I've noticed that direct combat spells tend to own in any situation. A stunbolt spell can end a single person without much effort on the part of the magician casting it, and can be a little excessive in any given situation. Also, compared to Indirect Combat spells, there's almost no reason not to use entirely Direct spells.
My proposal is that the damage on Direct Combat spells should be reduced to (Force/2) to help alleviate some of the issues associated with balance here. I can't think of a reasonable way to give them nearly as good of a Damage Resistance test as Indirect spells get. It still prevents some of the silliness of DC spells without raping them too much, since a Force 5 stunbolt is often all it takes to end a single person, and with this rule it's still going to do significant hurt, just not at entirely the same level - and it'll be a little more fair to the people who have to deal with the spell.
Full Version: Fixing Direct Combat spells
Heh.
You're welcome to use the myriad options to adjust the spells as you wish. There are even some in the rule book to use. And there are other variations that will be brought up in this thread.
Personally I don't think it's a problem so I don't need a solution.
You're welcome to use the myriad options to adjust the spells as you wish. There are even some in the rule book to use. And there are other variations that will be brought up in this thread.
Personally I don't think it's a problem so I don't need a solution.
Or you can make their drain based on Force instead of Force/2.
Or add 1 full point of Drain for each Hit applied as extra damage. Forces them to take the base force up.
Not that I think there's a problem.
You want proof against bullets? You get a bullet resistant vest.
You want proof against direct damage spells, get a team mage with good Counterspelling.
Not that I think there's a problem.
You want proof against bullets? You get a bullet resistant vest.
You want proof against direct damage spells, get a team mage with good Counterspelling.
I use the following houserules:
Spells (Drain)
• Direct Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
• Indirect Combat Spells get -1 Drain.
• All Stun Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
o This is in addition to the direct combat spell drain increase
Spells (Drain)
• Direct Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
• Indirect Combat Spells get -1 Drain.
• All Stun Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
o This is in addition to the direct combat spell drain increase
QUOTE (Raizer @ Aug 18 2009, 03:04 PM) 
I use the following houserules:
Spells (Drain)
• Direct Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
• Indirect Combat Spells get -1 Drain.
• All Stun Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
o This is in addition to the direct combat spell drain increase
Spells (Drain)
• Direct Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
• Indirect Combat Spells get -1 Drain.
• All Stun Combat Spells get +1 Drain.
o This is in addition to the direct combat spell drain increase
It's a great idea in principle. The problem is the indirect spells are inherently taxing because they're invoking Prime forces. It's neat for game balance, on the surface, but if you're also hitting the +Drain button on staging, then you're really hobbling magic.
It's absurdly quick and easy to weaken direct combat spells to uselessness, even without any houserules: have a mage with: counterspelling (combat spells) 4 (6), and the mana static spell.
Not only will most combat spells fizzle, and those that don't will do weaker damage due to the background count force penalty, but he's pretty good at weakening "invulnerable" spirits to the point that a technomancer could give them a swirly.
Not only will most combat spells fizzle, and those that don't will do weaker damage due to the background count force penalty, but he's pretty good at weakening "invulnerable" spirits to the point that a technomancer could give them a swirly.
QUOTE (Kerenshara @ Aug 18 2009, 08:58 PM)
Or add 1 full point of Drain for each Hit applied as extra damage. Forces them to take the base force up.
Not that I think there's a problem.
You want proof against bullets? You get a bullet resistant vest.
You want proof against direct damage spells, get a team mage with good Counterspelling.
Not that I think there's a problem.
You want proof against bullets? You get a bullet resistant vest.
You want proof against direct damage spells, get a team mage with good Counterspelling.
The problem here is that mages, per RAW, are uncommon. It can get really contrived if every CorpSec squad has a wagemage or a spirit with Magical Guard, when the books say security mages are very seldom common.
QUOTE (Meatbag @ Aug 18 2009, 03:13 PM)
The problem here is that mages, per RAW, are uncommon. It can get really contrived if every CorpSec squad has a wagemage or a spirit with Magical Guard, when the books say security mages are very seldom common.
*smirks*
Wow, somebody who actually read that section. That's almost equally rare I think as mages themselves.
But, if the target is hard enough you expect the PCs to have to stretch a bit, that implys the corps would have thought to have a mage on duty, neh?
They aren't on every street corner or even at the corner local outreach office, but they ARE going to be present at any sort of moderately secure facility.
QUOTE (Mr. Unpronounceable @ Aug 18 2009, 02:11 PM)
It's absurdly quick and easy to weaken direct combat spells to uselessness, even without any houserules: have a mage with: counterspelling (combat spells) 4 (6), and the mana static spell.
Not only will most combat spells fizzle, and those that don't will do weaker damage due to the background count force penalty, but he's pretty good at weakening "invulnerable" spirits to the point that a technomancer could give them a swirly.
Not only will most combat spells fizzle, and those that don't will do weaker damage due to the background count force penalty, but he's pretty good at weakening "invulnerable" spirits to the point that a technomancer could give them a swirly.
Yeah, I've heard of a few people that cut Mana Static because they thought it was too powerful. I was inclined to go that way too, at first, but then I said "Wait a minute..." Mana Static is a great "magical equalizer" spell and a great way to curb spellcasters gone wild and uber-spirits. A Bound Spirit of Man with Mana Static as a spell is probably a staple of inexpensive magical security. As soon as an enemy Magician shows up, the Spirit pops into the Physical in a pre-planned (probably critical, or chokepoint) location and pops its Mana Static spell. With Magic out of the equation, it's now down to bullets and no can argue that corp guards can bring a lot of those to bear...
QUOTE (Kerenshara @ Aug 18 2009, 02:58 PM)
You want proof against bullets? You get a bullet resistant vest.
You want proof against direct damage spells, get a team mage with good Counterspelling.
You want proof against direct damage spells, get a team mage with good Counterspelling.
+1
I had large problems with how overpowered spells can be when I first started GMing SR4, and not just Direct Combat spells like you mention here, but also with Mental Manipulations (especially Control Thoughts). My problems ran more along the lines of the PCs dropping threats without breaking a sweat. As soon as the mage got to go (and he was usually the first), the combat was over.
I discovered that for the most part, it was just that I was not presenting an adequate challenge for my new group and their power gaming tendencies. Counterspelling is a necessity for any team or threat that would be expected to include a mage. If the threat you are presenting would not be expected to include a mage, there are other possibilities to think about as well, such as free spirits who have taken to protecting the locals. There are also several drugs which help to increase willpower which I make sure gangers and other low-lifes have on them (if they are not already juiced up before the action even starts). Once I started doing this kind of thing, the only spell I had to house rule was the aforementioned Control Thoughts, but that is a story for another thread.
Hehe... I'm the mage in the OP's campaign, so you can imagine I'm pretty edgy on this issue...
I personally like Raizer and Kerenshara's suggestions, because they don't put the spells in the dumpster (I know it supposedly doesn't, but it really feels like the spells become useless), but that figures. On the other hand, Malachi's would cause havoc, sincea high force spell is deadly to the mage - a Force 8 Manabolt has you resisting 8P - that's NOT gonna happen.
I've also suggested building in some sort of damage resistance test, like perhaps Body + Will or Body + Will + Counterspelling or something, but that's really not enough for a decent damage resist. I really think raising drain is the way to balance the spell, rather than dropping damage.
I personally like Raizer and Kerenshara's suggestions, because they don't put the spells in the dumpster (I know it supposedly doesn't, but it really feels like the spells become useless), but that figures. On the other hand, Malachi's would cause havoc, sincea high force spell is deadly to the mage - a Force 8 Manabolt has you resisting 8P - that's NOT gonna happen.
I've also suggested building in some sort of damage resistance test, like perhaps Body + Will or Body + Will + Counterspelling or something, but that's really not enough for a decent damage resist. I really think raising drain is the way to balance the spell, rather than dropping damage.
*shrugs*
And getting less uncommon each edition. 4th has awakened far more common than doctors by percentage of population, for instance.
But if you absolutely must keep them rare, wards are relatively cheap, quick to put up, and fairly long-duration. A warded checkpoint with a couple of guards able to cover the approach (and therefore keep mages from entering the ward) will work fairly well, and only needs to be refreshed perhaps once a month. And wards function similarly to counterspelling: a flat +force to the resistance dice pool of targets inside.
And getting less uncommon each edition. 4th has awakened far more common than doctors by percentage of population, for instance.
But if you absolutely must keep them rare, wards are relatively cheap, quick to put up, and fairly long-duration. A warded checkpoint with a couple of guards able to cover the approach (and therefore keep mages from entering the ward) will work fairly well, and only needs to be refreshed perhaps once a month. And wards function similarly to counterspelling: a flat +force to the resistance dice pool of targets inside.
If you can't justify that a Mage would be present, there's always a Spirit with the Magical Guard power. Also keep in mind that pretty much all Security personnel have been trained in mundane ways to counter Magic. The biggest one being: line of sight. If the Mage can't see you, they can't cast a spell. So, liberal use of cover, smoke grenades, and flash packs.
ummm...
have the people in your group discovered the wonders of long bursts yet? it rather sounds like they haven't. with a long burst from most guns, you can pretty much guarantee your target is down. if you've got a lot of skill, you can even do that with a short burst (or even doing full auto and hitting each target with half the bullets). alternately, there's all kinds of drugs that will take someone down instantly, grenades whenever chunky salsa would apply... really, the list goes on.
sure, direct combat spells make people drop like flies. but then again... so does pretty much everything else in SR4 at least. direct combat spells are not particularly any different in that sense.
have the people in your group discovered the wonders of long bursts yet? it rather sounds like they haven't. with a long burst from most guns, you can pretty much guarantee your target is down. if you've got a lot of skill, you can even do that with a short burst (or even doing full auto and hitting each target with half the bullets). alternately, there's all kinds of drugs that will take someone down instantly, grenades whenever chunky salsa would apply... really, the list goes on.
sure, direct combat spells make people drop like flies. but then again... so does pretty much everything else in SR4 at least. direct combat spells are not particularly any different in that sense.
QUOTE (Jaid @ Aug 18 2009, 02:53 PM)
ummm...
have the people in your group discovered the wonders of long bursts yet? it rather sounds like they haven't. with a long burst from most guns, you can pretty much guarantee your target is down. if you've got a lot of skill, you can even do that with a short burst (or even doing full auto and hitting each target with half the bullets). alternately, there's all kinds of drugs that will take someone down instantly, grenades whenever chunky salsa would apply... really, the list goes on.
sure, direct combat spells make people drop like flies. but then again... so does pretty much everything else in SR4 at least. direct combat spells are not particularly any different in that sense.
have the people in your group discovered the wonders of long bursts yet? it rather sounds like they haven't. with a long burst from most guns, you can pretty much guarantee your target is down. if you've got a lot of skill, you can even do that with a short burst (or even doing full auto and hitting each target with half the bullets). alternately, there's all kinds of drugs that will take someone down instantly, grenades whenever chunky salsa would apply... really, the list goes on.
sure, direct combat spells make people drop like flies. but then again... so does pretty much everything else in SR4 at least. direct combat spells are not particularly any different in that sense.
Yeah, THIS...
Hm, well I suppose that's what Shadowrun IS - deadly. You do everything you can to be prepared, find all the ways and information to make your job safer and easier, and then you face off with a handful of guys with assault rifles and see just how well you did - and how good your luck is.
Pretty much the essence of the game...
Pretty much the essence of the game...
It's not that massive amounts of gunfire isn't deadly - it's that it allows both a test to dodge and a test to resist damage, as do indirect combat spells. Having a single test for spell resistance doesn't sit well with me for Direct Combat spells, and because the drain value on them is fairly low, there gets to be a huge problem when they're overcast, not resisted even by 1 hit, and target goes splat without a second shot. Even if you fire a HMG full narrow burst, you're going to be doing about 15P, but that gets to be resisted with Body + Ballistic Armor - AP, so for the average person, they may get shot up to hell, but they'll still have a chance of either dodging first, and failing that, resisting some of the damage done. With a direct spell, they don't get that. They get their "dodge" as if they'd made a full defense (WIL or BOD + Counterspelling), and if they fail, they die. It's an all-or-nothing effect, and I have a problem that it's that strong with those few limits. Even the drain values are manageable.
The reason I propose this is that bypassing Damage Resistance is an insanely strong effect on its own, especially against trolls and the like. Reducing the damage by a significant amount would put Direct Combat spells on par with Indirect Combat spells, as the IC spells allow both dodge and Damage Resistance for more damage, whereas the DC spells have only a spell resistance test and bypass Damage Resistance entirely.
The reason I propose this is that bypassing Damage Resistance is an insanely strong effect on its own, especially against trolls and the like. Reducing the damage by a significant amount would put Direct Combat spells on par with Indirect Combat spells, as the IC spells allow both dodge and Damage Resistance for more damage, whereas the DC spells have only a spell resistance test and bypass Damage Resistance entirely.
You have the same problem I did; not that they were overpowering (they are, but not by much, compared to other RAW options), but rather that they followed a separate system than every other combat test in the game. Thus, instead of introducing another sub-system to Direct Combat spells, as every other suggestion (including the RAW optional rule) does, why not remove the existing sub-system of stupidity, as I have done.
Targets of a Direct Combat Spell receive a Defense Test of Intuition (+ Counterspelling). If the Defender obtains an equal or greater number of Hits, they avoid the effects entirely; if the Attacker obtains a greater number of Hits, each Net Hits increases the Damage Value by 1.
Targets of a Direct Combat Spell receive a Resistance Test of Body + Astral Armor (for Physical spells) or Willpower + Astral Armor (for Mana spells). Each Hit on the Resistance Test reduces the Damage Value by 1. Any unresisted damage is applied normally.
Targets of a Direct Combat Spell receive a Defense Test of Intuition (+ Counterspelling). If the Defender obtains an equal or greater number of Hits, they avoid the effects entirely; if the Attacker obtains a greater number of Hits, each Net Hits increases the Damage Value by 1.
Targets of a Direct Combat Spell receive a Resistance Test of Body + Astral Armor (for Physical spells) or Willpower + Astral Armor (for Mana spells). Each Hit on the Resistance Test reduces the Damage Value by 1. Any unresisted damage is applied normally.
This is a really dumb question, that I could answer just by looking at the book, but in my laziness:
What's astral armor (besides the 'Armor' spell)?
And a slightly less stupif question: What's the in-game, role-playing explanation for this? This feels like we'd be taking a step in a really weird direction, by fluff standards...
What's astral armor (besides the 'Armor' spell)?
And a slightly less stupif question: What's the in-game, role-playing explanation for this? This feels like we'd be taking a step in a really weird direction, by fluff standards...
Mystic Armor (Critter Power) provides Astral Armor.
Astral Armor (Street Magic spell) provides Astral Armor.
Mystic Armor (Adept Power) provides Armor & Astral Armor.
Astral Armor (RAW) applies to Damage Resistance tests vs. Astral Combat attacks.
With my rule, it also assists against Direct Combat spells; the 'fluff' behind it is that Counterspelling can deflect an incoming bolt of magical energy, but not blunt it. Astral Armor will not assist you in avoiding being struck, but if you are, will blunt it's force - just as physical armor blunts the impact of physical attacks.
It will not help against Indirect spells, however, as Indirect spells are not lobbing mystic energy at you, they are using mystic energy to create an orb of fire, & lobbing that at you.
Astral Armor (Street Magic spell) provides Astral Armor.
Mystic Armor (Adept Power) provides Armor & Astral Armor.
Astral Armor (RAW) applies to Damage Resistance tests vs. Astral Combat attacks.
With my rule, it also assists against Direct Combat spells; the 'fluff' behind it is that Counterspelling can deflect an incoming bolt of magical energy, but not blunt it. Astral Armor will not assist you in avoiding being struck, but if you are, will blunt it's force - just as physical armor blunts the impact of physical attacks.
It will not help against Indirect spells, however, as Indirect spells are not lobbing mystic energy at you, they are using mystic energy to create an orb of fire, & lobbing that at you.
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Aug 18 2009, 10:39 PM)
Targets of a Direct Combat Spell receive a Resistance Test of Body + Astral Armor (for Physical spells) or Willpower + Astral Armor (for Mana spells). Each Hit on the Resistance Test reduces the Damage Value by 1. Any unresisted damage is applied normally.
The biggest problem that I have with this is that it wouldn't come into play often enough to make the option workable, since regular armor doesn't provide astral armor. In fact, the only things that I can find that provide non-critters astral armor are a spell and an adept power. Unless you also have some kind of house rule that grants mundanes astral armor, I appreciate your suggestion but I can't find a reason to use it. Astral armor is uncommon enough, and difficult for most people to get. Plus, this still gives a huge advantage of direct over indirect, since the drain value of direct spells are lower for a very, very similar effect.
1) It makes Astral Armor actually mean something. Mage's might actually take the spell once in a while.
2) It provides at minimum Body or Willpower to stage the damage down, which even with 'Joe Average', should regularly reduce damage by at least 1 box.
3) Most importantly, the rules are actually consistent with my adjustment.
Direct Combat Spells, with the Rules as Written, are indeed overpowering. It is by such a small amount, however, that it can generally be overlooked - especially when you take into account various other overpowering options available, most mundane (I'm looking at you Stick-n-Shock).
Indirect Combat Spells have several distinct advantages over Direct Combat Spells, which provide the reasoning behind their higher Drain Code (from a balance perspective - from fluff, it's harder to conjure fire than it is to simply overload their brain). I personally do not agree that what they have is enough to balance out the disadvantages (armor easier to obtain & higher Drain), but that is more a problem with Elemental Effects (except Electricity) & how they apply to Indirect spells, than it is with the Indirect spell itself.
My suggestions for Indirect Combat spells are:
1) Blind-Fire rules may be used; most important for single-target spells, it is also beneficial for Area spells if you cannot see at all.
2) Elemental effects do not have that stupid limiter of 'doesn't last more than one round' - Acid continues to burn for acid's normal duration. Other Elemental effects may need to be adjusted to bring them all to a similar power level; I still have yet to find a good solution on how to work Fire.
2) It provides at minimum Body or Willpower to stage the damage down, which even with 'Joe Average', should regularly reduce damage by at least 1 box.
3) Most importantly, the rules are actually consistent with my adjustment.
Direct Combat Spells, with the Rules as Written, are indeed overpowering. It is by such a small amount, however, that it can generally be overlooked - especially when you take into account various other overpowering options available, most mundane (I'm looking at you Stick-n-Shock).
Indirect Combat Spells have several distinct advantages over Direct Combat Spells, which provide the reasoning behind their higher Drain Code (from a balance perspective - from fluff, it's harder to conjure fire than it is to simply overload their brain). I personally do not agree that what they have is enough to balance out the disadvantages (armor easier to obtain & higher Drain), but that is more a problem with Elemental Effects (except Electricity) & how they apply to Indirect spells, than it is with the Indirect spell itself.
My suggestions for Indirect Combat spells are:
1) Blind-Fire rules may be used; most important for single-target spells, it is also beneficial for Area spells if you cannot see at all.
2) Elemental effects do not have that stupid limiter of 'doesn't last more than one round' - Acid continues to burn for acid's normal duration. Other Elemental effects may need to be adjusted to bring them all to a similar power level; I still have yet to find a good solution on how to work Fire.
Um... besides being useable when shooting at people you can't see, and the elemental effects, what advantages to Indirect spells have?
It seems that along with the obvious advantages, direct combat spells are also INVISIBLE, and thus leave to line of fire to trace the user's location...
It seems that along with the obvious advantages, direct combat spells are also INVISIBLE, and thus leave to line of fire to trace the user's location...
What people seem to think is
"Direct spells are overpowered, because they are better than Indirect spells".
What they should be thinking is
"Indirect spells are underpowered, because they are worse than Direct spells".
& to answer your question, casting a high-force spell is blatantly obvious, regardless of any 'visual effects' associated with the spell. Otherwise, you are essentially correct.
"Direct spells are overpowered, because they are better than Indirect spells".
What they should be thinking is
"Indirect spells are underpowered, because they are worse than Direct spells".
& to answer your question, casting a high-force spell is blatantly obvious, regardless of any 'visual effects' associated with the spell. Otherwise, you are essentially correct.
You can take out a drone with an indirect combat spell, and you don't even need 7 hits to do it. That's why I'd make sure to have one, or an RPG launcher. But the spell is cheaper than Heavy Weapons skill. And RPGs are heavy.
a drone will have maybe 12 armor. tough to beat? yes. needs a rocket launcher or heavy weapon? not really.
i'm still not seeing any huge problems with direct spells. ok, they bypass the damage resistance test. it's also like getting punched in the face. your opponent gets a virtual free counterattack without spending any actions, without investing any BP, and you don't get a dodge test. and if it's in a situation where you aren't negatively impacted by it because you've got time to use a medkit, well... let me just say this: if you are facing only one opponent, that opponent will probably get out-acted and die no matter what they do. it doesn't matter if you drop a force 10 stunbolt or if the group of you just walk up there and take turns punching them. they've already lost. and odds are, you have also already lost by virtue of the fact that his biomonitor went off, and now there's an HTR team on the way, the alarm has gone off, and you've only got a little bit of time to get out of there before you get caught in a really bad situation.
you wanna hear problematic? the mage drops a force 4 influence on the guard, with the thought that you belong there anyways. the entire team walks by, says hello, and carries on with what they were doing. and you expect me to worry about something like a stunbolt? i can duplicate stunbolt with a 250
taser, and stunball with an inexpensive narcoject splash grenade. you want problems? how about the physical mask that makes your cyberware invisible to scanners? because that's a heck of a lot more scary than something as straightforward as a direct combat spell.
i'm still not seeing any huge problems with direct spells. ok, they bypass the damage resistance test. it's also like getting punched in the face. your opponent gets a virtual free counterattack without spending any actions, without investing any BP, and you don't get a dodge test. and if it's in a situation where you aren't negatively impacted by it because you've got time to use a medkit, well... let me just say this: if you are facing only one opponent, that opponent will probably get out-acted and die no matter what they do. it doesn't matter if you drop a force 10 stunbolt or if the group of you just walk up there and take turns punching them. they've already lost. and odds are, you have also already lost by virtue of the fact that his biomonitor went off, and now there's an HTR team on the way, the alarm has gone off, and you've only got a little bit of time to get out of there before you get caught in a really bad situation.
you wanna hear problematic? the mage drops a force 4 influence on the guard, with the thought that you belong there anyways. the entire team walks by, says hello, and carries on with what they were doing. and you expect me to worry about something like a stunbolt? i can duplicate stunbolt with a 250
taser, and stunball with an inexpensive narcoject splash grenade. you want problems? how about the physical mask that makes your cyberware invisible to scanners? because that's a heck of a lot more scary than something as straightforward as a direct combat spell.
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Aug 18 2009, 11:28 PM)
What people seem to think is
"Direct spells are overpowered, because they are better than Indirect spells".
What they should be thinking is
"Indirect spells are underpowered, because they are worse than Direct spells".
"Direct spells are overpowered, because they are better than Indirect spells".
What they should be thinking is
"Indirect spells are underpowered, because they are worse than Direct spells".
Warning: Long post ahead.
[ Spoiler ]
I'm trying to make the spells that deal actual damage more reasonable, balance-wise. The other spells Jaid mentions in the above post have their utility in their own way, but they aren't really a part of this discussion as I see it. I'd like to try and make every option equally weighted against each other one so that there's some semblance of balance instead of the scales being weighted heavily in the favor of Direct Combat spells.
andinel: if you choose to use the crappy ways of dealing damage with physical combat, of course it's going to look impressive. something as simple as a supersquirt full of narcoject, or a splash grenade full of the same? capsule rounds with the same? full auto bursts have a starting DV of 15 (5 base, 9 from extra bullets = 14 + 1 for a net hit, assuming no special ammo, no aiming to increase damage.)
to match that potential, you're looking at a force 8 spell. which is actually *less* concealable than a full-auto burst from an ares alpha. not to mention in order to achieve that much damage, the spellslinger needs to hope for the target to get only 1 hit, because the hits are capped from those spells, not net hits. so armor might lead to taking less than that... big deal. throw in special ammo to the mix; stick-n-shock will KO the person with a very high chance of success, ex-ex increases damage and improves AP, and in any case, you're looking at someone with body 5 armor 10 to come out of the basic full-auto burst without being knocked out with any degree of reliability. and we still haven't gotten into taking a -4 penalty to hit to improve the DV by 4.
i don't give a crap if you can dish out more than enough damage to take out your target. once you've got enough to reliably put them down, that's all i care about, and it doesn't much matter if that's done with armor-bypassing magic or with a gun.
to match that potential, you're looking at a force 8 spell. which is actually *less* concealable than a full-auto burst from an ares alpha. not to mention in order to achieve that much damage, the spellslinger needs to hope for the target to get only 1 hit, because the hits are capped from those spells, not net hits. so armor might lead to taking less than that... big deal. throw in special ammo to the mix; stick-n-shock will KO the person with a very high chance of success, ex-ex increases damage and improves AP, and in any case, you're looking at someone with body 5 armor 10 to come out of the basic full-auto burst without being knocked out with any degree of reliability. and we still haven't gotten into taking a -4 penalty to hit to improve the DV by 4.
i don't give a crap if you can dish out more than enough damage to take out your target. once you've got enough to reliably put them down, that's all i care about, and it doesn't much matter if that's done with armor-bypassing magic or with a gun.
When i played 3rd edition we hade ruled the following:
Combat spells can not be staged higher. They will always do the damage they are cast at.
Manipulation spells can be aimed and as such can be staged.
I would just do the same in this edition too: more hits on the spellcasting are just to overcome resistance or such. So a force 8 stunbolt does 8 stun, no matter how many hits are achieved. (This can be staged down of course) And so even a force 12 spell is no guarenteed takedown against someone with high willpower.)
The indirect spells are noramly a bit harder on drain (most people stack elemental effect onto them too). Let them have sightmodifiers and such like ranged combat, but hits stage the power higher.
Thats how i would try for a session or so, and see if it works out allright. (the direct ones may get a bit weak against people with counterspelling/magical guard)
Combat spells can not be staged higher. They will always do the damage they are cast at.
Manipulation spells can be aimed and as such can be staged.
I would just do the same in this edition too: more hits on the spellcasting are just to overcome resistance or such. So a force 8 stunbolt does 8 stun, no matter how many hits are achieved. (This can be staged down of course) And so even a force 12 spell is no guarenteed takedown against someone with high willpower.)
The indirect spells are noramly a bit harder on drain (most people stack elemental effect onto them too). Let them have sightmodifiers and such like ranged combat, but hits stage the power higher.
Thats how i would try for a session or so, and see if it works out allright. (the direct ones may get a bit weak against people with counterspelling/magical guard)
The problem with narcoject grenades is that, although the cost is cheap, at 50¥ a dose and 20¥ a grenade, it adds up. 70¥ is cheap for something that can take someone out, but a chemical seal, gas mask, or chemical protection will be basically the end of your threat with it. Unfortunately, direct combat spells have no equivalent - there is no way to prevent a direct combat spell from taking full effect except resisting the spell entirely. On the other hand, let's say that someone's using EX-Ex ammo in a full burst with an AK-97 and hits with 1 net hit. Let's also give the defender 5 BOD and 14 points of milspec armor, since if someone can take in an assault rifle to a zone and not have it confiscated or be shot on sight, the opposition's probably going to be pretty capable of taking them on. With a full burst, first, the attacker spends 100¥ regardless of hit or miss - it's just money in ammo that disappears. With 1 net hit, he deals 17P with AP -2. The defender is looking at 17 dice to defend, which is an average of 5.67 hits, so they would take average damage of 11.33P. Total cost: a complex action firing and 100¥.
Now let's have the same character resist a Force 9 manabolt. Let's say that the caster has 12 dice for Drain resistance and 15 dice for Combat spells. Let's also say that the opponent has WIL 5 and has the benefit of 4 points of Counterspelling. On average, the caster will get 5 hits and the defender will get 3, netting the caster 2 hits. The defender takes 11P. The caster takes nothing, since the Drain DV is 4, which is an average roll on 12 dice. Total cost: a complex action, and no need to conceal a noticeable weapon.
Let's go to a third example with the same characters, this time with a lightning bolt at Force 9, and with the target having 5 Reaction. The caster will get 2 net hits and do 11P base damage. Then the target gets to soak with 11 dice, and let's say they have 3 points of nonconductivity. With a soak pool of 14, they'll get 4.67 average hits, and take 6.33P. The caster, on the other hand, will have to resist 7 points of drain, and will take 3 himself. Total cost: a complex action and 3P (or, in a very unlikely case, 3S).
In this instance, Indirect Combat spells are the most inferior of the three, as it will not even knock the target out at Force 9, and in addition to that will deal 3 damage to the caster. You could drop the target for 100¥ and a complex action each time, but that's only so repetitive. You could also drop the target for a complex action with a manabolt, or almost guarantee dropping him with a stunbolt that's just 2 Force higher (and you still are at no cost other than the action).
I may have been a little critical of physical combat before, but it's often just easier and cheaper in the long run to cast the direct spell. And if you're going to have things balance out, then it should only deal around as much damage as the indirect spell, or the indirect spell should deal at least as much damage as the direct spell. I'm opting for the former, as it makes combat last just a little longer.
Now let's have the same character resist a Force 9 manabolt. Let's say that the caster has 12 dice for Drain resistance and 15 dice for Combat spells. Let's also say that the opponent has WIL 5 and has the benefit of 4 points of Counterspelling. On average, the caster will get 5 hits and the defender will get 3, netting the caster 2 hits. The defender takes 11P. The caster takes nothing, since the Drain DV is 4, which is an average roll on 12 dice. Total cost: a complex action, and no need to conceal a noticeable weapon.
Let's go to a third example with the same characters, this time with a lightning bolt at Force 9, and with the target having 5 Reaction. The caster will get 2 net hits and do 11P base damage. Then the target gets to soak with 11 dice, and let's say they have 3 points of nonconductivity. With a soak pool of 14, they'll get 4.67 average hits, and take 6.33P. The caster, on the other hand, will have to resist 7 points of drain, and will take 3 himself. Total cost: a complex action and 3P (or, in a very unlikely case, 3S).
In this instance, Indirect Combat spells are the most inferior of the three, as it will not even knock the target out at Force 9, and in addition to that will deal 3 damage to the caster. You could drop the target for 100¥ and a complex action each time, but that's only so repetitive. You could also drop the target for a complex action with a manabolt, or almost guarantee dropping him with a stunbolt that's just 2 Force higher (and you still are at no cost other than the action).
I may have been a little critical of physical combat before, but it's often just easier and cheaper in the long run to cast the direct spell. And if you're going to have things balance out, then it should only deal around as much damage as the indirect spell, or the indirect spell should deal at least as much damage as the direct spell. I'm opting for the former, as it makes combat last just a little longer.
QUOTE (Jaid @ Aug 19 2009, 04:34 AM)
andinel: if you choose to use the crappy ways of dealing damage with physical combat, of course it's going to look impressive. something as simple as a supersquirt full of narcoject, or a splash grenade full of the same? capsule rounds with the same? full auto bursts have a starting DV of 15 (5 base, 9 from extra bullets = 14 + 1 for a net hit, assuming no special ammo, no aiming to increase damage.)
to match that potential, you're looking at a force 8 spell. which is actually *less* concealable than a full-auto burst from an ares alpha. not to mention in order to achieve that much damage, the spellslinger needs to hope for the target to get only 1 hit, because the hits are capped from those spells, not net hits. so armor might lead to taking less than that... big deal. throw in special ammo to the mix; stick-n-shock will KO the person with a very high chance of success, ex-ex increases damage and improves AP, and in any case, you're looking at someone with body 5 armor 10 to come out of the basic full-auto burst without being knocked out with any degree of reliability. and we still haven't gotten into taking a -4 penalty to hit to improve the DV by 4.
i don't give a crap if you can dish out more than enough damage to take out your target. once you've got enough to reliably put them down, that's all i care about, and it doesn't much matter if that's done with armor-bypassing magic or with a gun.
to match that potential, you're looking at a force 8 spell. which is actually *less* concealable than a full-auto burst from an ares alpha. not to mention in order to achieve that much damage, the spellslinger needs to hope for the target to get only 1 hit, because the hits are capped from those spells, not net hits. so armor might lead to taking less than that... big deal. throw in special ammo to the mix; stick-n-shock will KO the person with a very high chance of success, ex-ex increases damage and improves AP, and in any case, you're looking at someone with body 5 armor 10 to come out of the basic full-auto burst without being knocked out with any degree of reliability. and we still haven't gotten into taking a -4 penalty to hit to improve the DV by 4.
i don't give a crap if you can dish out more than enough damage to take out your target. once you've got enough to reliably put them down, that's all i care about, and it doesn't much matter if that's done with armor-bypassing magic or with a gun.
You know? I think this is the first time you and I have actually flat-out agreed on anything. But You're dead on, as far as I'm concerned. Eveything has a balance somewhere. The one thing you left out of your argument was that shooting an Ares Alpha on full-auto doesn't inherently have the chance of hurting you in the process (Drain). The point about the use of the Influence spell is well taken, and I have to say I hadn't considered the Physical Mask spell to conceal cyberware, but now that you've pointed it out, I feel like an idiot for not having considered it. How about masking guns from the same scanner? And an Initiate with Improved Masking could even sustain the spell without tipping off the spirit or mage watching astrally.
QUOTE (Andinel @ Aug 19 2009, 08:57 AM)
1. Physical combat
This is the cheapest in terms of BP, as most of it comes from the gear you have. The skills for this are fairly commonplace, since you don't need a quality to get them, and you can fit most physical combat gear within the 5000¥ you get for 1 BP. Depending on what weapon you're using, you can use it as often as you're in melee with the target (for melee weapons) or until your clip runs out, which is probably once every few Combat Turns if you're using full bursts. It has the least damage potential, though, because ballistic armor is typically higher than impact armor, and even with AP there's still a significant amount of damage that can be soaked, despite having a rather high base damage.
This is the cheapest in terms of BP, as most of it comes from the gear you have. The skills for this are fairly commonplace, since you don't need a quality to get them, and you can fit most physical combat gear within the 5000¥ you get for 1 BP. Depending on what weapon you're using, you can use it as often as you're in melee with the target (for melee weapons) or until your clip runs out, which is probably once every few Combat Turns if you're using full bursts. It has the least damage potential, though, because ballistic armor is typically higher than impact armor, and even with AP there's still a significant amount of damage that can be soaked, despite having a rather high base damage.
This is flat out wrong, by the way - physical combat has the highest potential damage, for all that it is less likely to reach its potential.
Among other things, it's fairly easy to get a firearms dicepool around 5 dice higher than a mage (before he initiates a half-dozen times, at least).
Look at it this way: a spellcaster's attack has a dice pool of about 3-4x the defense pool (assuming no magical support whatsoever) and does (force) damage (+net hits if not using the 4A rule) and has to soak drain.
A sammy has an attack pool of about 3 times the defense pool, and does a (weapon)+(burst?)+(ammo mods)+(net hits)-(soak hits), usually twice, and doesn't risk damaging himself at the same time. While his individual hits may not be as impressive, his total damage output per pass (and, generally, he'll have more passes as well) is generally higher, except in the case of low-willpower, high-body, high-armor, no-magical-support goons.
Examples from play:
The average damage from a (non-overcast, limiting-drain) spell is around 8.
The highest amount of damage I've seen from a spell was 18 damage and the mage was almost worthless from the drain afterward.
The average (pre-4A) damage from a Troll-bow was about 14.
The highest two-shot a GMC Banshee.
The average damage from a standard-ammo heavy pistol was around a 6 (x2, because they shoot twice as often).
The highest one-pass damage dropped two trolls.
The average damage from an assault rifle short-burst was around a 9 (x2 again).
One of the highest took out a Stepvan and a Rotodrone.
If the mages are outclassing the sammys consistantly, it's solely on the GM's plate - toss drones or some magical support in, and the sammys will seriously outdamage the mages.
Direct Combat Spells have several things over Firearms. Damage output is not one of them.
My suggested change was not meant to balance Direct spells (they needed minimal balancing), it was intended to bring Direct spells in line with every other combat system in the game - aka consistency FTW. It was also intended to make one of the worst abilities/spells in the book (Astral Armor) actually be useful.
It makes Direct spells a little weaker; I am fine with that, I felt the needed a minor nerf. Key there being minor.
Your problem is that you have no idea what the realistic capabilities of firearms are, an over-inflated sense of OMG DIR3KT WINZ! while ignoring Drain entirely based on high-level 'average' rolls (hint: 12 dice will, on average, soak 4 Drain 60% of the time).
The problem you are having, & failing miserably to recognize, is that Direct spells are not overpowered; Indirect spells are underpowered.
My suggested change was not meant to balance Direct spells (they needed minimal balancing), it was intended to bring Direct spells in line with every other combat system in the game - aka consistency FTW. It was also intended to make one of the worst abilities/spells in the book (Astral Armor) actually be useful.
It makes Direct spells a little weaker; I am fine with that, I felt the needed a minor nerf. Key there being minor.
Your problem is that you have no idea what the realistic capabilities of firearms are, an over-inflated sense of OMG DIR3KT WINZ! while ignoring Drain entirely based on high-level 'average' rolls (hint: 12 dice will, on average, soak 4 Drain 60% of the time).
The problem you are having, & failing miserably to recognize, is that Direct spells are not overpowered; Indirect spells are underpowered.
QUOTE (Muspellsheimr @ Aug 19 2009, 12:38 PM)
The problem you are having, & failing miserably to recognize, is that Direct spells are not overpowered; Indirect spells are underpowered.
Tell that to Sonic damage or Blast damage. Knockdown is a b**ch, and who really has Sound Dampers anyways? And, due to its Indirect nature, it will go around corners. Sonic damage is also ridiculously good at destroying barriers.
I am trying a new approach to direct damage (combat) spells.
They can only target astral targets. This in mechanics renames them (astral combat) spells.
still useful and still powerful, but it means that every pc and npc with a WILL less than 5 isn't dead waiting to happen.
I will say though, that in 4th it seems less of a problem. but it's still my (hits from 10-16 dice + 5-12 boxes from force) against your 3-5. Ok now let me soak 5-12 boxes with 10-16 dice.
p.s.
telling me my caster rolled way to few dice for a good build, doesn't help the argument.
They can only target astral targets. This in mechanics renames them (astral combat) spells.
still useful and still powerful, but it means that every pc and npc with a WILL less than 5 isn't dead waiting to happen.
I will say though, that in 4th it seems less of a problem. but it's still my (hits from 10-16 dice + 5-12 boxes from force) against your 3-5. Ok now let me soak 5-12 boxes with 10-16 dice.
p.s.
telling me my caster rolled way to few dice for a good build, doesn't help the argument.
QUOTE (Neraph @ Aug 19 2009, 10:45 AM)
Tell that to Sonic damage or Blast damage. Knockdown is a b**ch, and who really has Sound Dampers anyways? And, due to its Indirect nature, it will go around corners. Sonic damage is also ridiculously good at destroying barriers.
Blast needs to be adjusted, as does everything with 'at the gamemasters discretion' as part of the rules. Otherwise, yes, it actually is useful. As well as Electricity & Sonic. You see, unlike Acid, they actually get to use their Secondary effects, & unlike Fire, those effects are actually useful.
Every other element, however, is crap when used with Indirect spells as written.
I'd say that calling the spells useful and powerful once you remove them from being able to affect people who aren't dual-natured is a load of crap. But that's my opinion. What do you intend to do or say about Powerbolt, which is a direct combat spell INTENTIONALLY designed to be used against PHYSICAL things (as in NOT ASTRAL)?
I know that Powerbolt can hit people, just to note - I just mean that it can't be used for astral combat.
I know that Powerbolt can hit people, just to note - I just mean that it can't be used for astral combat.
QUOTE (Summerstorm @ Aug 19 2009, 06:02 AM)
*snip*
And so even a force 12 spell is no guarenteed takedown against someone with high willpower.)
*snip*
And so even a force 12 spell is no guarenteed takedown against someone with high willpower.)
*snip*
I'm surprised that nobody else pointed out how incorrect this is. The maximum willpower for anything that isn't A. a dwarf, B. Infected or C. using one of three willpower-enhancing pieces of bioware in the game is 6, that's a stretch. Any PC who has an excuse to be casting spells can throw at least 9 spellcasting dice, which will get more hits than 6 dice almost always, and 6 willpower results in a total of 12 Stun boxes (8+6/2=12), so yes, actually, the force 12 direct combact spell IS a guaranteed takedown.
I agree with Bugfoxmaster that removing DC spells from the physical plane of existence is hitting it a bit too hard with the nerf stick. I also agree with Muspellsheimr that none of the elements in the game are worth using, and IIRC that includes blast because any attack the damage of which exceeds A. the target's body or B. 10 will automatically knock the target down.
I think a good way to improve indirect combat spells would be to eliminate the drain modifier for an elemental effect that isn't Sound or Smoke. Most of them are incredibly weak, and they all have the drawback of adding another type of armor to the 1/2 impact the target uses to resist (nonconductivity, chemical protection etc. etc.) I'm in favor of keeping the general mod for indirect spells, though, because they're so much easier to use on nonliving targets, and at any table you can use net hits to pump DV.
Actually, she(?) was saying she'd give them a soak while leaving spell damage fixed at force. Roll your 6 dice, and you should likely soak 2 boxes of damage, leaving you with 10 of 11 filled. You're still up! (barely 
)
)
QUOTE (Neraph @ Aug 19 2009, 12:45 PM)
Tell that to Sonic damage or Blast damage. Knockdown is a b**ch, and who really has Sound Dampers anyways? And, due to its Indirect nature, it will go around corners. Sonic damage is also ridiculously good at destroying barriers.
Sound and Blast (along with potentially Water and Fire) have the annoying quality of being loud on top of everything else. Sometimes a little subtlety goes a long way.
QUOTE (McAllister @ Aug 19 2009, 02:25 PM)
... (8+6/2=12)...
Hummmm... and to think, all these years I have been doing it wrong.
QUOTE (InfinityzeN @ Aug 19 2009, 01:53 PM)
Hummmm... and to think, all these years I have been doing it wrong.
Math is hard!
Do you have to split up your drain pool when you cast multiple spells?
If you don't: (since we are clearly talking about Physical Combat monkeys lets allow mages to twink too)
Magic 6 + Spellcasting 5 + Spec (Combat) 2 + Mentor(Combat) 2 + Spell Focus (Combat) 5 = 20 dice to cast
Magic 6 + Willpower 5 = 11 dice to resist
Throw 2 * Stunbolt 10 each cast with 10 dice. (I think Tir Ghosts with full counterspelling get 11 or 12 dice)
Even if you split the drain pool you are still looking at maybe 3P in drain and you just laid down 20S in damage + net hits.
Finally you can also do other funky stuff like Powerbolt 10 + Stunbolt 10 to first take out cover and then to blast whoever's behind it. You can take drugs to both increase Willpower plus ignore drain penalties. Do the confusion type illusion spells reduce your dice pool for resistance tests as well? How about that Astral Window spell that lets you see through wards? Does that remove the dice penalty for a Stunbolt through?
Actually just thought of a good way to make indirect spells better. Dual cast Glue then indirect combat. Glue will stick them to the ground which should remove the Dodge test. Then it's a little closer to Direct Combat spells.
PS. Haha...Narcojet full of that compound that forces you to astrally perceive. Sam shoots everyone who is in the way and then the astral mage comes around and pops them. Awesomesauce. (If it works -- don't have rules with me)
If you don't: (since we are clearly talking about Physical Combat monkeys lets allow mages to twink too)
Magic 6 + Spellcasting 5 + Spec (Combat) 2 + Mentor(Combat) 2 + Spell Focus (Combat) 5 = 20 dice to cast
Magic 6 + Willpower 5 = 11 dice to resist
Throw 2 * Stunbolt 10 each cast with 10 dice. (I think Tir Ghosts with full counterspelling get 11 or 12 dice)
Even if you split the drain pool you are still looking at maybe 3P in drain and you just laid down 20S in damage + net hits.
Finally you can also do other funky stuff like Powerbolt 10 + Stunbolt 10 to first take out cover and then to blast whoever's behind it. You can take drugs to both increase Willpower plus ignore drain penalties. Do the confusion type illusion spells reduce your dice pool for resistance tests as well? How about that Astral Window spell that lets you see through wards? Does that remove the dice penalty for a Stunbolt through?
Actually just thought of a good way to make indirect spells better. Dual cast Glue then indirect combat. Glue will stick them to the ground which should remove the Dodge test. Then it's a little closer to Direct Combat spells.
PS. Haha...Narcojet full of that compound that forces you to astrally perceive. Sam shoots everyone who is in the way and then the astral mage comes around and pops them. Awesomesauce. (If it works -- don't have rules with me)
Fail.
First, you do not understand how splitting dice pools work.
Second, you ignore that each spell beyond the first increases the Drain of each spell.
Then, you ignore that firearms can still equal Direct spell damage per attack easily, & do not require splitting your pool for a second attack. -
Finally, you cannot dismiss Drain because you will 'on average' soak it all. <3-4 Hits happens quite a bit on 12 dice. 'On average', you will be taking at least 1 Drain 40% of the time (aka just under half) you cast a F10 Stunbolt (not including multicasting)
First, you do not understand how splitting dice pools work.
Second, you ignore that each spell beyond the first increases the Drain of each spell.
Then, you ignore that firearms can still equal Direct spell damage per attack easily, & do not require splitting your pool for a second attack. -
Finally, you cannot dismiss Drain because you will 'on average' soak it all. <3-4 Hits happens quite a bit on 12 dice. 'On average', you will be taking at least 1 Drain 40% of the time (aka just under half) you cast a F10 Stunbolt (not including multicasting)
I'm... a little confusd now. When did we start talking about Physical Combat monkeys? I thought this was about the merits and/or possible means of nerfing direct combat spells...
On top of that, 11 = 12, Dice pool splitting doesn't work (since when does splitting off into two spells leave you with only 3P drain???)... I'm totally missing what's gonig on.
On the other hand, I'm having my party's Sammy try the astral-percieve + Astral Mage gank trick...
On top of that, 11 = 12, Dice pool splitting doesn't work (since when does splitting off into two spells leave you with only 3P drain???)... I'm totally missing what's gonig on.
On the other hand, I'm having my party's Sammy try the astral-percieve + Astral Mage gank trick...
Something to think about, at least in a Pink Mohawk game is that unlike Direct Combat Spells, the Indirect ones have style, I mean, being able to send out streams of purple plasma (Fire/Lightening) death at your foes is just plain wizzer than turning a poor sec guard's brain into pudding.
Hmm... Maybe combining Fire, Lightning, and Acid to create some sort of ultimate doom stream of purple and green?
Acid... on fire. And covered with lightning bolts. Oh, what a pretty thought.
Acid... on fire. And covered with lightning bolts. Oh, what a pretty thought.
Man, back in SR3 when a Mage threw a DC spell he got to choose the base Damage Level of the spell (Light, Moderate, Serious, Deadly) and the Force.
The Mage's Target Number was the target's Willpower, and the victim's Target Number was the Force of the Spell. Assuming higher than average Willpower that was still 6 dice (Mage's spellcasting, often more because they threw in Spell Pool) vs TN 4 with the target opposing with 4 dice vs. TN 6 (force's spell). The target could get Counterspelling dice but the friendly Mage had to declare part of his Spell Pool to that purpose at the beginning of the Combat Turn. And oh, by the way, as those dice got "used" they went away and were not available for other people later in the Combat Turn. SR3 had the same system in that there was no separate damage resistance test.
I had a dwarf Magician in my SR3 group regularly throwing a Mana Ball, rolling 12 Dice against TN 3, opposed by guards with 3 dice against TN 6. Trust me when I say that SR4 is a ton better than it used to be. The fact that there isn't a separate damage resistance test is an inheritance from previous versions.
The Mage's Target Number was the target's Willpower, and the victim's Target Number was the Force of the Spell. Assuming higher than average Willpower that was still 6 dice (Mage's spellcasting, often more because they threw in Spell Pool) vs TN 4 with the target opposing with 4 dice vs. TN 6 (force's spell). The target could get Counterspelling dice but the friendly Mage had to declare part of his Spell Pool to that purpose at the beginning of the Combat Turn. And oh, by the way, as those dice got "used" they went away and were not available for other people later in the Combat Turn. SR3 had the same system in that there was no separate damage resistance test.
I had a dwarf Magician in my SR3 group regularly throwing a Mana Ball, rolling 12 Dice against TN 3, opposed by guards with 3 dice against TN 6. Trust me when I say that SR4 is a ton better than it used to be. The fact that there isn't a separate damage resistance test is an inheritance from previous versions.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.