I was just wondering. I'm in a bind as to the meaning of the rules and I wanted to see how the poll functionality worked of the new board . What confuses me is that the text says something like you apply a +2 to all tests but then follows up by saying that this includes drain resistance tests. The quandary: why say all tests and then specify a magical test. Makes me wonder if they felt the specificity of the magical test implied that the +2 was only applied to magical tests and they wanted to be sure that you applied it to the drain resistance test as well.

Thoughts? And I'm ignoring the focused concentration edge for the moment; it only changes the modification value anyway, not the semantics of the rules.

-- Dashifen --

Disclaimer : it's only my (uninformed) opinion...

I'm thinking this sentence may be related to the description of drain resistance as similar to resisting damage : as the body rolls aren't affected by modifiers, players could point out the similarity to willpower to avoid penalties when sustaining. So that would be (one of ?) the issue addressed by this rule specification.

edit : some spelling

The +2 TN is applied to all tests.

They specifically mention drain resistance because on page 183 of SR3:

You're welcome!

Just as an aside, we recently instituted a house rule in my campaign to tone down the crippling effects of these modifiers; +2 to all target numbers per spell just seemed excessive to us.

Per our house rules, the first spell maintained adds +1 to all target numbers. The second spell adds an additional +2, for a total of +3. The third spell adds an additional +3, for a total of +6. The fourth spell adds an additional +4, for a total of +10, and so on.

This way, it becomes easier to sustain one or two spells but harder to sustain four or more spells. This encourages the mage to hold up an Armor spell or an Invisibility or something and not be crippled. Simultaneously, it hinders mages who just want to sit on the rigger's lap and buff the group to kingdom come.

Interesting idea, Velocity - but how do you treat the Focused Concentration edge with such a system?

I'd say -1 to the TN for each spell after the first, so first is -1, second is -2, third is -4, fourth is -7, etc.

It's a neat idea, and fits with the 'progressive cost delta' mechanic of Karma.

Applying both the incremental sustaining penalty and the incrementing focused concentration bonus we seem to get this effect:
First: 0 Second: 1 Third: 2 Fourth: 3
A different progressive growth, and it does help on that first sustained spell. The edge would give you a free sustained spell in that you don't get a TN penalty until the second.

I don't mind that, but I would think some people would consider it too much to get a free sustained spell.

Personally, I'd say it goes from house to house for each rule.

I know in my game, which I run every once in a blue moon, it goes something like this. +2 to all magical tests and other tests requiring concentration, such as electronics work, demolitions work... etc, as long as you are focused in either the real world or the astral plane, but you drop them going into the matrix or hopping into a vehicle rig.

For soak tests, you don't have to add the +2 but you do have to make a willpower roll for EACH spell, with a modifier equal to the +2 to for each spell sustained, beyond the first.(I'm kind of generous like that), and you also have to add in damage modifiers for it, at one level lower. The math.

The math is quite simple. Add in normal wound modifiers after getting the TN.

Light Wound:4+[(n-1)*2]
Moderate Wound:5+[(n-1)*2]
Serious Wound:6+[(n-1)*2)]
Deadly Wound:Loss of Consiousness results in all spells being dropped.

n=number of spells sustained

+2TN for all rolls (short of BOD rolls for damage). To include drain resistance tests, perception, etc.

Both groups I play Shadowrun with (one that I run, and one that a friend runs) generally both use a +2 tn for all rolls save those that are usually not modified by wound penalties or concentration modifiers - such as body tests to resist damage, initiative rolls, etc.

This is because in all the games of Shadowrun I've played, I've played the mage/shaman in all of them but one, and I've found that with a little work, a mage can pretty much beat the snot out of most any non-magical individual around. This is based purely on the fact that non-magical people generally just don't have many dice to resist spells, and single-target combat spells (especially manabolt and stunbolt) have very low drain TNs compared to say, physical manips or powerballs.

Supposing a mage is holding one or two spells, even that TN increase of two to four won't slow down a mage who knows what he's doing with a stunbolt - setting the damage code at 6D with a measly one or two successes is generally enough to knock out damn near anyone, unless the target is willing to start blowing out all his karma on that one attack. Whereupon the mage can just do it again next pass, or at worst, next round. Things get even nastier if said mage has a power focus, a combat spell focus, or Centering.

Mages and shamans don't need anything to make them more combat effective, especially if they're smart and start chucking spells around corners with mirrors, because they're not using any combat pool for attacking with spells.

+2 TN to all test...?
i didn't know the book said all test. since it was written down in the magic chapter of the book, i asumed that the +2 TN only covered magical test... (which i'd say is more than enough of a handicap).

adding the +2 TN to all other test, would make it virtually impossible for the mage to do... well anything!

well, if the books say otherwise, then i'll just keep it the way i've always done and call it a house rule.

True and untrue at the same time. My previous example was supposing the mage was striking at a non-magical individual with said stunbolt, neh?

Typical starting mage: Sorcery 6, Spell Pool 6. Supposing he takes 4 dice from his spell pool to chuck them at said starting street sam with willpower 4-5 (average, in my experience), he'll be aiming for a target number of 6-7 if he has one spell sustained. Granted, two spells would be a bit much if he didn't have centerig, now that I think about it.

Allow me to round up for these success rates, for both the mage and the target, just to be charitable to both of them:

This would give him an average success rate of about 2 successes per shot, one additional success if one karma was burned, yeh? Supposing that mage was also like many starting mages I've seen (or saw, back in the days of 2nd edition, wherein money was tied to force points) and cranked up a level 3 combat spell focus (or a level 3 power focus, doesn't really matter here), he'd average 2 successes, 4 if one karma was spent.

By that token, said target has between 4-5 dice to cancel the magician's successes, which would average 1 success, 2 if one karma was rolled, regardless if it was willpower 4 or 5; the exact likelihood is the difference between .65 and .85 about. This means that the mage will generally cack off his target in one shot, even if one spell is being sustained.

Now, his drain target number will be 4, and supposing the mage has 6 willpower (again, standard as I've seen) and uses his remaining 2 spell pool dice to resist that 4D drain, he'll average 4 successes, 6 with one point of Karma (which assuming he's a starting mage, he won't have, but hey... By 2 karma pool you can't have initiated anyway...)

Result? Mage geeks opposition in one shot while sustaining a spell, gets off with moderate to light drain - which in most cases isn't the best result, but if you're chucking stunbolts at D, something bad just happened. Things only get more wacky once the mage gets centering, and can reduce TN penalties from sustained spells AND that drain he just took.

Net result? Let the mages suck their TN penalties for all actions. It keeps 'em from getting a weapon skill out the yang, sustaining Increased Reflexes on himself and 2 buddies, that smartlink-analagous spell on himself, and armor on his two buddies, and then having a TN of 2 to pop people with his rifle. Granted, that scenario may seem a bit extreme, but since all of those spells TECHNICALLY only need one success, if that mage has centering, wacky stuff will likely happen. And I've seen players try similar stunts.

Yeah, they do. My phrasing was kinda wacky.
Sorry about that. The second part of that about iniative modifiers was tied to the 'concentration' part of the previous pair.

Ah, no problem.