I suspect there is already a topic somewhere on the forum, but my forum search skills are only a 1 and I just botched...so...
My buddy just bought the 20th Anniv Ed for my B-Day (refered to as 4A???). Having always loved the magic in SR I immediately read the magic section (which btw the book is georgous looking).
One thing that really stood out to me was that successfull spellcasting hits also add to the total drain value? Did I read this correctly?
Full Version: Magic Drain
QUOTE (Flash @ Dec 10 2009, 04:35 PM) 
I suspect there is already a topic somewhere on the forum, but my forum search skills are only a 1 and I just botched...so...
My buddy just bought the 20th Anniv Ed for my B-Day (refered to as 4A???). Having always loved the magic in SR I immediately read the magic section (which btw the book is georgous looking).
One thing that really stood out to me was that successfull spellcasting hits also add to the total drain value? Did I read this correctly?
My buddy just bought the 20th Anniv Ed for my B-Day (refered to as 4A???). Having always loved the magic in SR I immediately read the magic section (which btw the book is georgous looking).
One thing that really stood out to me was that successfull spellcasting hits also add to the total drain value? Did I read this correctly?
It is a newly provided optional rule. It's purpose was to stop mages overcasing F12 stunbolts without breaking a sweat.
QUOTE (Karoline @ Dec 10 2009, 05:39 PM)
It is a newly provided optional rule. It's purpose was to stop mages overcasing F12 stunbolts without breaking a sweat.
And there are threads all over dumpshock about how that it doesnt do that at all.
QUOTE (Starmage21 @ Dec 12 2009, 11:25 AM)
And there are threads all over dumpshock about how that it doesnt do that at all.
Oh? I thought it would have been fairly effective, but I haven't really tried it out or anything. Anyway, main point is that the rule is optional. You don't have to use it.
It is an optional rule, and it ends up encouraging overcasting as opposed to normal casting. The drain result would be slightly less using a F12 with 3 successes than a F6 with 6 successes, and it would end up doing more damage.
At my table we do not use that, and I just make most opposition W4-5, or have a mage/spirit using Counterspelling. Seems effective enough like that.
At my table we do not use that, and I just make most opposition W4-5, or have a mage/spirit using Counterspelling. Seems effective enough like that.
to OP:
It's only net hits used for damage on direct combat spells. (stunbolt, manabolt, powerbolt series)
EG: I cast spell I get 3 net hits.
Now it's my option, do I leave the drain unchanged and only do basic force damage. Or I can add 1, 2, or 3 points of drain for +1, +2, or +3 damage.
It's an optional rule which is supposed to make indirect spells more effective vs direct combat spells. It really only makes the mage more likely to overcast or multicast. (I'll just hit him for 2 force 5 stunbolts... split my pool..)
IIRC: they also changed indrect spells slightly, but don't recall exactly how. (IMO: one of the few ways to make indirects work would have been to use the basic reaction roll to avoid getting hit, then add counterspelling to the damage soak, not the initial hit or miss roll).
It's only net hits used for damage on direct combat spells. (stunbolt, manabolt, powerbolt series)
EG: I cast spell I get 3 net hits.
Now it's my option, do I leave the drain unchanged and only do basic force damage. Or I can add 1, 2, or 3 points of drain for +1, +2, or +3 damage.
It's an optional rule which is supposed to make indirect spells more effective vs direct combat spells. It really only makes the mage more likely to overcast or multicast. (I'll just hit him for 2 force 5 stunbolts... split my pool..)
IIRC: they also changed indrect spells slightly, but don't recall exactly how. (IMO: one of the few ways to make indirects work would have been to use the basic reaction roll to avoid getting hit, then add counterspelling to the damage soak, not the initial hit or miss roll).
QUOTE (Neraph @ Dec 12 2009, 12:04 PM)
It is an optional rule, and it ends up encouraging overcasting as opposed to normal casting. The drain result would be slightly less using a F12 with 3 successes than a F6 with 6 successes, and it would end up doing more damage.
Right.
Force 12 stunbolt with 3 net hits => 15 damage and (9+N)P drain (I don't recall the drain modifier).
Force 6 stunbolt with 6 net hits => 12 damage and (9+N)S drain
Using Stunbolt, a F12 with 3 net successes ends up with 8P drain, dealing 15 Stun; whereas a F6 with 6 net successes is 9S drain with only 12 stun damage. It turns in to 1 less stun (albeit physical) for dealing 3 more damage.
QUOTE (Neraph @ Dec 12 2009, 12:19 PM)
Using Stunbolt, a F12 with 3 net successes ends up with 8P drain, dealing 15 Stun; whereas a F6 with 6 net successes is 9S drain with only 12 stun damage. It turns in to 1 less stun (albeit physical) for dealing 3 more damage.
Or better yet, I apply no net successes to damage on the force 12.
And I have 12 damage for a mere 5 drain. <-- (far more likely assuming a drain pool of say 15 dice)
Even here as a mage, I'm more likely to shift down to force 11, for the rounding benefit. 11 stun for only 4 drain. (how many targets have a willpower of 7+).
Alternatively, I cast 2 force7's simultaneously. Each has a drain of 3 (the -1 spell mod being offset by a +1 multicasting drain mod, each rolled seperately against my full drain pool), though here now I need to worry about splitting dice pool then adding additional modifiers to each pool. In this case, I have a high chance of doing 7 or 14 damage depending on my sources of bonus dice.
Remember the spell is automatically successfull provided I have net hits. It's only whether I choose to apply them to damage or not. The only change this is, is do I take less drain but risk it as physical, or do I take noticably more stun drain.
QUOTE (Falconer @ Dec 12 2009, 12:12 PM)
It's an optional rule which is supposed to make indirect spells more effective vs direct combat spells. It really only makes the mage more likely to overcast or multicast. (I'll just hit him for 2 force 5 stunbolts... split my pool..)
IIRC: they also changed indrect spells slightly, but don't recall exactly how. (IMO: one of the few ways to make indirects work would have been to use the basic reaction roll to avoid getting hit, then add counterspelling to the damage soak, not the initial hit or miss roll).
IIRC: they also changed indrect spells slightly, but don't recall exactly how. (IMO: one of the few ways to make indirects work would have been to use the basic reaction roll to avoid getting hit, then add counterspelling to the damage soak, not the initial hit or miss roll).
funny story: that's how indirect spells used to work before they changed them. in a move that has completely baffled me at least, they have removed the one thing that made indirect spells ever actually worthwhile (good for hitting targets with high counterspelling) and gotten rid of it. of course, now you're *explicitly* allowed to cast elemental spells at stuff you can't see, but that was already implicitly implied before the update. i can't say that the change to counterspelling indirect combat spells is a change i approve of; i think they should have left it the old way.
QUOTE (Falconer @ Dec 12 2009, 12:30 PM)
Or better yet, I apply no net successes to damage on the force 12.
And I have 12 damage for a mere 5 drain. <-- (far more likely assuming a drain pool of say 15 dice)
Even here as a mage, I'm more likely to shift down to force 11, for the rounding benefit. 11 stun for only 4 drain. (how many targets have a willpower of 7+).
Alternatively, I cast 2 force7's simultaneously. Each has a drain of 3 (the -1 spell mod being offset by a +1 multicasting drain mod, each rolled seperately against my full drain pool), though here now I need to worry about splitting dice pool then adding additional modifiers to each pool.
Remember the spell is automatically successfull provided I have net hits. It's only whether I choose to apply them to damage or not. The only change this is, is do I take less drain but risk it as physical, or do I take noticably more stun drain.
And I have 12 damage for a mere 5 drain. <-- (far more likely assuming a drain pool of say 15 dice)
Even here as a mage, I'm more likely to shift down to force 11, for the rounding benefit. 11 stun for only 4 drain. (how many targets have a willpower of 7+).
Alternatively, I cast 2 force7's simultaneously. Each has a drain of 3 (the -1 spell mod being offset by a +1 multicasting drain mod, each rolled seperately against my full drain pool), though here now I need to worry about splitting dice pool then adding additional modifiers to each pool.
Remember the spell is automatically successfull provided I have net hits. It's only whether I choose to apply them to damage or not. The only change this is, is do I take less drain but risk it as physical, or do I take noticably more stun drain.
I don't have the book, but that doesn't sound right. You have to have at least one net hit in order to hit someone, so I'd think you'd be at minimum required to have that much, but maybe it is worded that you still get the net hits to consider if you affect the target or not and then you get to pick how much drain you want to take.
Page 204... right before the optional rule. Combat spells.
"After the spellcasting is resisted the caster *CHOSES* whether or not to apply any net hits to increase the damage value of a spell as normal. (the net hits used may be declared after the targets resistance test)."
The paranthetical simply restates what was in the prior text. I roll the resistance test. I have net hits, I win, I automatically do base force level damage... now do I want to suffer more to make them suffer more or not. Even if the optional rule is NOT in play, I may not want to add additional hits (the goal is to knock the target out, not kill him with overflow).
"After the spellcasting is resisted the caster *CHOSES* whether or not to apply any net hits to increase the damage value of a spell as normal. (the net hits used may be declared after the targets resistance test)."
The paranthetical simply restates what was in the prior text. I roll the resistance test. I have net hits, I win, I automatically do base force level damage... now do I want to suffer more to make them suffer more or not. Even if the optional rule is NOT in play, I may not want to add additional hits (the goal is to knock the target out, not kill him with overflow).
Ah, that's cool. Like I said, don't have the new book and I don't think you could choose at all with the old book.
QUOTE (Neraph @ Dec 12 2009, 12:19 PM)
Using Stunbolt, a F12 with 3 net successes ends up with 8P drain, dealing 15 Stun; whereas a F6 with 6 net successes is 9S drain with only 12 stun damage. It turns in to 1 less stun (albeit physical) for dealing 3 more damage.
Your math is off.
(F/2)-1:
Force 6 -> 2 drain, +6 net hits = 8.
Force 12 -> 5 drain, +3 net hits = 8.
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Dec 12 2009, 01:48 PM)
Force 6 -> 2 drain, +6 net hits = 8.
Which also requires the target to get no hits on a Willpower + Counterspelling roll.
QUOTE (etherial @ Dec 13 2009, 12:31 AM)
Which also requires the target to get no hits on a Willpower + Counterspelling roll.
Yes, but under no circumstances will the drain on a Force 6 stunbolt ever be 9.
QUOTE (etherial @ Dec 13 2009, 12:31 AM)
Which also requires the target to get no hits on a Willpower + Counterspelling roll.
No, extra drain is only added from net hits, (As I understood it), so it doesn't matter how much Will + Counterspelling someone has. You're basically paying for damage with drain very directly.
QUOTE (Karoline @ Dec 13 2009, 06:48 AM)
No, extra drain is only added from net hits, (As I understood it), so it doesn't matter how much Will + Counterspelling someone has. You're basically paying for damage with drain very directly.
Yes, but to get those 6 net hits with a Force 6 spell, the defender had to have had no hits on his defense roll (WIL + Counterspelling).
QUOTE (pbangarth @ Dec 13 2009, 06:01 PM)
Yes, but to get those 6 net hits with a Force 6 spell, the defender had to have had no hits on his defense roll (WIL + Counterspelling).
You are confusing net hits and... Oh, I see what you mean. That is irrelevant, they were just using it to compare drain.
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Dec 13 2009, 06:34 AM)
Yes, but under no circumstances will the drain on a Force 6 stunbolt ever be 9.
Ahh, I forgot to -1.
On the topic of discouraging overcasting, I still like my houserule, that the portion of the Force above your Magic Rating does not get halved when figuring Drain.
i.e. Magic 5 and F10 Stunbolt => 6 DV
(first 5 points of Force are halved, resulting in 2 DV; second 5 points of Force are not halved, resulting in another 5 DV; and the -1 DV for Stun)
Also, just to make overcasting even less attractive, Drain is both Physical AND Stun, when overcasting (that is also a houserule, of course); you get to roll your Dice Pool twice, each times against the full DV, once P, once S.
Bye
Thanee
i.e. Magic 5 and F10 Stunbolt => 6 DV
(first 5 points of Force are halved, resulting in 2 DV; second 5 points of Force are not halved, resulting in another 5 DV; and the -1 DV for Stun)
Also, just to make overcasting even less attractive, Drain is both Physical AND Stun, when overcasting (that is also a houserule, of course); you get to roll your Dice Pool twice, each times against the full DV, once P, once S.
Bye
Thanee
Hmm, I like that ruling Thanee, certainly makes overcasting a proposition that you actually have to think hard about instead of just taking a point of damage in order to kill someone spontaneously.
Agreed. Not sure I agree with the double hit (once each track) but I do understand where he's coming from (that is, people start overcasting when their stun track is almost full).
Question:
Is that considered 1 roll or 2 when spending Edge?
Question:
Is that considered 1 roll or 2 when spending Edge?
I'd imagine two.
Two, yeah. But if you get bonus dice for Drain (like from a focus or limited spell) you get those to both tests.
As for why the two rolls... that rule actually comes from a time, where you could heal physical drain. And on some occasions, suffering physical is simply better than suffering stun. With both, things are on the safe side (for being tougher, which it should be; IMHO, of course).
Bye
Thanee
As for why the two rolls... that rule actually comes from a time, where you could heal physical drain. And on some occasions, suffering physical is simply better than suffering stun. With both, things are on the safe side (for being tougher, which it should be; IMHO, of course).
Bye
Thanee
Yeah Thanee, I've suggested that in the past as well for people trying to limit overcasting. However, generally that was before the optional rule on direct combat spell drain increase. If you're using that, it's a bad rule and just completely screws the mage. Also generally, I'd only limit it to combat spells, as it causes a lot of unintended consequences elsewhere.
However, there's a far easier way to state it than what you say. Just add 1/2 point drain for every point over the magic rating.
The only time, that overcasting turns problematic is when you start dealing w/ spirits... a force 8 or 9 spirit can be a monster and very hard to counter. (though here, giving the spirit extra few dice to resist summoning is an effective trick as well. since spirit drain is pretty punishing at 2 per hit)
Generally, overcast spells are NOT a problem. (especially once you get background counts!... magic 5... 2 point BGC...). Do you use background counts, or are your mages just that powerful, that screwing them that much doesn't matter much?
There's a lot of other things that breaks as well. Increase attribute spells. They need to be cast at the force of the augmented stat... so human force 9, pulling 3-4 hits to raise wil to max for example... that really bones the drain. Force 9/2 - 2 == 2 drain. But you're railing that up to 4 or 5 drain, on top of the sustaining penalty. (generally highest force sustaining foci which are practical are only force 5 or 6, especially with focus addiction rules).
Another example... magic 5, in 2 point BGC. Needs a force 5 illusion w/ a full 5 hits for improved invis to work against drones. The mage NEEDS to cast at effective force 7 (remember BGC is added to the force of the spell for drain calculations... just as if it was cast at force 7, then entered the BGC later while being sustained). Now not only do you have that nasty +1 drain modifier, your magic is only a 3. (meaning 2 dice casting penalty, on top of the lower force). So the drain is 4, (or 6 w/ your bad house rule), and chances are high that you'll need to recast it 2 to 4 times to get the hits required if not edge it.
Also, anyone shoots target w/ heavy pistol twice in a single pass. Each shot ends up doing say 8'ish soaked down to 4-5'ish. At the end of the round, target is still down 9 boxes... now you're going to screw the mage for doing the same thing w/ a force9 manabolt? And increase the self-inflicted damage for doing it! Yeah anyone can deal damage, but no you're not allowed to do magic to do it mage w/o completely screwing yourself over.... (compare mage output to chucking 2 grenades in a round, or firing 2 shots; also those don't leave astral signatures which need to be wiped up wasting valuable time afterwards).
However, there's a far easier way to state it than what you say. Just add 1/2 point drain for every point over the magic rating.
The only time, that overcasting turns problematic is when you start dealing w/ spirits... a force 8 or 9 spirit can be a monster and very hard to counter. (though here, giving the spirit extra few dice to resist summoning is an effective trick as well. since spirit drain is pretty punishing at 2 per hit)
Generally, overcast spells are NOT a problem. (especially once you get background counts!... magic 5... 2 point BGC...). Do you use background counts, or are your mages just that powerful, that screwing them that much doesn't matter much?
There's a lot of other things that breaks as well. Increase attribute spells. They need to be cast at the force of the augmented stat... so human force 9, pulling 3-4 hits to raise wil to max for example... that really bones the drain. Force 9/2 - 2 == 2 drain. But you're railing that up to 4 or 5 drain, on top of the sustaining penalty. (generally highest force sustaining foci which are practical are only force 5 or 6, especially with focus addiction rules).
Another example... magic 5, in 2 point BGC. Needs a force 5 illusion w/ a full 5 hits for improved invis to work against drones. The mage NEEDS to cast at effective force 7 (remember BGC is added to the force of the spell for drain calculations... just as if it was cast at force 7, then entered the BGC later while being sustained). Now not only do you have that nasty +1 drain modifier, your magic is only a 3. (meaning 2 dice casting penalty, on top of the lower force). So the drain is 4, (or 6 w/ your bad house rule), and chances are high that you'll need to recast it 2 to 4 times to get the hits required if not edge it.
Also, anyone shoots target w/ heavy pistol twice in a single pass. Each shot ends up doing say 8'ish soaked down to 4-5'ish. At the end of the round, target is still down 9 boxes... now you're going to screw the mage for doing the same thing w/ a force9 manabolt? And increase the self-inflicted damage for doing it! Yeah anyone can deal damage, but no you're not allowed to do magic to do it mage w/o completely screwing yourself over.... (compare mage output to chucking 2 grenades in a round, or firing 2 shots; also those don't leave astral signatures which need to be wiped up wasting valuable time afterwards).
I'm fairly sure the mages in the part are going to start getting pissed if everywhere they go they start running into high background counts. After all, they aren't supposed to be a common occurrence or anything.
AFAIK if you are inside of a background count area when you cast a spell, you don't need to increase the force of the spell. So you just need to throw up a force 5 spell if you are already in the area, but you'd need a force 7 spell if you cast it outside and then brought it in.
Also, for the increased attribute, you only need it to match your augmented stat, not the stat after you've cast the spell.
And sure, you can hit someone with a heavy pistol twice, but the roll is going to be against reaction (A generally high stat among combatants) and dodge (Another high skill) while the mage only has to deal with willpower and just maybe counterspelling, but not too likely. They also don't have to worry about people being behind cover or far away or anything else really, they just have to see the person. The shooter also has to deal with armor, which of course the mage doesn't have to worry about. And then remember that you haven't factored in the 3+ net hits that the F9 stunbolt would get, pumping it up to 12ish damage compared to about 8ish. So yeah, the mage gets to do 4 extra damage if she is willing to risk taking some damage in return. Or the mage could get about 9ish damage by casting at their magic without risking any real injury.
AFAIK if you are inside of a background count area when you cast a spell, you don't need to increase the force of the spell. So you just need to throw up a force 5 spell if you are already in the area, but you'd need a force 7 spell if you cast it outside and then brought it in.
Also, for the increased attribute, you only need it to match your augmented stat, not the stat after you've cast the spell.
And sure, you can hit someone with a heavy pistol twice, but the roll is going to be against reaction (A generally high stat among combatants) and dodge (Another high skill) while the mage only has to deal with willpower and just maybe counterspelling, but not too likely. They also don't have to worry about people being behind cover or far away or anything else really, they just have to see the person. The shooter also has to deal with armor, which of course the mage doesn't have to worry about. And then remember that you haven't factored in the 3+ net hits that the F9 stunbolt would get, pumping it up to 12ish damage compared to about 8ish. So yeah, the mage gets to do 4 extra damage if she is willing to risk taking some damage in return. Or the mage could get about 9ish damage by casting at their magic without risking any real injury.
Karoline:
by the book... 1 and 2 point BGC's are NOT uncommon, and are NOT strong. Especially in urban areas.
When casting a spell inside a BGC, you add the strength of the BGC to the spells force for drain calculations... so you'll get identical drain for casting a force 7 spell outside the BGC2 then entering it, or casting a force 5 inside it. (excepting if the one gents overcasting extra drain is in play, in which case it'll be even MORE drain... since your magic stat goes down as well giving you less dice to cast it with!
Karoline: and until you have shown that you've actually read, understand, and played with the magic rules, don't even try to engage me in the argument on increase attribute. That's been hashed out on other threads... under your reading a force 5 increase body... can take a normal body 4 human and increase him to max body 9 w/ no drain whatsoever! (it also makes it trivial to put those spells into sustaining foci). You are incorrect, you need to cast it at the force of the final attribute (FYI: this is how my GM plays it, after I abused the hell out of your and his original reading... and he very quickly changed his mind.) (it's also much closer in line w/ prior editions of the spell and what they were capable of when the spell had a +1 drian code instead of a -2 it does now, and the TN was variable, and dice pools much smaller).
On drain:
3 extra hits. IF the mage is willing to apply them to damage and take the drain!! (see note about optional rule..). I suggested using the overcasting extra drain for direct combat spells in the past in other threads. (and direct combat spells only, not spellcasting in general as direct combat spells are the only area where raw force of the spell can be problematic). However if the optional drain rule for net hits increasing damage is in play, then you only really need one or the other.
by the book... 1 and 2 point BGC's are NOT uncommon, and are NOT strong. Especially in urban areas.
When casting a spell inside a BGC, you add the strength of the BGC to the spells force for drain calculations... so you'll get identical drain for casting a force 7 spell outside the BGC2 then entering it, or casting a force 5 inside it. (excepting if the one gents overcasting extra drain is in play, in which case it'll be even MORE drain... since your magic stat goes down as well giving you less dice to cast it with!
Karoline: and until you have shown that you've actually read, understand, and played with the magic rules, don't even try to engage me in the argument on increase attribute. That's been hashed out on other threads... under your reading a force 5 increase body... can take a normal body 4 human and increase him to max body 9 w/ no drain whatsoever! (it also makes it trivial to put those spells into sustaining foci). You are incorrect, you need to cast it at the force of the final attribute (FYI: this is how my GM plays it, after I abused the hell out of your and his original reading... and he very quickly changed his mind.) (it's also much closer in line w/ prior editions of the spell and what they were capable of when the spell had a +1 drian code instead of a -2 it does now, and the TN was variable, and dice pools much smaller).
On drain:
3 extra hits. IF the mage is willing to apply them to damage and take the drain!! (see note about optional rule..). I suggested using the overcasting extra drain for direct combat spells in the past in other threads. (and direct combat spells only, not spellcasting in general as direct combat spells are the only area where raw force of the spell can be problematic). However if the optional drain rule for net hits increasing damage is in play, then you only really need one or the other.
Yeah, IF she is willing to take the drain IF that optional rule is being used.
It does look like you're right about the increase attribute spell from reading it over a few times, though it could certainly be clearer on the issue. Sorry I haven't read every thread ever created on this forum.
Where does it say that BGCs of 1 and 2 are common in urban areas? Because I was always under the impression that they where fairly uncommon, but I could be wrong, as I've said, I'm not exceedingly familiar with magic.
It does look like you're right about the increase attribute spell from reading it over a few times, though it could certainly be clearer on the issue. Sorry I haven't read every thread ever created on this forum.
Where does it say that BGCs of 1 and 2 are common in urban areas? Because I was always under the impression that they where fairly uncommon, but I could be wrong, as I've said, I'm not exceedingly familiar with magic.
Not Karoline, and Falconer's entitled to his opinions, but that's all they are. There's not even really consensus on the Increased Attribute spells here in the wilds of Dumpshock, and there's no official word*. "Hashed out" really means it's been debated back and forth with no clear answer. So I don't think anyone should be telling anyone else around here "don't even try to engage" in a discussion on these boards. Although after a post like that if I were Karoline I'd probably agree and just put Falconer on ignore. But I'm not, so I can play!
*Official word = printed text in a book, or officially published errata.
*Official word = printed text in a book, or officially published errata.
QUOTE (Falconer @ Dec 14 2009, 07:55 PM)
Karoline: and until you have shown that you've actually read, understand, and played with the magic rules, don't even try to engage me in the argument on increase attribute. That's been hashed out on other threads... under your reading a force 5 increase body... can take a normal body 4 human and increase him to max body 9 w/ no drain whatsoever! (it also makes it trivial to put those spells into sustaining foci). You are incorrect, you need to cast it at the force of the final attribute (FYI: this is how my GM plays it, after I abused the hell out of your and his original reading... and he very quickly changed his mind.) (it's also much closer in line w/ prior editions of the spell and what they were capable of when the spell had a +1 drian code instead of a -2 it does now, and the TN was variable, and dice pools much smaller).
The original reading does not lead to abuse, or rather unfair advantage over the rest of the universe, if the GM brings to bear all the difficulties that magic can face by RAW. It's unfortunate that your PC was not as challenged as he could have been. That does not make the system broken. Any rule or rule change can be made to appear broken if it is taken out of context and analyzed under a restricted set of parameters.
The Sixth World is a hellhole of conflict and emotional sinks. Look at the description of Domain examples on pg. 121, Street Magic. You can walk into a bar and have your Force 5 sustaining focus reduce, and thereby your Force 5 spell drop. Continual casting to make up for this phenomenon eventually will bring Drain. There is no such thing as 'no Drain whatsoever'. Sooner or later you pay.
QUOTE (Falconer @ Dec 15 2009, 02:31 AM)
Yeah Thanee, I've suggested that in the past as well for people trying to limit overcasting. However, generally that was before the optional rule on direct combat spell drain increase. If you're using that, it's a bad rule and just completely screws the mage. Also generally, I'd only limit it to combat spells, as it causes a lot of unintended consequences elsewhere.
Of course, this house rule comes from the earlier days of SR4 (the second one even dates back to SR2, originally). The optional rule for direct combat spells wasn't around by then, and it's also not used (because it doesn't work in a consistent fashion).
As for the noncombat spell issues... I havn't encountered any of those, yet. And we used this house rule pretty much all the time we played SR4.
I also cannot see any real issues with background count. It's supposed to be rare and it's supposed to limit mages. If it doesn't do anything, effectively, but impose a mostly neglectible dp penalty, what's the point? It could be considered, though, in combination with this house rule, to drop the extra Force increase for Drain. Since lowering the Magic Rating effectively includes that already. That part is therefore unnecessary. I will definitely consider this.
You are right, of course, that combat spells (and summoning) are the main issue here. But I do like the more general nature of the rule.
About spirit summoning, I'm still not entirely sure about how to handle this, but I'm leaning towards generally not allowing the summoning of spirits above your Magic Attribute.
QUOTE
However, there's a far easier way to state it than what you say. Just add 1/2 point drain for every point over the magic rating.
And it gets even easier (which is how I actually state it usually, but refrained from doing so here, because it is a little counter-intuitive).
DV = F - M/2 (round up) [this replaces the F/2 part when overcasting].
BTW, what's unclear about the Increase Attribute spell? Of course, as written, the Force must equal the attributes current (un-/augmented) value.
The final value (after the spell) doesn't even exist at the point of casting, so how could you even compare the Force to that?
Also, the fact, that the part about the Force having to equal or exceed the (augmented) attribute's value comes before the part that the hits increase the attribute in the spell description, is rather telling.
If it should work like you think it does, it would have to say something like "The increased attribute cannot exceed the Force of the spell."
Whether that is abusable or not is another issue entirely.
Just don't abuse anything, that is abusable. That's a really easy way of handling such things.
Bye
Thanee
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.