Someone poked me about this, so for anyone that cares: yes, there are places (as Falconer points out) where the FAQ directly contradicts the rules. Splitting dice pools was intended for an errata that never actually happened, so that's why that is there. Mystic adepts were another "rules as intended" rather than "rules as written" thing - there was some specific concern over Assensing and Astral Combat. In any event, the FAQ is only a guideline designed to (hopefully) answer questions and in places of ambiguity suggest how to proceed. Sorry. Mea maxima culpa.

Ancient History... but the FAQ itself is a MONSTROUS improvement over the prior work. I'm for one very glad you went to the time and initiative to get it out there. It did it's job in clarifying the vast majority of the questions it addresses. Glad to see you poking your head back into the forums.


Don't beat yourself up over it. Without you nothing would have been done, the last POS FAQ would still be floating around and that had far more problems than this one does. At least now, when people argue whatever... we can point at the FAQ and argue this is RAI and no it does not contradict RAW (with those few exceptions).

Hope life is treating you well since your retirement.

Seconded. Motion passed. The new FAQ is something our group will forever be grateful for.

.... but, that's something the RAW themselves caution GMs to guard against.

Thirded. The vast majority of the FAQ works very well. Sure, there's one or two rough patches, but since it's the product of human effort, and no human is or ever will be perfect ... *shrug*

Actually, it does not... Please read it again. It says that you should explore BOTH sides of the equatiuon; it NEVER says that the Split must stay equal. Essentaillyit is cautioning against the ludicrousness of a 0/5 Split, where you only take the quality so as to abuse the rules.

Disagree TJ... a split is not abusive merely because it's 0/5. Like I said, that portion of the warning is purely subjective. There are ways to utilize both halves of the whole without spending PP, or without taking magic. (say an adept who wants access to geomancy or some other magician only metamagics). Whether it's an abusive combo really varies on a case by case basis.


Where I disagree is with pax's assertion that the Mystic is gimped merely because he's slightly behind a full magician... which is how it should be.

If the mystic adept starts out say 4 dice behind the full magicition... 10 vs 6 is a big advantage... 20 vs 16 is small beans. By the time you're up to 30 vs 26 almost not worth getting too worried about given the vagaries and probability distro of the bell curve. The bigger the pools involved as things advance the less important the small starting differential.

Also Pax feels that mystic adepts should be able to hose out the cheap PP from the initiations optional rule... while still running their magic up the flag pole to the max. That Is a surefire route to overpowered and abusive mystic adepts even though they are fully engaging both of their sides. There's no real sacrifice being made to either half if you're getting full PP and full MagicPoints as well.

Once you concentrate on one side to the exclusion of the other ... you're not exploring both sides anymore. the split needn't be equal, but it should be continuing and ongoing. That is to say, it needin't be a 50%/50% split, but even with a 75%/25% split ... the gap in power will continue to widen. Indeed, nothing short of a 100%/0% split would ever FREEZE that gap. And a 100%/0% split is not "exploring both sides".

I consider a 20-2 split as abusive as a 5-0 split. Sure, maybe they started off with 3-2, but SINCE then, their "exploration" has been completely one-sided. They haven't applied any exploration to the "2" side, but have found the time and karma to do a whole LOT of exploring the side that went from 3 to 20.

Or, for that matter, a 20-6 split, that only concentrates itself later in it's progression. So sure, you started out 3-2. And the next 12 points you added, were distributed in about those proportions - winding up with an 11-6. But, the next NINE times your magic goes up ... it's all one, none of the other? Yellow flag, "you have ceased to explore BOTH parts of your nature".

And no, there isn't a hard and fast rule. It's all seat-of-the-pants, judge-it-by-eyeball stuff here. But generally speaking, even towards the very very END of the character's run ... if they're not still putting at least SOME of their growth as an Awakened being into both sides of being a Mystic Adept ... then as a GM, you need to step in. Traits can be abused two years after CharGen, just as much as during CharGen. The GM's duty to protect game balance never ends.

You miss my point, I think.

First, you forget that for the same karma, some of those Magic increases/initiations should be going towards the Adept-side's benefit. So if it's 10-v-6 at the start, it won't be 30-v-26 later ... it'll be more like 30-v-20. That's already a widening gap in power. To then compound that, with limiting the Force of spells they can cast - in a way that, much like the die pool, will fall steadily further behind? That's a double-whammy.


I wouldn't let a MysAd sacrifice EVERY Metamagic opportunity to get PP, either. 1/3 to 1/2 of them would not be unreasonable IMO.

Remember, the Mystic Adept is half Adept, as well as half Magician.

...

Let's look at the MysAd I actually built for myself, "Maus". He started with a 4 Magic, evenly split 2-2. And if the GM hadn't specifically said that he used the whole magic rating for maximum spell forces, I would simply never have played the character. Because, seriously ... F2 spells, at best without physical drain? Why even bother ...? The best that'd be good for, is parlor tricks.

But, look at the initiations I'd've done. There were three metamagics I wanted, before I would even consider opting for a Power Point instead (Masking, Flexible Signature, and Centering). I haven't really looked through the rest to know whether I'd find a fourth I "must have", so maybe I'd get a PP for the fourth initiation. And I'd want to raise my Magic a fair bit, too - getting as close to the maximum as possible. So at Grade 4, assuming I took that PP? I'd have up to a Magic of 9 beforehand, or 10 after. And some of those points would be going towards expanding my Adept abilities (I'd probably alternate for a while, Spellcasting first). Thus, I'd expect at Magic 9, to see a 4-5 split. Magic 10 might seem him go to 4+1/6.

Even if I managed Sorcery 6 in that time (not unlikely), that'd be 12 dice to cast spells - compared to the same Karma expenditure for 16 dice. A 2-die gap (Magic 4, Sorcery 5, 9 dice for a full Mage - compared to 7 for Maus at the start) has doubled. On the adept side, 11PP, compared to 5PP. 10 dice from Magic for appropriate tests (Attribute Boost, perhaps), compared to 4 dice. That is already a widening gap in power.

Using the split ratings to limit Spelclasting Force, as well as Adept power ratings, turns that "widening gap" from bearable, to "just call me Mister Gimpy". Being 4 dice short is bad enough; being four dice short AND being stuck with F6/F12 spells (compared to F10/F20) ... and being restricted to R4 adept powers, instead of R10 powers (on top of the few Adept powers that use Magic to determine DP) ... yeah. That's just too much, IMO.

It goes from "you pay for your versatility", into "you are punished for your versatility".

I tend to agree with you here (for the most part)... You must explore both sides, or it is abuse. It will never be a hard and fast rule, but I (and I am sure most) know abuse when it is seen.

Having played a 2 Adept/3 Sorcery Split (still do) with Force capped at Split Attribues (Rather than Total) I can assure you that you are wrong here. They are quite playable, and actually match the average level of Magic in the fluff (Magicians with Average Magic of 3).



From your Discussion above, You have obviously not actually played with the Caps in place. Having played several MysAds with caps in place, myself, I can assure you thet it is not that big of a deal. Do they become more powerful when you use the Full Magic Rating? Of course they do. Are they worthless when the Lower Caps are in place? Absolutely not. The problem with using the Total Magic Rating is that you do not have to invest all that much to be above average in both Adept AND Magician. In fact, I have seen it done such that the Mystic Adept was better overall than either the Pure Adept or the Pure Magician because of the synergy that was created. THAT is what I would consider wrong. A Mystic Adept SHOULD NEVER be on par with the pure option. EVER... In our case, the character was probably a fluke (WAY OVER-OPTIMIZED, in my opinion, while the pure options were likely a bit under-perfected) but it is possible, dependant upon Choices made in both Chargen and Experience. Fortunately, that character retired from play.

I LOVE my MysAd, even with the caps in place. I am less powerful, over all, than the Magic 7 Combat Mage and Magic 5 Adept, but I generally am WAY more useful in almost any situation that we encounter, becasue I opted for Breadth of ability rather than sheer power. Happens when you have a decent selection of Adept abilities, and almost 40 Spells (None of which are combast spells) on your sheet, I guess. Besides, Why use a Combat Spell when your Weapon Skill works just fine and leaves no Signature after the fact? I have found that Concept will drive a Mystic Adept much farther than Sheer power will, in most situations. Of course, We generally do not have characters throwing 16+ DP in Spellcasting or weapon skills either in that game.

HOW is it abuse, exactly? I've yet to see any combo's that late into gameplay that let Mystic Adepts stand head-and-shoulders above other characters. Balancing just to say you did so with a character is simply invading a players personal choices. The GM SHOULD have some sort of justification for meddling in the characters choices, and balance doesn't become a reason unless a break is being abused. So, where is the break? Please tell me there is some specific justification over the books vague and general warning about playing Magician for 5 less BP.

As for Mystic Adepts being on par, that is a fairly vague statement, even though I'm sure you are thinking of something more specific. Mystic Adepts SHOULD have a niche they fulfill better than another class. Such is fair balance. What should not happen is they should NOT be able to do that niche, AND still be able to perform on-par with other class arc-types outside their niche.

A Mystic Adept being the "best" at something is good. Being "best" at one thing and ALSO "just as good" as a magician or adept is bad. Short answer, there should always be an advantage to choose one over the other, depending on what is wanted or needed.

0-5 split, favoring Magician, to start with. Skip a few Metamagics to get enough PP for Improved Reflexes; pour all your actual Magic rating improvements directly into Magician abilities.

You'll essentially be a Magician that traded Astral Projection and a few metamagics for +6 Initiative and +3 Initiative Passes. So, say it's ten initiations and Magic is at maximum: Magic 16 (Split 0 Adept / 16 Magician), with 5PP and 5 Metamagics (4PP for the Reflexes, 1PP for Astral Perception). You're as good at spellcasting and spellslinging as a full Magician at the same magic rating, PLUS you've got four IPs and a strong Initiative stat.

For 5BP LESS than the Full Magician.

(For giggles and guffaws, be a Pixie with a Charisma Tradition - Astral Perception is racial, so get +Counterspelling dice instead, via Way of the Magician. Oh, and godlike Drain - soft-max both Will and Charisma, for a total of 14 dice.)


Like beauty, it lays in the eye of the beholder. And therein, to all our mutual and great misfortune, lays the rub.

Well, if you plan out the first 465 Karma (minus initiation rebates) the character is gonna spend, pick the right optional rules and tweak the entire CharGen to favour your plan, you get something more powerful than if you don't. D'oh! And, is the X/0 Magic split really the twinkish part in this plan?

Btw, how is being able to astrally travel to people and bombing them with spirits (and after 465 Karma those are gonna be pretty tough beasts) plus having 5 more Metamagics not worth the extra 5 BPs at the start?

indeed, this is while the rest of the group is spinning the same karma. This is not a comparison to other stocks, just a comparison to base mages. Mages can get the same results with 1-1.5 essence, or a single use of Improved Initiative bound to a sustaining focus. And your example uses an optional rule for adept points, to boot.

Also, this one of the few examples of "being a mage for less" that the book speaks of, using no points for adept powers. This could easily be mediated without forcing the much more stringent split the game suggested earlier. A single point required in adept powers, and your example is exactly on par with a magician with bioware.

I am not arguing in favor of twink builds, but simply pointing out there are other ways of achieving your example if not a mystic adept.

Four total initiative passes, for 1.5 Essence? Not cheaply - even going for Synaptic Booster 3, that's going to be almost a quarter-million nuyen, Standard grade. Plus then, the Magician is down two entire magic points.

Sustaining focus? Better get used to recasting every time you pass through a Ward boundary.


No, he'd still be ahead one point, with a 10 Magic split at 1-9, compared to the full magician (spending 1.5E like you say) being at Magic 8. In fact, he'd be AHEAD of the full mage, with one more die to spellcasting and summoning.

No you miss mine... there is no requirement ever spelled out of exactly what is exploring both sides. Any *ARBITRARY* houserule of just saying 5/0 or 0/5 is abuse is just that houseruling... it may or may not actually be abusive depending on the character concept and how heavily power-gamed it is. If the character is less powerful than the other players with the same rewards it's probably not an abuse and not a problem. It's not a matter of some arbitrary you must do X or Y... it's a matter of a subjective standard you should use your brain to judge.

Merely saying 0/5 or 5/0 or whatever else is not looking at the character and whether it's abusive... to do that you need to look at what powers is he taking, how is he playing it. Is the character a balance problem or power gamed. There's far more to the question of whether it's abusive than just the split.

It costs just as much for the mystic adept to raise his raw magic from 8->9 as it does the pure mage. It costs just as much for all time in the future (ignoring badly broken optional rules like PP for initiationg a non-pure adept). So no it is NOT costing the mystic adept more. He advances just as quickly as the mage if he chooses to invest in one side from this point on.

He's simply 2-4 dice behind because he's spent them elsewhere. But as time goes on that gap means less and less. Really once you hit the point you can cast 4/8 force you're pretty well set... 5/10 is just gravy after that. Generally past that point it's just more and more dice.

Pax, you are also still assuming Initiation grade optional rule of taking adept power points with initiations. That rule may be ignored, and then the scenario will not happen. And a mage who pays for Synaptic boost will have 16 metamagics the mystic adept did not, 460~ karma later. About this time, I imagine your other players would be bitching about Magic 16 in any case, but that aside: it's still more than doable. Recasting when passing wards is also not going to hurt me with a force 4? spell (I think it's 4).

But if you're worried about it in your game, just don't use the initiation adept point optional rule for mystic adepts, or at all.