damage +1
Example2: Stunbolt, magic+sorcery = 8 hits, I choose to use all 8 hits, will+counterspell = 1 hit => 7 net hit, drain/damage +7

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

Second Question:
Synner mentioned that the Karma generation rules in RC will be updated for SR4A. I assume that the attribute cost for the karma generation system is increased from x3 to x5 to match the SR4A karma rules for attributes. Are other changes planed or can at least the basic races (human etc) be re-generated using the adapted karma genereration rules?

For your first question, option 2) seems the most likely, especially for working out the Drain when multiple targets are concerned.

nice to see you around, apple. as you know I'm with HappyDaze. 2) seems to be the way to go.

Besides that I'd strongly recommend to release the RC errata ASAP or at least give us a post with the current stand of the karma sys version revision for the RC errata.

But it's not an exclusive relationship...

2) does not make much sense to me. Both sides make their rolls at the same time, so it seems the caster can withdraw hits whenever he likes during an opposed test. If some errata or the FAQ states "Attacker FIRST! Defender SECOND!" it would be different, alas, I'm unaware of such a statement.

Regarding the second question I assume the total Karma available will be adjustet to represent the increase in cost, which would be a good reason why we have no details on that topic besides "We are working on it". If they simply adjustet the cost and leave it at that, they could have said so without referring to a future errata that will possibly take months to see the light of day.

Actually, it makes more sense. If you're going to pull a punch, you do it beofre you know how well the other guy's going to take it, not after seeing his face deform.

No it doesn't. It's an opposed test, not a test sequence. It's abstract. You the player can make decisions about what happens that your character never could. You can use Edge after the dust settles to change the outcome, for crying out loud. I really don't see how it makes more sense that attackers need to finish it up before defenders get to roll. Especially, since that is not even implicated in the rules.

I choose option 2 because I dub it the cooler answer.

Apple, You're asking if (1) you keep all hits rolled, to determine whether the spell is successful, and then decide how many you want to use to increase damage/drain? Or (2) you decide how many hits you want to keep, and hope that you have enough to hit the target at all? Is that it?

All, note that your GM can require you to make either of these choices before you learn what your opponent rolled. The first, obviously allows you to play it safe, dealing the minimum damage and drain. Damage equal to the force is still quite reasonable, and you can up it, when absolutely necessary. The second is risky. I think players will always be calculating the maximum drain they're willing and/or likely to take.

I would go with Malicant and choose 1. It's bad enough that combat spells suddenly became much tougher, Drain-wise. Now you have to decide, in advance, how many hits to use? Direct combat spells are already risky enough, being an all-or-nothing deal, without forcing the mage to choose between potentially wiping himself out with Drain, or choosing a number of successes that might not be enough to do anything.

This sentence was already included in previous versions so it's not THAT new.

Given the wording: as a result every net hit used to increase the damage value of a Direct Combat spell also increases the Drain DV of the spell by +1, I would have to choose 1, since the wording implies that you have a choice to use net hits for increasing damage.

Is this actually the wording that's in the book? Is there any additional wording?

It is a direct quote from the PDF ... and I didnt found any other relevant quote (of course sometimes I am blind).

SYL

I would go with 1 just on the basis of fluent gameplay and fun.

Simply choosing how much drain you get is a lot faster than calculating the odds of the second choice.

Edit: Also... I feel that the second option might gimp direct combat spells too much.

This gives the impression of fine-tuned control. Plus, while the wording might be open to interpretation, they wouldn't need to phrase it that way if it is done the #2 way. They could have simply said "as a result, every net hit also increases the Drain DV of the spell by +1." So, after re-reading this snippet, I think #1 is the correct interpretation.

As a mage, I'd then overcast significantly more: and only take 1 net hit. I'm doing Force damage already, why take more drain than I need to?

And that is the root of all evil, the reason why I dislike this change, at least as long as overcasting is not changed to be in line with its fluff. Well, I still would dislike it a little if overcasting is adjusted, because it screws the ratio of how force and hits affect drain and damage.

Yes, overcasting definitely seems to be the 'way to go' with the new rules

Apple - As I understand your posting, option 1 is the correct one. Net hits are what you get after the Opposed Test is resolved. You can then fine tune the attack by controlling the amount of mana pumped into the direct combat spell (withholding net hits from the DV).

Example: A Magic 6 magician casting a Force 6 stunbolt at a security guard rolls 12 dice (Magic 6, Spellcasting 4, and a Spellcasting focus rating 2/Mentor spirit bonus), he gets 4 hits. The security guard now opposes with Willpower 3 and gets 1 hit. The magician is left with 3 net hits which he may chose whether or not to apply to the stunbolt's DV raising it to 9 DV. If he does increase the DV by 3 to 9, the Drain from the spell also goes from 3S (6/2, rounded down) to 6S. Had the magician overcast the stunbolt spell at Force 10, he could have chosen to raise the stunbolt's DV to 13 (or stick to 10, 11, or 12), but if he had done so the Drain would be 8P (10/2 + 3 net hits used).

In the case of area spells, the heighest number of net hits counts for Drain purposes.

I recognize the wording should have been more explicit, mea culpa, and I will attempt to get it tweaked in the print release.

What a wonderful example of how an advance PDF can help the print run! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Thank you very much for clearing this up.

Wouldn't a Magic 5 magician casting a Force 6 spell be overcasting, and thus, suffering Physical drain? The example works if you make him a Magic 6 magician and make his pool 13 dice.

You are correct, it's been a long day and I mixed up two examples I was working on, my apologies. Fixed now.

Synner, do the authors have an official position on whether the player knows the exact number of net hits before he decides?

Doesn't matter, does it?

"I use 1 net hit." If he has 1 he gets the one, if he has 4, he gets the one. The operative word here is "net." "I use one hit" means that he doesn't know the opponent's roll, "I use 1 net hit" implies that if he has ANY net hits, he's only using one of them, how many successes the other guy got doesn't need to be known.

Ah, right. I was thinking in terms of... it being different.

That's not what Synner said. The choice of how many net hits to use is made after the opponent's roll has taken effect. The player knows how many total hits he got, knows how many net hits he has from which to choose, and therefore knows how many hits the opponent got to give him that number of net hits.

I'm not sure, now that I write this, why this matters.

I am aware that this post is probably not going to be making me any friends, but that doesn't bother me.

Let me start by saying, that this change to direct damage spells is something I was not sure about. After I sat down and did some math I've come to the conclusion that I like it. What I don't like is how it does seem to encourage people to overcast in an effort to skirt around the increased drain. That being said, I've come up with an idea that I'll be testing at my table that I think addresses this.

When overcasting a direct damage spell, each net hit will add 2 to the drain DV instead of the +1 as described in SR4A.

The problem is, on an overcast spell in SR4.5, you don't *have* to use any net successes for damage. So, that rule becomes pointless.

RAW state, "The caster needs at least 1 net hit for the spell to take affect." (pg 195 BBB) On the next page (pg. 196 BBB) it goes on to say, "ANY net hits scored on the Spellcasting Test increases the DV by 1 per net hit." (emphasis mine).

You can chose to only take 1 net hit, that was the purpose of this thread, but that can have a significant impact.

That alone takes your force 12 manabolt troll killer to a base of 8P drain (6p for spell +2p for 1 net hit). On a stunball, that force 12 overcast now has a drain of 9p base. Etc.


Some might argue that adding 2 DV to the drain is nothing, but in the group I run that risk would be huge. Since the argument is that overcasters will only use 1 net success then this number can be adjusted if it doesn't work, but for my group I don't expect any problems with it.

Well it has the effect of giving players fine-grained control over how much damage they do which changes how we think of casting such a spell and reduces tension. If the player knows that they cast a Force 6 spell and knows that they got four net hits, then they can directly choose whether they want to do 7,8,9 or 10 points of damage. There's a lot of control there. I liken it to shooting someone with a firearm and then after having hit them, choosing how accurate you want your shot to be. I kind of like the magician choosing how hard to try without having that ability to casually fine tune the results. Adds to the drama and fits how I saw Direct Combat spells.

This is just my personal preference, but I like the fine tune control. Makes for more fun.

The way I see it happening, the spellcaster breaks through the defenses of the target, and then decides how much damage to do (which affects both damage and drain). From this point of view, it seems a bit strange that the spellcaster would 'pull a muscle' when his opponent rolls badly, do more damage than intended AND hurt himself more in the process.

Not a critique, just my personal opinion. Probably not in accordance with the real fluff.

That's fine. Mine's just personal opinion, too. At least it's easy to change the system one way or another.

I'm still going to stick with deciding how many successes to keep - and basing the added Drain off of all of these - before the target(s) resist. It feels better to me.

why do i get the mental image of a wizboy casting a combat spell, going "huh?" and then "oh crap!" before dropping like a sack of something?

im tempted to go with no picking, the number of net hits gets used as is, and the drain will match that.

It won't feel better to the mage suffering from random drain, but that is his problem.

hey, if one want dependable drain, use indirect spells

Why not add such a random drain thingy to everything? I mean, every spell channels mana, right? So with every spell you should have the fun of not knowing if you die from using it, especially, if you use it well. Success must be punished!

I'm with Malicant on this. While this rule does something to balance DCS against ICS, it promotes overcasting even more, by PUNISHING you for not doing it in most cases.

Example: A Mage with Magic 5 casts Stunbolt against an avg. opponent, so let's assume the caster wants to score 10 boxes of damage since thats about the stun track of most metahumans.

Old rules:

Regular: Stunbolt 5 + 5 net hits: 2S drain - guaranteed 5 boxes of damage if it goes through - rest depending on luck or edge use.
Overcast: Stunbolt 10: 4P drain - guaranteed 10 boxes of damage plus any net hits you want to use.

New rules:

Regular: Stunbolt 5 + 5 net hits: 7S drain! - still depending on the same luck as in the old rules, only with more drain.
Overcast: Stunbolt 10: Still 4P drain +1 for any net hits you want to use but you're already doing 10 boxes of damage.

Before, at least with a lot of luck or edge, you could still achieve similar results as an overcast by regular casts at a lower drain DV.
Now you're even being actively penalized if you land a lucky roll and get a lot of hits, so you have even more motivation to overcast all the time.
To address this, someone in another thread proposed of going from Force/2+Mods to Force+Mods when overcasting and I think that is a pretty good houserule, at least for DCS.
If you overcast, you still get a higher base DV no matter how bad your roll is as long as the spell goes through. But if an overcasted spell is resisted, like Stunbolt 10 in my example, you still have to soak 7P drain, while a resisted regular spell only leaves you with 2S to be soaked.

The best (i.e. most entertaining) argument defending those changes I've heard so far:
Overcasting is the norm, it is what you should do, regular casts are something you do rarely. That argument was straightfaced serious attempt to justify the rules changes, claiming, they balance direct combat spells, and overcasting is and never was a problem.

Seriously, WTF?

Ok, now I think hell froze over.

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

How I have seen it for 19 or so years
Initial drain is " I am opening a big farking whole to the other plane" How big? Force big
The variable aspect "This is how much energy came through and every drop is going to cost me"

Its an odd dilemma. While it does take skill to control how much comes through the mana tap, the skill roll is only on the spellcasting. Drain is now left to a pure force of will(two stats). Ideally, the choice would be up front to streamline actions. However, the skill only comes at the front and not for drain, so man its a toughy.

I have this oddball unheard of plan, play it for 6 months before complaining with full force. Or I could just start complaining with Fool Force.

BlueMax
/ Back in my day, drain was force+modifiers none of this pansy 1/2 force nonsensne

Well, I heard tell that there are some German socialist types who design the game, so yeah success must be punished.

Friggin' germans, can't stand them, if something is fun, they must ruin it. Gaming and fun are exclusive concepts to most them, because fun is something you don't have, ever. Fun is an abomination to god in certain areas.

Is it racism if you are talking about your own people?

Overcasting any spell, Orgasm or Powerball, to the full limit of your power (double your Magic rating) should carry serious risk of death. This is certainly part of the fluff of SR, but does not come into the game mechanics. A magician with MAG 6 casting any spell at Force 12 should BLEED.

End of story.

This is part of a certain part of fluff, not all. there exist stories where a mage casts a fireball and is knocked out by it and others where a mage casts a whole bunch of spells and goes on to ruin the day of his opposition. just because the first one is more dramatic doesn't mean it is representative for the design aims of the devs.

Those are the current rules. We're discussing the SR4.5 changes, which allow you to choose to use net successes for damage.


I have *never*. not in 20 years, seen a mage go unconscious from drain, and that includes the SR3 mage who threw a Force 20D spell. Not once has it happened, in my experience.

like I said - there ARE stories of it in the fluff. and counter-examples.

It did happen to my first Sr character ever, unter SR1 rules. Of course, I blew all magic pool in casting and resisted drain with only my base attribute. Hey, I was new to this, and 11 years old.

But it DID happen. I have seen it with another character too, whose player made a similar mistake. It will not happen if you know your magic and play intelligently, of course.