Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: what's the big deal with overcasting?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Roy Fokker
i'm relatively new to SR4 gm'ing and i don't see what is so overpowered about overcasting in SR4 and SR4a regarding drain. i realize the drain turns physical and overcasting increasing the force (and thereby net hits) but people seem to state in the SR4a threads that doing this *helps* lower drain. can anyone explain this to me? thanks!
Doc Byte
Now it will start all over again. rotate.gif
Malicant
I will use a metaphor for casting direct combat spells to explain that.

Imagine you run a hundred yards. Now imagine you were sprinting those yards, reaching your goal faster, but being more exhausted. That was SR4 regular and overcasting. Now in SR4A if you run, you can exert yourself so much, that your heart stops beating. Sprinting on the other hand is exactly the same as before.

That is my friggin' problem.
Andrew
The problem which some people seem to have appears to be that by Overcsting a mage takes physical damage rather than subdual damage but not a large amount of it which they can then heal by using first aid. In addition by overcasting they can select a damage value which will automaticically take out the target with only 1 net success.
I thought I would have a stab at answering your question instead of the random sarcasm
Neraph
Let me see if I can help out a bit too.

With normal casting, you'd have to get a lot of hits to do dangerous amounts of damage (thereby increasing the drain to yourself dangerously as well). Ex: Magic 6 spellcaster casting a force 6 spell needs 6 successes (raising the Drain by 6 as well) to deal 12 damage.

With overcasting, your drain is physical, but the base damage code is going to be substantially larger as well. Ex: Magic 6 spellcaster casting force 12 spell needs 1 success (raising the Drain by 1, for a total of 2 less than the above case) to deal 13 damage.

So you actually do end up with less drain (albeit not by much, and its physical now), and you deal more damage with the end result by overcasting Direct Combat spells.
Cain
Let me repeat the example that Synner said is the case, now, in SR4.5:

Take Joe Mage, with Magic 5. He really wants to take out a target, so he throws a manabolt. He has a choice: he can throw a Force 5 manabolt, hope he scores 5 net successes, and then take 7S drain.

Or, he can overcast a Force 10 manabolt, use no net successes for damage, and only be facing a 5P drain.

In either case, a first-aid kit will probably be able to patch up whatever damage he takes, Since his Drain resistance pool remains exactly the same, he's more likely to soak the damage from the overcast spell.

See the problem?
Uthred
QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 15 2009, 05:18 PM) *
Or, he can overcast a Force 10 manabolt, use no net successes for damage, and only be facing a 5P drain.


He has to use at least 1 net success
Degausser
Or you could just use the Base BBB rules. I know it's not the newest errata, but it works. You only take drain based on the force (not the hits), and overcasting increases the effective drain as well as changing it to physical. Also, I was under the impression that drain COULDN'T be healed by first aid. Only time (or the Medicine skill) could heal it.

Also, I may be wrong, but here is some food for thought: physical damage is a heckova lot worse then stun. BECAUSE, on a shadowrun, people are likely to be shooting you. So if you get shot, then overcast, all that damage is forcing you towards physical overflow. On the other hand, stun and physical damage are kept track of seperatly, so you are less likely to die in the middle of a firefight.
DWC
QUOTE (Degausser @ Mar 15 2009, 01:49 PM) *
Or you could just use the Base BBB rules. I know it's not the newest errata, but it works. You only take drain based on the force (not the hits), and overcasting increases the effective drain as well as changing it to physical. Also, I was under the impression that drain COULDN'T be healed by first aid. Only time (or the Medicine skill) could heal it.

Also, I may be wrong, but here is some food for thought: physical damage is a heckova lot worse then stun. BECAUSE, on a shadowrun, people are likely to be shooting you. So if you get shot, then overcast, all that damage is forcing you towards physical overflow. On the other hand, stun and physical damage are kept track of seperatly, so you are less likely to die in the middle of a firefight.


Thanks to how rediculous the FFBA and PPP armor stacking gets, most gunshot wounds are going to result in stun damage anyway.

Oh, and drain can't be magically healed. It can be first aided all day long.
Malicant
But doesn't that make First Aid magical, meaning, it can't heal drain? grinbig.gif
Cain
QUOTE (Uthred @ Mar 15 2009, 09:29 AM) *
He has to use at least 1 net success

Not according to the SR4.5 rules, he doesn't. He gets to choose. Since he's already dealing 10 boxes of damage, there's no need for the extra success.
TheDarkPhoenix
Yeah Deguasser, you have a point. All the examples above assume that you haven't taken any damage before you overcast. Using a first aid kit in the middle of combat isn't a very good idea. In most shadowrun games, your going to end up taking some damage, especially if you just knocked out one guy with one hit. (Surely you would be a nice target for those corp guys now). I suppose you may encounter a problem if you can almost always actually soak overcast and therefor rarely take damage. But you are going to be hurting if you fail.
Zurai
QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 15 2009, 01:01 PM) *
Not according to the SR4.5 rules, he doesn't. He gets to choose. Since he's already dealing 10 boxes of damage, there's no need for the extra success.


"The caster needs at least one net hit for the spell to take effect."

The same text is in the BBB.
Uthred
QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 15 2009, 06:01 PM) *
Not according to the SR4.5 rules, he doesn't. He gets to choose. Since he's already dealing 10 boxes of damage, there's no need for the extra success.


Yes according to the rules you do, from the Hits thread (where you missed or ignored it)

"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)."
pbangarth
QUOTE (Zurai @ Mar 15 2009, 11:05 AM) *
"The caster needs at least one net hit for the spell to take effect."

The same text is in the BBB.



QUOTE (Uthred @ Mar 15 2009, 11:24 AM) *
Yes according to the rules you do, from the Hits thread (where you missed or ignored it)

"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)."


But, now in SR4A, once you have scored the net hit(s) to achieve success, you can choose how many to apply to give extra damage. Opting for none is a viable choice.
Zurai
You are adding an additional step that is not present. According to you, the steps are as follows:

1. Roll Opposed Test (Magic + Spellcasting vs Willpower [+ Counterspelling, if applicable])
2. Determine how many net hits are available.
3. If net hits available > 0, the spell succeeds.
4. Determine how many net hits to use to increase damage.

This is incorrect. The correct steps are:

1. Roll Opposed Test (Magic + Spellcasting vs Willpower [+ Counterspelling, if applicable])
2. Determine how many net hits are available.
3. Determine how many net hits to use. If you use 0 net hits, the spell fails. If you use at least 1 net hit, increase the damage and the drain by 1 per net hit used.

It's a very minor change, but it's a very important one, procedurally. Net hits for damage are simultaneous with net hits for success. You can't separate them.
Draco18s
Source?
Zurai
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Mar 15 2009, 03:06 PM) *
Source?


Source for there being multiple passes on how many net hits you use?

You can't un-use a net hit.
kzt
QUOTE (Uthred @ Mar 15 2009, 11:29 AM) *
He has to use at least 1 net success

No, magic doesn't follow the basic game concepts. See the example of the motorbike on 174.
Muspellsheimr
Except Drain is not increased by Net Hits used, but by Net Hits used for damage, and you get to choose how many you wish to use for damage.

It is entirely acceptable to achieve 1+ Net Hits, enough for the spell to take effect, and apply none of them to increasing the DV, & thus none of them apply for increasing the Drain.
Roy Fokker
thanks for clearing that up. i'm not knowledgeable enough with the core rules yet to have picked up that difference.
Zurai
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Mar 15 2009, 03:33 PM) *
Except Drain is not increased by Net Hits used, but by Net Hits used for damage


Ah, good catch. Yes, you're right; objection withdrawn.
kzt
As the whole concept of overcasting seems to be horribly broken, why not just ban it?

The game doesn't allow people to punch extra hard when they want to, or double the damage of their pistols.

I'd probably also want to double drain on direct spells, as they get to ignore defenses. From a game point of view it makes no sense to have a way to attack someone that is the most effective and the least costly.
ElFenrir
Well, actually, called shots are allowed which can increase damage at a cost of DP. So yeah...they kinda can do that too.

And this:
QUOTE
Using a first aid kit in the middle of combat isn't a very good idea.



Typically, after a force 10 overcast Manaball is tossed at the opposition, combat is either over or so damn close to it, the first aid kit in question will usually indeed not be used in combat. wink.gif
darthmord
The messed up part is that with the right gear, that physical damage from overcasting becomes Stun damage anyways. If you have your numbers right, you can reduce the damage to 1 Stun AFTER Overcasting.

OC --> Resist all but 1 Dmg (P) --> Trauma Damper conversion --> Result: 1 Stun Damage
Malachi
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Mar 15 2009, 04:33 PM) *
Except Drain is not increased by Net Hits used, but by Net Hits used for damage, and you get to choose how many you wish to use for damage.

It is entirely acceptable to achieve 1+ Net Hits, enough for the spell to take effect, and apply none of them to increasing the DV, & thus none of them apply for increasing the Drain.

Yeah, this is the part that I will not be using in my game. I'm not going to let the Magician Character adjust "net hits" after the defensive roll has been made. In my games, the Magician will have to choose how many hits to keep after the initial Spellcasting Test only. It'll be a gamble on his part as he tries to "guess" how many hits the opposition will generate (no I will not tell him the opponent's Willpower or the presence of Counterspelling if he doesn't already know) balanced by the danger of increased Drain. Any Net Hits the Magician generates are always used to increase the DV of the spell (isn't that what you're doing when you throw those dice on the Spellcasting test?) and thus will increase the Drain.
BlueMax
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 09:38 AM) *
Yeah, this is the part that I will not be using in my game. I'm not going to let the Magician Character adjust "net hits" after the defensive roll has been made. In my games, the Magician will have to choose how many hits to keep after the initial Spellcasting Test only. It'll be a gamble on his part as he tries to "guess" how many hits the opposition will generate (no I will not tell him the opponent's Willpower or the presence of Counterspelling if he doesn't already know) balanced by the danger of increased Drain. Any Net Hits the Magician generates are always used to increase the DV of the spell (isn't that what you're doing when you throw those dice on the Spellcasting test?) and thus will increase the Drain.


I honestly can't understand why your way isn't the official way.
Zurai
In other words, you're banning direct combat spells.
BlueMax
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 09:38 AM) *
e the Drain.

EDIT: Here's a thought: instead of Net Hits that changed the DV, why not have the increased Drain based on the number of hits the Opponent rolled on their test? This would be similar to how Drain is calculated for Summoning Tests. It also has the nice mechanic that the Magician isn't getting "punished" for success, it's more of a "negative feedback" situation from the Opponent. The Magician is channeling a ton of Mana and trying to "jam" it directly into his Opponents aura, the Aura "pushes back" on some of that mana and (having no other place to go) it slams back into the originating Magician.


Very neat. Still uses a mechanism without looped steps (caster, target done instead of caster target castor)
Malachi
Here's a thought: instead of Net Hits that changed the DV, why not have the increased Drain based on the number of hits the Opponent rolled on their test? This would be similar to how Drain is calculated for Summoning Tests. It also has the nice mechanic that the Magician isn't getting "punished" for success, it's more of a "negative feedback" situation from the Opponent. The Magician is channeling a ton of Mana and trying to "jam" it directly into his Opponents aura, the Aura "pushes back" on some of that mana and (having no other place to go) it slams back into the originating Magician. For area affect you could use either the highest hits achieved by any opponent, or the total of all hits achieved by all affected by the spell... though the latter may be too punishing for Area Effect spells.
pbangarth
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 10:46 AM) *
Here's a thought: instead of Net Hits that changed the DV, why not have the increased Drain based on the number of hits the Opponent rolled on their test? This would be similar to how Drain is calculated for Summoning Tests. It also has the nice mechanic that the Magician isn't getting "punished" for success, it's more of a "negative feedback" situation from the Opponent. The Magician is channeling a ton of Mana and trying to "jam" it directly into his Opponents aura, the Aura "pushes back" on some of that mana and (having no other place to go) it slams back into the originating Magician. For area affect you could use either the highest hits achieved by any opponent, or the total of all hits achieved by all affected by the spell... though the latter may be too punishing for Area Effect spells.


Oh... Malachi ... I LIKE this one!

This is the first alternative I've seen proposed on DS that doesn't look like a self-stimulating accountant's fantasy. There -is- the issue of not conforming to the general format of combat resolution, perhaps countered by now being more like the other broad magical function, Summoning, but it sure would give a great feel to magical combat... the flow of mana back and forth... the brains leaking out of ears that tried too hard ... the consequences of picking on someone you should have left to the sammies... I like it.
Ryu
Maybe choosing used hits instead of used net hits could be the punishment for overcasting direct combat spells. As a houserule for those who dislike overcasting, but want to keep direct combat spells.
Mikado
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 11:46 AM) *
Here's a thought: instead of Net Hits that changed the DV, why not have the increased Drain based on the number of hits the Opponent rolled on their test? This would be similar to how Drain is calculated for Summoning Tests. It also has the nice mechanic that the Magician isn't getting "punished" for success, it's more of a "negative feedback" situation from the Opponent. The Magician is channeling a ton of Mana and trying to "jam" it directly into his Opponents aura, the Aura "pushes back" on some of that mana and (having no other place to go) it slams back into the originating Magician. For area affect you could use either the highest hits achieved by any opponent, or the total of all hits achieved by all affected by the spell... though the latter may be too punishing for Area Effect spells.

Wow, I like this. It nerfs direct combat spells and uses a mechanic already in place instead of changing a mechanic.
Zurai
It's certainly a more elegant solution than the current one, that's for sure. It still does nothing for overcasting, but the developers said they weren't trying to nerf overcasting, so...
Draco18s
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 11:38 AM) *
Yeah, this is the part that I will not be using in my game. I'm not going to let the Magician Character adjust "net hits" after the defensive roll has been made. In my games, the Magician will have to choose how many hits to keep after the initial Spellcasting Test only. It'll be a gamble on his part as he tries to "guess" how many hits the opposition will generate (no I will not tell him the opponent's Willpower or the presence of Counterspelling if he doesn't already know) balanced by the danger of increased Drain. Any Net Hits the Magician generates are always used to increase the DV of the spell (isn't that what you're doing when you throw those dice on the Spellcasting test?) and thus will increase the Drain.


You're still going to see more overcast spells than normal-cast. I know that in a situation where I don't know the target's willpower and the presence of counterspelling I'd choose 3 hits to use against them.

If they roll average on Average Willpower (3) and Exceptional Counterspelling (6) then they'll tie me. Underaverage roll, lack of CS or lower-than-average willpower and I'll likely have 1 to 2 net hits, making my drain managable (and the target out cold) versus using ALL my net hits on a normal-cast spell and taking 50% more drain (and the target is still standing).
BlueMax
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Mar 16 2009, 09:59 AM) *
You're still going to see more overcast spells than normal-cast. I know that in a situation where I don't know the target's willpower and the presence of counterspelling I'd choose 3 hits to use against them.

If they roll average on Average Willpower (3) and Exceptional Counterspelling (6) then they'll tie me. Underaverage roll, lack of CS or lower-than-average willpower and I'll likely have 1 to 2 net hits, making my drain managable (and the target out cold) versus using ALL my net hits on a normal-cast spell and taking 50% more drain (and the target is still standing).

We are all different. I want my foes down and wouldn't take the risk of limiting myself to 3, I would go as high as Drain + First Aid could fix me.

BlueMax
pushing the problem downstream
Caadium
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 09:46 AM) *
Here's a thought: instead of Net Hits that changed the DV, why not have the increased Drain based on the number of hits the Opponent rolled on their test? This would be similar to how Drain is calculated for Summoning Tests. It also has the nice mechanic that the Magician isn't getting "punished" for success, it's more of a "negative feedback" situation from the Opponent. The Magician is channeling a ton of Mana and trying to "jam" it directly into his Opponents aura, the Aura "pushes back" on some of that mana and (having no other place to go) it slams back into the originating Magician. For area affect you could use either the highest hits achieved by any opponent, or the total of all hits achieved by all affected by the spell... though the latter may be too punishing for Area Effect spells.


This is an interesting prospect and makes sense on a conceptual level. Unfortunately, I don't see this as really being enough to balance direct combat spells with indirect. In a nutshell I say this because most targets of direct combat spells have the stats to get about 1 success to resist (willpower 3 resisting a stunbolt for example). Given the low base drain this one extra success won't really slow down the full-auto stunslingers.

Conversely raising the drain by 3 or so (an average amount of net successes) has more of a chance to slow down the mage. Or, if the mage prefers he can lessen the affect of his spells so that they can keep firing on full-auto. In either case, you've successfully reduced the usefulness of Stunbolt and it's cousins to a level that is more inline with other magic.
Draco18s
QUOTE (BlueMax @ Mar 16 2009, 01:03 PM) *
We are all different. I want my foes down and wouldn't take the risk of limiting myself to 3, I would go as high as Drain + First Aid could fix me.


Granted, sometimes you'd go for all the successes available. But if the situation is more or less under control and not This Guy Needs to Die NOW then you'd be a little more conservative. If you KNOW that there's no mage giving counterspelling you could even say that you only take 2 successes (one for getting resisted by willpower, the other goes to Net).
pbangarth
QUOTE (Caadium @ Mar 16 2009, 11:31 AM) *
This is an interesting prospect and makes sense on a conceptual level. Unfortunately, I don't see this as really being enough to balance direct combat spells with indirect. In a nutshell I say this because most targets of direct combat spells have the stats to get about 1 success to resist (willpower 3 resisting a stunbolt for example). Given the low base drain this one extra success won't really slow down the full-auto stunslingers.

Conversely raising the drain by 3 or so (an average amount of net successes) has more of a chance to slow down the mage. Or, if the mage prefers he can lessen the affect of his spells so that they can keep firing on full-auto. In either case, you've successfully reduced the usefulness of Stunbolt and it's cousins to a level that is more inline with other magic.


But remember that the opposition successes are added to the regular Drain in this scheme. So even a little bit of push back starts to hurt. And the bit about every target in a crowd pushing back... yeah! Suddenly those Indirect Spells look a LOT better.
Caadium
QUOTE (pbangarth @ Mar 16 2009, 12:06 PM) *
But remember that the opposition successes are added to the regular Drain in this scheme. So even a little bit of push back starts to hurt. And the bit about every target in a crowd pushing back... yeah! Suddenly those Indirect Spells look a LOT better.


For single target spells this is an average of 1 hit to resist. As I said, that isn't much of a change and is probably not limiting enough. On the other side of that, if every hit from every target in an area of affect direct damage adds to drain then that is probably too much.

As I said, I like the concept a lot. I just don't see it as the solution that the new rules are going for.
BlueMax
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Mar 16 2009, 10:59 AM) *
Granted, sometimes you'd go for all the successes available. But if the situation is more or less under control and not This Guy Needs to Die NOW then you'd be a little more conservative. If you KNOW that there's no mage giving counterspelling you could even say that you only take 2 successes (one for getting resisted by willpower, the other goes to Net).


I should be clear, we ain't ever got drek under control. Its "go go go" till only we be booming.

BlueMax
Not a smooth operator once he hears a boomy go.
kzt
QUOTE (Caadium @ Mar 16 2009, 12:31 PM) *
This is an interesting prospect and makes sense on a conceptual level. Unfortunately, I don't see this as really being enough to balance direct combat spells with indirect. In a nutshell I say this because most targets of direct combat spells have the stats to get about 1 success to resist (willpower 3 resisting a stunbolt for example). Given the low base drain this one extra success won't really slow down the full-auto stunslingers.

Until they run into a teamwork counterspell. That plus will can generate serious dice. Then they use edge. And Mr Overcasting's head explodes.
Cain
Yeah, it's an excellent idea, but it doesn't address what happens with multiple-target spells, such as StunBall.
Malachi
QUOTE (Cain @ Mar 16 2009, 08:01 PM) *
Yeah, it's an excellent idea, but it doesn't address what happens with multiple-target spells, such as StunBall.


QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 12:46 PM) *
For area affect you could use either the highest hits achieved by any opponent, or the total of all hits achieved by all affected by the spell... though the latter may be too punishing for Area Effect spells.


Shinobi Killfist
QUOTE (Malachi @ Mar 16 2009, 11:46 AM) *
Here's a thought: instead of Net Hits that changed the DV, why not have the increased Drain based on the number of hits the Opponent rolled on their test? This would be similar to how Drain is calculated for Summoning Tests. It also has the nice mechanic that the Magician isn't getting "punished" for success, it's more of a "negative feedback" situation from the Opponent. The Magician is channeling a ton of Mana and trying to "jam" it directly into his Opponents aura, the Aura "pushes back" on some of that mana and (having no other place to go) it slams back into the originating Magician. For area affect you could use either the highest hits achieved by any opponent, or the total of all hits achieved by all affected by the spell... though the latter may be too punishing for Area Effect spells.


Wow, I really like it. I'd go with highest in the AoE not combined. But it limits direct combat spells and it gves the variability and randomness I think magic needs.
Shinobi Killfist
QUOTE (Caadium @ Mar 16 2009, 02:10 PM) *
For single target spells this is an average of 1 hit to resist. As I said, that isn't much of a change and is probably not limiting enough. On the other side of that, if every hit from every target in an area of affect direct damage adds to drain then that is probably too much.

As I said, I like the concept a lot. I just don't see it as the solution that the new rules are going for.


Personally I'm not worried about single target spells. I can pretty much guarantee a street sam will drop at least one guy every phase he acts in. A long burst from a SMG just ends people, and that is with no drain. Its the near free suped up grenades I have a problem with.
Wasabi
Someone else posted in another thread about adding a -1 to the success test for each point of overcasting. I think thats a pretty elegant solution personally...
Caadium
QUOTE (Wasabi @ Mar 16 2009, 10:33 PM) *
Someone else posted in another thread about adding a -1 to the success test for each point of overcasting. I think thats a pretty elegant solution personally...


In other words something akin to: Overcast spell lvl - Magic rating = number of hits required to successfully cast the spell

Or, in practical terms, a force 12 stunball cast by someone with magic 6 would need 6 hits to even be considered to successfully cast?
Draco18s
QUOTE (Caadium @ Mar 17 2009, 01:03 AM) *
In other words something akin to: Overcast spell lvl - Magic rating = number of hits required to successfully cast the spell

Or, in practical terms, a force 12 stunball cast by someone with magic 6 would need 6 hits to even be considered to successfully cast?


No. Where did you come up with that?

The actual idea was:

Magic + Spellcasting - (Force - Magic, min 0) = Dice Pool.
Caadium
Oops. For some reason I misread that. He said -1 to overcasting, and I translated that to -1 hit. A good sign that it's bed time.
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